Thursday, July 31, 2014

The Left’s Absolutely, Bone-Crushingly, Mindless Buffoons

By Craig Andresen  / The National Patriot

check 1Jumping the shark is the term used in show business when any particular series, movie or television, has gone past the point of no return with something so inane and ridiculous that people, even their die-hard fans, simply give up and stop watching.

It originated when Fonzie used water skis to jump over a tank with a live shark swimming in it and basically, that was the end of any interest in Happy Days.

The Obama regime has, officially, jumped the shark.

All but the completely Kool Aid soaked liberal/socialists and progressives, those so overtly inebriated on the juice that they can no longer utter a three word sentence, are now asking themselves…What in THE HELL???

Folks, you cannot make this stuff up. They actually said these things and there is no turning back because…they actually MEANT to say these things.

First…let’s lend an ear or an eye to the shark-jumping words of one Hillary Clinton…

To read the entire article click on link:
It has been well established under the Constitution and throughout our history that the president's job as the chief federal law enforcement officer permits him to put his ideological stamp on the nature of the work done by the executive branch. The courts have characterized this stamp as "discretion."

Thus when exercising their discretion, some presidents veer toward authority, others toward freedom. John Adams prosecuted a congressman whose criticism brought him into disrepute, an act protected by the First Amendment yet punishable under the Alien and Sedition Acts, and Thomas Jefferson declined to enforce the Acts because they punished speech, and pardoned all those convicted. Jimmy Carter asserted vast federal regulatory authority over the trucking and airline industries, and Ronald Reagan undid nearly all of it.

The president has discretion to adapt law enforcement to the needs of the times and to his reading of the wishes of the American people. Yet that discretion has a serious and mandatory guiding light -- namely, that the president will do so faithfully.

The word "faithfully" appears in the oath of office that is administered to every president. The reason for its use is to assure Americans that their wishes for government behavior, as manifested in written law, would be carried out even if the president personally disagrees with the laws he swore to enforce.

This has not always worked as planned. President George W. Bush once famously signed into law a statute prohibiting federal agents without a search warrant from reading mail sent to persons other than themselves -- and as he was literally holding his pen, he stated he had no intention of enforcing it. That was a rejection of his presidential duties and a violation of his oath.

But today, President Obama has taken the concept of discretion and so distorted it, and has taken the obligation of faithful enforcement and so rejected it, that his job as chief law enforcer has become one of incompetent madness or chief lawbreaker. Time after time, in areas as disparate as civil liberties, immigration, foreign affairs and health care, the president has demonstrated a propensity for rejecting his oath and doing damage to our fabric of liberty that cannot easily be undone by a successor.

Item: He has permitted unconstitutional and unbridled spying on all Americans all the time, and he has dispatched his agents to lie and mislead the American people and their elected representatives in Congress about it. This has resulted in a federal culture in which the supposed servants of the people have become our permanent and intimate monitors and squealers on what they observe.

Item: He has permitted illegal immigrants to remain here and continue to break the law, and he has instructed them on how to get away with it. His encouragement has resulted in the flood of tens of thousands of foreign unaccompanied children being pushed across our borders. This has resulted in culture shock to children now used as political pawns, the impairment of their lives and the imposition of grievous financial burdens upon local and state governments.

Item: His agents fomented a revolution in Libya that resulted in the murder of that country's leader, the killing of the U.S. ambassador and the evacuation of the U.S. embassy. His agents fomented a revolution in Ukraine that resulted in a Russian invasion, an active insurgency, sham elections and the killing of hundreds of innocent passengers flying on a commercial airliner.

Item: He has dispatched CIA agents to fight undeclared and secret wars in Yemen and in Pakistan, and he has dispatched unmanned drones to kill innocents there. He has boasted that some secret reading of public positive law permits him to kill whomever he wishes, even Americans and their children.

Item: His State Department has treated Hamas -- a gang of ruthless murderers whose stated purpose is the destruction of Israel -- as if it were a legitimate state deserving of diplomatic niceties, and this has encouraged Hamas to persist in attacking our only serious ally in the Middle East.

Item: His Department of Veterans Affairs has so neglected patients in government hospitals that many of them died, and it even destroyed records to hide its misdeeds. His Internal Revenue Service has enforced the law more heavily against his political opponents than against his friends, and it has destroyed government computer records in order to hide its misdeeds.

Item: He has relieved his friends of the burdens of timely compliance with Obamacare, and he has burdened his enemies with tortured interpretations of that law -- even interpretations that were rejected by the very Congress that enacted the law and interpretations that were invalidated by the Supreme Court.

He has done all these things with a cool indifference, and he has threatened to continue to do so until the pressure builds on his political opponents to see things his way.

The Framers could not have intended a president so devoid of fidelity to the rule of law that it is nearly impossible to distinguish between incompetence and lawlessness -- and I am not sure which is worse. Archbishop Fulton Sheen often said he'd prefer to deal with a smart devil than a stupid one.

But the Framers did give us a remedy, and the remedy is not a frivolous lawsuit that the federal courts will no doubt reject as a political stunt. The remedy is removal from office. This is not to be undertaken lightly, as was the case when this remedy was last used. But it is the remaining constitutional means to save the freedoms the Constitution was intended to guarantee.

The choice is between two more years of government by decree or two years of prosecution. It is a choice the president has imposed upon us all.
Italian journalist leaves Gaza, tells truth once free from Hamas retaliation: Hamas killed those kids
Out of #Gaza far from #Hamas retaliation: misfired rocket killed children yday in Shati. Witness: militants rushed and cleared debris
— gabrielebarbati (@gabrielebarbati) July 29, 2014
@IDFSpokesperson said truth in communique released yesterday about Shati camp massacre. It was not #Israel behind it
— gabrielebarbati (@gabrielebarbati) July 29, 2014

An Italian reporter, after leaving Gaza, confirms that it was a Hamas rocket that hit a school playground, killing 10 kids, but Obama sent Hamas 50 million bucks anyway, while he cancelled tourist visa applications for Israelis.
“Media cover-up of Hamas crimes starting to unravel”, William A. Jacobson, Legal Insurrection, July 29, 2014
Italian journalist leaves Gaza, tells truth once free from Hamas retaliation
Yesterday one of the stories thrust into the mainstream media was nearly simultaneous explosions in a Palestinian neighborhood and at al-Shifa hospital.
The media immediately took the Hamas line that it was Israeli missiles. Later, the IDF stated that it had not fired on those locations, and that the explosions were misfired Hamas or Islamic Jihad missiles.
The media played it as he said, he said.
But an Italian journalist has just left Gaza and is telling the truth about what happened now that he needs not fear Hamas retaliation — Israel was right (h/t Israelly Cool):
How many more of the civilian casualties have been cause by Hamas and Islamic rockets that fell short or misfired? Like Israel says...

