Monday, May 13, 2013

The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer

Heritage Foundation ^ | May 6, 2013 | Robert Rector and Jason Richwine

Executive Summary
Unlawful immigration and amnesty for current unlawful immigrants can pose large fiscal costs for U.S. taxpayers. Government provides four types of benefits and services that are relevant to this issue:
Direct benefits. These include Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation.
Means-tested welfare benefits. There are over 80 of these programs which, at a cost of nearly $900 billion per year, provide cash, food, housing, medical, and other services to roughly 100 million low-income Americans. Major programs include Medicaid, food stamps, the refundable Earned Income Tax Credit, public housing, Supplemental Security Income, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
Public education. At a cost of $12,300 per pupil per year, these services are largely free or heavily subsidized for low-income parents.
Population-based services. Police, fire, highways, parks, and similar services, as the National Academy of Sciences determined in its study of the fiscal costs of immigration, generally have to expand as new immigrants enter a community; someone has to bear the cost of that expansion.
The cost of these governmental services is far larger than many people imagine. For example, in 2010, the average U.S. household received $31,584 in government benefits and services in these four categories.
The governmental system is highly redistributive. Well-educated households tend to be net tax contributors: The taxes they pay exceed the direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services they receive. For example, in 2010, in the whole U.S. population, households with college-educated heads, on average, received $24,839 in government benefits while paying $54,089 in taxes. The average college-educated household thus generated a fiscal surplus of $29,250 that government used to finance benefits for other households.
Read the rest of the report here:
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Lesbian Mothers- Turned Normal Boy Into a Girl: Gay Adoption=Child Abuse ^ | May 12, 2013 | Susan Shannon

In 2011, a little boy became the victim of gay adoption laws. Perhaps he was difficult to adopt due to having a substantial speech impediment and only began communicating at age three with sign language. This is the vulnerable population of children that are considered ‘un-adoptable’, perhaps. These are the poor children whom the gay community say they are ‘rescuing’ from adoption homes. These are the children that are being experimented on by our Godless society today. “Let’s see if two lesbians or two gay men can raise a child as well as a proper male/female married couple. This grand experiment, in their minds, will be the final justification that gay sex, gay ‘marriage’ and gay parenting are not only ‘ok’, but are every bit as good as a good old fashioned mommy and daddy. I’m not sure why the story is being resurrected now, but I’m glad it is. Because this poor boy has produced some videos which his progressives ‘mothers’ seem to think are fine to be uploaded for the world to see on YouTube. These videos are disturbing in so many ways. They show a child who is desperately unhappy and unhealthy. What you will see is the result of one of the most cruel forms of experimentation ever done on little children.
Thomas, aged two, was irresponsibly allowed to be adopted by two lesbian grandmothers who had ‘decided’ late in life that they were gay (after already having children & grandchildren with men). Because our government has been utterly corrupted by Progressives, it no longer bothered to find a decent home for this two year old boy. Instead, in the spirit of ‘fair play’ and political correctness, gave this innocent boy over to the care of two rebellious women who are in full disobedience to...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama dismisses criticism of Benghazi talking points as ‘side show’!

Washington Post ^ | May 13, 2013 | Scott Wilson

A frustrated President Obama on Monday dismissed new questions surrounding the White House role in producing a set of public talking points after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks in Benghazi, Libya, calling the debate around them a politically motivated “side show.”
“We don’t have time to keep playing these political games in Washington,” Obama said, arguing that the more important work is ensuring that U.S. diplomats are adequately protected. “We dishonor them when we turn things like this into a political circus.”
“The whole issue of talking points throughout this process has been a side show,” Obama said Monday. “Suddenly three days ago this gets spun up as if there is something new to the story. There’s no there there.”
Obama continued, “The whole thing defies logic, and the fact that this keeps getting churned out frankly has a lot to do with political motivations.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

White House: Well, the conduct “of a small number of IRS employees may have fallen short…”

