Thursday, February 28, 2013

How Jimmy Carter Ruined America Twice

by / Personal Liberty Digest

Until Barack Obama came along, Jimmy Carter held the title “Worst President in U.S. History.” Now, Carter may have taken the title back. You would have thought he’d be satisfied with almost destroying the U.S. economy and almost breaking the spirit of our country once. But, no! Thirty-three years later, Carter is now instrumental in helping Obama finish the job he started.

As President from 1976 to 1980, Carter came close to wrecking our economy and our entire country. An ultra-liberal, politically correct do-gooder, just like Obama, Carter announced his Presidency would be dedicated to “compassion” and human rights. And, just as had happened during Obama’s tenure, the leftist gobbly-gook “feel-good philosophy” led to disaster.

The Carter nightmare included four years of crippling high unemployment, stagflation of 13.5 percent, unimaginable 21.5 percent interest rates, record gas prices, shortages and gas lines, a doubling of the deficit from $27 billion to almost $60 billion, U.S. embassy personnel in Iran held hostage, an unsuccessful hostage rescue attempt, the embarrassing decline of our military, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. America almost did not survive Carter.

Along came a true patriot and American hero, Ronald Reagan, who turned Carter’s malaise and misery and the worst economy since the Great Depression into the greatest economic turnaround and expansion in world history. Reagan showed the world that America was indeed the “shining beacon on the hill.”

Reagan made us great again and, by doing so, exposed Carter as an incompetent, ultra-liberal laughingstock. To make matters worse for Carter’s legacy, the U.S. hostages in Iran were released on Reagan’s Inauguration Day. Carter never forgave Reagan or America for leaving his reputation in tatters.

Carter wandered the wilderness for the past 33 years, growing more angry and bitter with each passing year. He took out his anger by embarrassing the United States and meddling in foreign affairs. He spent the past 33 years denouncing Israel, praising nations that supported Muslim terrorists, defying the U.S. travel ban to Cuba and praising tyrants like Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Yugoslavian dictator Josip Broz Tito and North Korean despot Kim Il Sung. He oversaw election fraud and corruption in Venezuela and Haiti and declared everything fair and square. The man has spent 33 bitter, disgraceful years venting his hatred for America.

Now, Carter has finally gotten his revenge. Angry at America’s success since Reagan, including those 40 million new jobs created since the early 1980s, Carter might be the man most responsible for Obama’s re-election, allowing him to continue the destruction Carter began all those years ago in 1976.

How did Carter help re-elect Obama? Mitt Romney was poised to do to Obama exactly what Reagan did to Carter. A brilliant businessman and turnaround specialist, Romney was the perfect man to again save America. He would have turned around this Obamageddon economy in two years with low taxes, reduced spending and smaller government — exactly how Reagan saved us from Carter. But along came that secret tape where Romney discussed “the 47 percent” of Americans who want government to give them checks and will vote for the politician who keeps the checks coming. The release of that tape was the beginning of the end for Romney. His reputation, likeability ratings and Presidential campaign never recovered.

Well guess who released that damaging tape? It was Carter’s grandson, Democratic operative Jimmy Carter IV, getting sweet revenge for Grandpa.

Carter’s grandson said: ”I’ve been hearing all my life people making fun of my grandfather, or saying that he was a bad president, or things like that, and I’ve just gotten used to it. And it’s nice to be able to hit back.”

Upon seeing the tape of Romney’s remarks, the former President said in an email to his grandson: ”James: This is extraordinary. Congratulations! Papa.”

It may not have been the only reason Romney lost, but it certainly did more damage to his campaign than anything Obama said in months of campaigning. And so, with the help of Carter’s grandson, history was changed. Instead of a modern-day Reagan, we got stuck with a second, disastrous term of a modern-day Carter. If Carter had been re-elected back in 1980, there very likely would never have been 40 million new jobs over the next 25 years. America’s military and economy probably never would have recovered, and we’d have a lower standard of living and gasoline prices of $8 per gallon — just like in the European socialist countries both Carter and Obama want America to emulate.

But thanks to Carter’s grandson, it’s Groundhog Day. Carter gets a do-over. We’re about to see what would have happened if we’d never elected Reagan and had given Carter a chance to finish the job of destroying America. We’re about to see if Obama can finish the job of destroying the U.S. economy in a second term — all in the name of tax and spend, compassion, fairness, social justice, and human rights.

Once Obama is done using Carter’s ultra-left policies to gain retribution and redistribution, I can imagine only that America will be a shell of its former self. America’s military will decline, the U.S. economy will continue in misery and malaise, inflation will return to unimaginable heights, debt will continue to rise, and gas lines and rationing will once again be part of our lives. America will be anything but exceptional.

Congratulations, Carter. It took 33 years and your grandson’s help, but you’ve finally gotten your revenge on the American people and American exceptionalism.

Sadly, just like a second term of Carter, I can promise you, this will not end well.

Hamas official calls for Third Intifada

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

But if we only give them enough money and diplomatic means to destroy Israel, they will certainly call it off.

"Hamas Official Calls for Third Intifada," by Elad Benari for Israel National News, February 27 (thanks to Voice of the Copts):
A day after a Hamas official called on terrorists to kidnap IDF soldiers in order to force Israel to release their fellow terrorists from Israeli prisons, another Hamas official called on PA Arabs on Tuesday to start an intifada (violent uprising). 
The official, Izzat al-Rishq, said in a statement he released, “Our Palestinian people will not abandon the intifada and the resistance, and they live their lives in constant conflict with the Israeli enemy.”
He added that the Israeli "aggression" which, he claimed, consists of the ongoing violation of human rights of the “Palestinian people”, the “Judaization” of Jerusalem and “defilement” of the Al-Aqsa mosque brings PA Arabs to a state of daily confrontation with the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria who, he claimed, are protected by the IDF.
Al-Rishq said the IDF's preparedness against the escalation of the ongoing riots by PA Arabs will only increase their determination to avenge the death of Arafat Jaradat, the prisoner who died while in Israeli custody.
An autopsy conducted Sunday on the body of Jaradat, who died at the Meggido Prison a day earlier, found that it is impossible to determine the exact cause of his death.
The PA’s minister of prisoners, Issa Qaraqaa, nevertheless took advantage of the non-conclusive report to blame Israel for torturing Jaradat to death, citing the preliminary findings of the joint autopsy which reported bruises on Jaradat's body, muscle damage and broken ribs. Those, however, can be caused by resuscitation attempts, according to the autopsy.
Thousands took part on Monday in Jaradat’s funeral. The funeral was held at his village, Sa'ir, near Hevron.
At nearby Beit Anun, hundreds of Arabs gathered and hurled rocks at security forces who were on high alert during the funeral. The security forces countered the rioting with riot dispersal gear....

Teacher Tells Students to Call 9-11 Hijackers “Freedom Fighters”

By: Todd Starnes / Townhall Columnist
Teacher Tells Students to Call 9-11 Hijackers “Freedom Fighters”
An Advanced Placement World Geography teacher at a Texas high school who encouraged students to dress in Islamic clothing also instructed them to refer to the 9-11 hijackers not as terrorists – but as “freedom fighters,” according to students who were in the class.

Students at Lumberton High School were also told to stop referring to the Holocaust as Genocide – instead they were told to use the term “ethnic cleansing.”

John Valastro, the superintendent of the Lumberton Independent School District, tells me that the teacher did absolutely nothing wrong.

