Monday, October 21, 2013

Obama -- "Mission Accomplished"

Obamacare comes in a dead last while destroying the well-worn race track along the way. Obama's response from his delusional grand stand? "Mission Accomplished"

  • Project destroying cost over-runs
  • Failed web site interface
  • No government employee support
  • Illegal bait and switch product to sales profile
  • Claims of lower cost premiums in reality are price doubling increases
  • Staggering drain on an already failing economy
  • Self-destructing, non-sustainable internal program structure
  • American Family disenfranchising medical plans
  • Death panels
  • Opt-out Obama-friends cronyism

Obama, “Mission accomplished”

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

We Don’t need Barak Hussein Obama in Order for Democracy to Work | Editorial 2013

“Barrack Hussein Obama can’t make democracy work.”

There are many distracting arguments coming from the left that easily obscure a simple truth that voting Americans need to realize.

Barrack Hussein Obama can’t make democracy work.

He is not fit for the job of leading a democratic republic mostly because he has chosen not to follow this country’s foundation and duly chosen form of government. Whether his actions are deliberate or merely show him to be incompetent is irrelevant in the voting booth. But, it is an issue at large for every citizen that treasures freedom and liberty. And, if we freedom lovers are to take back what is rightfully ours, we'll need to do it without The Press, without some elected officials, and in some extreme cases, without some lawfully elected and appointed judges of The Law.

--The Press and Advertising Dollars

What should be a major news story every night on the evening news is merely BAU, Business As Usual. One would think that the sitting POTUS circumnavigating the rule of law in order to land his agenda squarely in history’s lap might be something to talk about over the anchor desk of ABC, CBS or NBC, but apparently not.

Our resident press corps has chosen to deliberately obfuscate Mr. Obama’s obvious anti American courses of action for whatever reason. But again, the presses’ motivation is less important as what to do about it.
For Mr. Obama’s case, it is obvious that he needs to be removed from office one way or another.
In the case of our non-journalistic journalists, we simply turn them off and put down their writings; which apparently is exactly what America has been doing for almost a decade now.
If you listen to news broadcasts and editorializers who favor the status quo; editorializing masquerading as news journals, one would think that everything is fine; they’re all good, and rich and fat and happy. “Nothing to see here; move along, move along. Ooh, look at that over there…” But the dollars, layoffs and bankruptcies in the News Entertaining Industry say otherwise.

In case you have forgotten, or just didn’t know, all of Newsdome (think “kingdom”) and the TV entertainment empire is funded by advertising. Or, that’s the conventional and sustainable method from days of old—before the super rich Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner started funding a now failing *oligarchy.

Advertising 101

Remember Soap Operas? They were called that since the 1950s and 1960s origin of the genre’ when  Dial Corporation, Procter & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive and Lever Brothers, all soap manufacturers, were the major advertisers of daytime “soaps”. Advertising to the millions of stay at home moms who were the main laundry engineers at home was a major boon for soap sellers, advertising execs and TV producing studios all at once.

The marriage of TV dramas, moms and laundry soap was so advantageous because everyone was well served.
  • The laundry soap really did make things whiter; mom was happy.
  • Moms bought a lot of soap. Advertisers were happy.
  • Advertisers proved that they could deliver a gigantuous buying audience to their clients. The soap manufacturers were happy.
  • TV studios could crank out easy-to-make dramas based on stories that dragged on into eternity with never a close or The End to worry about; the easiest story to write is the one with no end. One just keeps writing. The plot is no longer important to support a killer ending. The producers were happy.

This happy closed loop of partakers in American enterprise on steroids is a perfect example of synergy; elements together are greater than the sum of their separate parts.

Additionally, the industry added greatly to the new royalty called TV stars whom TV watchers idolized and adhering loyalties were born almost overnight; an unlooked for boon to the creators of day time soaps which drew even larger advertising dollars from the added leverage of viewer and customer loyalty; thus the really big bucks that drove advertising rates into the stratosphere where only the really well funded industries could reach.

Question: So, what happened? Why are ad rates in such severe decline? First of all, it needs to be pointed out that the Entertainment world and the Newsies are inherently related. They are in a marriage from which there is no divorce. They share the same pocketbook of funding and therefore are in it together for better or for worse. Fox’s entertainment programs are concretely tied to their news programs. IT IS ALL ENTERTAINMENT.

