Archive | May 2013

This IRS scandal is going to come to the doors of a great many of these liberal democrat political hacks. Starting with Shumer and Franken who can’t answer a simple question.. because the answer is “yes we pressed the IRS to single out republican groups”.

And you people want these malicious fools controlling your health care?

Advertisements

Durbin says the First Amendment is out of date

Liberals despise the idea of a free press and free thought. Recent events prove this out. But another complete pin head Dick Durban thinks if you don’t tow the government line or you use alternative avenues to let your voice be heard…you are dangerous..

Again,… democrats… is this what you voted for??

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/2…ge-1/#comments

Thanks to the Obama administration’s attacks on the Associated Press and its representation in federal court that Fox News’ James Rosen is a spy for asking questions, one has to wonder whether the First Amendment applies to anyone in the Age of Hope and Change.

Fox News host Chris Wallace asked Senator Dick Durbin whether Barack Obama’s promise to have Eric Holder look into cases of abuse that he personally approved represents a conflict of interest, but Durbin dodges that question and talks instead about the shield law proposed repeatedly over the last few years as the appropriate Congressional response to the scandal. However, Durbin asks what exactly “freedom of the press” means in 2013, and wonders aloud whether it would include bloggers, Twitter users, and the rest of the Internet media:

Durbin’s question isn’t even the biggest non-sequitur in this argument. The biggest non-sequitur is the shield law itself, which wouldn’t have even addressed the Rosen or AP situation. And considering that the Obama administration ignored existing statutes in both cases, why should we believe they would obey a shield law when it got in their way?

‘They don’t want to integrate’: Fifth night of youth rioting rocks Stockholm

I find it revealing that even Sweden is finally understanding what open immigration and insane multiculturalism can do to a country.  There is a disaster on its way.  Same with France.  Same with Britain.  Look at the news this week and do your own Google search for the undeniable truth…

And most telling…. these are MUSLIMS!!!  Yet you won’t hear a peep about it in the USA press that these hooligans are MUSLIMS!!…   anyone see a trend??

http://rt.com/news/stockholm-violence-outbreak-fires-671/

Youth gang riots in the Swedish capital Stockholm have entered fifth straight night. Hundreds of mostly immigrant teenagers tore through the suburbs, smashing windows and burning cars in the country’s worst outbreak of violence in years.

“In Sweden you’ve got welfare, access to the educational system – up to university level, you got access to public transport, libraries, healthcare – to everything.  And still they feel that they [immigrants] need to riot through stones and Molotov cocktails.  It’s ridiculous and a bad excuse,” Swedish Democrats MP Kent Ekeroth told RT.

“Police can put down these riots in five minutes – if the politicians were to allow them,” Ekeroth added.

“The problem is not from the Swedish government or from the Swedish people,” the editor in chief of Dispatch International said. “The last 20 years or so, we have seen so many immigrants coming to Sweden that really don’t like Sweden. They do not want to integrate, they do not want to live in [Swedish] society: Working, paying taxes and so on.”

“The people come here now because they know that Sweden will give them money for nothing. They don’t have to work, they don’t have to pay taxes – they can just stay here and get a lot of money. That is really a problem,” Carlqvist added.

Young Muslims who enjoy tolerance, social institutions and welfare while living in Sweden nevertheless refuse to integrate into the West, Gerolf Annemans told RT. Annemans is the parliamentary leader of Vlaams Belang (‘Flemish Interest’), a Belgian far-right nationalist political party.

“They [Muslim youths] have always sought excuse to show that they are not agreeing with the basic values of Western society,” Annemans said, pointing to the recent cases of the Boston Marathon bombing in the US and yesterday’s beheading of a British soldier in the UK.

“It’s always the same problem. There is a massive refusal by Muslim youngsters of the basics of Western society…  and they take any excuse whatsoever to show that with violence – that is where the problem is,” he said.

 

 

Gun Running in Benghazi – More details and questions

Very detailed article attached for your review.  A couple of observations from it.  First, it does a great job cataloging the events leading up to 9/11 Benghazi and after.  Specifically how the CIA and State Department lost track of the Stingers post the attack on our Embassy.  They don’t know how many or where they are.  Most likely Syria.  Second, it questions which country was actually providing the weaponry and what, if any, involvement the US had in either providing or enabling shipment.  Finally, the article is completely sourced from public information.  As the author jokes at one point:

To save Eric Holder and the Department of Justice the trouble of reading my e-mail or collecting my phone records, all of the information in this report is gathered from public and open sources, both in the U.S. and overseas, and none of it can be considered classified or sensitive.