Hotair ^ | 05/13/2013 | Erika Johnsen

No need to be quite so modest here, White House — as to the most ‘recent media reports,’ we already learned this weekend that high-up agency leaders knew this tea-party targeting had been going on was going on for at least a couple of years now and certainly didn’t bother to stop it, and the fact that this was all performed by a relatively small number of employees in the workforce-hugeness of the IRS is really not a mitigating factor. Via ABC:
In a statement this morning White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that the president is “concerned” the conduct of a few employees of the IRS has “fallen short” of the integrity expected of government officials. “The President believes that the American people expect and deserve to have the very best public servants with the highest levels of integrity working in government agencies on their behalf. Based on recent media reports, he is concerned that the conduct of a small number of Internal Revenue Service employees may have fallen short of that standard. We understand that the matter is currently under review by the Inspector General. If the Inspector General finds that there were any rules broken or that conduct of government officials did not meet the standards required of them, the President expects that swift and appropriate steps will be taken to address any misconduct,” Carney said in the statement.
President Obama also glossed over the issue during his press conference with British PM David Cameron just before noon, obligatorily agreeing that it’s “outrageous,” that the “IRS as an independent agency has to act with absolute integrity” and that “I’ve got no patience for it and I will not tolerate it,” but ultimately demurring: “The IG is conducting their investigation and I’m not going to comment prematurely.” …Hmm, waiting for the IG report to comment? As fond as President Obama is of that politically safe route (where have we heard that before recently?), the IRS had been caught red-handed in official wrongdoing here, and it doesn’t look like the forthcoming IG report is going to be helping their case by any stretch of the imagination.
On MSNBC this morning, Tom Brokaw asserted that the time for action from the president is already nigh — and as Chuck Todd added, “Why aren’t there more Democrats jumping on this? This is outrageous no matter what political party you are.” Via Mediaite:


Gingrich pounds IRS: ‘Administration won’t profile terrorists, but profiles patriots’

BizPac ^ | May 13, 2013 | Janeen Capizola

Former House Speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich made two points Monday on “Morning Joe” that Americans should hear and heed.
Referring to the still developing IRS scandal involving its targeting of tea party-like, conservative political groups, Gingrich asked, “How can you put Obamacare under the Internal Revenue Service?”
Gingrich said President Obama “has a huge problem because Obamacare relies very heavily on the IRS.”
Although not in the segment of the video below, Politico reported Gingrich also said during the interview:
Why would you trust the bureaucracy with your health if you can’t trust the bureaucracy with your politics? … There are bureaucrats in the IRS who are capable of ruining your life while lying about it.
Gingrich then sharply reminded viewers:
Remember, this is an administration which will not profile terrorists, but profile patriots? Profile constitutional groups? I mean, this is almost madness.
It is madness, Newt.
Watch the former Speaker via Washington Free Beacon on YouTube:
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Here are 173 examples of Barack Obama’s lying

Here are 173 examples of Barack Obama’s lying, lawbreaking, corruption, cronyism, hypocrisy, government waste, and other misdeeds

Revealed: The 55 questions the IRS asked one tea party group...

Daily Mail ^ | May 13, 20913 | David Martosko

Full title: Revealed: The 55 questions the IRS asked one tea party group after more than two years of waiting – including demands for names of all its donors and volunteers

Link to 55-question inquisition (PDF)

The Internal Revenue Service wrote to the Richmond Tea Party last year demanding to know the names of all its financial donors and volunteers, as part of a 55-question inquisition into its application for tax-exempt status, MailOnline has learned.
The agency wanted to know 'the names of the donors, contributors, and grantors' for every year 'from inception to the present.'
It also demanded 'the amounts of each of the donations, contributions, and grants and the dates you received them.'
'How did you use these donations, contributions, and grants?' the IRS asked. 'Provide the details.'

Link to 55-question inquisition (PDF)

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Coming Next January: New Tax Form to Comply With Obamacare Mandate!

