PRESIDENT TRUMP!




Real America Stands with TRUMP!

Friday, May 31, 2013

Will the Real Trayvon Martin Show Up at Zimmerman Murder Trial?

The Prosecution is doing their best to keep evidence of Trayvon's violence and drug abuse out of courtroom!

It's a safe bet that most Americans know more about Trayvon Martin, the black teenager killed in a scuffle with George Zimmerman in Florida last year than they do about the death of our Ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya last September.

It's also a safe bet that what most Americans know about Trayvon Martin is wrong. Racebaiters and their media accomplices did their best to portray Trayvon as an innocent lamb gunned down by a racist vigilante. Democrats embraced this image and amplified it. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Georgia) said Trayvon "was executed for 'WWB' in a 'GC.' Walking While Black in a Gated Community."

Obama even got into the act saying "If I had a son he would look like Trayvon." Really? The majority of photographs we see of Trayvon were taken years before his death. They give the impression of an innocent, if not angelic, teen. One photo, which was widely used on posters and T shirts was photoshopped to soften Trayvon's features and skin tone.

But the real Trayvon, the one who showed up in Zimmerman's neighborhood on that fateful night looked like this:


Is this Obama's "son?" The real Trayvon Martin minutes before his death.
It's no surprise that the Prosecutor in the Zimmerman trial, set to begin later in June, wants to keep images of the real Trayvon out of the trial. With jurors already saturated with images of an angelic teen, the truth about Trayvon would undermine the prosecution case. In pretrial motions the judge has sided with the prosecution and kept all photos, textstweets and evidence of violent behavior and drug use out of the trial.

Some of those forbidden images show Trayvon smoking pot and showing a gun:


 Images from Trayvon Martin's cell phone. Not the innocent lamb he is portrayed to be.
Unless the Prosecutor seeks to paint Trayvon as an innocent teen the Defense may be blocked from introducing the contradictory information. But why should the prosecution raise the issue since the media has already done that to such an extent that the positive image of Trayvon and the negative perception of Zimmerman is already ingrained in the minds of the public and likely jurors.

The Martin family worries that releasing photos and texts showing the real Trayvon might prejudice the jury. But isn't that exactly what has been happening here against the defendant? Will justice be served?

Thursday, May 30, 2013

White House Claim IRS "Independent Agency" Falls Apart with News Chief Visited WH 157 Times!

Former Bush IRS head visited once during four years!

As soon as the scandal of the Internal Revenue Service targeting conservative groups broke the White House spokesman attempted to deflect any attention on White House action by saying repeatedly that the IRS is an "independent agency."

So, if the IRS is so "independent" why did IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman visit the White House far more times than any other cabinet official? Here's the breakdown from the Daily Caller review of White House visitor logs:
For the record, Shulman's predecessor visited the White House ONCE during four years of the Bush Administration.

 There is nothing to indicate that Shulman was directly involved in discussions with White House officials targeting Tea Party groups. However, it's entirely plausible that with SOOO MANY visits to the White House Shulman could have gotten a clear understanding of White House concern that something needed to be done to stymie the Tea Party.

Dems counter by saying that Shulman was a Bush appointee. True, but that doesn't mean Shulman was a Republican. In fact, Shulman and his wife contributed to Democrats including John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

Something smells here and we won't know exactly what it is until we have either full disclosure from the White House or a Special Prosecutor with full subpoena power!

Friday, May 24, 2013

Muslim Imigrant Riots in SWEDEN?

Not ENOUGH welfare handouts?

Big welfare state multiculturalism is a socialist's dream right? Well, it's not working out that way in Sweden of all places. Gangs of immigrant youth from mostly Muslim countries have gone on a rampage the last four days setting fires and destroying property.

The Swedes are shocked!
“In Sweden you’ve got welfare, access to the educational system – up to university level, you got access to public transport, libraries, healthcare – to everything. And still they feel that they [immigrants] need to riot through stones and Molotov cocktails. It’s ridiculous and a bad excuse,” Swedish Democrats MP Kent Ekeroth told RT.
...
“The problem is not from the Swedish government or from the Swedish people,” the editor in chief of Dispatch International said. “The last 20 years or so, we have seen so many immigrants coming to Sweden that really don’t like Sweden. They do not want to integrate, they do not want to live in [Swedish] society: Working, paying taxes and so on.”

“The people come here now because they know that Sweden will give them money for nothing. They don’t have to work, they don’t have to pay taxes – they can just stay here and get a lot of money. That is really a problem,” Carlqvist added.
...
Young Muslims who enjoy tolerance, social institutions and welfare while living in Sweden nevertheless refuse to integrate into the West, Gerolf Annemans told RT. Annemans is the parliamentary leader of Vlaams Belang (‘Flemish Interest’), a Belgian far-right nationalist political party.

...
“It’s always the same problem. There is a massive refusal by Muslim youngsters of the basics of Western society... and they take any excuse whatsoever to show that with violence – that is where the problem is,” he said.
In a related story of the stupidity of Western socialism, Douglas Murray, writing in the Wall Street Journal, points out that radical Muslim clerics in Britain took home more in state welfare benefits than the pay of the average British solider like the slaughtered Drummer Lee Rigby. Radical Muslims even laugh about it calling the benefit a "jihad-seekers' allowance."

Like the Boston Bombers who took tens of thousands in welfare benefits we are repaid for our kindness and tolerance with murder and mayhem. How much longer will this stupidity continue?

Thursday, May 23, 2013

London Lesson: Face the Reality of Radical Islam or Die at Their Hands

The savagery of radical Islam on full display!

The face of evil.  Mujahid, which means “one who engages in jihad”
moments after he butchered soldier Lee Rigby in London.

Michael Adebolajo was born in Britain and raised as a Christian. In 2003 he converted to Islam and became radicalized. He took the name Mujahid. His radical views were known to intelligence services in Britain.
Lee Riggers 25. Served in Afghanistan
and leaves behind a wife and 2 year old son.
Like the Boston terrorists who killed and maimed without remorse at the Boston Marathon, monsters like Mujahid justify their acts in the name of Allah.

Thankfully, there was only one victim in this attack. Lee Rigby, or "Riggers" to his friends was 25 and a drummer in the Army. He had served in Afghanistan and leaves behind a wife and 2 year old boy.

