Notice: This website may or may not use or set cookies used by Google Ad-sense or other third party companies. If you do not wish to have cookies downloaded to your computer, please disable cookie use in your browser. Thank You.


Monday, August 19, 2013

Obamacare = Obummercare

10 Reasons Why Obamacare Is Going to Ruin Your Medical Care and Your Life By Elzabeth Lee Vliet, M.D.

Here are the ten most important points that I tell my patients:

• Your private insurance premiums will cost more and more each year.

• You will lose the choices and flexibility in health insurance policies that we have had available up until now.

• As reimbursements continue to drop, fewer and fewer doctors will take Medicare (for those 65 and older) or Medicaid (people younger than 65).

• Fewer doctors accepting Medicare and Medicaid causes an increase in wait times for appointments and a decrease in the numbers and types of specialists available on these plans. Consumers would be wise to line up their doctors now.

• Studies from various organizations and states have consistently shown that Medicaid recipients have longer waits for medical care, fewer options for specialists, poorer medical outcomes, and die sooner after surgeries than people with no health insurance at all. Yet an increasing number of Americans will be forced into this second-class medical care.

• As more people enter the taxpayer-funded plans (Medicare and Medicaid) instead of paying for private insurance, the costs to provide this increased medical care and medications will escalate, leading to higher taxes.

• With no eligibility verifications in place, millions of people who are in the US illegally will be able to access taxpayer-funded medical services, making longer lines, longer wait times, and less money available for medical care for American citizens, unless taxes are increased even more.

• Higher expenditures to provide medical services lead to rationing of medical care and treatment options to reduce costs. This is the mandated function of the Independent Payment Advisory Board: to cut costs by deciding which types of medical services to allow, or disallow. If you are denied treatment, you have no appeal of IPAB decisions; you are simply out of luck, and possibly out of life. This is a radical departure from the appeals process required for all private health insurance plans. Further, the IPAB is accountable only to President Obama, and cannot be overridden by Congress or the courts. IPAB is designed to have the final word on your health.

• Under current regulations, if medical care is denied by Medicare, then a patient is not allowed to pay cash to a Medicare-contracted physician or hospital or other health professional. Patients who need medical care that is denied under Medicare or Medicaid will find themselves having to either: 1) look for an independent physician or hospital (quite rare these days); or 2) go outside the USA for treatment.

• Expect a loss of medical privacy. Beginning in 2014, if you participate in government health insurance, your health records will be sent to a centralized federal database, with or without your consent.

The bottom line is that Americans are losing more and more of their medical freedom. By 2015, so many workers will be trapped in the government-run health insurance exchanges that there will be no going back to the private plans we have today.

At this rate, single-payer proponents will drive private insurance companies out of business, which has been their intention all along.

Americans need to become far more proactive about taking charge of their health. The healthier you are, the less vulnerable you are to our degrading healthcare system. It's also wise to consider proactively planning for medical treatment options outside the US.

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

California in the Same Boat as Detroit

California - Going the Way of Detroit Not necessarily going bankrupt,..not just yet, but the level of corruption and governmental misfeasance makes the formerly Great State of California a good bet to goes toes up soon. Read this article from The Blaze, entitled "Relentless CNN Reporter Grills Calif. Health Secretary Until She Responds to His Questions About Fraud Allegations",

Refusing to take no for an answer, CNN’s Drew Griffin tracked down California Health and Human Services Secretary Diana S. Dooley and pelted her with questions about fraud allegations within the state’s federally funded “MediCal” program. Though she initially refused to talk, the news crew’s persistence eventually led to at least a response — before she called security.

“The state of California takes fraud very seriously, and there are many investigations that are underway…all allegations are given full and fair consideration,” she finally answered, adding that she was late for a “meeting.”

However, when Griffin attempted to follow up with some additional questions, Dooley grew irritated and eventually called security.

Earlier in the video package, Griffin hunted down a number of rehab clinic owners and asked them questions about potential fraud related to phony billing to the “MediCal” program in California.

CNN’s investigation found that “MediCal” paid out $94 million in the past two years to drug clinics that have shown signs of deception or questionable billing practices.

Since Dooley’s confrontation with Dooley, the Department of Health and Human Services in California has suspended 38 clinics and are apparently investigating alleged cases of massive fraud, CNN’s Anderson Cooper reported on Friday.

Cooper also grilled the director of the department and pressed him to reveal what they have discovered in their years-long investigation into MediCal fraud. He got very few answers.

Monday, August 12, 2013

Nancy Pelosi - The Biggest Idiot in Congress

Some of the most outrageous lies that Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has uttered. Courtesy of the Independent Journal Review

1. No Spending Problem Here
"It is almost a false argument to say we have a spending problem. We have a budget deficit problem that we have to address."

2. Unemployment Creates Jobs
"[Unemployment benefits] creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name." Pelosi also said it has the "double benefit" of helping those who lost their jobs and acting as a "job creator" on the side.

3. Health Independence?
“This week marks one year since the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act. It captures the spirit of our founders. The spirit they wrote in the Declaration of Independence."

4. Obamacare Allows People to Quit Their Day-Jobs
"Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or, eh, a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance, or that people could start a business and be entrepreneurial and take risk but not [be] job-locked because a child has asthma or someone in the family is bipolar. You name it. Any condition is job-blocking."

5. Obamacare is Slashing Deficits
"Many of the initiatives that he passed are what are coming to bear now -- including the Affordable Care Act," Pelosi said. "The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down in both the public and private sector, and that is what is largely responsible for the deficit coming down." The Affordable Care Act is already three times original cost estimates at $2.7 trillion over ten years and will add $6.2 trillion to the long-term debt.

6. Government Fulfills Americans
“To some of us the role of government is about doing things for the American people to help them reach fulfillment."

7. Finding Out What's In Obamacare
"It’s going to be very, very exciting. But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it..."

8. Politics Getting in Obama's Way
"I don't think [Obama's] ever done anything for political reasons [...] This has been a president as bipartisan as any that I've seen."

Saturday, August 10, 2013

Don't Fund Obamacare

Please go to this website and sign the petition. Help Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY) to de-fund this stupid program.

Friday, August 9, 2013

Schooling Geneal Dempsey About Honor and Responsibility

Letter To General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), Posted by Harry Riley on June 29, 2013 in Support Our Troops and Veterans View Discussions

. June 30, 2013
General Martin Dempsey
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
9999 Joint Staff, Pentagon
Washington, DC 20318-9999

General Dempsey,

I am a combat veteran, a decade ahead of you. I am a Christian, a Constitutionalist and a Patriot. According to the DHS, I am a potential homegrown terrorist. You have had several letters from me already, here is yet another one.

When you and I were sworn in as commissioned officers, we took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. I do not recall an expiration date in that oath and although I have been out of the service since 1976, I still honor it. Somehow, you have risen to the highest level of authority and responsibility in the Armed Forces and that oath certainly still applies to you.

Your actions over the past few years shows little respect for that oath of office, for the men you "lead," for military readiness, or for the honor your position calls for. You have become a political puppet for one of the worst Commanders In Chief America has ever seen. You have become one of America's "domestic enemies." I am confident you don't follow email traffic and Internet blogs but if you did, you'd realize just how little respect veterans and active duty personnel have for you and those who carry your water bucket. Were it me, I'd be humiliated and embarrassed to the point of resignation.

I'll grant you that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is appointed by the President and serves at his discretion. I also know that any General worth his salt would stand up for the military he is supposed to represent and lead, or resign if he cannot do so honorably. To support Barack Obama's deliberate attempts to destroy our military by rolling over, playing dead, and claiming you were just following orders, is reprehensible. By doing so you dishonor the uniform, your position, all those who honorably serve this country, and the millions who have served before you, many of whom gave their all in defense of liberty. We deserve better. Barack Obama has become the laughing-stock of leaders of other nations around the world. They see his weakness in national defense, the weakness of those who surround and advise him, including you, and proceed to take advantage of that weakness to our detriment. The future does not look bright for our Republic. Thanks for your complicity.

