Friday, May 10, 2013

Sex Education

Posted Image

Bleeding From Behind

Posted Image

The Musical

Posted Image

What cover-up?

Posted Image

Hillary Sings

Posted Image

Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference!

ABC News ^ 

When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

As America Arms Up, Gun Crime Goes Down! ^ | 5-9-2013 | Rush Limbaugh


RUSH: Earlier this week... Is this Thursday already? It is. We had news earlier this week -- in fact, it might have been yesterday; if not yesterday, the day before -- about the falling numbers of gun deaths and gun crimes. I think it was yesterday. It's striking. The amount of murders with guns since the mid-1990s is plummeting. I think they're down 39%, and overall crimes with guns are down 69%.
This is the LA Times, by the way. The story was the American people don't know this. The American people think that crime with guns is on the uptick, and they think this because of the focused coverage in places like Aurora, Colorado, and the Gabby Giffords incident, and Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut. (I'm getting it confused with the hurricane location.) Anyway, they think gun Drive-By Media is just going through the roof, and it's not.
Gun crime is down.
Now, here's a headline in the Christian Science Monitor: "With Gun Violence Down, is America Arming Against an Imagined Threat?" Oh, yeah! "You people are arming up but the threats that you feel out there are imaginary. You've got no reason to be arming up. Gun crime is down. Murders with guns are way down. What are you doing, arming up? What are you doing buying all those guns? You got no business doing this!"

The Monitor: "Mass shootings, frantic gun-buying, and more Americans legally carrying guns on the street all point to a country fighting a gun violence epidemic, right? Not necessarily. As part of a broader trend of declining crime, gun violence in America -- while still high relative to other Western countries -- has dropped by 49% from 1993 to 2011, while nonfatal gun crimes dropped by 69%, according to the US Justice Department.
"But that slow-motion decline in Americans turning guns on each other has failed to register with most people, only 12% of whom answered the question correctly when asked by the Pew Research Center in a poll released Tuesday. Some 56% of respondents said they believed that gun violence had actually increased over the last 20 years. ... 'The gun prohibition lobby has long promoted this idea that reducing the number of guns is a good idea, that fewer guns are better categorically,' says Dave Kopel, a research analyst at the Independence Institute in Denver.
"'But here we have a real world experiment which shows the opposite, where we have a huge decline in gun crime at the same time as there's been an enormous increase in the firearms supply in the United States. It doesn't prove that the increase in gun numbers or licensed carry caused the decline, but it sure does contest the simplistic theory ... that more guns equal more crime.'" Now, I don't think that the Christian Science Monitor -- I don't think the left intended this correlation.
I think when they put this story out, "Gun crime is way down, so there's no reason for you to have a gun," was what they wanted to convey. "Gun crimes and murders with guns? It's way down since the nineties! What business do you have buying a gun? You don't need to be buying guns! You're arming up over an imagined threat." What the media doesn't get is, as the American people have "armed up," gun crime as fallen, dramatically, 49 and 69%. That's gun crime and gun murders.
Gun violence is down as gun ownership has increased and concealed carry permits have, too. "With Gun Violence Down, is America Arming Against an Imagined Threat?" The media and the headline writer here at the Christian Science Monitor are saying, "You people with guns, you people are actually nuts! You're wackos. I mean, you're out there, you're buying all these guns, and there's no threat. Gun crime is down. You're arming up against an imagined threat.
Even when they go talk to the guy from the Independence Institute in Denver who points out, "You know what? Isn't it strange that as Americans have 'armed up,' as you say, gun crime has plummeted?" Because the left loves to say that all these guns out there, and all that ammo out there, "Why, that's just gonna increase gun crime!" It's just the exact opposite. I have to laugh here because the Drive-Bys thought they were on to something, and they don't even see the correlation.
Now, "The paradox provides a poignant backdrop for a national gun debate that had primarily Democrats but also key Republicans pushing for more gun controls, including expanded background checks, in the wake of a string of mass murders..." Why do people think that gun crime is up? That's obviously clear. It's because of the media attention and focus on these mass shootings. Do you know that mass shootings are down, too?
Amazingly so. You go back all the way to the forties and fifties, and you will see that mass shootings, like at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown or whatever, are down. They don't happen nearly as much as they used to. But in the past they didn't get the media coverage they get today, saturated media coverage -- and we don't just get coverage of the event. After each event we get weeks and weeks of hand-wringing on TV. "Oh, my Lord, woe is us! How terrible this is, Rush! Why are these people doing this? We've gotta get guns off the street," and it's just the opposite.
It's just the exact opposite.