His brutal murder, in which he was hacked to death by Mujahid and another attacker brings home the nature of the enemy we face.

When radical Islam corrupts the soul to the point where this kind of savagery is possible it shows how very dangerous such a vile ideology is.

This kind of savagery and the ideology behind it should be impossible to ignore yet so many seek to do just that rather face the uncomfortable reality that the menace has not gone away!

We Know Who and Where They Are but Obama Refuses to Strike at Benghazi Terrorists

Did politics intervene again?

On September 14, 2012, standing before the coffins of four Americans who died in the attack in Benghazi, Obama told the families:
To you -- their families and colleagues -- to all Americans, know this: Their sacrifice will never be forgotten. We will bring to justice those who took them from us.
Since then, nothing has been done. Just words, just speeches. Isn't that Obama in a nutshell?

Now we learn that we have known all along who carried out the attacks and we know, or have known, where they are but were blocked from getting them:
U.S. military sources serving in North Africa are challenging the latest White House claim that the administration is applying "all the resources" at its disposal to bring the Benghazi attackers to justice, charging instead that the Obama administration knows who is responsible but is not acting.

"They have let it slip by because of politics, and now we've taken all the correlation we had and dropped the ball because of risk (aversion) -- and now the security in Libya is more fragile than ever," one U.S. special operator told Fox News. The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirms that U.S. forces have tracked the alleged attackers since October but have since lost the trail of some of them, as no one up the chain of command would authorize them to capture or kill the targeted militia members.

Sources who have worked in and around Benghazi since last October spoke out after White House Press Secretary Jay Carney repeatedly said at a briefing more than a week ago that the administration was going after the suspects in the Sept. 11 terror attack. "From the beginning, the president has committed all the resources of this administration, of this government, to finding out who was responsible and to bringing them to justice," Carney said, as he faced a barrage of critical questions from the press on the heels of reports that challenged the administration's Benghazi narrative.
...
"We know exactly where the mastermind lives," one U.S. official said.

U.S. intelligence sources claim the "mastermind" and other suspects are on video that night at the U.S. compound, and that investigators have other evidence.
In a separate Associated Press report it is suggested that Obama refuses to act because there is not enough evidence to proceed with a criminal trial in the United States.

We're left with a curious Obama Administration policy which says it is OK to kill American citizens using drones but nothing can be done about known terrorists who have killed Americans without sufficient evidence for trial? Obama's policy only invites further attacks as terrorists see how weak we really are!

Tonight Show Spoof Shows Obama Getting Tough Questions from School Kids

What a shame the White House Press Corps can't ask questions like these!

There's so much going on in Obama's Scandal Land that a wider update post is in the works. But for now, a lighter touch with a serious side....


Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Did Obama Use IRS Union to Target Tea Party?

New disclosure shows cozy relationship between Obama and IRS union!

The White House has been very clear that they exercised no improper, political influence over the IRS. Directly that is. Someone needs to ask Obama whether he did an end run around that standard of conduct by working with the IRS union to accomplish targeting of Tea Party groups?

Writing at the American Spectator Jeffrey Lord documents close ties between Obama and the IRS union head. White House visits went hand in hand with an Executive Order which granted "employees and unions to have pre-decisional involvement in all workplace matters."

Shortly after that Executive Order was signed in December 2010 the IRS began targeting conservative groups. Lord writes:
The very next day after her White House meeting with the President, according to the Treasury Department’s Inspector General’s Report, IRS employees — the same employees who belong to the NTEU — set to work in earnest targeting the Tea Party and conservative groups around America. The IG report wrote it up this way:

April 1-2, 2010: The new Acting Manager, Technical Unit, suggested the need for a Sensitive Case Report on the Tea Party cases. The Determinations Unit Program Manager Agreed.

In short: the very day after the president of the quite publicly anti-Tea Party labor union — the union for IRS employees — met with President Obama, the manager of the IRS “Determinations Unit Program agreed” to open a “Sensitive Case report on the Tea party cases.” As stated by the IG report.
The order for that change in procedure had to come from some where. This wasn't just a few rogue employees. Did the IRS union use it's new power under Obama's Executive Order, perhaps even at Obama's direction, to change IRS work procedures?

Lord goes on to point out Obama's curious answer at a press conference last week where he dodged a direct question: "Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the agency’s actions before your Counsel’s Office found out on April 22nd?" Obama's answer: " I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press." Notice the disconnect?

What was the White House involvement with the IRS union? Did anyone at the White House know of the IRS targeting of the Tea Party prior to the Inspector General's report? Did Obama or White House staff direct the IRS union to effect changes in workplace procedure?

If Obama is unwilling to give direct answers to these questions then we must demand a Special Prosecutor to get the answers the hard way. If Obama used the IRS, however indirectly, it may well be a very serious matter indeed!

Where Was the Commander in Chief the Night of Benghazi Attack?

And why does the White House want to keep it a secret?

When Navy Seals killed Osama bin Laden the White House was only too eager to release photos showing Obama in the Situation Room and to discuss the raid in detail. When asked where Obama was during the time our people in Benghazi were being killed by Al Queda terrorists on September 11, 2012 the White House has refused to answer. The question is why?

On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace repeatedly asked White House Communications Director Dan Pfieffer where Obama was during the attack. Pfieffer refused to answer [video] and claimed the information was "irrelevant," a word he used multiple times on Sunday news shows to dismiss the seriousness of White House scandals.

Why not answer a simple question?

What was Obama doing? Obviously if he had been in command of the crisis it would help their case to release the information so we can only conclude that he was occupied elsewhere. But what could be more important than to have the Commander in Chief in the chair during such a crisis. It's been thirty years since a U.S. Ambassador was killed in the line of duty. Didn't this situation warrant Obama's direct personal attention?

Was Obama upstairs in the residence having dinner with Michelle? Certainly the image of Obama dining while Americans were dying is not one the White House would like to promote.

Or,  it's possible that the White House goal here is to stir up conspiracy theories the same way they manipulated the "birthers" who thought Obama was born in Kenya. If so, it would be a damnable thing to willfully work to incite distrust and suspicion on the part of the American people.

I'm reminded again of this famous Obama quote: ‘The only people that don’t want to disclose the truth, are people with something to hide.”

Monday, May 20, 2013

Chicago Journalist Describes Why IRS Scandal is Result of Obama's "Chicago Way" Politics

Why is anyone surprised that Obama and his team turned out to be as corrupt and incompetent as any other Chicago politician?

Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass is not a friend of Obama. Kass has seen the dark, seedy reality of Chicago politics and knew from the start that Obama's veneer of being some new kind of politician was all hooey.

Trying to explain the roots of the IRS scandal Kass goes back to what is known as "The Chicago Way" from the perspective of his own Chicago family, a group of Greek immigrants. On Sundays the family would gather and argue politics after dinner and one day, young John asked senior family members why they didn't get involved in politics. It was as if he had committed some gross indecency and his question was ignored but he repeated it:
We could support a political candidacy, we could donate or work for one or another politician that we agreed with.

This is America, I said.

"Are you in your good senses?" said my father. "We have lives here. We have businesses. If we get involved in politics, they will ruin us."

And no one, not the Roosevelt Democrats or the Reagan Republicans, disagreed. The socialists, the communists, the royalists, everyone nodded their heads.

This was Chicago. And for a business owner to get involved meant one thing: It would cost you money and somebody from government could destroy you.

The health inspectors would come, and the revenue department, the building inspectors, the fire inspectors, on and on. The city code books aren't thick because politicians like to write new laws and regulations. The codes are thick because when government swings them at a citizen, they hurt.

And who swings the codes and regulations at those who'd open their mouths? A government worker. That government worker owes his or her job to the political boss. And that boss has a boss.

The worker doesn't have to be told. The worker wants a promotion. If an irritant rises, it is erased. The hack gets a promotion. This is government.
Obama himself reiterated his belief in The Chicago Way when he told an Hispanic audience before the midterm elections in 2010 that "We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends." This statement was made at the same time the IRS was doing everything it could to throw the rule book (and inventing a few new rules) at conservatives!

Sadly, we can't have a do over for the 2012 election but we can hold Obama and his corrupt, incompetent minions accountable. Congress can hold hearings and if the Obama Administration continues to obstruct those investigations a Special Prosecutor needs to be appointed. I say we get a prosecutor from Chicago. One who has experience with the kind of corruption we see all around us from the Obama Administration!

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Dem's Defense: Obama and Admin are Ignorant, Insular, Incompetent and Idiotic!

That's what his FRIENDS say about Obama and his team!

Last week saw an avalanche of commentary and news reports all painting Obama and his Administration in a less than favorable light. There are so many examples it would be difficult to cite them all but here's a sampling:
  • “We’re portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots,” said one Obama administration official who was part of the Benghazi response. “It’s actually closer to us being idiots.”
  • David Rohde writes a column in The Atlantic titled "How Obama Has Contributed to His Own Aura of Scandal," in which he concludes "the president's biggest sin is being aloof and disengaged."
  • "Obama, the uninterested president" by By Dana Milbank in the Washington Post says "President Passerby needs urgently to become a participant in his presidency."
  • MSNBC's Chris Matthews says Obama is "a ship with the engine off."
  • “‘It feel like they don’t know what they’re here to do,’ a former senior Obama administration official said. ‘When there’s no narrative, stuff like this consumes you.’” (Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei, “D.C. Turns On Obama,” Politico, 5/14/13
  • “This White House’s Instinctive Petulance, Arrogance And Defensiveness Have All Worked Together To Isolate Obama At A Time When He Most Needs A Support System.” (Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei, “D.C. Turns On Obama,” Politico, 5/14/13)
  •  "In the current atmosphere of multi-ring uproars, it is easier to make a case that a mindset of inattention to governing detail and excessive attention to politics was at work in the State Department on Benghazi, and the IRS on investigation of tea party groups, even if Obama isn’t shown to be directly involved.” (Alexander Burns and John F. Harris, “Obama’s Dangerous New Narrative,” Politico, 3/15/13)
  • National Journal ‘s Ron Fournier Says He Doesn’t Know Whether Obama’s Late Realization Of The IRS Scandal Is Due To His Insulation Or Simply “PR Incompetence.”   (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 5/14/13)
  • “President Obama And His Insular Team Are Violating Almost Every Principle Of Crisis Management. Shoot Straight. Ditch The Spin. Don’t Feed The Fire. Restore Trust.” (Ron Fournier, “Does Obama Need Staff Shakeup To Manage Scandals,” National Journal, 5/14/13)
  •  Democrats also criticized the president for not being more aggressive in responding to trouble within the government. Robert Gibbs, Obama’s former White House press secretary, said the president should have appointed a bipartisan commission of former IRS officials to look into the issue of targeting political organizations. And Gibbs gently chided his former boss for using passive language when he first addressed the political targeting during a White House news conference Monday.” (Julie Pace, “Obama Tries To Regain Control Amid Controversies,” The Associated Press, 5/15/13)
  • "The Obama administration is making the case for conservatism better than Mitt Romney ever did."By John Dickerson Slate.Com 5/14/13
  • "In Obama’s case, the narrative emerging from this tumultuous week goes something like this: None of these messes would have happened under a president less obsessed with politics, less insulated within his own White House and less trusting of government as an institution." Politico, 5/15/13
Then there were the hearings on Capitol Hill and Obama press conferences where either Obama or top Administration officials repeatedly deny nothing anything about much of anything. As former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said, "the only thing Obama will take responsibility for is killing bin Laden." When it comes to the everyday running of government he seems totally clueless.

Remember that just six weeks ago news outlets were running stories like "Obama Takes Control In The Second Term," and "no question who’s in charge." Now Obama's top campaign strategist, David Axelrod, is running around saying that the government is just too big and it's not possible to control it. Yet Axelrod, with the willing help of many of the media sources cited above gladly put out the myth of Obama in 2008 as some sort of superhuman who could do it all!

Well, I still remember the words of  Harriet Christian, a Hillary supporter from New York who delivered an angry rant in 2008 trying to warn us all that Obama as "inadequate" for the job. Her words seem mild in hindsight.

Ignorant, Insular, Incompetent, Idiotic. Obama's friends are describing him using many of the same words Republicans have for years!

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Highlights of IRS Hearing

Hearing raises new questions about whether White House knew about plan to target conservatives!

Friday's hearing was a smackdown on the IRS chief brought to testify. However, despite being fired from his job (he planned to leave anyway) Acting IRS Commissioner Steve T. Miller was arrogant and largely uncooperative with Representatives who made no secret about their anger at the IRS.

