In Florida's 

23 Congressional District 

the Republican candidates are 

RINO Richard DiNappoli 

and true Conservative 

Juan Garcia...

guess who I'm supporting!

More Obama Fraud

by Bob Livingston  / Personal Liberty Digest

PHOTOS.COM

There is yet more fraud surrounding the undocumented usurper currently occupying the people’s house. Given that Barack Obama’s entire existence is based on a fraud, how can it surprise that his re-election was based on yet another?

From his birth narrative to his life in Indonesia to his youth spent in Hawaii to his Social Security numbers to his Selective Service application to his noms de guerre to his college life to his authorship to his “Hope and Change” to his “If you like your healthcare, you can keep it”: Everything about the man is a fraud.

For four years, he perpetuated the lie that people who had health insurance they were happy with could keep it. He knew every time he said it that it was a lie. Now we know that the unemployment numbers that came out in the September before the election were lies as well. And the lies were made based on orders from above.

The employment numbers were manipulated. But they were manipulated far and away more than the normal, “acceptable” manipulation that occurs month to month. And what’s worse, the Census Bureau knew they were manipulated and did nothing about it; and the orders for the manipulation came from the upper echelons of the Bureau.

As I and others have said many times, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ employment numbers are cooked. The Bureau doesn’t count all the unemployed as being unemployed. They only count the unemployed seeking work. Once a worker drops out of the workforce, he is no longer considered unemployed.

The Census Bureau is under contract with the Labor Department to conduct household surveys to help determine the “official” unemployment rate. Given that Federal Reserve money printing is ostensibly based on what Helicopter Ben Bernanke determines is an acceptable or unacceptable level of employment, the unemployment numbers are crucial to U.S. financial policy. They were also crucial to Obama’s election, apparently.

According to The New York Post, as the November 2012 election drew near, Census employees were deliberately fabricating employment surveys. That accounts for the drop in unemployment from 8.1 percent in August 2012 to 7.8 percent in September — a number that most pundits thought at the time was unrealistic. Turns out it was.

Op-ed:
ObamaCare…and lies are spewed yet again
By: Diane Sori
 
Obama knew…Kathleen Sebelius knew…they all knew as far back as last March that the ObamaCare website…Healthcare.gov…had problems…major problems…yet they kept moving forward and promoting a site that simply did NOT work while telling ‘We the People’ that all was well and on schedule.

Incompetence…subterfuge…LIES…Barack HUSSEIN
Obama runs the gamut of all three as a law the majority of the American people do NOT want, (57+% do NOT want ObamaCare in any form and 71% at least want it delayed) need, or can afford, is being shoved down our throats…shoved down our throats as we’re told we must go shopping for health insurance on a site that is broken beyond repair...or else we'll be hit with a penalty even though we have NOTHING to do with the site's problems.

And so the broken record spins on and on and on...ad nauseum

“I was NOT informed directly that the website does NOT work,” so said Barack HUSSEIN Obama during his anything but an 'apology tour' while he made the media rounds. Now read those words again and pay close attention to the context of the way the word ‘directly’ is used. Directly…Obama said he was NOT told ‘directly’ but he was indeed told for ‘directly’ only means that Sebelius herself did NOT tell him…it does NOT mean that someone else involved with the site did NOT tell him.

But the truth is that according to documents released yesterday by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Obama and those in his administration were indeed told last March that there were potential risks with the implementation of the Healthcare.gov site and this in turn forced Obama mouthpiece Jay Carney to allude to the fact that Obama might indeed have been briefed back in March.

So now it’s time for Obama and his minion to devise yet another LIE to cover for the LIE that he did NOT know the site was such a mess…which in turn was devised to cover for his LIE about the cancellation notices…which covers for his BIG LIE about the fact that ObamaCare was actually designed to fail so he could get what he’s wanted all along…a single-payer system of health care…a single-payer system so he could further tighten the grip on ‘We the People.’

But thankfully, Obama’s web of LIES is starting to unravel. In fact, McKinsey & Co…the independent consulting firm that waded through 200+ documents and interviewed HHS staff to identify problems that might rise before the official October 1st rollout…told in a report of giving administration and HHS officials briefings last March in relation to issues that could affect ObamaCare’s debut…issues including insufficient testing, evolving requirements, and that ObamaCare relied too heavily on outside contractors.

But in spite of all the problems with the website’s official rollout…paramount of which is that the website simply does NOT work…problems that the site is ‘hacker-friendly’ causing people to be subjected to identity theft and fraud…problems with proposed monthly rates so high that it scares most who peruse the site to run away…the first enrollment deadline of December 15th for those who want insurance coverage beginning January 1, 2014, is fast approaching and Obama still will NOT agree to a delay.

So when December 15th does arrive with enrollment numbers NOT met what happens then…I’ll tell you what…Obama has another happy little surprise in store to screw ‘We the People’ yet again.

And that happy little surprise is that to assure that his namesake law works, Obama had a clause buried within its 2000+ pages of nonsense that says the government can bailout insurance companies who do NOT make enough money because of all law’s mandatory coverage requirements. In a provision called ‘risk corridors’ that’s used to mitigate an insurer’s pricing risk...basically protecting insurance companies from unexpected monetary changes in the marketplace…a safety net for insurers during the first three years of ObamaCare’s implementation designed to protect the marketplace if more expensive patients (meaning older sicker Americans) sign up than the so-wanted younger healthier sign-ups. This means if costs end up being higher, the government pays part of the difference and if costs are lower the insurance company pays the government…translating to its ‘We the People’s’ taxpayer dollars that will be forced to bail out the insurance companies.

So while Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) yesterday introduced a bill to remove this clause, Obama and crew continue to squawk that the risk corridors provision is important for avoiding the so-called ‘death-spiral’ of high costs and low participation that could jeopardize…if NOT outright kill the law. A lack of risk protection could cause insurers NOT to participate in the exchanges, or raise their premium rates even higher than they’ve already been raised…meaning more people will simply choose to pay the penalty than to buy insurance they simply cannot afford to buy let alone to maintain.

And the nightmare that is ObamaCare continues to wreak havoc on our economy…our business communities…and on each and every American NOT only cancelled from carriers and policies they were happy with but on ALL taxpaying Americans who are now being forced to pay and carry the burden for the mere 5% of Americans who currently are uninsured…Americans who can walk into any emergency room in this country and NOT get turned away.

And while the ObamaCare nightmare continues on there is a way to wake up from it…REPEAL the whole damn thing and be done with it...and then vote out each and every Democrat who voted this monstrosity in BEFORE they even bothered to read it...period.

Bring Bowe Home ...

Remember...NO MAN LEFT BEHIND !!!

 

 

An Open Letter to Oprah (Of Barack and Barry)

Culture, Email Featured 194 comments

“There’s a level of disrespect for the office that occurs. And that occurs in some cases and maybe even many cases because he’s African American.”

No, Oprah. In all sincerity I disrespect Obama for the same reason I disrespect you… because he is not worthy of respect.
Hard as it is to believe, in some circles of this great and glorious land we call “America,” there are people who think for themselves. These are those who don’t wait for some overpaid, egocentric talk-show host to tell them what to believe, what to think, or how to vote. They are the countless millions who expect others to take responsibility for themselves and their own families.
You see, we grew up in a time when there was no Oprah show to tell us we were poor, downtrodden, mistreated and abused.
Instead, we had to shoulder both trial and tragedy with no one to blame for our state but the man in the mirror. If we succeeded or if we failed, it was because of something we had done, not the color of our skin. There have been many in America of every race who were born into truly poor and terribly disadvantaged homes, yet succeeded wildly. Take Barack Obama (please).

Now, your friend Barack sits between two worlds. “Barack”, the African son of black, Kenyan economist, Barack Obama Sr., and “Barry”, son of white, American economist Ann Dunham.

I don’t believe you understand the quandary you’ve placed yourself in!
On the one hand, you couldn’t help but defend “Barack’s” African-American heritage from the evil white man. After all, no white person could actually be judging the man based upon his actions. Whites are inherently racist, after all.
On the other hand, “Barry” is responsible for one of the largest economic declines for minorities in US history. How could you possibly allow his Caucasian side to get away with leading African-Americans into such a horrible state of affairs?
It appears you want to both have your cake and eat it too (and eat it… and eat it…).

I want to thank you for reminding us all of our apparent racism. I hope you’ll take the time to remind Barry of his.

Read more at http://theblacksphere.net/2013/11/open-letter-oprah-barack-barry/#s36LZTDLmvFkjUjy.99

An Open Letter to Oprah (Of Barack and Barry)

Culture, Email Featured 194 comments

“There’s a level of disrespect for the office that occurs. And that occurs in some cases and maybe even many cases because he’s African American.”

No, Oprah. In all sincerity I disrespect Obama for the same reason I disrespect you… because he is not worthy of respect.
Hard as it is to believe, in some circles of this great and glorious land we call “America,” there are people who think for themselves. These are those who don’t wait for some overpaid, egocentric talk-show host to tell them what to believe, what to think, or how to vote. They are the countless millions who expect others to take responsibility for themselves and their own families.
You see, we grew up in a time when there was no Oprah show to tell us we were poor, downtrodden, mistreated and abused.
Instead, we had to shoulder both trial and tragedy with no one to blame for our state but the man in the mirror. If we succeeded or if we failed, it was because of something we had done, not the color of our skin. There have been many in America of every race who were born into truly poor and terribly disadvantaged homes, yet succeeded wildly. Take Barack Obama (please).

Now, your friend Barack sits between two worlds. “Barack”, the African son of black, Kenyan economist, Barack Obama Sr., and “Barry”, son of white, American economist Ann Dunham.

I don’t believe you understand the quandary you’ve placed yourself in!
On the one hand, you couldn’t help but defend “Barack’s” African-American heritage from the evil white man. After all, no white person could actually be judging the man based upon his actions. Whites are inherently racist, after all.
On the other hand, “Barry” is responsible for one of the largest economic declines for minorities in US history. How could you possibly allow his Caucasian side to get away with leading African-Americans into such a horrible state of affairs?
It appears you want to both have your cake and eat it too (and eat it… and eat it…).

I want to thank you for reminding us all of our apparent racism. I hope you’ll take the time to remind Barry of his.

Read more at http://theblacksphere.net/2013/11/open-letter-oprah-barack-barry/#s36LZTDLmvFkjUjy.99

To Pass Health Plan, Obama and Dems Kept Mum About its Downsides

Byron York / Townhall Columnist

The journalist Jonathan Cohn, an ardent supporter of Obamacare, recently wrote in The New Republic that problems with the rollout of the Affordable Care Act should be "an opportunity to have a serious conversation about the law's trade-offs -- the one that should have happened a while ago."

Cohn is right that there was no serious conversation about those trade-offs back when Congress was considering the law's passage in 2009 and 2010. But why was that? It was because President Obama and his Democratic allies could not speak seriously -- and honestly -- about those trade-offs and still pass their bill.

So instead, Obama assured Americans they could keep health care policies they liked. And it wasn't just Obama. "One of our core principles is that if you like the health care you have, you can keep it," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said in August 2009. "If you like what you have, you can keep it," said then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in October of the same year.

Many, many Democrats promised the same thing. They had to. If they had declared openly that millions of Americans would lose their current coverage and face higher premiums and deductibles -- if Obama and Democratic leaders had said that, they would not have been able to maintain party unity in support of the bill, and the Affordable Care Act would never have passed Congress.

It would not have mattered that Republicans opposed the bill unanimously. A frank public discussion of Obamacare would have divided Democratic support, with the result being no new law at all.

But now, as the reality of Obamacare begins to present itself in the lives of millions of Americans, the president and his party can no longer avoid an honest look at the law they passed. And one part of that honesty will be examining what they said when they passed Obamacare. There will likely be a lot of accountability in coming months.

For example, CNN's Jake Tapper recently asked Rep. Steve Israel, a leading congressional Democrat, whether the bill's supporters "were as forthright about some of the issues as they could have been" during the Obamacare debate. Tapper specified not just the president's keep-your-coverage promise but "some of the trade-offs" of the law that favor some Americans over others. "If you could go back in time, do you think there should have been more honest salesmanship?" Tapper asked.

"Well, there should have been certainly more precise education and more precise salesmanship, there's no question about that," Israel said. "But you can't go back in time."

Yes, you can. Not literally; of course Democrats can't have a do-over. But the American people can certainly go back in time and examine the Democratic sales job for Obamacare in light of today's reality. The president and his party knew full well the trade-offs they were making; they just didn't tell the rest of the country.

All during the debate, Democratic officeholders, aides, policy wonks, advocates and sympathetic journalists all knew coverage cancellations would be coming as part of Obamacare. Of course, the president knew, too. When Obama made the keep-your-coverage promise, over and over, those Washington insiders accepted the untruth as a necessary part of the process, something Democrats had to do to pass their bill.

But millions of Americans didn't get the memo and took Obama at his word. And now that the promise has been proven false, the president is trying to recover his credibility -- his desire to do so was painfully evident at his long and sometimes rambling news conference -- and his party is searching for cover.

There won't be any. In coming days, Republicans, who voted unanimously against Obamacare, will be happy to remind the public of what Democrats promised. On Thursday afternoon, for example, the House GOP leadership published a list of quotes from 61 House Democrats pledging that if Americans liked their health coverage they could keep it. And in the Senate, for those vulnerable Democrats up for re-election in 2014, the accountability could be quite painful indeed.

The situation could become infinitely worse if problems now plaguing the individual insurance market begin to infect employer-based insurance, which covers by far the largest number of Americans.

In response, Democrats will no doubt talk a lot about various measures to "fix" this or that part of Obamacare. But voters will know that those Democrats are just seeking to clean up a mess they made in the first place. The political price to be paid could be very, very high.

A Devastating Poll on Obama -- and Obamacare

Michael Barone / Townhall Columnist

"The Affordable Care Act's political position has deteriorated dramatically over the last week." That, coming from longtime Obamacare cheerleader and Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein, was pretty strong language. And it was only Wednesday.

That was the day after the release of a devastating Quinnipiac national poll. It showed Barack Obama's approval rating at 39 percent, with his disapproval rating at 54 percent -- sharply down from 45 percent approval and 49 percent disapproval on Oct. 1, the day the government shutdown began and healthcare.gov went into (limited) operation.

Democrats hoped that Republicans would take a shellacking in public opinion for the Oct. 1-16 government shutdown. They did, briefly. But Quinnipiac's survey, conducted three weeks after the shutdown ended, indicated that the Obamacare rollout inflicted much more damage on the Democratic brand -- and the party's leader.

Quinnipiac's numbers on Obamacare were also exactly the same as their numbers on Obama: 49 percent favored the health care legislation, 55 percent were opposed. Moreover, a near-majority -- 46 percent -- said the president knowingly deceived them when he assured Americans over and over that they could keep their health insurance plans.

There are few names a president can be called that are more damaging than liar.

The numbers are particularly daunting when you look at the groups that Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg identifies as major parts of "the big cultural and demographic wave that threatens to swamp the Republican party" -- young voters and Hispanics.

Obama carried voters under 30 by 66 percent to 32 percent in 2008 and 60 percent to 37 percent in 2010. He carried older voters by 1 point in the first election and lost them to Mitt Romney in the second.

Obama did even better with Hispanics: 67 percent to 31 percent in 2008 and 71 percent to 27 percent in 2012. This was one of the few demographic groups among which he ran stronger than four years earlier.

But that was then, and this is now. Quinnipiac shows young voters disapproving of Obama 54 percent to 36 percent and Hispanics disapproving 47 percent to 41 percent.

