Sunday, February 3, 2013

Seven Reasons Why it's a Photoshop(Obama's skeet photo) ^ | 2-3-2013 | Michael Harlin

I'm sure we've all seen by now the "photo op" of President Obama shooting skeet. If he's shooting skeet then I'm Daffy Duck.

Now, what's wrong with the president's picture? First the weapon is nearly level to the ground. Can't be skeet shooting, nor likely trap either. Second, it is evident that the President has never shot a shotgun before as his stance is leaning slightly backward. Look at the position of his torso to his legs. Skeet or trap shooters never do this. They lean slightly forward like a boxer in the ring. Third, he doesn't know or was never taught that the butt of the weapon must fit to his shoulder. He's holding the weapon with a gap between his shoulder and the top of the butt. Sure you can fire it that way, but expect lots of pain if not bruising later.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Administration to delay Keystone pipeline again!

daily caller ^ | february 1, 2013 | Neil Munro

Republicans jumped on the news that the Obama administration is delaying judgment on the Keystone XL pipeline by another six months.
“Americans have already waited >4yrs for #KXL, time for POTUS to say ‘yes,’” said a 11:14 a.m. tweet from the office of House Speaker Rep. John Boehner.
Americans have already waited >4yrs for #KXL, time for POTUS to say “yes” #4jobs via @housecommerce
— Speaker John Boehner (@SpeakerBoehner) February 1, 2013
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Paul Krugman: NRA Is 'An Insane Organization' (Says The Lunatic) ^ | February 3, 2013 | Noel Sheppard

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on Sunday once again perfectly illustrated the intolerance of America's liberal media.
Appearing on ABC's This Week, he said the National Rifle Association is - and I quote! - "an insane organization" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Krugman: NRA Is 'An Insane Organization'

PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: But what really strikes me -- I don't know how this plays, you know, what will happen. What strikes me is we've actually gotten a glimpse into the mindset, though, of the pro-gun people and we've seen certainly Wayne LaPierre and some of these others. It's bizarre. They have this vision that we're living in a "Mad Max" movie and that nothing can be done about it, that America cannot manage unless everybody's prepared to shoot intruders, that -- the idea that we have a police forces that provides public safety is somehow totally impractical, despite the fact that, you know, that is, in fact, the way we live.
So I think that the terms of the debate have shifted. Now the craziness of the extreme pro-gun lobby has been revealed, and that has got to move the debate and got to move the legislation at least to some degree.
A few minutes later, former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina pushed back:

CARLY FIORINA, FORMER CEO HEWLETT PACKARD: Paul said something that's illustrative of what I meant when I said people overplay their hands. What Paul just did was lump everybody together as a crazy radical gun-owner. KRUGMAN: Not true.
FIORINA: Yes. So you're condemning people...
KRUGMAN: No, there are plenty of gun-owners who are fine. But the lobbying groups, the NRA is now revealed as an insane organization, and that matters quite a lot.
FIORINA: I said at the outset, I think the NRA overplayed its hand a bit.
KRUGMAN: More than that.
FIORINA: I think...
KRUGMAN: More than just overplaying its hand.
FIORINA: ... we should support universal background checks. On the other hand, we need to say that if -- let's just say Dianne Feinstein's bill passed banning assault weapons. It won't do anything to solve the problem.
Wow! A New York Times columnist said on national television Sunday that the NRA is "an insane organization," and the only person that pushed back was Fiorina.
Why didn't host George Stephanopoulos step in a challenge Krugman for going so far?
Likely, it's because Stephanopoulos agreed with him.
Says a lot about today's media, doesn't it?

Obama's Jobless Recovery Continues Unabated

IBD ^ | 02/02/2013

So the economy created 157,000 new payroll jobs in January. Wow. At this rate, we might actually get back down to Bush-era unemployment rates sometime, oh, within the next 100 years.
The January jobs report is supposed to be good news.
After all, the economy has now added a total of 6.1 million jobs over the past three years, and the BLS revised last year's jobs numbers sharply upward.
But it doesn't take much effort to notice that, when it comes to job creation, we are barely treading water.
Case in point: Despite these "big" gains, unemployment climbed to 7.9% — higher than when Obama took office amid the "worst recession since the Great Depression."
That 7.9% is deceptively low: It fails to account for the exodus of 8.5 million from the labor force under Obama. As a result, the Bureau of Labor Statistics' broader measure of unemployment remains stuck at a depressing 14.4% — also higher than when Obama took office.
In addition, there are still 4.7 million long-term unemployed — nearly twice as many as when Obama was first sworn in. And at 35 weeks, the average length of unemployment is far higher than any time between World War II and the Obama era.
But the worst news of all is that we remain 3.2 million jobs shy of the previous employment peak of five years ago. To get a sense of how dismal this is, consider this: It took an average of just 24 months to regain all the jobs lost in the previous nine recessions. But at the current Obama job-creation pace, it will take about 80 months to regain those lost jobs.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Army Night Stalkers opening helicopters for women!