The hearing opened with Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) saying that the IRS has lied to the American people about the scandal which top IRS officials knew about for more than a year. Camp went on to say that this was “just the latest example of a culture of cover-ups — and political intimidation — in this administration. It seems like the truth is hidden from the American people just long enough to make it through an election.”
Rep. Camp added: "Trimming a few branches will not solve the problem when the roots of the tree have gone rotten and that is exactly what has happened with our entire tax system - it is rotten at the core, and it must be ripped out so we can start fresh."
Video highlights of the hearings can be found here but I would like to highlight two for your special attention. The first is the questioning by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the former GOP vice presidential nominee. Ryan laid out the case for the lies told by the IRS. Lies to Congress are a criminal offense:


RYAN: "How can we conclude that you did not mislead this committee?"

The second clip by Rep. Mike Kelly slams the IRS:

KELLY: "And when the IRS comes in, you’re not allowed to be shoddy, you’re not allowed to be run horribly, you’re not allowed to make mistakes, you’re not allowed to do one damn thing that doesn’t come in compliance. If you do, you’re held responsible right then.”...“This is absolutely an overreach and this is an outrage for all America!"
At that point the audience in the hearing rose to their feet in thunderous applause!

Also at the hearing we learned that at least one tax exempt applicant was asked to "detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers." Doesn't that smack of a clear violation of civil rights and the separation of church and state liberals are constantly going on about?

From the Treasury Inspector General's testimony we also learned that Obama Administration officials were made aware of the probe last June which will only prompt more questions about what the White House knew and why this information was withheld from the American people until after the election.

Just like Watergate!

Friday, May 17, 2013

Roundup of the Latest News on IRS Scandal

The abuse of power is so widespread it's hard to imagine it happened without people at the top knowing about it!
  • USA Today has the analysis of approvals of tax exempt groups. The first Tea Party group was approved in 90 days. After the mysterious change in policy, there wouldn't be another Tea Party group approved for 27 months. Meanwhile, approval for liberal groups sailed through.
  • In all, about 471 conservative groups had their tax exempt status delayed and with unlawful scrutiny. Only three examples of similar scrutiny for liberal groups was found.
  • In 2011 Conservative watchdog group Media Trackers filed with the IRS to achieve nonprofit status. The application got stuck in Obama-induced IRS limbo. In 2012 the same group changed its name and filed again with the IRS as “Greenhouse Solutions.” They were granted nonprofit status in 3 weeks.
    IRS agents in Cincinnati insist that "they simply did what their bosses ordered."
  • IRS employees gave political donations overwhelmingly in favor of Obama. One of those at the heart of the scandal has a husband whose law firm has close ties to the Obama campaign.
  • Another IRS employee in the division which oversaw this scandal was awarded a $103,390 bonus. She's now been put in charge of IRS implementation of ObamaCare!
  • Karl Rove reminds us that it was Democrats in the U.S. Senate who constantly wrote the IRS demanding an investigation of Tea Party groups. Obviously those demands were not ignored.
Need further proof that the IRS under Obama is out of control? Another of those groups targeted for investigation was none other than Billy Graham, a revered Christian leader. That's right, they even went after Billy Graham!

Graham's son Franklin sent President Obama a letter (PDF). From the report in Politico:
Graham said that “in light” of the IRS admission that it targeted tea party groups for added scrutiny, “I do not believe that the IRS audit of our two organizations last year is a coincidence – or justifiable.”

“While these audits not only wasted taxpayer money, they wasted money contributed by donors for ministry purposes as we had to spend precious resources servicing the IRS agents in our offices,” Graham wrote in the letter, which was shared with POLITICO. “I believe that someone in the administration was targeting and attempting to intimidate us. This is morally wrong and unethical – indeed some would call it ‘un-American.”
Obama Dodges Question on White House Involvement

In the press conference Thursday Obama was asked "Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the agency’s actions before your counsel’s office found out on April 22nd?" His answer was very curious. He did not answer the question but instead said "Let me make sure that I answer your specific question. I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press." How was that an answer to a "specific question" whether anyone in the White House knew about the IRS practice before the scandal broke? The reporter didn't even ask about the Inspector General's report that Obama referred to.

More questions will need to be asked, THEN ANSWERED! One political analyst in Washington put it this way:
Trey Hardin: “I will tell you this on the IRS front. I’ve worked in this town for over 20 years in the White House and on Capitol Hill and I can say with a very strong sense of certainty that there are people very close to this president that not only knew what the IRS were doing but authorized it. It simply just does not happen at an agency level like that without political advisers likely in the West Wing certainly connected to the president’s ongoing campaign organization.”
There are some Washington reporters still willing to carry Obama's water. Ezra Klein at the Washington Post has decreed that the scandals are over because Obama has spoken and told us there's nothing wrong. Corruption and stupidity still go hand in hand!

Finally, the evasions on the IRS scandal, like Benghazi, remind me of these words from an Obama radio address in August 2010:

 Obama: "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide."

UPDATE: IRS Hid Investigation Until After Election!
  • NBC's Lisa Myers reported this morning that the IRS  deliberately chose not to reveal that it had wrongly targeted conservative groups until after the 2012 presidential election. Did IRS officials lie to Congress when questions were raised in 2012?
  • An Obama tax exempt group was approved in 34 days at the same time conservative groups were put on hold for months, even years.
  • Senior Democratic Sen. Max Baucus, who recently slapped Obamacare as a "train wreck," believes that the IRS scandal is just beginning and that "a lot more" damaging information will be revealed, likely at congressional hearings."I have a hunch that a lot more is going to come out, frankly."
  • CBS News Bob Schieffer: I mean, just all of a sudden you have this thing with the Justice Department where they’re getting all these phone records of all the reporters. The Attorney General, well he didn’t know anything about it. You get to the IRS, they don’t seem to know anything about the Tea Party thing. You come to White House, they don’t know anything about Benghazi. Somebody’s got to grab hold of this thing. It’s very, very disturbing what we’re seeing here.
  • Kimberly Strassel at the Wall Street Journal traces years of Obama attacks on conservatives and concludes: "according to Mr. Obama, he is "outraged" and "angry" that the IRS looked into the very groups and individuals that he spent years claiming were shady, undemocratic, even lawbreaking." Obama didn't need to make the call ordering the IRS to investigate conservatives. They heard him loud and clear every day!
  • John Fund describes Obama's weak management style and raises the question about Chicago pal Valerie Jarrett's possible role in all this.
When these scandals first broke I pointed to Obama's attack on conservatives at the commencement address at Ohio State University earlier this month. I'm glad to see the same theme repeated:

 

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

With Domestic Spying, IRS Enemies List and Benghazi Lies, A Miasma of Scandal Surrounds Obama White House

What a shame the news media didn't inquire more about many of these stories BEFORE last November's election!