This does not mean that one network’s news dept. is just as unreliable as the rest. Each program’s content rests upon its own efficacy. If it’s spouting lies, the viewing public will know; especially if there is a running standard of truth tellers by which the liars can be compared.

The answer: no longer is there a happy circle of well served elements in the closed synergestic loop. The soap still works, but advertising is now well known for embellishing to the point of misrepresentation at the same time that the attached network news journalists are even better known for embellishing to the point of editorializing the daily news. If you look up editorializing in journalism 101 courses, it is the same as a curse word for purists of the truth. One can either journalize the news (report it) or editorialize a story. But never the twain shall meet, nor shall the line be made unclear.

During the heyday of the soaps, CBS’s anchor man, Walter Cronkite was hailed as America’s most trusted voice. Today, these anchor men and women seek not after trust, but back slaps at the Leftist White House cocktail pressers (Press Release, Press Parties, etc).

And also, there is … (wait for it) … the Rush factor. Since the 1988 national syndication of his radio program, Rush Limbaugh’s unabashedly conservative and therefore honest presentation of all things American politic have turned America’s attention from limiting their entertainment digest from purely entertuinamnt programs to news programs while at the same time opening up opportunities for non-broadcast based news programs and entertainment programs to catch the attention of the public via The Internet.

This perfect storm of Rush and The Internet occurring in the same annual hemisphere has put a major dent in advertising. What was once viewed as a vast base of a giant pie referred to as “shares” of a the market, has now caused the creation out of virtually thin air of the massively diluting force of Internet based as well as alternative news programs that have not only reduced advertising rates through dilution, but also pretty much removed the solid meaning of a strong market share scale from which advertising rates used to be figured almost 100%.

Ad rate averages, like real estate, used to never go down. So, to have rates reduced as much as the 13-15% being noticed in print ads alone is definitely market shaking. Advertising rates for news programs dropping through the basement is not being talked about with honesty yet, so that’s one to watch for. But the biggest to watch for in my estimation is the attempt by major news sources like ABC, CBS and NBC to try something new for a change; honesty. At the least they could try separating journalizing from editorializing. It seems to work well for Fox news.

--The Editorial Format

When I was cutting my media teeth at my first gig in TV, I was a floor director and camera operator for the evening news in our home town of Medford, Oregon. I operated on a split shift that required I come in at 7am for the local morning magazine human interests show, produce any commercial spots and public service announcements and additionally, produce the station manager’s editorial for the month, before taking my 3 hour lunch before coming in for the live Evening News with Hank Henry. The General Manager and owner of Channel 10 in Medford was R.J. Johnson. My first exposure to an editorial was from behind Camera One as my boss expounded upon his opinion of important political issues of the day.

The broadcast technicalities that separate the line between an editorial and a news story used to be
glaring in its clarity; today, not so much. Mr. Johnson, General Manager of Channel 10 in Medford Oregon had his editorial teased at the head by a pre-rolled tape announcing the editorial segment, and closed at the tail with a like post-roll. These teaser and closer tapes clearly explained that this segment was an opinion piece, not a news story. So, an editorial used to be a clearly marked section of dialogue that was an opportunity for the chief editor of a newspaper or owner of a TV station or radio station to expose their market to their opinion on matters of weight to the community at large.

Today, apparently all of the editorials are preceded by pre-rolled tape announcing the evening news with Diane Sawyer, Brian Williams or Scott Pelley; and one is left waiting for the evening news to actually follow all of the editorializing. There is little difference between editorializing and journalizing the news these days over at the ABC, CBS and ABC studios. Instead of pointing at the obvious political hey making for the Democratic Party and calling it the shameful acts of dishonest and disreputable editorializing, the press corps count it as a brave and courageous thing to mislead their viewers towards socialism and slavery.

--It's DejaVu all Over Again

So, instead of the Russian/Chinese communism brand of socialism dished out carefully and quietly in the 1950s and 60s, we are being fed Pseudo Sharia Muslim statism openly; our hope and change for the 2000’s.

So, Mr. Clinton couldn’t and Mr. Obama can’t make democracy work in a republic. Fortunately for us, our founding fathers knew that this was a danger; and some even felt it was inevitable. Thus the separated powers profile of our unique three part form of government.

