Thursday, October 1, 2015

Hillary says it DISHONORS military to hold her accountable for Benghazi

bizpacreview ^ | October 1, 2015 | Tom Tillison 

Does this woman have any shame?
Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton took offense to remarks by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy that the ongoing House select committee investigation into the Benghazi attacks is hurting her campaign, and used members of the U.S. military as political pawns in disparaging the probe.
Clinton appeared Wednesday on MSNBC’s “PoliticsNation” and told host Al Sharpton that McCarthy’s comment “demonstrates unequivocally that this was always meant to be a partisan political exercise.”
She then claimed the pursuit for answers to why four Americans died in the attack is somehow an affront not only to those who lost their lives, but to all members of the military.
“I feel like it does a grave disservice and dishonors not just the memory of the four that we lost, but of everybody who has served our country,” Clinton said.
But veterans weren’t buying the political spin that it’s disrespectful to expect Clinton to answer for her role in Benghazi.
A number of vets took to social media to denounce Clinton’s “flippant” attitude about Benghazi. Here’s a sampling of responses from Twitter:
" I am a veteran & we won't vote 4 the Butcher of Benghazi"

California Labor Union That Fought for $15 Minimum Wage Now Wants an Exemption!

The Daily Signal ^ | September 30, 2015 | Natalie Johnson 

The labor union that led the charge for a $15 minimum wage hike in cities across California is now moving to secure an exemption for employers under union contracts.
The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor buried the exemption on the eighth page of its 12-page proposal for the Santa Monica City Council to review Tuesday while deciding whether to follow Los Angeles and increase the minimum wage.
The loophole would allow employers with collective bargaining agreements to sidestep the wage hike and pay their union members below the proposed $15-per-hour minimum wage.
James Sherk, a research fellow in labor economics at The Heritage Foundation, said the exemption is a union attempt to encourage businesses to unionize by making themselves the only low-wage option as union membership continues to drop off.
“This proposal would force any worker in Santa Monica whose labor is worth less than $15 an hour to purchase union representation in order to hold a job,” Sherk said. “Unions should not be able to selectively exempt themselves from the harmful consequences of the minimum wage hikes they lobby for.”
The move in Santa Monica is not the federation of labor’s first attempt to compound a collective bargaining exemption into a minimum wage increase.
The federation received an outpouring of criticism when it attempted to push the same carve-out for unionized employers after Los Angeles decided to increase its minimum wage from $9 to $15.
“This is hypocrisy at its worst,” the Los Angeles Times wrote in a blistering editorial. “It plays into the cynical view that the federation is more interested in unionizing companies and boosting its rolls of dues-paying members than in helping poor workers.”
Rusty Hicks, the head of the federation, released a statement in May saying that businesses and employees under collective bargaining agreements should have the ability to negotiate a wage below the law’s mandated minimum in exchange for other benefits.
“This provision gives the parties the option, the freedom, to negotiate that agreement. And that is a good thing,” Hicks said.
Hicks told the Los Angeles City Council to thwart the measure’s passage unless the exemption was included, but he ultimately lost the battle after receiving significant backlash for the request.
In Santa Monica, where council members ordered a rewrite of the minimum wage proposal Tuesday night, the exemption stirred no controversy among members. Council members told a local paper the exemption would remain in the final minimum wage proposal.

US Delegates Refuse to Applaud Netanyahu at UN – Kerry and US Ambassador Power Skip Speech!