ABC News compares Obama to Nixon
 
Here's an update on this week's major Obama scandals:

Domestic Spying on AP Reporters

When President Bush monitored the communications of foreign terrorists on lines which crossed through the United States Democrats screamed it was "domestic spying." They never found any citizen whose rights were infringed but that didn't matter.

Now, the Washington Post reports:
In a sweeping and unusual move, the Justice Department secretly obtained two months’ worth of telephone records of journalists working for the Associated Press as part of a year-long investigation into the disclosure of classified information about a failed al-Qaeda plot last year.

The AP’s president said Monday that federal authorities obtained cellular, office and home telephone records of individual reporters and an editor; AP general office numbers in Washington, New York and Hartford, Conn.; and the main number for AP reporters covering Congress. He called the Justice Department’s actions a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into newsgathering activities.
At Politico, one Democrat strategist described this latest scandal:
The AP phone records thing just sealed the deal for what the newest narrative around the Obama administration is going to be. They are the new Nixon admin when it comes to bullying, withholding info and targeting enemies. The right won't probably call him directly Nixon because you know, Nixon was a Republican, but it will be the basic idea. You will hear claims that there has never been an administration who reached so far to suppress information and dissent.
The Dem strategist went on to say he fears that for the remainder of his term Obama's team may appear "a group of shadowy thugs."

IRS Scandal: It's Even WORSE Than First Thought

Talk about "a group of shadowy thugs...."

First reports of the IRS targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny presented the claim that the potentially illegal process was limited to the Cincinnati office and no one in Washington had anything to do with it or had any knowledge of it. Wrong on both counts (1,2). But things are worse than that. Now we learn that sensitive tax information was leaked to a liberal group dominated by Obama campaign donors so they could "expose" the activities of conservative groups.

The new revelation reminds us that the Obama campaign targeted donors to Romney's campaign. In one such case a donor was then audited by the IRS and the Dept. of Labor.

Wash Post Fact Checker: Obama Flat Out LIED on Benghazi

In Tuesday's press conference Obama once again tried to dismiss questions over the Benghazi cover up as a "sideshow." Months ago he called the setbacks, including the attack which left our Ambassador and three other Americans dead a "bump in the road."

But what caught the Washington Post Fact Checker's attention was Obama's repeated insistence that he labeled Benghazi a "terrorist act."

On May 13 Obama said: “The day after it happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism.” Except that's not what he said. He called it an "act of terror" which is decidedly different and repeatedly refused to call it a terrorist attack.

Here's the Fact Checker's conclusion:
During the campaign, the president could just get away with claiming he said “act of terror,” since he did use those words — though not in the way he often claimed. It seemed like a bit of after-the-fact spin, but those were his actual words — to the surprise of Mitt Romney in the debate.

But the president’s claim that he said “act of terrorism” is taking revisionist history too far, given that he repeatedly refused to commit to that phrase when asked directly by reporters in the weeks after the attack. He appears to have gone out of his way to avoid saying it was a terrorist attack, so he has little standing to make that claim now.

Fact Check awards Obama "Four Pinocchios" which puts him in the "whoppers" category or "liar, liar pants on fire!"

White House: "Wait" for the Facts

Stretch out the investigation then dismiss the issue as "old news."

When confronted with this miasma of scandal on Tuesday, Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary repeated said we must "wait" for the facts to come out or investigations to be completed. Yet as investigations on the Benghazi attack reached critical mass Carney dismissed questions saying the attack "happened a long time ago." Tuesday Carney added that questions about Benghazi were an attempt to politicize tragedy. But isn't this exactly what Obama and Hillary Clinton did when they lied to the family members over the coffins of their loved ones lost in Benghazi with the phony You Tube video story? Revelations on the phony talking points led one reporter to conclude: that the Obama Administration has been  "caught playing politics with tragedy."

Domestic Spying, IRS investigating political opponents, politicizing tragedy and lying to the American people. If Nixon was forced from office for less, how should Obama be held accountable?

Sunday, May 12, 2013

Obama's IRS Targets Conservative Groups

A brazen attempt to stifle free speech and association.  And it comes from the TOP!

Imagine for a moment if the Administration of George W. Bush targeted left leaning groups for special treatment from the IRS threatening their taxpayer status which is essential for fundraising activities on which those groups depend.

You'd still be hearing the screaming.

Fast Forward to the Obama Administration. This report from the Washington Post may be just the tip of the iceberg:
IRS targeted groups that criticized the government, IG report says
By Juliet Eilperin,
Published: May 12, 2013 at 2:30 pm

At various points over the past two years, Internal Revenue Service officials targeted nonprofit groups that criticized the government and sought to educate Americans about the U.S. Constitution, according to documents in an audit conducted by the agency’s inspector general.

The documents, obtained by The Washington Post from a congressional aide with knowledge of the findings, show that on June 29, 2011, IRS staffers held a briefing with senior agency official Lois G. Lerner in which they described giving special attention to instances where “statements in the case file criticize how the country is being run.” Lerner, who oversees tax-exempt groups for the agency, raised objections and the agency revised its criteria a week later.

But six months later, the IRS applied a new political test to groups that applied for tax-exempt status as “social welfare” groups, the document says. On Jan. 15, 2012 the agency decided to target “political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform movement.,” according to the appendix in the IG report, which was requested by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and has yet to be released.

The new revelations are likely to intensify criticism of the IRS, which has been under fire since agency officials acknowledged they had deliberately targeted groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their name for heightened scrutiny.
Effort to Stifle Dissent Comes from Obama

The IRS scandal is a clear effort to stifle political dissent and Democrats would never stand for it for a moment if it were happening to them. It's fascist behavior plain and simple.

