Saturday, August 4, 2012

Unemploy Obama

The Weekly Standard ^ | Aug 13, 2012 | Irwin Stelzer

The latest jobs report should persuade all those who worry about the president’s economic policies but find him likable that enough is enough, and that policy trumps personality when it comes to deciding who should occupy the White House. Job creation remains anemic, the unemployment rate has ticked up to 8.3 percent, and the labor force participation rate continues to fall as more and more Americans choose the couch over tramping the streets looking for work. The Labor Department sums it up: Both the number of unemployed and the unemployment rate "have shown little movement thus far in 2012." It should be clear that it is time for a change.
The president has gambled the nation's ability to recover from this recession on policies that include high taxes, more regulation, attacks on businesses and "millionaires and billionaires," stimulus spending that ends up largely in the pockets of members of public service trade unions and campaign contributors, and huge deficits - gambled and lost.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Left Continues To Ignore Rampant Voter ID Fraud, Says Photo ID Laws Are Racist ^ | August 4, 2012 | Demetrius Minor

With the presidential election less than four months away, it's imperative that voters in November find the process as fair and accessible as possible. Several states have decided to enact the requirement of possessing a photo ID to help prevent the occurrence of voter fraud. Predictably, many on the Left are vocalizing their opposition to these measures, claiming that the elderly and minorities would not have the resources needed to acquire one, putting them at a distinct disadvantage.

This debate was accelerated to a higher level when Emily Schultheis of Politico opined that young voters and minorities will be grossly affected in swing states with these laws in tact. She points out that roughly 750,000 citizens in Pennsylvania do not have the necessary forms to acquire a photo ID card.

There is an implied notion here that individuals, specifically minorities, are not smart enough to figure out how to obtain proper identification. Liberals are notoriously known for claiming to be the champions of minority rights and equality, while invoking that the federal government must be the spokesperson for them because they are simply incapable of thinking on their own. What exactly is preventing young people and minorities from filling out forms needed to acquire a photo ID?

All Americans should reject this rhetoric. It is a common class warfare antic used by the Left to divulge attention from voter fraud and system inadequacies, and attempt to paint voter ID activists and advocates as racially motivated and bent on taking away votes from President Obama and other Democratic candidates.

The Left’s claim that voter identification affects turnout is preposterous. It’s a weak attempt to suggest that voters will be held back from voting for Obama due to stringent requirements, and not the simple fact that they are dismayed and dissatisfied with the president’s policies and the direction the U.S. economy is headed.

Schultheis referenced Attorney General Holder’s “poll tax” comparison when he spoke about voter ID laws at the NAACP convention earlier in July. It's rather ironic that the Attorney General expressed this divisive view with the NAACP, seeing as how the organization was just in hot water over corruption charges. Lessadolla Sowers, a Tunica County, MS NAACP Executive Committee member, was just sentenced to prison on 10 counts of illegally using absentee ballots.

Of course, the mainstream media doesn’t speak about this because it defeats the Left’s declaration that voter fraud doesn’t exist. They are counting on the fact that Americans will either be disillusioned, or turn a deaf ear to their cries of racism and injustice of those who are pleading for voting integrity. It is our duty and obligation to hold organizations like the NAACP accountable for trying to distort the voting process and tip the election results in favor of Democratic candidates.

But there are those who remain strong in leading the fight for voter integrity; Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True The Vote, a nonpartisan organization committed to combatting voter fraud nationwide, stated it best when she said, “Corruption, when not stopped at the polls, rises essentially unchecked to the highest offices in our nation. And it has to stop. If our elections aren’t truly fair, we aren’t truly free.”

Reid Again Prevents Vote on Obamacare Repeal (gridlock)

Newsmax ^ | 8/03/12

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yet again stymied a Republican attempt to vote on repealing the healthcare reform law Thursday evening.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell proposed that the Senate vote on repeal of Obamacare soon after it returns from vacation in September, The Hill reports. “Let’s have a vote,” McConnell said on the floor. “Is Obamacare making things better or worse? Let’s show the American people what they want. It’s a vote they deserve.”

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Time to Bench Obama: "I’m Dirty Harry and I approved this message!"

Michelle Obama's Mirror ^ | 8-4-2012 | MOTUS

It’s half time in America, people. And things aren’t looking so good.

Our quarterback has had a rough first half. And the coaches have gotten together and they think it might be time to pull him...

...Because when the guy with the fistful of dollars says "I think the country needs a boost," I’m inclined to listen...

I’m Dirty Harry and I approved this message
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Ohio Concerned With Obama Military Lawsuit

Daily Caller ^ | Holly Bensur

The Obama for America campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Ohio Democratic Party filed a lawsuit in late July to strike down part of an Ohio law concerning voting by members of the military, reported on Thursday.
The law currently allows Ohio citizens to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election, and gives members of the military three additional days to vote.
Democrats contest the law, saying that it is “arbitrary” and possesses “no discernible rational basis.”
The National Defense Committee says that the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the president and Congress that the primary “reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote,” for each of the last three years.
“We are concerned with the premise of the lawsuit,” Maggie Osrowki, a spokeswoman for the Ohio Secretary of State told The Daily Caller. The Obama for America campaign and the DNC “disagree with the additional flexibility” the law gives to military members.
“There are plenty of opportunities for Ohioans to participate in the election,” Osrowki said. Military members are “in a different situation than all the other voters.”
On the other hand, says ”it is extremely difficult or impossible for ordinary people to vote,” because most states require identification in order to vote.