Gateway Pundit ^ | Oct 1st, 2015 11:27 am | Jim Hoft 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to the UN General Assembly today in New York City.
At one point the auditorium broke out is applause after Netanyahu’s comments on Iranian threats.
The US delegates refused to applaud.
Netanyahu told the General Assembly:
“Here’s a general rule that I learned and you must have learned in your lifetime. When bad behavior is rewarded it only gets worse.”
The General Assembly audience broke out in applause. The US delegates sat silent.
US Delegates Refuse to Applaud Netanyahu at UN – Kerry and US Ambassador Power Skip Speech (VIDEO)
Jim Hoft Oct 1st, 2015 11:27 am 47 Comments
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to the UN General Assembly today in New York City.
At one point the auditorium broke out is applause after Netanyahu’s comments on Iranian threats.
The US delegates refused to applaud. us netanyahu
Netanyahu told the General Assembly:
“Here’s a general rule that I learned and you must have learned in your lifetime. When bad behavior is rewarded it only gets worse.”
The General Assembly audience broke out in applause. The US delegates sat silent.
UPDATE: Secretary of State John Kerry and US Ambassador Samantha Power skipped the speech.

Former US Marshal: Oregon Gunman Chose ‘Gun Free Facility’ with Umpqua Community College!

breitbart ^ | 10/1/15 | ar hawkins 

During an October 1 appearance on CNN’s Newroom, former US Marshal Art Roderick said the gunman at Oregon’s Umpqua Community College probably chose his target by knowing it was as gun free-zone and therefore “an easy target.”
Roderick’s exact words: “[The gunman] probably knew that the facility was a gun free facility, [which is] an easy target for these kinds of coward individuals. They know they’re not going to get any response unless they happen to run into security or a campus police officer.”
Roderick went on to explain that the key for investigators right now is ascertaining the gunman’s motive and figuring out how he got his weapon(s).
On August 2 Breitbart News reported that eight attacks with firearms in gun free zones in the last eight years resulted in the lost of 105 lives and the wounding of 150 others. Those attacks were on the Lafayette Grand Theater (July 23), Chattanooga (July 16), Fort Hood (April 2, 2014), DC Navy Yard (September 16, 2013), Sandy Hook Elementary (December 14, 2012), Aurora movie theater (July 12, 2012), Fort Hood (November 5, 2009), and Virginia Tech (April 16, 2007)
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Cruz Well-Positioned for the Long Haul

Townhall ^ | October 1, 2015 | Mat Mackowiak

With the Summer of Trump behind us, the GOP presidential primary race is beginning to take shape.
The sharp decline and hasty exit of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker leaves only four truly competitive candidates for the Iowa Caucuses on Feb. 1: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Donald Trump, Ben Carson and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.
Cruz has the strongest ground game of that group and is the best-funded. Carson is better organized than most realize, but has an unproven team and is an unproven candidate. I agree with many experts who believe we now have seen Trump's peak in polling, and Huckabee probably has a 20 percent ceiling.
If Cruz wins Iowa, conservatives will unite behind him quickly.
The GOP field has 15 active candidates, but it will narrow further before year's end - and perhaps by the end of October once fundraising figures are made public and the CNBC debate occurs.
What matters now is, where are you competing?
Iowa has those four competitors - and Cruz has as good a chance as any of them.
New Hampshire has former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and perhaps New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.
The top two candidates in both contests will survive and advance.
With an eye toward the early states next year, the recent CNN debate was a clarifying moment for the campaign.
It again offered voters a chance to see Trump's complete lack of policy depth.
It allowed Carly Fiorina to rise into the first tier and ensure that she will be in every prime time debate going forward. With one simple statement, she badly damaged Trump with women by cleverly responding to his attack on her appearance.
The CNN debate massively helped Fiorina and somewhat damaged Trump. Everyone else was lost in the middle.
Cruz was solid, substantive and delivered some good points on the Iran Deal and Planned Parenthood. He did not make headlines and he did no damage to himself.
And from that position, Cruz has been incredibly steady, making progress every day. He has an excellent political organization and is building a national organization with an eye toward the "SEC primary" on March 1.
It is entirely possible that on March 2, Cruz will have the most delegates in the GOP field.
On March 1, Cruz is likely to receive at least two-thirds of the delegates that Texas offers that day.
As the field will continue to narrow, he will consolidate support as the strongest conservative in the race and a viable alternative to Trump.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Bush are the two most likely establishment finalists.
Cruz's team had made a calculation that the GOP primary will result in a final head-to-head matchup of a conservative grassroots candidate and Jeb Bush. It may turn out to be a conservative grassroots finalist and Trump.
This strategic approach benefited Cruz in his long shot bid for the U.S. Senate in 2012. At that time, he knew that in the primary, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst was the front-runner; but in a primary runoff, Dewhurst would become the long shot. So forcing the runoff was the whole ball game.
This scenario may be playing out again. If Cruz can be a finalist against either Bush or Trump, he believes he becomes the front-runner.
Cruz's team thought Bush would be the long shot in a final race against a conservative candidate. But Trump has turned the race upside down.
What Cruz has going for him: a reliable candidate performance, well-funded campaign, strong political organization, enthusiastic base support, real path in Iowa and South Carolina, and the second-richest Super PAC.
What Cruz has working against him: the hatred of the GOP establishment and questions about his electability.
Cruz has a very real path to the GOP nomination; every day his chances improve.
If he is the nominee against Hillary Clinton, it will be a fantastic contrast.