There's an attempt by the usual suspects to say that this is just an isolated incident. Yet there is clear evidence that this kind of intolerant attitude that abuses civil liberties comes from the top. Here's Obama lecturing the grads at the Ohio State commencement ceremony on May 5:
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They'll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, and creative, and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted.
With these new revelations there may be plenty of people who will find that their distrust in government is fully justified.

Are These the Voices Obama "Rejects?"

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."
Patrick Henry

"The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing."
John Adams

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams

"Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains."
Patrick Henry

"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves. If we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power."
Thomas Jefferson

"We the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts--not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
Abraham Lincoln

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government."
Thomas Paine

"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does NOT mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country."
Theodore Roosevelt



Saturday, May 11, 2013

Mark Steyn is Brilliant on Benghazi

If you read one full commentary on Benghazi, make it this one!

It's difficult to excerpt portions of a Mark Steyn commentary. Particularly every paragraph cries out to be read in full. But here's a selection to whet your appetite:
Hillary Clinton had denied ever seeing Ambassador Stevens’s warnings about deteriorating security in Libya on the grounds that “1.43 million cables come to my office” — and she can’t be expected to see all of them, or any. Once Ambassador Stevens was in his flag-draped coffin listening to her eulogy for him at Andrews Air Force Base, he was her bestest friend in the world — it was all “Chris this” and “Chris that,” as if they’d known each other since third grade. But up till that point he was just one of 1.43 million close personal friends of Hillary trying in vain to get her ear.

Now we know that at 8 p.m. Eastern time on the last night of Stevens’s life, his deputy in Libya spoke to Secretary Clinton and informed her of the attack in Benghazi and the fact that the ambassador was now missing. An hour later, Gregory Hicks received a call from the then–Libyan prime minister, Abdurrahim el-Keib, informing him that Stevens was dead. Hicks immediately called Washington. It was 9 p.m. Eastern time, or 3 a.m. in Libya. Remember the Clinton presidential team’s most famous campaign ad? About how Hillary would be ready to take that 3 a.m. call? Four years later, the phone rings, and Secretary Clinton’s not there. She doesn’t call Hicks back that evening. Or the following day.

Are murdered ambassadors like those 1.43 million cables she doesn’t read? Just too many of them to keep track of? No. Only six had been killed in the history of the republic.
...
What was Secretary Clinton doing that was more important? What was the president doing? Aside, that is, from resting up for his big Vegas campaign event. A real government would be scrambling furiously to see what it could do to rescue its people. It’s easy, afterwards, to say that nothing would have made any difference. But, at the time Deputy Chief Hicks was calling 9-1-1 and getting executive-branch voicemail, nobody in Washington knew how long it would last. A terrorist attack isn’t like a soccer game, over in 90 minutes. If it is a sport, it’s more like a tennis match: Whether it’s all over in three sets or goes to five depends on how hard the other guy pushes back. The government of the United States took the extremely strange decision to lose in straight sets. Not only did they not deploy out-of-area assets, they ordered even those in Libya to stand down. Lieutenant Colonel Gibson had a small team in Tripoli that twice readied to go to Benghazi to assist and twice was denied authority to do so, the latter when they were already at the airport. There weren’t many of them, not compared to the estimated 150 men assailing the compound. But they were special forces, not bozo jihadists. Back in Benghazi, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty held off numerically superior forces for hours before dying on a rooftop waiting for back-up from a government that had switched the answering machine on and gone to Vegas.
...
As Mr. Hicks testified, his superiors in Washington knew early that night that a well-executed terrorist attack with the possible participation of al-Qaeda elements was under way. Instead of responding, the most powerful figures in the government decided that an unseen YouTube video better served their political needs. And, in the most revealing glimpse of the administration’s depravity, the president and secretary of state peddled the lie even in their mawkish eulogies to their buddy “Chris” and three other dead Americans. They lied to the victims’ coffins and then strolled over to lie to the bereaved, Hillary telling the Woods family that “we’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video.” And she did. The government dispatched more firepower to arrest Nakoula Basseley Nakoula in Los Angeles than it did to protect its mission in Benghazi.
...
Truth matters, and character matters. For the American people to accept the Obama-Clinton lie is to be complicit in it.

Friday, May 10, 2013

Democrats Attempt to Politicize Benghazi Hearings Backfires

Their effort merely highlights how the Obama Administration treated this as political from the get go!

This week's hearings in the House of Representatives on the September 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi brought the issue into clearer focus with the credible testimony of top State Department officials who were on the ground in Libya.

Deputy Chief of Mission Greg Hicks testified that Ambassador Stevens went to Benghazi at the behest of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton despite the warnings of poor security and requests for additional help that were rejected.

Hicks also revealed that he spoke with Secretary Clinton during the attacks and said that at no time did a protest over a You Tube video factor in the attacks. From a new report by Stephen Hayes in the Weekly Standard:
“The YouTube video was a nonevent in Libya,” said Gregory Hicks, a 22-year veteran diplomat and deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli at the time of the attacks, in testimony before the House Oversight and Reform Committee on May 8. “The only report that our mission made through every channel was that there had been an attack on a consulate . . . no protest.”
Later, when Hicks learned that UN Ambassador Susan Rice had repeatedly blamed a You Tube video for the attacks "I was stunned. My jaw dropped. And I was embarrassed," Hicks said. When Hicks contacted a higher up in Washington to ask why this false information was put out the response indicated "it was very clear from the tone that I should not proceed with any further [questions],” he told lawmakers."

When Congressman Chafetz (R-UT) visited Libya to investigate the attacks, Hicks was told not to meet with him. When he did so without State Department minders present he was given a direct rebuke from Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills (Bill Clinton's impeachment lawyer) who Hicks said was "very upset" that he had done so. Hicks would later be demoted.

Obama Administration Knew Terrorists Were to Blame on Sept. 12

Also from Wednesday's hearing we learn of a secret State Department email from September 12, the day after the attack, reveals State officials knew it was a terrorist attack from an Al Queda related group. This fits with the original talking points supplied by the CIA which were later changed. The Obama Administration has refused to release that and other emails relating to how the story changed. House Speaker John Boehner has demanded these be made public.

For Obama and Dems Benghazi, Like Everything Else, is All Politics, All the Time!

On Friday, ABC News' Jonathon Karl describes how the Benghazi talking points went through 12 revisions and were "scrubbed of terror reference." Stephen Hayes, who was first with this story revises it today in greater detail. General David Petraeus "expressed frustration at the new, scrubbed talking points, noting that they had been stripped of much of the content his agency had provided."