14 ways Hamas weaponizes women, children, animals against Israel

  / Jihad Watch

PJ Media has put together an extraordinarily powerful and informative resource here. No one who goes through this material with an open mind will be able to support the “Palestinians.”

A small excerpt with background:
Although in 2005 Israel gave up Gaza to the Palestinians in a naive “land for peace” unilateral withdrawal, the result was not peace but rather over 10,000 rockets fired from Gaza at Israeli civilian communities. Here we show how Hamas and other groups weaponize Palestinian civilians and institutions to attack Israel.
The Hamas Charter of 1988 – Defines the Hamas Mission Against Israel and Jews
Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it.
Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah’s victory is realized.
The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:
“The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.” (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
Read it all, and get your friends and coworkers who support the “Palestinians” to read it.

SHARIA-COMPLIANT Department of Defense orders US troops to refrain from eating or drinking in front of Muslims during Ramadan 


Bare Naked Islam 

They were also told to learn more about Islam and the brigade commander provided a link to a website about Islam, and specifically Ramadan. That’s the directive that has gone out to active duty military personnel at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, a Department of Defense medical and graduate school in Bethesda, Md. The brigade commander sent an email to military personnel before the start of Ramadan, advising them to show respect to Muslim colleagues. 

They'll either sue you or slit your throat
They’ll either sue you or slit your throat.

FOX News via TROP “This is a period of great personal restraint and commitment in addition to renewed focus on worship,” Brigade Commander Col. Kevin Glasz wrote. “I’d like to encourage you to learn just a little more about this religion, but more importantly, I’m asking you to be considerate and do not consume food or drink in front of our Muslim colleagues; it is a simple, yet respectful action.” During the month-long period known as Ramadan, Muslims refrain from eating or drinking during daylight hours.

Don’t Fall For This ‘Patriotic’ Smokescreen
by  / Personal Liberty Digest
Don’t Fall For This ‘Patriotic’ Smokescreen
Wouldn’t you know it? Barack Obama and his cohorts have found yet another way to blame those greedy, bloodsucking profit-seekers (otherwise known as American businesses) for tarnishing the American dream.

What’s the latest sin of those dastardly companies?

It’s having the unmitigated gall to move their headquarters out of this country in order to save on taxes. How dare they! Aren’t they supposed to put their country’s need for more money ahead of their shareholders’ desire for more profits?

“My attitude is, I don’t care if it’s legal, it’s wrong,” the President thundered during a recent speech. He called on Congress to fast-track legislation to make such relocations (known as “inversions”) illegal. In the meantime, he and other Democratic officials said companies should demonstrate their “economic patriotism” by resisting the lure of moving abroad.

So now the “patriotic” thing for a company to do is to pay more in taxes than it needs to, so our bloated Big Brother government can increase in size and power. That sure makes sense, doesn’t it?

Before you jump on this leftist bandwagon and accuse some American companies of putting profits before patriotism, please consider the following:
  • First, the U.S. tax rate on corporate profits is the highest in the developed world. American companies must pay a combined corporate income-tax rate of 39.1 percent. At 35 percent, Federal taxes represent the lion’s share of that amount.
  • But here’s an even bigger kicker: Our government insists on collecting those taxes on every dollar of profits a company makes anywhere in the world, if they are foolish enough to bring their gains back to the United States. How much money have U.S. companies left overseas, just to avoid to paying those usurious U.S. taxes? Estimates are that the grand total is somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 trillion. Ladies and gentlemen, that is a very expensive neighborhood.
Here’s an idea: How about granting a tax holiday to any company that will bring some of that money home? Reduce the tax grab to, say, 10 percent. And then make it the patriotic thing to repatriate a bunch of those funds.

Hey, 10 percent of a few hundred billion dollars is a lot better than 35 percent of nothing! And think how many jobs a trillion or two dollars could create here at home. Oh, and think how many additional taxes those new wage earners would pay. Not to mention all of the additional tax dollars Uncle Sam would collect from those corporations over the years.

Now there’s a tax reform that makes sense, doesn’t it? Too bad the Democrats won’t consider it for a second.

The U.S. tax rate on corporate profits is more than three times higher than the rate in Ireland, which is a rock-bottom 12.5 percent. The United Kingdom has made plans to reduce its corporate tax rate again, lowering it from an already-competitive 28 percent to an extremely attractive 20 percent. No wonder many companies are eager to add those savings to their bottom line.

Even Jack Lew, the secretary of the Treasury, has acknowledged that the smartest thing this country could do is to change the law. In a letter to Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Lew admitted that the “best way to address this situation is through business tax reform that lowers the corporate tax rate, broadens the tax base, closes loopholes, and simplifies the tax system.”

If lowering the corporate tax rate is the “best way” to deal with the situation, what are the chances that that is what we will do? Sadly, with a demagoguing Obama in the White House and with Harry Reid (D-Nev.) controlling what happens in the Senate, I’m afraid the answer is pretty close to zero.

No, the Democrats would rather try to win some votes this November — and protect some of their vulnerable Senate by bashing those greedy American businessmen — than cooperate with Republicans in passing tax reform.

With both the House and the Senate getting ready to shut down so the lawmakers can enjoy a five-week summer recess and with Obama planning to head off to Martha’s Vineyard for three weeks of rest, relaxation and golf, don’t expect anything positive to get done in Washington anytime soon.