“What is more dangerous – fear and ignorance or education and understanding,” he asked. “From our standpoint, we are here to educate the kids.

Valastro said the teacher involved is a 32-year veteran who was simply following state teaching guidelines.

“I don’t think my freshman-level teacher was trying to politicize radical Islam or anything like that,” he said. “I don’t think our teacher my knowledge ever converted a single student to Islam.”

The Islamic lessons in the small public high school generated national attention after a photograph of four female students wearing burqas surfaced on Facebook.

April LeBlanc’s 15-year-old daughter was one of the students in the photograph. She told me that many parents in the district feel betrayed by school officials.

“My biggest thing is not the burqa,” she said. “That was the key to opening up the rest. It’s scary how far they dove into the Islamic faith. It’s scary what they taught my daughter. Who’s in charge of this? How did our superintendent let this slip through the cracks?”

LeBlanc said the students were told that they could no longer use the terms suicide bomber or terrorist. Instead, they were instructed to use the words “freedom fighters.”

“This teacher taught her that a freedom fighter is when they give their life for the Holy War – and that they’re going to go to heaven,” she said. “They were saturating these kids in Islam and my daughter is an American Christian child.”

Madelyn LeBlanc told me that it was clear her teacher was very uncomfortable lecturing the students.

“I do have a lot of sympathy for her,” the 15-year-old said. “At the very beginning she said she didn’t want to teach it but it was in the curriculum.”

Her mother added that it was her impression that the teacher did not agree with the quote about calling the terrorists freedom fighters and laced her lecture with sarcasm.

During a lesson on Judaism, LeBlanc said the teacher told the class, “Students, I’m supposed to be politically correct and tell you that the Holocaust was not Genocide. It was an ethnic cleansing.”

LeBlanc said her daughter kept detailed notes of every classroom lecture and as she read the transcripts she became disturbed.

“Really,” she asked. “They can’t call the Holocaust Genocide? I was more upset with that than the lessons on Islam. It made me sick.”

And then came the comparison between the 9-11 hijackers and the freedom fighters.

Madelyn said a young man sitting beside her was stunned.

“He was shocked that we had to call them that,” she told Fox News. “He laughed and asked the teacher, ‘Is that a joke? Are you serious? Why do we have to call them that? That makes it sound okay (what they did) And it’s not.’”

Madelyn said the teacher didn’t know how to respond.

“She said it was something we have to learn for the end of the year testing,” she said. “I’m sure it was very difficult for her to do.”

Madelyn said the lesson about freedom fighters made her feel “terrible.”

“That made it sound like what they were doing was okay,” she said.

The superintendent also defended the lesson on freedom fighters.

“The whole idea behind this particular lesson – do you call yourself a freedom fighter or Islamic jihadist – or whatever it is you want to be called – you’ve got to put things in perspective,” the superintendent said. “We’re trying to teach the kids to discern for themselves that one thing can be called many different things.”

Valastro said it’s important for students to understand context.

“We might see it as terrorism, but from the Islamic side they might call it jihadist or freedom fighter,” he said.

The superintendent said he was not aware of the specific comments made about the 9-11 hijackers – but conceded there was only one side to the attack.

“I do agree it was a terrorist attack,” he said. “But in several classes across this country, you’re going to have a make-up of students from all over the world in your class. We teach it as an act of terrorism – whereas they are teaching it to their kids as a revolutionary event.”

LeBlanc said she was especially bothered by the lack of emphasis on other religions. She said there were hardly any lessons on Judaism and none on Christianity.

“I wondered how it was okay for them to go so in-depth into a religion from the other side of the world but it was not okay for them to be like that with Christianity,” she said.

“I try to stay open-minded,” she said. “I don’t want my daughter to be ignorant about the world. My kids watch the news with us. We make them aware. I don’t even mind the high school teaching these things.”

But, she added, there was no balance.

“They can talk about how important Mecca is – but why aren’t they talking about how important Christianity was to the founding of the nation,” she asked.

LeBlanc and other parents said they feel betrayed.

“We trusted these people,” she said of the school system. “It scares me. I feel like our school is being infiltrated. How can this not be a sign? We’re talking about Lumberton, Texas. We’re talking about a small town with Christian churches on every street corner. Right in our small school this is going on.”

The Big O Goes for the Big Zero Again

As the president resumes his “It’s-not-my-fault” presidency-cum-campaign, I’d like to point out to everyone that it’s been 1,401 days since the Democrat-Controlled Senate passed a budget.

I say this because when the Mayan financial calendar runs out on the country this Friday, we’ll be awash in illegal immigrants, downed airliners, out-of-work teachers, Russian missile strikes, Chinese hackers and Aryan Nation terrorists.

And, oh, come on now: We all know that the only real terrorists the White House is worried about are the white supremacists at places like the Family Research Council.

There’s nothing so dangerous to America today as an organization that advances “faith, family and freedom in public policy and the culture from a Christian worldview.”

Except, perhaps, Glenn Beck, who still clings bitterly to his gun AND his religion.

While it’s temping to blame the entire financial mess on the president, I subscribe to the Occam’s Razor theory. It says that the most logical explanation, more often than not, is the right one.

Sooooo…that’s why I DO blame the president.

And no. Not any of the Bush presidents, but rather, I blame the Dear Leader, Comrade Barack H. Obama, Esq. & Associates.

As Bertrand Russell once observed about fallacious thinking: “The method of ‘postulating’ what we want has many advantages; they are the same as the advantages of theft over honest toil. Let us leave them to others and proceed with our honest toil.”

This I think sums up Obama’s budget and fiscal policies over the last four years in a nuthouse, err, nutshell.

Because behind all the posturing of the president, the demanding and the breath-holding, nothing better expresses the intellectual theft of Barack Obama than Russell’s observation of the cheapness of substituting postulation of what one wants for actual policy.

That’s why our Demander-in-Chief has not been able to get even a single vote on a “postulated” budget since April 29th, 2009.

And “paaaahlease”: Spare me the claims that the 2011 kick-the-can contest that’s led to sequestration and has now turned into day 1,401 of The Fiscal Nightmare on Main Street was an actual budget.

Real budgets, honest budgets- budgets that are the result of honest toil rather than theft- those budgets don’t end in the finger pointing, posturing and postulating that the White House is doing over sequestration.

"If you look right now at what our economy needs,” postulated Obama, according to The Hill, “taking $85 billion out of over the next six months, indiscriminately, arbitrarily without any strategy behind it, that's not a smart thing to do. What we should be doing and what I've been calling for repeatedly... is a balanced approach to deficit reduction."

That last part? Oh, yes. That’s the give away. Whenever Obama speaks of “deficit reduction” it means he’s scared.

He’s suddenly turned down the rhetoric on spending more and now is back in favor of a “balanced approach.”

That’s the “theft over honest toil” part; that’s the postulated position of a man who is deathly afraid that the Democrats, once again, won’t give him a single vote on his budget proposals.
Tax increases typically aren’t bragging points in any campaign. 2014 will be no exception.

The only way that Democrats will get away with hiking taxes again is if some Republicans join them in a majority.

Otherwise, Obama’s fiscal postulations will, once again, fail to get one, single vote- at least in the Senate.

Woodward: White House Threatened Me Over Attacks on Budget

By Todd Beamon
 / Newsmax

Newspaper editor and book author Bob Woodward said on Wednesday that a senior White House official threatened him for suggesting the President was at fault for the sequestration crisis.