And, if the federal powers are too corrupt, there are the state’s rights powers. And, if even these fail; which also looks inevitable in some states, there is always the posse comitatus of individuals taking back their own piece of turf as they follow The Rule of Law as presented in The U.S. Constitution, against which there is no lawful argument.

At some point, citizens may no longer be defined by how they vote, but by how well they hide their arms and ammunition.



SQAD | TV Week: TV Ad Prices Falling…

Seeking Alpha | Westwood One: Radio Advertising Falls on Hard Times

Oligarchy; a small group of people who together govern a nation or control an organization, often for their own purposes. The Encarta Dictionary.

Disclaimer; I do not promote vigilantism. I support local law enforcement. In my experience, local sheriffs are generally honest, hard working elected officials who respect The Rule of Law. If a group of individuals begin a vigilante police action without going through their local sheriff, they just might end up getting what they deserve. If you think that your ten friends with their 25 AR 15s and several thousand rounds of ammunition are any match for your state's national guard contingent, then you slept too long on one side last night and all your brains ran out your ear hole. What good is freedom if you get your wife and ten friends killed? One needs to pick one's battles and count the cost.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Crude Oil, Gasoline and Politics-- and a Moose | Editorial 2013

Parsing the facts; it's not that complicated

At the bottom of this editorial is an article forwarded to me by my dad. He asked the question, "Should the US be exporting crude oil?"
The issue of exporting crude, and/or refining it for resale and domestic consumption is not unlike talking wholesale and retail.

Let’s compare the wholesale/retail process using metal products. I can talk about this subject at length and with some authority because I deal in metal products from artists and craftsman locally.

My company, Specialized Media Merchandise buys metal art from two different craftsmen in The Northwest in order to resell it at large. They get the metal for free or cheap because lately the supply of raw metal has increased drastically. Raw materiel is a term that metal workers use to describe both new metal and acquired scrap metal. These together make up the category called raw material for artists and craftsmen.

One of these metal artists looks for cast off scrap compressor and fuel tanks as they are made of both lower grade iron and higher grade stainless steel; his two mediums of choice. He can get the stainless steel tanks for extremely cheap; sometimes free. The pieces he cuts out of them and turns into ornamental art, like a particularly interesting three dimensional shark that is displayed in his shop, (I do not have authority to display a picture of his 3D shark for this article, thus the moose) gets him about $150, which we can sell near the $250 price point.

Retail is all about buying low and selling high. This concept is universal, obviously.
Out of one small scrap tank, he can get two or three of these 3D sharks that hang from people’s decks and back porch eaves. So, the motivation for him is great to acquire and horde raw materials in order to turn them into metal art at hundreds and thousands of percent markup.

Then, one looks at market demand in order to figure market strategy. This artist can sell every single piece that he produces in a matter of days, with people standing in line asking for more. So, market demand is high with no end in site. Therefore, market strategy is simple; produce and sell locally. Do not sell wholesale; sell retail.


One barrel of crude oil costs American companies $33.76 to lift out of the ground and put in a barrel ready for shipping and refining. This is figured from 2009 dollars because currently it is very involved to get that figure for today. Many factors that are used to determine cost per barrel change many times a year, so the only stable figures are a few years old, but those proportions don’t change as much as the other end of the money chain; the selling price; so the math is still pretty solid.

The selling price for a barrel of crude yesterday, 10/12/2013 was $102.02 for WTI crude, and $111.28 for Brent crude; an average of $106.65 per barrel.

Cost $33.76
Sell $106.65

That's only the crude, crude figures, (pun intended); we have yet to delve into retail breakdowns that include the multiple pieces of the retail pie that a 42 gallon barrel of crude oil fall into: gasoline, kerosene, diesel, asphalt and chemical reagents used to make plastics and pharmaceuticals (Wiki). That's a $72.89 profit per barrel before it's even broken down into it's various wholesale elements for refining into retail products, which is the real frosting on the cake.

In May of 2013, the volume of oil produced by American companies topped 7 million barrels (wait for it) per day. And, remember that this is not all out production mode. America's "free trade" is severely hampered by politics. But 7,000,000 x $72.89 = $510,230,000 per day, before cracking into usable product.