PJ Tatler ^ | May 12, 2013 | Rick Moran

I’ve been wondering how the IRS was going to determine whether taxpayers were complying with the individual mandate contained in Obamacare.
I needn’t have wondered. The IRS is a bureaucracy and what do bureaucracies adore almost as much as taxpayer-financed trips to Vegas for conferences?
Forms, of course.
When Obamacare’s individual mandate takes effect in 2014, all Americans who file income tax returns must complete an additional IRS tax form.
The new form will require disclosure of a taxpayer’s personal identifying health information in order to determine compliance with the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.
As confirmed by IRS testimony to the tax-writing House Committee on Ways and Means, “taxpayers will file their tax returns reporting their health insurance coverage, and/or making a payment”.
So why will the Obama IRS require your personal identifying health information?
Simply put, there is no way for the IRS to enforce Obamacare’s individual mandate without such an invasive reporting scheme. Every January, health insurance companies across America will send out tax documents to each insured individual. This tax document—a copy of which will be furnished to the IRS—must contain sufficient information for taxpayers to prove that they purchased qualifying health insurance under Obamacare.
This new tax information document must, at a minimum, contain: the name and health insurance identification number of the taxpayer; the name and tax identification number of the health insurance company; the number of months the taxpayer was covered by this insurance plan; and whether or not the plan was purchased in one of Obamacare’s “exchanges.”
This will involve millions of new tax documents landing in mailboxes across America every January, along with the usual raft of W-2s, 1099s, and 1098s.....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Corruption of Jay Carney

| @Peter_Wehner 05.12.2013 - 9:35 AM

The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two, of these two institutions were changing the word “consulate” to “diplomatic facility,” because “consulate” was inaccurate.
We now know that statement was false. Enormous substantive changes were made at the request of the State Department. And it’s not simply that changes were made; it’s that the changes did violence to the truth. With each new revision, the story became less and less accurate, so by the time U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on five Sunday talk shows, a massive fabrication was being peddled. And the president, the vice president, and the secretary of state all participated in the false narrative.
Yet on Friday, during his on-camera briefing, Mr. Carney was asked repeatedly whether he or the administration deliberately misled reporters last fall about the changes in the talking points. “Mr. Carney,” the New York Times reports, “expressed no regrets.”
“I do stand by that,” Mr. Carney said of his statement that the White House changed only a word or two to make clear the diplomatic post in Benghazi was not referred to as a consulate. “White House involvement in the talking points was very limited and nonsubstantive.”
Except that what Mr. Carney said in November is that neither the White House nor the State Department made substantive changes. In addition, as ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported, “Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes wrote an email saying the State Department’s concerns needed to be addressed. ‘We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.’” And third, the White House hosted a Deputies Committee meeting on September 15, out of which emerged the final, false talking points.
So Mr. Carney obviously misled the public in November; the only question is whether he did so willfully. Yet rather than admit to his multiple misleading statements in the past, Carney blamed Mitt Romney and Republicans. The spin Carney used was transparently dishonest. He constructed a false reality to defend himself and the administration. In the process, he has merely further damaged his credibility. You can watch the whole painful press briefing here.
Once upon a time, Jay Carney was a journalist who wanted to search for truth. Now he is an Obama White House official awkwardly attempting to hide it. He is now part of a cover-up. The questions are just how wide and deep the cover-up extends, how many more falsehoods the Obama White House will employ in its defense, and whether being played for fools by a liberal administration will bother the elite media and White House press corps.
We’re about to find out.

ICE Agent Tells Mark Levin: Obama ‘Inflating’ Deportation Numbers, La Raza ‘Running Our Agency’!