Both groups rate him negatively on the economy, the federal budget, immigration, foreign policy and health care. Bare majorities, 51 percent of both groups, say Obama cares about people like them.

Obamacare, popular among both groups in 2012, is now an Obama albatross. Young voters oppose it 51 percent to 42 percent and Hispanics 50 percent to 44 percent. Majorities of both groups give Obama negative ratings on health care.

One must note that this is just one poll and that opinions may change as events unfold. But it looks very much like the astonishingly disastrous Obamacare rollout has moved opinion decisively against the president and his trademark policy.

And all those predictions -- not just by Democrats -- that the Republican Party faced extinction because of overwhelming opposition from Millennials and Hispanics look to be, like Mark Twain's famous obituary, premature.

There's one other interesting result from Quinnipiac. Has the Obama administration "been competent in running the government"? Overall, 53 percent said no and only 43 percent said yes. Young voters (47 percent said yes, 46 percent said no) and Hispanics (51 percent said yes, 46 percent said no) were only slightly more positive.

The fiasco of the healthcare.gov website undoubtedly contributed to this. But perhaps Americans are also starting to notice that this president is not performing his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the law -- and in this case, a law he and his party wrote.

The Obama administration announced last July that it is not enforcing Obamacare's employer mandate. It has admitted that it cannot verify the eligibility of applicants for Obamacare subsidies.

(Come and get it!)

It says it will provide subsidies for those buying insurance through the federal health care exchanges in 36 states -- even though the legislation nowhere authorizes that.

And last Thursday, as congressional Democrats were panicking and supporting measures to allow people to keep their current health insurance policies, Obama announced that he would not impose penalties on policies that don't comply with the law.

That was plainly a transparent attempt to fob off the blame for cancelled policies on insurers and state regulators who complied with the law as written. It is a political ploy inconsistent with the rule of law.

Quinnipiac and other pollsters are not in the habit of asking Americans whether presidents are faithfully executing the law. The assumption has been that, unlike in Russia, they mostly are -- or were.

The Framers of the Constitution regarded refusal to faithfully execute the law as tyranny. Barack Obama, with his Swiss cheese exceptions to Obamacare, seems to take a different view.

Obama White House ordered John Kerry to support Muslim Brotherhood

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

Not as bad as the others

But he didn't say what they wanted him to say. New respect for John Kerry: "Exclusive: John Kerry Defies the White House on Egypt Policy," by Josh Rogin for the Daily Beast, November 18 (thanks to Kenneth):

The secretary doesn’t agree with Obama’s team, especially Susan Rice, on how to deal with Egypt. Unfortunately for Rice, Kerry is the one on the ground—and he’s doing things his way. 

Before Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent trip to Cairo, National Security Adviser Susan Rice told him to make strong statements in public and private about the trial of deposed President Mohamed Morsi. On his own, Kerry decided to disregard the White House’s instructions.

The tension between the national security adviser and the secretary of state spilled over into public view in the past week, when Rice laid out her critical appraisal of the Egyptian government, which contradicted Kerry’s assessment that Egypt was “on the path to democracy.” The now public rift has been simmering behind the scenes for months and illustrates the strikingly divergent Egypt policies the White House and the State Department are pursuing.

The turf battles and internal confusion are hampering the administration’s approach to Egypt, say lawmakers, experts, and officials inside both governments.

“John Kerry doesn’t agree with Susan Rice on big portions of our Egypt policy, and he made a deliberate and conscious decision not to mention Morsi in his Cairo meetings,” an administration official told The Daily Beast. “Susan Rice wasn’t happy about it.”...

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations State and Foreign Ops subcommittee, told The Daily Beast in an interview that he is opposed to giving the government of Egypt any more aid until it takes major steps toward restoring the rule of law.

“I’m not going to authorize more assistance to Egypt until they march toward a transition to a civilian-controlled government,” he said. “My goal is to not reinforce the coup but to reinforce the transition.”

Asked about the Kerry-Rice split on Egypt policy, Graham said, “I’m in the Susan Rice camp.”

What a surprise.