Category Archives: Featured Political News

G.W. Bush Offers Rare Criticism of Obama

President G.W. Bush

President G.W. BushAt an hour-long question-and-answer session with the Republican Jewish Coalition, former President George W. Bush offered harsh criticism of President Obama’s handling of the Middle-East.

Bush has previously avoided criticizing the sitting President, but Saturday night he offered his views on Obama’s handling of the Iranian nuclear deal, the retreat from Iraq and President Obama’s approach to dealing with ISIS.

Bush said that Obama’s approach to Iran is naive and that allowing sanctions to expire with an idle threat that they could be put back in place at any time was unrealistic. The former president also characterized Obama’s approach as short-sighted when he said “You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That’s how Americans should view the deal.”

Bush then put ISIS’ advancement in Iraq squarely on Obama’s shoulders. He called President Obama’s decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq without a Strategic Forces Agreement a “strategic blunder.”

On dealing with terrorists, Bush hinted that Obama has been too soft. Bush said “In order to be an effective president … when you say something you have to mean it. You gotta kill em.”

 

How the Clinton Global Initiative Used its Funds During Hillary’s Tenure at State

150425-clinton-global-graft-initiative

In 2010, when Barack Obama said, “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money,” he definitely wasn’t referring to the Clintons.

Because it wasn’t enough for Bill Clinton to sell sensitive missile technology to the Red Chinese for campaign donations. It wasn’t enough for Hillary Clinton to sell America’s most valuable nuclear technologies to the Russians for “contributions” to her family’s personal piggy bank.

That piggy bank, otherwise known as “The Clinton Global Graft Initiative”, had an interesting way of doling out the “contributions” it received.

The Clintons are a malignant tumor on the body politic. They have a history of doing anything for money — including selling out their own country — and when it comes to their personal bank accounts, there’s apparently never enough zeroes.

Megyn Kelly Tells Whiney College Kids to “Suck it up”

Magun on cupcakes

If you go through life thinking that everyone should agree with you – you’ve got another thing coming. Your parents and friends should have told you from time-to-time that your views aren’t the only ones that exist and you have to listen to and understand others. Megyn tells a few snobbish collegiates to buck up or back off. Actually, she told them to “Suck it up, cupcake!”

Deal Reached on Sex Trafficking and Lynch

Loretta_Lynch

Loretta_LynchRepublicans and Democrats came together to reach compromise on two contested issues – Loretta Lynch and sex trafficking legislation.

For the last week, the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as Attorney General has been stalled while Democrats held up a bill intended to help the victims of sex trafficking.

The bill was set to make it unlawful for any fines paid by sex traffickers to be used to pay for abortions. Democrats disagreed and the tension began.

In order to force compromises on the sex trafficking bill, Republicans hold Loretta Lynch’s confirmation up until an agreement could be reached.

Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Patty Murray (D-WA) sat down and hashed out the base agreement with help from others.

The sex trafficking bill is set for a vote today and the Lynch nomination could move forward as soon as Wednesday.

The final deal gave both sides what they were looking for: Republicans prevented sex trafficking money from going to pay for abortions and Democrats get the President his Attorney General.

 

Hilllary’s ‘Just Like Us’ Tour Shows How She’s Nothing Like Us

Hillary Flying Coach - Kinda

Mrs. Clinton’s campaign start was intended to portray the former First Lady as ‘one of us’, but it instead showed how wealthy and different she is from just about any of us.

Hillary Flying Coach - KindaMost recently, Hillary tried to show her ‘every person’ side by flying coach. Unfortunately, the rest of us don’t get picked up by a limo at the side of the plane. We have to go down to baggage… then wait… then get our bags… then wait… catch a rental shuttle or hotel shuttle.

Hillary tries to relate to Americans even though she hasn’t experienced everyday life in decades. Heck, the last time she drove a car “Macarena” was the #1 song on the radio and Tracy Chapman was still relevant. (That hurt just researching it.)

The Scooby Doo Mystery Machine Van tour turned out to be less grass roots and more of an overly-controlled photo-op. Heck, even in meetings with friendly operatives, phones were confiscated. She can’t even trust the loyal operatives inside the DNC.

Anyone that believes that a Clinton can run anything other than a tightly-controlled, guaranteed-result campaign, is in for a surprise.

The question is whether Democrats would rather pick their nominee or have her handed to them by the elites that control the party.

 

AMAC: the issue of executive power gets court’s attention

AMAC: the issue of executive power gets court’s attention

Liberal scholar chides the president for ‘burning the constitution’

WASHINGTON, DC, Apr 10 – President Obama’s “overreach” when it comes to his administration’s use of Executive Orders will come under scrutiny next week in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The case, State of West Virginia v the Environmental Protection Agency, is already causing quite a stir, according to Dan Weber, president of the Association of Mature American Citizens.

“Liberals are coming out in droves to disparage one of their own-fellow liberal Laurence H. Tribe, one of the nation’s top constitutional scholars.  Tribe also happens to a self-described proud professor at Harvard Law School, one of whose students was President Obama, himself.  In a brief he filed in the case, Tribe denounces the president’s use of executive power, likening it to “burning the Constitution.”

Professor Tribe once described President Obama as “one of the most amazing research assistants I’ve ever had.”  But, it appears that the president is no longer “teacher’s pet,” said Weber.