Stand With Arizona ^ | 05-13-2013 | John Hill

chris crane

Chris Crane, president of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers union, spoke to radio host Mark Levin, and unleashed two bombshells that should outrage all Americans.
First, that Obama is "cooking the books" on his so-called "record" deportation numbers - inflating them by up to 50%, by Crane's estimate.
And perhaps most shocking, Crane revealed that the race-baiting pressure group La Raza is effectively "running" ICE - forcing agents to stop enforcing the law against illegal aliens nationwide.
Crane revealed these stunning facts to a disgusted Levin on his radio show Thursday night (audio below).
Crane is suing his own bosses at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a landmark case, Crane v. Napolitano, to try and halt the Administration's orders to ICE agents to stop enforcement of Federal immigration laws.
On April 24, Crane - who represents 7,200 agents nationwide - won a stunning initial court victory in his lawsuit against the Obama Administration. As SWA reported at the time, Federal Judge Federal Judge Reed O’Connor told DHS that they had no power to refuse to deport illegal aliens, and that he was likely to strike down Obama’s virtual “DACA” amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. The ruling shocked the Washington establishment, and Crane’s lawsuit (you can donate here) could derail Obama’s four-year effort to undermine immigration enforcement nationwide.
Crane explained to Levin how President Obama and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano have, since the administration’s start, “attempted to shut down” border enforcement and “absolutely” tied law enforcement’s hands.
For example, Crane explained that ICE agents are not allowed (despite express authority from Congress) to arrest an individual they suspect to be an illegal alien, an illegal alien gang member, or illegal alien criminal. Instead, they are reportedly under orders to wait until the individual commits a crime, is arrested by another law enforcement agency (such as local police), jailed, and only then may an immigration agent speak with the individual.
Additionally, the deportation process can only begin if the individual has been convicted of three or more criminal offenses.
Despite the Obama Administration’s claims of robust border enforcement and record-high ICE deportation numbers, Crane noted how the administration actually cooks the books and inflates deportation numbers. Data that Crane obtained demonstrates that, since 2008, ICE arrests and deportations “have plummeted.”
Crane explained how it works: Border Patrol (a separate agency from ICE) makes an arrest on the border, but instead of handling the deportation itself, Border Patrol hands the detainee over to ICE to deport the individual, thereby inflating the number of ICE deportations. Crane described it as a “shell game” that allows what would normally be a mere "turn-back" to be counted as a formal "deportation," thus inflating the deportation statistics.
Crane's claims are fully backed up by official ICE documents that were revealed as a result of his lawsuit against DHS.
Crane also noted that he has received “no response at all” to his requests for meetings with three Republican "Gang of 8" senators: Jeff Flake (R-AZ), John McCain (R-AZ), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) - in order to provide the input of law enforcement to their immigration bill.
When Levin remarked that these senators nonetheless have had time to meet with the National Council of La Raza, Crane claimed: “Those groups are now running our agency... That’s why we’re not arresting people, that’s why we can’t do our jobs – it’s because they’re basically embedded in running our agency.”
A "disgusted" Levin called the information “stunning” and noted: “How in the hell are we supposed to get behind any so-called immigration bill when you just heard what Chris Crane had to say?... Folks! All hands on deck! Now’s the time to fight this!”
The pressure on the former Marine Crane and his agents for taking on their own bosses, and the massive establishment machine pushing amnesty must be immense. We salute their courage and will do everything we can to help them prevail.
Below is the audio of the shocking radio interview...
Excerpt...Click here for the full article.

Wider Problems Found at IRS

Wall Street Journal ^ | May 12, 2013 | JOHN D. MCKINNON and SIOBHAN HUGHES

The Internal Revenue Service's scrutiny of conservative groups went beyond those with "tea party" or "patriot" in their names—as the agency admitted Friday—to also include ones worried about government spending, debt or taxes, and even ones that lobbied to "make America a better place to live," according to new details of a government probe.