General, having four stars does not authenticate respect. Respect must be earned, it's not automatic with promotions. If you think it is, you're a fool. You have lost respect. "Diversity" does not equate to readiness or esprit de corps and good morale of the unit. Taking away Chaplains' rights to honor their own faith in their duty to the troops destroys their mission, nullifies their role, weakens the force. Allowing women in combat roles, especially in the Rangers and SEALS, and I note that you are neither, is about as wise a decision as would be the elimination of the Infantry. No nation on earth, since the beginning of time, including the US, has sought to do that until the wisdom of Obama, Dempsey and Odierno arrived on the scene. "Professing to be wise, proven to be fools." And since the day of General George Washington, homosexuals were not allowed to openly serve side-by-side with straights, for good reason. But the Obama, Dempsey, Odierno wisdom trumps General Washington, 200 years of experience, and God's warnings to allow it in today's military. Pray tell, how does any of this improve readiness? How does political correctness improve readiness? For the politicians is all about getting votes. What does it do for Generals?

I note that in Secretary Hagel's recent remarks at the Pentagon Pride ceremony for gays and lesbians, he stated that openly acknowledging the gay community in the military "...makes our military and our nation stronger, much stronger." Care to offer any justification or proof of the Secretary's statement? Stronger in what way? He went on to tout how this now makes us "all created equal," and is "social justice in advancing equality and opportunity for all people." All tripe. But Hagel is a politician, in a suit. You're supposed to be a soldier, in a uniform. Using the military for social engineering is disruptive, expensive - in money and lives - and goes against all common sense, not to mention 200+ years of experience. The consequences of this stupidity will be your legacy, not any good you may have done prior to your Chairmanship.

You have just been reappointed as Chairman. My recommendation is that you decline. Retire from the military, go into hiding somewhere, and allow a more able person, one who will honor his oath of office, to assume the role. If Obama refuses to appoint someone like that, looking for another political puppet instead, America, specifically veterans, will deal with Obama. Should you accept Obama's offer to continue the destructive puppet role of the last few years, you will add insult to injury and further weaken our military. Veterans will petition their Senators to NOT confirm your reappointment. We have ample evidence that better options are available.

Larry W. Reams

Secretary Chuck Hagel
General Ray Odierno
Senator John Cornyn
Senator Ted Cruz
Various veteran groups

Thursday, August 8, 2013

More John McCain Jackassery

ABC published an article with McCain titled "The ‘Straight Talk Express’ is back: McCain on his fears about the future of the GOP" - go to this link to listen to McCain, who sounds reasonable until you consider the fact that when a person rolls over (on your principles) you pick up all sorts of debris. First McCain lauds platitudes on Hillary Clinton who is partly responsible in the deaths of Americans in Benghazi, and now he' says good things about Chuck Schumer!! Unbelievable.

Sen. John McCain has a strong warning for Republicans: Falter on immigration reform and the party will lose in 2016.

“If we fail on immigration reform, it won't matter who our nominee is because of the polarization of the Hispanic vote,” McCain, R-Ariz., tells “The Fine Print.” “Now that's not why I'm for immigration reform but it certainly is one of the consequences of a failure.”

McCain, who has simultaneously emerged as a friend to the White House and a critic of some of the new GOP firebrands on Capitol Hill, says he’s hopeful that the August congressional recess will bring lawmakers back to Washington “with at least a willingness to move forward” on a course to overhaul the nation's immigration system.

“Members are back interacting with their constituents,” McCain says of the upcoming recess. “And we see a coalition of Evangelicals, of the Catholic Church, of business, of labor, of small business, high tech, across the board, support the likes of which we, I've never seen for one specific part of legislation.”

As for Republican newcomers, such as Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Rand Paul, R-Ky., who have been bucking establishment Republican positions on immigration and other issues, McCain advises that they read up on their history.

“The people who are pushing this Obamacare vs. government shutdown, none of them that I know were here the last time we saw that movie,” he says.

While freshman senators do bring a positive “infusion” of new ideas, he says, it’s also important to maintain the Senate’s “corporate memory.”

Asked about their 2016 presidential aspirations, McCain isn't very charitable, calling them only "viable."

On the topic of his partnership with Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, a key Democratic leader, McCain laughed off the criticism voiced by some Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

“Sen. Schumer is a person who is as good as his word,” McCain says. “His word is good, and he reminds me, in a way, of the work that I used to do with Ted Kennedy.”

McCain says his bipartisan partnership with Schumer remains strong and has been solidified through months of negotiations on tough issues like immigration reform, potential filibusters and the fiscal cliff.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Obama Can't tell the Truth

This is by Terry Anderson, a black Los Angeles Talk Radio Host who went down a list of Obama mistruths, spins and complete lies.

1.) Selma March Got Me Born - NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965. (Google 'Obama Selma ' for his full March 4, 2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.) ! !

2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.

3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.

4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT EXACTLY; your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your half-brother, Abongo Obama, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out the following link for verification of that....and for more.

Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and tried to get Sharia Muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the elections, his followers have burned Christians' homes and then burned men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took shelter... Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to know the truth.

5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - NOT EXACTLY, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.

6.) My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.

Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. He is the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya , his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro). Go to: .an,_only_6.25%25_African

7.) I Never Practiced Islam - NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run for office.

4-3-08 Article 'Obama was 'quite religious in Islam'';

8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - NOT EXACTLY, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book).

February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times: Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it'll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as 'one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.' This is just one example of what Pamela is talking about when she says 'Obama's narrative is being altered, enhanced and manipulated to whitewash troubling facts.'

9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - NOT EXACTLY, not one teacher says you could speak the language.

10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia , I Have More Foreign Experience – NOT EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak the language. What did you learn except how to study the Koran and watch cartoons?

11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - NOT EXACTLY, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise); you have never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest allies.

12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - NOT EXACTLY, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine.

13.) An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - NOT EXACTLY, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.

14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - NOT EXACTLY, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.

15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - NOT EXACTLY, despite saying, live on TV, which you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.

16.) Voting 'Present' is Common In Illinois Senate - NOT EXACTLY, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.

17.) Oops, I Miss-voted - NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by church groups and Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.

18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - NOT EXACTLY; you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - NOT EXACTLY, you didn't write it, introduce it, change it or create it.

21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - NOT EXACTLY, it took just 14 days from start to finish.

22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - NOT EXACTLY, your bill was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.

23.) I Have Released My State Records - NOT EXACTLY, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.

24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - NOT EXACTLY, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your haste to pat yourself on your back.

25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - NOT EXACTLY, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.

26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - NOT EXACTLY, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.

27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - NOT EXACTLY, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.

28.) No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA - NOT EXACTLY, the Canadian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them.

29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - NOT EXACTLY, you missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the destruction off Israel.

30.) I Want All Votes To Count - NOT EXACTLY; you said let the delegates decide.

31.) I Want Americans To Decide - NOT EXACTLY, you prefer caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.

32.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - NOT EXACTLY, you passed 26, most of which you didn't write yourself.

33.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - NOT EXACTLY, you used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.

34.) I Don't Take PAC Money - NOT EXACTLY, you take loads of it.

35.) I don't Have Lobbyists - NOT EXACTLY, you have over 47 lobbyists, and counting.

36.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - NOT EXACTLY, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.

37.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - NOT EXACTLY, you weren't in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time.

38.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - NOT EXACTLY, your plan leaves us all to pay for the 15,000,000 who don't have to buy it.

39.) My uncle liberated Auschwitz concentration camp - NOT EXACTLY, your mother had no brothers and the Russian army did the liberating.

So, who EXACTLY is this Obama guy and what is he trying to sell us?! And there are some people out there that still trust Obama and think he wants the best for this country LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

No NSA Spying on Mosques?

No NSA Spying on Mosques? Surveillance off limits on Muslims? FBI banned from investigating radical jihadists?

Now this makes perfect sense doesn’t it? Obama’s NSA snooping exempts one part of America from their spying. Muslim mosques. You couldn’t make this crap up if you tried. Mosques being off limits by the NSA isn’t something that was started in the Bush administration either. Exempting Mosques from the NSA began in October 2011 and they are off-limits to FBI agents. Kind of defeats the purpose of ‘protecting America’ by snooping when 95% of terrorism in this country is from Muslims. But the President just won't allow it. Well, what the hell do we expect from a President who brought Muslim Brotherhood terrorists into the White House,...the People's House, for a chat?

Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee. Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret. We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel’s formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.

The above comentary came from

Monday, August 5, 2013

Wasserman Schutz - One Way Player

WH ‘absolutely outraged’ Wasserman Schultz using DNC for own ambitions c-for-own-ambitions-80924

U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz hasn’t spent the last 18 months as the head of the Democratic National Committee just for the good of the Party. It appears she plans to use the experience, and the Rolodex, for her own ambitions – and not everyone is happy about it.

The congresswoman will use the DNC’s donor network to expand her political operation, so she can “double” the money she gives to Democrats in the House, Senate and state capitals around the country, according to Politico.

While House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has been the top House Democratic fundraiser, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer is perceived as the heir apparent when she steps aside. But Wasserman Schultz’s political team explicitly said her goal this cycle is to match Hoyer’s contributions to candidates — $2.5 million —positioning her to be a player.

“I don’t really do anything halfway,” Wasserman Schultz told Politico in an interview at DNC headquarters. “We thought with the higher profile I have at the DNC, and the donor relationships I’ve been able to build — and thankfully, a lot of people who want to help me be successful, because we share the same goals. We kind of put the leadership PAC on steroids. That’s the best way to describe it.”

Wasserman Schultz did not give specifics about her plans, and wouldn’t rule out running for leadership, governor or senator.

“So far, the people of the 23rd Congressional District still continue to want me to represent them, and I don’t have any immediate plans to run for statewide office,” she told Politico. “But I can’t tell you I would never run for statewide office.”

But not everyone is happy about her ambition, and one senior Democratic source said the White House was “absolutely outraged” by Wasserman Schultz’s comments in Politico, according to BuzzFeed.

“This is unbelievable. So much for supporting the president or electing Democrats,” a top Democratic political adviser told BuzzFeed. “She was honest that this is about her.”

A DNC official defended Wasserman Schultz, referring to her travel schedule and plans to stump for Democratic candidates like Terry McAuliffe in Virginia, as proof she is still focused on the national scene.

Assault on the First Amendment

Great writeup on yet another assault on the Constitution and our God given rights which are only verified by the Constitution. Thanks to Lee Camp and the Huffington Post for their article titled: Anti-Protest Law Passes Nearly Unanimously And Is Signed By The President.

So I have some great news folks! The Republicans and the Democrats in Congress and the White House FINALLY came together and agreed on something. This is HUGE. These guys disagree on EVERYTHING! Getting them to see eye-to-eye is like getting the Jews and the Palestinians to do a trust fall together. Or getting Eskimos and polar bears to play Jenga.

I'm referring to the bill H.R. 347 that was signed by President Obama the other day, passed unanimously in the Senate, and 388-3 in the House. That's nearly EVERY SINGLE lawmaker. The last time they agreed that closely on something, it was a bill raising monthly Congressional pay to include a box of Ding Dongs, two erotic cakes featuring Bonanza star Pernell Roberts, and a gentle yet inquisitive prostate exam every Tuesday.

What did this magical universally-loved bill say? Well some are calling it the anti-Occupy law and it allows the government to bring charges against Americans involved in many kinds of political protest at any location the secret service, quote, "is or will be temporarily visiting." So basically if the government wants to shut down a protest, they just send a secret service officer down there to scratch his balls, and then they can start putting people in jail for a year or more.

This is all lovely except for that bitchy bothersome document, the Constitution. I believe somewhere in the back it says, "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . or the right of the people peaceably to assemble." Aw shit! That musta sucked when Congress found that out! To get that close to passing it and then shot down? It musta been like getting hired to rub baby oil on the contestants of Miss Universe before the bathing suit portion of the competition and then losing your hands in a freak exploding cell phone accident! So when Congress heard about that first amendment they musta been like, "God damnit! That really f**ks up all our plans. That f**king line in the Constitution says not to do EXACTLY what we just did." That's what they must've said, right? ... They didn't just pass it anyway ... Right?

But the bill doesn't stop there. I mean, when you have the entirety of Congress with the exception of Ron Paul agreeing on something, why not swing for the fences? The bill also says it could be a federal crime to protest near an event of, quote, "national significance." Well, that's not vague at all. So you could be convicted of a federal crime and locked away for a year or more for the following things:

1) Marching outside the Democratic or Republican National Conventions

2) Yelling "C**k-face corporate whore" outside a barber shop where Mitt Romney is getting his ear hair trimmed.

3) Marching in front of the entrance of the New York Stock Exchange.

4) Sprinkling magic homosexual glitter on Rick Santorum, or even anyone near Rick Santorum, or even just making fun of his stupid sweater vest!

5) Going to the gates of the White House and demanding the President read the Constitution. ...You know, if he gets a chance.

Well, Congress gets to stomp on the Bill of Rights, I want to do it too. I want to bring back cruel and unusual punishment, and then we could demand that every man or woman who voted for the Anti-Protest Law or signed it from the Oval Office be tied up in the town square naked for a week while everyone gets to throw fire ants and bumble bees at their naughty parts. Deal??

Sunday, August 4, 2013

Chicago About to Blow Up

This came to me in an e-mail. While I would understand if someone thought the following piece had a racist bent, but there is no denying the fact that many liberal groups attempt to diversify the racial makeup of organizations as a primary goal without considering the effectiveness or mission of that organization. I have always thought that the best person for a particular position should be chosen, whether that person is male or female, black, white, orange, pink or whatever color of that person's skin. There are disavantages for minority groups as far as primary educational opportunities, but quotas on race won't fix that. I am an advocate of economic conditions replacing racial quotas. This will remove the status or stigma that minority or racial makeup automatically placing you at a disavantage. Anyway, the following letter from a retired cop laments the fact the political correctness and a governmental heavy hand has been and is attempting to correct "social injustice" to the detriment of all.

TO: Anyone who will listen
FROM: A retired old cop

Chicago, formerly America's Second City a once proud bastion of American capitalism. Now, after years of liberal Democrat rule, we have a city in rapid decline, soon to enter into bankruptcy. Chicago will become Detroit west.

Now some home truths from a former Chicago cop.

That was the score 4th of July (2013) weekend in Chicago. 86 shot (actually puncture wounds) 12 dead, Chicago stopped counting graze wounds and only counts actual bullet holes now, you don't count if you get your nose or ear shot off. Chicago is also a city three quarters of which is unsafe to walk in. The thug and gang infested South, West and East sides are expanding like a cancer, while the few remaining safe neighborhoods are shrinking annually due, largely in part, to scattered site housing.

This is the crowning achievement of our politicians and the social engineers, who long ago decided that big, bad, brutish policemen were no longer needed. So, it came to pass that, in the '70s, they started allowing females onto the department. That did away with height and strength requirements. They then decided that the correct rainbow of colors was needed. To accomplish this, they lowered the aptitude tests and created quotas. That did away with intelligence and integrity requirements. Of course, gays could not be excluded, either. The ideal candidate for promotion became a black transvestite with a Spanish surname.

Our weapons were next on their agenda. Blackjacks, sap gloves and the like were banned. Our shotguns were moved from the front seat to the trunk, from the trunk to the radio room and, from there, just disappeared. New ammunition was issued, which was so inadequate it would ricochet off of car windshields. And God help you if you hit someone with your flashlight.

Finally, the politicians got rid of the real Policemen. The old dinosaurs were lured into early retirements and replaced with internal affairs weenies and gays with a decent sprinkling of color. The brutish "Old Clancy" stereotype was laid to rest and replaced by "Officers Ken and Barbie." The end result is a department that is befuddled, cow towed, hamstrung, weak and totally not feared by the thugs and gang bangers, but oh so politically correct.

The City has succeeded in ridding itself of the brutish dinosaur cops of old and has replaced them with little girls and college yuppies who wouldn't know a bad guy if he shit in their face. They have invented new politically correct terms like Wilding and Flash Mobs to describe black Mob Violence, which is rapidly spreading into the once "Safe Zones" of Michigan Avenue, River North and Wrigleyville.