Valerie Jarrett Throws Hillary Under the Bus on Email Scandal!

Breitbart ^ 

Obama White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett threw Hillary Clinton under the bus Wednesday at the Washington Ideas Forum, where she told interviewer Andrea Mitchell that the White House gave Clinton guidance forbidding her from using private email.

“Yes, there were. Yeah, absolutely,” Jarrett said when asked if the White House sent guidance to Cabinet secretaries about not using private email. “Obviously we want to make sure that we preserve all government records, and so there was guidance given that government business should be done on government emails and that if you did use a private email that it should be turned over.”

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Obamacare could shift hundreds of millions in claims to workers' comp insurers!

San Fransisco Business Times ^ | September 30, 2015 | By Chris Rauber 

"Hundreds of millions of dollars" in insurance claims nationally, and possibly far more, could shift from health insurers to workers' comp carriers due to Obamacare, according to a new study.
In California alone, a 3 percent shift of cases involving so-called "soft tissue conditions," such as non-specific back pain, from group health insurers to workers' compensation carriers could result in a $250 million increase in Golden State workers' comp costs, the report said.
In Pennsylvania, a similarly small shift of back-pain cases would increase workers' comp costs by nearly $100 million, according to a study released Tuesday by the Cambridge, Mass.-based Workers Compensation Research Institute.
Such "case shifting" from health insurers to workers' comp carriers could be a "significant under-appreciated effect" of Obamacare, the group said. That's especially true in states like California, Massachusetts, New York, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Oregon, where 28 percent or more workers are enrolled in HMO plans. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at bizjournals.com ...