The investigation also revealed that a high-ranking IRS official knew as early as mid-2011 that conservative groups were being inappropriately targeted—nearly a year before then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman told a congressional committee the agency wasn't targeting conservative groups.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Whoever Said The (Shale) World Was Sane? (California vs. Texas)

Forbes ^ | May 8, 2013 | David Blackmon

Following up on last week’s piece detailing the reasons why the Shale oil and natural gas boom has taken place in Texas, but not in other states like California and New York, we’ve seen quite a bit of interesting, related news pieces over the last several days.
On Monday, the Wall Street Journal published a very informative op/ed in its Review & Outlook section, titled “A Tale of Two Oil States”, which made more detailed comparisons between the economic performance between Texas and California, and the ways in which each state’s policy decisions related to shale development have affected that performance. Here is a key passage:
The two richest fields are the Eagle Ford shale formation in South Texas, where production is up 50% in the last year alone, and the 250-square mile Permian Basin. Midland-Odessa in the Permian is one of America’s fastest-growing metro areas.
More than 400,000 Texans are employed by the oil and gas industry (almost 10 times more than in California) and (Texas Railroad Commission Chairman Barry) Smitherman says the average salary is $100,000 a year. The industry generates about $80 billion a year in economic activity, which exceeds the annual output of all goods and services in 13 individual states.....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Ways and Means Committee: When Did WH Know IRS Targeted Groups Based on Political Philosophy?

CNS News ^ | 5/12/13 | Terence P. Jeffrey

( - The House Ways and Means Committee wants to know when the White House first knew that the Internal Revenue Service was targeting groups for heightened scrutiny for their political views, including groups that used the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax exempt status, or that sought to educate people about the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration has provided a timeline to congressional staff that indicates that in the 2010 election year the Internal Revenue Service instructed officials in its "Determinations Unit" to "be on the lookout for" organizations applying for tax exempt status that used the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

You can own a piece of history -- for as little as... ^ | May 12, 2013

Federal officials at the General Services Administration are set to hawk an extraordinary item this week: a plane that once served as Air Force One.

The plane flew every president from Ford to George W., VPs and VIPs -- and it can be yours for as little as $50,000.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Public slams IRS targeting of Tea Party as 'chilling,' a form of intimidation!

Fox News / The Associated Press ^ | May 12, 2013

Washington Republicans on Sunday characterized the IRS targeting Tea Party groups and other conservative political organizations as “chilling” and intimidating acts that heighten Americans' mistrust in government.

Their comments follow the IRS acknowledgment Friday that the agency targeted such groups during the 2012 election cycle to see whether they were violating their tax-exempt status -- a revelation followed by a report that such activity dated back to the previous year......

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obamacare extortion!

Washington Post ^ | May 12, 2013 | By Jennifer Rubin

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has gone, hat in hand, to health industry officials, asking them to make large financial donations to help with the effort to implement President Obama’s landmark health-care law, two people familiar with the outreach said.
Her unusual fundraising push comes after Congress repeatedly rejected the Obama administration’s requests for additional funds to set up the Affordable Care Act, leaving HHS to implement the president’s signature legislative accomplishment on what officials have described as a shoestring budget.
Bizarrely, HHS spokesman Jason Young claims that “Sebelius did not solicit for funds directly from industries that HHS regulates, such as insurance companies and hospitals, but rather asked them to contribute in whatever way they can.”
Well, Mr. Young, it’s not a “contribution” when the government regulator comes with its hand out. These are hence not “contributions,” but monies obtained under duress, and the fear of adverse government action.
I realize scandal investigations are backing up like cars on the Beltway in rush hour, but this one seems like it should go close to the front of the line. We have an unpopular health-care bill with gross implementation and design problems that exceeds its budget.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Plan Si

Posted Image

It's Not Working!

Posted Image

A Government

Posted Image


Posted Image

Knowing what he's doing?

Posted Image


Posted Image

Background Checks

Posted Image

At Some Point

Posted Image

Parental Consent

Posted Image


Posted Image

Hell YES!

Posted Image

Less Talking, More Running!

Posted Image


Posted Image

Obama Contact

Posted Image

Liar, Liar, Embassy on Fire!

Posted Image

Spending Problem

Posted Image


Posted Image

Watchdog Media

Posted Image


Posted Image


Posted Image

THIS is the Week where Benghazigate Devours the Wicked Obama Regime! ^ | 13 May 2013 | Reaganite Republican

You won't have to wait for any investigations,
Obama has made so many enemies at State Dept,
CIA, and Pentagon, it's all coming out out now...

