Sunday, September 15, 2013

Hillary! Because What Difference Does it Make?

American Thinker ^ | September 15, 2013 | Clarice Feldman

Watching Hillary get a Liberty Medal on September 10, the day before the anniversary of the attack on the United States soil and the more recent murder of our ambassador and others in Benghazi, I think it's time to review the record of a woman whose life is marked by deceit and professional failure and ask about the sanity and judgment of her ardent supporters.

From Wellesley she went to Yale law school after which she moved to Washington, D.C. to take a job with the House Judiciary Committee investigating Watergate. She was fired from her job and from that point on distinguished herself as a public master of mendacity.
Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of the 27-year-old, fired her, and has explained why:

"Because she was a liar," Zeifman said in an interview last week. "She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality."
What difference does it make? It should seem obvious that she does not feel constrained to follow ethical or legal constraints, and therefore presents a danger whenever she finds herself in a position to exercise power.
At about the same time, Hillary failed the District of Columbia bar exam, hardly one of the more difficult bar exams in the country. What difference does it make? I realize that many voters have uncritically adopted Bill Clinton's description of her as "the smartest woman in the world", but except at deceit, self-promotion, and self-enrichment she is a repeat, proven failure whenever tested.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


Want to Get on the Disability Gravy Train? There's an App For That!

Townhall.com ^ | September 15, 2013 | Mike Shedlock


In response to several recent posts on disability fraud, I received several interesting emails from readers.

Reader Ervin writes ....

Hi Mish,

I have a niece and nephew in their early thirties. Both are perfectly healthy. They have a son with a slight learning disability. The mom got him on disability and then applied for funds to take care of him and got it. Her husband, an Afghanistan vet in supply never saw a moment’s action. He worked at a desk. When he came home he applied for disability claiming Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome and got on disability. The wife then applied for money to take care of him. She got it. They are also on a long list of other entitlements like welfare.

They bought a new house a little over a year ago and a month ago they both went out and bought two brand new cars! She actually brags about playing the system.

I have no doubt there are hundreds of thousands or millions doing the same thing. Needless to say it boils my blood.

Ervin
There's an App For That!

Want on the disability gravy train? Several readers said to check out Disability Over 50.
We could help you get your benefits approved! Get your FREE, no-obligation evaluation now.

All free evaluations are performed by an experienced social security disability advocate or attorney.
Since when do lawyers do anything for free? Someone has to pay. So who is it?

I wanted to call them, but there is no number, just online forms, then they call you.

Possibly states pay them to get you off welfare and on to disability, or possibly you pay them something if they succeed in getting you on disability.

Either way, there is no one acting on behalf of the taxpayer, to stop fraud.

Incentive For Fraud

I noted in detail how fraud works and why in States Have an Incentive to Promote (Not Stop) Disability Fraud; So How Much Fraud Is There?

Lawmakers see waste hanging in hallowed halls!

Richmond Times-Dispatch (&LA Times) ^  National & World News

WASHINGTON The capital is full of portraits of government officials, sometimes more than one of the same person.

An effort is underway to put an end to the practice of taxpayers footing the bill for the commissioned paintings. The measure is dubbed the Eliminating Government-funded Oil-painting, or EGO, Act.

Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-La., introduced it after reports that the Environmental Protection Agency spent $38,350 for former administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s portrait.

“Lisa Jackson can borrow my camera for free,” he suggested.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesdispatch.com ...

TOPICS: Crime/CorruptionGovernmentNews/Current Events
KEYWORDS: epalisajacksontaxeswaste
Look what we (the 43% who actually pay taxes) bought!


also recently (8/28) "Lisa Jackson Hires Lawyer for Email Concealment Fiasco"