Well, actually, I got that wrong. Getting all those politicians out of town for a while is probably the best thing we could hope to happen. At least while they’re gone, they won’t be making matters worse.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.
Catholic League Chief Speaks Out on Obama's Eid al-Fitr Message

By Sandy Fitzgerald

Catholic League President Bill Donohue is slamming President Barack Obama for his statement commemorating the end of the Muslim Ramadan observance, saying Obama doesn't "stand with people of all faiths."

Obama's brief statement, issued earlier this week to send best wishes to Muslims during the Eid al-Fitr celebration, said that the observance reminds him and wife Michelle "of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy."

Further, Obama said he and his wife "stand with people of all faiths, here at home and around the world, to protect and advance their rights to prosper, and we welcome their commitment to giving back to their communities."

"While Eid marks the completion of Ramadan, it also celebrates the common values that unite us in our humanity and reinforces the obligations that people of all faiths have to each other, especially those impacted by poverty, conflict, and disease," the president said.

Donohue wrote on the Catholic League's website that Obama does not stand with all faiths while protecting human rights.

"As you speak, Christians are being beheaded all over the Middle East because they are Christians, and those carrying out this mass murder are doing so in the name of Islam,"  Donohue wrote. "Yet you continue to say and do absolutely nothing about these unspeakable crimes. Do Christian lives mean so little to you?"

Donohue said that when he types in the phrase "President Obama Speaks Out," or "Speaks Against," into Internet search engines, subjects such as "Trayvon Martin," "Kanye West," "Fox News," and "bullying" come up.

"I can search in vain to find you condemning the genocidal slaughter of Christians by Muslims," Donohue wrote. "Muslim terrorists are killing Jews in Israel and their representatives have pledged to wipe Jews off the face of the earth. Yet your administration spends most of its time lecturing Israelis to be patient. About what? Being bombed because they are Jews? Do Jewish lives mean so little to you?"

Donohue admitted that nobody wants the president to insult Muslim Americans from the White House, "but you had an opportunity to at least call on them to speak out about what their people are doing in the Middle East, and you blew it. Instead, you decided to patronize them for all their contributions to human rights."

New Emails Show Lois Lerner Called Some Conservatives ‘A**holes’

New emails uncovered by the House Ways and Means Committee indicate that former IRS employee Lois Lerner has a strong dislike of some conservatives, and at one point called them “assholes” in an email exchange.

The committee released an email Lerner received in November 2012 complaining about the “whacko wing of the GOP.” The person mocked conservatives for believing there are “too many foreigners sucking the teat” and that it is “time to hunker down, buy ammo and food, and prepare for the end.”

The person added that the “right wing radio shows are scary to listen to.”

Barack Obama Lois Lerner Dave Camp Bob Goodlatte IRS targeting scandal
New emails released by House Republicans show former IRS employee Lois Lerner called conservatives “a**holes.” 

Lerner replied, “Great. Maybe we are through if there are that many assholes.”

The other person then wrote, “And I’m talking about the hosts of the shows. The callers are rabid.”

Lerner replied, “So we don’t need to worry about alien terrorists. It’s our own crazies that will take us down.”

Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) said this exchange shows the has a “deep animus towards conservatives,” which may have explained her efforts to target conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status.

“This email shows that Ms. Lerner’s mistreatment of conservative groups was driven by her personal hostility toward conservatives,” Camp wrote in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder. ”This new evidence clearly demonstrates why Ms. Lerner not only targeted conservatives, but denied such groups their rights to due process and equal protection under the law.”

Camp’s letter recounted that his committee has found that Lerner personally directed the IRS to audit Crossroads GPS, the group run by Karl Rove, and hinted at seeking a job with Organizing For Action, the group aimed at helping to re-elect President Barack Obama.

Camp said all of this evidence combined shows that a special counsel is needed to investigate the IRS and Lois Lerner, who has refused to testify before Congress by pleading the Fifth Amendment.

“While the Committee has not seen any evidence of a serious investigation by your department, it is my sincere hope that in light of this new, strong evidence that you immediately begin aggressively investigating this matter or appoint a special counsel,” Camp wrote. “Failure to do so will only further erode public trust in not only the IRS, but the department as well.”

Wednesday, July 30, 2014



Today, Wednesday July 30th, on RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS…We will welcome back to the show, Jake Danishevsky…an American who grew up in Ukraine, to bring us up to date on what’s happening right now in his country of birth!!!

We will also be talking about the situation in Israel as the war against Hamas in Gaza continues.

We’ve got a LOT to cover on today’s show, from the border and amnesty to John Kerry’s epic fail in negotiating a cease fire.



And chat with live shows at

Alexander Herzen, an 18th century writer from Russia, once quipped, “There is nothing in the world more stubborn than a corpse: you can hit it, you can knock it to pieces, but you cannot convince it.” Today, such a description could apply to unconstitutional gun control laws, which received what should have been a death sentence in 2008 with the Heller decision, only to languish on despite being knocked to pieces in court in the half dozen years since that seminal decision.

In Heller, one of the most important rulings for liberty in recent American history, attorney Alan Gura successfully sued the D.C. government; in the process overturning its blatantly unconstitutional, 1970s-era ban on firearms. Heller clearly affirmed the individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment; as contrasted to the mushy, collective right interpretation long-favored by gun-grabbers like Michael Bloomberg and Rahm Emmanuel. Gura then successfully sued the city of Chicago, which resulted in the High Court’s 2010 McDonald decision, thus extending Heller’s ruling to local governments across the country.

Following these two landmark Supreme Court rulings, other lawsuits picked apart the anti-gun apparatus in federal court. Yet, as stubborn as a corpse can be, anti-gun state and local government officials immediately began fashioning new ways to undermine the restoration of gun rights in their jurisdictions. Officials in Washington, D.C. -- ground zero for the modern day resurgence of the Second Amendment – refused to comply with the letter and intent of those Supreme Court decisions.