After you have been shot, raped or robbed, Officers Ken and Barbie will arrive and write a most excellent report with perfect grammar and punctuation, which will be fed into a state of the art computer, which will crunch and manipulate the numbers precisely. Me, I long for the old days when Clancy crunched and manipulated the thugs before I became the next victim.

All of this in the most corrupt city, most corrupt county, most corrupt state in the country, whose political leaders zealously and vehemently fight to impose the most restrictive gun control legislation in the nation. If you believe Officers Ken and Barbie are going to protect you and yours, you had better get your head out of your butt and smell the coffee. Old Clancy is retired. It's now up to you to protect yourself.

Rejoice, oh liberals. You have gotten exactly what you wanted. Hope you enjoy it! Sincerely, a retired "old-school" Chicago cop

Saturday, August 3, 2013

McCain Has Lost His Mind

McCain, as in John McCain the Senator, allegedy a Republican, from Arizona, has lost his mind. And we almost elected this asshat as president. He still would have been a better choice than Obama, but at least Obama serves a purpose, and that is to demonstrate liberal policies, large government and higher taxes just don't work.

McCain: Voting for Hillary a “Tough Choice”, She’s a “Rock Star" - from Capitalism Institute.

This man isn’t conservative, libertarian, or anything in between. He doesn’t believe in the basic idea of liberty, small government, or a defense-oriented foreign policy. He’s in the wrong party. It’s time to just flat-out say it. In a lengthy and comprehensive interview with the far-left publication, John McCain says that Hillary is a “rock star”, that she did a great job during Benghazi and the other conflicts, that Obama has “grown in office”, and that if Rand Paul runs against Hillary Clinton, it’ll be a “tough choice” who to vote for. That some continue to defend John McCain no longer makes sense. The man is seriously admitting that whether he would ever vote for Hillary Clinton is a tough choice. It’s probably impossible to make a bigger “RINO” statement than that. Quotes From the Interview Let’s look at the relevant quotes from the interview. “IC” stands for Isaac Chotiner, the interviewer. JC stands for John McCain. Here are the excerpts. IC: When Hillary Clinton versus Rand Paul occurs in 2016, I guess you are going to have to decide who to vote for, huh? JM: It’s gonna be a tough choice [laughs]. Note that a big part of what Obama has “learned” recently is “reaching out” to McCain and Graham. This included wining and dining them while Rand Paul was filibustering Obama. The sheer honesty of being a turncoat is pretty fascinating. He should go the next step and switch parties. Do you think Obama has grown in office since 2009? JM: Oh yeah. No doubt. IC: How so? JM: He had just won a huge victory in 2009, had overwhelming majorities, he could pass whatever he wanted. That breeds a certain degree of confidence, if not—the word isn’t cocky, it isn’t arrogant—a certain self-assuredness that you don’t have to deal with the minority. I think the big mistake was doing Obamacare when he should have addressed the debt. He had the votes to do it then. That is for historians to decide. He was confident and had reason to be. Here is a young man who, six or seven years before, was a state legislator and had lost a primary for a House seat. I think he has grown to appreciate bipartisanship. He is looking at his legacy. I know that for a fact and it is entirely appropriate. One is, close Guantánamo. It is an unfulfilled commitment. Outreach to me and Lindsey. So yeah, I think he has learned a lot.

Next up, McCain says something so disturbing, it made me wince. Here it is: IC: Given that you think things are out of control, what do you make of Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state? JM: I think she did a fine job. She’s a rock star. She has, maybe not glamour, but certainly the aura of someone widely regarded throughout the world. Note that this is AFTER Benghazi. This is AFTER the cover ups and the lies. He thinks she’s a “rock star” who did a “fine job”. I would say it’s “unbelievable”, but we’ve seen this kind of behavior from him before. He attacked Ted Cruz and Rand Paul as “wacko birds”. He dined with Obama while Rand and others were filibustering him. He says the Democrats are a “fine party”. He says he often has “more in common” with Obama on foreign policy. He says he’s bringing gun control “back”. We shouldn’t tolerate such pro-Hillary or pro-Obama behavior in the GOP. If the GOP begins to stand for Hillary and Obama, what’s even the point? John McCain must go.

Friday, August 2, 2013

Democrat Scandals That Aren't So 'Phony'

Article by Emily Hulsey appearing on the Independent Journal Review

During his economic address Wednesday, President Obama denounced the recent fixation on ‘phony scandals‘, saying that we need to refocus on things that matter, like the economy. However, a large number of recent political scandals aren’t phony; they’re serious breaches of the public’s trust, and ignoring them won’t make them go away.

Bob Filner
San Diego Mayor
Bob Filner refuses to resign, but he may be entering therapy in response to a recent onslaught of sexual harassment allegations.

Anthony Weiner
Former Congressman and current New York mayoral candidate
Anthony Weiner has been involved in numerous sex scandals, leading voters to question his morals and integrity.

DOJ Record Harvesting
Attorney General Eric Holder had little to say when it was revealed that the Department of Justice harvested journalists' phone records in the search for possible leakers.

Michael Brown
Former DC councilman
Michael Brown recently plead guilty to federal bribery charges after he was caught in an undercover sting operation.

IRS Scandal
The IRS's targeting of conservative groups has spawned a suspension, a resignation, and a lot more questions.

Jesse Jackson, Jr.
aka Ass Hat Junior
The son of Jesse Jackson was just sent to prison for using campaign funds for personal matters.

Good article by Ms Hulsey, however she forgot a couple scandals,............but what's a scandal or two to this administration? - the most scandalous administration in the history of this country?

Fast and Furious
Where the Department of Justice sold over 2,000 assault weapons to the Sinaloan Cartel resulting in not only the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, but a thousands of Mexican citizens caught in the Cartel wars in Mexico.

Private Funding of Obamacare
Government asking for "donations" to fund Obamacare HHS Sectretary Silly Kathleen Sebelius was caught in an illegal move asking for drugs and medical companies to donate to fund Obamacare. That's like asking death row inamtes to buy their own lethal injection drugs.

Detroit Bankruptcy
Following 51 years of total democratic control, Detroit is going under. 

Chicago Death Zone
Nobody is talking about the death toll of blacks in Chicago.  While the race hustlers like Jesse Jackson Sr, Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, Eric Holder only talk about Treyvon Martin being "gunned down", black youth continue to be killed in Chicago is numbers that rival violence in the Middle East.

But the bigger question is why or how Obama gets on television and lies to the American people that these are "fake" scandals? The why is that a large percentage of the people, uneducated and driven only by their entiltist and hating America agenda will agree with him without any critical thinking. The how is that a product of Obama's unbringing and character.

Thursday, August 1, 2013

MSNBC's Melissa Harris Perry - An Extreme Ass Hat

MSNBC host says newborn infants don't count as 'alive' unless parents decide they do; infanticide is the new abortion. Article from by Mike Adams, Editor of

Today Natural News denounces Melissa Harris-Perry, the latest talking head "death worshipper" to publicly imply that she supports the murder of living, breathing newborn children. According to Harris-Perry, life begins when the parents feel like life begins. And together with some twisted new "ethics" arguments from the radical left, this can include months or years after a child is born.

That's why I need to premise this article with a disclaimer: This article is not about abortion. It's about the murder of children after they are born. Because once a child is born alive, terminating that life is no longer a "choice" … it's murder by every legal and moral standard. Because while abortion friends and foes can argue about when life begins in the womb, no one disagrees that a child born alive is, well, ALIVE… do they?

Indeed, they do. MSNBC talking head Melissa Harris-Perry insists that life only begins when the parents have a "feeling" that it begins. "When does life begin? I submit the answer depends an awful lot on the feeling of the parents. A powerful feeling -- but not science," Harris-Perry said to nationwide astonishment on her July 21 MSNBC show.

And in one stroke, she simultaneously condones the murder of newborn infants (i.e. "post-birth abortion") while attacking the science of biology which unambiguously states that a living, breathing infant with a heartbeat and brain function is alive, not dead.