The walls are closing-in fast- and they know it: witness Jay 'Carney Barker' Carney's 'ashen appearance' at Friday's hostile presser... where all present witnessed the glorious miracle of the White House press corps arising from the grave in unison and actually starting to ask questions. Meanwhile other players are now starting to talk, i.e. David Patraeus' comment that he always considered the WH/State Dept Benghazi talking points to be 'useless'.
And there's no shortage of questions to ask, esp. considering how the MSM to this point hasn't really asked very many-
of course Carney answered even fewer, and when he did, with obfuscation, deflection, and baldfaced lies.

So WHERE was Obama that night? Did he just go to bed like Mark Levin says? Where's the cool picture from the White House Situation Room this time? Hmmm?

If I'm not mistaken, only the president issues 'stand down' orders- WHY did he do it? We now know rescue crews were chomping at the bit- yet he and Hillary left a US Ambassador and three others to die. WHY?

WHERE are all the other witnesses that were there on that night? WHO's hiding them?

WHY were the talking points edited 12x? WHY was the CIA's references to 'Al Qaeda' and 'five previous Benghazi attacks' get scrubbed from them? WHO did it?

WHY did Obama, Biden, Rice, Hillary, and Carney ALL LIE to us about some fictional 'demonstration'... among other things?

And why did Jay Carney have a special, private, off-the-record meeting with 'reporters that matter' (he really did say that) just prior to Friday's presser... a meeting that went on-and-on in a back room, delaying the original scheduled time of the press conference by over three hours?

This schlubb has got to crack under the pressure soon- is anyone envious of a man who serves as this habitually dishonest president's firewall between him and an increasingly hostile press (that's trying to save what residual crumbs of credibility they retain)?

Evidence such cracking may already can be seen in Mr Carney's assertion that increased IRS scrutiny/audits of TEA Party and other conservative groups were 'not political' in nature... of course not Jay lol

Pop the popcorn and kick back, this is going to be a great week...

