Friday, February 22, 2013

Did you know....

A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Miss., was halted by the school's vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck.

A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun.

A 2008 terrorist attack at an Israeli school was quickly stopped by an armed teacher and a school guard.

A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Va., came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter.

A 2007 mall shooting in Ogden, Utah, ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened.

A 2009 workplace shooting in Houston, Texas, was halted by two coworkers who carried concealed handguns.

A 2012 church shooting in Aurora, Colo., was stopped by a member of the congregation carrying a gun.

At the recent mall shooting in Portland, Ore., the gunman took his own life minutes after being confronted by a shopper carrying a concealed weapon.

2500 times last year alone legal gun owners stopped violent crime when confronted with it long before any police assistance ...

What's insane is people who think removing rights from responsible people will somehow keep them safe.

And...Florida has the most concealed weapons permits and the lowest violent crime rate in the US.

Go figure. 
Chicago has the toughest anti-gun laws in the country and more people are killed in Chicago than are killed in the Middle East. 
Go figure.

 

WOO HOO! Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) says Americans needs guns to protect the nation from Islamic sharia law

images

Tea Party Conservative Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) told a conservative radio show on Thursday that the GOP must oppose gun regulations to protect the country from the threat of Sharia Law.

Think Progress  Appearing on The Voice of Freedom, Gohmert said he “hoped and prayed” that Congress rejects gun safety legislation, arguing that Americans may need to use the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to avoid succumbing to Muslims:

6-e13598740988101“[The Second Amendment] is for our protection and the founders’ quotes make that very very clear and including against a government that would run amuck. We’ve got some people who think Sharia Law should be the law of the land, forget the Constitution. But the guns are there… to make sure all of the rest of the Amendments are followed.”


Will GOP Fumble Away Guaranteed Sequester Victory?
Notwithstanding hysterical rhetoric from the White House, the bureaucracies, and the various pro-spending lobbies in Washington, the sequester does not mean “vicious” or “draconian” spending cuts.

I wish that was the case.

All it does is restrain spending so that it grows by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years rather than $2.5 trillion. We need a much greater degree of fiscal discipline to address the long-term spending crisis – including some real entitlement reform.

But the sequester is certainly better than doing nothing.

My concern, though, is that feckless and incompetent Republicans will fumble away victory. I explain in this Larry Kudlow interview that “doing nothing” is the right approach since the sequester happens automatically, but I’m worried that this very modest step in the right direction will be eroded as part of subsequent spending bills.

See and hear the interview by clicking on the link below...
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/danieljmitchell/2013/02/22/will-gop-fumble-away-guaranteed-sequester-victory-n1517466/page/full/

On a related note, Byron York of the Washington Examiner is rather perplexed by the GOP’s sequester strategy, which is based on the inconsistent message that it should happen, but that it’s bad.

Boehner calls the cuts “deep,” when most conservatives emphasize that for the next year they amount to about $85 billion out of a $3,600 billion budget.  Which leads to another question: Why would Boehner adopt the Democratic description of the cuts as “deep” when they would touch such a relatively small part of federal spending? The effect of Boehner’s argument is to make Obama seem reasonable in comparison. After all, the president certainly agrees with Boehner that the sequester cuts threaten national security and jobs.  The difference is that Obama wants to avoid them.  At the same time, Boehner is contributing to Republican confusion on the question of whether the cuts are in fact “deep” or whether they are relatively minor. Could the GOP message on the sequester be any more self-defeating?

My two cents is that fiscal conservatives should argue that sequestration isn’t the ideal way to trim the burden of government spending, but that it’s the only option since President Obama is refusing to look at any alternatives unless they are based on class-warfare tax hikes and phony entitlement gimmicks.

What really matters, though, is in the driver’s seat in this battle. They can win…but only if they want to.
Every so often, I issue imperious edicts about things that Republicans should do to demonstrate that they genuinely support limited government.
  1. No tax increases, since more money for Washington will encourage a bigger burden of government and undermine prosperity.
  2. To stop bailouts for Europe’s decrepit welfare states, no more money for the International Monetary Fund.
  3. Reform the biased number-crunching methodology at the Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation.
  4. No more money from American taxpayers to subsidize the left-wing bureaucrats at the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
  5. Defund the crony capitalists at the Export-Import Bank.
I’m not naive enough to think that GOPers actually care about my demands, but I certainly think the sequester is a “gut-check” moment for Republicans.