Woodward said a "very senior" White House official warned him in an email that he would “regret doing this” — referring to the legendary journalist's criticisms of the Obama administration over its actions regarding the upcoming sequester.

“It was said very clearly, ‘You will regret doing this,’” Woodward told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Wednesday night, who then asked him who sent the email. “I’m not going to say. It was a very senior person.

“It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters that you are going to regret doing something that you believe in — and even if you don’t look at it that way [as a threat], you do look at it,” he said.

Woodward, an associate editor for The Washington Post, began stirring controversy last Friday when he lambasted Obama in an op-ed piece for not taking responsibility for the sequester itself.

In his article, Woodward claimed that the White House, not Republicans, first proposed the sequester.

Woodward wrote: "My extensive reporting for my book 'The Price of Politics' shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of [Jack] Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.”

He also blamed the White House for “moving the goal posts” in the negotiations with Congress on the sequester by now demanding that increased revenues be part of any deal to avert the $85 billion in cuts scheduled to take place on Friday.

And earlier on Wednesday, Woodward slammed as “madness” Obama’s decision to not deploy the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf earlier this month — also because of the impending cuts.

Blitzer said the Obama administration declined an invitation to debate Woodward on his Wednesday program.

“It’s irrefutable,” Woodward said of the circumstances leading to his “goal posts” accusation. “That’s exactly what happened. I’m not saying that this moving of the goal posts is some criminal act. I’m just saying that’s what happened.

“They are not happy at all — and some people have said, ‘Look, we don’t see eye to eye on this,’” Woodward added. “They haven’t really said that this is falsely wrong.”

He added, “I think they’re confused on the issue.”

Op-ed:                                                                                                                                                 America's very own 'Axis of Evil'
By: Diane Sori                                                                            
America's very own 'Axis of Evil' is taking shape very nicely thanks to the traitor in the White House. 

An 'Axis of Evil' with its titular head being Barack HUSSEIN Obama whose misguided if NOT outright traitorous vision for American foreign policy has gained traction with the recent confirmation of John Kerry as Secretary of State, Tuesday's confirmation of Chuck Hagel as Defense Secretary, and today the Senate is scheduled to vote on John Brennan’s confirmation as CIA Director. 
Scheduled to vote...why bother even going through the motions, because with a Democratic controlled Senate the outcome is pretty obvious even before a vote is taken.

The confirmation of John Kerry as Secretary of State, the man fourth in line for the presidency, was bad, very bad indeed.

Mr. Swiftboat himself...a traitor who stood before Congress telling tales of 'war crimes' committed by American forces in Viet Nam that turned out to be complete and total lies...a man who considers 'Hanoi Jane' Fonda as one of his close friends.  John Kerry...a man who is a welfare state liberal who voted for the stimulus and ObamaCare...a man who blamed Republicans for failing to reach a deal during 2011's debt ceiling negotiations...a man who believes climate change is the 'biggest long term threat' to security (totally clueless as to what constitutes security it seems)...a man who is a vehement supporter of abortion rights.  John Kerry...a man who in 2009 urged Israel to do more to support a Palestinian state and has NOT changed his mind since...a man who voted AGAINST designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization...a man who last April said that he believes Iranian leaders will act 'rationally' on the discussion of nuclear issues (gagging).  John Kerry...a man who just the other day during a speech in Germany said Americans 'have a right to be stupid'.  John Kerry...a man with a failed presidential run on his resume who holds a grudge AGAINST America for his loss to George W. (Miss Me Yet) Bush...and by the way I sure do.
And this is just a small litany of the man who is now Secretary of State...NOT good...NOT good at all.

And now we have Chuck Hagel as the new Secretary of Defense...once again very bad indeed for this confirmation showed the triumph of partisanship and ideology over national interest. 
Chuck Hagel......a man who never managed a workforce or budget even remotely comparable in scope to those of the Pentagon...a man who in his tenure as a Republican Senator NEVER authored significant legislation, chaired no committees, held no leadership posts.  Chuck Hagel...a man who voted AGAINST the Iraq War and NOT only spoke AGAINST the surge but also criticized the very need for it...a man who supports radical islamists in Syria and Egypt calling them 'freedom fighters'.  Chuck Hagel...a man who when testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, screws up the Obama administration’s policy on a nuclear armed Iran...a man who repeatedly voted AGAINST sanctions being placed on Iran...a man who also voted AGAINST designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization.  Chuck Hagel...a man who said that Israel “keep[s] Palestinians caged up like animals”...a man who said that “the political reality is that the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here”...a man who has suggested that Israel's interests don't 100% align with America's (NOT true)... a man who said in a speech at Rueters University that the US State Department was being run by the Israeli Foreign Ministry.  Chuck Hagel...a man whose very words and actions are anti-Israel and most probably anti-Semitic too.

Chuck Hagel is now the new Secretary of Defense, just another 'yes-man' for Obama...a man who will also turn his back on Israel and the dangers she faces from those out to wipe her off the face of the Earth and if Israel goes 'they' will come for us next...NOT good... NOT good at all.

America's 'Axis of Evil' is now almost complete.

And today up comes John Brennan for yet another dog and pony show confirmation...a man who may very well be the worst of the three.

John Brennan...a man whose involvement in the run-up to the murderous attack at Benghazi and whose conduct during that seven-hour engagement, along with his role in the subsequent cover-up have NOT been satisfactorily addressed.  John Brennan...a man who still has NOT openly responded to questions about Obama's policy on the use of armed drones to attack U.S. citizens......a man who opposes 'enhanced interrogation techniques' like waterboarding, and says that it "never will be used" under his direction (oh great...they can kill us but a little waterboarding is a no-no).  John Brennan...a man who is believed to have revealing classified information from covert operations for his and Obama's political gain...a man who says that Obama needs to have a paramilitary force at his disposal to carry out operations the military is prohibited from conducting by the law of war (NO I don't thinks so for that's too much power in the hands of one man).  John Brennan...a man who refers to Israel’s capital city of Jerusalem as 'al Quds' the name used by Hezbollah militants...a man who said Hezbollah is “a very interesting organization”...a man who has stated that the Muslim Brotherhood is 'largely secular', jihad is a “legitimate tenet of islam” and jihadists are victims of 'political, economic and social forces'.  John Brennan...a man who is believed to have converted to islam when he served in an official capacity on behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia, thus calling into play where his true allegiances lie, especially in light of statements like those above.

If this man, John Brennan, is confirmed as CIA Director America is in BIG trouble for whose side is he really on...whose side indeed for do you think intelligence information reported on the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, and Hamas will be truthful and honest...will 'We the People' be told the truth about the treatment of women and  Christians who live in islamic countries or will he cover this up...and will Americans have confidence in US foreign and military policy towards Iran, China, or North Korea...

...NOT with this man we won't be for if John Brennan is confirmed
America's 'Axis of Evil' will be complete for all three men will bow down and grovel to our enemies just like Barack HUSSEIN Obama already does...all will sell us out to the highest bidder...all will aid in stabbing Israel in the back...all will allow Iran to secure nuclear weapons...and all will aid in America losing its place as the only remaining superpower in the world.