Blacks outvoted whites in 2012, the first time on record (and they got their Socialist)

cnn ^ | 5/10/2013 | Dan Merica

A new Census Bureau report shows a higher percentage of African-Americans than whites voted in a presidential election for the first time in history last year during the matchup between President Obama and GOP nominee Mitt Romney.
The report, released Wednesday, found that more than 66% of eligible blacks voted in the presidential contest. Only 64.1% of whites turned out to vote.
This marks the first time since 1968 that blacks turned out at a higher rate the whites.
In addition to blacks turning out at a higher rate, the number of Asian and Hispanic voters grew from 2008 to 2012. Hispanics added 1.4 million people and Asians added over 500,000. Between 1996 and 2012, blacks, Asians and Hispanics all saw their percentage of the voting population increase.
"Over the last five presidential elections, the share of voters who were racial or ethnic minorities rose from just over one in six in 1996 to more than one in four in 2012," said Thom File, the report's author.
The highest turnout of blacks, in addition to the growing number of Hispanics and Asians, could also explain Obama's success in defeating Romney.
According to CNN exit polls, 93% of African-Americans, 71% of Hispanics and 73% of Asians supported Obama over Romney.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Cleveland Kidnap Horror (a great place to be a monster)

THE DAILY BEAST ^ | 5/9/13 | Michael Daly

How Ariel Castro Remained at Liberty in Cleveland All These Years
(monumentally stupid cops and ethnic solidarity)