For example, the District forces its residents to obtain a permit to carry a firearm outside of the home; but the City steadfastly has refused to institute a process enabling citizens seeking to so defend themselves, to obtain permits. In essence, the city created a de facto ban on carrying firearms in public, all the while claiming to comply with the intent of the Heller decision. One can see why Gura has been so busy.
Fortunately, half a decade worth of post-Heller litigation paid off last week, when federal district court Judge Frederick Scullin ruled D.C.’s permitting scheme to be unconstitutional. “In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny,” wrote Scullin, “there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.”

Scullin’s refreshingly clear ruling follows one in December 2012 by federal Court of Appeals Judge for the Seventh Circuit, Richard Posner. In that ruling Posner noted that “to confine the right to be armed to the home” -- as Illinois’ then-blanket ban on the private carry of firearms did -- “is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald.”

Posner noted pointedly that residents of Chicago, a notoriously dangerous city despite years of aggressive gun control laws, had a far greater claim to self-defense outside the home than in it.

As Scullin and Posner’s rulings suggest, it is only logical that law-abiding citizens protecting themselves from violence outside the home is a natural and logical focus of the Second Amendment, especially given the legal clarity on the issue from two recent Supreme Court battles. Unfortunately, logic is not an attribute favored by gun-control zealots such as those controlling the levers of power in the District of Columbia; which is precisely why the fight for the Second Amendment continues long after a majority of Supreme Court justices might have thought they resolved the issue in 2008 and 2010.

And, the anti-gun grandstanding in the courts is not without financial costs to taxpayers, who are forced to pay the legal fees of both parties after each government defeat. The six years D.C. officials dragged Dick Heller through the legal system, only to be told what the language of and history behind the Second Amendments clearly proclaims to the world (that “the right of the people to keep and bear [a]rms shall not be infringed”), cost taxpayers more than one million dollars in attorney fees, just for Heller’s team.

That is why some members of Congress are starting to use the power of the purse strings to rein in D.C. officials who continue to violate the clear directive of the Supreme Court. Earlier this month, for example, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) successfully passed an appropriations amendment that prohibits the District of Columbia from using federal tax dollars to enforce its unconstitutional gun control laws. While the fate of such a common-sense measure remains unclear in the Senate, the fact that many Democratic incumbents facing reelection in November hail from states whose voters are strong Second Amendment supporters, raises the legislation’s odds considerably.

It is now all the fashionable rage in Washington, D.C., to proclaim solidarity with America's working poor in front of the cameras -- while stabbing them in the back behind closed doors. 
Privileged Illinois Democratic Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and others have taken to Twitter, posting photos of themselves eating tuna sandwiches and buying Ramen noodles to show how much they empathize with minimum-wage workers. On the other side of the aisle, GOP Rep. Paul Ryan has wrapped himself in a cloak of compassion, putting a cheesy Taylor Swift hand heart around conservatism by proposing government "life coaches" for those in poverty.

Message: They care! Reality: They fake. The cognitive dissonance on Capitol Hill is so thick you need a V8-powered chainsaw to slice it.

While cynical politicians prattle on about protecting the American Dream, they're working together to destroy it. If these elected officials care so much about reducing poverty, why are they working so hard to import more of it from around the world? Leaders in both political parties have thrown struggling Americans under the bus to feed the cheap illegal alien labor machine.

The working poor are the biggest losers in D.C.'s amnesty game. U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow has been a lonely voice warning about the impact of mass illegal immigration and perpetual amnesty on low-income black Americans. "The country's economic woes have disproportionately harmed African-Americans, especially those with little education," he warned this spring. "The economy has a glut of low-skilled workers, not a shortage," which is driving wages down.

Stagnant wages and depressed economic growth affect working poor Americans of all colors, while illegal alien amnesty beneficiaries cash in. Steve Camarota and Karen Ziegler of the Center for Immigration Studies reported last month that "since 2000, all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is remarkable given that native-born Americans accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working-age population. Though there has been some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level."

President Obama has already granted administrative amnesty to an estimated two million illegal aliens and renewed "temporary" work permits for 520,000. The administration is planning an expansion that would grant amnesties to at least six million more lawbreakers.

Where is the opposition? Appeasement Republicans refuse to support Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz's on-target proposal to repeal Obama's "DREAM" magnet and Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions' clarion call to block any more executive amnesties as a precondition to border bill negotiations.

According to my sources on the Hill, the staffs of Sens. McCain, Flake and Murkowski met privately and opposed any changes to Obama's DREAM passes for illegals -- which makes them willing and suicidal accomplices in the perpetual Democratic voter recruitment drive. On the House side, GOP House Speaker John Boehner is also openly opposed to stopping the DREAM nightmare.

There are no longer two separate parties in Washington. There's just one big Amnesty Inc. conglomerate addicted to Big Business donations and Big Government grievance politics. The Obama White House needs to buy off Hispanic voters, keep immigration lawyers employed and secure a left-wing permanent ruling majority. Establishment Republicans need to pay off the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, pander to minority lobbyists and curry favor with open-borders CEOS led by Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg.

The real crisis is not at the border. It's being fomented inside our nation's capital. The "border crisis" is a bipartisan D.C. catastrophe of craven politicians abandoning their constitutional duties to defend our sovereignty and put American workers first.

Third rocket arsenal found in UN school in Gaza

/ Jihad Watch

There needs to be an investigation of the UNRWA over this. Could it really keep happening without any UN officials knowing what was going on? The problem is, who can investigate the United Nations? Not Obama’s investigative or intelligence apparatus.

In any case, if we had a President who had America and its allies’ best interests at heart, that President could announce that no U.S. funds would go to the United Nations if any more jihad rockets were found in its schools — and the schools would thenceforth be clear of the rockets.