Pics/video at Reaganite Republican

The Broken President’s Broken Politics ^ | May 13, 2013 | John Ransom

Being president was always easy for Barack Obama.
That is, it was easy up until the time he actually was elected president. Then things got a little tougher.
In part, Obama’s troubles stem from the rigidity of his broken ideas. They admit of no compromise. Consequently, he has subsumed his whole personality into an unworkable ideology that was dead outside of academia- and news rooms- until he resurrected it.
It’s the idea that a benign government of technocrats and academics can engineer near perfect justice at the trivial cost of liberty to most.
His life and presidency can only be understood by recognizing this Obama idée fixe goes beyond merely his ideology and merges into that of his personality. Because only when one realizes that he personally identifies with his ideology in the same way that he identifies himself as a father or husband, can one finally understand how tightly he clings to it.
It’s an ideology that he clings to, like some do guns and religion, despite a century of abject failure when implemented- as his own disastrous record as president shows on a fairly small scale.
Unlike guns and religion, however, which both have long records of reliability, his ideology depends upon the unreliable magic trick of redefining of words to mean the opposite of what any plain speaking person in the USA would understand them to mean.
For example, if you redefine liberty to mean that most everyone outside of the ruling elite has the same amount of “things,” then Obama’s materialist ideology ensures “some liberty for most.” Therefore, it is only when you have a static majority, a majority that can neither rise nor fall, that “good, kind-hearted, fat, benevolent people,” as Twain describes them, can assure honest poverty for the rest of us.
In that case, why wouldn’t good, kind-hearted, fat Warren Buffett pay a tax to ensure he and his fellows maintain an ascendancy that can’t be compromised by the majority? Why wouldn’t donor good, kind-hearted, fat George Kaiser go knocking on the door of the White House for a subsidized loan for his failing private venture? The first rule of capital is to preserve it in the same way that politicians first preserve power.
And thus, in Obama’s world, everyone is happy.
It was so much easier for Obama to be president when all he had to do was come up with sunshine words and rosy promises, as opposed to, say, executing unworkable legislation, controlling a suspicious congress, creating policy that gave to the rich in order to secure “some liberty for most;” or following a budget that isn’t even written down on a napkin.
Talk is cheap- as is writing- but when you claim the mantle of leadership you actually have to do something. And in doing something Obama has revealed to Americans the underside, unspoken ideology that belongs to the spirit of the Bastille, rather than that of the Boston Tea Party.
It’s the spirit that talks about immigration reform, but ignores immigration law -or not- depending on how the spirits move him. It’s the spirit that plays the part of constitutional law professor, while ignoring the duty to defend the constitution. It’s the spirit that tells banks to lend money to poor people, but punishes banks through extra-legal means- because they loaned money to poor people.
And those spirits create misgivings in most Americans; and those misgivings are strongly confirmed by the economic failures they have engendered.
When you measure those failures against the expectations that the liberal left pinned on Obama via speeches and skin color, and subtract out the deepening number of Americans who think the country is on the wrong track, we can quantify how cheapened the presidency has become. All you have to do is subtract the Obama expectations from the Obama result.
What you are left with is a remainder that confirms that this president is broken.
How broken?
Utterly, 100 percent, non-fixable broken.
It is interesting to note that the essential defect of this president was pegged by Sarah Palin early on.
“But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform,” said Palin at the 2008 Republican convention while she was accepting the spot as vice president on the McCain ticket.
Obama still hasn’t authored anything much but speeches; speeches which contain nothing new; “not one” new idea, say his friends.
Even his signature healthcare bill wasn’t his own creation but rather a compilation of ideas from lobbyists and Senators.
Because if Obama authored legislation, on say, immigration, or the debt ceiling or his own version of healthcare- if he told us what he really thought of the Main Street American bank or those who truly occupy Main Street - Americans would understand how bankrupt the man is.
They only have to look to the funeral dirge from Benghazi, where the man, the president, hugged and consoled a widow, with false explanations- explanations that he knew were false- to shift blame from himself.
“On most days it's hard to tell him he's wrong about anything,” recently confessed one top Democrat about the Commander in Brief. That apparently applies to his lies as well.
All you have to do is subtract his words from our reality to see the result: broken.
He’s made a broken Washington, D.C., even more broke.
And despite the words- the now hollow words, not hallowed words- and brave promises from Obama, he’s not the guy who will fix the mess we’re in.
We have to do that all by ourselves.
But that’s the good news.
Really, it is.

Obama refuses to fire IRS employees who illegally targeted conservative groups!

wordpress ^ | May 12, 2013 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

In May 2013, the Washington Post reported that the IRS had illegally targeted conservative groups for additional reviews. Organizations with the words “tea party” or “patriot” were singled out for harassment, such as requiring them to provide a list of donors, details about their internet postings on social networking websites, and information about their family members.
When this was first reported by the media in May 2013, Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that had conducted these illegal activities, claimed that only low level employees had known about it, and that no high level IRS officials had known about it. However, soon afterward, NPR reported that an Inspector General report showed that Lerner had been lying, and that she herself had actually been aware of it since June 29, 2011.
During Congressional testimony that had taken place in March 2012, IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman falsely said that the IRS had not targeted conservative groups.
Michael Macleod-Ball, chief of staff at the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office, said of this:
“Even the appearance of playing partisan politics with the tax code is about as constitutionally troubling as it gets. With the recent push to grant federal agencies broad new powers to mandate donor disclosure for advocacy groups on both the left and the right, there must be clear checks in place to prevent this from ever happening again.”
The Washington Post reported that President Obama had not done anything to investigate or fire the IRS employees who had engaged in this illegal harassment.

