Friday, November 7, 2014

SECURITYNEWS Here’s How Conservatives Aim to Stop Obama’s Action on Illegal Immigrants!

Daily Signal ^ | 11/7/2014 | Josh Seigel 

Aides to conservative members of the U.S. Senate say their bosses are rallying around a strategy to prevent President Obama from taking executive action to move illegal immigrants toward citizenship: Use government funding bills to withhold the money the president needs to implement his plan.
At the same time, some of the Senate’s most conservative members are worried that party leadership could try to strike a deal with Democrats in the lame duck session on a longer-term spending agreement that could limit lawmakers’ ability to defund whatever Obama decides to do.
In a series of interviews with The Daily Signal, conservative Senate staffers said their lawmakers firmly oppose Obama’s acting on his own to allow millions of illegal immigrants to stay in the country. However, they are open to supporting a piecemeal approach on immigration policy that would emphasize border security first.
The results of this week’s election — where Republicans took control of the Senate and picked up seats in the House with a platform opposed to unilateral immigration action by the president — only emboldened their will to fight it, the Senate staffers said.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailysignal.com ...

Open Carry is Coming to Texas: Governor Elect Abbot to Keep Promise!

Gun Watch ^ | 6 November, 2014 | Dean Weingarten 


Both Governor candidates in Texas endorsed the concept of legal open carry of modern pistols.   The open carry of long guns is protected by the Texas Constitution, and the open carry of antique pistols is allowed under current Texas law.   The conventional wisdom is that once elected, candidates avoid campaign promises.   Governor elect Abbot did not back away form his promise on open carry.  From dailytexanonline.com:
Abbott also said if legislation allowing firearms to be carried openly in public came to him, he would sign it into law.

“If open carry is good enough for Massachusetts, it's good enough for the state of Texas,” Abbott said.
 Opponents of open carry were weakened by the Texas legislative elections.  Wendy Davis seat went to a Tea Party conservative, Konni Burton.     The new Texas state senator is an open carry supporter.   Dan Patrick, the new Lt. Governor, which is a powerful position in Texas government, says that he will fight for open carry on his campaign web page.

The prohibition of open carry of modern handguns is a historical anomaly in Texas.  Governor elect Abbot referred to it by mentioning that open carry is legal in even most states that are less supportive of the second amendment. 



The major question is: will the open carry bill be a licensed open carry, or a constitutional open carry, with no permit required, as exists in most other states.?

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

GOP Take Note: With Obama It's His Way or the Highway!

Radix News ^ | November 7, 2014 | David Limbaugh 

President Obama’s remarks at his postelection news conference were instructive on his attitude about the election results and his approach going forward.
He always pays lip service to hearing the voters’ message when his side loses but then reveals he hears only what he chooses to hear.
He said that what stood out to him was that the American people had sent the same message they had sent for the past several elections. How can that be?
If he had said the people had sent a similar message to the one they’d sent in 2010, it would have made more sense. But what commonality is there in the election results of 2012, when he was re-elected, and those of 2010 and this past week?
Well, he said the American people expect their elected leaders “to work as hard as they do.” I assume he was not interpreting the message as a rebuke for his excessive golf playing, especially in the very moments of crisis, because he included all elected officials in his statement.
“They expect us to focus on their ambitions and not ours,” he continued. “They want us to get the job done.”
What ambitions? Finish what job? For Obama to imply that the people share policy goals that can be achieved by bipartisan legislative action is as insulting as it is misleading.
(Excerpt) Read more at radixnews.com ...