So, the next step in figuring market strategy is looking at the need factor. The US had over 240 million cars in 2012. That’s more than registered drivers. This figure is fantastic and quite phenomenal. All of those gas tanks need fuel, and we fill them up or drop $20 worth in every week whether we use all of that up or not. And this does not even account for municipal buses and trucks, and commercial trucks and equipment, and trains which more than doubles the number of gas tanks, and the size of those tanks is always much larger than a passenger car or truck.

The National Automobile Dealers Association and the US Dept of statistics has determined that the number of just passenger vehicles alone increases at a rate of up to 5.88% annually; this larger figure was recorded back in 1999, but never falls below 3.69% every year.

"Market strategy is simple; make as much refined fuel for resale at home."

Market strategy is simple; make as much refined fuel for resale at home. Doing this nets the oil refineries the highest profit in the shortest amount of time and is virtually guaranteed into the foreseeable future and most likely beyond. As a matter of fact, realistic published reports that try to predict when the US will run out of oil resources in the ground are all bogus because new giant caches are discovered every year. There is more oil in the ground ready for refining now, than all of the oil ever used to date.

So, why sell wholesale at all? For the answer, one must look outside of the standard wholesale/retail market plan and ask our government that question. The US Government has controlled the acquisition and resale of crude oil from day one. And their control gains purchase every decade. And, every day that the free market is blocked from selling their product costs American citizens millions in lost revenue in the form of jobs and lost US taxes.

Obviously, there is a minute amount (comparatively) of product that must be reserved for the Federal government for tactical and emergency application, but that can be acquired at retail prices. There is no reason for the US government to get a discount on fuel.

It’s political. It’s not complicated like the main stream journalists and leftist politicians would have us believe, but it is definitely political.


US Dept of Statistics
National Automobile Dealers Association
Robert S.


A fact about the U.S. "shale oil boom" that would shock most Americans

Thursday, October 10, 2013
From Matt Badiali, editor, S&A Resource Report:
Today, I went on Fox Business News to discuss exporting crude oil...

And while I didn't have a chance to fully flesh out my ideas on TV, I would like to make my points with you. Because I do think there is a benefit to not exporting oil and gas today.

The background is simple, in the 1970s, the Arab Oil Embargo scared the U.S. into blocking oil exports. We were running out and the supply was in the hands of our enemies.

Fast forward to today. Oil production is back up to 1992 levels and rising. For some reason, folks are fired up about exporting oil.

This is one of my favorite subjects right now. When there was a big price gap between Brent and WTI crude oil this summer, refiners pulled an end run around oil export rules. They refined the crude just enough to call it "refined product" then put it on ships out of here.

In other words, the law is toothless. I'm all for an open market, so scrap the law. However, I'm not sure exporting crude oil is a good idea. Here's what I mean:

According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA) we export about 3.4 million barrels of refined product per day. That's right… we already export 3.4 million barrels of oil products every day already.

That's up from less than about 1 million barrels per day in 2006. To put that in perspective, our production boom added about 2.4 million barrels per day over that same period. So we are effectively exporting all the new production anyway.

That leads me to three points against exporting crude oil.

1. There is no reason to export crude oil. We already export "refined products" around the world. That's good for our economy. We keep good, high paying refining jobs here in the U.S. We keep the best petroleum engineers here and develop the best engineering programs at U.S. universities.

2. We don't produce all the oil we need yet. Why would we export oil if we are still importing oil from OPEC (3.8 million barrels per day)? We need to ramp our own production up and keep it home. There is no need to export crude oil abroad.

3. If we keep the oil here and export the refined products, there is a value chain created in the U.S. before we export the refined product. That means some of that profit stays here (in the form of wages, taxes, investment in infrastructure, etc...). The value of the export isn't in the raw product, it is in the finished goods. That's why the law is fine with me.

I'm sure that there are excellent reasons to open up crude oil exports. I’m really on the fence. But I hope that my points give you something to think about.

So, What do you think?

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

America- Changing Before Our Very Eyes. But, Fear Not

Editorial; October 2013; I sleep just fine at night.

This World is not Our Home, We're Just-a-passin' Through

When I hear liberals who voted for Obama (hard to find anyone who will actually admit it anymore) whine and excuse themselves by saying, "Well, I didn't know he was going to _____...", I have absolutely no sympathy for them.

Everyone had a chance to predict what a socialist would do, but only half the country took the opportunity to properly predict Obama's actions by voting no. The other half? Not so much.