If they capitulate to Obama in the short run, or if they wipe out the sequester savings as part of subsequent spending bills, that will be a very dismal sign that the folks who came to DC thinking it was a cesspool have instead decided that it’s really a hot tub.

Hagel Proves Obama Won't Stop Iran

By: Mona Charen Townhall Columnist
Hagel Proves Obama Won't Stop Iran
Does it matter that a nominee for secretary of defense doesn't particularly care for American power?

Speaking to the Center for Strategic and International Studies in 2007, Sen. Chuck Hagel revealed the kind of prejudices regarding American military strength most frequently found in the pages of the Nation magazine or among protesters at Occupy rallies.

Distancing himself from Republicans he regarded as too bellicose, Hagel said, "Rather than acting like a nation riddled with the insecurities of a schoolyard bully, we ought to carry ourselves with the confidence that should come from the dignity of our heritage, the experience of our history, and from the strength of our humanity, not from the power of our military."

This is a familiar leftist critique of America, a psuedo-psychological analysis of our foreign policy as a form of pathology. For a certain set of people, the problems in the world are never (fill in the blank): Soviet aggression and expansionism, communist repression and adventurism or Islamic radicalism and terror. No, the problem is always America's neurotic need to throw its weight around, alienating benign foreign powers and creating discord and trouble.

Whereas fair-minded people the world over consider the Islamic Republic of Iran to be a terror-sponsoring gangster regime, Sen. Hagel described the Iranian regime at his confirmation hearing as an "elected and legitimate" government. A friendly Democratic senator later offered him an avenue for retreat, which he grabbed, saying, "What I meant to say -- should have said -- it's recognizable." What regime isn't "recognizable"?

What solicitous Democrats cannot obscure is that Sen. Hagel has a long record of softness toward Iran. He voted against designating Al Quds a terrorist entity, advised direct negotiations with the mullahs, opposed sanctions, and suggested that a military response to Iran's nuclear program is not a "viable, feasible, responsible option." In a 2007 speech, he praised Iran's cooperation with the U.S. in Afghanistan and noted that our two nations had found "common interests." From these, Hagel continued, "emerged common actions working toward a common purpose."

This is sheer fantasy -- disturbing enough in a U.S. senator but profoundly unsettling in a secretary of defense. Just two months before Hagel sprinkled these rhetorical rosebuds at the mullahs' feet, an Al Quds force had attacked our forces in Karbala, Iraq. We were not at war with Iran (or not consciously).

Time magazine reported the ambush: "In the back of two of the vehicles were the four Americans. One of them was alive, though barely. Handcuffed, he had been shot in the back of the head, but he was breathing. The other soldiers were already dead. One had taken bullets in both legs and his right hand, and at some point the kidnappers had torn open his body armor and fired bullets into his chest and torso. Two others were handcuffed together, with one's right hand joined to the other's left. Two shots in the face and neck had killed one. Four bullets in the chest had killed the other."

The Al Quds terrorists had stolen all of the men's ID tags. Before dying, one of them had scrawled his name in the dust of the jeep.

Hagel is not worried about a nuclear Iran. In his 2008 book, he notes blithely, "The genie of nuclear weapons is already out of the bottle no matter what Iran does." In that same year, Hagel proposed that the State Department open an "interests section" in Tehran.

Before the Hagel nomination, we lived with the polite fiction that President Obama was determined to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. The president has reiterated this position consistently since 2007. Mr. Hagel demonstrated confusion about it during his confirmation hearing, mumbling, "We have no position on containment." For clarity, Sen. Carl Levin (another helpful Democrat) corrected Hagel.

"We do have a position on containment, and that is, we do not favor containment."