“THIRD Rocket Arsenal Found At UN School In Gaza,” by Jordan Schachtel, Breitbart News, July 29, 2014:
The United Nations Relief & Works Agency For Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) announced Tuesday that another rocket stockpile has been found at one of its schools in Gaza. This instance marks the third time since the beginning of Operation Protective Edge that a weapons arsenal has been found at an UNRWA school in Gaza.
UNRWA has yet to place blame on any individuals or organizations for placing the weapons stockpile within a children’s school. The UN body refused to do so on the past two previous occasions as well.
The UN body, after both previous findings, has handed the rockets it had found back into the possession of “the local police,” otherwise known as the terrorist group Hamas.
This week, UNRWA supplies and building materials had been found in Hamas’s tunnel infrastructure, which has been used to smuggle weapons and carry out attacks on the State of Israel.
The UN agency has a well-documented history of using their US taxpayer-funded facilities to promote anti-Israel and anti-Semitic propaganda. It has in the past been accused of aiding and abetting radical Islamists in Gaza and elsewhere.
UNRWA was created in 1949 to provide relief and public works programs for displaced Arab refugees that had formerly inhabited the British mandate of Palestine. UNRWA is currently the largest agency-subdivision of the entire UN, employing over 30,000 staff.
UNRWA has objectively failed in its primary goal of finding homes for those it has deemed “refugees”. From 1949 to present day, refugees recognized by UNRWA has grown from 750,000 to 5,000,000 people.

Leaked Transcript of Phone Call Between Obama and Netanyahu

Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

Publicly, both sides are denying this. But Obama is a liar, an unabashed, pathological unconscionable liar (“You can keep your doctor,” “Not a smidgen of corruption” at the IRS, “Benghazi was a spontaneous attack because of a youtube video”). And Bibi is in no position to upset the jihadophile in the White House.

But if true — it gives us a glimpse at the monster running the country.

There are so many alarmingly wrong things that jump out from this short transcript, it is like the US was hijacked by a MB agent…

Channel 1 reporter says PM-POTUS transcript legit: Despite rejections by American and Israeli officials, Channel 1′s Or Nahari insists that the transcript leaked to him by a “senior American official” is authentic, but acknowledges that the quotes he published were merely an except from a long conversation. (TOI)

The State Department is running for cover. They can leak Israel intel that jeopardizes their national security  (here and here too) but don’t reveal what Obama is actually doing.
Shocking and disappointing someone would sink to misrepresenting a pvt convo between POTUS and PM in fabrications to Israeli press 2/2
— @NSCPress (@NSCPress) July 29, 2014

It certainly hurts Israel to alienate Obama but maybe Israel wants the world to know what a savage Obama really is.
“Leaked Phone Conversation between Obama and Bibi,”  J Space
Below is a transcript that was reported on the IBA...

IRANIAN official says “Iran will arm the West Bank with missiles”

Bare Naked Israel

Former Iranian defense adviser says Tehran would seek to arm Palestinians in the West Bank with “strategic weapons” including missiles to target Tel Aviv and Haifa, which will be much easier to hit from Judea and Samaria than from Gaza.


Times of Israel  Iranian researcher Amir Mousavi told Lebanon’s Mayadeen TV channel that “a major reshuffle awaits the region” as “new and significant fronts will be opened all of a sudden, to support the Palestinian cause in the West Bank and Gaza.”


Mousavi added that Gaza would also receive increased military support from Iran. As for the Palestinian Authority which controls the West Bank and has in recent years cooperated closely with Israel on security issues, Mousavi remarked: “We hope that the brothers in the Palestinian Authority will help rather than impede this.”


On Tuesday Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged the Islamic world to arm Palestinians to allow them to counter what he called Israel’s “genocide” in the Gaza Strip. In a speech marking the Muslim festival of Eid al-Fitr, Khamenei said Israel was acting like a “rabid dog” and “a wild wolf,” causing a human catastrophe that must be resisted.


Click on link to see video:

Report: Administration Likely Knew Some Obamacare Subsidies Illegal

By Melanie Batley / Newsmax

The recent ruling by the D.C. Circuit that the implementation of Obamacare is illegal has uncovered the possibility that the Obama administration was aware of this all along, Politico Magazine reported.

The Halbig v. Burwell lawsuit ruled that the Affordable Care Act does not allow for Obamacare to provide subsidized health insurance for the 5 million Americans living in the 36 states using the federal healthcare website,

Instead, the legislation stipulated that subsidies would be extended only to those who enroll through an exchange "established by the State."

The administration, including Jonathan Gruber, who helped craft the ACA legislation, has insisted since the ruling that Congress never intended to withhold subsidies from residents of states that did not choose to set up their own exchanges.

Gruber, an MIT economist, described the ruling as "implausible," "screwy," "nutty," and "stupid."

But a 2012 video has since surfaced indicating that Gruber told an audience, "If you're a state and you don't set up an exchange, that means your citizens don't get their tax credits."

Another 2012 recording has also emerged of Gruber making similar comments, both of which may have been an attempt to try to "squeeze" the states into establishing their own exchanges, according to Politico.

Politico said Gruber's 2012 comments "demolish" the administration's case against Halbig.

"When the chief architect of the [Affordable Care Act] admits it withholds tax credits in uncooperative states, that establishes that the plaintiffs' interpretation of the statute in Halbig was not only plausible but that it had currency among the law's authors," Politico said.

Gruber has since tried to play down his 2012 comments, calling them a "speak-o," but Politico argues his explanation doesn't stand up.

"It is precisely because of Gruber's intellect and profound familiarity with the PPACA that his attempts to explain away his past statements are not credible," Politico added.

"Back in January 2012, before anyone knew 36 states would refuse to establish an exchange, Gruber understood and had no problem with what the law says. When it became apparent that two-thirds of the states would not establish exchanges, and that this language therefore threatened the PPACA's survival, Gruber changed his tune," Politico said.

"To claim Gruber didn't know what he was saying is as absurd as saying a conductor might fail to notice that the brass section suddenly stopped playing."

Politico added, "Gruber's comments raise questions about whether this (correct) interpretation of the law was also understood by the members of Congress and administration officials Gruber advised. They also corroborate other evidence showing that the administration was aware it was breaking the law all along."

The publication also noted that last year, seven career Treasury and IRS officials told congressional investigators they knew that the healthcare law did not authorize them to issue tax credits in federal exchanges and that their regulations only pertained to exchanges "established by the state."

