Minimal Design

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it ...

Easy to use theme’s admin panel

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it ...

Featured posts

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it ...

Hello, I am Vk bhardwaj and i do awsome Blogger Template Designs for your blog, download templates at Www.BestTheme.Net. Thanks A Lot


Surviving a Local Move- Uprooting from the acquaintances of one neighborhood and instilling them in another is an intimidating experience. With this transformation of surroundings comes a change in every day custom, social interaction, and even personal identity, with a little planning and strategic family inclusion, the stress of local moving can be minimized.
All that it takes is efficient planning and preparation.
Before starting with your moving process, you need to devise the wadding system together with its packaging supplies. In order to maximize efficiency, assemble the family and outline a basic plan for packing supplies; designed to meet your specific needs, the best packaging supplies can offer you surface protection, cushioning, and void fill. In order to cut down the packing time and to curb aggravation, build up a cohesive procedure.
Finding packaging supplies for your local move is never too much to bother about when you do it with usapackaging.net  

read more


President Barack Obama considers William Daley for White House post; debt a focus of debate over Republican Party chairmanship; Obama to sign food-safety law.

TOP GOVERNMENT STORIES

Obama Said to Consider JPMorgan’s Daley for White House Post

President Barack Obama is considering naming William Daley, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. executive and former U.S. Commerce secretary, to a high-level administration post, possibly White House chief of staff, people familiar with the matter said.

Republican Party’s $20 Million Debt Is Focus of Chairman Debate

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele defended his record against criticism from four challengers that he ran up $20 million in debt and neglected major donors during his two-year term.

Obama Will Sign Food-Safety Law Today as Funding Battle Looms

President Barack Obama will sign a $1.4 billion food-safety bill today that marks the biggest change to oversight of the food industry since 1938 and sets up a funding fight with Republicans poised to take over the House.

Warren Plans Information-Sharing With States on Non-Bank Lenders

Elizabeth Warren, the White House adviser assigned to set up a U.S. consumer financial-protection bureau, is planning to share information with state regulators to streamline oversight of nonbank firms such as payday lenders.

House Republicans to Push New Tax-Cut Plan for Small Businesses

U.S. House Republican leaders will push to create a tax break for companies with 500 or fewer employees that would allow a 20 percent deduction from their federal tax liability over the next two years.

TODAY ON BLOOMBERG TV: David Cole of the Center for Automotive Research appears at 12:30 p.m. to talk about the U.S. auto industry; and former Federal Reserve Governor Randall Kroszner appears at 3:10 p.m. to discuss federal economic policy.

WHITE HOUSE President Barack Obama returns from his Hawaiian vacation today.

REPORTS The Commerce Department will report November factory orders at 10 a.m. The Federal Reserve at 2 p.m. will release minutes of its Dec. 14 policy meeting.

HIGHLIGHTS FROM NEWSPAPERS

U.S. Envoy in Seoul for Korean Peninsula Talks, Xinhua Reports

U.S. special envoy on North Korea, Stephen Bosworth, has arrived in Seoul to discuss “next steps” on the Korean peninsula, Xinhua News Agency reported today in a flash headline.

read more


Only a few moderate or conservative Democrats remain left in the House of Representatives come opening day on Wednesday, but expect at least a chunk of them to vote in favor of the Republican plan to repeal the health care law.

As one of its first act in the new Congress, the Republican majority is calling up the law for repeal. Text of the repeal bill is already online for Americans to read and a vote is expected on Jan. 12.

Several moderate and conservative Democrats contacted by Fox News on Monday night said they wanted to first evaluate the Republican proposal hitting the House floor before deciding how they might vote.

But, at least one Democrat who voted against the health bill last year and in late 2009 is already leaning toward voting to repeal the law.

"I have not read the language yet, but I am inclined to support the repeal," said Rep. Dan Boren D-Okla. "I have voted against the measure in the last Congress and a full 68 percent of Oklahomans support repeal."

Other Democrats call the move "reckless."

"The reckless Republican repeal of health care is a budget busting bailout for insurance companies that will kill jobs, raise Americans' taxes, and deny critical care to women and children. It is unconscionable that Republicans plan on ramming the bill through the House without exploring the disastrous impact repeal will have on Americans," said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the outgoing chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.

But Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said the vote against the original bill was bipartisan so even with a reduced number of moderate Democrats in the House, the vote could earn some bipartisan support.

"There were Republicans and Democrats who opposed the bill. So I think it will be a bipartisan vote to repeal the bill. It's interesting that if just one in four Democrats vote to repeal the bill, then that is -- would allow us to override any veto that the president might provide," he said.

