Sunday, June 1, 2014

GOP’s Obamacare fears come true: A national enrollment system under Obamacare.

Politico ^ | 06/01/2014 | By KYLE CHENEY and JENNIFER HABERKORN
Liberals wanted a national enrollment system under Obamacare. They might just get it.  Right now, 36 states rely on, the federal exchange, to enroll people in health coverage. At least two more states are opting in next year, with a few others likely to follow. Only two states are trying to get out. That’s precisely the opposite of the Affordable Care Act’s original intent: 50 exchanges run by 50 states. The federal option was supposed to be a limited and temporary fallback. But a shift to a bigger, more permanent Washington-controlled system is instead underway — without preparation, funding or even public discussion about what a national exchange covering millions of Americans means for the future of U.S. health care. It’s coming about because intransigent Republicans shunned state exchanges, and ambitious Democrats bungled them.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

VA: Big Labor’s Choke Hold ^ | June 1, 2014 | Nick Sorrentino
Public sector unions are out of control. They are extracting wealth from the productive economy and playing taxpayers for chumps. Simple as that. Whether the it’s the teachers unions, the municipal unions, the SEIU, the workers at the myriad of of alphabet soup agencies, the assumption is that somehow taxpayers work for government employees, for the low level cronies. Our money is supposed to fund their pensions and above market salaries. We owe it to them. The average federal worker makes over $120,000 in total compensation. A comparable private sector worker? About $50,000. This should not be. To some degree we need a basic civil service, but what we have now amounts in many ways to a crony cancer on the country and on our economy. Trust me, I’ve spent a good part of my life in Northern Virginia (government worker and government contractor central – also the wealthiest area of the USA) just outside of Washington DC and these workers really do think you work for them. No joke. Let the taxpayer funded workers and retirees wail away in the comments section below but its time to cut the fat deeply. With an axe if need be. Sorry but government should cost the real economy as little as possible and it costs WAY too much now.
(From The Wall Street Journal) The Federal Labor Relations Authority, the agency that mediates federal labor disputes, earlier this month ruled in favor of this union president, in a dispute over whether she need bother to show up at her workplace—the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Martinsburg, W.Va. According to FLRA documents, this particular VA employee is 100% “official time”—D.C. parlance for federal employees who work every hour of every work day for their union, at the taxpayer’s expense. In April 2012, this, ahem, VA “employee” broke her ankle and declared that she now wanted to do her nonwork for the VA entirely from the comfort of her home. Veterans Affairs attempted a compromise: Perhaps she could, pretty please, come in two days a week? She refused, and complained to the FLRA that the VA was interfering with her right to act as a union official. The VA failed to respond to the complaint in the required time (perhaps too busy caring for actual veterans) and so the union boss summarily won her case. The VA battle is only just starting, but any real reform inevitably ends with a fight over organized labor. Think of it as the federal version of Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan and other states where elected officials have attempted to rein in the public-sector unions that have hijacked government agencies for their own purpose. Fixing the VA requires first breaking labor’s grip, and the unions are already girding for that fight.
Click here for the article.For more from Nick Sorrentino, visit

A womans advocate!

We are tired of Left-Overs!

A British Warning!