Even New York Times Notes History of Harry Reid Viciousness

NewsBusters ^ | August 4, 2012 | P.J. Gladnick

Although Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been described as "soft-spoken" in the Huffington Post and "honorable" by CNN's Candy Crowley, even many liberals such as Jon Stewart have registered disgust over the wild charges that Reid has been hurling about an "unnamed" source telling him that presidential candidate Mitt Romney hasn't paid his income taxes for ten years. And now even the New York Times, in an article by Michael D. Shear and Richard A. Oppel, has noted the wild charges that Reid has tossed around in the past:

...Mr. Reid appears to be once again reprising a rhetorical technique he has mastered over 25 years in the Senate: repeatedly needling his Republican adversaries in ways that often push the boundaries of political propriety.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Gallup: Obama Negative Ratings in 37 states, But King of DC! ^ | August 4, 2012 | Byron York

Gallup has just released Barack Obama’s job approval rating for the first half of 2012, broken down by state, and the news is not encouraging for the president.

Obama’s approval rating is below 50 percent in 37 states, ranging from a 26 percent rating in Utah to a 49 percent rating in Michigan. Obama is at 50 percent or higher in just 13 states, from a 50 percent rating in Minnesota to a 63 percent rating in Hawaii. The president is most popular in Washington DC, where his job approval rating is an astonishing 83 percent.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Happy Birthday Barack





The People v. The Democratic Party

Frontpage ^ | Jul 26th, 2012 | Mark Tapson

In the latest in a series of 48-page broadsides from Encounter Books, writer Michael Walsh puts the Democratic Party on trial and presents the case for abolishing what is nothing more than “a criminal organization masquerading as a political party.”

Michael Walsh is an American Book Award-winning novelist, music critic, screenwriter, and media critic. Formerly the editor of Andrew Breitbart’s, he writes political commentary for the New York Post and also for the National Review under both his own name and that of his alter ego David Kahane, whose Rules for Radical Conservatives: Beating the Left at its Own Game to Take Back America is a must-read guide for waging political warfare. Now Walsh brings his erudition, humor, and political killer instinct to his Encounter pamphlet, The People v. The Democratic Party.
Not one to urge Republicans to reach across the political aisle in search of compromise, Walsh begins by pulling no punches in his condemnation of those on the other side of that aisle. “From the inception of the Republic,” he writes, “the Democratic Party has been a public enemy – an organization antithetical to our nation’s traditions, civic virtues, and moral values.” In fact, “the party of slavery, segregation, secularism, and sedition has always been in the forefront of everything inimical to the United States of America.”

He proceeds to sketch the history of the Democratic Party by noting that one of its founders and its first vice-president, Aaron Burr Jr., shot and killed one of the Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton, in a duel and plotted sedition against his own president: “If one man besides George Washington can be said to have set the American experiment on its future course – in this case not for good but for ill – that man is Burr.” The duel embodied the struggle between the Federalists and the Democrats, and a two-party conflict has been waged ever since. Burr went on to lead Tammany Hall, a New York City political organization which became the iconic standard of big-city corruption and of politics as special-interest factionalism and legalized bribery.
Walsh moves on to a brief discussion of the Civil War, during which it was the Democratic Party that was “on the wrong side of history” (as the left always likes to accuse Republicans of being). They denounced the Republican President Lincoln as a tyrant and advocated a settlement with the South. Lincoln was later assassinated by a Democrat, John Wilkes Booth.
Picking up the story again with the history of the corrupt Society of Tammany, which “set the Democrats fully on their strategic path of political tribalism,” and its immigrant gangland alliance all the way into the 1920s and ‘30s, Walsh points out that
The Democratic Party has always appealed to the basest instincts of the American people, molting and changing shape as the political winds dictated but solely devoted to its raison d’etre: the accumulation and retention of political power.
Despite the Democratic Party successfully selling itself as the political champion of social justice for the poor and the dispossessed, its actual history reveals it to be otherwise:

Always wrapping itself in the false cloak of righteousness and celebrating the folk wisdom of the demos, the Democrats have consistently championed class envy, social division, and often – quite nakedly – racism, if they thought it would buy them votes.
Only the Democrats could reinvent themselves so effortlessly, molting from the party of the Ku Klux Klan to the party of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. From the party of the aggressive atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair, who destroyed school prayer and helped set the country on its downward moral spiral in 1963, to the party of Bible-toting Baptist presidents (Bill Clinton) and the racist ravings of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. When your only principle is power, it’s easy to embrace flexibility and nuance.
He moves on into the ‘50s, when the Cold War ratcheted up Democratic corruption and Soviet infiltration in the State Department, which as Walsh says, “remains the most consistently left-wing, at times anti-American, entity in the executive branch.” He briefly relates tales of such Communist agents as George Koval, “perhaps the Soviet Union’s most effective atomic spy” who looted secrets from the Manhattan Project labs, and Walter Kendall Myers, a State Dept. analyst who received a life sentence in 2010 for spying for Cuba for 30 years.
A significant segment of the left,” Walsh writes, “sees absolutely nothing wrong with what they did”:
[S]omething in Marxism, Communism, and – especially, I would argue – totalitarianism fires the imagination of the “peaceful and tolerant” left, which can’t wait to seize power and impose its will on the citizens of the United States – for their own good, naturally.
He ties this in with President Obama, the progressive word-made-flesh, the living embodiment of the Cloward-Piven strategy: “Obama is the ne plus ultra of the twin strains of anti-American leftist thought, the spawn of the gangster ethos of the 1920s and ‘30s and the fashionable Marxism of the ‘revolutionary’ year of 1968.”
Walsh then addresses more contemporary facets of the Democratic Party’s “political perfidy, cultural malevolence, and, when necessary, sedition and outright treason,” such as voter fraud and the left-leaning media’s complicity.
In his closing argument for this short but wide-ranging and entertaining work, The People v. The Democratic Party, Walsh posits that it’s time to consider abolishing that party entirely, for the good of the country:
Is there a place in the American political system for a truly loyal opposition – one that does not seek “fundamental transformation” of our constitutional Republic but rather its betterment and continuance? Of course there is.
But is there a place for a criminal organization masquerading as a political party? If our nation is to survive, not any more.

Pink Slip

Obama's Post-Apocalyptic Economy

Tea Party Tribune ^ | 2012-08-03 12:13:55 | mrcurmudgeon

By Mr. Curmudgeon:
While Team Obama presses on with its campaign to frighten anxious Americans away from freedom and its residual energy, capitalism, Obama's anti-free market ethos is etching an indelible mark on our society.
Friday, the "official" unemployment rate in America bumped up to 8.3% from its previous 8.2%, and the Department of Labor Statistics' U-6 number (the jobless rate for Americans who have run through their unemployment benefits and still cannot find work) stands at a staggering 14.9%.
The Labor department also broke down the jobless U-6 figures for the states: Nevada (Harry Reid's state) 22.1%; California 20.3%; Rhode Island 18.3%; Florida 17%; Ohio and Pennsylvania stand at 14%.
"The lack of improvement in state U-6 rates continues to be troubling," Chris Mauro, a municipal bond investment specialist, told CNBC, "... state U-6 levels remain dramatically higher than they were in 2007 and 2008."
The stubborn real unemployment rate of Obamanomics undermines the income redistribution dreams of governments (federal, state and local) and reduces the credit worthiness of consumers.
What Obamanomics lacks in tangible job creation, it more than makes up for in the growth of another commodity ... fear."What am I going to do if I'm homeless?" asked 52-year-old Laurie Cullinan, an out-of-work office manager whose unemployment benefits are about to run out, "My mind won't let me comprehend that," reports USA TODAY.
"More Americans who are concerned about the teetering financial system dependent on government handouts are preparing for a potential doomsday scenario," writes CNBC reporter Jane Wells, "They have been dubbed 'Suburban Survivalists,' and they're one reason stocks of companies like Cabela's and Big Five have more than doubled since the start of the year."
Wells relates how Jim Wiseman, a La Jolla, California fire protection contractor, has stacked enough canned goods in his garage to feed 10 people for a year, installed a 250-gallon water tank, purchased a portable electric generator and assembled enough weapons to protect his stores and family.
Washington's response to the financial crisis - bank bailouts and redistributive "stimulus" - fed Wiseman's fears, "If this was our response from the government to fix the problem, then I can't depend on them to provide for me and my family," the father of five told CNBC.
Obama's economic prescriptions, writes Wells, told Wiseman the nation's community-organizer's aim was not to "let the free markets work, but to hand out money."
Entitlement-dazed Americans are getting a first-class lesson in basic economics from the man who proudly proclaimed, "When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Obama and the Federal Reserve have spent untold trillions of dollars to sustain big governments internationally (even down to the state level), coupled with bailouts for their crony-capitalist enablers. Elbowed out of the credit markets, the "you didn't build that" small business sector (the largest employer in America) cannot grow.
Shrinking government tax receipts means entitlement programs are running out of money, and it's only a matter of time before international investors in U.S. debt (China) stop propping up a going-out-of-business America.
No economic growth, no "wealth to spread around." Parasitical socialism is killing its capitalist host.
"We have the right as individuals to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity," said frontier Congressman Davy Crockett, "but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money."
Of course, Crockett lived at a time when Congress governed under the limits placed upon its power by the United States Constitution. Securing individual freedom, not providing fictional economic security, was its chief responsibility under the law.
After his defeat for re-election in 1836, Crockett's farewell speech was classic. He told a constituent gathering that he was "done with politics for the present" and that they "might all go to hell, and I will go to Texas."
Unlike the Americans of today, Crocket hunted his own food, once killing a bear (if the story is true) with nothing more than a pack of hunting dogs and his knife.
As you surely know, Crocket's Texas adventure didn't go so well. His rugged self-reliance - emulated by Jim Wiseman of La Jolla - didn't spare him from the bayonets affixed to rifles commanded by the big-government dictator of Mexico, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna.
Attaining power, not providing economic security for the people, is big government's chief goal. To achieve this, big government must destroy any possibility for free Americans to achieve self-reliance.
We can all go to Texas, but Obama's distructive big government will be waiting.

Barack Obama Runs On Empty And Toward Defeat!

Investor's Business Daily ^ | August 3, 2012 | Douglas MacKinnon

The social experiment that was Barack Obama's election and presidency is over. Way over.
As one who was born in the heart of Boston and worked the political world of Washington for 20 years, I know quite a few Democrats. Some are family, and many are close friends. Most voted for Obama in 2008. None at this point is inclined to vote for him in 2012.
Why? Because they view him as an abject failure across the board and have decided to put the welfare of their families and themselves before the empty rhetoric of the Obama campaign before it's too late.
Because of my time in Washington and past positions there, I also know and am friends with quite a few journalists. I speak with many on a regular basis, and it's safe to say that the majority of them lean left politically.
That said, in off-the-record conversations with my left-leaning journalistic friends, not one believes Obama is going to win re-election. Not one. While most believe Mitt Romney to be a weak candidate, they are still convinced that he will comfortably defeat Obama on Nov. 6.
These liberal and jaded journalists privately admit that Obama has been exposed for what he is: an overhyped, self-invented candidate with no real-world experience who has been frozen into inaction by the enormity of the office he holds.
Obama has no domestic policy to speak of. He has no foreign policy to speak of. He has no jobs program to speak of. His signature health care plan is driving doctors out of the field, crippling small businesses and putting thousands of Americans out of work.
The Obama of 2012 has nothing positive to run on. Nothing. And guess what? He, more than anyone else in his White House or campaign, knows it.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...


Richard D Gregory Sr | 08/03/2012 | Richard D Gregory Sr

We all want to say something about this “gay” or homosexual thing gripping the nation today. I do too. I just want to say my piece without… anger, or hatred…how can we do this? How can we make statements about homosexual …ideals? It’s easy The lifestyle of the homosexual has been proven to be dangerous; Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome speaks for itself. It is acquired. People do not just get this disease. It only comes from homosexual activity. Now the homosexuals would like our schools to teach this “alternative lifestyle” to our children. I am sure everyone knows once AIDS is contracted; there is no cure. With expensive drugs this can be slowed; but there is still no cure.

That was sort of like smoking cigarettes. I used to smoke. Once I became addicted to them; it was real tough to quit. But eventually I did quit; I almost cannot breath anymore but I did quit. I think that would be sort of like homosexuality. Being addicted is terrible; I guess I am an alcoholic; well, I drank from the time I was around seventeen ‘till I was somewhere around fifty. Let me see; 17 yrs old to start; then a few quits, then finally in ‘91 I quit. Talk about dangerous habits; each seems as bad as the other; they all kill; some quicker than others.
Now we get to Dan Cathy; A man builds a business; he works hard; takes financial chances; creates something that is proven to be a successful. So now people that may, or may not be homosexual attack him. Why? Because; according to some; they don’t like Mr Cathy’s convictions. You see; Mr Cathy is a Christian. Now there are others maybe many more; cities which do not like Mr Cathy’s Christianity; how did Rohm Immanuel put it? He doesn’t like his principles? Would Rohm prefer people that are killers; or just what kind of people??? What happened to our Christian Heritage? We used to be able to practice our faith in America. Now Mister Obama wants us to stop being Christians?? I remember protests; Rev Dr Martin Luther King practiced Protests. They were peaceful; not from the point of view of some; but Dr King’s were. He practiced non-violence. Well; we’re in a bad situation now; the homosexuals want us to practice a dangerous lifestyle; teach our children the habit of homosexuality; and America does not want us to. Chicago and Boston, and maybe some Californians want to create hardships for an individual who is industrious. These cities plan on creating a situation to stifle business; at a time when America needs to build businesses. All for a dangerous choice which kills. Have you made your peace with GOD? Richard D Gregory Sr

Coal CEO Tells Soledad O'Brien 'Obama Responsible Entirely for Closure of Mine and Loss of Jobs'! ^ | August 3, 2012 | Noel Sheppard

Robert E. Murray, the founder and CEO of Murray Energy Corporation, told CNN's Soledad O'Brien Friday that the closure and subsequent layoffs at his company's mine near Brilliant, Ohio, were "entirely" due to the anti-coal policies of Barack Obama.

Not surprisingly, the Starting Point host spent much of the eleven-minute segment defending the president she adores from this accusation (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Coal CEO Tells Soledad O'Brien 'Obama Responsible Entirely for Closure of Mine and Loss of Jobs'

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, HOST: This morning we're taking a closer look at coal, an Ohio mining company now shutting down its operations. That will happen in the fall laying off all its workers. They say it's the president's fault. An Ohio American Energy statement says this, regulatory actions by President Barack Obama and his appointees and followers were cited as the entire reason of the closure. The mine is located near Brilliant, Ohio. At its peak, 239 people work there. Right now, they have 56 employees, 32 of them have been told they will be transferred within the company.
Overall the coal industry has been suffering lately. In 2011, the United States used 124 million fewer tons of coal than four years earlier and its competition, natural gas, has become lots cheaper to use.
Ohio American Energy is a subsidiary of Murray Energy Corporation and Mr. Murray, Robert Murray, is the founder, its chairman, its president and CEO. It's nice to see you, sir. Thanks for talking with us.
When we read your press release yesterday you blamed regulatory actions by President Barack Obama. What specific regulatory actions are you referring to that you specifically say are being blamed for the closure of this company?

ROBERT E. MURRAY, FOUNDER & CEO, MURRAY ENERGY CORPORATION: Good morning, ma'am. Yes, ma'am, President Obama is responsible entirely for the closure of that mine and the loss of those jobs.
So far according to his own energy information agency, he has closed 175 power plants, coal fired power plants, in the United States of America.
O'BRIEN: So I was asking though about --
MURRAY: -- are being eliminated.
O'BRIEN: I was asking though about the specific because you talk about regulations. I wanted to know which were the regulations you felt specifically were to blame for the fact this mining operation was going to have to shut down?
MURRAY: Those are some of the specific regulations. The many regulations that he and his radical appointees and the U.S. EPA have put on the use of coal, there are dozens of them and collectively by his own energy administration have closed 175 power plants.
In addition, we cannot get permits for these mines. They are delaying the issuance of permits. If you can't get the permit, you can't have the mine. Ma'am, I'm very distraught this morning because this is a human issue to me.
I created those jobs and I put the investment in that mine. And when it came time to lay the people off, I went up personally and talked to everyone of them myself to lay them off. It's a human issue. Obama --
O'BRIEN: Forgive me for interrupting. People who are environmentalists, often clashing with the coal companies would also say it's a human issue.
Your attorney who was cited in some articles mentioned three specific rules so I'll name them, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, which is known as CARE, which put in place back in 2005, before President Obama.
The Cross State Air Pollution rule, which actually there is a stay on that law, it hasn't been implemented yet. And there's the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which would basically make sure that air quality for certain things like carbon monoxide and lead and nitrogen dioxide and particle pollution and sulphur dioxide.
That all those things are not only monitored, but they are also limited so they can't drift from one coal production into another state. So I think environmentalists would say that these are rules that are actually very valuable.
Talk about caring for people, to -- in terms of people's health as well. Some of them started not under President Obama, but started way before President Obama came into office.
MURRAY: You are correct and incorrect both. Though the CARE Act enacted in 2005 did protect the health of people and it did allow the coal industry to exist.
It is what the Obama administration has done with those rules over the years and implemented since he took office. He said when he took office if you build a coal powered plant in America we're going to bankrupt you.
Joe Biden said no coal in America. They are making good on that promise. But to me as I started to say it's a human issue, Ma'am, because he's destroying the lives and livelihoods of many people I know by name. These jobs will never come back.
No, they likely won't, but that didn't prevent O'Brien from continuing to defend the President.
As the conversation ensued, she brought up Murray's political contributions as well as something he once said about George W. Bush:

O'BRIEN: You know, I want to ask you about the politics of this. Because when people look into who you support politically this year alone, right, and we're only in August. I believe you've given $150,000 to the GOP. You know, so I think there are people who could say, your position is more about politics than anything else.
Wouldn't you love to see O'Brien challenging an Obama-supporting businessman with his political contributions? Don't hold your breath.
But she wasn't done shooting the messenger:

O'BRIEN: Let me read a quote from you. You said, "God was shining on America when Bush got elected." That's a quote. All I can say, God was shining on America when George W. Bush got elected and there are many people who would look to the reputation that the Bush administration had. Courts found and this is a quote, in court rulings, that "The administration contradicted and disregarded language of the Clean Air Act" and the courts overturned 15 rulings of the administration's own Environmental Protection Agency.
So I think that there are people who would say it's not, not about politics. That actually, clearly, if you run a coal company and you're trying to get a break on certain policies.
And that actually it does matter who's in office and you might be more willing and supportive of someone you think will give you a break.
Pretty predictable, isn't it? Frankly, I'm surprised she didn't accuse Murray of being racist.
That would have been par for the course.
(HT Deneen Borell)

“This guy shouldn’t have been in America"...Obama's Willie Horton!

Examiner ^ | Jan, 2012 | Dave Gibson

Is Kesler Dufrene Barack Obama’s Willie Horton? He should be. Remember Horton? Furloughed for the weekend from a Massachusetts prison Horton, a convicted killer, brutalized a couple, stabbed the man and raped his fiancé twice.

Presidential candidate Al Gore exposed the furlough fiasco in a Presidential Candidate Debate with Michael Dukakis, ....
Kesler Dufrene, on the other hand, is the direct responsibility of President Obama...
According to North Miami detectives, a twice-convicted felon and Haitian illegal alien whose deportation was stayed by the Obama administration murdered three people, including a 15-year-old girl last year.
Though an immigration judge ordered that Kesler Dufrene be deported when he got out of prison for burglary in October 2010, immigration authorities in Miami simply released the illegal alien back onto the streets.
On January 2, 2011, Dufrene shot three people to death, according to North Miami police.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Ex-Navy Seal Launches Anti-Obama Super PAC!

Newsmax ^ | Friday, 03 Aug 2012 05:59 PM | David A. Patten

It sounds like a plot out of an espionage thriller: An elite group of special-forces soldiers goes rogue, vowing to stop a politically ambitious president.

In reality, a group of former special-operations warriors in fact has precisely that goal in mind. And to accomplish their aim, they have created their own super PAC.
Ryan Zinke, a former Navy SEAL Commander and Republican state senator from Montana, has announced the formation of a new Special Operations for America PAC. He told Newsmax in an exclusive interview that the PAC is dedicated to supporting a strong military, and hopes to give the soldiers who put their lives on the line a political voice. …
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

US to weigh gay relationships in deportation cases (if you're QUEER, you can stay!)

Associated Press ^ | Aug. 3, 2012 8:30 PM ET | LISA LEFF and AMY TAXIN

Amid pressure from Democratic lawmakers, Homeland Security officials reiterated Friday that a foreigner's longstanding same-sex relationship with a U.S. citizen could help stave off the threat of deportation.

Binational gay couples are eligible for consideration under a federal program designed to focus resources away from low-priority deportation cases and let officials spend more time tracking down convicted criminals, said Marsha Catron, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security.
However, the Obama administration will not automatically shelve deportation cases or process green card applications involving foreign citizens married to same-sex American partners.
Catron said Homeland Security will continue to comply with a 1996 law that prohibits the government from recognizing same-sex relationships, even as it takes these relationships into consideration when evaluating possible deportation.
The Obama administration last year said it considers the Defense of Marriage law unconstitutional and would no longer defend it in court. …
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Target 11 investigates telemarketers violating the Do Not Call list ^ | August 3, 2012

PITTSBURGH -- The national Do Not Call registry was supposed to stop calls from telemarketers, but it hasn’t worked as well it should. The Federal Trade Commission says complaints are up. Target 11 Consumer Investigator Robin Taylor takes a look at why the calls haven't stopped.
When you used to answer a phone call from a telemarketer there would be a pause after you said hello and then a real person would come on the line.
These days, telemarketers are using prerecorded messages known as robocalls, which are even more frustrating because you can't say, “Don't call me.”
Robocall: "This is a very important message about your current credit card accounts."
Breana Gardner, who lives in Plum Borough, contacted Target 11 because she gets robocalls like this from telemarketers that want to lower her interest rate all the time.
"I can honestly say I don't have any credit cards right now, so I don't know what kind of interest rates they want to lower," said Gardner.
Her number is on the Do Not Call list, but that hasn't stopped the telemarketers. She recently got five calls from the same company in one day.
"It's very annoying, but what are you going to do?" said Gardner.
The Federal Trade Commission says the number of complaints about telemarketers violating the Do Not Call registry has more than doubled in the past year.
"There have been a number of technological developments that have made it very cheap and very easy for people to send out millions of these robocalls with just the click of a mouse," said Kati Daffen, an attorney with the FTC.
The new technology allows telemarketers to spoof caller ID, and that makes it harder for the FTC to trace the call.
Robocalls are against the law unless you've stated in writing you want to receive them. The exceptions are political calls, surveys and charitable solicitations.
Robocall: "Hello. The FBI reports there is a home break-in every 15 seconds."
Diana Mey is a consumer advocate from Wheeling, W. Va., who was so annoyed by these disruptions that she sued and was part of a class action lawsuit that won $6 million.
"If I'm getting them, I can only imagine what other consumers are getting," said Mey.
Robocall: “Our records indicate that you have a vehicle that's under 100,00 miles."
Mey now records telemarketing calls. She questions why they are violating the law.
"I'm just curious as to why you called my number since it's on the national Do Not Call registry. Do you have any explanation for that?" asked Mey.
"You would think my name would be in neon lights flashing in every boiler room across the country, and yet I still get the calls," said Mey.
The FTC says that if you get an illegal robocall that asks you press a number to be put on their Do Not Call list, don’t press it. Just hang up, because pressing any button will only verify your phone number is valid and lead to more robocalls.
The federal government is stepping up its efforts to fine violators. It's sued 85 companies and collected $68 million in penalties.
"These cases have shut down companies that were responsible for billions of robocalls," said Daffan.
You can report illegal robocalls to the FTC. To file a complaint, click here.
You should also make sure your number is on the national Do Not Call list. It only takes a few minutes to register. National “Do Not Call” Registry
Pennsylvania also has a Do Not Call list, and the attorney general will go after violators. “Do Not Call” Law in Pennsylvania


AP ^ | 8/2/2012 | Josh Lederman

WASHINGTON—The Internal Revenue Service may have delivered more than $5 billion in refund checks to identity thieves who filed fraudulent tax returns for 2011, Treasury Department investigators said Thursday. They estimate another $21 billion could make its way to ID thieves' pockets over the next five years. The IRS is detecting far fewer fraudulent tax refund claims than actually occur, according to a government audit that warned the widespread problem could undermine public trust in the U.S. tax system. Although the IRS detected about 940,000 fraudulent returns for last year claiming $6.5 billion in refunds, there were potentially another 1.5 million undetected cases of thieves seeking refunds after assuming the identity of a dead person, child or someone else who normally wouldn't file a tax return.
In one example, investigators found a single address in Lansing, Mich., that was used to file 2,137 separate tax returns. The IRS issued more than $3.3 million in refunds to that address. Three addresses in Florida, the epicenter of the identity theft crisis, filed more than 500 returns totaling more than $1 million in refunds for each address.
In another troubling scenario, hundreds of refunds were deposited into the same bank account—a red flag for investigators searching for ID thieves who may be filing for refunds for multiple people. In one instance, the IRS deposited 590 refunds totaling more than $900,000 into one account.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Dems Move to Block Military Vote!

Semi-News/Semi-Satire ^ | 3 Aug 2012 | John Semmens

In recent elections less than 5% of the ballots cast by active duty military personnel serving overseas arrived in time to be counted. Nevertheless, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and the Ohio Democratic Party have jointly filed suit in Ohio to strike down a law that gives deployed troops more time to cast absentee ballots.

The suit alleges that the provision allowing more time for deployed troops is “contrary to the policy of the current Administration” and “would improperly embroil military personnel in partisan politics.”
DNC Chairperson Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla) declared that “it is a long standing tradition in America that our armed forces do not engage in partisan politics while on duty. States should not be permitted to undermine this tradition.”
“Not only would the Ohio law undermine this tradition, it also would undermine national security,” she added. “Soldiers deployed overseas should not be distracted from their primary duty of carrying out the orders of their Commander-in-Chief. The idea that we should be accommodating the opportunity for them to vote to depose their Commander-in-Chief is about as wrongheaded as could be.”
Wasserman-Schultz assured that she isn't advocating taking away their right to vote because “a move that overt could incite a negative reaction from too many people. Letting them cast ballots that arrive too late to be counted is a good compromise. It's kind of a 'pressure release valve.' We allow them to vent without subjecting the nation to an unwarranted influence on election outcomes.”
Surveys of military personnel indicate that they tend to favor Republicans by about a three to one ratio.
In related news, U.S. District Judge Gregg Costa blocked a Texas voter registration law on the grounds that “requiring ID will tend to discourage those without documents from voting. This disproportionately affects those of Mexican descent.” Costa ruled that “until everyone has documents no one can be required to show them in order to cast a ballot.”
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news posts you can find them at...

Romney lands Clint Eastwood endorsement!

CNN ^ | August 4, 2012 | Shawna Shepherd

It could have been a scene from one of his films, but fortunately for Mitt Romney, it was no act when Clint Eastwood endorsed him Friday night.
At a fundraiser in the Idaho resort town of Sun Valley, where Eastwood owns a home, Romney said the legendary actor and director "just made my day."
But Eastwood showed up at the Sun Valley resort as a citizen concerned about the direction of the country, telling reporters beforehand he was backing the Republican presidential candidate "because I think the country needs a boost somewhere."
He later told hundreds at the outdoor reception that Romney was "going to restore, hopefully, a decent tax system that we need that there's a fairness and people are not pitted against one another as to who's paying taxes and who isn't."
The 82-year-old also weighed in on the controversy involving U.S. Olympians, depending on their income bracket, getting taxed on their medals...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

To win, Obama needs to get white voters to stay home!

Hot Air ^ | August 3, 2012 | Howard Portnoy

President Obama has met the enemy, and they are us (us, that is, if you are Caucasian). So reads the handwriting on the wall, according to BuzzFeed, which reports:

President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign has spent more than $100 million on advertising over the last 3 months. Much, if not most, of it has been produced to shred Mitt Romney’s reputation and suppress turnout among white voters who might vote for Romney.

That last sentence is worth re-reading. It links to a New York Times op-ed that notes with equal candor, not to mention nonchalance:
He is running a two-track campaign. One track of his re-election drive seeks to boost turnout among core liberal groups; the other aims to suppress turnout and minimize his margin of defeat in the most hostile segment of the electorate, whites without college degrees.
It’s a simple matter of arithmetic, the BuzzFeed article goes on to note. In 2008, black voter turnout reached its highest level ever. Hispanic and “youth” voters (ages 18 to 29) also turned out in record numbers. Obama captured 43% of the white vote, cinching a victory.
But with black unemployment reaching 14.4% in July and unemployment among millennials at 12.7%, enthusiasm is down. The dreaded “white vote” is now expected to account for 75% of ballots cast.
By most analysts’ lights, Obama needs to capture 40% of that voting bloc to win a second term. But a Quinnipiac poll released on July 12 shows him attracting just 29% of non-college-educated white males. Taken together with other recent polls, Obama’s share of the white vote as a whole is well shy of the 40% threshold.
The BuzzFeed piece predicts a “chemical warfare campaign, the war to end all wars” but doesn’t offer specifics on what that might translate to.
In the meantime, one might wonder how Obama supporters countenance speaking in such matter-of-fact terms about voter suppression, which Democrats consider the ultimate sin. The answer is provided in the Times op-ed by Thomas Edsall, who asserts that Obama is merely taking a page out of the Republican handbook. “Over the past two years,” he writes, “Republican-controlled state legislatures have been conducting an aggressive vote-suppression strategy of their own through the passage of voter identification laws and laws imposing harsh restrictions on voter registration drives.”
It is a fascinating admission. He imputes the basest possible motive to supporters of voter IDs laws, and one that is unprovable, to justify behavior that can’t rationalized as anything other cynical and anti-American. Just imagine the reaction if the tables were turned.

Romney can't ignore Sarah Palin in 2012. The Tea Party champ is more politically relevant than ever!

The London Telegraph ^ | August 2, 2012 | Dr. Tim Stanley, Oxford University

Love her or loathe her (and those seem to be the only options), Sarah Palin won’t go away. Despite holding no office and having no obvious intention of running for one, she continues to dominate headlines and divide the country. So how will Romney handle her in 2012? Presuming that he won’t nominate her for Veep (the smart money is on a really boring white guy), what role – if any – will she take in the campaign? Should the GOP embrace the Palin effect or pretend it doesn’t exist?

Palin’s national role in the last few days reminds us why she matters. Last Sunday, Dick Cheney told ABC News that he thought putting her on the ticket in 2008 was a mistake because she wasn’t “capable of being President of the United States.” Cheney’s idea of a perfect ticket would probably be Cheney and Cheney, so we might put this one down to ego. But his remarks highlight the fact that Palin’s pick in 2008 is still relevant to the debate over the GOP’s strategy in 2012. The choice is this: do they run a moderate ticket that doesn’t offend anyone or take a risk on a radical ticket that angers some but motivates others? How mavericky does Romney want to be?
The evidence suggests that the maverick strategy didn’t work in 2008. Some will say that the Republicans chose the wrong maverick, and there’s no denying that Palin wasn’t yet ready for the media exposure. But a fair mind can never quite dismiss the Palin gambit out of hand because it was also tried in the wrong year. Frankly, the Democrats could have nominated Roseanne Barr in 2008 and the crazy lady would’ve won by a landslide...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Homosexuality a personal choice, says New Zealand Conservative Party leader!

New Zealand Herald ^ | 4 august 2012 | gareththomasnz

Conservative Party leader Colin Craig has sparked outrage by saying homosexuality is a choice and gay people are more likely to have been abused as children.

The comments on TV3's The Nation this morning came in a discussion with Labour MP Louisa Wall over her bill to legalise same-sex marriage.
Asked if he thought the bill might encourage homosexuality, Mr Craig replied people chose to be homosexual and factors other than genetics could determine whether someone was gay.
"I think most people recognise that there are other influences such as upbringing, such as events in life," he said.
"For homosexuals, they are statistically far more likely to have suffered child abuses as a child... It certainly can make a difference in someone's choices in life, there's no question about that in my mind."
Mr Craig said he was not worried the bill would fuel homosexuality, because it was a personal choice.
Ms Wall responded: "Homosexuality isn't a choice Colin, people are born the way they are born."
Mr Craig's comments sparked an immediate backlash on Twitter.
Claudette Hauiti described the comments as dangerous, homophobic and ignorant.
Kaine Thompson tweeted: "How can Colin Craig get away with saying homosexuality comes about because of child abuse?"
Bruce Buckman tweeted that Colin Craig would have campaigned against women's suffrage in the 1890s on the grounds that it "undermined institution of democracy".
Ms Wall told The Nation her bill would recognise the equality of people's citizenship in a modern democracy.
"What my bill seeks to do is to allow two people - regardless of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity - to marry within the institution of love that I think marriage is."
Ms Wall said marriage was the primary focus of the bill, but by virtue of the definition, married same-sex couples would be able to adopt.

Chick-fil-A flap reveals true QUEER agenda!

Washington Times ^ | 8/3/2012 | Jeffrey T. Kuhner

The homosexual lobby wants to outlaw Christianity. This is the real meaning behind the uproar over Chick-fil-A. 

The chicken sandwich franchise has become a lightning rod for the culture war. Liberals despise it; conservatives back it. Supporters of QUEER marriage want to prevent the Atlanta-based chain from expanding, demanding new restaurant permits be denied.

The reason: Its CEO Dan Cathy opposes same-sex marriage. In an interview with the Baptist Press, Mr. Cathy was asked his views on the issue. He said that he supports the “biblical definition of the family unit.” Meaning — horror of all horrors — that Mr. Cathy believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. That such a common-sense view could be controversial in today’s America shows how far society has fallen.
Anti-Christian activists immediately called for a boycott of Chick-fil-A. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel publicly vilified the chain. He claimed that Chick-fil-A does not share “Chicago values.” Mr. Emanuel said the restaurant was not welcome in the Windy City. Yet, he warmly embraced Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. According to Mr. Emanuel, a Christian family man expressing his private opinion defending traditional marriage is an extremist, while a radical black nationalist and vile anti-Semite is acceptable.
The left’s goal is to reduce Christians to permanent second-class citizens. Now they are coming for our freedom of speech. This is Christophobia — the dominant bigotry of our time. Christians unite, before it’s too late.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...