Even if it passes the House, it would stop dead in its track in the Democratic-led Senate. The move, however, would be the fulfillment of a pledge by many of the newly elected Republican majority to work to get rid of the nearly trillion-dollar legislation.

"The majority of the American people continue to say that they dislike this law," said Rep. Nan Hayworth, R-N.Y. "They want it repealed so whether or not the vote will be symbolic will depend on what the Senate and our president do. It's entirely meaningful within the context of what the house is doing. That's what we were elected to do."

read more

Rahm Emanuel has talked with President Barack Obama and other powerful leaders about some of the most serious questions of the day.

Now, in his bid to be Chicago mayor, he will have to sit in a room in the bowels of a government building and answer questions from lawyers and city residents who don't want him to run.

The stakes couldn't be higher for Emanuel, who quit one of the most powerful jobs in the nation as Obama's chief of staff, for the chance to replace powerful Chicago Mayor Richard Daley.

The former Chicago congressman gets to defend himself Tuesday when he is expected to take the stand at what could be a raucous hearing about whether he remained a Chicago resident while he worked in Washington and is eligible to run for mayor.

He faces hours of questioning from lawyers and some of the more than two dozen people without lawyers who challenged his mayoral bid, including one man on Monday who claimed the hearing officer in the case should be arrested for not subpoenaing certain witnesses.

Paul Green, a political scientist at Roosevelt University, said the hearing on Emanuel's residency has the potential for "a lot of lunacy."

"It very easily could become a kangaroo court," Green said.

Emanuel is fighting to stay on the Feb. 22 ballot in a crowded race to replace Daley, who isn't seeking a seventh term.

Opponents argue Emanuel isn't eligible to be mayor because he lived in Washington for nearly two years before coming back to Chicago to run for mayor in October.

He's expected to be the first person to testify when the hearing officer for the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners begins listening to evidence, and those who object to his name being on the ballot will get to question him personally.

They also will get to question the couple who began renting Emanuel's Chicago home when he moved to Washington.

It was obvious during a set-up hearing Monday that not everybody is well-versed on the finer points of the law — starting with one objector who couldn't understand why he wouldn't be allowed to subpoena journalists who have covered the issue to testify about what they know.

Emanuel and his lawyers claim he didn't forfeit his residency when he left Chicago. Among other things, the lawyers contend the Emanuel family continued to keep important personal items at their home, including his wife's wedding dress, the clothes his children wore home from the hospital after they were born and their school report cards. They have stressed he always intended to return.

"I own a home here in the city of Chicago," Emanuel told reporters during a campaign stop. "My car is licensed here in the city of Chicago. I pay property taxes here in the city of Chicago. I vote in the city of Chicago."

But attorney Burt Odelson said Emanuel did take some steps to give up his residency. For example, Odelson said Emanuel initially declared himself on tax forms to be a part-time resident of Chicago, and only changed that wording when people filed objections to his mayoral bid.

read more

A bipartisan bloc of senators easily propelled President Obama’s tax cut compromise over a key procedural hurdle yesterday, clearing the way for a final Senate vote as early as today, and setting the stage for a potential showdown later this week among divided Democrats in the House.

A looming Jan. 1 deadline — when Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire, raising taxes for most Americans — brought Democrats and Republicans together in the Senate to advance Obama’s compromise over the objection of liberals. The lopsided vote of 83 to 15 easily cleared a 60-vote threshold to prevent a filibuster and generated momentum for the Obama-GOP alliance on the contentious issue.

The agreement would extend the tax cuts at all income levels for two years, though most Democrats, including the president, had wanted the cuts to extend only to families with incomes less than $250,000 a year.

“I just can’t see adding hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit to give some multimillionaires a tax break, and that’s all there is to it,’’ said Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who joined a group of liberal senators and a smattering of conservative Republicans in voting no.

But the Senate’s minority leader, Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, said in a floor speech that the compromise was an essential first step toward addressing the nation’s deficit, by “cutting off the spigot’’ of tax income to the federal government to force Congress to make spending cuts.

In the House, debate is expected not only on the income tax, but on the estate tax. The current estate tax is zero, but it is due to be reset Jan. 1 at 10-year-old levels that members of both parties say are too high.

The president’s deal calls for a 35 percent tax on the value of an estate above $5 million — terms some Democrats in both chambers say is too generous to the wealthy.

“The estate tax is way too rich,’’ said Senator Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat who supported the overall deal on yesterday’s procedural vote. Conrad said he will try to amend the package before it is passed.

Many Democrats prefer setting the estate tax at 2009 levels: a 45 percent tax on value above $3.5 million.