Amazing a journalist could put this kind of story together with publically available information yet this is being covered virtually no where in the press.  Link:

http://nationalreview.com/article/349231/%5Btitle-raw%5D-jim-geraghty

Obama / Hillary sent Chris Stevens to Bengahzi to buy back Stinger Missiles from Al-Qaeda

So, Obama gets us into an unconstitutional war in Libya and sells arms to terrorists to do it.  This is why they are trying to cover up Benghazi.  This is the true crime and issue.  This is why Chris Stevens was there on 9/11.   If true, this is explosive.  Is anyone in the MSM even remotely paying attention.  I am including a link from earlier as well.

The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”

This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.

http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/05/21/pjm-exclusive-ex-diplomats-report-new-benghazi-whistleblowers-with-info-devastating-to-clinton-and-obama/

https://atlasshruggedtoday.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/benghazi-cover-up-article-by-retired-admiral-sheds-light-us-gun-running-in-libya/

 

Sharp shoppers scuttle Obamacare

When are the obamacare supporters going to come out and agree that the people who opposed this insipid bill were 100% correct in their concerns??

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/20/sharp-shoppers-scuttle-obamacare/

The political travails of the Affordable Care Act — aka Obamacare — continue, as witnessed by the furor surrounding Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius‘ attempts to solicit funds to pay for its implementation. Politics do garner the bulk of the media attention, and the public may think that partisan battles will determine the law’s future.  A recent poll sponsored by the American Action Forum, though, shows that the nuts and bolts of consumer decision-making may be its real Achilles heel.

Unfortunately, health insurance is a product, not a social vision. What we know to be true thanks to ample survey and analytic research is that in 2014, Obamacare will cause insurance premiums to rise sharply for the healthy and young. When it comes to products, Americans aged 18 to 40 act like consumers of all ages everywhere: They have a price point, and when the price gets too high, they get busy making changes.

The results are illuminating. In this group of current insurance purchasers, only 83 percent will still purchase if premiums rise 10 percent; 65 percent, if premiums rise 20 percent; and only 55 percent, if premiums rise 30 percent. The economic lesson is simple: As premiums rise, eventually, some consumers reach a price point at which they simply stop buying health insurance.

The policy lesson is twofold. First, a law intended to expand coverage will to some extent do exactly the opposite. Second, young Americans are exceedingly rational. If premiums rise 10 percent, 7 percent of those polled would pay the penalty, but then turn around and buy insurance (as the law dictates they must be permitted to do) if they got sick. The fraction rises to 11 percent and 20 percent for the larger premium hikes, respectively.

Obamacare is a controversial law whose provisions have received a mixed public reception. These results are echoed by the sentiments of the 18- to 40 year-olds polled by the American Action Forum. Obamacare is intended to expand insurance coverage by mandating that those same young Americans form a lower-cost insurance pool. This group, however, powerfully undercuts this goal. Behaving like all price-conscious consumers, young Americans will drop their insurance in the face of sharp premium increases.

Hey Hillary, Look out, here comes the Benghazi Bus courtesy of the White House

Breaking News.  Repost from Breitbart.com:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/17/White-House-Officials-Blame-State-for-Not-Deploying%20Rapid-Response%20Terror%20Unit%20to%20Benghazi

FEST was not deployed and Attkisson’s White House sources blame that on Hillary Clinton’s deputy at State, Patrick Kennedy:

Yet deployment of the counterterrorism experts on the FEST was ruled out from the start. That decision became a source of great internal dissent and the cause of puzzlement to some outsiders.

Thursday, an administration official who was part of the Benghazi response told CBS News: “I wish we’d sent it.”

The official said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s deputy, Patrick Kennedy, quickly dispensed with the idea. A senior State Department official Thursday told CBS News, “Under Secretary Kennedy is not in the decision chain on FEST deployment” but would not directly confirm whether Kennedy or somebody else dismissed the FEST.

Regardless of who is responsible, the officials interviewed said there was no good reason not to deploy FEST.

White House critics would disagree.

One very good reason not to deploy FEST would be because the very act of deploying a counterterror unit to Benghazi would be an admission that a terrorist act had occurred in Benghazi. After the attack, the Obama Administration (which includes State) spent almost two weeks spinning a false narrative that said Libya was not a terror attack.

The fact that FEST was not deployed only helped that narrative.