New Obama Border Patrol Policy: "Seek Cover & Move Back" ^ | June 1, 2014 | Kevin McCullough
There it was in the Saturday edition of the USA Today in black and white text on my screen: "When possible, agents are to seek cover or move back out of the immediate area of danger."It was one of the new policies and tighter restrictions our Homeland Security Department is putting on our southern border."When possible, agents are to seek cover or move back out of the immediate area of danger."Shockingly (or not) the administration is bringing its policy from that successful night on the town in Benghazi to our own borders. You like smaller numbers of military in active duty through a downsized fighting force? Hey, here's a winner, how 'bout we neuter the effectiveness of those meanies trying to protect our citizens living on the American side of the U.S.-Mexico line?So if the cartels, the drug runners, gangs, human traffickers, and of course Eric Holder and his fast but furious gun runners decide to become aggressive and launch rocks or cars at our border patrol, the administration has now explicitly said to run for cover.The new policy is being couched in this idea that our Border Patrol has been too rough, too aggressive, and too quick to use force when attempting to curtail illegal shipments of criminals, drugs, humans, and terrorists over our borders. The thinking has been that it's imposing too much upon the people who are not allowed to be here, to step in front of their vehicle and demand that they stop.Now admittedly not all of the Border Patrol use of force in recent years has stopped the really horrible guys exclusively. Yes there have been one or two cases of mistaken identity when force was applied.But that problem wouldn't exist in the first place if the people looking to not get shot weren't taking the same routes across our southern border as the cartels, gangs, traffickers, and terrorists. It's easy to get them confused when ALL of them are breaking the law to begin with. We even have nicely-painted-sign-placarded-gates where people can come across and risk not even being sent to a jail--unlike our Marines headed the other way.Then of course we add to the confusion by letting our Justice Department hand over high-powered weapons to the same cartels, gangs, traffickers, and terrorists and trick ourselves into "thinking" we can track them back across the border. And that theory was still not a complete epic fail until border patrol officers started ending up dead on our borders in shoot outs with violent armed gangs using the guns we let them walk with. Still not content, the administration has instituted a no-tasering policy as well.Do you know how many actual cases the administration studied to come up with these new policies of proactive cowardice? According to the USA Today--roughly 25.Lastly--in an attempt to look as completely feckless as possible--the administration made sure it sent out press releases, made public statements, and patted itself on the back in the press about the new "direction" of border security.For the last decade or more residents in southern New Mexico, Arizona, and to a lesser degree California and Texas have been inundated with border violence that has raped their children, stolen their families’ land, life, and work, and more or less created some zones of complete lawless anarchy.Crowing about how the Border Patrol will be diving for cover when a 1972 Chevy Silverado comes barricading through a border crossing will increase or lessen the fears our fellow American citizens already live with in that region?I know that it is more important to this president that he make America look as weak as they possibly can be in the eyes of the watching world. But this kind of public pronouncement of a policy that weakens border security--taking tools, opportunity, and rationale out of the equation--is inviting invasion by those who would wish us harm and more often than not figure out a way to follow through on it.I know that staying up all night and helping our boys run to the fight and save the life of an ambassador who was caught under fire in Libya would've prevented him having his beauty rest for his Vegas fundraiser the next day.I know that making a three minute phone call to the Mexican authorities to get our Marine out of the grubby mitts of the Tijuana posse was too much for his already packed golf schedule.Now I know that if El General, El Profe, or El Gori II decide to turn lower Arizona into their version of Afghani training camps, the administration will see to it that they're comfy! Where are Lucky, Ned, and Dusty when we need them?

Obama Knows He Can Ignore Scandal with Impunity (Un-impeachable)

The New York Post ^ | Saturday, May 31, 2014 | Andrew C. McCarthy
President Obama’s record of lawlessness is prodigious. There is the assumption of a power to rule by presidential decree — unilaterally amending ObamaCare provisions, immigration statutes, and other enactments in flagrant disregard of Congress’s constitutional power to write the laws. There is rampant fraud on the American people — think: “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan, period,” just for a start. In the Benghazi massacre, we see the arc of administration malfeasance: In the absence of congressional authorization, the president instigated an unprovoked and ultimately disastrous war in Libya, empowering virulently anti-American Islamic supremacists. He then recklessly failed to provide adequate security for US officials who, for reasons that remain mysterious, were dispatched to Benghazi, one of the most dangerous places on the planet for Americans. SNIP Thus, while it takes a simple House majority to file articles of impeachment, it requires an overwhelming two-thirds Senate majority to unseat a president. Real impeachment — the removal of a president from power — requires a broad consensus. Without that, the Senate will not feel the political pressure to convict, regardless of the validity of the House’s impeachment articles. The liberal media would call the whole thing racist, without considering the actual legal argument. Is it any wonder that Obama refused to fire Shinseki for the Veteran’s Affairs scandal (Shinseki finally resigned on Friday)? Curious as to why he’s letting illegal immigrants be dropped unceremoniously off at Arizona bus stations? Why he’s changing laws without Congress and having his attorney general ignore rules he doesn’t like? Because he knows there will be no repercussions. Legally, Obama should be impeached. Politically, he’s a president with impunity.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

House Intel Chair Mike Rogers: Obama ´Violated the Law´ with Bergdahl Deal

Breitbart ^ | 6/1/14 | staff
On Sunday’s “State of the Union” on CNN, House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) explained to moderator Candy Crowley why the Obama administration’s deal to secure American prisoner of war Bowe Bergdahl’s release for five Guantanamo detainees was a bad deal and broke law. According to Rogers, this sends the wrong message to terrorists around the world. “[W]e have other means to use, and remember, they came to Congress about a year ago and we're thinking about doing these negotiations. And by the way, they didn't get a very warm reception from either party in the national security committees. They said this is fraught with trouble. So this all of a sudden comes a year later. They didn't notify Congress. I think they violated the law in two different places here. Why is because this is a -- this is morphing into different places.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Did U.S. trade five jihadists for one jihadist?