The domestic-violence and abduction allegations didn’t stop him. Nor did telling a kid on the bus he drove, ‘Lay down, bitch.’ Michael Daly on how Cleveland proved the perfect home for the alleged kidnapper.
Cleveland seems to be a great city to be a monster.
Ariel Castro remained at liberty there for year after year, even though three kidnapped women were imprisoned in his house and his ex-wife had told the domestic-violence court that he had brutalized and terrorized her and their children.
Police in protective suits on May 8 investigate homes down the street from the house where three women were held captive for close to a decade in Cleveland. (Matt Sullivan/Getty)
In her petition for an order of protection, ex-wife Grimilda Figueroa stated that Castro had “broken petitioner’s nose (twice), ribs, lacerations, knocked out tooth, blood clot on brain, (inoperable tumor), dislocated shoulder, (twice, once on each side) threatened to kill petitioner and daughters 3 to 4 times just this year.”
Figueroa had further alleged that Castro “frequently abducts daughters and keeps them from mother/petitioner/legal custodian.”
Deputies were dispatched to serve Castro notice of a hearing on the ex-wife’s petition, and they first went to the Cleveland schoolbus depot on Ridge Road. They were told he no longer worked out of that location, having been suspended and then transferred the year before, after an incident that began when he failed to drop off a grammar-school special-education student.
Castro is said to have told the student, “Lay down, bitch,” and left the youngster on the bus while he grabbed a bite at a Wendy’s. Castro had then driven around for a time before finally delivering the child. That would certainly seem to have constituted endangering the welfare of a child, but the police who went to Castro’s house to interview him decided there was no criminal intent and let the matter drop.
The Castro house was visited on three occasions by the deputies seeking to serve the hearing notice. Castro did not answer the door, perhaps because by that time three women were imprisoned there. Or he may have already been in court on another matter, as the witness in a sex-abuse and kidnapping case against his ex-wife’s husband, Fernando Colon.
That’s right, even as three three missing women were being held in Castro’s house and his ex-wife was accusing him of beating her, he was on the stand in a case where Colon was accused of detaining and molesting two of Castro’s three daughters.
Investigators had first taken an interest in the Castro family when they learned that one of the daughters, Arlene, was the last person to see Gina DeJesus before she vanished in 2004. Arlene was said to be Gina’s best friend. The two had spoken of Arlene going to Gina’s house after school.
Castro was never interviewed and he was able just to continue on, allegedly growing only more monstrous.
“She gave me 50 cents to call my mom and so my mom said no, that I can’t go over to her house,” Arlene would tell the TV show America’s Most Wanted on the first anniversary of her friend’s disappearance. “So I told her I couldn’t and she said, ‘Well, OK, I’ll talk to you later,’ and she just walked.”
Arlene said that after giving her the 50 cents, Gina no longer had enough money to take the bus and had set off for home on foot. A police dog would later track Gina’s scent halfway up the block before there suddenly was no trace of her.
Investigators interviewed Arlene, who was living with her mom. The investigators began to take an interest in her stepfather, Colon, after there were suggestions that he may have been molesting two of the Castro daughters. Colon would later insist that Ariel Castro was behind the allegations.
Colon reportedly agreed to take a polygraph test, which is said to have indicated that he had no involvement in Gina’s disappearance. The sex-abuse allegations remained, and court records show that Colon was indicted on November 1, 2004. He subsequently went to trial on August 30, 2005, a day after his wife filed the domestic-abuse allegations against Castro.
Those who testified in Colon’s defense included his wife, Castro’s ex, Figueroa. Colon was convicted on September 6, 2005. He would continue to insist that he had been set up by Castro. He could not be reached for comment.
Exactly a week after Colon’s conviction, Castro contacted the domestic-violence court to acknowledge notice of the hearing. But after all that, the hearing was canceled, apparently because Figueroa’s lawyer, Robert Fererri, failed to show. The lawyer was apparently the same Fererri who had been suspended twice while a judge and would subsequently resign from the practice of law following questions about a case in which he represented two defendants with conflicting interests. He did not return repeated calls for comment.
By then, the investigators seem to have nixed Colon as a suspect in the disappearance. Had they taken a look at Castro—as they should have if they had investigated everybody with a possible connection to the missing Gina—they would have seen Figueroa’s allegation in the court papers that he frequently abducted his daughters.
It would not take much imagination to consider the possibility that Castro might have been waiting outside the school to abduct Arlene and then decided to kidnap Gina instead. Castro always had to return his daughters to their mother. But Gina he could keep, along with the other two captives who might have served as an available rush of power to offset no longer being able to control his ex-wife.
Castro was never interviewed and he was able just to continue on, allegedly growing only more monstrous. He is said to have impregnated one of his hostages five times, forcing at least one of four ensuing miscarriages.
Around 2007, one pregnancy went to term, and Castro allegedly ordered another hostage to deliver the baby in an inflatable plastic swimming pool, threatening her with death if the child died. The hostage turned midwife is said by police to have breathed air into the infant to get the babe breathing, perhaps saving both of their lives. The child survived to become a fourth kidnap victim.
By some reports that police officially neither deny nor confirm, investigators found a draft of an apparent suicide note in Castro’s house in which he complained of an unhappy childhood and blamed the captives for his troubles.
Yet, to many who encountered him outside his dungeon, he seemed generally cheery. He certainly seemed chipper enough on his Facebook page when he talked about the joys of listening to a cardinal herald the approach of spring or rhapsodized, “miracles really do happen. God is good :)”
Maybe the miracle was that he was able to keep it up for so long without being caught.
Were it not for Amanda Berry’s courage when she finally saw an opportunity to escape with the child and for Charles Ramsey’s courage in coming to their aid, Cleveland might have kept on being a good town to be a monster.
In fairness, Cleveland also seems a good city to be a striver, as others of the Castro family proved after becoming one of the first Hispanic families to settle there, coming from the town of Yauco in Puerto Rico after World War II. Ariel’s father, Nona Castro, opened a used-car lot. One of Ariel’s uncles, Julio “Cedi” Castro, opened the Caribe Grocery and became a prominent figure in the community. He was honored in 1996 as one of the top 12 Hispanics in Ohio.
Among the other highly regarded members of the Hispanic community in Cleveland is Victor Perez, the city’s chief prosecutor. Perez stood as both a proud citizen of Cleveland and an equally proud native of Puerto Rico as he announced the charges against Castro on Wednesday.
The word from the jail is that Castro is beginning to learn that a monster also can find Cleveland to be a very bad place indeed once he is found out.

Faith and Benghazi

National Review ^ | May 10, 2013 | National Review

Bad Faith and Benghazi: Hillary Clinton’s “whatever” defense falls flat. By Jonah Goldberg

Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”
That was how then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton famously brushed off the question of when she knew that the attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were, in fact, a terrorist assault and not a “protest” of an anti-Islam video that got out of hand.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Tell Me Again Why the U.S. Used Jihadists to Guard Benghazi!