As recently as last September President Obama said, "Make no mistake: A nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained. ... The United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

But who can take that boilerplate seriously now? The president has nominated a man for defense secretary who warms the heart of the terror regime in Tehran, a man who despises U.S. power, a man who opposed not just military action but even sanctions against Iran. That the president refuses to withdraw this nomination makes nonsense of his repeated pledges to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. If ever a nomination were filibuster worthy, this is it.

DeMint: Obama 'has lost contact with reality'

U.S. facing 'real meltdown' if it doesn't control spending, debt


Republicans should let the sequester proceed if President Obama won’t let the defense cuts be eased, and Obama is simply out of touch with reality on fiscal matters, according to former U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, S.C.

DeMint resigned his seat in January as he prepares to become the new president of the Heritage Foundation. In a wide-ranging interview, DeMint addressed looming debates on guns and immigration, but he’s also passionate about how the current sequestration fight plays out. DeMint told WND House GOP members have responsibly approved changes in sequestration so the cuts won’t land so hard on national security spending, and the ball is now in Obama’s court.

“If we can’t get the president to come off the military cuts, we need to leave these cuts in place,” DeMint said. “In most cases, it’s not really cuts. It’s just a slowing of the growth of spending which has been out of control for years. I would encourage Republicans, if the president’s not going to be reasonable about restoring military funding and allowing these other programs to actually be reduced, then they’re just going to have to swallow it. It’s a small percent of our total budget and, frankly, we’re going to have to do a lot more of these cuts if we’re going to balance the budget within 10 years.”

Obama has repeatedly demanded a “balanced” approach that consists of spending cuts and higher taxes for the wealthy. The president also says he and Congress have already made painful cuts of $2.5 trillion. DeMint said the president is simply not living in the real world.

“The president has a difficult time with the truth. We have not cut any spending in Washington. We’ve doubled spending in the last 10 years. He keeps talking about ‘revenues,’ which is their new code word for more tax increases,” said DeMint, citing the fiscal cliff deal and the Obamacare as major tax increases that have already been implemented.

“We don’t have a revenue problem,” he said. “If we would cut spending, you would see the private sector grow and even more revenues to the federal government. The president talks about a fair and balanced approach. American businesses and individuals now have some of the highest rates in the world. It’s hard to compete internationally. He’s still talking about more tax increases. The president is really going to hurt our country in a long-term way if we don’t push back on this.”

The mounting debt makes fiscal responsibility essential, and DeMint said America doesn’t have much time to change course.

“If we’re going to save our country and keep us from looking like Greece in a few years, we’re going to have to find things we can cut,” he said, noting that duplicative programs and services that should be under state control are a good place to start.

“I think the president has lost contact with reality,” DeMint said. “He doesn’t see the spending and the debt as a problem. We are approaching a real meltdown if we don’t get control of it.”

The former senator also made news this week for his public defense of freshman Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. Democrats and some media outlets slammed Cruz for his pointed criticism of defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel and demanding that Hagel reveal which groups hired him to speak and how much he was paid for those appearances. Demint said the partisan double-standard should be condemned, and Cruz should be commended for doing his job.

“What Ted Cruz is doing makes me so proud I could pop, because the pressure against doing what he’s doing is really great,” said Demint, who notes that liberals and the media demanded tax records from Mitt Romney going back a decade.

“The questions that Ted Cruz asked were very reasonable and very thorough. He’s tried cases before the Supreme Court. He knows how to get answers out of people. I think he was doing just the right thing,” he said.

While DeMint has left the Senate, he plans to remain active in recruiting solid conservative candidates to Senate races, a move he said will bring heartburn to the establishment for both parties. DeMint rejects the assertion from Karl Rove and others that the GOP has suffered from “unelectable” conservatives winning primaries in winnable states.

“We haven’t been too conservative. Certainly, we have to have our candidates better prepared for the shark pool that they’re going to get into because the media’s always trying to ask questions that we don’t need to be answering because they are not federal issues,” said DeMint, who suggests making a campaign issue out of federalism and moving more and more responsibilities out of Washington and back to the state level.

