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.
Cowboys and the Tea Party political movement have a lot on common. Both believe in individual responsibility; judging a man by his actions not words; and, both are disgusted with government intrusions into our lives and particularly our God given rights.
Monday, August 19, 2013
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.
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."
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.
www.DontFundObamacare.com
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
CF:
Secretary Chuck Hagel
General Ray Odierno
Senator John Cornyn
Senator Ted Cruz
Various veteran groups
. 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
CF:
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.
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: http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_Hussein_Obama_-_Arab-Americ .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''
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view%22;http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view
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 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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: http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_Hussein_Obama_-_Arab-Americ .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''
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view%22;http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view
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 Investors.com
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 Investors.com
Monday, August 5, 2013
Wasserman Schutz - One Way Player
WH ‘absolutely outraged’ Wasserman Schultz using DNC for own ambitions
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/08/04/wh-absolutely-outraged-wasserman-schultz-using-dn
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.
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??
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
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.
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 NaturalNews.com
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."
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."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)