Pope Burnout

Townhall.com ^ | October 1, 2015 | Victor Davis Hanson 


Unpopular though it may be to say so, I, for one, grew exhausted by the nonstop pronouncements/commentaries of Pope Francis. The spiritual leader of 1 billion Catholics -- roughly half of the world's Christians -- Francis just completed a high-profile, endlessly publicized visit to the United States.
But unlike past visiting pontiffs, the Argentine-born Francis weighed in on a number of hot-button U.S. social, domestic and foreign-policy issues during a heated presidential election cycle.
Francis, in characteristic cryptic language, pontificated about climate change. He lectured on illegal immigration. He harped on the harshness of capitalism, as well as abortion and capital punishment.
A fair-minded person might infer from his advice that capitalism is more prone to impoverish than to create enough wealth to bring the underclass out of poverty. Yet the poor in the free-market United States are mostly better off than the middle classes in Pope Francis' homeland. Argentina's statism has transformed one of the most resource-rich countries in the world into an impoverished nation. Are the wages of socialism therefore less than Christian?
Authoritarian regimes such as the Castro dynasty in Cuba or Iran's theocracy do not receive much criticism from the pope for their administration of state justice. Yet Francis blasted capital punishment, which in America is mostly reserved for first-degree murderers, not the perpetrators of thought crimes as in Cuba and Iran.
Francis believes -- and ipso facto puts the church behind the creed -- that global warming is man-caused. It is supposedly ongoing and can be addressed only though radical state intervention.
Francis, who arrived in the U.S. in a carbon-spewing jet, seems to leave no room for other views. If the climate really is becoming warmer, it cannot be because of naturally occurring cycles of long duration.
Hundreds of thousands of migrants are now swarming illegally into the West, whether into Europe mostly from the Middle East, or into America from Latin America. They arrive in numbers that make them difficult to assimilate and integrate, with radical repercussions on the host country's ability to serve the social needs of its own poorer citizens.
Yet Francis reserves most of his advice for host countries to ensure that they treat the often-impoverished and mostly young male newcomers with Christian humanity. That advice is admirable. But the pope might have likewise lectured the leaders of countries such as Syria and Mexico to stop whatever they are doing to heartlessly drive out millions of their own citizens from their homes.
Or he might have suggested that migrants seek lawful immigration and thereby more charitably not harm the interests of immigrants who wait patiently until they can resettle lawfully.
Or he might have praised the West for uniquely creating conditions that draw in, rather than repel, the world's migrants.
In sum, Francis did not fully understand a country founded on the principle of separation of church and state. And he has tragically harmed that delicate American equilibrium.
If a Christian truly believes that capitalism is the world's only hope, that illegal immigration is detrimental to all involved, or that the Iranian nuke deal is a prelude to either war or nuclear proliferation, is he thereby somewhat less Christian or Catholic?
Is Francis aware of age-old hospitality adages about guests and hosts, or warnings about those who live in glass houses?
Would an American president dare to visit the Vatican to lecture the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church about their blatant sex and age discrimination, and to advise Francis that his successor should be female or under 50?
Should Americans urge the pope to adopt the supposedly enlightened Western doctrine of disparate impact, which might fault senior Vatican clergymen for failing to promote diversity in matters of sex, race or age?
In this new freewheeling climate of frank exchange, should Protestant friends now advise Catholic dioceses to open their aggregate 200 million acres of global church lands to help house current migrants? Or should Francis first deplore the capitalist business practices in the administration of the so-called Vatican Bank?
Should the church turn over to prosecuting attorneys all the names of past and present clergy accused of criminal sexual abuse, and cede all investigation and punishment entirely to the state?
Lots of hypocrisy inevitably follows when churches and their leaders politick.
Conservatives who object to Francis' sermonizing often enjoy it when the moral majority and born-again evangelicals stamp their own social agendas with Protestant piety.
Liberals might applaud the pope when he weighs in on global warming and cutthroat capitalism but perhaps want him to stick to religion when he frowns on abortions or female priests.
Because Pope Francis has shed the Catholic Church's historic immunity from American politics, for good or bad, he and the church are fair game for political pushback.
But do we really want a priest in the role of Bernie Sanders or Ted Cruz, dressed in ancient Roman miter and vestments, addressing hot-button issues with divine sanction?

Obama in the trunk

196722.jpg

Blood Moon

8Q3pweW.jpg

Socialist Buddies

rBYtHMu.jpg

Press 1

196731.jpg

Graphs

G8zK1iu.jpg

IF...

OX5ApUY.jpg

UH-OH!

Planned-Care-600-LI.jpg

Illiterates

db8NOSr.png

SAD!

sad.jpg

I know war!

196727.png

What actually happened

196726.jpg

Compromise

WOR3dRb.jpg

FAKE?

HYurVwV.jpg

Fraud

MJACPOs.jpg

FAITH?

nUt47Hm.jpg

My will!

U5OM1z8.jpg

Great Job!

5SKDwVS.jpg

Our Best?

40kbhCw.jpg