"At the direction of their political-appointee superiors, however, they dropped that language and announced that tax credits would be available through exchanges established by the federal government, as well," Politico said. "Further investigation is in order and should proceed with all deliberate speed so as to inform the courts that will consider the appeals of these rulings."

Thanks To War On Terror, Islamic Extremists Have Everything They Need To Kill Americans

by / Personal Liberty Digest
Thanks To War On Terror, Islamic Extremists Have Everything They Need To Kill Americans

A top military official who heads the Defense Intelligence Agency told journalists at the Aspen Security Forum last week that the United States is no safer than it was before the World Trade Center attacks that set the Nation’s perpetual war machine into motion. In fact, the Nation is likely far less safe than it was in 2001.

“We have a whole gang of new actors out there that are far more extreme than al-Qaida,” Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn said, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Of course, Flynn’s remarks certainly don’t come as a surprise to anyone paying attention to the current state of global affairs.

Hawks intent on keeping U.S. military action alive in the Mideast have commonly argued that the U.S. must fight them (whoever they are) over there (wherever that is) to prevent bloodshed in the homeland. Other times, those hawks have warned Americans of depraved despots in possession of dangerous weapons.

As a result, many Americans gladly and patriotically supported U.S. invasions in the Mideast — most importantly those to pursue extremists in the deserts of Afghanistan and its neighboring countries and to cripple Saddam Hussein’s regime and bring Democracy to Iraq. In the past 13 years, the United States has spent trillions of dollars and lost thousands of American soldiers as the world’s leading self-appointed crusader against terror, an enemy with no concrete face or nation, and purveyor of democracy, a form of government best served self-earned.

So how have we done?

In October 2001, U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan in pursuit of Osama bin Laden who claimed responsibility for the Trade Center attacks. The war was sold to an emotional American public as a straightforward operation to cut off al-Qaida’s head and install a government that would, unlike the Taliban that seized control in 1996, prevent extremists from ever again using Afghanistan as a terror staging ground.

The Taliban were eventually replaced by a farcical sham of a democratic government in Afghanistan. And elections, rife with predictable corruption, have taken place in the country from time to time. After repeated U.S. troop surges and withdrawals over the course of several years, the U.S. military eventually settled into a routine of training Afghan forces (who routinely turned to be infiltrated by extremists intent on killing U.S. soldiers) to defend themselves without American support.

If you squint really hard, it almost looks like the U.S. achieved its goal in Afghanistan. With eyes wide open, however, one would be able to see all the way back to the 1970s — when the U.S. first attempted Afghan regime change — and realize that history is on repeat.

The New York Times reported last week:
The Taliban have found success beyond their traditional strongholds in the rural south and are now dominating territory near crucial highways and cities that surround Kabul, the capital, in strategic provinces like Kapisa and Nangarhar.
Their advance has gone unreported because most American forces have left the field and officials in Kabul have largely refused to talk about it.
So extremists are taking over larger swaths of land than they had previously influenced in Afghanistan. That’s not so bad. At least we won Iraq, right?

In March 2003, President George W. Bush ordered an invasion of Iraq to eliminate the country’s weapons of mass destruction.

“They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat,” Bush said at the time.

They weren’t. Actually, we never found them.

The U.S. invasion did manage to take Saddam and his Baath Party out of power and install a new, more democratic government. Unfortunately, good ole apple pie democracy evidently was not enough to calm the tensions of nearly 1,500 years of tribal conflict between Sunni and Shiite Islam in the region.

Under the Baath Party’s rule, Iraq was led by its Sunni minority, as it had been since the Ottoman Empire. That, of course, wasn’t pleasant for many members of the majority Shiite population. So when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite at the helm of a largely Shiite government, took control in Iraq after Saddam’s ouster, things got predictably nasty for the Nation’s Sunnis.

The Islamic State terror group (aka ISIS/ISIL), mostly consisting of violent extremists intent on turning the whole Arab world into a jihad training camp, has profoundly benefited from the tribal tensions that were inflamed by the U.S. invasion. And with the help of wealthy Sunni donors the group is quickly taking control of much of Iraq.

“The speed that [ISIS] came into this northern city of Iraq, into Mosul, and they were able to, you know, kind of [cut through Iraqi security force defenses] like a hot knife through butter through really about four [Iraqi Army] divisions,” Flynn said of the current situation, “I would say that, yeah, that caught us — that level of speed that they were able to do that — caught us by surprise.”

With Iraq’s democratic government likely a stone’s throw (pun intended) from collapsing and Afghanistan having never really managed to have a legitimate governing structure following the U.S. invasions, the situation in the Mideast looks about as bad as it possibly could. But thanks to the United States’ decision to aid rebels overthrow relatively stable — though sometimes despicable — regimes in places like Libya and Syria, the situation is actually much more volatile that the Pentagon would like to admit.

Syria’s civil war has given the Islamic State group an opportunity to take over large portions of the country for the borderless Islamic state it is bent on creating. Libya, meanwhile, is in a state of chaos and largely under the control of al-Qaida militants.

The United States’ war on terror has expanded al-Qaida’s reign and created the opportunity for more extreme extremists under the Islamic State group flag to gain a firm foothold throughout the Mideast. How is that possible?

Flynn contends that it’s because it’s hard to attack an idea with a military.

“I, you know, have been going against these guys for a long time. The core is the core belief that these individuals have — and it’s not on the run,” he said. “That ideology is actually, sadly, it feels like it’s exponentially growing.”

Meanwhile, the United States’ southern border is too poorly defended to stop illegal immigrants, most of them people with no ill-intent toward the Nation and no fanatical religious drive to murder, from making it into the country. When you consider how a highly organized and opportunistic group of jihadists like those who make up the Islamic State group might exploit the border weaknesses, it becomes pretty obvious where those trillions of taxpayer dollars would have been better spent.
Aiding America's Ills with a Cough and a Sneeze                …
By: Diane Sori 

Disease...illness...epidemic...words that make most people cringe and rightly so for NO one enjoys being sick. Thankfully, in America most major communicable diseases have been if NOT eradicated at least held down to a minimum with isolated pockets popping-up sporadically here and there thanks to childhood vaccines and adult booster shots. And I am NOT talking about the usual garden variety of winter and summer illnesses...the common cold, simple uncomplicated flu, food poisoning, and such...but I mean the hardcore stuff...diseases that can send people to the hospitals en masse...or the morgue.