Jihad Watch ^ | 06-01-14 | Robert Spencer
The Taliban claimed in 2010 that [Sgt. Bowe] Bergdahl had converted to Islam and was teaching bomb-making to its jihadists. His father is a convert to Islam who has called for the release of the jihadists in Guantanamo and has implied that American troops are killing Afghan children. There is evidence that he was not captured, but walked away from his unit: “On July 2, two U.S. officials told The Associated Press the soldier had “just walked off” his base with three Afghans after his shift.” So we may have traded five jihadists for one jihadist.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

More Evidence that Big Government Doesn’t Work: Unambiguously Awful Employment Numbers! ^ | May 31, 2014 | Daniel J. Mitchell
On many occasions, I’ve explained that economic output is a function of how much labor and capital are productively utilized. This is why I relentlessly criticize policies that undermine GDP growth by hindering the use of these “factors of production.” That’s a bit of economic jargon, but it helps to explain why we shouldn’t bediscriminating against capital by double taxing income that is saved and invested. And it helps to explain why we shouldn’t be discouraging labor by subsidizingunemployment and idleness. But it’s time to issue a very important caveat. The goal of policy should be economic freedom, not maximizing GDP. There’s nothing wrong with people choosing to be out of the labor force – so long as they’re not expecting taxpayers to pay their expenses. Many women, for instance, may want to be at home with children, particularly during their younger years. Moreover, some older workers may want to retire early. So while I think it’s bad news that labor force participation has dropped under Obama, there’s more than one possible way to look at that data when you factor in the voluntary choices of some segments of the potential workforce. But it’s very difficult to give any sort of optimistic or positive spin to these numbers from the Senate Budget Committee. They show a very worrisome trend among prime-working-age men. These are people who should be in the labor force. Here’s what John Hinderaker at Powerline wrote about these sobering figures.
An unprecedented number of men–one in six–between the ages of 25 and 54, what should be their prime earning years, are either unemployed or out of the work force entirely.
Here’s the breakdown.
One in eight, the highest proportion since record-keeping began in 1955, are out of the labor force… Another 2.9 million men in the 25-54 age group haven’t given up–they are still in the labor force–but are currently unemployed.
And here are the consequences.
…the damage done to a generation of American men (and women too, of course) will not easily be undone. Those who missed a chunk of what should have been their most productive years, or departed the labor force entirely, will suffer from Obamanomics for the rest of their lives. The damage being done by our current, inept economic policies is literally incalculable.
Here’s another chart, this one comparing idleness among men in 2007 and 2014. So how do we fix this problem, keeping in mind that this is not a partisan issue since the bad trend started under Bush? The big-picture answer is free markets and small government. In other words, you create jobs by having Washington get out of the way. P.S. Over the years, the President has made some remarkable statements.
  • In my video on class warfare, I noted that Obama said in 2008 that – for reasons of “fairness” – he wanted to raise the capital gains tax even if the government lost revenue.
  • A couple of years ago, he arrogantly remarked that “at some point you have made enough money.”
  • In 2011, the President was complaining about bank fees and asserted that, “you don’t have some inherent right just to, you know, get a certain amount of profit…”
  • And in 2012, Obama made his infamous “you didn’t build that” statement, which generated some very amusing political cartoons.
With these statements in mind, here’s some Obama humor. No substantive policy message, I’ll admit, but still funny. Sort of like this t-shirt, this Pennsylvania joke, this Reagan-Obama comparison, this Wyoming joke, thisBush-Obama comparison, this video satire, and this bumper sticker.

‘WE’RE UP AGAINST EVIL’: Duck Dynasty Patriarch Blasts Obama, Tells GOP to ‘Get Godly’

Clash Daily ^ | 30 May 2014
Phil Robertson recently spoke at a Republican Leadership conference in New Orleans and had some choice words for the White House and the GOP at the same time: The New Orleans Advocate – Phil Robertson, star of the A&E network’s hit reality television series “Duck Dynasty,” came to New Orleans on Thursday preaching the Bible and the gun to a group of jubilant Republicans. He had a few words for President Barack Obama as well. “We’re up against evil like I’ve never seen in my life,” he said. “I’m sitting there and I’m thinking, ‘What’s coming out of the White House?’ The only thing I can tell you folks is it’s just downright embarrassing.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Fact Check: Clinton’s Benghazi chapter has holes!

