Findalis from Monkey in the Middle just published a piece about the Muslim outrage over a Facebook photo of a burning Quran and a saying kept running through my head but I couldn't remember who said it, so I hunted for it.
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of
comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and
controversy."-- Martin Luther King Jr.
This latest outrage by Muslim extremists follows directly on the heels of protests across the world against American embassies under the guise of offense over a movie clip where Mohammed was profiled as a pedophile, womanizer, etc.... and as examples have shown time and time again, there is only one group that consistently react with violence, death and destruction when they feel offense.
Muslim/Islamic extremists.
When photos and YouTube clips are published of people burning bibles,
the reaction is a shake of the head an a prayer for the poor soul that
feels the need to denigrate the Bible.
These savages live in a perpetual state of outrage and proponents of free speech can never, ever let them cower us with their threats and continuous savagery.
Kudos to Geller: "In any war between civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man."
They have declared Jihad, a holy war, against free speech... they will not win.
Just off the "outrage" over the film Innocence of Muslims, the Religion of PeaceReligion of Intolerance is now rioting over an offensive photograph on Facebook.
Extremist Muslim rioters torched Buddhist communities in southeastern Bangladesh Sunday over an “offensive” photo on Facebook.
The rioting was ignited over a photo uploaded to the social networking site by a Buddhist man from the area that allegedly defamed the Qur'an, according to district administrator Joinul Bari.
Some 25,000 Muslims stormed a Buddhist hamlet in Ramu, torching centuries-old temples.
Once ablaze, the mob swept into villages outside the town, chanting “Allah is Great!,” leaving a trail of devastating in its wake. One witness told a reporter that 11 wooden temples were looted and destroyed, including two that were 300 years old. Shops were similarly attacked. In all, 15 Buddhist villages were attacked, and more than 100 homes were looted and damaged.
Buddhists comprise less than one percent of the population in 90-percent Muslim Bangladesh, where the rest of the populace is Hindu. Most Buddhists live close to the border near the Buddhist-majority nation of Myanmar. Public gatherings have been banned to prevent further violence, Bari told reporters.
Extremist Muslim violence worldwide resulted in some 40 deaths barely a month ago when an obscure, amateur anti-Islam video produced in the United States raised the ire of followers after a trailer of the film was translated into Arabic and posted to the Internet. The trailer, which was broadcast on Egyptian television, led to worldwide violence. It was also used as the excuse for an Al Qaeda-linked terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya that left a U.S. Ambassador and three American diplomats dead.
There is no end to Muslim outrage. In fact this is a deliberately orchestrated action to force the West to remove their right of Free Speech.
There is only one outcome that can be done to stop these riots. More pictures, more movies, more outrage. Let these idiots riot all they want. Our freedoms are too important to give up. Let us offend these left overs from the Stone Age every day, hundreds of times a day.
Fox News reports that voter registration is down in Ohio, especially in Democratic strongholds:
Voter registration in the Buckeye State is down by 490,000 people
from four years ago. Of that reduction, 44 percent is in Cleveland and
surrounding Cuyahoga County, where Democrats outnumber Republicans more
than two to one.
"I think what we're seeing is a lot of spin and hype on the part of
the Obama campaign to try to make it appear that they're going to cruise
to victory in Ohio," Cuyahoga County Republican Chairman Rob Frost
said. "It's not just Cuyahoga County. Nearly 350,000 of those voters are
the decrease in the rolls in the three largest counties, Cuyahoga,
Hamilton and Franklin."
Frost points out that those three counties all contain urban centers, where the largest Democrat vote traditionally has been.
Fox points to a recent report from a Democratic think tank which shows that massive drop in Democratic registration is being seen in other battleground states as well, a report I highlighted back in mid August and is embedded below;
From that piece:
Findings:
• Democratic registration is down by 800,329, or 5.2%, since 2008.
•Republican registration is down by by 78,985, or 0.7%,
• Independent registration has increased by 486,677, or 6.4%
In 6 of the 8 states—Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, North
Carolina, and Pennsylvania—Independent registration has outpaced both
Democratic and Republican registration since 2008. In the remaining two,
Republicans have had the edge—likely the result of the competitive GOP
primary. In Iowa, Republican registration increased by 6.4% while
Democratic and, to a lesser extent, Independent registration fell. In
New Hampshire, voter registration has declined across the board; however, Republicans have shed the fewest voters.
The questioning for Barack Obama by Maria Elena Salinas and Jorge Ramos when he was interviewed on Univision became particularly uncomfortable for him when the questions turned to the Fast and Furious scandal. They highlighted the need for a special independent investigation, asked why Eric Holder had not been fired and specifically asked why Obama is not releasing the information the House Oversight
Committee has requested, even issued a subpoena for, if he has nothing to
hide.
A prelude for what was to come?
Tonight, September 30, 2012, at 7pm, Univision News Investigative Unit reveals their findings after investigating Fast and Furious, which are being called a "bombshell." The report will be aired with closed captioning in English
Fast and Furious was a program of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives, overseen by Attorney General Eric Holder’s DOJ.
It sent thousands of weapons to Mexican drug cartels via straw
purchasers — people who purchased guns in the United States with the
known intention of illegally trafficking them somewhere else.
Spanish-language television network Univision plans to air a
television special that it said reveals more violence than previously
known, as well as the stories of how many more Operation Fast and
Furious victims were killed, the network announced in a Friday release.
“The consequences of the controversial ‘Fast and Furious’ undercover
operation put in place by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives (ATF) in 2009 have been deadlier than what has been made
public to date,” the network said. “The exclusive, in-depth
investigation by Univision News’ award-winning Investigative Unit —
Univision Investiga — has found that the guns that crossed the border as
part of Operation Fast and Furious caused dozens of deaths inside
Mexico.”