Socialists, communists and statists will always seek more power, while a saboteur like Obama goes even further by seeking actions of the most destruction, reserving the most damage for the final months of his control. With the media's willing collusion, Obama is systematically destroying America, while judges, military leaders, police commanders and all others who might actually be instructed to fire on and imprison their neighbors watch it happen; hoping that they can retire or otherwise vacate their office before it happens.

There are Three Stooges scenes that remind me of Obama's actions. One stands out among the others as a perfect alegory to Obama's playbook. Moe open-slaps Curly real hard on the right cheek. When Curly's eyes clear up and his ears stop ringing, he looks back at Moe and cries, "Why did you do that!?" Moe looks him right in the face and says, "Do what?"

Moe is Obama. Mobama.

Mobama keeps slapping us and slapping us. He never has to say why he's doing it. He can deny, change the subject, even use the most confusing and illogical explanations, like, "You slapped yourself." He gets away with it because nobody with the microphone is asking why. Mobama's bosses just sit and watch it all happen.

This will continue until an adult in the room stands up and says, "Enough!"

We need some more Scott Walkers and Sarah Palins who have vowed to stand in the gap; Rand Paul and others already in office who have proven that they have what it takes to put others' before their career.

We may never again see pre Obama and Clinton America. But, the least we can do is not give up.

If a complete reset is in order, then one has to reach further back for an American template to follow than the Bill Clinton era of debacles. One needs to reach all the way back prior to The New Deal of FDR. Because America needs to know what it is like to live under a governmental rule that respects and supports the Rule of law. Every American alive today knows only the treason of a lawless government.

My generation and the rest of the overlapping generations of "Baby-Boomers" have always took for granted American patriotism. We remember family members and national heroes who did hard things during war time and The Great Depression. We can only look back to those heroes because there are no heroes now, according to our press corps.

Black is called white and white is called black. Liars are hailed for their forward thinking while those who defend the Rule of law and our U.S. Constitution are called anarchists and saboteurs. When one calls out Obama for his lies, deceit and America-hating reforms that harm American families including military patriots and families who are paying and have paid the ultimate sacrifice, they are called racists.

Without people who can and will stand in the gap against these domestic enemies, America has no hope. Everything rises and falls on leadership. The citizen can not save this country without leaders.

Who will stand up for America in this crises? Who is hiding? Who is it that will be pointed to and acclaimed as the one who is here for such a time as this?

Meanwhile, Jesus is having the trumpet shined and placed in position by the warrior angel who gets to sound His return.

Know this; you who hate America enough to support Obama and his minions, are helping him prepare this country for the end times. And then, you can proudly look around you and say, "I built this."


Governor Scott Walker stands up to National Park Service

The National Park Service, in direct violation of the Constitution, tried to tell Wisconsin to close state parks in Kettle Moraine State ForestDevil’s Lake State Park and Wisconsin’s oldest park, Interstate Park. There are a few other locations, but none of the state areas will be closed.
their drive to punish Americans for the Washington politics meltdown. When the order came down, unlike other state governments, Scott Walker put his foot down. The parks the NPS wanted shut down was
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Cathy Step has spoken on the issue. “After close review and legal consult, DNR has clarified areas where the federal procedures are over-reaching by ordering the closure of properties where the state has management authority through existing agreements.”
In a press release, the DNR official stance is while the federal government shutdown has closed federal properties in Wisconsin, such as the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore and some national wildlife refuges, and improved campgrounds and other buildings in the Chequamegon and Nicolet National Forests, all state, county and local recreational areas remain open in Wisconsin.
The DNR has also been removing barricades wherever the NPS has illegally put them up.

Monday, October 7, 2013

"Unbiased Media" Openly Slamming Tea Party

MRC Study: Even Before Shutdown, Networks Dumped Most Blame on Conservatives

On Monday morning, Time/MSNBC political analyst Mark Halperin explained an obvious political reality to his fellow Morning Joe panelists: “The White House does not have much incentive” to negotiate on the government shutdown, because Democrats expect the liberal news media to hand them a public relations victory. As Halperin put it: “The press is largely sympathetic to their arguments that it’s the House Republicans’ fault.” 