What the Pollsters Missed: Voters Crushing Obama

Townhall.com ^ | November 7, 2014 | Matt Towery 


I've been called a lot of things over the years, but "biased for the Democrats" has generally not been one of them.
But that's what I and other pollsters were labeled following Tuesday's elections by statistical gurus such as Nate Silver of ESPN.
What's that? You've never heard of Nate Silver? Well, don't worry; neither has 99 percent of America. The other 1 percent probably relied on his lousy statistical forecast and bet that Brazil would win the World Cup earlier this year. (They got routed.)
But Nate is right. Pollsters, in general, got 2014 wrong. My firm, InsiderAdvantage, polled only Georgia. Our final poll had the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate, David Perdue, leading the race 48 percent to 45 percent over the Democrat, with the rest either undecided or going to the Libertarian candidate. But darn it, we just couldn't force the undecided voters to tell us how they would vote!
Of course, we nailed it on who was in the lead. And our polls showed the Democrat fading fast. But if we had just put the screws to the undecideds we polled, we might have been able to extract enough data to realize the magnitude of what was about to happen.
That meant on Election Day, when Michelle Nunn, daughter of former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn, lost to Perdue by a 53-percent-to-45-percent margin, our firm, along with all other pollsters, were forced to walk the political plank and atone for our sin of not nailing the race down to the very percentage point.
Silver is indeed right. Most pollsters polled with a Democratic "bias" this year. But his argument is slightly less sinister than one might imagine. He doesn't accuse us of being partisan or "cooking" our numbers. What he is really saying is that, for whatever reason, the voter turnout models that we used to weight our polls were too favorable to groups that would tend to support Democrats. Not to mention his belief that some of us are incompetent.
But I sort of want to thank Nate. He and the gaggle of liberal journalists who are sniping at pollsters have helped take away the final vestige of suspicion with regard to our firm's and other pollsters' ability to be objective. With me having been a Republican elected official who chaired state and national campaigns for the likes of Newt Gingrich, it seemed like it would take a lifetime for some in the media to stop treating me as an escaped GOP convict turned pollster/analyst.
So in answer to those who wonder why companies like mine were only close to being right, instead of being dead on, here is my answer.
The American people cannot stand Barack Obama. They dislike his policies. They dislike his "above it all" demeanor. And they rose out of their chairs and off their couches and came out in droves to defeat anyone who they thought was even remotely supportive of him or his administration.
Yep, I was one of those dumb pollster/analysts who thought that no president in a midterm election could possibly be as big of a drag on candidates as was Obama. But I was wrong. He wasn't just a drag; he was his own voter turnout machine for Republicans.
The fact is that too many Americans wanted to vote to make it clear that the emperor has no clothes. And they did so. After all, the polls had shown that they are unhappy about Obamacare, Ebola, the IRS, ISIS -- you name it. And it wasn't a matter of frustration with "all politicians," as some in the media tried to spin it. It was the president and his policies. Period.
And so they raced to the polls in mass numbers and decided that they would do whatever they could to rescue their nation before it was regulated and red-taped to death.
As for the technicalities of polling and all of its problems, that's for the next generation to figure out. As I wing my way back to my home in Florida, polling is hardly a concern of mine. Like my friend and colleague Brad Coker of the polling firm Mason-Dixon put it, we have other lives, and besides, we care more about college football right now.
I'll even take Mr. Silver's predictions into account when it comes to the NCAA football championship playoffs.
See, Nate? I'm not as biased or as stupid as you think!

Barack Obama Just Released Another Terrorist!

Conservitive Daily ^ | Nov. 7, 2014 | Joe Otto 

This is just disgusting. A few days removed from a complete shellacking in the midterm elections, Obama has decided to stick his nose up at the American people and release another dangerous terrorist from the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility.
Fawzi al-Odah was one of the longest-held terrorists in GITMO. Instead of keeping him in Guantanamo where we know he can be stopped, the Obama administration released him back to Kuwait.
Once home, al-Odah will be forced to spend a year in a Kuwaiti “militant-rehabilitation center,” however after six months he will become eligible for ‘parole,’ specifically more time outside the center to spend with family and friends.
What’s even worse is that a day before his release was made public, an al-Qaeda Twitter account tweeted out the good news of al-Odah’s transfer.
I don’t want to believe that the Obama administration leaked this information to our enemies. I desperately don’t want to believe that. But I don’t see how else a classified government transfer order would be leaked to al-Qaeda…
In six months, this jihadi will be free to meet with his terrorist cohorts. In a year, he will be back on the battlefield. This is all thanks to Barack Hussein Obama!
Obama is releasing terrorist prisoners to spite the GOP! You need to DEMAND that Congress stop these dangerous transfers!
The Obama administration has remained largely silent on this matter. But you can expect that in the coming days, they will try to depict Fawzi al-Odah as a rehabilitated terrorist.
Unfortunately for Democrats, all of al-Odah’s records have been published by Wikileaks. So We the People have full access to the military’s records.
Fawzi al-Odah was caught in November/December of 2001 walking through the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan carrying an AK-47 rifle and American currency.
Not only was he caught fighting for the Taliban, but in January of 2008 he was deemed by the Pentagon to be “a HIGH risk, as he is likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies.” (emphasis in original).
People weren’t just backpacking through Tora Bora in 2001… this was almost exclusively done by fleeing al-Qaeda members.
I can understand where Guantanamo’s critics are coming from… I can empathize with the argument that indefinite detention is unconstitutional. But we aren’t talking about someone who was wrongly imprisoned. We are talking about a high-value, dangerous terrorist that Obama just released to return back to the battlefield!
This is just so despicable! Barack Obama promised to close Guantanamo years ago. But now that the clock is ticking leading up to the GOP takeover of the Senate, Obama knows he is running out of time to release violent terrorists!
It doesn’t matter the conditions of their release. It doesn’t matter whether other countries promise to “rehabilitate” these terrorists.
It is estimated that 20-30 of the terrorists released by Obama have snuck into Syria and are now fighting for ISIS and other terrorist groups.
This is what tyranny looks like… A bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly voted to halt Guantanamo Bay prisoner releases yet Obama has chosen to do to release these terrorists anyway!
Obama is releasing terrorist prisoners to spite the GOP! You need to DEMAND that Congress stop these dangerous transfers!
Now we are hearing that in addition to sending terrorists back to the Middle East, Obama’s aides are also drafting an executive order to allow the President to bring these extremists to American prisons!
When these terrorists are released, they rejoin the fight. They join up with other violent extremists and target Americans and their allies.
That is the LAST thing we want!
Many on the Left want to give these terrorists a trial in the American court system, and if this happens it is likely that many of them will simply get let off. So what then? We’ll just have a bunch of terrorists living among us?
Regardless of whether you support the idea of Guantanamo Bay or not, the government has no business bringing these terrorists into the United States or releasing them to countries that sponsor and harbor terrorists!
Yet, with the stroke of a pen, Barack Obama will sign an executive order that rewrites the law to enact his own dangerous liberal agenda!