Both news stories run directly counter to the long held assertion by White House Spokesman Jay Carney that the talking points were almost exclusively the product of the Intelligence Community.Writing  for National Journal Ron Fournier discussed this aspect of the scandal in an article titled "Scrubbing the Truth from Benghazi," with the subhead "Caught playing politics with tragedy..."
“These changes don’t resolve all of my issues or those of my building’s leadership.” With that sentence, one in a series of emails and draft “talking points” leaked to Jonathan Karl of ABC News, the Obama administration was caught playing politics with Benghazi.
...
Credibility: The White House has long maintained that the talking points were drafted almost exclusively by the CIA, a claim that gave cover to both President Obama and his potential successor, Clinton. “Those talking points originated from the intelligence community,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said in November, adding that the only editing by the White House or the State Department was to change the word "consulate" to "diplomatic facility."  Nuland’s emails prove him wrong.
We know that the final version of the phony talking points was developed at a White House meeting on Saturday, September 15. Stephen Hayes reports that there is an email, with the name of the sender redacted, which introduces the "Movie Protests" theme which eventually became the big lie spread by the Administration on repeated occasions including to the family members of slain State Department employees.

There is a paper trail and we know the people involved. How much longer will it take to get to the truth?

Meanwhile, Democrats are attacking (1,2) the process people involved while seeking to turn the entire hunt for the truth into a circus to discredit the damaging testimony. Their media allies are speaking with the mantra that this is a "political," "partisan," "witch hunt." Strange but we never heard them describe the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson affair in such terms.

But Democrat critics are right on one point. This is a partisan, political event. One that started the very day Democrats in the Obama Administration deliberately lied to the American people for political purposes and continue to defend the liars today for the same political reasons!

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

Republican Sanford Wins SC Special Congressional Election

Big Labor, Nancy Pelosi and national Dems pulled out all the stops, and money, to turn the 1st SC district from red to blue. But in the end, voters weren't fooled by Colbert Busch's (D) lies about being a new kind of Democrat!

Former SC Governor Mark Sanford enjoys his comeback victory with his family on Tuesday night in Charleston, SC
I was very happy to cast my vote Tuesday for Mark Sanford and send to Congress a Representative that I know will support a conservative low tax, smaller government agenda. In the end, the race was much closer than many originally thought with Sanford winning by only 9%. Tim Scott (R) who was appointed to fill the remainder of Sen. Jim DeMint's term in the U.S. Senate previously won the seat by 26%.

The race was closer for two reasons. First, Democrats very effectively worked to suppress GOP voter turnout with reminders about Sanford's past particularly cheating on his wife 4 years ago and resigning as Governor. Democrats may insist the attacks that left four Americans dead in Benghazi last September "happened a long time ago" but in the 1st District, they ran ads that made you think Sanford was still cheating on his ex-wife. Imagine the howls accusing the GOP of racism if we attempted a voter suppression campaign on the scale Dems launched in the 1st District.

The second reason it was such a close race ironically turned out to be the reason Sanford won. Dems spent more than one million trying to smear Sanford and depress GOP voters. But in the end, their spending revealed the close link that Colbert Busch had with the very liberal Dem leadership like Nancy Pelosi. South Carolina is nothing like San Francisco!

Colbert Busch only debated Sanford once, never gave a press conference or held informal Q&A sessions with voters such as is common in this state. She used a barrage of television ads to try and convince voters that if elected she would be a non-partisan, independent voice in Congress pushing fiscal responsibility. Well, voters here have also heard Obama promise to be a new kind of Democrat who believes in fiscal responsibility and we were not about to be fooled again.

Dems Try to Spin Loss

You know if Colbert Busch had won it would be front page news. Dems and their media accomplices would proclaim that even a very conservative district like SC-1 was ready to endorse the Obama agenda and how this augured ill for Republicans in the 2014 midterm elections. Predictably, when it looked like Sanford was going to pull it out the liberal media had the alternate story line all ready to go and guess what? Dems win either way even with a Sanford win.

What this election proves is that the liberal leopard cannot change it's spots no matter how much it outspends their GOP rival in television ads. The message this sends for 2014 is that  a GOP candidate with small government principles, even one with personal flaws, can win. And now that Democrats have wasted over a million in South Carolina they'll have that much less to spend in 2014!

Monday, May 06, 2013

Key Documents and Witnesses Show How the Obama Admin Developed the Libya Lie

If Bush had done this he would have been impeached!

Remember the Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame CIA scandal during the Bush years? Of course you do. It was on the front page day after day for YEARS. A Special Prosecutor was brought in but he never charged anyone with the crime of revealing Valerie Plame's CIA status. Congressional hearings were also held with a demand that we get to the truth.

It's important to note that no one died in that scandal.

Contrast that with the Obama Administration and Democrat's attempt to cover up the attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. Four Americans, including the first Ambassador to die in the line of duty in decades, lost their lives. But Democrats have refused all calls for a Special Prosecutor or special congressional panels. And when questions are raised as to why on the scene witnesses have not been identified, let alone brought forward to testify (at least one witness was placed in the hospital under an assumed name) the White House attempts to dismiss concerns by suggesting it all "happened a long time ago."

There are so many unanswered questions about the Benghazi attacks. Why were security warnings ignored and security forces cut back prior to the attack? Why was no help sent during the hours the attack was underway?

One of the most galling questions is why did the Obama Administration lie about a You Tube video being the cause of the attack? Last week I posted the congressional report describing the development of that lie but new reporting by Stephen Hayes at the Weekly Standard brings the issue into even sharper focus.

The CIA originally put out a draft which spelled out advance warnings of threats in Benghazi and clearly stated that "we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attacks." Later, all references to Al Queda and warnings of attacks were omitted. No where do any of these drafts mention You Tube videos as the cause.

But we all recall how often Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top Administration officials repeatedly blamed a video and downplayed any Al Queda link. Those of us who were informed knew that was a lie but Obama and company repeated it over and over and over. Defending UN Ambassador Susan Rice, who was first to jump out of the gate with the big lie, a State Department spokesperson said "the comments that Ambassador Rice made accurately reflect our government's initial assessment." Nothing could be further from the truth!