Fox News ^ | May 31, 2014 | Catherine Herridge
In the limited excerpts published Friday from Clinton’s Benghazi chapter, the former secretary of State continued to defend the administration from what she termed a “political slugfest.” Specifically, she defended the flawed explanation -- used by then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice five days after the attack -- that an obscure anti-Islam video fueled a protest gone awry in Benghazi. "There were scores of attackers that night, almost certainly with differing motives," Clinton wrote, according to Politico. "It is inaccurate to state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video.It is equally inaccurate to state that none of them were. Both assertions deny not only the evidence but logic as well." Further, she reportedly wrote that Rice relied on existing intelligence in making her statements. But former CIA deputy director Mike Morell, who now works for Clinton's principal gatekeeper Philippe Reines at the D.C. consulting firm Beacon Global Strategies, testified in April that it was Rice who linked the video to the Benghazi attack. Morrell, who still faces allegations he misled Congress over the so-called talking points, said the video was not part of the CIA analysis as Clinton seems to suggest. Morell told members of the House Intelligence Committee that Rice’s claims about the attacks evolving from a protest were “exactly what the talking points said, and it was exactly what the intelligence community analysts believed.” However, he said: “When she talked about the video, my reaction was, that's not something that the analysts have attributed this attack to." An independent review of more than 4,000 social media postings, conducted by a leading social media monitoring firm in December 2012, also found the YouTube video was a non-event in Benghazi.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

How Many Have to Die?

American Thinker ^ | 5/31/2014 | William L. Gensert
How many have to die before people recognize Barack Obama for what he is, an incompetent ideologue, in way over his head? Ever the sociopathic solipsist, everything is always about him, and if lives are lost in service of his place in the history books, they will not have died in vain, for there is no greater goal than the deification of Barack Obama. Just ask him; he’ll tell you. The latest administration scandal involves the VA hospital system, which is alleged to have been run like a criminal enterprise. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for Veterans Affairs has released a preliminary report raising the possibility of criminal misconduct. It is said that as many as 40 or more veterans died unnecessarily while waiting for medical treatment they never received. Sadly, it did not start there.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

ExxonMobil votes against expanding pro-homosexual employment policy for the 17th time! ^ | 05/31/2014 | KIRSTEN ANDERSEN
Homosexual activists are outraged after ExxonMobil once again refused to explicitly include sexual preference in its anti-discrimination policy, marking the 17th time the company has done so. New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli has led the charge to add sexual preference to the gas company’s equal opportunity policies, which currently state that individuals employed by or seeking employment with the corporation will be evaluated without regard to “race, color, sex, religion, national origin, citizenship status, age, genetic information, physical or mental disability, veteran or other legally protected status.” ExxonMobil argues that their “zero-tolerance” standards for discrimination already exceed federal regulations and apply equally to every worker, regardless of sexual preference. The company has also offered full benefits to legally “married” same-sex couples since the Supreme Court struck down key provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 2012. But homosexual activists say it’s not enough for ExxonMobil to simply declare all discrimination out-of-bounds: they want homosexuals and transgender people specifically highlighted as off limits. Some gay activists have called on Barack Obama to issue an executive order forcing the company to comply with their demands.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Cruz: GOP can empower grassroots by ditching consultants, ‘Soviet-style campaigns’

The Washington Times ^ | May 31, 2014 | Seth McLaughlin
(VIDEO-AT-LINK) Sen. Ted Cruz said Saturday that the GOP can bolster its appeal by sticking to its conservative principles and embracing a bottom-up campaign model that empowers grassroots voters. Speaking at the Republican Leadership Conference, Mr. Cruz said the party must ditch the Washington-centric campaign model and stop listening to the political consultants. “A lot of Republicans tend to have top-down Soviet-style campaigns,” Mr. Cruz said. “It is very odd for a party that believes in free market that they run campaigns through command and control.” “That is disempowering and it doesn’t inspire,” Mr. Cruz said. “What is far more effective is having a race built on empowering the grassroots.” Since being elected in 2012, Mr. Cruz has occasionally butted headed with GOP leaders in Washington, and has become a darling of the tea party and grassroots activists around the country. The 43-year-old is now thought to be considering a run for GOP presidential nomination in 2016 in what is shaping up to be a crowded field....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