Socialists, communists, muslim sympathizers all...I wonder what our
Founders would say if they saw what has become of those chosen to be the stewards of the greatest nation the world has ever known... something tells me they would NOT be happy at all.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Brewer: Release of Hundreds of Illegals Ahead of Cuts 'Height of Absurdity'

By Todd Beamon

  / Newsmax

“I’m appalled to learn the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has begun to release hundreds of illegal aliens from custody, the first of potentially thousands to soon be freed under the guise of federal budget cuts,” said Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who has long battled the White House on immigration matters. “This is pure political posturing and the height of absurdity, given that the releases are being granted before the federal sequestration cuts have even gone into effect.”

In Pinal County, about 70 miles north of the U.S.-Mexico border, Sheriff Paul Babeau told Newsmax that the release of hundreds of detainees over the weekend was “outrageous and unacceptable because there’s a direct and immediate impact to public safety of families in my county.”

“These are criminal illegals,” Babeau said. “They were headed for deportation — but now, they have received a budget pardon.”

Arizona Sen. John McCain told Newsmax, “We’re very concerned about this.”

The 2008 GOP presidential candidate met with President Barack Obama on Tuesday at the White House to discuss immigration reform.

“People shouldn’t be released who have been incarcerated,” McCain said.

The illegal immigrants were released after their cases were reviewed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said ICE spokeswoman Gillian M. Christensen.

The agency falls under Homeland Security, headed by Secretary Janet Napolitano, a former Arizona attorney general and its governor from 2003-2009.

About $85 billion in cross-government cuts are scheduled to go into effect on Friday. Approximately 5.3 percent of the ICE budget would be cut.

“As fiscal uncertainty remains over the continuing resolution and possible sequestration, ICE has reviewed its detained population to ensure detention levels stay within ICE’s current budget,” Christensen said in a statement. “Over the last week, ICE has reviewed several hundred cases and placed these individuals on methods of supervision less costly than detention.

“All of these individuals remain in removal proceedings,” Christensen added. “Priority for detention remains on serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety.”

The illegals were granted supervised release, under which defendants in immigration cases must abide by a strict reporting schedule that might include attending appointments at regional ICE offices and telephone and electronic monitoring, Christensen said.

Christensen said she could not specify how many detainees had been released, nationally or in Arizona, or when the releases began.

But a source who was not authorized to speak on the record told Newsmax that slightly more than 300 immigrants had been released across the country since last Thursday — with about 50 from Pinal County facilities — and all were classified as low-security threats.

Still, Babeau said that any release of illegals in Pinal County, regardless of how they’re designated by ICE, posed a threat because two major interstate highways intersect in the county. “We are one of the most-impacted counties in the country for drugs and human smuggling,” he said.

Pinal County, located in central Arizona, is located between Phoenix and Tucson. It spans about 5,400 square miles and has about 400,000 residents. The Sheriff’s Department, with 214 sworn deputies, manages a jail with about 1,500 inmates, Babeau said.

“A lot of these people weren’t even arrested here. They weren’t arrested in my county,” he said. “A lot of them were arrested in Phoenix or somewhere else, and they’re brought into my county — and now, they are released on the streets and in my neighborhoods.”

Babeau said it doesn’t matter that the illegals are now on supervised release.

“It is unacceptable for anyone to believe that’s feasible. These are people who have defied and disrespected our law to come into our country — and we’ve had a problem even stopping them from coming into our sovereign country — so how do we think we’re going to be able to supervise release for criminal illegals?” Babeau asked. “They don’t respect the law.”

Meanwhile, other GOP legislators on Capitol Hill joined with McCain in blasting the White House over the detainee releases.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said they jeopardized the chances for a deal on immigration reform between the White House and Congress.

“It is clear the administration is using the [budget cuts known as the sequester] as a convenient excuse to bow to political pressure from the amnesty groups, as it did with its unilateral decision to confer legal status on millions who are not lawfully present,” Sessions said.

“With this new action, the administration has further demonstrated that it has no commitment to enforcing the law and cannot be trusted to deliver on any future promises of enforcement.”

And House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte was just as brutal.

“It’s abhorrent that President Obama is releasing criminals into our communities to promote his political agenda on sequestration,” the Virginia Republican said.

“By releasing criminal immigrants onto the streets, the administration is needlessly endangering American lives,” he said. “It also undermines our efforts to come together with the administration and reform our nation’s immigration laws.”

David Yonkman, Newsmax’s Washington Correspondent, contributed to this report.

U.S. military command in Afghanistan to revise count of Taliban attacks -- whoops, jihadists aren't in decline after all

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

Sorry, folks, we aren't winning after all. Not that we really even want to. "AP Newsbreak: Drop in Taliban attacks incorrect," by Robert Burns for the Associated Press, February 26:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S.-led military command in Afghanistan incorrectly reported a decline last year in Taliban attacks and is preparing to publish corrected numbers that could undercut its narrative of a Taliban in steep decline. 
After finding what they called clerical errors, military officials in Kabul said Tuesday that a 7 percent drop in "enemy initiated attacks" for the period from January through December 2012 reported last month will be corrected to show no change in the number of attacks during that span.
The 7 percent figure had been included in a report posted on the coalition's website until it was removed recently without explanation. After The Associated Press inquired about the missing report, coalition officials said they were correcting the data and would re-publish the report.
"During a quality control check, ISAF recently became aware that some data was incorrectly entered into the database that is used for tracking security-related incidents across Afghanistan," said Jamie Graybeal, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition known officially as the International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF.
Graybeal said a subsequent audit determined that portions of the data from unilateral Afghan military operations were "not properly reflected" in the trends ISAF had reported in its monthly updates on security and violence.
"After including this unilateral ANSF (Afghan National Security Force) data into our database, we have determined that there was no change in the total number of EIAs (enemy initiated attacks) from 2011 to 2012," Graybeal said.
"This was a record-keeping error that we recognized and have now corrected," he added.
The coalition defines enemy initiated attacks as attacks by small arms, mortars, rockets and improvised explosive devices, or IEDs. But it does not include IEDs that are found and cleared before they explode.
Trends in Taliban attacks are one yardstick used by ISAF to measure war progress. Others include the state of security in populated areas, the number of coalition and Afghan casualties, the degree to which civilians can move about freely, and the performance of Afghan security forces.
Graybeal said that even though the number of 2012 Taliban attacks was unchanged from 2011, "our assessment of the fundamentals of campaign progress has not changed. The enemy is increasingly separated from the population and the ANSF are currently in the lead for the vast majority of partnered operations."
Wishful thinking.

The Malignancy in Federal Medical Research

The Malignancy in Federal Medical Research

By: Terry Jeffrey / Townhall Columnist

When George W. Bush was stumping as a "compassionate conservative" in the closing days of the 2000 presidential campaign, he went to Florida and repeated a campaign promise to double the funding for the National Institutes of Health. 

"I will lead a medical moon shot to reach far beyond what seems possible today and discover new cures for age-old afflictions," Bush said.

After he won Florida by a famously narrow margin -- and thus was elected president despite losing the nationwide popular vote -- Bush basically made good on his funding promise.

In fiscal 2000, the NIH spent $15.415 billion; in fiscal 2008, it spent $29.847 billion; and in fiscal 2012, it spent $32.781 billion. Even when adjusted for inflation, NIH spending grew from $20.55 billion in constant 2012 dollars in 2000 to $32.781 billion in 2012 -- an increase of about 60 percent.

Now President Obama is complaining that the minor curtailments in anticipated federal spending that he signed into law in 2011 in exchange for a $2.4-trillion increase in the national debt will decimate the NIH's research capabilities.