I am however talking about diseases that are endemic to other countries that are now being brought back into our country by this newest ILLEGAL influx of children causing an entire generation of America's children having NO immunities to them facing exposure and being infected by them. Remember, as certain childhood diseases became for the most part eradicated...diseases like measles, mumps, chicken pox, polio, whooping cough, etc...parents started to become lax about immunizing their children, especially with all the misinformation out there that this shot causes autism...that shot causes something else...without even thinking through the reality about how many lives have been saved because of immunizations. These parents forget that every immunization, every medicine... even something as simple as aspirin...can cause devastating effects...even those allergic to them. But the numbers hurt by vaccines and meds are small compared to the overwhelming numbers of those helped.

And these children now entering our country are NOT just bringing the usual childhood diseases with them but are bringing the 'nasty' ones...the ones that can indeed cause epidemics or worse... pandemics...diseases like tuberculosis, leprosy, cholera, smallpox, and even bubonic plague. And let's NOT forget the older ones bring herpes, gonorrhea, and other sorts of sexually transmitted diseases with them too...strains of these diseases resistant to the current generation of antibiotics in use in this country today.

And the bottom line in this latest influx of children...and the adults currently crossing as that for all intents and purposes a potential public health crisis has now been amassing along our southern border. Two cases in point...drug-resistant TB is spreading rapidly with several counties in southern Texas reporting twice the usual average number of cases, and Dengue fever has been detected this year in southern Texas for the first time since 2005. And while Dengue fever can be deadly even when treated, it's especially deadly when left untreated...when left ignored to spread.

All that I have stated above is a medical observation on my part, now here is an observation that is even more these sick children are crowded into cramped makeshift detention centers...centers conducive to spreading infectious diseases...they do indeed spread the diseases they carry amongst those who were NOT previously sick, thus increasing the number of children now sick who in turn will spread these diseases even in via the number of sick and contagious children that are being sent to cities all over our country increases.

And so a vicious cycle has been set-up all courtesy of our borders NOT being secured...all courtesy of the lax enforcement of the immigration laws currently on the books...all courtesy of Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

And the Obama sanctioned dispersing of these sick children is the key element element NOT seen before in regards to those entering our country either LEGALLY or ILLEGALLY. Remember, in the past when immigrants arrived sick they were immediately turned away and sent back home or they were sent to sanatoriums until they were well enough to enter the general population. But now under Obama's new rules regarding ILLEGALS...who are treated better than those LEGALLY entering our country I might add...the sick are being dispersed across our country to spread their diseases to a now susceptible American population...and of course to increase the Democratic voting base for children, as we know, do grow up to vote.

And let's be honest here...when LEGAL immigrants enter our country they are required by law to receive a medical exam, and must show proof of vaccination for measles, mumps, rubella, polio, tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), and a host of other communicable diseases. But with the ILLEGALS now entering our country...who are given what amounts to two aspirin and a bus pass to a city within the 100-mile Constitutional Free zone where they cannot be deported...they have been set free to spread their assorted nasties to an unsuspecting and unprotected population who then will be forced to seek medical help, but who will most likely be turned down for treatment because they don't meet the ObamaCare rules governing who can receive medical treatment for what disease and who can't.

And even when ILLEGALS do receive medical exams at the border the screening they receive is NOT up to the same standard of what LEGALS are subjected to, making those doing the screening ineffective at controlling the spread of disease. And why...because there are just too damn many of 'them' coming...and NOT enough doctors and nurses to treat 'them' effectively. And let's NOT forget the simple fact that Obama and the Democrats do NOT under any circumstances want 'them' turned away and sent back...especially the children...because they dare NOT stem the tide of much needed future Democratic voters who will help ensure a Democratic voting bloc for many years to come.

So while YES I am being somewhat sarcastic, but even with sarcasm there is much truth in what I say. First, it's a fact that ICE isn’t screening for infectious diseases, relying instead on self-reporting...meaning relying on criminals...and YES the very way these people, including the unaccompanied children, enter our country ILLEGALLY does make them criminals...relying on them to voluntarily give up the information that they're sick. And know these people will NOT do that out of fear of then being detained and sent back to whence they came.

And know that it's a fact that these sick children are indeed being sent to major cities all across our country...cities like New York City, Los Angeles, Boston, and Miami amongst many others where they will again be living in close quarters, coughing, sneezing, and hacking on both each other and those attending to them who will leave these centers at the end of the day and spread the nasties they now carry out to those they come in contact with.

And the cycle of spread continues on growing by leaps and bounds on a daily basis.

And lest we forget another very important fact...the sheer number of ILLEGALS now entering our country. This cannot be stressed enough for their very number is what we should fear the most for there is and has always been strength in numbers. And if Obama has his way the sheer number of those entering ILLEGALLY...who he will in turn give LEGAL status to courtesy of his pen and his phone...could forever change the political complexion of America, and NOT for the better for these people now entering ILLEGALLY have their hands out to rape America's welfare and healthcare systems, and it will be 'We the People' who will end up paying for them...for their upkeep and medical care...for generations to come.

And it will be 'We the People' who will see our children and even us infected with diseases we long thought had been vanished from our shores a generation ago.

Thanks've screwed America yet again.

Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Obamacare has proven again to be the biggest legislative failure in history, with last week's ruling that its subsidies are illegal. These subsidies induced some 5 million Americans to sign up for Obamacare but are prohibited by law as held by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Halbig v. Burwell.

This humiliation to the Obama administration was a devastating setback to legislation already disfavored by a 59-40 percent margin among the public, according to the latest CNN poll. Twice as many Americans say they are being hurt rather than helped by Obamacare.

Officially known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Obamacare is neither affordable nor protective of patients. It promised subsidies for millions of Americans to buy new health insurance and to pay costly premiums that have driven insurance company stock values to record highs.