“We need to prove to these Washington establishment folks that the best way to win races is to get a good conservative candidate,” he said. “We saw it in (Marco) Rubio, Rand Paul, Pat Toomey, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Jeff Flake. They’re out there. They can win, and we just need to identify them and support them.”

Other pending debates also have DeMint’s attention. On guns, he said exhaustive Heritage Foundation studies show that gun-control measures do not work. He argued that this is another issue best handled at the local level.

“We can’t eliminate evil in this world, but the schools are going to have to do things at the local and at the state level to protect themselves and have the ability within to stop something like this once it happens,” DeMint said.

“Gun-control laws don’t help. If they did, Chicago wouldn’t be the murder capital of the world. We need to look at real solutions and not just this political talk that makes people feel better but doesn’t make our children safer.”

Finally, on immigration, DeMint said this is another issue where the Obama rhetoric sounds appealing to many but the real motivation is far less noble.

“It’s very apparent to me what’s going on here. The president and the Democrats want two things. They want voters. They want union members. So everything they talk about is about citizenship,” said DeMint, who warned that the U.S. has an illegal immigration problem and not a citizenship problem.


Rico Petrocelli & Broward Establishment Try To Fool Us One Last Time

by
 
On Tuesday February 19, 2013 Rico Petrocelli, chairman of the Broward Republican Executive Committee resigned effective immediately. Petrocelli’s reign lasted just 79 days. This is a fact.  Almost everything else you’ve read about Petrocelli’s resignation is pure Broward-style baloney.

In his public statement, Petrocelli says he quit over “irreconcilable differences” with his fellow board members. On Facebook, Petrocelli wrote, “Not giving interviews, etc from TV or Print. In the best interest of the Party…” But at a Wednesday morning meeting Petrocelli told his fellow Broward County Housing Authority Board Members he had talked to Anthony Man of the Sun-Sentinel. In fact, when Petrocelli’s cell phone rang during the Pledge of Allegiance, he laughingly told the board it was the Miami Herald calling him.

Make no mistake, Petrocelli and his allies are trying to paint him as the victim.

Michael George DeGruccio, Petrocelli’s hand picked flunkie, posted a picture from “The Mutiny On The Bounty” on his Facebook page.  Again another ham-fisted attempt to paint Petrocelli and DeGruccio as “victims”. One problem: It’s not true.

From the day Petrocelli took the reigns of BREC from Richard DeNapoli, sources have painted a picture of disarray and questionable decisions and practices implemented by Team Petrocelli.

RED BROWARD documented the push for fewer meetings. It was true.

We exposed his plans to get non-REC member Sheela Venero VanHoose onto a key RPOF committee. It was true.

We documented Petrocelli’s questionable 20% commission scheme. It was true.

We documented the controversial luncheon for Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll. It was true.

We posted the State’s ethics investigation into Petrocelli. We posted how Petrocelli endorsed a controvesial Democrat in Plantation.

We documented his maneuvers to turn BREC headquarters into a private investigation firm. Again, it was true.

Petrocelli followed the patented Broward politician handbook: “Deny. Nobody reads/watches them. Ignore them. It will all go away.” Sadly, this usually works in Broward County.

It didn’t work this time. People listened. Some of those people are BREC board members.

From the start, it was clear Petrocelli was going ignore his board. He had the unwavering support of DeGruccio and Mark McCarthy, BREC treasurer. Petrocelli had State Committeewoman Sharon Day running interference for him.

The new board members wanted transparency. They wanted to know about the money being raised. They wanted to know about payments being made to DeGruccio and others. When board members requested access to key files or computers, they were told DeGruccio had passwords. When the board wanted to have a meeting Petrocelli said he was too tired to attend.

Petrocelli never wanted to give answers.

Money was clearly an issue. On December 18, 2012 Petrocelli authorized payments to DeGruccio and Benjamin Bennett totaling $800. Questions had been raised by BREC members regarding Bennett’s role at BREC. At the January BREC meeting, Petrocelli dubbed Bennett his “Chief Sergeant at Arms”. But official BREC business cards named Bennett as a “consultant”.  A plausible question would then be ‘What kind of consulting did Bennett offer?’