But don't tell that to the radical abortion whackos. Far beyond arguing for the "right" to abort a baby in the first or second trimester, many abortion advocates who run in the same circles as Melissa Harris-Perry are now publicly arguing that it is okay for parents to

It was also called a "fourth trimester abortion" by a clever pollster who recently took to the streets of George Mason University to find out if summertime college students would sign a petition legalizing fourth-trimester abortions. Nearly all who were asked to sign the petition did so! One of the college students even asked whether the procedure would "cause harm to the child."

"Well the child wouldn't be there anymore," responded the pollster, after which the college student then proceeded to sign the petition.

Murdering live babies under the label of "abortion"

Let's be clear about where all this is headed. This is not about arguing over a woman's right to have a first- or second-trimester abortion. This isn't even a debate about a third-trimester abortion, the kind of abortion that was recently outlawed in Texas, much to the despair of late-term abortion advocates across the country, some of whom actually chanted "Hail Satan" in unison at the Austin abortion rally.

This is really about the zealous desire of the radical left to legalize the "aborting" of babies after they are born alive so that parents can have the legal right to kill living babies they suddenly decide they don't want to raise.

Getting back to Harris-Perry, according to her radical brand of death culture ideology, a parent can "decide" that a baby born alive isn't really alive yet. That parent can wait to see whether the baby is well-behaved, or cute, or has the right skin color, or whatever, before deciding whether to keep it or kill it. If such an ideology were fronted by someone like George Bush, it would be wildly derided as barbaric and anti-human, but because the idea of murdering newborn babies is being pushed by liberals, it is met with silence instead of outrage.

"When a pregnancy is wanted . . . It is easy to think of the bump as a baby," says Melissa Harris-Perry, implying that when a pregnancy is not wanted, that bump isn't a baby at all. Somehow it's just a mass of dead tissue that you can dispose of at will. The fact that the "bump" results in a live childbirth is never admitted by people like Harris-Perry. The baby isn't "alive" until you decide it is!

Recently, two black parents were shocked to find that the woman gave birth to a white baby. According to Melissa Harris-Perry, these two black parents can now "decide" their white baby isn't alive at all and therefore commit infanticide that's rephrased as a "post-birth abortion."

This is the position embraced by the radical left: babies are not humans, and it is okay to murder them even up to age three.

Newborn babies have no "moral right to life"

A study published in the Journal of Medical Ethics argues that newborn babies have no "moral right to life," and are thus not actually "persons." Alberto Giubilini, from The University of Milan, and Francesca Minerva, a post-doctoral fellow at The University of Melbourne's Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, are heroes of the radical left. They argue that infanticide should be legal but renamed "post-birth abortion."

They insist that newborn babies have no right to life and that parents can simply "decide" to kill their children for all sorts of reasons, including feeling like the child will be too expensive to raise, or suddenly discovering the fact that newborn babies cry a lot.

"Rather than being actual persons, newborns were potential persons," write the study authors. They don't really count as human beings until the parents decide they do.

This appears to be the same argument being made by MSNBC's Melissa Harris-Perry, who expressed extreme outrage over the murder of Trayvon Martin but seems to openly embrace the murder of countless black infants who are born alive and healthy but are "unwanted" by their parents. Life begins based "on the feeling of the parents," she submits. So it's utterly unscientific and subject to (liberal) interpretation, which in this case seems to favor infanticide and even eugenics. (By far most aborted babies in America are Black and Hispanic. If post-birth abortion is openly embraced, most of the murdered infants will also be Black and Hispanic.)

And so the violent contradiction of radical leftist ideology is exposed in the raw: Liberals claim to support "equality" but then they consider living babies to be "non-persons." Liberals claim to support racial minorities, yet they endorse and even encourage the murder of the young babies of their own minority race. Liberals claim that all life is sacred, but their glaring exception is the life of a newborn child, which should be the most sacred of all but is instead considered worthless.

When it comes to taking a life, pro-abortion liberals are all for it. But when it comes to defending your life with a legal firearm, liberals are aggressively opposed to it.

So let me get this straight: Murder is okay but self defense is evil?

Or better yet, if Trayvon Martin had been an "unwanted" newborn just six months old, would his murder have been celebrated by the left instead of mourned? Help me figure this out, please, because I'm trying to understand at what age, exactly, the murder of a young black baby invokes racially-charged marches across the nation vs. receiving applause from people like Melissa Harris-Perry. Apparently if Trayvon Martin had been murdered by his own parents 16 years earlier, that would have been perfectly acceptable to these people.

Melissa Harris-Perry is a modern-day holocaust denier

At the risk of being accused of making sense, let me state the obvious here: People like Melissa Harris-Perry are the new holocaust deniers. They are anti-human agenda pushers who literally inspire others to murder their own children.

I don't know about you, but I cannot accept, as a spiritual human being and a responsible member of society, the legalization of the murder of babies who are born alive and breathing. Yet that is precisely what the radical left is pushing for: the "right" to murder their own children up to the age of three. (Oh yeah, they're also pushing for the "right" to kill elderly people, but that's another article altogether.)

Such an agenda is despicable, if not downright demonic. And the fact that people like Harris-Perry spew this death cult violence on MSNBC -- the propaganda branch of the White house -- only further proves that MSNBC has lost all credibility and is now being run as a Hitler-style holocaust support network that tolerates hosts who effectively endorse the mass murder of babies all across America.

There is evil in this nation, and wicked women like Harris-Perry are steeped in it. Mainstream media networks like MSNBC thrive on it, and the destructive forces that currently occupy the White House gain power from it. Everywhere you turn, there are efforts under way to sow racial hatred, murder innocent babies, poison the food supply, chemically lobotomize children with vaccines and enslave the masses medically and economically.

I hereby denounce this wickedness, on the record, as a statement of principle for the world to witness. I will forever oppose these merchants of death and their sick, demented eugenics schemes. I will fight to protect the lives of the innocent for as long as I am alive, even if those innocent lives include two-day-old black babies who have just been brought into this world through the miracle of gestation and childbirth.

I call for all Natural News readers and supporters to take steps each and every day to resist evil and overcome the forces of death and destruction that now dominate our society through witch-hearted minions like Melissa Harris-Perry, a traitor to humanity and an endorser of the murder of children.

This woman should be immediately blackballed by the entire media and yanked off the air to return to her own little world of tampon earrings and dead newborns. Or maybe she will murder her own baby in the near future and feature it on the set of MSNBC in a special celebration broadcast complete with pentagrams etched on the desk and a chorus of hooded Satan worshippers drinking the blood of the dead fetus while Melissa Harris-Perry reads the names of sponsors. Sadly, it would probably get record ratings and be heralded by the death culture media as "pioneering television." And it would most certainly be cheered by the radical left as a "choice."

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

George H.W. Bush Shaves Head in Solidarity with Cancer Stricken Child

Article by Oliver Knox, demonstrating why former President George Bush, the senior, is much beloved by the people, especially his Secret Service detail. What a cool President!!

What did you expect from a guy who didn't hesitate to celebrate his 85th birthday with a parachute jump?

Former President George H.W. Bush shaved his head this week in solidarity with the leukemia-stricken 2-year-old son of a member of his security detail. Little Patrick — seen in one of the pictures provided by Bush's office clutching toy cars as he sits on the smiling former commander in chief's lap — started losing his hair because of his cancer treatment.

Bush, 89, shaved his head after learning that many members of his security detail had done so to support Patrick and his father, Jon (the family asked to withhold their last name). Security detail members also created a website,, to help defray medical costs. They also raised funds with a 50-mile motorcycle ride through Maine, followed by a lunch and silent auction.

“Once President and Mrs. Bush learned of this 'Patrick's Pals' effort, they made a donation and President Bush volunteered to shave his head as well,” the former president’s office said in a statement. “The Bushes lost their second child, Robin, to leukemia 60 years ago this October at the age of four.”

The photographs were taken July 24 at the Bush's Kennebunkport, Maine, family compound, known as Walker's Point.

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Sent to me through the Patriot net.

NONE from Wyoming or Texas!! Any from your state??? Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

The Statement of Purpose from the bill reads To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S., and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo.

Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.

Here are the 46 senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.  We call this the "List of Ass Hats"

Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Notice that these are all Democrats, including the two Independents who thinly disguise their liberal, anti-constitutionalists views with an "I" as opposed to a "D" next to their name.

People this needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take our guns. They need to lose the next election. We have been betrayed. 46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N.

Pass this on to ALL of your contacts far and wide!!! These people need to be Immediately removed from office as soon as possible!!!!!! Tarring and feathering would also be nice!!!

Monday, July 29, 2013

Your Country Needs You - Get Politically Active

Great advice from Mychal Massie of the Daily Rant

Basic Things We Can Do

People ask me every day what they can do to make a difference. So I’m listing, in no particular, order basic things that every person can do and that will begin to make a difference.

1. Write letters to the editor of your local newspapers. If your local paper refuses to print your letters call the managing editor and demand an explanation.

2. Research the information that is being reported in your local newspapers. The Bradford newspaper is the poster child for the complete absence of credibility in reporting and on its editorial page. Managing editor Mark Ivancic of The Bradford Era was caught red-handed on more than one occasion, changing copyrighted, syndicated articles to intentionally make them read counter to the authors’ intent, and that includes my work. He may be one of the most contemptible managing editors, but he is by no means alone in said practice.

3. If your newspapers do not carry conservative opinion-editorial writers on a weekly basis end your subscriptions and/or stop purchasing them from vendors. Tell the editors why you are canceling your subscription. Why pay for something that is not meeting your expectations? Encourage five of your friends to do same, and have them encourage five of their friends, and so on.

4. Write reasoned, respectful letters to area businesses that advertise in your local newspapers. Clearly state your discontent with them advertising in a local newspaper that is deeply slanted to the left and/or refuses to carry conservative opinion-editorial commentaries and that pushes opinions contrary to your beliefs. And one that engages in biased reporting — site examples.

5. Make it a point to call in to local talk-radio programming and voice your concerns and share cogent, reasoned thoughts. Calling and insisting that Obama is bringing Russian troops to America to help put us in FEMA camps is not reasoned nor cogent. But calling and discussing Benghazi is.

6. Send handwritten letters to your Congressman and Senators. Without using profanities and threats, make your positions clearly known. For approximately one dollar, you can send two letters a month to your representatives. Call their local offices and congressional offices weekly. Let them know when you disapprove and when you approve. When elected officials start receiving several bags of mail daily all condemning the same thing it will get their attention. I can tell you that while emails are okay, 99 percent of elected representatives do not read them. The email comes in, and an automated letter goes out. Why do you think you receive a praise report from your representative when you write addressing a totally different subject? Snail-mail works.

7. Keep in mind that the elected are not our friends — they are our employees. They either represent us and our interests or we replace them. Rewarding failed representatives like Pat Toomey, R-PA and Marco Rubio, R-FL with reelection simply reinforces to them that they can do what they want and remain in office. John Boehner, John McCain, Eric Cantor, Lindsey Graham, et al. have done nothing to serve our interests, and still they are rewarded with reelection over and over. How does rewarding failure incentivize the elected to change?

8. Stop supporting candidates Republican hierarchy tells us we must elect to prevent a liberal from winning. The only difference between a liberal and a moderate is the spelling. We are conservatives not liberals and not moderates. We should not waste a nano second considering support for someone who isn’t in lockstep with our convictions and concerns.

9. Do not be afraid not to vote, and do not send money to the Republican National Committee or Karl Rove’s 527. They do not use that money to support the candidates we want supported. Voting for the lesser of two evils has never given us candidates we can rely on. Quite the opposite. Every successful person, every successful sports team, every successful entrepreneur understands that you cannot be afraid to lose if you expect to win. I’ve said it before, Obama is not our enemy: we are own enemies because we bought the bags of manure Rove, Reince Preibus, et al. were peddling per how great Mitt Romney would be. We absolved ourselves by saying things like “Herman Cain was my first choice but…” It is imperative to remember we elect candidates; contrary to political mythology, our votes still count.

10. Become militant. Refuse to be bullied and refuse to comply to bastardizations of legislation designed to deprive us of our rights. For example, how many people can our government punish if the 61 percent of Americans opposed to Obamacare refused to comply with it?

11. Organize protests around television networks and their local affiliates in your towns. Why at the television stations? Because it is impossible for you to be ignored when you are in front of their steps.

12. Stop believing internet myths that are circulated. Aliens didn’t crash at Roswell, and Obama isn’t going to appoint himself supreme leader and refuse to leave office.

13. Attend your local municipality meetings. They meet monthly and go mostly unattended. It is our job to do the little things that make a difference before we run out and attempt to do some grandiose effort.

14. Print out posters condemning a particular political action and post them around town. If they work for lost dogs and yard sales why not for our causes?

15. Those with the means, spend money helping those of us who are engaged and are not simply tools for those in office who are already not paying attention to the will of the people.

16. And finally, asking God to save the nation while we continue to place our hopes in the same failed politicians is idiotic. Our first step should be to seek the Lord for ourselves and make sure our lives are right with God. When that happens the 15 things listed above will fall in place without a lot of effort.

This is by no means an exhaustive list. It is a list for those who want to be involved and do not know how to make that happen. These seemingly insignificant things we can do will encourage and empower us to do greater things. My single most important question is, what has doing things the way they have been done the last years done for you and me? If your answer is nothing, then isn’t it time we tried something different? Can it hurt?

If you are not familar with Mychal Massie - Mychal S. Massie is the former National Chairman of the conservative black think tank, Project 21-The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives; and a member of its’ parent think tank, the National Center for Public Policy Research. In his official capacity with this free market public policy think tank he has spoken at the U.S. Capitol, CPAC, participated in numerous press conferences on Capitol Hill, the National Press Club and has testified concerning property rights pursuant to the “Endangered Species Act” before the Chairman of the House Committee on Resources. He has been a keynote speaker at colleges and universities nationwide, at Tea Party Rallies, at rallies supporting our troops and conservative presidents; and rally’s supporting conservative causes across the country. He is an unapologetic supporter of our right to own and carry firearms.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Newt on Detroit