People in households making between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty line (between $11,670 and $46,680 per year for one-person households) have been getting subsidies to buy insurance on health insurance exchanges. A staggering 90 percent of those who signed up for this Obamacare insurance did so in reliance on these subsidies, which the court just ruled are illegal.

These health insurance exchanges are much more than marketplaces, like Travelocity or Expedia, to make it easier to shop for and buy health insurance. They are also the vehicle for dispensing subsidies and imposing penalties, while also building big brother-like databases about Americans.

The liberal central planners inside the D.C. Beltway thought the 50 States would comply with President Barack Obama's demand that they set up these health insurance exchanges at costs estimated to be as much as $100 million per exchange. As an incentive for states to set up these exchanges, the law provided substantial subsides to people who sign up for a state-established exchange.

The central government planners thought the subsidies would coerce states to establish their own health insurance exchanges, similar to how the federal government coerces states to obey D.C. commands in other fields such as education. But states balked after they saw how much control they would be giving to the federal government by establishing a state exchange and how expensive they would end up being.

Nearly two years ago, noted patient advocate and registered nurse Twila Brase explained why "a state-established exchange is a federal takeover center." State exchanges would be required to obey federal regulations, report annually to the federal secretary of Health and Human Services, and comply with a list of federally mandated Essential Health Benefits as dictated by the HHS secretary.

Her conclusion: "Just say no," because "refusing to build the state exchanges is key to stopping Obamacare." More than two-thirds of the states -- 36 of them -- have done just that.

States do not work for Obama, which he has been slow to figure out. Democrats were crushed in the landslide midterm elections after the passage of Obamacare in 2010, and a repeat performance looms large with the next midterm elections barely three months away.

Back in 2010, Obama was riding high and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demanded passage of Obamacare by declaring, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it!" But now Democrats are angry at what the D.C. Circuit told them is really in the bill.

Perhaps Obama and his lieutenants should have read the bill before railroading it through Congress.

The text of Obamacare expressly states that the subsidies for the purchase of health insurance on an exchange are available only for an "Exchange established by the State," and the Obama administration broke the law by subsidizing the purchase of health insurance over federal rather than state exchanges.

The D.C. Circuit admirably upheld the law as it was passed and properly rejected attempts by the Obama administration to rewrite it now. The Court admitted that "our ruling will likely have significant consequences both for millions of individuals receiving tax credits through federal Exchanges and for health insurance markets more broadly," but confined its ruling to interpreting the law rather than rewriting it as Obama seeks now.

Adding to the chaos, on the very same day as this defeat of Obamacare in the D.C. Circuit, another federal appellate court upheld it. That is like one umpire calling a pitch as a "ball" after another umpire had declared it a "strike."

Chief Justice John Roberts testified during his confirmation hearings that a judge should limit himself to the role of an umpire, calling the balls and strikes without changing the rules of the game. It is refreshing that a panel of judges on the D.C. Circuit did exactly that in applying the law as it was written, not rewriting it as Obama now wishes he had written it.

Many years ago, on my first trip around the world, I was struck by how the children in the Middle East -- Arab and Israeli alike -- were among the nicest looking little children I had seen anywhere.

It was painful to think that they were going to grow up killing each other. But that is exactly what happened.

It is understandable that today many people in many lands just want the fighting between the Israelis and the Palestinians to stop. Calls for a cease-fire are ringing out from the United Nations and from Washington, as well as from ordinary people in many places around the world.

According to the New York Times, Secretary of State John Kerry is hoping for a cease-fire to "open the door to Israeli and Palestinian negotiations for a long-term solution." President Obama has urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to have an "immediate, unconditional humanitarian cease-fire" -- again, with the idea of pursuing some long-lasting agreement.

If this was the first outbreak of violence between the Palestinians and the Israelis, such hopes might make sense. But where have the U.N., Kerry and Obama been during all these decades of endlessly repeated Middle East carnage?

The Middle East must lead the world in cease-fires. If cease-fires were the road to peace, the Middle East would easily be the most peaceful place on the planet.

"Cease-fire" and "negotiations" are magic words to "the international community." But just what do cease-fires actually accomplish?

In the short run, they save some lives. But in the long run they cost far more lives, by lowering the cost of aggression.

At one time, launching a military attack on another nation risked not only retaliation but annihilation. When Carthage attacked Rome, that was the end of Carthage.

But when Hamas or some other terrorist group launches an attack on Israel, they know in advance that whatever Israel does in response will be limited by calls for a cease-fire, backed by political and economic pressures from the United States.

It is not at all clear what Israel's critics can rationally expect the Israelis to do when they are attacked. Suffer in silence? Surrender? Flee the Middle East?

Or -- most unrealistic of al -- fight a "nice" war, with no civilian casualties? General William T. Sherman said it all, 150 years ago: "War is hell."

If you want to minimize civilian casualties, then minimize the dangers of war, by no longer coming to the rescue of those who start wars.

Israel was attacked, not only by vast numbers of rockets but was also invaded -- underground -- by mazes of tunnels.

There is something grotesque about people living thousands of miles away, in safety and comfort, loftily second-guessing and trying to micro-manage what the Israelis are doing in a matter of life and death.

Such self-indulgences are a danger, not simply to Israel, but to the whole Western world, for it betrays a lack of realism that shows in everything from the current disastrous consequences of our policies in Egypt, Libya and Iraq to future catastrophes from a nuclear-armed Iran.

Those who say that we can contain a nuclear Iran, as we contained a nuclear Soviet Union, are acting as if they are discussing abstract people in an abstract world. Whatever the Soviets were, they were not suicidal fanatics, ready to see their own cities destroyed in order to destroy ours.

As for the ever-elusive "solution" to the Arab-Israeli conflicts in the Middle East, there is nothing faintly resembling a solution anywhere on the horizon. Nor is it hard to see why.

Even if the Israelis were all saints -- and sainthood is not common in any branch of the human race -- the cold fact is that they are far more advanced than their neighbors, and groups that cannot tolerate even subordinate Christian minorities can hardly be expected to tolerate an independent, and more advanced, Jewish state that is a daily rebuke to their egos.