"Even President Bush's director of the National Institutes of Health says these cuts will set back medical science for a generation," Obama said in his weekly radio address.

Dr. Francis Collins, the current director of NIH, told Congressional Quarterly last week that the sequester requires the agency to cut $1.5 billion from its annual budget -- which would still leave NIH about 50 percent bigger in real terms then it was 12 years ago.

Sequestration at NIH, said Collins, would mean "across-the-board damage to virtually everything."

In fact, Congress needs to pay much closer attention to exactly how the now-bloated NIH is spending borrowed federal dollars.

In 2008, for example, Pete Winn of did a story about the NIH spending more than $1 million on a project that studied hookah smoking in Syria. In 2009, Edwin Mora of did a story about the NIH paying $2.6 million for a project that focused on the drinking habits of prostitutes in China.

Most recently, Liz Harrington of reported that National Cancer Institute-funded researchers at the University of California at San Francisco had discovered that "astroturfing" by the tobacco industry had helped create the tea party movement.

Did America need these studies? No.

As President Obama hypes the impact of the sequester, Congress should begin aggressively investigating and exposing where taxpayers' money has actually been going in recent years. Over the last three presidential terms, the growth in the federal government has been obscene.

In fiscal 2000, federal spending was 18.2 percent of gross domestic product and the federal government ran a surplus. In fiscal 2012, federal spending was 24.3 percent of GDP and the federal government ran a $1-trillion-plus deficit for the fourth year in a row.

It is true that much of the growth in federal spending is driven by entitlements -- including the Medicare prescription drug plan, a new entitlement signed into law by George W. Bush. But, at the same time, Congress and the last two presidents have also driven up discretionary spending.

The National Institutes of Health is a good case study in how both parties have worked to expand that spending. Bush, a Republican, campaigned promising to double the size of NIH as a way of persuading voters in swing states like Florida that he was compassionate and ready to spend other people's money to advance what he perceived to be their interests. Obama, a Democrat, has no intention of reversing the upward spending trajectory Bush endorsed and set for NIH.

Other than through the sequester -- if they now let it go forward -- Republican leaders in Congress have shown no will to turn things around.

They should let the sequester hit NIH and every other government agency. Then they should come back to Washington next Monday ready to demand far deeper cuts in federal spending as they begin exposing all of the ridiculous things the NIH and other federal agencies have been doing with money borrowed from generations of Americans yet unborn.

The Islamification of Texas

Imagine browsing Facebook one day and discovered a photograph of your 14-year-old daughter wearing a burqa – at school. 
That’s exactly what happened to a parent in Lumberton, Tex. She asked me not to disclose her identity because she fears for her daughter’s safety.

Her daughter’s world geography class was supposed to be learning about the continents. Instead, they were given a tutorial in Islam – complete with authentic Muslim garments. Some of the young ladies were photographed – and the image has now gone viral.

The students were told the purpose of the class was to change their perceptions of Islam. They were instructed to no longer call those who commit terrorist attacks terrorists. Instead, the Muslim terrorists were to be called freedom fighters.

They were also assigned to write an essay based on a Washington Post story that blamed Egypt’s troubles on democracy – instead of the Muslim Brotherhood.

“I am outraged,” the angry mom told me. “I felt my blood pressure go through my head.”

The parent said she was not even aware of the lesson until she discovered the Facebook photograph.

“As parents we should have been made aware this,” she said. “I felt like the line had been crossed.”

The parents said they immediately contacted the principal of the high school who defended the program and said it was required under CSCOPE – a controversial electronic curriculum system that provides online lesson plans for teachers.

“The principal told me it was world geography and they have to learn this stuff,” she said. I called Janice VanCleave, a vocal critic of the CSCOPE program and the founder of Texas CSCOPE Review. She said the education program is without question promoting the Islamic religion – and students are not given the full story.

“They are not telling students how these young women are treated in this religion,” she told me. “In the Islamic countries women are not treated well at all.”

Last month, evidence was presented at a state hearing showing that CSCOPE offered a number of lessons about Islam.

One particular lesson instructed teachers to provide classroom readings of selected texts from the Koran.
Students were also taught that Allah is God.

CSCOPE offered no comparable lessons on Christianity or Judaism, VanCleave told Fox News.

“I do think CSCOPE promotes the Islamic religion,” she said. “I don’t think it’s right to be proselytizing the Islamic religion in our schools.”

She’s got a point.

Imagine for just a moment the school directing Muslim children to dress up like priests – or pretend to be baptized in a pool of water.

There would be significant outrage. The national media would dispatch satellite trucks to Lumberton and produce one-hour specials about anti-Muslim fervor in the Bible Belt.

Something strange is happening in Texas. Public schools are embracing Islamic values and traditions while Christian values and traditions are being given the boot.

And unless parents rise up and put a stop to the Islamification of their school system – the Bible Belt could very well become the Koran Belt.
islam and sharia law...the enemy amongst us
By: Diane Sori

While we've all been focused on sequestration, ObamaCare, and Obama's anti-American, pro-islam* cabinet appointments, stealthily and under the radar, islam and sharia law creeps into our country with its goal of turning America into an islamic caliphate.  As CAIR founder Omar M. Ahmad says, and I quote verbatim, "islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant...the qur'an, the muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

NO...I don't think so for...

...islam is barbaric, perverted, and vile...a throwback to days when men were NOT civilized...islam...a religion it is NOT for religion is supposed to bring comfort, peace of mind, love, calmness, and joy to the heart and soul of its followers, and islam is the antithesis of all that for islam has NO heart...islam has NO soul...just barbaric act after barbaric act perpetrated upon the innocent.  islam's followers bring to the world and now to our shores a hatred of all things American...and a hatred of our one true living God and all He stands for and all we believe in Him...and brings it in the guise of jihadists commanded by the qur'an to kill us all for we are the infidels...the enemy of islam..the enemy of allah.

And muslims in America do indeed share with jihadists a hatred of America and of our one true living God along with the desire to remake our beloved country into a nation ruled by the doctrines of militant other words the tenets of sharia law.  This is obvious for the simple fact is that without speaking out either as a group or as individuals to condemn jihad, the silence of the muslims in America sends the message...NO it's more than a sends a warning of condoning...condoning those that hate us for those muslims living in our country will try to convert us infidels, because that's the only possible justification for them living in our infidel land.  Convert us or kill us to be more exact for they came to our shores for one reason and one reason establish 'allah's din' [faith] and if we do NOT subjugate ourselves to 'allah's din' then we will be killed according to the commands of the qur'an.

And kill us is becoming a reality as stealth jihad is now spreading its tentacles within our cities and towns. The just happened case of a muslim man who is behind bars in New Jersey facing murder and desecration charges after beheading two Egyptian Christians and cutting off their hands is a perfect example of creeping jihad. Beheadings...the mark of a jihadist...religiously motivated and according to Pamela Geller, the executive director of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), are consistent with muslim teachings, because the victims were Coptic Christians living in America and the murderer was muslim, and we all know how Coptic Christians in Egypt are treated by the now Muslim Brotherhood controlled government.

(qur'an verse 8:12) “When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!”