The final collapse of Detroit should lead to thorough congressional investigations into the pathology that killed a great American city. You might think "killed" is too strong a term, but consider these facts about what was once our fourth largest city with the highest per capita income of any city in America.
The recent bankruptcy in Detroit is a harbinger of the steady decay of government competence in America. To have the city with the highest per capita income in America in 1950 collapse economically, culturally and in the basic aspects of civilization is horrifying. To have a city of 1,400,000 people decline to fewer than 700,000 is astonishing. With the collapse in population there are 78,000 empty houses. Some can be bought for $1 (yes, it's true) and no one will buy them.
The number of Detroit manufacturing jobs dropped from 296,000 to 27,000.
No one will create new jobs in the city because it has become a public safety and public services wasteland. In some ways it resembles the post-devastation world of the movie Mad Max.
Imagine a world in which 40% of the traffic lights don't work. Almost one third of the ambulances don't work. Of the ambulances that have been repaired some have over 250,000 miles on them. In some dangerous neighborhoods ambulances will not go without police. On average it takes the police nearly an hour to show up when called. Faced with this public safety crisis, the politicians cut the police force by 40% and closed most police stations to the public 16 hours a day.
As the politicians have eliminated public safety personnel and budgets, crime has soared. You are 11 times more likely to be killed in Detroit than in New York. You are 5 times more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than the national average. The police solve fewer than 10% of the crimes committed in Detroit. (You thought the reference to Mad Max was exaggerated?)
Mark Steyn has a devastating analysis of the collapse of Detroit and its wider implications. He writes:
"The tunnel from Windsor, Ontario, to Detroit, Michigan, is now a border between the First World and the Third World — or, if you prefer, the developed world and the post-developed world. To any American time-transported from the mid 20th century, the city’s implosion would be literally incredible: Were he to compare photographs of today’s Hiroshima with today’s Detroit, he would assume Japan won the Second World War after nuking Michigan."
The greatest problem in Detroit isn't structural. It is the collapse of human capital. Consider Steyn's further observation: "Forty-seven percent of adults are functionally illiterate, which is about the same rate as the Central African Republic, which at least has the excuse that it was ruled throughout the Seventies by a cannibal emperor...The illiterates include a recent president of the school board, Otis Mathis, which doesn’t bode well for the potential work force a decade hence."
Detroit is a human tragedy for the unnecessary pain its residents are living through. It is an historic tragedy for the loss of a great American city and a symbol of American industrial power. It is a sobering warning of what can happen in the rest of the country if we continue to tolerate massive, systemic breakdown in government.
Detroit is not unique. It is in fact a warning signal of what can happen to us at every level of government if we continue to tolerate the breakdown in government capabilities and performance.
For two generations we have had a political system dominated by protecting the government class and growing a dependency class. More and more people got unsustainable deals through government employee union power to coerce politicians (for whom they were often the largest and most powerful reelection threat). More and more people were told they didn't have to learn or work or be productive because someone else would take care of it all for them.
These pathologies need to be exposed and studied. Their lessons should be applied at every level of government across the country.
Detroit's problems are not new. I outlined the pathology and some possible solutions at the Mackinac Policy Conference in June 2010. I also spoke there in September 2007.
Six months later on March 27, 2008 at the American Enterprise Institute I responded to then Senator Obama's speech in Philadelphia on race. A significant part of my talk focused on Detroit:
Senator Obama asserted, the history of legalized discrimination 'helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persist today in so many urban and rural communities.'
So let’s take Senator Obama seriously about discussing this. His analysis is simply factually false. The collapse of Detroit, from 1950 to 2008, which I think should be the centerpiece of the fall campaign, because it is the case study in bad culture and bad government. Detroit in 1950 had 1,800,000 people. Last year, it dropped below 900,000. Less than half the housing stock is needed. It is the first American city in history to drop below a million.
The numbers are actually worse than that in the last three years: Detroit had three times the out-migration rate of any other city in the United States. Twenty-seven thousand additional people fled Detroit. It dropped from being the number one per capita income city in the United States to ranking number sixty-second.
Now, you could say, well, it’s all the auto industry’s fault. That’s simply not true. First of all, there are large parts of America that have very successful auto industries. They tend to be in right-to-work states with low tax rates and without the United Auto Workers. But they’re quite successful. We’ve had a very large increase in factories that produce cars.
Second, even in Michigan, despite a very destructive governor and a very destructive state legislature, Grand Rapids is in the middle of a building boom. Now why is Grand Rapids, on the western side of Michigan, growing dramatically while Detroit, on the eastern side of Michigan, is continuing to collapse?
The results are even worse. The best estimate of the Gates Foundation was that a freshman entering the Detroit school system had one chance in four of graduating on time. Three out of four children in Detroit are being cheated by one of the most expensive school bureaucracies in America.
But that’s because we measure the wrong metric. The primary metric of the Detroit school bureaucracy has nothing to do with the children. It has to do with whether or not the paychecks are issued every month. And it has been a stunningly effective bureaucracy at issuing paychecks. It just doesn’t do anything for the paychecks. And yet no one wants to talk about this.
So start with the idea that if we’re going to have an honest conversation, we ought to start with Detroit because if we can’t have an honest conversation about how big a disaster Detroit is, we sure can’t have an honest conversation about poverty in America, and we sure can’t have a conversation about what needs to change.
It’s that simple and that direct. And I think virtually no one on the Left is prepared today to talk candidly about Detroit because it is their institutions and their culture which has caused the collapse of one of America’s great cities.
And you may think I’m exaggerating. Consider the following. An entrepreneur offered $200 million to develop charter schools in Detroit and was rejected on the grounds that he was obviously a white racist attempting to overturn the black power structure. “I am disappointed and saddened by the anger and hostility that has greeted our proposal,” explained [Bob] Thompson to the Associated Press.
"Because of these contentious conditions, we are not going to move forward with our planned charter high schools. Our proposal to build a number of new, very small charter high schools in Detroit was intended to increase options for Detroit parents and children. The proposal was meant to be for kids, and not against anyone in any institution."
Now what does that tell you about pathology, when you can have a system failing, and remember, if you’re an African-American male, and you drop out of high school, you face a 73 percent unemployment rate in your 20s and a 60 percent chance of going to jail.
And you have to ask yourself, by what moral authority did the Detroit school bureaucracy block $200 million from saving young men from going to jail, from giving them an opportunity to go to college, from offering them hope? And why did no one speak out against it?
The disaster in Detroit involves ruined lives, lost futures, tragic deaths, avoidable poverty, and a host of societal, governmental, economic and political pathologies.
The Congress should thoroughly explore the disaster and outline what steps we need to do to avoid repeating this terrible human tragedy in other cities.
Your Friend,

Friday, July 26, 2013

What Entitlement Program Will Go Broke First?

What Entitlement Program Will Go Broke First? by Sean Hackbarth on

What federal entitlement program is closest to fiscal collapse?

Medicare? No.

Social Security? Negative.

Medicaid? Uh-uh.

While the three above are in peril, the “award” goes to the Social Security Disability Insurance Fund (SSDI), which is expected to run out of money in 2016.

In the Wall Street Journal, economist Michael Boskin notes the explosion in the people using it and SSDI’s costs:

The number of people collecting disability benefits has soared, especially in recent years, to almost 11 million in June, up from 2.7 million in 1970. The 2012 price tag was $140 billion, up eightfold, adjusted for inflation, from 1970.

In a 2011 paper, MIT economist David Autor put these costs in the context of the rest of the federal budget [h/t Reihan Salam]:

In 2010, SSDI cash transfer payments totaled $124 billion, while the cost of Medicare for SSDI bene?ciaries was $59 billion. These outlays, exceeding $1,500 for every U.S. household, comprised 7.3 percent of federal non-defense spending last year—a sum that is larger than interest payments on the federal debt. In the last two decades, outlays grew at 5.6 percent in real terms, compared to just 2.2 percent for all other Social Security spending. As a consequence SSDI’s share of total Social Security outlays has risen from one in ten dollars in 1988 to almost one in ?ve dollars at present. Perhaps most ominously, SSDI expenditures now exceed by 30 percent the payroll tax revenue dedicated to funding the program.

By expanding the medical conditions that qualify and increasing payments, SSDI has turned into something it wasn’t originally designed to be writes Boskin: “Disability insurance has clearly become, in part, a form of extended unemployment insurance and early retirement, with Medicare benefits.”

This was covered by in April:

[A]n extensive April 10 report from the Wall Street Journal dug into the explosion in Americans covered by the Social Security Disability Insurance Program since 2007. The number of Americans on federal disability grew by a half million over the course of the 2007-2009 recession, from 7.1 million to 7.6 million.

But since the recession’s end in June 2009, that number has swelled to a historically high 8.9 million. That’s more than double the number of disability beneficiaries in the 1990s, according to Jordan Weissman in The Atlantic, who notes that the eligibility requirements for disability have been relaxed at the same time jobs have grown more scarce.

A significant proportion of the former workers on disability are below the age of 50, the Journal notes. Based on the statistics, it’s unlikely that these workers will rejoin the labor force. In 2011, the Journal report finds, only .5 percent of disability recipients left the program to return to work.

In March, a National Public Radio (NPR) reporter explored the growth of the disability rolls and found that the disability program was essentially serving to “hide” workers who may not be disabled, but are otherwise unemployable due to changes in the economy—suggesting the real unemployment rate is significantly higher than the official 7.6 percent rate.

"That's a kind of ugly secret of the American labor market," David Autor, an economist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, tells NPR. "Part of the reason our unemployment rates have been low, until recently, is that a lot of people who would have trouble finding jobs are on a different program."

[As a side note, the fact that millions move from being unemployed to being disabled indicates how weak our economy is and how critical pro-growth, job-creating policies are.]

To prevent the SSDI’s collapse Boskin recommends that the program better target the truly disabled:

Eligibility should emphasize objective medical—as opposed to more subjective and vocational—criteria, with a more rigorous appeals process for potential false rejections of meritorious but difficult-to-verify claims. About 40% of disability awards now follow appeals, of which a large majority are successful.