“There’s much consternation in the House about the estate tax,’’ majority leader Steny Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland, said yesterday, suggesting the House could try to amend that if Conrad’s attempt fails.

The White House has warned there is little room for changes. Senator Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama, said yesterday that his party would not accept a significantly different bill.

“I would think that what we agreed on will probably prevail,’’ he said in an interview. He noted that “the size of the vote, the showing of a lot of bipartisanship over here,’’ should create momentum that will make it hard for the House to resist.

Several political analysts agreed. “Considering all the criticism this package got from the right and the left, this vote is remarkable,’’ said a University of Virginia political analyst, Larry Sabato.

The wide margin is a blow to opponents of the deal, he said, adding, “it’s hard to see now how this is stopped.’’

Some of the angry rhetoric from liberal Democrats against the package has dissipated. Last week, Democrats, including several from Massachusetts, had bitterly denounced the deal, and the House Democratic caucus objected in a nonbinding voice vote.

Yesterday, Hoyer spoke of compromise: “You know, my experience in life, I haven’t gotten everything I wanted. That’s life. That’s the way we work with one another.

“I think we’ll pass a bill,’’ Hoyer said in a speech before the National Press Club. “As opposed to simply not passing anything.’’

Still, Massachusetts House members had not warmed to it by yesterday, despite the overwhelming support in the Senate.

“I just don’t get borrowing $855 billion from the Chinese to help families making more than $250,000,’’ said Representative Stephen Lynch, a South Boston Democrat.

The deal, negotiated by the president and congressional Republicans, also extends for 13 months an expiring program to provide federal unemployment benefits to those who have exhausted their 26 weeks of state benefits. The compromise would also create or continue a variety of tax breaks for individuals and businesses, including the establishment of a cut of 2 percentage points in the payroll tax and an extension of alternative energy credits that were part of the federal stimulus bill.

Lawrence Summers, in his last speech as head of President Obama’s National Economic Council, said the tax cut plan “averts what could have been a serious collapse in purchasing power.’’ He also said it delivers more in stimulus spending than most Democrats had thought politically possible.

Both Bay State senators supported the compromise. Democratic Senator John Kerry said it was hard to accept the tax cuts for the wealthy, but that was the price for extending unemployment benefits and preventing a tax increase on the middle class.

“Is it the deal I wanted? No,’’ Kerry said in a statement. “But the reality is we don’t have 60 senators who oppose the Bush tax policies the way I do, and the way Barack Obama and Joe Biden do, and this compromise provides many critical benefits for middle class folks that we’ve been fighting for and haven’t been able to win any other way.’’

Republican Senator Scott Brown said in a statement that the deal “is good for American families, for small businesses, and for individuals in Massachusetts and across the country.’’

Obama, who has weathered heavy criticism from liberals who complain he gave up too much in the deal, said yesterday that the Senate vote “proves that both parties can in fact work together to grow our economy and look out for the American people.’’ He urged the House to act quickly.

Representative James McGovern, a Worcester Democrat who continues to oppose the deal, acknowledged that a number of House Democrats support the current package, and with Republican support there may be enough votes to pass it.

Jeffrey Berry, a Tufts University political science professor, agreed.

“House Democrats need some symbolic compromise to make the medicine go down easier,’’ he said, “but this will pass because Democrats can’t afford to hold it up’’ and be blamed for higher middle-class taxes.

read more

Residents here rejoiced two years ago when gas companies poked into a mammoth natural gas deposit 2 miles under their homes, sparking a modern-day gold rush.

The companies offered residents tens of thousands of dollars an acre to drill on their land, enriching some folks overnight in this rural corner of northwestern Louisiana.

Then cows started to die. Methane seeped into the drinking water. Homes were evacuated when natural gas escaped uncontrollably from a wellhead.

Today, many residents and local officials still praise the bounty reaped from the Haynesville Shale, one of the world's largest natural gas deposits, spread under Louisiana, Arkansas and eastern Texas. An estimated 250 trillion cubic feet of natural gas is trapped there — enough to power the United States for more than a decade, says Kevin McCotter, a senior director with Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy Corp., the largest gas producer in the area. The shale has delivered a clean energy source while enriching residents, he says.

"At a time when our nation needs jobs and domestic investment more than ever, the Haynesville Shale has been a flu shot for northern Louisiana and East Texas," he says.

Others question whether the money landowners get for leasing their property is worth the risk they say the drilling poses.

"There are a lot of concerns," says Kassi Ebarb, who organized neighbors in her Shreveport suburb to demand more environmental safeguards from gas companies. "We would walk away (from the money) rather than take anything that was insufficient to protect our neighborhood and our kids."