Among other groups of Fast and Furious victim stories Univision says
it will tell in the special to air Sunday evening at 7 p.m., is one
about how “16 young people attending a party in a residential area of
Ciudad Juárez in January of 2010″ were gunned down with weapons the
Obama administration gave to drug cartel criminals through Fast and
Furious.
“Univision News’ Investigative Unit was also able to identify
additional guns that escaped the control of ATF agents and were used in
different types of crimes throughout Mexico,” the network added.
“Furthermore, some of these guns — none of which were reported by
congressional investigators — were put in the hands of drug traffickers
in Honduras, Puerto Rico, and Colombia. A person familiar with the
recent congressional hearings called Univision’s findings ‘the holy
grail’ that Congress had been searching for.”
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, have
pressed, unsuccessfully, for an interview with Kevin O'Reilly for a
year. O'Reilly also declined to speak to the Department of Justice
Inspector General (IG) who investigated Fast and Furious. Last week, the
IG issued a scathing report that criticized many officials at ATF, the
Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's office and said O'Reilly had
declined to be interviewed.
O'Reilly, then a White House
National Security staffer, had phone and email exchanges about Fast and
Furious from July 2010 to Feb. 2011 with the lead ATF official on the
case: ATF Special Agent in Charge Bill Newell. Just days after Newell
testified to Congress on July 26, 2011 that he'd shared information with
O'Reilly, whom he described as a long time friend, O'Reilly was
transferred to Iraq and not available for questioning. Thereafter, he
declined interviews with congressional investigators and the IG.
In
a letter sent to O'Reilly's attorney Thursday, Issa and Grassley state
that O'Reilly's "sudden transfer" to Iraq took him out of pocket in
their investigation, and placed him in a position that had already been
given to somebody else, raising "serious questions about O'Reilly's
assignment in Baghdad (and) the motivation for his transfer there."
Major Hat Tip to one of my Daily Reads, Pirate's Cove, for pointing out that it took the Times of Israel to report what American media should have but didn't as they continue to cover Obama's ass time and time again.
The US Embassy in Cairo issued a terrorist threat warning on Friday stating there are credible threats of terrorists targeting female U.S. missionaries.
The Embassy has credible information suggesting terrorist interest in
targeting U.S. female missionaries in Egypt. Accordingly, U.S. citizens
should exercise vigilance, taking necessary precautions to maintain
their personal security. U.S. citizens are advised to maintain valid
travel documents. U.S. citizens living or traveling abroad are
encouraged to enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP).
U.S. citizens without internet access may enroll directly at any U.S.
Embassy or Consulate. By enrolling, U.S. citizens make it easier for the
Embassy or Consulate to contact them in case of emergency.
Screenshot below in case the U.S. embassy in Cairo decides to try to scrub their site of this press release as they did recently with their apologetic condemnation of free speech (not before a screen shot was captured- seen here)
The Obama media is so busy trying to cover Obama's ass that they are not doing their jobs, they are not informing Americans of the news, of potential attacks, or of credible threats against Americans and America.
The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN) protects
workers, their families, and communities by requiring most employers with 100 or
more employees to provide notification 60 calendar days in advance of plant
closings and mass layoffs.
Employee entitled to notice under WARN include managers and supervisors,
as well as hourly and salaried workers. WARN requires that notice also
be given to employees' representatives, the local chief elected
official, and the state dislocated worker unit.
Advance notice gives workers and their families some transition time to
adjust to the prospective loss of employment, to seek and obtain other jobs,
and, if necessary, to enter skill training or retraining that will allow these
workers to compete successfully in the job market.
Generally, WARN covers employers with 100 or more employees, not
counting those who have worked less than six months in the last 12 months and
those who work an average of less than 20 hours a week.
Employees entitled to advance notice under WARN include managers and
supervisors as well as hourly and salaried workers.
Regular federal, state, and local government entities that provide
public services are not covered by WARN.
The Obama administration is encouraging contractors to violate the WARN Act by not sending out layoff notices and offering them compensation of legal costs that occur by violating the WARN Act, because those layoff notices are due to come out before the November presidential election.
The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for
defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration’s position
that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration.
The Labor Department issued guidance in July saying it would
be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs
tied to sequestration cuts. But a few contractors, most notably Lockheed
Martin, said they still were considering whether to issue the notices — which
would be sent out just days before the November election.
But the Friday guidance from the Office of Management and
Budget raised the stakes in the dispute, telling contractors that they would be
compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations
under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance.
The guidance said that if plant closings or mass layoffs
occur under sequestration, then “employee compensation costs for [Worker Adjustment
and Retraining Notification] WARN act liability as determined by a court” would
be paid for covered by the contracting federal agency.
Republicans are rightly calling the Obama administration on it's attempt to hide the bad news coming by way of layoffs from the American people, right before the presidential election.
Senate Republicans, who accused the White House of trying to
hide job losses after the first guidance, said Friday that the new OMB
statement “puts politics ahead of American workers.”
“The Obama Administration is cynically trying to skirt the
WARN Act to keep the American people in the dark about this looming national
security and fiscal crisis,” Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham
(R-S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said in a statement. “The president should
insist that companies act in accordance with the clearly stated law and move
forward with the layoff notices.”
The fight over WARN Act notices began in June when Lockheed
Martin CEO Bob Stevens said his company might send the notices to all 123,000
of its employees.
Is there no lie too big, no depths too low for Obama to sink to in order to get reelected?
Conservatives have been screaming from the rooftops, figuratively, about loosening up regulations as a way to help businesses grow, expand and create more jobs in order to address and lower unemployment here in America which has been over 8 percent for 43 straight months.
“In Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, people rose up against their dictators
because they were fed up with governments that served the interests of a
few at the expense of everyone else,” said Clinton.
“But economic and social challenges did not disappear with the
dictators. Too many people still can’t find jobs, and young and growing
populations crave a sense of opportunity and self-determination.
“On the economic front, we are zeroing in on small and medium-sized
enterprises because they are the growth engines in any economy,” Clinton
said. “They create the bulk of new jobs and they spread wealth more
broadly through more communities. And when people have the opportunity
to unleash their talents and create something of their own, they are
more invested in their communities, their countries, and their new
democracies.
“So the OECD is helping emerging democracies find ways they can
loosen regulations and make it easier to start or expand a small
business................
Amazing how the Obama administration can recommend for other countries, exactly what Conservatives have proposing in the U.S., and not see the irony.
The reason this so-called recovery effort implemented by the Obama
administration has been the weakest, feeblest recovery since the Great Depression is directly attributable to Barack Obama's policies and agenda, according to a poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies (POS), who surveyed 800 small business
owners,
manufacturers and decision-makers at small and medium-sized companies,
via a release from The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and
the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB).
(55 percent) saying the national economy is in a worse position
compared to three years ago. Among the chief factors survey respondents
cited were federal regulations, taxes, government spending and the cost
of health insurance and energy.
Key survey findings include the following:
67 percent say there is too much uncertainty in the market today to expand, grow or hire new workers.
69 percent of small business owners and manufacturers say
President Obama’s Executive Branch and regulatory policies have hurt
American small businesses and manufacturers.
55 percent say they would not start a business today given what they know now and in the current environment.
54 percent say other countries like China and India are more
supportive of their small businesses and manufacturers than the United
States.
ATR (Americans for Tax Reform) has separated out the top five taxes within the Obamacare law from the full list of 20, that are to take effect on January 1, 2013.
The Obamacare Medical Device Tax – a $20 billion tax increase:
Medical device manufacturers employ 409,000 people in 12,000 plants
across the country. Obamacare imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax on
gross sales – even if the company does not earn a profit in a given
year. In addition to killing small business jobs and impacting research
and development budgets, this will increase the cost of your health
care – making everything from pacemakers to prosthetics more expensive.
The Obamacare “Special Needs Kids Tax” – a $13 billion tax increase:
The 30-35 million Americans who use a Flexible Spending Account (FSA)
at work to pay for their family’s basic medical needs will face a new
government cap of $2,500 (currently the accounts are unlimited under
federal law, though employers are allowed to set a cap).
There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be
particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.
There are several million families with special needs children in the
United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs
education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special
needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can
easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used
to pay for this type of special needs education. This Obamacare tax
provision will limit the options available to these families.
The Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income – a $123 billion tax increase: This is a new, 3.8 percentage point surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single).
The Obamacare “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deductions – a $15.2 billion tax increase: Currently,
those Americans facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction to
the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross
income (AGI). This tax increase imposes a threshold of 10 percent of
AGI. By limiting this deduction, Obamacare widens the net of taxable
income for the sickest Americans. This tax provision will most harm
near retirees and those with modest incomes but high medical bills.
The Obamacare Medicare Payroll Tax Hike -- an $86.8 billion tax increase: The
Medicare payroll tax is currently 2.9 percent on all wages and
self-employment profits. Under this tax hike, wages and profits
exceeding $200,000 ($250,000 in the case of married couples) will face a
3.8 percent rate instead. This is a direct marginal income tax hike on
small business owners, who are liable for self-employment tax in most
cases.
Click over to ATR to see the tables/charts associated with the taxes.
(See Comprehensive List Of 20 Obamacare Tax Hikes With Effective Dates-Embedded HERE)
New York Lawmakers Fight to Protect 9/11 Health &
Compensation Programs from Looming Budget Ax
Lawmakers Advocate for the Heroes Who Answered the Call
of Duty on 9/11 to be Treated With Same Dignity As Military Veterans -- Slashing
9/11 Treatment and Compensation Funds Violates Congressional Rule and Intent,
and Contradicts Precedent to Aid Injured and Sick Victims
New York, NY– U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Charles
Schumer (D-NY), joined by Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Peter King
(R-NY), and Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) today urged the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) to preserve funding for the critical 9/11 health programs that were
passed into law under the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act should
any sequestration budget cuts go into effect next year. A preliminary report by
OMB shows that $24 million is slated to be slashed from the Victim Compensation
Fund, and an additional $14 million would be cut from the World Trade Center
Health Fund in 2013, as part o
The lawmakers wrote in a letter
to OMB Acting Director Zients, “[W]e all agree that applying sequestration to
these two programs [established by the James Zadroga 9-11 Health and
Compensation Act] does not make sense, is not consistent with Congressional
intent, does not follow precedent regarding trust funds provided for victims,
and we would urge OMB to reconsider this initial finding if it is required to
proceed with a sequester… We are concerned that OMB has not fully investigated
the facts under which these programs operate.”
“Nothing exemplifies this
unbalanced and draconian approach to deficit reduction more than asking our
heroes who have already
sacrificed so much to sacrifice yet again,” said Senator Gillibrand. “Our
9/11 heroes who answered the call of duty should be treated with the same
dignity as our veterans. Just as we have come together as Democrats and
Republicans to fight for our heroes, I urge our colleagues to do the same and
work towards a balanced approach that keeps struggling families from sacrificing
the most.”
“This is one of the most
poignant examples of why we must work to avert the sequester,” said Senator
Schumer. “We can entirely avoid this problem if both parties agree to
support a balanced deficit reduction plan that includes revenues as well as
sensible savings. But in the event that they don't, we must work to make sure
there that the burden does not fall on the national heroes who are finally
receiving the help they deserve through the Zadroga Act. Veterans have been
exempted from sequestration and the heroes who have rushed to towers after 9/11
should be treated the same. They risked their lives in a time of war and
suffered for it.”
“Sequestering 9/11 health
funding would be a monumental misapplication of the law and a gross affront to
those who continue to suffer the health consequences of the terrorist attacks
and their aftermath,” said Congresswoman Maloney. “The World Trade Center
Health Program and the Victim Compensation Fund are both paid for with a
dedicated funding stream and do not contribute one cent to our nation’s budget
deficit. Needlessly cutting health funding for responders, workers, and
residents who are sick or dying as a result of their exposure to Ground Zero
toxins would literally be adding insult to injury.”
“We have come too far and our
9/11 heroes have endured too much for this funding to be subjected to a
bureaucratic reduction,” said Congressman King. “It would be a cruel hoax
to finally allow these individuals to start their necessary treatment, only to
find out they will not be able to continue it through no fault of their
own.”
“I am quite concerned that,
among the vast devastation that sequestration would bring, it will also include
cuts to Zadroga Act funding,” said Congressman Nadler. “We have all
worked extremely hard, with the help and support of 9/11 first responders and
survivors, to obtain health care and compensation for those who need it, and we
must not now, all of a sudden, ration assistance for the sick. We are urging the
Office of Management and Budget to reconsider its determination on Zadroga’s
exemption from the sequester. The health and well-being – not to mention peace
of mind – of thousands of responders and survivors of 9/11 depend on
it.”
In addition to noting that cuts
to these programs would be devastating for the families of 9/11 victims and
first responders, the five members of Congress also listed three key reasons why
the 9/11 programs should be exempt from automatic cuts:
·The preliminary budget
fails to take into account New York City’s agreement to voluntarily pay 10%
share for the 9/11 program. Under
federal rule, “activities financed by voluntary payments to the government” are
exempt from sequester. Lawmakers pointed out that accordin
·The 9/11 health programs
should be added onto the list of federal health and compensation programs that
are already immune from cuts. There are
currently 150 exemptions, including at least six programs established for
injuries and illnesses, signed into law by February 2010—nearly a year before
the 9/11 health bill was passed. Had the 9/11 health bill existed then, the 9/11
programs would have been among the items protected from
sequestration.
·The proposed budget cuts
are an affront to the 9/11 health law that was already formulated to cut the
deficit. The 9/11 law was already
devised to be fully paid for and to cut the deficit. According to the
Congressional Budget Office's estimate, the law slashes $433 million from the
deficit.
The budget already spares
veterans from most of the automatic budget cuts. OMB released a letter in April
assuring that programs under the Veterans Affairs agency would be exempt from
sequestration.
Full text of the lawmakers’
letter is below:
Dear Acting Director Zients,
We are writing to convey our
deep concern about the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) initial
determination that the programs established by the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and
Compensation Act are subject to sequestration under the Sequestration
Transparency Act of 2012. As Members of Congress, some of whom voted for the
“Budget Control Act of 2011” and some of whom voted against, we all agree that
applying sequestration to these two programs does not make sense, is not
consistent with Congressional intent, does not follow precedent regarding trust
funds provided for victims, and we would urge OMB to reconsider this initial
finding if it is required to proceed with a sequester.
The September 14, 2012 “OMB
Report Pursuant to the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012 (P. L. 112–155)”
identifies the World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program, administered by the
Department of Health and Human Services and the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund (VCF),
administered by the Department of Justice as programs subject to sequestration.
Both of these programs are listed as being subject to a 7.6 sequester percentage
with the WTC Health Program’s $190 million budget authority for FY 2013 slated
for a $14 million reduction and the VCF’s $322 million budget authority reduced
by $24 million. Not only would these cuts be devastating for the victims that
need assistance, we are concerned that OMB has not fully investigated the facts
under which these programs operate.
For example, the 7.6% sequester
estimate was applied to the total $190 million health program instead of
subtracting the 10% payment volunteered by the City of New York prior to
calculating the cut. Pursuant to the PAYGO Statue, Section 11(g) ‘‘Activities
financed by voluntary payments to the Government for goods or services to be
provided for such payments” are exempt from sequester. The City of New York has
voluntarily agreed, through a memorandum of understanding (MOU), to pay a 10%
share for the program. Therefore, including their portion of the funding
violates the sequester process.
In addition, as OMB is aware,
the PAYGO Statute which was signed into law in February 2010 includes 150
exemptions. Among the programs exempted are similar health and compensation
programs that have been established for other injuries and illnesses such as:
the Payment to Radiation Exposure Compensation Trust Fund, Radiation Exposure
Compensation Trust Fund, Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Fund, Vaccine Injury Compensation, Vaccine
But the 9/11
health and compensation funds did not exist at the time the PAYGO Statute was
enacted. The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which established
these funds, was not passed by the Congress until December 2010 and was signed
into law by the President in January of 2011. Clearly had the 9/11 Heath and
Compensation programs existed in February 2010, when the PAYGO law was passed,
they would have been included on the list of specific exemptions and therefore
we request that both the health and compensation programs are excluded from
sequestration.
Moreover, the James Zadroga
9/11 Health and Compensation Act, when enacted, was not only fully PAYGO
compliant with a dedicated stream of revenue that fully pays for the program,
but in fact provided an additional $433 million in deficit reduction, revenue
above what the Act spent. Given that it was fully PAYGO compliant and in fact in
the end will lead to over $400 million in deficit reduction we do not believe
that subjecting the two programs to sequester is proper or consistent with the
precedent set by similar health and compensation programs provided to injured
workers.
In conclusion, we know that the
task before OMB is difficult and it is our sincere hope that Congress will find
an alternative to sequestration. However, as your report states on page one,
“The estimates and classifications in the report are preliminary. If the
sequestration were to occur, the actual results would differ based on changes in
law and ongoing legal, budgetary, and technical analysis.” We therefore write to
you in the hope of pointing out that we do not believe that Congress
intended to have these two programs fall under sequestration.
###
For more background on the Zadroga Act, starthere.
The program is called Lifeline, established in 1984, originally
created to subsidize landline phone service for low income Americans,
funded by government-collected telecommunication fees, paid by
consumers.
In 2008, the program was expanded to support cell phones which
quickly escalated the cost of the program. In 2008 the program cost $772
million, but by 2011 it cost $1.6 billion.
A 2011 audit found that 269,000 wireless Lifeline subscribers were receiving free phones and monthly service
from two or more carriers. Several websites have been created to
promote “free” government cell phones, including the”The Obama Cell
Phone” website at Obamaphone.net.
Sometimes you look at something and just say "wow."
This is definitely one that should be added to the Obama supporters that Howard Stern exposed. (See that video here.)
As Obama nears the end of his term, his administration hasn’t met those
goals, failing to follow the requirements of the Freedom of Information
Act, according to an analysis of open-government requests filed by Bloomberg News.
Nineteen of 20 cabinet-level agencies disobeyed the law requiring the
disclosure of public information: The cost of travel by top officials.
In all, just eight of the 57 federal agencies met Bloomberg’s request
for those documents within the 20-day window required by the Act.
“When
it comes to implementation of Obama’s wonderful transparency policy
goals, especially FOIA policy in particular, there has been far more
‘talk the talk’ rather than ‘walk the walk,’” said Daniel Metcalfe, director of the Department of Justice’s office monitoring the government’s compliance with FOIA requests from 1981 to 2007.
• A list of trips taken out of Washington, D.C., by the head of the agency
• Documents showing dates and modes of transport
• A breakdown of travel expenses, including all gifts or reimbursements covered by outside sources
Democrat and Republicans from the United States Senate, Committee On Foreign Relations, are jointly sending a letter to the Obama administration for more information than they have gotten to date.
Letter will be embedded below the post.
Additional Questions (Page #4)
1. Please expand the accounting of the attacks against U.S. missions in Egypt, Libya and Yemen beginning on September 11, 2012, to include attacks that took place at any U.S. missions from September 11-13, 2012.
2. In addition to a discussion of whether host government security forces were of adequate size and were adequately trained and equipped to protect our mission, please expand your response to include a discussion of the steps, if any, those forces took to protect U.S. missions or assist U.S. personnel on the days in question.
3. In addition to whether the United States or the host governments had intelligence prior to the attacks in Egypt, Libya or Yemen, please expand your response to include an assessment of attacks that took place at any U.S. missions from September 11-13, 2012. Please also discuss whether there were adequate mechanisms in place to share that information on a timely basis with U.S. security personnel posted at the mission.
4. Please provide an assessment of the state of security of other U.S. embassies and consulates in high threat environments that were not attacked from September 11-13, 2012.
The letter marks the first time congressional
Democrats have so directly expressed their dissatisfaction with the
administration's response to inquiries about the attacks, which resulted
in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others and raised questions about U.S. security throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa.
A Kerry aide confirmed that the committee
intended to enlist the support of Republicans and Democrats and said the
letter would likely be sent Friday. Another aide told The Examiner that
the panel's 10 Democrats and nine Republicans plan to sign it.
This bipartisan letter comes six days after Senate Republicans blasted the Obama administration for giving more details of the Libya attack to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal than to the United States Senate.
Via The Right Scoop and remember Powers is a Democrat, so this type of criticism against liberal media bias coming from a moderate Dem is indicative of the frustration felt on both sides of the political spectrum.
Kirsten Powers believes that media bias has gotten out of control on
the issue of the Benghazi attack and the subsequent lies from the Obama
administration on what happened. There are so many questions that need
answering and she says that the media could possibly be complicit in
another terrorist attack on America if they don’t get to the bottom of
what is happening here. She cites the attacks on our embassies pre-9/11
as warnings back then, and says Al-Qaeda is not dead and the media
should be asking what this really means.
School kids are starting their own type of revolution aimed against Michelle Obama's 2010 health initiative which limits the amount of calories can provide with the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. The complaint from the kids is that the lunches are leaving them hungry.
[WATCH] We Are Hungry Paradoy
The video above was created by students and teachers from a high school in Kansas, but they are not the only ones joining this revolt against Michelle Obama's initiative.
In Pierre SD, kids are tossing more food away than they are eating.
"I know a lot of my friends who are just drinking a jug of milk for
their lunch. And they are not getting a proper meal," middle school
student Samantha Gortmaker said.
You can see from the garbage line, a lot of the healthy foods kids have
to put on their plates aren't going in their stomachs. Some are
concerned certain kids need more food than they're allowed to take under
the new regulations.
It isn't only the children who are noticing the problems with Michelle Obama's initiative either:
Schools need to keep students below a certain calorie count depending on
their age. Darrel Davis heads the school lunch program in Pierre.
"When they're running cross country and burning 3,000 calories a day,
they need more energy. They need more fuel," Darrel Davis said.
Davis says he doesn't have all the answers, but wants to see more
flexibility. Noem agrees. The Congresswoman says she's been fielding
complaints from people across the state, including her own kids.
"With all these new requirements that are coming, the goals are great.
We just really need the flexibility to really make them work," Noem
said.
A new product has popped up on the city's black
market and it's selling in an unexpected place: Greater New Bedford
Vocational-Technical High School, which has become ground zero for a new
underground economy based on trade in chocolate syrup.
Students
said some of their peers are buying the contraband liquid for 50 cents
and squeezing it into cartons of white milk to give it flavor. It's
their way of coping with a ban on flavored milk — and a long list of
other items — that took effect Aug. 1.
Then again, Michelle might have to be given credit for creating more future conservatives out these children as evidenced by 16 year old Erik Cortez of New Bedford, who says "I get it, but why should they have the right to tell you what you can and can't eat?"
Why indeed... it used to be a parent's right to decide what their kids dietary needs are, Michelle has made it the governments.
Moving right along to Great Falls, MT, we see kids eating their lunch then hopping over to McDonalds because they left hungry after Michelle's interference.
As he grabbed lunch before a road trip to Malta for a football game,
junior Joey Kercher quickly ate two slices of pizza, grapes and milk.
Then he left the school cafeteria for McDonald’s and his second lunch.
School lunch “is not enough,” he said.
Thanks
to new USDA rules, Kercher could have had however many servings of
vegetables he wanted — though he skipped the first helping of cucumbers
and salad offered, calling them “not appetizing” — but couldn’t have
seconds on pizza.
More:
Sharing his table, junior Michael Kraft said he goes home for lunch because the school’s offerings “don’t fill me up.”Sometimes he eats carrots, but generally he eats “whatever I can find” and skips the veggies.
Some smart school officials are simply ignoring portions of the new rules.
While his school in Sunburst has continued to add more fruits and
vegetables, keeps a well-stocked salad bar, moved from 2-percent to
1-percent milk and added more whole grains, the school isn’t complying
with portion or seconds rules on protiens, said Superintendent Tim Tharp
of North Toole County High School.
Last week the school board officially decided to ignore certain components of the new food regulations.
“The kids would bring their own lunch or go to the grocery store for fried food, soda pop and chips,” he said.
Still more examples of the backfiring of Michelle sticking her nose into other people's business.
Taelynn Still Smoking, a Cut Bank middle schooler, remains miffed
about the chicken nuggets, which she described as only four
quarter-sized pieces.
Sharing her table, Falon BigSpring said more classmates are going to Subway, McDonald’s, Taco Johns and Latte Da for lunch.
From one end of the country to the other, kids, teachers and food servers are saying that some kids needs more than others, some are more active, some only get their full amount of calories for the day at school and this program is leaving the children hungry.
Video and transcript below it, with the diagram Prime Minister Netanyahu showed during his speech.
Below, The Algemeiner has published the full transcript of Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to the United Nations
General Assembly on September 27, 2012.
It’s a pleasure to see the General Assembly presided by the
Ambassador from Israel, and it’s good to see all of you, distinguished
delegates.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Three thousand years ago, King David reigned over the Jewish state in
our eternal capital, Jerusalem. I say that to all those who proclaim
that the Jewish state has no roots in our region and that it will soon
disappear.
Throughout our history, the Jewish people have overcome all the tyrants who have sought our destruction. It’s their ideologies that have been discarded by history.
The people of Israel live on. We say in Hebrew Am Yisrael Chai, and the Jewish state will live forever.
The Jewish people have lived in the land of Israel for thousands of
years. Even after most of our people were exiled from it, Jews continued
to live in the land of Israel throughout the ages. The masses of our
people never gave up the dreamed of returning to our ancient homeland.
Defying the laws of history, we did just that. We ingathered the
exiles, restored our independence and rebuilt our national life. The
Jewish people have come home.
We will never be uprooted again.
Yesterday was Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish year.
Every year, for over three millennia, we have come together on this
day of reflection and atonement. We take stock of our past. We pray for
our future. We remember the sorrows of our persecution; we remember the
great travails of our dispersion; we mourn the extermination of a third
of our people, six million, in the Holocaust.
But at the end of Yom Kippur, we celebrate.
We celebrate the rebirth of Israel. We celebrate the heroism of our
young men and women who have defended our people with the indomitable
courage of Joshua, David, and the Maccabees of old. We celebrate the
marvel of the flourishing modern Jewish state.
In Israel, we walk the same paths tread by our patriarchs Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob. But we blaze new trails in science, technology,
medicine, agriculture.
In Israel, the past and the future find common ground.
Unfortunately, that is not the case in many other countries. For
today, a great battle is being waged between the modern and the
medieval.
The forces of modernity seek a bright future in which the rights of
all are protected, in which an ever-expanding digital library is
available in the palm of every child, in which every life is sacred.
The forces of medievalism seek a world in which women and minorities
are subjugated, in which knowledge is suppressed, in which not life but
death is glorified.
These forces clash around the globe, but nowhere more starkly than in the Middle East.
Israel stands proudly with the forces of modernity. We protect the
rights of all our citizens: men and women, Jews and Arabs, Muslims and
Christians – all are equal before the law.
Israel is also making the world a better place: our scientists win
Nobel Prizes. Our know-how is in every cell-phone and computer that
you’re using. We prevent hunger by irrigating arid lands in Africa and
Asia.
Recently, I was deeply moved when I visited Technion, one of our
technological institutes in Haifa, and I saw a man paralyzed from the
waist down climb up a flight of stairs, quite easily, with the aid of an
Israeli invention.
And Israel’s exceptional creativity is matched by our people’s
remarkable compassion. When disaster strikes anywhere in the world – in
Haiti, Japan, India, Turkey Indonesia and elsewhere – Israeli doctors
are among the first on the scene, performing life-saving surgeries.
In the past year, I lost both my father and my father-in-law. In the
same hospital wards where they were treated, Israeli doctors were
treating Palestinian Arabs. In fact, every year, thousands of Arabs from
the Palestinian territories and Arabs from throughout the Middle East
come to Israel to be treated in Israeli hospitals by Israeli doctors.
I know you’re not going to hear that from speakers around this
podium, but that’s the truth. It’s important that you are aware of this
truth.
It’s because Israel cherishes life, that Israel cherishes peace and seeks peace.
We seek to preserve our historic ties and our historic peace treaties
with Egypt and Jordan. We seek to forge a durable peace with the
Palestinians.
President Abbas just spoke here.
I say to him and I say to you:
We won’t solve our conflict with libelous speeches at the UN. That’s
not the way to solve it. We won’t solve our conflict with unilateral
declarations of statehood.
We have to sit together, negotiate together, and reach a mutual
compromise, in which a demilitarized Palestinian state recognizes the
one and only Jewish State.
Israel wants to see a Middle East of progress and peace. We want to
see the three great religions that sprang forth from our region –
Judaism, Christianity and Islam – coexist in peace and in mutual
respect.
Yet the medieval forces of radical Islam, whom you just saw storming
the American embassies throughout the Middle East, they oppose this.
They seek supremacy over all Muslims. They are bent on world
conquest. They want to destroy Israel, Europe, America. They want to
extinguish freedom. They want to end the modern world.
Militant Islam has many branches – from the rulers of Iran with their
Revolutionary Guards to Al Qaeda terrorists to the radical cells
lurking in every part of the globe.
But despite their differences, they are all rooted in the same bitter
soil of intolerance. That intolerance is directed first at their fellow
Muslims, and then to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, secular
people, anyone who doesn’t submit to their unforgiving creed.
They want to drag humanity back to an age of unquestioning dogma and unrelenting conflict.
I am sure of one thing. Ultimately they will fail. Ultimately, light will penetrate the darkness.
We’ve seen that happen before.
Some five hundred years ago, the printing press helped pry a
cloistered Europe out of a dark age. Eventually, ignorance gave way to
enlightenment.
So too, a cloistered Middle East will eventually yield to the
irresistible power of freedom and technology. When this happens, our
region will be guided not by fanaticism and conspiracy, but by reason
and curiosity.
I think the relevant question is this: it’s not whetherthis fanaticism will be defeated. It’s how many lives will be lost before it’s defeated.
We’ve seen that happen before too.
Some 70 years ago, the world saw another fanatic ideology bent on
world conquest. It went down in flames. But not before it took millions
of people with it. Those who opposed that fanaticism waited too long to
act. In the end they triumphed, but at an horrific cost.
My friends, we cannot let that happen again.
At stake is not merely the future of my own country. At stake is the
future of the world. Nothing could imperil our common future more than
the arming of Iran with nuclear weapons.
To understand what the world would be like with a nuclear-armed Iran, just imagine the world with a nuclear-armed Al-Qaeda.
It makes no difference whether these lethal weapons are in the hands
of the world’s most dangerous terrorist regime or the world’s most
dangerous terrorist organization. They’re both fired by the same hatred;
they’re both driven by the same lust for violence.
Just look at what the Iranian regime has done up till now, without nuclear weapons.
In 2009, they brutally put down mass protests for democracy in their
own country. Today, their henchmen are participating in the slaughter of
tens of thousands of Syrian civilians, including thousands of children,
directly participating in this murder.
They abetted the killing of American soldiers in Iraq and continue to
do so in Afghanistan. Before that, Iranian proxies killed hundreds of
American troops in Beirut and in Saudi Arabia. They’ve turned Lebanon
and Gaza into terror strongholds, embedding nearly 100,000 missiles and
rockets in civilian areas. Thousands of these rockets and missiles have
already been fired at Israeli communities by their terrorist proxies.
In the last year, they’ve spread their international terror networks
to two dozen countries across five continents – from India and Thailand
to Kenya and Bulgaria. They’ve even plotted to blow up a restaurant a
few blocks from the White House in order to kill a diplomat.
And of course, Iran’s rulers repeatedly deny the Holocaust and call
for Israel’s destruction almost on a daily basis, as they did again this
week from the United Nations.
So I ask you, given this record of Iranian aggression without nuclear
weapons, just imagine Iranian aggression with nuclear weapons. Imagine
their long range missiles tipped with nuclear warheads, their terror
networks armed with atomic bombs.
Who among you would feel safe in the Middle East? Who would be safe
in Europe? Who would be safe in America? Who would be safe anywhere?
There are those who believe that a nuclear-armed Iran can be deterred like the Soviet Union.
That’s a very dangerous assumption.
Militant Jihadists behave very differently from secular Marxists.
There were no Soviet suicide bombers. Yet Iran produces hordes of them.
Deterrence worked with the Soviets, because every time the Soviets
faced a choice between their ideology and their survival, they chose
their survival.
But deterrence may not work with the Iranians once they get nuclear weapons.
There’s a great scholar of the Middle East, Prof. Bernard Lewis, who
put it best. He said that for the Ayatollahs of Iran, mutually assured
destruction is not a deterrent, it’s an inducement.
Iran’s apocalyptic leaders believe that a medieval holy man will
reappear in the wake of a devastating Holy War, thereby ensuring that
their brand of radical Islam will rule the earth.
That’s not just what they believe. That’s what is actually guiding their policies and their actions.
Just listen to Ayatollah Rafsanjani who said, I quote: ”The use of
even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything, however it
would only harm the Islamic world.”
Rafsanjani said: “It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.”
Not irrational…
And that’s coming from one of the so-called moderates of Iran.
Shockingly, some people have begun to peddle the absurd notion that a
nuclear-armed Iran would actually stabilize the Middle East.
Yeah, right…
That’s like saying a nuclear-armed Al-Qaeda would usher in an era of universal peace.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I’ve been speaking about the need to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons for over 15 years.
I spoke about it in my first term in office as Prime Minister, and
then I spoke about it when I left office. I spoke about it when it was
fashionable, and I spoke about it when it wasn’t fashionable.
I speak about it now because the hour is getting late, very late. I
speak about it now because the Iranian nuclear calendar doesn’t take
time out for anyone or for anything. I speak about it now because when
it comes to the survival of my country, it’s not only my right to speak;
it’s my duty to speak. And I believe that this is the duty of every
responsible leader who wants to preserve world peace.
For nearly a decade, the international community has tried to stop the Iranian nuclear program with diplomacy.
That hasn’t worked.
Iran uses diplomatic negotiations as a means to buy time to advance its nuclear program.
For over seven years, the international community has tried sanctions
with Iran. Under the leadership of President Obama, the international
community has passed some of the strongest sanctions to date.
I want to thank the governments represented here that have joined in
this effort. It’s had an effect. Oil exports have been curbed and the
Iranian economy has been hit hard.
It’s had an effect on the economy, but we must face the truth. Sanctions have not stopped Iran’s nuclear program either.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, during the last
year alone, Iran has doubled the number of centrifuges in its
underground nuclear facility in Qom.
At this late hour, there is only one way to peacefully prevent Iran
from getting atomic bombs. That’s by placing a clear red line on Iran’s
nuclear weapons program.
Red lines don’t lead to war; red lines prevent war.
Look at NATO’s charter: it made clear that an attack on one member
country would be considered an attack on all. NATO’s red line helped
keep the peace in Europe for nearly half a century.
President Kennedy set a red line during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
That red line also prevented war and helped preserve the peace for
decades.
In fact, it’s the failure to place red lines that has often invited aggression.
If the Western powers had drawn clear red lines during the 1930s, I
believe they would have stopped Nazi aggression and World War II might
have been avoided.
In 1990, if Saddam Hussein had been clearly told that his conquest of
Kuwait would cross a red line, the first Gulf War might have been
avoided.
Clear red lines have also worked with Iran.
Earlier this year, Iran threatened to close the Straits of Hormouz. The United States drew a clear red line and Iran backed off.
Red lines could be drawn in different parts of Iran’s nuclear weapons
program. But to be credible, a red line must be drawn first and
foremost in one vital part of their program: on Iran’s efforts to enrich
uranium. Now let me explain why:
Basically, any bomb consists of explosive material and a mechanism to ignite it.
The simplest example is gunpowder and a fuse. That is, you light the fuse and set off the gunpowder.
In the case of Iran’s plans to build a nuclear weapon, the gunpowder is enriched uranium. The fuse is a nuclear detonator.
For Iran, amassing enough enriched uranium is far more difficult than producing the nuclear fuse.
For a country like Iran, it takes many, many years to enrich uranium
for a bomb. That requires thousands of centrifuges spinning in tandem in
very big industrial plants. Those Iranian plants are visible and
they’re still vulnerable.
In contrast, Iran could produce the nuclear detonator – the fuse – in
a lot less time, maybe under a year, maybe only a few months.
The detonator can be made in a small workshop the size of a
classroom. It may be very difficult to find and target that workshop,
especially in Iran. That’s a country that’s bigger than France, Germany,
Italy and Britain combined.
The same is true for the small facility in which they could assemble a
warhead or a nuclear device that could be placed in a container ship.
Chances are you won’t find that facility either.
So in fact the only way that you can credibly prevent Iran from
developing a nuclear weapon, is to prevent Iran from amassing enough
enriched uranium for a bomb.
So, how much enriched uranium do you need for a bomb? And how close is Iran to getting it?
Let me show you. I brought a diagram for you. Here’s the diagram.
In the case of Iran’s nuclear plans to build a bomb, this bomb has to
be filled with enough enriched uranium. And Iran has to go through
three stages.
The first stage: they have to enrich enough of low enriched uranium.
The second stage: they have to enrich enough medium enriched uranium.
And the third stage and final stage: they have to enrich enough high enriched uranium for the first bomb.
Where’s Iran? Iran’s completed the first stage. It took them many years, but they completed it and they’re 70% of the way there.
Now they are well into the second stage. By next spring, at most by
next summer at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the
medium enrichment and move on to the final stage.
From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ladies and Gentlemen,
What I told you now is not based on secret information. It’s not
based on military intelligence. It’s based on public reports by the
International Atomic Energy Agency. Anybody can read them. They’re
online.
So if these are the facts, and they are, where should the red line be drawn?
The red line should be drawn right here…………..
(Diagram)
Before Iran completes the second stage of nuclear enrichment necessary to make a bomb.
Before Iran gets to a point where it’s a few months away or a few
weeks away from amassing enough enriched uranium to make a nuclear
weapon.
Each day, that point is getting closer. That’s why I speak today with
such a sense of urgency. And that’s why everyone should have a sense of
urgency.
Some who claim that even if Iran completes the enrichment process,
even if it crosses that red line that I just drew, our intelligence
agencies will know when and where Iran will make the fuse, assemble the
bomb, and prepare the warhead.
Look, no one appreciats our intelligence agencies more than the Prime
Minister of Israel. All these leading intelligence agencies are superb,
including ours. They’ve foiled many attacks. They’ve saved many lives.
But they are not foolproof.
For over two years, our intelligence agencies didn’t know that Iran
was building a huge nuclear enrichment plant under a mountain.
Do we want to risk the security of the world on the assumption that
we would find in time a small workshop in a country half the size of
Europe?
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The relevant question is not when Iran will get the bomb. The relevant question is at what stage can we no longer stop Iran from getting the bomb.
The red line must be drawn on Iran’s nuclear enrichment program
because these enrichment facilities are the only nuclear installations
that we can definitely see and credibly target.
I believe that faced with a clear red line, Iran willbackdown.
This will give more time for sanctions and diplomacy to convince Iran to dismantle its nuclear weapons program altogether.
Two days ago, from this podium, President Obama reiterated that the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran cannot be contained.
I very much appreciate the President’s position as does everyone in
my country. We share the goal of stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons
program. This goal unites the people of Israel. It unites Americans,
Democrats and Republicans alike and it is shared by important leaders
throughout the world.
What I have said today will help ensure that this common goal is achieved.
Israel is in discussions with the United States over this issue, and I am confident that we can chart a path forward together.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The clash between modernity and medievalism need not be a clash between progress and tradition.
The traditions of the Jewish people go back thousands of years. They
are the source of our collective values and the foundation of our
national strength.
At the same time, the Jewish people have always looked towards the
future. Throughout history, we have been at the forefront of efforts to
expand liberty, promote equality, and advance human rights.
We champion these principles not despite of our traditions but because of them.
We heed the words of the Jewish prophets Isaiah, Amos, and Jeremiah
to treat all with dignity and compassion, to pursue justice and cherish
life and to pray and strive for peace.
These are the timeless values of my people and these are the Jewish people’s greatest gift to mankind.
Let us commit ourselves today to defend these values so that we can defend our freedom and protect our common civilization.
Yesterday I wrote about the "Dirty Jobs" star Mike Rowe writing a letter to Mitt Romney, the same type of letter he wrote to Barack Obama in 2009, talking about skilled labor, jobs and opportunity. Obama never responded, Romney did and Romney invited Rowe to speak on the topic at a campaign event in Ohio.
Below is the video of Romney's then Rowes' remarks.