Next, offer better incentives to return to work for those who can. This means early intervention and providing information about job options—before people lose any attachment to the labor market and their skills deteriorate. Today, the disability-insurance program hardly focuses on the return to work. It is a Hotel California—you check in with a disability and don't leave unless you die or convert to Social Security retirement at age 66. In 2009 only a tiny percentage of those on disability, 0.8%, returned to work or gave up the benefits for other reasons.

He hopes fixing SSDI can be a springboard to broader entitlement reform:

With luck, the looming implosion of the Disability Insurance Fund will focus attention on other entitlements (and may dampen some of the happy talk now heard in Washington about the health of Social Security and Medicare). Coming to grips with the disability program also may provide a guide to reform of the larger programs.

The clock's ticking on SSDI, and we can't afford to ignore it.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx CATP - Black conservative Deneen Borelli blacklisted from NAACP Convention The NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) was founded “to ensure the political, educational, social and economic equality of minority group citizens of the United States and eliminate race prejudice.” The organization claims it “seeks to remove all barriers of racial discrimination through the democratic processes.”

Well apparently the NAACP has erected a barrier of its own and blacklisted black conservative, Deneen Borelli.

Borelli, author of book Blacklash: How Obama and the Left Are Driving Americans to the Government Plantation, and Fox News commentator, and her husband, Dr. Tom Borelli, were told there was no room at the 104th conference when they tried to pay for booth space. Photos of the venue, however, clearly showed plenty of available space.

But there was no room at the inn for Doreen and husband, who might have upset the new NAACP meme of discrimination for all BUT black liberals who tow the race-baiters’ line.

The organization once formed to ensure black people could strive, on an equal playing field without fear of bodily harm, to achieve their dreams in America, now only protects the struggles and aspirations of liberal blacks.

Thursday, July 25, 2013

Congresswoman Frederica Wilson Inflames Racial Tensions with Hate Speech

Thanks to The Blaze for bringing this story of Congresswoman Frederica Wilson inflaming racial tensions with this hate speech. She is nothing but a racial profiteer like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. And for all her talk about "being guilty for being black", Wilson is certainly guilty of being stupid. Congresswoman Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) had harsh words Saturday for those who racially profile black men. An article from The Blaze.

Wilson said that black males “will continue to be singled out and arrested for driving while black, shopping while black, walking while black, eating while black, and just being plain old black.”

Her fiery comments drew loud cheers and applause from more than 300 hundred people who gathered at a “Justice for Trayvon” vigil held in front of the Federal Building in Miami, according to the Miami Herald.

In related news, the brother of Trayvon Martin is interning for Wilson, her office confirmed to NBC News. Jahvaris Fulton attends Florida International University in Miami, according to his Twitter page, NBC News reports.

Fulton is also part of the 5000 Role Models of Excellence Project founded by Wilson 20 years ago, which aims to prevent drop-outs and mentor at-risk boys in Miami-Dade schools, Wilson’s office told NBC News.

Here’s a clip of Wilson’s racial divisive speech this past Saturday:

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

IRS Hearings - No Longer Can Obama Deny His Scandal

One of the better rollups of this weeks Congressional Hearings on the IRS targeting of Conservative groups can be found on Town Hall. Many WOW moments from these hearings,......the look on Congressman Ass Hat Cummings' face when it became known from IRS employee Hull that the office of a political appointee of Obama's is where the orders to target Conservative groups came from. Cummings' mug is to the left.  Whoever voted for this hardly literate, Obama apologist should be ashamed of themselves.

IRS Inspector George, a black man mind you, shot down many of the Democrat/IRS apologists arguements that the IRS investigation is a political witch hunt. If this is a hunt at all, it is a skunk hunt.

IRS Inspector General Russell George defused many of the Democrats' lines of attack during his opening statement, effectively "pre-butting" gotcha-style questions. A few observations:

(1) George reminded the committee that the IRS acknowledged and apologized for its improper targeting of conservative groups prior to the release of his audit in May. Don't forget that the agency's own internal review -- which predated the IG's audit -- came to similar conclusions about the malfeasance, including who was victimized. Both investigations were prompted by complaints from conservative, not liberal, groups regarding excessive wait times, interminable delays, and abusive questioning. During the hearing, George and his team told committee Democrats that their relatively narrow field of inquiry was initially limited by so-called BOLO (be on the lookout) terms provided to them by the IRS itself. George said that throughout his investigation, employees at multiple levels of the agency all confirmed that "Tea Party" (and related terms) was the relevant targeting nomenclature.

(2) Responding to accusatory statements from Democrats -- especially the contemptible Gerry Connolly -- about his political roots, George confirmed that he was appointed by President Bush and had worked for several Republicans many years ago. He also revealed that he worked at the 1980 DNC and helped found Howard University's College Democrats. That took the wind out of the "he's a Republican hatchet man!" line of argument. Also, as pointed out by Rep. Jim Jordan and Chairman Darrell Issa (and yours truly), if George had been working in concert with the GOP, he would have made this scandal public before the 2012 election.

(3) The Inspector General said that since his audit was published, more information has come to his attention regarding BOLO lists that included liberal-sounding buzz words. He said he's looking into those reports, and the investigation remains ongoing. That status also applies to his work with the FBI and DOJ. The witnesses said their inquiry into IRS officials' emails and conduct was fairly limited -- for instance, Lois Lerner's emails haven't yet been probed. Chairman Issa said he hoped that any potential evidence (re: Lerner) remained intact, in light of her decision not to incriminate herself in Congressional testimony. Rep. Jordan commented how unlikely it is that the IRS would have admitted to targeting one side of the aisle if they'd actually been treating both sides equally. He said a few extraneous examples of other BOLO lists and liberal groups possibly being screened have only emerged as Democrats have grappled for fig leaves in the wake of the scandal. Chairman Issa said that if there are any left-leaning groups who were abused the way conservative organizations were (never-ending delays, inappropriate questions, burdensome paperwork, etc), he'd like to see the evidence. And if those examples exist, were they proportional to the Tea Party's blanket treatment? All indications point in one direction. One piece of evidence:

In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked. That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months. In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.

(4) A few Democrats bizarrely claimed that George had "withheld" his lack of evidence that the Tea Party targeting was explicitly political. It was in his written report, and he's testified to that effect several times. One Democrat, Rep. Jackie Spier of California, advanced the long-debunked claim that the IRS was only trying to "streamline" their review system due to the huge influx of new applicants. I also feel compelled to commend Democratic Congressman Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts for another fair-minded performance today. It's clear he's a loyal Democrat, but he also seems genuinely interested in the truth and put off by the partisan misdirection tactics employed by some of his colleagues.

(5) In summary, the rancor that I anticipated this afternoon never really materialized. Mr. George and his colleagues explained their actions well, and assured members on both sides that their investigation continues. Democrats continue to hope that at least one example of improper scrutiny of a liberal group emerges, although that's not what the IG has found so far. Which makes sense for numerous reasons:

Zero Tea Party conservative groups were approved for tax-exempt status over a period of 27 months, while dozens of lefty groups received the green light. Conservative organizations were deliberately buried in burdensome paperwork, fraught with wildly inappropriate questions and outrageous demands. This emanated from, and was sometimes micromanaged by, DC. The IRS' former commissioner testified under oath that only conservative-leaning groups were mistreated this way. When the House Oversight Committee held hearings featuring the IRS' victims, committee Democrats couldn't produce a single liberal witness. Oh, and the IRS admitted and publicly apologized for their wrongful targeting of conservatives following their own internal investigation, and before the IG report was published. If the truth was "we did it to both sides!" they would have presented that evidence early and often. They didn't.

Parting thought: If, as Democrats suggest, the targeting impacted both sides and this is all a big non-scandal, where is the "progressive-assigned" version of Elizabeth Hofacre? That is to say, where is the IRS employee tasked with screening dozens of targeted liberal organizations whose superiors wouldn't permit any resolutions for months (and ultimately years) on end? If such an employee exists, don't you think we'd have heard about him or her by now?