Obamacare Is Headed For Another Supreme Court Showdown, And It Puts The Law In 'Dangerous Territory'

Business Insider ^ | November 7, 2014 | Brett LoGiurato 

The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to take up a new challenge to the Affordable Care Act, a move that will again thrust the law into a high-profile battle before the high court.
The Supreme Court's move is somewhat surprising, considering there is still no split in the lower, circuit courts. But the high court agreed to King v. Burwell, a case in which the Fourth Circuit court upheld an IRS rule that extends the distribution of health insurance subsidies to states served by the federal insurance marketplace.
The challenge to the law is viewed as having the potential to cripple Obamacare in the 36 states where the federal government provides subsidies for low-income people to buy health insurance.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...

The difference Between Democrats and Republicans

by ImJustAnotherOkie

This is an excerpt of an excerpt on Drudge from GWB's book.
In a chapter titled "DIPLOMACY," the son recounts an anecdote about Watergate:

"The final straw came on August 5, 1974. The Supreme Court had ruled that the White House must turn over all the tapes to Leon Jaworski, the new Watergate special prosecutor and a friend of Dad’s from Houston. The tapes revealed that Nixon had spoken to one of his aides about thwarting the FBI’s investigation into the Watergate break-in. That was proof that he knew about the cover-up and that he had lied to the country. The revelation shattered Dad’s trust in Nixon.
"The day after the smoking-gun tape became public, Nixon held a meeting with his Cabinet and key political advisers. Dad attended the meeting and witnessed a surreal scene in which the President spent the meeting talking about the economy and other policy issues rather than confronting the only question that really mattered. Later that day, Dad gave Nixon’s Chief of Staff, Alexander Haig, a candid assessment. After speaking to some of his old friends in Congress, he had learned that the President would not have the votes to survive an impeachment proceeding.
"Despite his deep disappointment, my father refused to condemn Nixon publicly. While he might have benefited in the short run, Dad saw little point in “piling on,” as he put it. He voiced his opinion privately in a letter to the President on August 7. As far as I know, he is the only party Chairman in American history who has ever written such a letter.
"'I now firmly feel that resignation is best for this country, best for this President,' he wrote. 'I believe this view is held by most Republican leaders across the country.' Writing with his characteristic sympathy, Dad continued, 'This letter is made much more difficult because of the gratitude I will always have for you. If you do leave office, history will properly record your achievements with a lasting respect.' The next day, President Nixon announced that he would resign."

Has the Tea Party been tamed?

The Hill's Ballot Box ^ | November 6, 2014 | Alexandra Jaffe and Ben Kamisar 

Establishment Republicans are crowing that their resounding wins Tuesday night repudiated the Tea Party’s insistence that ideological purity is key to electoral success.
But don’t tell that to conservatives, who aren’t admitting defeat.
In fact, they’re claiming victory on the issues, if not for the candidates themselves, and pledging future fights to hold the GOP-led Senate accountable if senators stray from their campaign promises. “Every single Republican ran as a conservative,” Brent Bozell, chairman of ForAmerica, told The Hill. “Name me one moderate issue that won. Moderation was defeated everywhere.”
The numbers don’t bear that out. The national party made an early and aggressive play to neutralize conservative challenges and make sure the most electable candidates won the party’s nominations, to great effect.
"We said we were going to be the Nick Saban of recruiting, we were going to recruit the best candidates, put them in the right position," National Republican Senatorial Committee Political Director Ward Baker told reporters Thursday. "We decided we couldn't be Akin-ed anymore. No more witches, no more gaffes."
In the end, conservatives won just one of their competitive primary fights in the Nebraska Senate race, lost all of their incumbent challenges and worked with establishment Republicans to support less-than-ideal candidates to achieve the shared goal of taking back Senate control....
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...

A reason!

Dressed for?

Common Core Math!

Be Serious

HOw many?

Cover Up

CONTROL

Vomiting

Our Leader?

The Oath

Reset This!

Why I have a gun!

I waited and waited!

Banning Guns

Well, there you go!

Borders

STUPIDITY!

RACISTS

Pretending

PHOTOS

Obligation!

PICKIN'

SMOKIN'

Chickenshit!

Caring!

Safety!

BOHICA

NASTY!

STUCK!

Two Thirds

Compromise Now?

The Wave!

We're sick!