Shreveport and the surrounding area have entered a national debate on the safety standards of a specialized form of natural gas drilling that pumps chemicals and water into the ground to release natural gas trapped thousands of feet below.

The debate centers on the controversial technique known as "hydraulic fracturing," or "fracking," in which companies drill down, then horizontally to reach natural gas deposits trapped in a shale formation. A mixture of water, chemicals and sand then is pumped into the shale with great force, breaking up the rock and releasing the gas.

The technology allows drillers to extract previously inaccessible natural gas deposits and has opened huge swaths of the USA to drilling. Nearly 500,000 natural gas wells are producing in 32 states, up from 393,000 in 2003, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The percentage of natural gas drilled from shale formations using hydraulic fracturing is expected to climb from 14% last year to 23% in 2020, according to the Department of Energy.

Environmentalists warn that chemicals blasted into the ground during fracking could harm water supplies and release toxic air and water, threatening rivers, air quality and human health.

"We've gone from getting the easiest oil and gas to the hardest," says Gwen Lachelt, director of Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project, a group advocating stricter drilling regulations. "It's getting dirtier and dirtier."

Gas companies and advocates of fracking say the technique is safe and poses little risk to drinking water or the environment. "We have a very good record when it comes to hydraulic fracturing, its regulations and the safety of the environment," says Jodee Bruyninckx of the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association.

Recent developments in fracking:

•The New York Assembly last week passed a temporary ban on hydraulic fracturing until next year, while regulators review permitting rules.

•The Environmental Protection Agency in March launched a two-year study of the effects of hydraulic fracturing.

•The Pittsburgh City Council last month unanimously approved a measure banning natural gas drilling from its city limits, citing health and environmental concerns.

•The EPA last year found high levels of benzene, hydrocarbons and other harmful chemicals in water wells near gas rigs in Pavillion, Wyo., after residents complained of a foul odor and taste in the water, the agency says.

•Pennsylvania environmental regulators recently blamed the methane contamination of an aquifer — a natural underground formation that stores water — near Dimock, Pa., on Houston-based Cabot Oil & Gas, which has been drilling into the region's Marcellus Shale. Cabot disputes the allegation.

A 'tough road' to regulation

Fracking is exempt from the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, an exemption passed under the 2005 Energy Policy Act, according to legislative records. Under the exemption, gas companies don't have to disclose the chemicals used in the process.

A bill known as the FRAC Act, introduced in Congress last year by Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., would compel gas companies to reveal those chemicals, which largely have been guarded as trade secrets, Casey says. The bill is not expected to make it to the Senate floor in the near future, given the current political climate in Washington, he says.

"There's a tough road ahead of us," Casey says.

Further testing and monitoring should be done on the technique, which also is exempt from sections of the Clean Water Act and other federal environmental laws, says Josh Fox, a filmmaker whose documentary film, Gasland, profiles families across the USA impacted by natural gas drilling.

The film, released this year, shows residents setting the water coming out of their faucets on fire because of flammable methane gas in the water.

"This process has never been investigated," Fox says. "We don't put out drugs in the market without testing them first."

Fears of faucets flaring because of fracking are overblown, says Gary Hanson, a hydrologist at Louisiana State University at Shreveport who has studied the technique. Hydraulic fracturing bores down more than 2 miles underground, well past aquifers that sit at less than 1,000 feet, making it difficult for the process to contaminate drinking water supplies, he says.

Even if it doesn't fall under federal safety rules, fracking is still monitored by state and local agencies, Hanson says.

"You're going to have some incidents. There are going to be some spills," Hanson says. "But I don't see major contamination occurring."

Some see drilling as a 'blessing'

The financial benefits have been undeniable. Last year, Haynesville Shale drilling brought $10.6 billion in new business sales to the state, $5.7 billion in household earnings and 57,000 new jobs across the state, according to a study commissioned by the Louisiana Oil And Gas Association.

"Not only is natural gas production — and Haynesville Shale in particular — boosting Louisiana's economy and creating jobs, this type of exploration is helping to fuel America and decrease our dependence on foreign sources of energy," Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican, said in a statement.

Reegis Richard, pastor of the Temple of Knowledge Church International in nearby Mansfield, the heart of drilling activity, received $30,000 in gas money by leasing his church's 7 acres, and offerings from his enriched congregation have more than doubled, he says.

The influx of cash has allowed him to finish a new church building, open a private Christian school and travel twice to Israel with his wife and local ministers, he says.

"People's lives have been transformed," Richard says. "It's been a blessing."

The increased activity has also brought a greater strain on state regulators. In Louisiana, 38 oil and gas inspectors are responsible for monitoring the state's 19,000 producing natural gas wells, including 781 in the Haynesville Shale area, according to the state Department of Natural Resources.