Townhall ^ | 5/10/2013 | Diana West

Uncle Sam's open support for jihad is an epic scandal that is never even acknowledged.
Farenthold [Congressman-Rep-Texas]: "Were you aware of any ties by that militia to Islamic extremists?"
Nordstrom: "Absolutely. Yeah, we had that discussion on a number of occasions, the last of which was when there was a Facebook posting of a threat that named Ambassador Stevens and Sen. (John) McCain, who was coming out for the elections. That was in the July (2012) time frame. I met with some of my agents and also some (CIA) annex personnel and we discussed that."
More news: Nordstrom seems to be saying that the February 17 Martyrs Brigade actually threatened both the U.S. ambassador and a U.S. senator -- and still served as U.S. security guards. This is shocking to read in black and white, although, again, when it becomes clear that Uncle Sam supported the same, exact jihad in Libya that al-Qaida supported, it makes -- if not sense exactly, then certainly a pattern.
Farenthold: "Mr. Hicks, you were in Libya on the night of the attack. Do you believe the February 17 militia played a role in those attacks, was complacent in those attacks?"
Hicks: "Certainly, elements of that militia were complicit in the attacks. The attackers had to make a long approach march through multiple checkpoints that were manned by February 17 militia."
More news: Most media accounts identified al-Qaida-linked Ansar al-Sharia ("Supporters of Sharia") as the militia manning the checkpoints around the compound that horrible night.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hillary's White House hopes under fire!

Boston Herald ^ | May 9, 2013 | Joe Battenfeld

She weathered Whitewater. She made it past Monica 
Lewinsky. Now Hillary Clinton is hoping to beat the rap on Benghazi and make it to the White House.
The Clinton political 
machine is in full campaign mode already, preparing for 2016 and hoping voters forget by then that she had a key role in the Obama administration’s handling of the terror attack.
But that’s becoming more difficult as the GOP appears to be laying the groundwork for tying Clinton to Benghazi and making sure it stays front and center in the next campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

More Good News for You, Barry: Obamacare Approval TANKING (35%!)

Reaganite Republican ^ | 10 May 2013 | Reaganite Republican

Bad-week-after-bad-week for the besieged Obama
White House- and this one still ain't even over yet!

At a point in time when Obamacare's most unpleasant periods of implementation -and massive tax hikes- are yet to have hit, seems reality has already penetrated much of the public awareness... at least to the point so that somebody besides medical professionals and small-businesses are frightened by this legislative Frankenstein.

Obamacare has never enjoyed 50% support in any poll I've ever seen- now today, barely a third of regular Joes and Josephines approve, just one point better than the all time low of 34% in September 2009- that in the midst of heated town hall debates nationwide (of course AP couldn't resist interweaving the entire story with snarky commentary re. GOP alternative proposals from Medicare chief -and committed leftist- Donald Berwick).

With 65+ seniors approval below 30% for the first time, it's no wonder we found Obama out on the stump pimping Obamacare yet again.

I first started actively/vehemently opposing Barack Obama in early 2008, at that time almost purely on his lack of qualification for Commander in Chief... so after 5 years of dumb luck in foreign policy like I've never seen, the Benghazigate hearings had me feeling a bit vindicated in that base argument against his presidency. But Barack Obama has sown the seeds for SO much disaster -particularly in the Middle East- that Benghazi's just the tip of the iceberg.

Once the regime's all-encompassing radicalism became apparent -and talk of 'bipartisanship' and 'moderation' proven to be a smokescreen- I've fought him tooth-and-nail, like so many other Americans. Yet even in the wake of 2012 hyper-disappointing defeat, I always felt our ace-in-the-hole would be the implementation of Obamacare- it was never reconciled properly, cannot be implemented in anything like it's current form, and will cost taxpayers an ARM and a LEG... the eventual backlash would have to be tremendous.

Seems that's already started...

The Best They Can Do?

Posted Image

Cauldron of Muslim Hate

Posted Image

Rapido y Furioso

Posted Image

Waterboard Obama!

Posted Image

Dads & GrandDads

Posted Image

Lone Wolf Pack!

Posted Image


Posted Image

Take Two

Posted Image

Bashed and Praised

Posted Image

Obama Phone Calls

Posted Image

Red Lines

Posted Image


Posted Image


Posted Image

Say Something

Posted Image

The moment of responsibility for Hillary Clinton [Rand Paul Takes on the Murderess]

Washington Times ^ | 5/10/13 | Rand Paul

When I took Hillary Rodham Clinton to task in January for the mishandling of security in Benghazi, Libya, I told her that if I had been president at the time, I would have relieved her of her post. Some politicians and pundits took offense at my line of questioning.
During those hearings, I reminded Mrs. Clinton that multiple requests were sent to the State Department asking for increased security measures. I asked if she had read the cables from Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens asking for increased security. She replied that she was busy and had not read them. I find that inexcusable.
Four months later, we are hearing that Mrs. Clinton allegedly withheld information from a counterterrorism bureau during the response. We are hearing new allegations that Special Forces wanting to respond during the attacks were told, “You can’t go” by superiors. Ambassador Stevens’ deputy, Gregory Hicks, testified this week that he spoke with Mrs. Clinton on the night of the attack, when these orders were given. We are hearing that Mr. Hicks was initially told by the State Department not to meet with congressional investigators.
We are, again, hearing allegations that contradict the White House’s story.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Texas Economic Lesson Obama Refuses To Learn

Investor's Business Daily ^ | 05/09/2013 | John Merline

President Obama went to Texas on Thursday to kick off a nationwide tour pushing his economic policies, apparently unaware that Texas has thrived the past four years by doing pretty much the opposite of what Obama has prescribed.
Since taking office, Obama has pushed more government as the way to get the economy moving. He dramatically boosted spending, imposed massive amounts of new regulations, ran enormous deficits, and has imposed more than $1 trillion in tax hikes. [snip]
Texas, meanwhile, has pursued a far different path from the one Obama advocates.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...


Our Stained, Muzzled Military ^ | May 10, 2013 | Mark Davis

It is hard to point to one thing as the worst element of the current scandal over the Benghazi cover-up. But there’s something that belongs on the list that has not been mentioned enough.
Obviously, it is a consuming matter to absorb the deaths of four Americans and a subsequent campaign of deceit designed to protect those in power now and those who may seek it later.
But politicians have a long history of lying to protect themselves. What is different here, and disturbing to a whole new level, is the capacity of this administration to plow well beyond its own corruption to corrupt others.
There is no more distressing victim of this phenomenon than the hierarchy and culture of the United States military.
This White House has very little use for our men and women in uniform, and no proper instinct for the respect they deserve.
They become useful props when it’s time to crow again about the killing of Osama bin Laden, but the war that made that possible is a cancer the Obama team is radiating into obscurity, as we cut and run from Afghanistan, Iraq and every theater where we had a chance to boost democracy with our stabilizing presence.
There is little doubt that the Benghazi terrorists were energized by this American surrender. Does anyone believe they would have pulled this off if we had maintained a strong presence throughout the Middle East?
But even with our Obama-depleted ranks in the region, we now know we could have mounted some response to minimize the damage done by the Benghazi terrorists.
But those response teams were told to stand down. Reaction throughout the ranks apparently ranged from fury to disbelief.
Both are warranted, among our armed forces and across the American landscape. How in God’s name were responding forces restrained? And by whom?
If Democrats can stifle their chant that all questions have been answered, they might work on that one. And then they might join the chorus of curious souls wondering how officials who knew better could continue to parrot that stupid story about a YouTube video as the catalyst for the Benghazi attacks.
But again, much has been written about that. Not enough light has been directed at the last shred of dignity stripped from our military by this White House. The intimidation of whistleblowers, the attempted muzzling of witnesses who might have more to tell, the stunning disregard shown to the forces who were begging to be loosed to help their countrymen-- this is the work of a wholly unfit Commander-in-Chief.
And yet because of that title, the aggrieved troops cannot speak truth to power. This tragedy demands answers from various military levels on questions about how their trust was trampled by the current President and the former Secretary of State who may wish to be his successor.
This is just the latest dishonor foisted on our armed forces by this regime. Here in the season of sequester, The budgetarily minuscule Blue Angels and Thunderbirds are grounded, silencing their ability to create goodwill. But far more seriously, a carrier group that should be patrolling treacherous Persian Gulf waters is stuck in port, all because this President chooses to strand them there so that an inattentive public can think this is what spending cuts do.
This cries out for a military hero to step forward to proclaim, “Enough!”
I can imagine the testimony of such a valiant figure. “The air shows did not need to be cancelled. Our ships certainly do not need to be shackled to their docks. This is pure politics.”
But this will never happen. The hierarchy of military power precludes all ranks from publicly highlighting the duplicity of the President, a rule which probably serves us well.
But we need more. We need military heroes to step forward with details of any effort by Barack Obama to spread lies about Benghazi and its aftermath. And we need for even more courageous voices to share any measures undertaken by Hillary Clinton to obscure the truth, including the question of who ordered the silencing of Benghazi survivors and key players.
I am dreaming, of course. This would be the height of insubordination.
The Benghazi hearings, thorough as they were, merely scratched the surface of what people did at the highest levels of power, to keep power.
They simply could not have witnesses spilling out with a story of a terror hotbed that Obama somehow had not fixed.
So the cover-up began, and it continues to this day, a corruptive stain that spreads across multiple figures.
Military personnel are not used to being caught up in political self-protection games. But they surely are now, and it sickens them. Or it should