Bennett was previously listed as an investigator with the Arun Active private investigation firm. At the Lt Governor luncheon in Coral Springs, Bennett was spotted with the owner of Arun Active. It was clear to many that Bennett was taking an active role in Petrocelli & Associates. According to a high level source, Bennett was present at BREC HQ when Petrocelli tried to get former Broward Sheriff Al Lamberti to join Petrocelli & Associates. Lamberti declined.

Bennett’s BREC business card
Bennett's BREC business card
In 1982, Bennett, a former Tamarac policeman, was charged with 10 felony counts including drug dealing and conspiracy to commit armed robbery. Bennett served four years of a fifteen year prison sentence. In a 1985 prison interview with the Sun-Sentinel, Bennett said, “I`ve done a lot of good since I`ve been in prison, and I want that known. So much has been said about me that`s not true.”  In 2008, Bennett was arrested again. He was charged with battery and lewd and lascivious molestation of a person under the age of 16 years old. The Broward State Attorney would later decide not prosecute the case.With such a background, concerned BREC members were right to ask for more information regarding Bennett’s role in the county party.  Petrocelli warned that Bennett was now a “minister” and any questions may jeopardize donations Bennett brought into the BREC coffers.Petrocelli was also a former police officer. He was dismissed from the Hacienda Village police department in 1977. BREC treasurer Mark McCarthy is a private investigator as well.

Questions were raised if Petrocelli and Associates was conducting its business out of the BREC offices. We may never know.

Minutes after Petrocelli announced his resignation, State Committeewoman and RNC co-chair Sharon Day issued an email screed attacking the board for daring to question Petrocelli’s actions.  Day wrote:
Dear Rico, I am sorry that you felt the need to make this decision, and I can honestly say I fully understand from the meetings I was a part of and the never ending accusatory email threads .
I hope this is enough communications for the members of this Executive Board and I hope beyond an interim Chair no one is planning to run for Chairman from this board!
Sharon Day
Believe in America - Vote Republican
Apparently, Ms. Day doesn’t like those of us who elected her asking questions. Day protege and Gov. Scott aide Sheela Venero VanHoose censored RED BROWARD when we exposed Petrocelli’s schemes. We reported Day was upset, but she wasn’t upset at Petrocelli. Turns out she was one of Petrocelli’s biggest fans.

Though she serves at the pleasure of those who elected her, Day is the self- appointed ”queen” of the Broward do-nothing establishment.  She touts her titles at BREC meetings, but what does she do for Broward Republicans? She doesn’t support local candidates. Name one local candidate who got a dime from Sharon Day. At the BREC meetings she drones on about RNC fundraising and how she only hires Republican money managers and brokers. Wow, talk about rich people problems. I dare Day to name all the local and State Republicans who ran in the last election. No peeking Sharon.

Sharon Day is Petrocelli’s fellow commissoner over at the Broward County Housing Authority. They distribute Federal tax dollars to local builders and landlords. Gee, how very Republican of them. Day and Petrocelli were appointed by Florida’s favorite turncoat, former Governor Charlie Crist.

Now that Petrocelli is gone, expect the rest of the Broward Do-Nothing Establishment to come out of the woodwork. “The Chairmen” a.k.a Broward County Commissioner Chip LaMarca, Ed Pozzuoli and Kevin Tynan, are probably sharing some wings with Karen Harrington as we speak. They secretly courted Harrington to challenge DeNapoli in December. When DeNapoli bowed out, “the chairmen” hung Harrington out to dry. We doubt Harrington will listen to their overtures this time.

Back in 2010, LaMarca and friends tried to get local attorney David DiPietro (who?) to run against Denapoli. Maybe they’ll try to get him to run this time. It would be a classic example of “pulling a LaMarca”. Di Pietro gave Broward State Attorney Mike Satz a big fat $500 contribution last year even though he had a Republican challenger. You remember Mike Satz; He’s the Democrat who has let corruption run rampant in Broward County since 1976. Di Pietro operates several political action committees including A Better Broward, Broward Citizens For A Strong Judiciary and Mile Marker 1. Di Pietro supported Judy Stern’s favorite judicial candidate last year. BREC doesn’t need a LaMarca apologist at the helm.

rpoopsAre you starting to see why Broward Republicans always come up short? Last year you worked hard. You organized. You made calls. You knocked on doors. You wrote letters. You raised money. BREC spent money. Yet we have nothing to show for it. Day and Co. blame “messaging” and “branding” and crazy tea party candidates.