State agencies "don't have the political will nor the budget or the staff to adequately address the level of drilling that's going on in this area," says Murray Lloyd, a local lawyer.

Last spring, the Caddo Parish Sheriff's Office received calls about cows in a pasture near a drilling rig that were foaming and bleeding at the mouth and keeling over, Sheriff Steve Prator says. Deputies found 17 dead cows there.

Necropsies later determined they had died from drinking fracking fluids that had leaked into the pasture, he says. Chesapeake and one of its subcontractors were later fined $22,000 each for the incident, according to the state Department of Environmental Quality.

Then in April, about 200 homes in rural Caddo Parish were evacuated when a gas well blew out, sending gas into the air and local water supply, Prator says. Regulators detected high levels of methane in water from residents' toilets and sinks, he says.

The incident prompted Prator to contact Jindal's Office of Homeland Security and create the Haynesville Shale Task Force to better plan for emergencies. Lack of coordination among state agencies and their overall handling of the events frustrated him, Prator says. Another worrying development: gas rigs creeping closer to schools and crowded neighborhoods, he says.

"It made me question, 'Are we doing the right thing?' " Prator says.

One of those evacuated during the blowout was Frances Contario, 50, who left her trailer near Wallace Lake and lived in a room at the Clarion Hotel in Shreveport with her 23-year-old son, Braden, for 17 days. EXCO Resources, the Dallas-based gas company responsible for the blowout, paid the residents' hotel tabs and expenses, Prator says.

Contario says she has been drinking only bottled water since returning and fears that the lake, streams and forests near her home will be fouled by under so much drilling.

"We didn't ask for this," says Contario, who grew up in the area. "Our biggest concern is that one day this will all be contaminated."

read more

On two separate Sunday news programs, the still-popular rascal of the 1990’s, Former President Bill Clinton, said that President Obama “was socked by the intensity of Republican opposition” and that “It disoriented him for awhile”, but that he is “getting his groove back”.

President Clinton went on to discuss the Republican strategy for regaining control of Congress, which was used against him in 1993 and 1994, which was simply to say no to everything. Mr. Clinton seems to forget that the Republicans regained control of Congress in the 1990’s because voters were angry that he sent our jobs to Mexico with NAFTA, and to other parts of the world with other Free Trade or Fair Trade agreements.

Now Obama proudly campaigns every week and tells Americans that the jobs that were sent overseas and south of the wide-open border with Mexico that “those jobs aren’t coming back”.

So what groove, exactly is our Socialist President supposed to be getting back? Has he found a way to send even more jobs out of the country? Well, of course he has! Most of the “Green Jobs Initiative” contracts went to places like China- curly-cue light bulbs, anyone? That contract was sent to China because the EPA didn’t want the dangerous mercury in the bulbs anywhere near people, because they don’t think Americans are smart enough to keep ourselves safe from the mercury, so now the fluorescent bulbs are not only made in China, this Chinese contract is forcing the closure of a light bulb factory in Winchester, Virginia.

Now the Mutual Adoration Society that is the Clinton/Obama Alliance will speak together in an event promoting the Clinton Initiative, meant to help women globally and supposedly to help create Green Jobs in the US without Government involvement. Does anyone smell the BS?

Clinton’s pandering to Big Business in the 1990’s sent American jobs everywhere but America. Obama is proud of the fact that not a single one of them will ever return to the US. POTUS has even said that it is a good thing they won’t return, saying that Americans need to be more educated, not so worried about jobs that are beneath them. Really, Mr. President?

All of America is supposed to be rich, fat and lazy, and let people like you and the other Marxists, Socialists and Progressives in your Administration brainwash us into believing we should serve you, we should serve everyone else in the whole world, and that America should make nothing, build nothing, unless we belong to a Union? Are we supposed to believe this crap?

What makes you think that Americans want to be indebted to the Government? Your experiences with the lazy, and the worthless in your Chicago Community Organizing efforts, who expect to be taken care of, and don’t believe they should work?

America wants her jobs back, so there won’t be so many poor huddled masses under bridges, Mr. President. We aren’t ashamed to work in factories or mills. We aren’t ashamed to dig coal. We aren’t ashamed to drive trucks. We are Americans, and there is nothing we cannot build, nothing our people cannot or will not do.

We deserve the chance to support our families without being indebted for decades by the price of a college education that isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. You never had a “groove”, Mr. President. You had a big mouth, and a big political machine behind that big mouth.

Welders, Halloween Costume, Fantasy Football, FFToolbox.com

read more