This the murderer did all in the name of allah...allah...the made-up supposed 'god' born from the delusions of a madman.  muslim religious killings in our our Judeo/Christian America...a nation that lives by the laws of morality of the one true living God.  And acts like this are becoming NOT uncommon now...they're just NOT being reported by the msm who've been 'instructed' (and we all know by whom) to say little or nothing for time is needed to prepare the 'standard story line' that this now to be called 'incident' was just another case of being done by one who 'misunderstood' the religion of peace. (gag)

And with this qur'an sanctioned islamic brutality comes its partner sharia law, a system of 'moral' codes that governs all aspects of muslim life...if you call the codes of conduct muslims live by 'moral'.  sharia law...a barbaric set of rules where women are treated as chattel...the property of their husbands to do with as they wish...and the wishes of muslim men are brutal if nothing else.  And the man will NOT be punished no matter how harsh he is with her nor are there 'safe places' for her to run to for help as there are no public or private shelters for abused women under sharia law.  Throwing acid in a women's face is standard practice for perceived wrongs, and while the woman suffers unimaginable agony the man rejoices that his honor has been restored for whatever wrong he believes her to have done.  Under sharia law women must be veiled or worse...encased in the garbage bag known as a, claustrophobic, and at times outright suffocating.  Under sharia law women are jailed for being victims of rape, they're lashed until raw then buried up to their neck and stoned to death for adultery, and lesbians (and gay men) are put to death for simply being gay. 
And nor should we forget the seldom mentioned but barbaric and outright vile practice of female circumcision that's condoned and encouraged under islam and sharia law.

Sadly, in some cases when acts such as these are brought to trial here in our country they're NOT being tried under our laws but under sharia law.  In Arizona, just a few months ago, a muslim mother was sentenced to two years' probation after beating and setting her teenage daughter on fire, because the girl refused to go along with an arranged marriage and was caught talking to a boy at her high school.  And a devout muslim father who cut his daughter's neck with a knife, and who freely admitted that he tried to kill her, which he said was his right under islam, was freed.  Both were tried in American courts but under the rules of sharia law which says honor violence is encouraged and accepted, and that honor killing of ones offspring is sanctioned under islam.

So while we know that sharia law has indeed entered our halls of justice as witnessed by these few rulings, thankfully a growing number of states are drafting constitutional amendments to prohibit state judges from applying Islamic or international law in deciding cases.  Some states even have laws already in place to stop this nonsense.  Kansas, for example, has legislation prohibiting judges in the state from considering foreign law (sharia is a foreign law) in their rulings.

Thank you Kansas for insisting that American legal principles...not foreign ones...apply in Kansas.

And all this and so much more is happening right here in our country, and happening more and more every day but hey, we have to 'respect islam' according to our president (gag) Barack HUSSEIN Obama...the man who welcomed the Muslim Brotherhood into the White House through the front door but made Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu enter and leave through the back door.

Will I respect islam...NOT a chance...accept sharia law...NO way...NOT in my beloved America...and I'm sure I'm NOT alone in my feelings.

*For those who were wondering, I NEVER capitalize the words muslim, islam, allah, qur'an, sharia law, or burqa as to do so shows respect, and I have NO respect for muslims, islam, allah, the qur'an, sharia law, or the burqa.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Senate Judiciary Committee to Hold Vote on Anti-Gun BillsBy Greg Campbell / TPNN Contributor

The proposed ban on weapons deemed “assault weapons” has drawn much criticism from the right and much praise from the left. However, even its supporters realize that passing the bill through both the Senate and the Republican-controlled House will be a challenge. The president and vice president has made an effort to drum up support in the media and by travelling to various parts of the country to outline their support for the bill and other anti-gun rights legislation.

Now, the proposed bill will face one of the first serious hurdles as a key test vote will occur in the Senate Judiciary Committee perhaps as early as Wednesday. The vote will decide whether the proposed assault weapons ban should be presented to the Senate.

The Senate Judiciary Meeting is set to consider four anti-gun rights bills that have created quite a rift between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate. The bills are the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (Feinstein), the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 (Leahy), the Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 (Schumer), and the School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013 (Boxer).

The USA Today reported,
“The future of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, which would ban 157 kinds of ‘military-style’ assault weapons, is gloomy at best in the Democratic-controlled Senate and worse in the Republican-dominated House of Representatives. Neither the House nor the Senate versions of the assault weapons ban have Republican co-sponsors.
Lawmakers who have championed the bill acknowledged that its path to passage would be difficult but hoped that public opinion would help push hesitant lawmakers to give it a second look.
‘I recognize it’s an uphill battle, but I also know that these events are going to continue and America has to step up,’ Feinstein, D-Calif., told MSNBC on Monday. ‘I think we will make the case that this is constitutional, I think we will make the case that these weapons do not belong on the streets of our cities.’”
Despite the campaign-style approach to pushing for gun control laws, the bills are certainly facing an uphill battle as the issue is a controversial issue that has been awash in much divisive rhetoric. While anti-gun rights advocates urge America to “do something,” the framers of the anti-gun bills have done little in explaining, exactly, how their bills would be effective in deterring violent crimes, like the shooting in Newtown.

Further, the Obama Administration has done little to enforce the already-existing gun laws, as prosecutions of gun crimes have slowed considerably in the last few years. In 2010, the Obama Justice Department pursued only 44 instances of background check violations in a year that saw 72,600 applications denied on the basis of a background check. Vice President Biden insisted to the NRA that they don’t have the “time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”

The Judiciary Committee vote could happen as early as Wednesday; however, Republicans could stall and push the vote until next week. If the committee brings the bills to the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he will allow them to be brought up for a vote. Although, several centrist Democrats have expressed hesitation as 2014 is not too far away and the tough vote is likely endanger several Democrats who hold moderate or pro-gun rights leanings. Even Senator Reid, liberal on many issues, has endeared himself to NRA members in recent years.

Food Stamps: Policy or Political Payoff

Food Stamps: Policy or Political Payoff
In an early strategic preparation for the struggle to avoid the fiscal cliff, the president and several Democratic luminaries decided to redefine as essential several entitlement programs. In an old fashioned way of manipulating the public, they began to redefine commonly held beliefs. In the interest of time, we will share only one example.

Last December, Newark Mayor Cory Booker spent a much-publicized week trying to live the life of a food stamp recipient. And after a nationwide media tour, we learned many valuable lessons. First of all, we learned that giving up your daily Starbucks causes headaches, and leftovers are not as pleasant as five-star dining. Publicity stunts aside, food stamp usage is indeed at an all-time high. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported recently that nearly 48 million people were enrolled in the SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). This is both the largest number of people and the largest percentage of the population ever.

In some ways this is unsurprising: we are in the midst of a weak economy. The program was intended to be supplemental; not a replacement for a family’s entire food budget. It follows that an increasing number of families might have difficulty putting food on the table. A closer look at the situation, however, raises some concerns.

The first is that people are not necessarily “turning to” food stamps, as much as they are being recruited to receive them. Since 2008, the USDA has produced Spanish language radio advertisements about SNAP, with the expressed goal of increasing the number of Spanish speaking individuals receiving food stamps. The spots were created in the style of popular Spanish language soap operas. In each episode, characters talk to one another about the benefits of food stamps and how important they are to good health. Often they encourage others to overcome their “pride” of self-sufficiency and enroll in the program.

The USDA believes that increasing SNAP enrollment among the Latino population will improve their overall health and well being. The USDA’s website, explaining why it wants to increase enrollment while the federal government is running a trillion dollar deficit, says the campaign exists so that everyone “can feed their families healthy, nutritious food.” Apparently, they believe there are many “unreached” Latinos who cannot do this without government aid.