AP ^ | February 01, 2013

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Another one of the many military jobs on the front lines of combat may be opening to women: Flying the high-tech helicopters that move special forces under cover of darkness for missions like the one that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.
The Army's most elite aviation unit has proposed a test program to let women serve as pilots and crew chiefs, pending congressional approval. The 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, based at Fort Campbell, Ky., and known as the Night Stalkers, decided to give women a trial as pilots and crew chiefs as part of a military-wide review on gender policies last year that preceded the Pentagon's announcement on Jan. 24 to lift a broad ban on women fighting in smaller ground combat units, which include many artillery, armor and infantry jobs.
The military announced last year that it would open up about 14,000 new jobs for women in units below the brigade level. But the aviation unit is the first among Army special operations units to move toward more unrestricted roles for women, well ahead of a 2016 deadline to integrate women across the services.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama plays with guns?

Will the Boy Scouts Give In? (Interesting facts the media has neglected to divulge on the topic)

Catholic Exchange ^ | February 1, 2013 | ELIZABETH YANK

Say it isn’t so! Not the Boy Scouts. I couldn’t believe it. I didn’t want to believe it. I opened my e-mail and found an urgent request from the Family Research Council to call the Boy Scouts. The Boy Scouts were “considering” revising their policy of allowing active homosexuals to participate as scouts and leaders.
A statement released from the national leadership of the Boy Scouts stated they were “discussing potentially removing the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation.” They were going to defer membership requirements to local groups.
What are the contributing factors to the Boy Scouts considering caving into the demands of homosexual activists and media pressure? Certainly media hype surrounding two cases last year were major contributors. One story concerned Ryan Andresen, who was denied his Eagle Scout badge because he considers himself homosexual.
In another incident, den leader Jennifer Tyrrell was asked to leave because she is a lesbian.
Both Ryan’s mom and Jennifer Tyrrell generated petitions with large numbers of signatures to change the policy. Never mind that in both instances, they were fully aware of the Boy Scouts policy, but wielded pressure on the organization to change its policy for them. And never mind that the media pushing the homosexual agenda totally omitted the fact that Andresen did not want to take the scout Oath because he did not agree to Duty to God. “This scout proactively notified his unit leadership and Eagle Scout counselor that he does not agree to scouting’s principle of ‘Duty to God’ and does not meet scouting’s membership standard on sexual orientation,” Deron Smith, a spokesman for the organization said in a statement. “Agreeing to do one’s ‘Duty to God’ is a part of the scout Oath and Law and a requirement of achieving the Eagle Scout rank” (My underlining).
In addition to distorting the facts about the Andresen case, the mainstream media is also disregarding a story about two prominent national board members, Ernst & Young CEO James Turley and AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson, who are actively seeking to change the Boy Scouts long standing policy.
Oddly enough, at the same time last year that members and leaders were petitioning for homosexuals to join the Boy Scouts, the Los Angeles Times released a disturbing story about sexual abuse within the Boy Scouts.,0,5822319.story
Of course, the liberal media was quick to point out that homosexuals are not pedophiles, while never answering the question of when does a boy become a man—when he hits puberty or hits 18 or 21. What is the magical age?
What really might be prompting the Boy Scouts to reconsider their policy is money. Last year with all the controversy swirling around the Boy Scouts not allowing homosexuals to participate, United Way as well as companies that offered corporate support in the past pulled their funding, financially hurting the Boy Scouts.
While some people might say, “What’s the big deal? Homosexuals are nice people”. The issue is not whether or not homosexuals are nice people.
The real issue is the consequences of this decision. Why do homosexuals want to join the Boy Scouts? No one is required to join the Boy Scouts. Why should they really care? Once the Boy Scouts cave in, then homosexual activists will push for the next step. If the Boy Scouts allow homosexuals to participate, are the Boy Scouts legitimizing homosexual behavior? If you legitimize a deviant behavior is the deviant behavior then acceptable? Is it then acceptable for Boy Scout leaders to discuss deviant behavior as the new normal? Are those who disagree with that behavior than considered not normal? Is it then acceptable to bully those who oppose homosexual activities? Homosexual activists already bash Christians. Just read the comments on the stories covering this topic. And if it is okay to discuss homosexual behavior as acceptable–just a lifestyle choice that young people should explore– is it then acceptable to engage in those activities?
Oh, how soon we forget. Not that long ago homosexuality was listed by the American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association as a mental illness. There were and in a few cases still are laws against sodomy. Why? It was a protection of society. People don’t want to admit what homosexuality is—a deviant behavior. People no longer understand natural law. If the Boy Scouts allow homosexuals to join, they will be living a lie, because they will no longer be able to live their scout oath.
Scout Oath
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

Life In Progressivetown

NRA Adding More Than 10,000 New Members - Per Day! (Up 500,000 in a little over a month) ^

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has added 500,000 new members over the last month and a half.
Jacqueline Otto, media liaison for the NRA, spoke to and confirmed the new membership numbers:
"We mark that [membership increase] from the, you know, Congressional calls for gun control and President Obama's executive orders and things like that. That's what's driving the increased membership." asked: "That's approximately over what time span then?"
"A month, month and a half," Otto said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Texas Valentines

Iran & Kerry

Obama's Jobs Council

Jobs Council

Target Practice

Obama Shooting?

The Naked