In fact, as a new Media Research Center analysis of broadcast network evening news coverage shows, ABC, CBS and NBC spent the two weeks prior to the shutdown almost universally pinning the blame on congressional Republicans, especially conservative/Tea Party House Republicans. By the time the shutdown actually took place on October 1, news audiences had been repeatedly instructed to think about it as a GOP-generated crisis.

From September 17 through September 30, the Big Three evening newscasts ran a total of 39 stories about the possibility of a government shutdown. Our MRC analysts found that a majority of those stories (21) were framed around the idea of Republicans triggering the crisis, compared to four that blamed both sides and absolutely none that put the onus on Democrats’ failure to negotiate. (The remaining 14 stories did not include discussion of blame.)

As explained by network news correspondents, the responsibility for the deadlock lies with Republicans for failing to put aside their opposition to ObamaCare. Talking about the initial House Republican decision to seek defunding of the health care law, CBS Evening News correspondent Nancy Cordes on September 18 said “Speaker Boehner was forced into the risky strategy by his right flank...[a strategy] one Senate Republican described to us today as suicide.”

Two days later, NBC’s Brian Williams argued that “the wheels were set in motion” toward a potential shutdown after “Republicans in the House passed a bill that would keep the government going while killing ObamaCare.” A week later, on the September 27Nightly News, NBC’s David Gregory zeroed in on “a relatively small group of legislators, you have Tea Party conservatives in the House who don’t want to give up on this ObamaCare defunding fight.”

By Sunday, September 29, after Harry Reid’s Senate had killed the proposal to cut off ObamaCare funding, the networks characterized the much-milder demand for a one-year delay as too radical to consider. According to NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell that night, “Tea Party conservatives held to their risky demand,” while on CBS, Nancy Cordes argued that “House Speaker John Boehner had hoped to dial back this fight, but was urged to press on by conservative Tea Party members.”

The next night, after Republicans had retreated to an even-milder proposal to delay just the individual mandate (the President himself, in July, had ordered such a delay for the mandate on businesses), ABC’s Diane Sawyer presented Obama’s characterization of the situation as reality: “The President expressed outrage that one faction in one House of Congress is ready to bring the entire federal government to a halt.”

But Sawyer’s hyperbole about “the entire federal government” coming to a halt was contradicted by her own correspondent, Jonathan Karl, a few minutes later: “Not everything gets shut down. Troops will continue to get paid, Social Security checks will continue to go out.”

Meanwhile, on that night’s CBS Evening NewsFace the Nation host Bob Schieffer framed it as a crisis caused by “ultra-conservatives.” According to Schieffer, the question was “will the moderate and more establishment Republicans continue to go along with the ultra-conservatives?...We’re headed to a shutdown unless the moderates in the House revolt.”

As for the rare story that blamed both sides, ABC’s Karl on the September 26 World Newsjuxtaposed Republicans’ “laundry list of demands” with a White House that “has decided not to try” to strike a deal. “Instead of negotiating, they are name calling,” Karl reported. “Today, one of the President’s top aides said of Republicans, quote, ‘What we’re not for is negotiating with people with a bomb strapped to their chest.’”

In a White House briefing on Monday, CNN’s Jim Acosta actually confronted spokesman Jay Carney about the tactic of seeming to “taunt Republicans” rather than exploring the potential for a constructive dialogue.

Acosta told Carney: “In the last couple of weeks, Democrats, including the President, have
— and he has not used all of these words, but I’ll throw out some of them that have been used — have referred to Republicans as ‘arsonists,’ ‘anarchists,’ ‘extortionists,’ ‘blackmailers,’ ‘hostage-takers.’...It almost sounds as if this White House is trying to taunt Republicans into shutting the government down.”

If Democratic congressmen, or a Democratic Speaker of the House, pursuing a liberal policy objective, was subjected to similar ridicule or insults from a Republican President or a Republican Senate Majority Leader, you can bet that the networks would have made such language the centerpiece of their coverage.

Instead, the media have chosen to foist all of the blame on conservatives for sticking to their promise to oppose ObamaCare.
— Rich Noyes is Research Director at the Media Research Center. Follow Rich Noyes on Twitter.

Smoky Mountain Area Residents Are IN YOUR FACE OBAMA

These Smoky Mountain National Park area residents and business owners are not sitting quiet while the Obama Democrats try to destroy our local economies for political expedience.

We have visited this beautiful area many times and fully endorse a vacation spent there.