This is not new territory for the food stamp program. During the early days of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs, thousands of federal “recruiters” were deployed to the black community to persuade African Americans to overcome their pride and accept food stamps. The USDA magazine reported in 1972 that, "With careful explanations . . . coupled with intensive outreach efforts, resistance from the 'too prouds' is bending.”

The USDA accomplished its mission: approximately 25% of black Americans are now enrolled in SNAP, and many of those households have been receiving food stamps for two generations. Has this improved black American health, as the USDA claims it will for Latinos? African Americans, even after three generations of food stamps, have lower life expectancies than whites (74.3 years to 78.4, respectively).

While starvation is largely a thing of the past in America, blacks suffer from higher rates of heart disease, obesity and diabetes than their white counterparts. Ironically, Hispanic Americans currently outlive both whites and blacks.

As Professor Gary Galles of Pepperdine University points out:
Studies find little difference between the nutritional adequacy of the diets of low- and high-income families, so that the problem is vastly overstated. Added food spending also often fails to improve nutrition, as less nutritious but more convenient pre-prepared food is substituted for healthier home-prepared food. Further, obesity is a more common problem among low-income families today than lack of food. Therefore, trying to force recipients to consume more food than they would otherwise by giving food aid instead of cash would probably do little to improve nutrition, but would worsen obesity problems.
So it is by no means clear that increased enrollment in the food stamp program will improve the health of Latinos in our country. The aggressive USDA campaign goes to the heart of the program’s mission. The federal food stamp program was begun in 1939 as a way to get rid of large agricultural surpluses that the government had purchased from farmers. Years of the Great Depression had made hunger a real danger for some Americans, particularly in cities, but the program was discontinued in 1943 when widespread unemployment and unmarketable crop surpluses were no longer issues.

Food stamps were revived in the 1960s as part of President Johnson’s Great Society, and federal recruiters were dispatched to increase enrollment in the program. This marked a decided shift in the philosophy of what enables people to actually get out of poverty. One of the elders in my church, a PhD in economics, was actually apart of evaluating the effectiveness of the early food stamps program. The problems with the program are the same today as they were then. A man with “get-up-and-go” would rather have help establishing a new business or leveraging the support he receives from the government.

The American Dream was built on the idea of self-reliance: that given sufficient opportunity, anyone could succeed by hard work and determination. Despite slavery and Jim Crow, black income rose at a faster rate before Johnson’s programs than it did afterwards.

Anyone who works among the poor in America today knows the rarity of that “pride of self-reliance,” they also see the problem of generational poverty in both urban and rural America. Like crack cocaine, the government dole is very addictive. Blacks and Latinos need policies that will empower them, not federal recruiters to lure them into greater dependence. And at a time of unprecedented deficits—when our government needs to both raise revenues and cut spending—we need SNAP to enroll only those truly in need.

John Kerry...a dangerous man

Kerry assures Syrian jihadists that U.S. help is on the way

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

Madness -- ultimately of the suicidal variety.

"Kerry urges Syrian opposition to attend Rome talks," by Matthew Lee for the Associated Press, February 25:
LONDON (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry tried Monday to patch back together a conference with Syrian opposition leaders that was to be the centerpiece of his debut overseas trip, urging Syrian rebel leaders not to boycott the meeting and insisting that more help is on the way in their fight against President Bashar Assad. 
Kerry not only made a public plea at a joint news conference Monday with British Foreign Secretary William Hague, he also called Moaz Khatib, leader of the Syrian Opposition Council, "to encourage him to come to Rome," a senior U.S. official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
Kerry was in London for the first leg of his first trip as secretary of state — a hectic nine-country dash through Europe and the Middle East. The trip includes a Syrian opposition conference Thursday in Rome, which some members of the sharply divided Syrian opposition council have threatened to boycott.

Kerry also dispatched his top Syrian envoy to Cairo in hopes of convincing opposition leaders that their participation in the conference in Rome is critical to addressing questions from potential donors and securing additional aid from the United States and Europe.
The Rome meeting is the centerpiece of Kerry's nine-nation tour of Europe and the Middle East.
"We are not coming to Rome simply to talk," Kerry told reporters in London. "We are coming to Rome to talk about next steps."
Kerry said he was sympathetic to the opposition's complaints that the international community had not done enough, and noted that as a senator he had called for the Obama administration to consider military aid to the Syrian opposition.
But he also noted that he now is part of the administration and "and the president of the United States has sent me here ... because he is concerned about the course of events."
"This moment is ripe for us to be considering what more we can do," he said, adding that if the opposition wants results, "join us."...
Op-ed:                                                                          Gun control = gun confiscation
By: Diane Sori

Gun control advocacy, as we all know, is just useless leftist drivel for trying to find out who has and doesn't have firearms in their possession, as the fact is that gun control simply does NOTHING to control crime.  Case in point...last year law-abiding citizens used firearms 2.5 million times in self-defense against criminals...equating out to about 6,850 times a day.  This means that last year, firearms were used 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.

More facts prove that gun control doesn't work...facts like Washington DC having the strictest gun laws in the country yet their death rate from guns is 5 times higher than the general average...facts like Utah having one of the most liberal concealed carry policies in the country yet their death rates from guns is one of the lowest....facts like firearm deaths actually fall as millions obtain permits to carry concealed weapons because criminals are NOT going to go to the local gun dealer and submit to a background check to purchase a gun...facts like in recent years the number of guns in this country increased by roughly 40 million even while the murder rate decreased by almost 40%...facts like concealed carry laws have reduced murder and crime rates in all the states that have enacted them...facts like my home state of Florida is one million valid concealed weapon and firearm licenses strong, and Florida's gun death rate is amongst the lowest in the country.

Bottom line...concealed carry is the answer to reducing crime NOT gun control.  Concealed carry could have done just that in these two incidents alone...James Holmes, the Aurora, Colorado shooter choose a movie theater that promoted itself as a 'gun free zone'.  There were theaters closer to him with larger seating capacities that allowed concealed carry, but mentally ill individuals do NOT want to be confronted with someone who is armed and could shoot back.  So instead he chose to do his nasty deed in a theater where he knew the movie goers would NOT be armed...just as the 'monster' in Newtown, Connecticut did when he chose to murder 27 people, 21 of which were children, in a 'gun free school zone'.

Again, concealed carry is the answer to reducing crime for even The Journal of the American Medical Association and the CDC has found that the Brady Bill, the most important piece of federal gun control legislation in decades, failed to reduce murder rates.  The Brady Bill (which established a national system for quickly checking the background of a prospective handgun purchaser) has had no statistically discernable effect on reducing gun deaths, according to Philip J. Cook, a Duke University professor of public policy, economics and sociology, who is regarded as the nation's foremost authority on gun control, who flat out said, "The Brady Bill seems to have been a failure."

The country's foremost gun control bill is a complete failure so why would any new bill do any wouldn't.

And as for the dreaded 'assault weapon' being the gun of choice for shooters, gun statistics can't prove that because some sources track 'gun deaths' (a combination of accidental shootings, suicides and homicides) rather than the type of firearm used in the related death, and those that do often group all rifles together, so there is no differentiation noted between hunting rifles and so-called 'assault rifles.'  Also, homicides are only tracked if they're known, and guns used in self-defense but NOT fired are NOT for example, we have NO way of truly knowing how many would-be rapists turned and ran when a gun was drawn.

When a gun was drawn...NOT like that idiot representative in Colorado who said to blow a whistle, pee, vomit, or tell the would-be rapist you have a 'disease.'

Why then are facts, logic and common sense so hard for Obama and his fellow miscreants in DC and the 'blue states' so hard to understand...why...because stopping crime is NOT their objective and NEVER was for if it were they'd be working their butts off to come up with ways to stop criminals from getting guns NOT getting down the backs of law-abiding firearms owners with all this registration and magazine limitation nonsense...and this just proves that their true objective is indeed disarming 'We the People'...the world's largest militia.

And disarmament starts small with the left bloviating that background checks and gun registration will be the panacea to solve everything, but the wise words of NRA/CEO Wayne LaPierre stick in my mind..."This so-called universal background check that you're hearing about all over the aimed at one thing: It's aimed at registering your guns...And when another tragic opportunity presents itself, that registry will be used to confiscate your guns."

LaPierre continues that the lefts assault on our unhindered right to bear arms is "the single most devastating attack on the Second Amendment that this country has ever seen."

And how right he is on all accounts.

"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of them people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

So says the Second Amendment and in 1897, the US Supreme Court ruled in Robertson v. Baldwin that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons."  On June 26, 2008, the US Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment guarantees "the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”  This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment, and that the Bill of Rights included a guarantee of the personal right to own a gun.  On June 28, 2010, the US Supreme Court again ruled 5 to 4 in McDoanlad v. Chicago that the findings in District of Columbia v. Heller apply to the state and local governments in addition to federal jurisdictions like DC.

So logic and these Supreme Court rulings should have ended all debate on gun control, but of course it hasn't for again the lefts true agenda is NOT gun control but gun confiscation.  And so it begins one state at a time as the New Jersey Assembly's Democratic majority recently passed 22, YES 22, gun-control bills to supposedly help curb gun violence.  22 bills are needed for criminals NOT to buy guns (as if a criminal goes into a store to buy a gun)...give me a break as they know as well as you and I that inanimate objects are NOT the cause of the violence...the individuals who pull the triggers are.

But NO matter as confiscating our guns state by state is the plan, but Obama's dream of disarming us will turn into Obama's nightmare if he and his cohorts so much as dare to try for 'behind every blade of grass...' just saying...

Monday, February 25, 2013

More Code Words 
by / Personal  Liberty Di

More Code WordsJust about one year ago, I told you about some of thecode words that are devised in the back rooms and inner sanctums of power. These words are repeated over and over in order to dumb us down and create conditioned responses.

While we know in our subconscious the true meaning of most of these words, repetition ad nauseam of their changed definition causes the new definition to be adopted by the masses and then accepted as conventionalwisdom. The words and phrases are then used to drive the debate and create ready acceptance of laws and policies that reduce liberty. Once they are adopted, challenges to these newly accepted definitions are ridiculed and dismissed.

Here are some more code words or phrases to add to the list:

Conspiracy theory: Any challenge to conventional wisdom. The elites prefer that their messages, as broadcast by their mainstream media mouthpieces, be blindly accepted without question. Asking questions — even those pointing out the obvious fallacies in the message — is labeled “conspiracy.” In fact, the conspiracy lies in those in the MSM who parrot the message without thought and investigation.

Legitimate news source: A control phrase used to bolster the concept that the only “real” news comes from the mainstream media, the propaganda mouthpiece of the 1 percent. Six megacorporations now control 90 percent of what we see and hear on a daily basis. The only true and legitimate news sources are now found on the Internet.

For the children: Used as a substitute for what it really means; bad policy or really bad policy. Tyrants and dictators have long cloaked themselves with the faces of children. Higher-form creatures take every effort to protect their young, and humans are no exception. So any policy, no matter how feckless, is accepted if it can be sold as a protector of the children. “For the children” rivals “to keep us safe” as the most dangerous of phrases that result in loss of freedom.

Sequestration: President Barack Obama’s plan to avoid responsibility for proposed insignificant cuts to the growth of leviathan government and create another wedge issue in his ongoing class warfare battle. The elected class will do nothing to cut government. Doing so reduces their power and gives them less “playing room” when it comes time to “spread the wealth around” to their cronies and corporate masters.

The proposed $1.2 trillion in cuts over 10 years are not cuts as real people understand them, but a reduction in the baseline increases that occur automatically in government. They are completely insignificant, though the 1 percent will use them to create fear of impending doom and gloom.

Revenues: A replacement word for taxes that still means confiscation of wealth from producers to the 1 percent for redistribution to the dependent class and corporatist interests.

Investments: A control word now used in place of “spending.” It is money transferred to favored pass-through industries that get special incentives and funnel the money back to the war chests of politicians.

Quantitative easing: The world’s greatest check kiting scheme, which dwarfs anything Charles Ponzi or Bernie Madoff could have imagined. It is simply currency debasement and destruction and an involuntary transfer of wealth from you, the taxpayers, to a narrow financial elite. It is by far the largest looting in the history of the world.

Stimulus: Abstractions and illusions designed to make people think that wealth can be created by printing money and transferring it to the corrupt banking system and other industries and labor unions favored by the 1 percent. It has resulted in an unsustainable stock market bubble that is giving a false sense of recovery when, in fact, the U.S. economy is in dire shape. Freight shipments are at their lowest levels in two years, gasoline prices have risen every day for more than a month and are up more than 50 cents in two months, retailers are projecting the closure of hundreds of stores this year, Wal-Mart sales for the year are a “total disaster,” gross domestic product contracted at an annual rate of .1 percent during the fourth quarter of 2012, the economies of the richest countries contracted in the last quarter and corporate insiders are dumping stocks.

Extremist: Anyone who advocates for a smaller, less intrusive government, opposes all policies that are unConstitutional and rejects compromise on Constitutional principles.

Minimum wage: Another wedge issue designed to incite the dependent class against the producers. In his State of the Union address, Obama proposed raising the minimum wage from $7.25 to $9, a 24 percent increase. He did so with the implication that it was not a “living wage” and that there are people trying to raise a family on minimum wage. This is a false notion. Minimum-wage jobs are held by young people (mostly), some seniors (who work to stay busy and/or overcome the effects of inflation and artificially low interest rates on their pensions and savings) and people working a second job. In fact, raising the minimum wage would harm each of those segments, as the businesses would eliminate many of those jobs rather than absorb or pass along the wage increases. Increasing the minimum wage would also lead to higher prices on goods and services, thereby eliminating any benefits that might accrue from the additional wages paid to a smaller number of employees. A higher minimum wage coupled with Obamacare mandates in a sagging economy with no jobs for young workers — who currently have an unemployment rate of 23.4 percent (according to phony government data) — is a job killer that will drive even more people to government dependency.

Inflation: Inflation is not rising prices. It is an increase in the money supply that devalues the dollars in circulation. As Alan Greenspan said in 1966 (before he sold his soul to the banksters), inflation is a “scheme for the hidden confiscation of wealth.” This is something that probably not one in a million people understands, yet it is an issue that is of utmost importance. Henry Hazlitt wrote in What You Should Know About Inflation: “As the money supply is increased, people have more money to offer for goods. But if the supply of goods doesn’t increase — or increases at a slower pace than the money supply — the prices of goods goes up. Each individual dollar becomes less valuable because there are more dollars available. This leads to more of them being offered for a commodity. A ‘price’ is an exchange ratio between a dollar and a unit of goods. When people have more dollars, they value them less. Goods then rise in price, not because there are fewer goods than before, but rather because there are more dollars available.”