They never take blame. They circle the wagons. They protect their own.

Petrocelli is gone, but the work to unshackle the Broward Republican Party from the Broward Do-Nothing establishment rages on.
Op-ed:
Iran plays games again and Obama calls for 'further isolation'                     
By: Diane Sori                                    

While Obama has busied us with sequestration and gun control measures that hopefully will NOT pass the House, his muslim brethren in Iran have been working ever so quietly on installing hundreds of 2nd-generation advanced centrifuge equipment to speed up production of enriched uranium, all while the nuclear watchdog group, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), believes Iran has already completed explosives tests necessary in the building of nuclear weapons.
  
Not good...NOT good at all.

And in an effort to try and fool the IAEA, Iran is limiting its stockpile of the type of fuel that could be easily converted for use in atomic bombs...visibly limiting it that is...for who knows where they've moved and hidden their true stockpile.

These new IR-2m centrifuges are four times more efficient than Iran's current ones, and can enrich uranium two or three times faster than those currently in use...centrifuges that convert uranium gas into enriched fuel that can be used in either civilian power plants that Iran, thinking we're all stupid, claims they're being used for (saying that under international law they have the right to enrich uranium for scientific, civil, and medical purposes) or can be used in nuclear weapons, what we know they're really being used for. And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said these new centrifuges could cut the time Iran needs to create a nuclear bomb by a third.

Remember that 'line in the sand' BiBi spoke about at the U(seless) N(ations) last year...well with these new centrifuges Iran just crossed it and could now potentially build a nuclear bomb within four to six months, meaning by this summer, according to former Israeli Military Intelligence Chief Maj. Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin.

And add into this mix that some analyst's believe that if Iranian does get nuclear weapons capability that it might just set off a Middle East arms race where Egypt and Turkey will also try to get nuclear weapons...and remember who now is in control of Egypt...Obama's buddies the Muslim Brotherhood. And back in December 2011, former Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Turki al-Faisal said that if Tehran did gain nuclear weapons capability, Saudi Arabia should consider matching it. 

So what was Obama's response to this newest development about the centrifuges...'further isolation'. Ahmedinejad must have laughed his head off when White House spokesman Jay Carney warned Iran that their newest upgrade would violate UN resolutions and "invite further isolation by the international community" and US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said "It would mark yet another provocative step." 

Hell...I'm even laughing at those responses...'further isolation'...bad bad Iran...now go stand in the corner and think about that bad thing you just did. But what can you expect from an administration that sees Iran as their end all to what Obama and his minions really consider the 'Israel problem' for if he was really concerned he would say, 'enough...we've had enough' and go in jointly with Israel to end this once and for all...but he won't and we all know why.

And next week just for further laughs, after a no-talks lull of 8 months, Iranian officials say they're going to meet with representatives from the US and five other countries (the US, the UK, China, France, Russia and Germany) and discuss proposed cuts to their nuclear program in exchange for lifting some of the already useless sanctions (after all whatever aid we deny them China willingly gives them), and to negotiate a solution that will end the 'supposed' international military threats against them.

What international military threats against them for only Israel has had the guts to seriously call Iran to task, and we all know that Israel NEVER has international backing in anything they do let alone US backing under this miserable excuse of a president.

And with Iran already having produced 280 kilos (617 pounds) of 20-percent uranium (the very thing the sanctions were supposed to have prevented), of which around 110 kilos have already been diverted to needed bomb fuel production (around 250 kilos are needed for one bomb), they are getting close...too close for comfort.

But hey, 'further isolation' might just do the trick (yeah right)...according to fellow muslim-in-arms, America and Israel hater, cutter of our military budget and atomic stockpile...Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

And with that...God help us all.