Dems Shoot Themselves in the Foot Again On Guns ^ | 5-13-2013 | Kurt Schlichter

Despite suffering the most humiliating rejection of his presidency, President Obama and the liberal establishment are determined to revive their failed gun control scheme. That’s a good thing. The Republicans should remember Napoleon’s warning that you should never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake. This mistake will cost the Democrats dearly in 2014.
We need to understand that the motivation behind the gun grabbing campaign has always been more than just naked political calculation. Certainly, liberals think it will help motivate their base and maybe shore up the squishy suburban mom demographic for 2014, but this is really a campaign fueled by emotion.
That emotion is hate.
This isn’t about dead children. If saving kids was their real motivation, liberals would have long ago allowed the police to end the daily slaughter in Democrat-owned war zones like Chicago, Detroit and Washington, D.C. No, this campaign is driven by elitist hatred for regular Americans who refuse to bend to their will, who defiantly live life on their own terms, and who stubbornly resist accepting the moral supremacy of the urban liberals who would rule them.
They want to show us who is boss, to put us in our place, to take away the proud symbols of – and the tools that protect – our independence for one reason and one reason only. They want to show that they can. They want to demonstrate that what rights we have come not from our maker but from them, to be granted or withdrawn as they please.
They want us disarmed, demoralized and defeated. They are furious that we refuse to allow it, but anger is a poor foundation for building strategy.
Their anger clouds their thinking – they simply do not understand their opponents and seem to feel that considering their opponents’ motivations, even if only to come up with a way to defeat them, are somehow beneath their dignity. Sun Tzu knew what happens when a general does not understand his enemy. He loses.
Look at the mainstream media’s reporting on the gun bill. Has there been, anywhere in the mainstream media, a comprehensive analysis of the substantive problems those opposing Toomey-Manchin had with the bill? Of course not – instead, the media regurgitates the clichéd 90% support figure for “background checks” as if 90% of the American people had sat down and parsed the legislative language of this particular bill.
People had real, specific concerns about this bill that the media utterly ignored. People were concerned that they could suddenly face felony charges for doing things they had always done, like lending a life-long buddy a hunting rifle or borrowing a pistol while target shooting. They saw that the alleged prohibition on a federal gun registry was not supported by the language of the bill. People were rightly suspicious at how this was another of those obnoxious “deals” rushed to the floor for a vote without the kind of committee analysis and development that we were taught in civics class is how a bill is supposed to become a law.
Moreover, people were angered by the bald-faced lies they were fed. It’s not reassuring to be told that “Nobody wants to take your guns” when key Democrats like Governor Andrew Cuomo, Senator Diane Feinstein and Mayor Michael Bloomberg manifestly do. Sometimes they seem to forget that YouTube tubed the era of the memory hole.
Nor do gun freedom advocates appreciate the cynical and intellectually bankrupt tactic of shutting down reasoned debate by dragging out the relatives of murder victims to scream at politicians. It didn’t help that not only did the bill fail to do anything that might have prevented Sandy Hook, but that opposition to it was portrayed as tantamount to condoning child murder.
People tend to get angry when libeled.
And those people made their concerns known, spurring their elected representatives to refuse to obey the elite’s command. This infuriated the elite, who consider themselves every senator’s true constituency. They are morally offended that senators might take their cues from voters back home in their own states rather than from the political and media mandarins on the coasts. So, the liberals are now taking their anger out on the red state Democrats who declined to commit political suicide to please the MSNBC crowd, which is great news for Republicans.
The era when gun freedom advocates resided on both sides of the aisle seems to be drawing to a close. Democrats are purging gun ban dissenters, and those voters will go GOP because they will simply have no alternative. Best of all, the red state Democrats who voted for gun rights are still in danger – not only are liberals taking aim at them but voters seeing the party pressure may well decide not to take a chance that their senator will “evolve” once he has won a new six-year term.
The anti-gun campaign has activated only two groups of people, the small circle of liberal media commentators and the huge mass of gun freedom advocates. A couple of out-of-state, paid Organizing for America activists waving pre-printed signage at a town hall is not a grass roots movement.
The only grass roots movement is for gun freedom. The NRA membership rolls are exploding, and there will be no sitting on the sidelines in 2014 for those concerned with gun rights. They will all vote.
Let the Democrats bring up another gun control bill. Let their hate cloud their strategic thinking. Let them keep making mistakes.