VA internal audit: Wait-list fraud found at 64% of VA facilities

Hot Air ^ | May 31, 2014 | Ed Morrissey
A new VA internal audit found wait-list fraud at almost two-thirds of all VA facilities, and that 13% of schedulers had been trained to commit fraud as part of their work. This new audit, which is separate from the Inspector General probe of the Phoenix facility, provided the final straw that forced VA Secretary Eric Shinseki to offer his resignation yesterday: Appointments’ wait times were manipulated at more than 60 percent of the Department of Veterans Affairs health facilities investigated as part of a new internal audit. The White House-ordered audit found that schedulers faced pressure to manipulate the system and concluded there was a “systemic lack of integrity within some Veterans Health Administration facilities.” The audit, issued as VA Secretary Eric Shinseki resigned Friday, found that 64 percent of the 216 VA facilities reviewed had at least one instance where a veterans’ desired appointment date had been changed. The review found 13 percent of schedulers had received specific instructions to misrepresent wait times. … The review also found that 7 percent to 8 percent of scheduling staff said they used alternatives to the VA’s electronic wait list, a practice that occurred in 62 percent of the facilities examined. This President spent the last several years shrugging off scandals and massive incompetence — Benghazi, the ObamaCare rollout at HHS, Operation Fast & Furious at the Department of Justice, and James Clapper committing perjury in the Senate, just to name a few that resulted in zero firings at any level. This time, though, Obama had no choice, even though he had inexplicably issued two statements of confidence in Shinseki in the previous two weeks. Apparently no one at the White House had bothered to keep up with their own promises to clean up the VA from the 2008 campaign, and got blindsided by the massive corruption that Shinseki allowed to fester: In other high-profile situations — involving Internal Revenue Service employees targeting Tea Party groups, Secret Service agents partying in foreign countries and the State Department response to the Benghazi consulate attacks in 2012 — Obama also resisted calls from political rivals and media pundits to remove top figures. In some cases, Obama did not believe the agencies involved had made major transgressions, calling the lapses isolated and trumped up by his political rivals. Even with Shinseki, Obama went to great lengths to defend the retired general, who had been injured after stepping on a land mine in Vietnam, calling him “ a good man . . .an outstanding soldier. . .a champion of our veterans.” And the president emphasized repeatedly that the problems at veterans hospitals preceded Obama’s tenure and that the specific recent examples of wrongdoing “did not surface to the level where Ric was aware or it or we were able to see it.” But Shinseki was more exposed when influential Democrats began joining Republicans in calling for his ouster, something that did not happen to Sebelius. In her case, the White House and Democrats feared a nasty confirmation fight for a replacement at a time when Republicans were trying to exploit the health-care Web site problems for political gain heading into the midterm election cycle this fall. By the time Sebelius had departed, the enrollment figures showed that the White House had surpassed its initial goals, blunting GOP criticism. In Shinseki’s case, the problems inside the VA are far more in­trac­table and will take a lot longer to fix. The latest blow to the general came Friday morning, when Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), a former Veterans Affairs official who lost both of her legs while serving in combat in Iraq, urged Shinseki to resign. “Our first priority should be the veterans, and at this point, whether Secretary Shinseki will stay or go is too much of a distraction,” Duckworth said. “I think he has to go. He certainly loves veterans, but it’s time for new leadership.” Don’t bet on that being the final factor. The audit showing corruption at 64% of VA facilities on an initial and internal audit would have made Shinseki politically radioactive in any context. Shinseki had more than five years to take control of the VA, and the sheer scale of this systemic failure points directly to his incompetence at running the organization. It also points to Obama’s detachment from his own administration again, even on initiatives that Obama himself insists are high priorities for himself. Next, Congress should insist on conducting its own audit of the VA, probably through GAO. Even with the scale of corruption at the VA registering this high on an internal audit, it’s an easy bet that it’ll be higher in an independent probe of all facilities.

Z-Street Wins Ruling Against IRS – Was Targeted By Obama Officials Because of It’s Pro-Israel Views

The Gateway Pundit ^ | 5/31/14 | Jim Hoft
Z Street representative Lori Lowenthal Marcus spoke out in March 2013 about the harassment the pro-Israel group received from the Obama IRS: “They told us terrorism happens in Israel. Therefore, they had to look into our organization because they thought we might be funding terrorism. We’re a purely educational entity. We didn’t fund anybody. We barely funded ourselves.” Remember: This is the same administration that wouldn’t call the Benghazi massacre a terrorist attack but accused a pro-Israel group of supporting terror.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Cruz wins presidential straw poll at GOP summit

Yahoo/AP ^ | 5-31-14
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has won the latest 2016 presidential straw poll at a conservative summit in Louisiana. Cruz took 30 percent of the vote at the Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans. He edged out conservative speaker and author Ben Carson. Organizers at the annual conference say about a third out of 1,500 delegates voted in the straw poll. Delegates had to pay to register for the conference and vote in the straw poll. Cruz promised delegates Saturday to continue his uncompromising approach on Capitol Hill. Carson did not address delegates before the voting. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Texas Gov. Rick Perry trailed Cruz and Carson in the poll
(Excerpt) Read more at ...