On Sunday, U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) who serves on one of House committees investigating the attack was asked about the talking points:
Lynch: “They certainly weren’t accurate. I don’t know what the process was there. But, absolutely, they were false. They were wrong. There were no protests outside of the Benghazi compound there. This was a deliberate and strategic attack on the consulate there. So any statements that this was sort of like the other protests that we saw in Cairo and other embassies- this was not that type of case. This was a concerted effort. ”
New Witness to Testify

On Wednesday, the House Oversight Committee will hear the testimony of three witnesses, including Greg Hicks, acting Ambassador in Libya. On Sunday, in one of the rare moments when the mainstream media has reported on this attack, Bob Schieffer on the CBS program Face the Nation revealed excerpts of the statements Ambassador Hicks gave to investigators [video full report]:
Greg Hicks: I thought it was a terrorist attack from the get-go. I think everybody in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning.

Question: ...Did you ever have any indication that there was a protest, a popular protest, outside the mission in Benghazi?

Greg Hicks: No question.

Question: And if there was such a protest, would that have been reported?:

Greg Hicks: Absolutely... for there to have been a demonstration on Chris Stevens' front door and him not to have reported it is unbelievable.
When Amb. Hicks saw Susan Rice's performance on the Sunday show, following as it did an interview on CBS with the president of Libya who stated unequivocally that it was a terrorist attack he was dumbfounded:
Greg Hicks: ... The net impact of what has transpired is the spokesperson of the most powerful country in the world has basically said that the President of Libya is either a liar or doesn't know what he's talking about. The impact of that is immeasurable. Magariaf has just lost face in front of not only his own people, but the world... my jaw hit the floor as I watched this... I've never been as embarrassed in my life, in my career as on that day... I never reported a demonstration; I reported an attack on the consulate. Chris's last report, if you want to say his final report, is, "Greg, we are under attack." ... It is jaw-dropping that - to me that - how that came to be.

Bob Schieffer: Mr. Hicks went on to tell your investigators that no one from the State Department contacted him before Ambassador Rice's appearance. He said:

Greg Hicks: ... I was personally known to one of Ambassador Rice's staff members... I could have been called, and, you know, the phone call could have been, hey, Greg, Ambassador Rice is going to say blah, blah, blah, blah and I could have said, no, that's not the right thing. That phone call was never made.
Hicks went on to say that he believes the reason it took three weeks to get the FBI into Benghazi to investigate the attacks is because of the Obama Administration insult to the Libyan President. Hicks also called his superiors at the State Dept. to find out why these false statements were made and got the cold shoulder.

What we have is a clear case of intelligence information being corrupted for political purposes by the Obama Administration. What a shame this issue wasn't thoroughly vetted by the news media prior to the 2012 presidential election. Instead, we are stuck with a corrupt, incompetent Obama Administration caught in a web of lies! Where is the accountability? Where is the transparency?

Friday, May 03, 2013

Historic Snow in May Means Only One Thing: Al Gore Has Given Another Speech Warning About Global Warming!

Al Gore continues to "shovel" something that isn't snow!

For years the global warming alarmists (or "Warmists") have said that lack of snow is a sure sign that manmade global warming is destroying the planet. For years politicians who support an irrational anti-carbon agenda have stepped up and told us how it's all our fault.

This year is no different. Al Gore, the perennial prophet of doom (or should that read PROFIT of doom) was in Beverly Hills a few days ago warning everyone that would listen:
"This is for real. It is not made up. The scientists are not in a conspiracy to lie to us," Gore nearly shouted.

"The generation of people alive today will be held accountable," he said. "Our children and grandchildren ... if they exist in a world that has been devastated by these consequences that have been predicted and are beginning to unfold -- they would be well justified in asking of us: 'What in the hell were you thinking?'
Does this look like global warming to you? Record snow in May!

As Gore spoke storm clouds gathered over Colorado and a storm of epic proportions stretching to the upper Midwest began to dump "historic" (1,2,3). It is the "biggest snow" ever recorded for many of the areas affected and the first May snow ever in Arkansas.

Which brings us back to Al Gore. Since it looks more likely that "our children and grandchildren" will be freezing their asses off they might indeed be "justified in asking of us: 'What in the hell were you thinking," by wasting so much time, energy and MONEY combating a problem that didn't exist?

But I suppose that as long as Al Gore and Obama's rich friends are making millions off phony green projects the scam will continue!


Thursday, May 02, 2013

Arrest of 3 More Suspects in Boston Bombing Puts Lie to the Myth of Isolated, Lone Wolf Attack

But the same Administration which now dismisses new questions about Benghazi attack saying it "happened  a long time ago" will ignore the obvious facts and stick to their myth!

At Monday's press conference Obama repeatedly described the Boston Bombers as "self radicalized." Since we know that the older brother Tamerlan had disturbing terrorist videos on his You Tube account Obama's description is another variation of the same "You Tube did it" excuse for the Benghazi attacks.

But that dodge went out the window with the arrest of three additional suspects. As the Boston Globe described it: "The White House and law enforcement authorities have previously suggested that the Tsarnaevs may have acted alone without clear ties to foreign governments or terrorist groups."

Of course we knew the "lone wolf" or "self radicalized" myth was phony as soon as we learned of Tamerlan Tsarnaev's six month trip to a radical region in Russia and the warnings from Russian sources about his activities. Combine that with the use of pressure cooker bombs, a signature of Pakistani/Afghan terrorism and any suggestion that this was just some spontaneous spark of the jihad impulse is tragically misguided.

It's all part of the willful blindness that the Obama Administration engages in when it comes to fighting terrorism. The consequence of such weakness is that we are more vulnerable to attacks in ways we were not during the Bush years following the original September 11th attack.

There's little to stop Obama from continuing down this dangerous path. They know they can simply stonewall any difficult questions until the public interest dies down. Take the Benghazi attacks on September 11, 2012 as a case study. Despite Obama's pledge to bring the You Tube protesters terrorists to justice, nothing has been done. Now, any question to the White House about the attack is met by the Press Secretary with the statement it "happened a long time ago." Just another variation on Hillary Clinton screeching "what difference does it make?"

A new Pew Survey of Muslims shows that 28% worldwide say violent jihad by suicide bombing may be justified.  With potentially hundreds of millions of Muslims so inclined, how is it that the Obama Administration attitude refusing to link Islam and terrorism helpful in preventing future attacks?
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator