Thursday, November 1, 2012

Let Them Eat Cake: Obama Celebs Party in Manhattan During Hurricane Aftermath

Big Hollywood ^ | 1 Nov 2012, 12:18 PM PDT

As millions suffered without power and as law enforcement continued to find bodies in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, Bette Midler and her Obama-supporting pals found time to throw a lavish Halloween party in Manhattan, just miles from where streets remained underwater.
These 1 percenters seemed blissfully unconcerned about the situation just a few blocks away as they partied late into the night at the Waldorf Astoria hotel. Midler was joined by Michael Kors and, fittingly, Debra Messing dressed as Marie Antoinette. Really.
Midler is a loud and proud Obama supporter, recently tweeting: "All the things Pres. Obama put in place are starting to work! Just starting! Don't give up the Ship of State to the untrustworthy." She also suggested that the YouTube filmmaker blamed by the Obama administration for the Benghazi attacks be jailed.
Debra Messing is an Obama backer. So too is Kors.
Al Gore was slated to show up to give the keynote address. He couldn’t make it, Midler tweeted, thanks to the Hurricane and global warming.
Midler raised $1.8 million for her charity. She did, however, add that throwing this event was "unbelievably stressful" thanks to Sandy.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

You're Fired!

Creators Syndicate ^ | November 2, 2012 | Oliver North

WASHINGTON — When Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston and Roger Sherman sat down to draft the Declaration of Independence, they began with a "Bill of Particulars" against King George III. They accused the monarch of "repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States." Now, 236 years later, "We the People" are about to decide whom we should hire as our chief executive and commander in chief. It's an appropriate time to review the grievances of our Founding Fathers — and examine the offenses committed by our present head of state.
Jefferson and his colleagues determined that the king had "refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good." That's certainly relevant to the incumbent administration, which repeatedly has rejected all efforts by Congress to pass a budget as required by our Constitution.
The drafters found that the British monarch had "forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance, unless suspended in their Operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he (had) utterly neglected to attend to them." That sounds a lot like what happened when Gov. Jan Brewer and the Arizona Legislature passed a law to protect the citizens of said state from the depredations of illegal aliens crossing our borders.
Our nation's founders were likewise offended by the imperious manner in which the king had "obstructed the Administration of Justice." That charge is relevant to the Obama administration's willful decision in ordering firearms shipped to violent Mexican drug cartels in Operation Fast and Furious and then claiming executive privilege to withhold information about the activity from Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...

Democrats Are About To Be Doubly Disappointed!

Forbes ^ | 11/01/2012 | Bill Flax

Democrats could be doubly disappointed come January. President Obama might be handing Mitt Romney unparalleled presidential power. The best alibi liberals can leverage in defending Obama’s overstretch continues to be blaming problems "inherited" from Bush while scaring voters about Mr. Romney’s sinister aspirations. Rather than tout his public sector expansion Obama’s electoral pitch consists largely in lambasting Romney for private sector success.
To illustrate a point, accept that Republicans are equally inept, waste as much and are just as scandal prone as Democrats. Pretend Romney really is the fiend that Obama’s attack ads caricature. He'll outsource your job then let your family suffer so he can reward his rich friends. Consider what this premise entails about the proper scope of government.
If Romney is so awful, why grant him such sweeping authority?
Even lovers of government for government’s sake, i.e. Democrats, don’t necessarily want the reins harnessed by their rivals. Those who believe the state is basically altruistic surely still recognize the peril of unaccountable hegemony in the wrong hands. Barack Obama drastically expanded government, particularly in the Executive Branch. Dozens of unelected czars, widespread executive orders, an accelerating run-up in regulation and extensive granting of Obamacare waivers may soon become the GOP’s bailiwick.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...

Obama's October Surprise: 41.1 % Spike in Job Layoffs

Tea Party Tribune ^ | 2012-11-01 15:17:41 | mrcurmudgeon


By Mr. Curmudgeon:

Less than a week before Americans decide who will take the presidential oath of office this January 20, the Department of Labor reports that U.S. employers cut 47,724 jobs in the month of October, the highest level in five months. The announced 41.1% spike in job layoffs comes ahead of the much anticipated employment report due out on Friday, which analysts expect will come in at 150,000 for last month. And last week, 363,000 Americans filed for unemployment benefits.
Some economists say America's private-sector economy will have to produce 350,000 jobs per month for three years before U.S. unemployment drops to 6%. Obama's Solyndra-based economic model is not likely to spur that kind of robust growth, and a growing number of Americans now realize this fact.
"The tidal wave of anti-debt, anti-big-government voters that swamped Democrats in the 2010 congressional elections is readying itself again," reported the Washington Times on Thursday, "poised to sweep Mitt Romney into the Oval Office ..."
Republican pollster John McLaughlin told the Times, "The undecided voter is not really undecided. They overwhelmingly disapprove of the job the president has done and will largely vote against the incumbent. It's a hidden vote that will vote against the president."
While many in the mainstream media trumpet polls claiming President Obama leads his Republican challenger Mitt Romney among likely swing-state voters, the Gallup organization reports that Romney leads in early voting 52% to Obama's 45%. Here in battleground Florida where I live, Obama's early-voting tallies are down by 70% compared to 2008.
An electoral tsunami is building and is poised to push hope and change out to sea. That tsunami is due in large part to the Tea Party that organized to fight Obama's dictatorial health care monstrosity, and translated protest anger into an effective electoral machine that ended the careers of big-government, big-spending politicians in both parties.
If four years under the authoritarian thumb of the Obama administration has taught us anything, it's that government power is limited in affecting change for the better. It can dictate the closure of coalmines, block offshore oil exploration and force individuals to pay government health-care premiums as the price of American citizenship, but it has no power to create national prosperity or jobs. Our government, originally chartered to protect "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," has degenerated into nothing more than a mindless spending machine.
Our Progressive masters claimed that surrendering our liberties was a small price to pay in exchange for "security." Today, that price is so high that Washington's freedom-killing-spending-machine must borrow trillions of dollars from communist China to stay afloat. And the Progressive's promised "security" hangs by a flimsy thread.
Obama's October layoff surprise is really no surprise at all. Prosperity and freedom are two sides of the same coin. The only surprise is that a once free people allowed Progressive masterminds to drag the "last best hope of mankind" to the edge of the abyss.
On November 6, Americans begin the hard work of national restoration. And believe me, it's only a beginning.

What Do I Tell My Black Child If Obama Loses?

Townhall.com ^ | November 1, 2012 | Larry Elder

What do I tell my black child if Barack Obama, America's first black president, loses his bid for re-election? This is a question many parents are asking themselves -- especially those who would blame the loss on racism.

Jubilant black parents on the front pages of newspapers, the day after Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008, said things like, "for the first time" they could "sincerely" say to their children that a black person could realistically aspire to become president of the United States.

The New York Times wrote: "That a new day had dawned was immediately apparent at breakfast on Wednesday at Eagle Academy, a young public school in the spot where the often hard-edged Brooklyn neighborhoods of Brownsville and Ocean Hill intersect: The sixth-grade boys sat in silence over their eggs, biscuits and apple juice.

"They were too busy poring over the transcripts of President-elect Barack Obama's speech that teachers had handed them as they walked in. Too tired, perhaps, from having been awoken at midnight to hear the news from their tearful mothers. ...
"The 30-year-old principal, Rashad Meade, pushed his proteges, asking why they thought ... this moment was so important ... why their parents had woken them the night before.
"Isaiah Purcell, who is 11, started to say something about the issues, then trailed off. He picked up again, asserting that Mr. Obama's ascendancy to the White House 'makes us think that we could accomplish anything when you put your mind to it (emphasis added).'"
Goodness! Pre-Obama, what were these parents and teachers telling these kids about their future? What would the teary-eyed parents have said had Obama lost? Would they have told their children that racism remains a major force in America and Obama's defeat proves the point? And assuming he loses his bid for re-election, what will this defeat say about "race" in America?
My father, a former Marine, World War II vet, was born to an illiterate single mother in Athens, Ga. An only child, he never met his biological father. He was a 14-year-old teenager in that Jim Crow South when the Great Depression began. Hard, hard knocks.
But as I write in my new book, "Dear Father, Dear Son," my father taught my brothers and me that the only barrier to success is lack of effort. My Huntsville, Alabama-born mother also taught us that, through education and steady application, goals could be achieved -- no matter how lofty.
Yes, even the presidency of the United States.
I write: "Mom made me feel like I could spit lightening and make bullets bounce off my chest. She sat me down on the front porch when I was about 6 years old. She had an illustrated book of all the presidents from George Washington to Dwight Eisenhower. We talked about their achievements and disappointments.
"'Larry,' she said, tapping the book, 'if you work hard enough and want it bad enough, someday you can be in this book.'"
My parents told us that no one can make you feel inferior without your permission. In high school, we read a sad, bitter poem about racism in a black literature course:
"While riding through old Baltimore, so small and full of glee,
"I saw a young Baltimorean keep a-lookin' straight at me.
"Now, he was young and very small, and I was not much bigger
"And so I smiled, but he put out his tongue and called me 'nigger.'
"I saw the whole of Baltimore from May until September,
"Of all the things that happened there, that's all that I remember."
The teacher angrily talked about the permanent damage done to this little boy's psyche. The permanent stain of racism. The assault on the little boy's dignity. The boy, said the teacher, will never be the same. By the time the bell sounded, everyone was angry.
When I got home, I read the poem to my mother. She was in the kitchen, cooking a pot of greens. When I finished the last line, she turned, big spoon in hand, and looked me in the eye.
"Too bad," she said, "that boy let something so trivial spoil his vacation."
If Obama loses, how many parents will tell their children that his race did him in? Already, The Associated Press published a poll supposedly showing that the negative "racial attitudes" people hold against blacks could likely cost Obama 2 points in the election.
Really?
Not only does Obama benefit from a near-unanimous black vote, but also from the many whites who voted for Obama because of his race. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, explained in 2008: "This is (their) chance to demonstrate that we have been able to get this boogeyman called race behind us. And so they are going to vote for him, whether he has credentials or not, whether he has any experience."
Hall of Famer Frank Robinson became the first black manager in the modern major leagues. There have been many since. Robinson's hiring made a statement about the irrelevance of race. Years later, when his team underperformed, Robinson was fired.
Obama can be fired, as well.

SHHHHHHH

The presidential race is over, cue the conspiracy theories!

The Daily Caller ^ | October 30, 2012 | Theo Caldwell

This race is over, but the conspiracy theories are about to begin. And, boy howdy, are things going to get ugly.

To wit, Mitt Romney will defeat Barack Obama for the presidency on November 6, after which there will be hysterical blowback. The election result is quantifiable, with Romney consistently leading in national tracking polls, finding a level at or above 50 percent in many, and closing the necessary gaps in swing states and among demographic groups. Greater evidence can be found, however, in Obama’s sour demeanor and the conduct of his campaign. What a mess.

Opinion-peddlers have noted that the Obama re-election effort has taken on the hallmarks of failed campaigns from previous cycles: scattershot messaging, flailing narratives, ad hominem attacks and joyless mockery. This was never going to work, and Democratic political veterans like Bob Beckel and Doug Schoen will likely admit as much once the polls are closed. Incurables like Alan Colmes and Maureen Dowd, however, will never let it go. And this latter stance — that Obama’s defeat is somehow illegitimate — will take hold in many, noisy quarters.
It is not only the politically interested who will adopt this view — even casual observers will be sucked in. We often see leftist orthodoxy morph into popular convention. This is because, while there are some smart people on the left, it requires almost no thinking to be a liberal. Simply absorb the political sentiments you hear in almost any Hollywood film, or on most any television program or newscast and, presto, you’re in. Repeat these nostrums at school or work and you will be rewarded. Augmented by the emotional satisfaction of the left’s perpetual righteous indignation, this dynamic becomes self-fulfilling and very cozy.
And it’s that snorting indignation warming up in the bullpen that augurs an ugly autumn. After Obama loses, every bellyacher you know will take to the worldwide interwebs to blame the Bilderbergs, Bain Capital, Big Oil, Brigham Young — basically anyone but Obama himself. It will be insufferable. Theories will be all over the map, mutually contradicting one another, but advanced with furious certainty. Again, we see this often. The showerless outrage of the left knows no bounds, and it is impervious to reason.
Whether Romney’s margin of victory is large or small will matter little to the tone of these plaints. Certainly, a resounding win will foreclose the Democrats’ propensity to steal close elections through after-the-fact chicanery (presented as Exhibit A: Al Franken is a senator) but, for Obama apologists, a blowout will simply evince a wider conspiracy, and darker depths of American ignorance, bigotry and credulousness.
This sort of heads-we-win-tails-you’re-a-cheating-moron default is endemic to Democrats and emblematic of the international left. The last time a fabulously wealthy politician from Massachusetts ran for president, he lost fair and square. But John Kerry had the good fortune to be a Democrat (and had the further good fortune to marry into money — twice — making him several times wealthier than the self-made Romney), which is why California Sen. Barbara Boxer, among others, made it her business to overturn the electoral results in Ohio owing to voting “irregularities” she knew, just knew, had occurred. Britain’s Daily Mirror, meanwhile, responded to George W. Bush’s 2004 defeat of Kerry by asking, “How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB?”
It will be far worse this time, however. Accusations of racism have been hurled at Obama’s opponents since he first announced his candidacy. While the effectiveness of this tactic has seen diminishing returns, its cynicism and ubiquity remain nonpareil in American politics, and will reach new heights after the election. But if, as Dr. King dreamed, we should be judged on the content of our character rather than the color of our skin, then any such assessment can be either good or bad.
The simple truth is that Barack Obama has been a lousy president — worse than Jimmy Carter, and the most antipathetic to the U.S. Constitution since the despicable Woodrow Wilson (incidentally, one wonders how Wilson, an actual racist, would react to seeing his Progressive Era rhubarb revived by America’s first black president — food for thought).
Obama deserves to lose, and he will. By turning him out of office, the American people will be affording him the same treatment owed any president, regardless of color or creed, whose term has been a failure. In this way, Barack Obama’s defeat will provide greater evidence of America’s racial progress than his election ever did.

New York Wants $6 Billion In Printed Money to Help Them Rebuild!

November 1, 2012 | PittsburghAfterDark

I am just sitting here in a bizarre sense of smug self-satisfaction reading about New York governor Andrew Cuomo and various Democratic senators and politicians asking the Federal government to pick up 100% of the costs in rebuilding their state and "the greatest city in the world".

Their line of thought? They can't print money like the Federal government can so, buddy, get those printing presses up to speed.

This is one of those road to Damascus moments. What exactly is the role of government? Well we've seen what it is, government is the ultimate tool and the ultimate control for keeping a population dependent across all segments of society.

Governor Chris Christie has asked for a whopping 7 day change in fuel distribution rules to allow New Jersey retailers to be allowed to buy gasoline from outside the state. The EPA is waiving gasoline blend regulations in an attempt to refill tanks in the state with fuel that works, regardless of any other consideration. President Obama has thrown down the gauntlet and said no red tape, just get it done.
Now, isn't it just amazing that suddenly government rules, regulations and stipulations are being acknowledged as problems? Oh, but only for a week or two. Don't get used to it.
Personally I think the thing that I am most personally offended by is that these bluest of blue states are now crying to the rest of the country that they need us to pay for, not now of course but someday (I mean what's $6 billion on top of $17,000,000,000,000.) their reconstruction.
Well folks, lets remember what you poor red state suckers have been told. Without the blue states paying for you you wouldn't exist. The red states are net takers from the Federal pie with more money going to your states than coming from your states. Now remember something, those red states house military bases, those red states build your national defense hardware, those red states grow your food and raise your livestock. That's the majority of the surplus if not its etirety.
In return for doing that for those New Yorkers, they mock you. Sometimes its innocent and annoying belittling you as living in fly over country or living in the sticks. Other times it's just downright hostile. You're a racist, bigoted, homophobe, knuckle dragging teabagger, Reich Winger, Replikkkan et all.
However now, you owe them. You owe them $6,000,000,000 today. You owe them the privilege of paying for rebuilding Tribeca home to Robery DiNiro. You owe them to rebuild the Village where you would be likely spit on and chased out of any establishment for wearing a Romney Ryan t-shirt even today as their elected representatives demand your cash.
You see, I just know how I can really react in a positive manner to such a request. Give us your money, but f you, all of you and the horses you rode in on to give us the check.
You see the mayor of New York has been very concerned with childhood obesity, limiting trans fats New York City restaurants and selling 16 ounce sodas instead of Big Gulps. Protecting lower Manhattan from the sea? Building flood controls for the Brooklyn Battery, PATH and subway tunnels? No, not important. But dammit get those reps from KFC, McDonald's, Coke and Hershey in here! There's a hearing to be had on fat kids!
"New York State is upside down and backwards; high taxes and low performance. The New York State government was at one time a national model. Now, unfortunately, it's a national disgrace. Sometimes, the corruption in Albany could even make Boss Tweed blush." Andrew Cuomo
I don't need to say it, their own governor did. Now you bold, new leader. Lead and figure out a way to pay for it on your own.
We've had it, our sympathy is all used up.

Obama's Layoff BOMB

National Review Online ^ | Novmber 1, 2012 | Magdalen

Obama’s Layoff Bomb: His policies are killing jobs.

By Michelle Malkin

In June, a diffident and self-deluded President Obama claimed that “the private sector is doing fine.” Last week, the private sector responded: Speak for yourself, buster. Who needs an “October Surprise” when the business headlines are broadcasting the imminent layoff bomb in neon lights?
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported last Tuesday that employers issued 1,316 “mass layoff actions” (affecting 50 workers or more) in September; more than 122,000 workers were affected. USA Today financial reporter Matt Krantz wrote that “much of the recent layoff activity is connected to what’s been the slowest period of earnings growth since the third quarter of 2009.” Some necessary restructuring is underway in response to the stagnant European economy. But more and more U.S. businesses are putting the blame — bravely and squarely — right where it belongs: on the obstructionist policies and regulatory schemes of the blame-shifter-in-chief.
Last week, Ohio-based auto-parts manufacturer Dana Holding Corporation warned employees of potential layoffs amid “looming concern” about the economy. President and CEO Roger Wood specifically mentioned the walloping burden of “increasing taxes on small businesses” and the need to “offset increased costs that are placed on us through new laws and regulations.”
Case in point: Obamacare. The mandate will cost Dana Holding Corporation, which employs some 24,500 workers, “approximately $24 million over the next six years in additional U.S. health-care expenses.” As Ohio Watchdog blogger Maggie Thurber reported, the firm’s Toledo-area corporate offices laid off seven white-collar employees last Friday; company insiders told her more were on the way. They are not alone.
On Tuesday, Consol Energy issued a federally mandated layoff disclosure announcing its “intent to idle its Miller Creek surface operations near Naugatuck, W.Va.” The move will affect the company’s Wiley Surface Mine, Wiley Creek Surface Mine, Minway Surface Mine, Minway Preparation Plant, and Miller Creek Administration Group, all in Mingo County, W.Va. Despite state approval, the company’s cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and myriad other agencies, and its stellar safety record, Obama’s EPA dragged its feet on the permit-approval process. The impasse has forced layoffs of 145 Consol Energy employees that will hit at the end of the year. They are not alone.
In August, Robert E. Murray, founder and CEO of Murray Energy Corporation in Ohio, blasted the White House anti-coal agenda for the layoffs at and the closure of his company’s mine. He told Obama-water-carrying CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien that “the many regulations that [Obama] and his radical appointees and the U.S. EPA have put on the use of coal, there are dozens of them . . . have closed 175 power plants.” As O’Brien barked at her guest about purported environmental objections, Murray explained that “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. . . . 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 every one of them myself to lay them off. It’s a human issue.”
And it’s an innovation issue, too. As I reported in February, Obamacare’s impending 2.3 percent medical-device excise tax has already wrought havoc on that industry:
Stryker, a maker of artificial hips and knees, based in Kalamazoo, Mich., is slashing 5 percent of its global work force (an estimated 1,000 workers) this coming year to reduce costs related to Obamacare’s taxes and mandates.
Covidien, a New York–based surgical-supplies manufacturer, recently announced layoffs of 200 American workers and plans to move some of its plant work to Mexico and Costa Rica, in part because of the coming tax hit.
Massachusetts-based ZOLL Medical Corporation, which makes defibrillators and employs some 1,800 workers in the U.S. and around the world, says the medical-device tax will cost the company between $5 million and $10 million a year.
This July, Indiana’s Cook Medical shelved plans to open five new plants because of the imminent medical-device tax hit. They are not alone.
The heads of Koch Industries, Westgate Resorts, and ASG Software Solutions have all separately informed their employees of prosperity-undermining Obama economic politics. Left-wing groups have lambasted the executives for exercising their political free speech — but they have remained silent while the White House corruptocrats bribed federal defense contractors into delaying federally mandated layoff disclosures before the election. In a memo now being investigated on Capitol Hill, Obama promised to cover the legal fees of Lockheed Martin and other defense contractors if they ignored legal requirements to inform workers in advance about so-called sequestration cuts to the military’s budget scheduled to kick in next year.
Truth suppression is a time-honored Obama tactic, of course. Remember: The administration and its Democratic allies on Capitol Hill attempted to punish Deere, Caterpillar, Verizon, and ATT in 2010 for disclosing how the costs of Obamacare taxes were hitting their bottom lines — even though they were simply following SEC disclosure requirements. The White House also tried to silence insurers who dared to inform their customers about how Obamacare was driving up premiums.
Not this time. The administration’s bullyboys don’t have enough whitewash and duct tape to cover up the past, present, and future devastation of the president and his economic demolition team.

Mrs. Eric Holder co-owns abortion mill

Jill Stanek online ^ | November 1, 2012 | Magdalen

Breaking: Eric Holder’s wife co-owns abortion clinic building run by indicted abortionist
Thanks to pro-lifers Michelle Wolven and Catherine Davis, a small group of us have been on this story for weeks. While Michelle and Catherine were digging through online records of Georgia abortion clinics, they stumbled on the fact that Attorney General Eric Holder’s wife Sharon Malone Holder co-owns with her sister an Atlanta area abortion clinic building.

The building is located at 6210 Old National Highway, College Park, Georgia. The business itself is called Old National GYN. The story was so big, Catherine handed it off to Watchdog.org reporter Troy Anderson. Anderson’s article, “Holder’s family papers over his ties to abortion doctor,” was published in Human Events today.
Anderson’s story deepens beyond the obvious breaking news that Sharon Holder, an OB/GYN herself, co-owns a building – and has for many years – that operates as an abortion clinic.
Clinic abortionist indicted on Medicaid charges What’s more, the abortionist at Old National, Tyrone Cecile Malloy, was indicted last year by a Georgia grand jury on charges of Medicaid fraud. The paper trail backward, according to Anderson: The same tax records show the building was formerly owned by Dr. Mack A. Jones, late husband of another of Holder’s sister-in-laws, Vivian Malone Jones. Her death, announced in an Oct. 14, 2005 obituary in The Washington Post, reported that she was Malone Holder’s sister. The other two sisters apparently inherited the building at that time.
Paper trail cover-up attempt
Anderson further detailed how, after he alerted the Holders and sister co-owner Margie Malone Tuckson 0f the information he had, requesting comment, the family quickly moved to put the abortion clinic building into a blind trust.
Explains a lot
Pro-lifers agree Holder’s ties to the abortion industry explain a lot – his attacks against pro-life activists and that he looks the other way on abortion industry skulduggery. Details Anderson: Critics say it may also explain why Holder has been eager to prosecute pro-life advocates who counsel women outside abortion clinics….
“There is a clear conflict of interest when the man charged with pursuing those that abuse the system is also one who is engaged in some way with the business,” said Davis, whose organization brought the issue to the attention of Watchdog….
In recent months, judges have blocked Holder’s efforts to punish pro-life supporters counseling women outside abortion clinics. In one case, Holder’s Department of Justice agreed to pay Mary “Susan” Pine $120,000 for its filing of an “improper lawsuit” against her, according to a statement by Liberty Counsel, an Orlando, Fla.-based nonprofit legal firm. Pine counseled women on the sidewalk outside a Florida abortion clinic….
Karen Handel, the former secretary of state in Georgia and a former senior vice president of public policy for the Susan G. Komen Center, said she was “shocked” by the findings of the Watchdog investigation.
“It certainly underscores the deep ties the Obama Administration has to the abortion issue,” said Handel, author of the new book, Planned Bullyhood: The Truth Behind the Headlines about the Planned Parenthood Funding Battle with Susan G. Komen for the Cure.
“This certainly seems to shed some additional light into why Obama and his team seem obsessed with protecting Planned Parenthood and abortion rights at the expense of other important issues in the country.”…
Davis pointed to cases in which activists have sued Planned Parenthood for alleged Medicaid fraud – in Georgia, Iowa, Texas, New York, and Massachusetts – but where Holder’s Justice Department has failed to act. “The U.S. attorney general has not at all pursued a case against any of them, including this one in Georgia where his wife owns the property,” Davis said.
Also add to the mix the DOJ’s October decision not to investigate an Indiana abortion clinic Allen County Right to Life alleges is violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Obama's Failures - Back To His Record

Political Realities ^ | 11/01/12 | LD Jackson

How long has it been since Barack Obama ran his first campaign ad, attacking Mitt Romney and basically trying to convince Americans the former Governor of Massachusetts was an evil man? It seems like it has gone on for a very long time, at least a year. The Obama campaign knew Mitt Romney was the candidate they would likely face in 2012 and they have been working against him all along. In so doing, they have attempted to distract voters from looking closely at the record President Obama has amassed in his first four years. Let's look at the record, shall we?

Obama's Failures

Barack Obama promised we would see unemployment at 5.6%, if only we would apply his stimulus plan and spend billions of dollars we were borrowing from the Chinese. As you can see from the unemployment numbers, the official unemployment is hovering around 8%, and that's with what many of us believe are cooked books. Failure or success? You be the judge.
Did not Barack Obama promise to cut the national debt and the deficit when he came into office? If I recall correctly, he said it was unpatriotic for President George W. Bush to rack up so much spending in eight years of living in the White House. When we look at the facts, we find Barack Obama has increased both the debt and the deficit exponentially, in only four years. Failure or success? Patriotic or not? You be the judge.
Barack Obama promised to bring Americans together, in search of the common good of the country. He promised he would end the divisions that were so prominent in our government. How has he done so far? The divisions have not changed for the better. America is more divided than it has ever been and our government is at a virtual standstill. Congress has not passed a budget in how many years? Failure or success? You be the judge.
Barack Obama promised to repair our image and status in the world. What he has done is to give our enemies assurance that we will not be tough on the issues that concern us. Yes, Osama bin Laden is dead, but Al Qaeda is not on the run, not even close. The President has shown himself to have little concern for the safety of the men and women who are serving our country around the world. As a result, our Ambassador to Libya is dead, along with three brave souls who disobeyed their orders to "stand down", all because it was the right thing to do. All the while, the President and his team have blamed a YouTube video for causing a protest that didn't exist, and for the deaths of our people. They are more interested in covering their own tracks, than they are in protecting our people, or allowing the truth to come out. Failure or success? You be the judge.
For the past four years we have watched as Barack Obama performed what he considered his "duties" as President of our country. He has bypassed Congress at every opportunity, saying it was easier to work around them, than with them. He has openly villanized the Supreme Court for their decisions, unless it was when he was praising them for their failed ruling on Obamacare. He has openly portrayed his disdain for our system of government and seems to think he could do much better, if only he could make all the decisions.
Failure or success? You be the judge

Benghazi Reveals Obama-Islamist Alliance!

AmericanThinker.com ^ | 11/1/2012 | James Lewis

The nature of the Benghazi disaster is now clear. Ambassador Stevens was engaged in smuggling sizable quantities of Libyan arms from the destroyed Gaddafi regime to the Syrian rebels, to help overthrow the Assad regime in Syria. Smuggling arms to the so-called "Free Syrian Army" is itself a huge gamble, but Obama has been a gambler with human lives over the last four years, as shown by the tens of thousands of Arabs who have died in the so-called Arab Spring -- which has brought nothing but disaster to the Arab world.
For the last four years, the Obama policy has been to offer aid and comfort violent Islamic radicals in the delusional belief that their loyalty can be bought. We therefore betrayed Hosni Mubarak, our 30-year ally in Egypt, so that the Muslim Brotherhood led by Muhammed Morsi could take over. Obama indeed demanded publicly that Mubarak resign, for reasons that never made any sense at all. Egypt went into a political and economic tailspin, and the Muslim Brotherhood were elected. The Muslim radicals have now purged the only other viable political force, the army and police, to protect their monopoly on power. We have colluded in that betrayal.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Unions Are Not Good For Government Workers ... Or Taxpayers!

Capitol Confidential ^ | 10/30/2012 | Jarrett Skorup

It’s no secret that the main supporters of Proposal 2, which would guarantee public employee collective bargaining and override state laws that conflict with local contracts, are government employee unions. But members of those unions who think this is in their own best interest should look to another Midwestern state to see how the measure not be good for the state or for their own pocketbooks.
A new report from former New York Lt. Gov. Richard Ravitch and former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker — men who most recently worked for the Democratic governor of New York and President Barack Obama, respectively — details the precarious financial situation in Illinois, as the Wall Street Journal noted:
Unfunded pension liabilities now total more than $85 billion, while Medicaid liabilities have doubled in 10 years and are "growing far more rapidly than tax revenue." Rampant borrowing through the sale of pension bonds has made Illinois debt per capita one of the highest and its credit rating the worst. Based on a projected $27 billion cash deficit in Illinois in 2021, the University of Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs Fiscal Futures calculates that "if the projected deficits were paid for by borrowing, debt service costs would grow to consume all sales tax and income tax collections in just five years."
Reforms to those Illinois pension obligations were blocked every step of the way by government employee unions. That worked for the unions in the short term, but what happens next? And what would happen in this state if Proposal 2 gives those unions the power to veto laws made by the elected legislature if they relate to collective bargaining?
Illinois has unfunded government employee pension liabilities of at least $167 billion, out of a total state budget of $33.7 billion (not counting federal money). In addition, it had an $8.3 billion general fund budget deficit in 2011, and has a bond rating of "A2" with a "negative" outlook — lowest in the country. The state is months behind paying its bills, to such an extent that the state Comptroller refers to it as a “deadbeat state.”
Raise taxes? Been there, done that. A lame-duck legislature jammed through a 67-percent income tax increase as well as a 69-percent business tax hike on the eve of its own final adjournment in early 2011. As a result, businesses fled and state finances got worse.
National bailout? A few weeks ago, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn floated the idea of a federal pension guarantee of the state’s debt. It was quickly shot down and ridiculed by leaders in Congress, non-profits and the Chicago Tribune.
So what happens when the laws of mathematics slam into a legislature that refuses to cut spending because of government union demands? Eventually, insolvency.
Here in Michigan, the government and public school employee unions pushing Proposal 2 have touted dozens of laws that would be nullified by the constitutional amendment. One of these is the 1996 pension reform that put new non-teacher state employee hires into 401(k)-type plans, preserving Michigan taxpayers from up to $4.3 billion in unfunded liabilities. Another is the law passed this year increasing the amount school employees must contribute to their own pensions, which is saving over $300 million this year and much more going forward.
Repealing those laws, and dozens of others, would cost the state at least $1.6 billion annually. It would add more costs to a pension and health care system and revert back to a system with nearly $50 billion in unfunded liabilities — benefits promised without allocated money. And that fiscal situation was getting worse and worse.
Case studies of what happens to public employees during bankruptcy are occurring around the country. In Stockton, Calif., police and fire positions were cut by 25 percent and 30 percent. In Central Falls, Rhode Island, current employees saw their pensions slashed 34 percent. In Scranton, Pa., city worker wages were cut to minimum wage and citizens are facing a 78 percent tax increase. And here in Michigan, emergency managers in Pontiac, Ecorse, Highland Park, Flint, Benton Harbor and elsewhere have been forced to amend collective bargaining agreements in order to save cities and school district.
If those Michigan cost-savings are repealed, and union power is so consolidated that the legislature cannot reform the system, little stands in the way of this state joining Illinois and many municipalities on the road to fiscal ruin.
Which would not good for taxpayers or government union workers.

Benghazi Stand Down Denials Don't Stand Up To Reason

Forbes ^ | November 1, 2012 | Larry Bell

There are some large disconnects between Obama administration explanations concerning security and response actions taken before, during and after the disastrous terrorist attacks on our Benghazi consulate and accounts,compared with those which continue to emerge from outside sources. Following numerous White House claims now known to be inaccurate and intentionally misleading,we are repeatedly assured that we will get the real scoop in due time after full investigations are complete. One perplexing issue,among many, evolves around conflicting accounts regarding requests and denials of military aid which might have saved American lives.
Further delays only increase wide-spread suspicions that there are no legitimate answers,and that the president’s strategy is to run out the clock until after his final election is over. If this were not the case, it would seem logical that he would seize upon every opportunity to demonstrate evidence of the leadership and transparency he has repeatedly promised. Meanwhile, those who dare to raise those questions and express such suspicions are often subjected by his supporters to scornful reproach. And yes,I speak from experience on this…a subject I will get to later.
Putting serious questions aside regarding why early requests for enhanced consulate security had been repeatedly denied, along with misplaced blame for the attack on an obscure anti-Muslim video,let’s focus exclusively upon controversies surrounding that fateful seven-hour assault period.
During an October 16 interview, Denver’s WUSA-TV reporter Kyle Clark asked President Obama a two-part question: “Were the Americans under attack at the consulate in Benghazi,Libya denied requests for help during that attack,and is it fair to tell Americans that what happened is under investigation until after the election?” Expressing his regret about the casualties and sympathy for their families,plus a determination to bring the perpetrators to justice,the president didn’t answer either question.
After dodging, Clark asked the first and most important part again:..
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...

Libya storyline still crumbling!

Washington Post ^ | November 1, 2012 | Jennifer Rubin

Fox News reports:

>>>The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack” . . . .
Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected. . . .

According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed “on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning.<<<
This is yet another contradiction of the White House narrative. (“While the administration’s public statements have suggested that the attack came without warning, the Aug. 16 cable seems to undercut those claims. It was a direct warning to the State Department that the Benghazi consulate was vulnerable to attack, that it could not be defended and that the presence of anti-U.S. militias and Al Qaeda was well-known to the U.S. intelligence community.”) If the president had spent a fraction of the time he is now play-acting as Sandy disaster commander to the deteriorating situation in Libya, would the pleas from Ambassador Stevens have gone unheeded?
Cliff May of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies e-mails Right Turn: “Based on this cable,...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

It is going to really suck if Obama loses. Here is why!

by MNDude

It is going to REALLY REALLY suck if Obama loses this election next week! But not for us, but for the liberals. This loss will be much more painful than any Presidential election we have known. And this why:

Just think about how depressed you may have felt when McCain, Dole, or Bush Sr. lost the election. But seriously, did any of you have any great love for any those three? In fact, most of us probably think some of them are kind of dorks.

Likewise, liberals were very sad when Kerry, Gore, and Dukakis lost, but again, were any of them greatly loved?
Now we are talking about Baraq Obama. The family man, the black man, the white man, the Muslim, and the homosexual all rolled up in one. He is the winner of the Nobel Peace prize, the man that children sang mmmm mmmm mmm about, and schools were named after him. Four years ago, women were fainting, stadiums were filled with tens of thousands of followers, and he was considered a Messiah to many. This is the man that would turn our dirty energy based economy into a green energy based utopia. Nations would now love us, and it would be cool to be an American at a European cocktail party. He is bringing healthcare to all, punishing those smug capitalists for their greed, and forcing the haters to embrace alternative lifestyles or pay dearly.
We actually can't even comprehend what it will be like to have such a loss. Try to imagine how much you love Ronald Reagan, multiply that by 5000, and then imagine him losing his second election. They LOVE LOVE LOVE Baraq Obama!
Yes, the name George W Bush is stained, but if Baraq Obama loses this election, he can never even be considered to be in the same league of him or other two term Presidents. No, the liberals know he will not be compared to Ronald Reagan, FDR, Bill Clinton, or even George W Bush. Rather his name will appear along with Jimmy Carter, Bush Senior, and Hubert Hoover. He will no longer any chance to be remembered as a messiah, but rather as a schmuck. S-C-H-M-U-C-K. SCHMUCK!
To make it even worse, his Obama's lovers know how sweet it will be to those that detest him to see him lose. Yes, the will gloat and gloat and gloat for decades to come. If you want to post a nasty comment about conservatives on a CNN story, you risk getting a gloating response about your fallen Messiah. Forty years from now, the conservatives will relish to say "The worst economy since Baraq Obama".
The despair and devastation that will be experienced by Sandra Fluke, Soledad Obrien, Ed Schultz, Candy Crowley, Michael Moore, Chris Matthew, and those disrespectful people that make comments on news stories at ABCNews.com will be collosal. That is why it is going to totally suck if Baraq Obama loses.

Why Christians Should Vote for Romney

Off Grid Blogger Blog ^ | October 30, 2012 | Off Grid Blogger

Please watch this video. It may be the best campaign video this year. It is short, sweet, and hard-hitting (only 7 minutes long). Every Christian should see this. (Suffer through the partial birth abortion segment.):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKOem7wiVIQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

By the way, studies show that a large percentage of conservative Christians fail to vote. What a tragedy. If we all voted, we would win consistently and America would recover from its ills.
Jesus taught us to “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” In a democratic republic, we the people are Caesar. We must infer that this command requires us to contribute to the republic by, at the very least, exercising our right to vote. Unlike non-Christians, the right to vote is really the obligation to vote.
There are numerous Bible passages that confirm the importance of God, Government, and the Christian’s obligation to engage the culture. These include:
Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. (Matthew 22:21)
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.( 2 Cor 10:5)
The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof. (Psalm 24:1)
We must obey God rather than man. (Acts 5:29) You are the salt of the earth…the light of the world. (Matthew 5:13-16)
The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget about God.(Psalm 9:17)
Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. (Psalm 33:12)
On account of me, you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. (Mark 13:9)
The good influence of godly citizens causes a city to prosper. (Proverbs 11:11)
I, the Lord, speak the truth; I declare what is right. (Isaiah 45:19)
We are not trying to please men, but God, who tests our hearts. (1 Thessalonians 2:4)
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil. (Isaiah 5:20-21)
Thou shalt not kill. (Exodus 20:13-15)
Do not give the devil a foothold. (Ephesians 4:27)
A wise man attacks the city of the mighty and pulls down the stronghold in which they trust. (Proverbs 21:22)
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness. (Matthew 5:10-12)
Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them, as leaders, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. (Exodus 18:21)
When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn. (Proverbs 29:2)
When rulers are wicked, their people are too. (Proverbs 29:16)
For the wicked shall not rule the godly, lest the godly be forced to do wrong.(Psalm 125:3)
Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain. (Psalm 127:1)
Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves. (Proverbs 13:8-9)
To the Jews I became like a Jew…. (1 Corinthians 9:20-24)
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me.” (Matthew 28:18)
Fill the earth and subdue it. (Genesis 1:26-28)
Your kingdom come. Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. (Matthew 6:10)

Libya just one of Obama’s deceptions!

omaha.com ^

It was a little much when President Barack Obama said he was “offended” by the suggestion that his administration would try to deceive the public about what happened in Benghazi, Libya. What has this man not deceived the public about?

Remember his pledge to cut the deficit in half in his first term in office? This was followed by the first trillion-dollar deficit ever, under any president of the United States — followed by trillion-dollar deficits in every year of the Obama administration.

Remember his pledge to have a “transparent” government that would post its legislative proposals on the Internet several days before Congress was to vote on them, so that everybody would know what was happening? This was followed by an Obamacare bill so huge and passed so fast that even members of Congress did not have time to read it...

(Excerpt) Read more at omaha.com ...