The left is up in arms, many of them calling Tribe a traitor.  But the professor, who is representing the nation’s largest coal producer, Peabody Energy, insists that he’s following his conscience in this matter.  “EPA is attempting an unconstitutional trifecta: usurping the prerogatives of the States, Congress and the Federal Courts all at once,” he said.

The case is about an Executive Order issued by the EPA, at the behest of the president, that would severely restrict the use of coal for power generation.  “If it is upheld, it’ll result in massive job losses, particularly among the nation’s coal miners.  It will also cause sharp increases in the cost of electricity, impacting vulnerable senior citizens who can ill afford it,” Weber said.

“Perhaps, more important is that the administration’s excessive use of Executive Orders is a testament to the president’s desire to become the nation’s lawmaker-in-chief,” he added.

“Here is one of Mr. Obama’s most prominent cheerleaders, Laurence Tribe, taking him to task for transgressions against the Constitution.  If it was enough to rouse the ire of adherents on the other side of the aisle, it is enough to galvanize those among us who believe in sanctity of the Constitutional.”

This is not the first time that a supporter of the president’s ambitions has ‘jumped ship’ when he overstepped his authority.  Another noted liberal, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, also came under fire when he chided the president, and his surrogates, for his reliance on Executive Orders to avert Congressional opposition.

As Turley put it: “What the Democrats are creating is something very, very dangerous. They’re creating a president who can go at it alone and to go at it alone is something that is a very danger that the framers sought to avoid in our constitution.”

There’s little doubt among the experts that the coal case will wind up on the Supreme Court’s calendar, Weber concluded.  “In the meantime, it is a reminder of the true legacy of this administration-a nation with an ever expanding, intrusive and progressive government establishment.”

Bloomberg – Obama Gun Control Efforts Worry Democrats for 2016

Hillary Clinton anti-gun

Hillary Clinton anti-gunEven huge gun control proponents like Hillary Clinton and Dianne “it’s legal to hunt humans” Feinstein (D-CA) have been silent lately on the issue of gun control. The Obama-Bloomberg anti-gun push is making all Democrats nervous with 2016 so close.

Il Duce ObamaIn an April 10th interview with ABC News, President Obama issued a warning to Americans that he hasn’t “given up on gun control” and that he is “going to keep chipping away at this.” – Democrats wish he would just stop talking about it.

Michael Bloomberg has led several rich-boy financed efforts to create fake grass roots organizations (astro-turf) to lead some Americans to believe that defending yourself is dangerous. Democrats really want him to stop.

Being anti-gun rights in America is a third rail to politicians. As each push to destroy the second amendment is made, more Americans become gun owners. It has reached the point that just about any sane person understands that the defense of their family and property rests solely on them. The police won’t get their until the crime has been committed, but then they will certainly do everything they can to catch the bad people.

The realization that liberal policies have not made anyone safer is accepted by most Americans. Looking at violent crime rates in centers of liberalism like Los Angeles, Chicago and Detroit, the voting population has discovered that the government cannot protect them.

2016 is approaching and politicians cannot afford to be associated with Bloomberg or other anti-gun groups and initiatives.

Democrats struggle with their anti-gun initiatives because their credibility on the issues is nearly non-existent and they are typically uncomfortable talking about guns. Saying that AR-15’s can launch 30 rounds in half of a second, that magazines are single-use or that standard capacity magazines make murder legal are just a few of the countless terrible and unfounded arguments made by the left.

Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY): “The Second Amendment only protects the people who want all the guns they can have. The rest of us, we’ve got no Second Amendment. What are we supposed to do?

Dianne Feinstein hates gunsSen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) “And yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines.”

Democrats would prefer not to be forced to talk about guns and are wishing that President Obama and Michael Bloomberg would just shut-up about the issue.

How A Republican Handles Discrimination

Well, here we go again, there are two words that I have heard more times in the past five years, than I have heard my entire life, racist and discrimination. It seems like our buddies on the left love calling everyone who do not think like them or do not believe what they believe a racist and are discriminating against them.

After this past week’s hoopla in Indiana, it seems to me that those Lefties who were crying are the ones who are the “intolerant bigots,” and we should have laws to protect us from idiots like them. As all this was going on I started thinking, was I ever discriminated against, so I thought back to twice in my life that I could recall, once because I wasn’t a woman, the other because I wasn’t Greek.

The first time that I can remember was when I was moving out on my own, the year was 1971 and I was 19 years old. I am from Manhattan in New York City, but the rents were too high so I went out to Astoria in the burrow of Queens. It was unfamiliar territory so I walked into the first real estate office near the subway. I walked in and said to the man behind the desk that I was looking for an apartment, right away I see him looking me over, giving me the once over. First words out of his mouth were “are you Greek?”

Now I knew exactly what he was doing, he was Greek and he wanted to keep his neighborhood Greek, but I said no anyway. He just looked at me and said four-hundred dollars a month. Now I know that sounds like a cheap rent, but in 1971 it was high, especially for a kid just out of high school, so I said thanks and left. I walked down a few blocks to the Italian neighborhood and got one for one-thirty a month.

The second time was in the early 1980’s, I was in sales at the time and was on a job interview. After about 20 minutes the interviewer says, “Chris you have a great resume and you have the qualifications, but I really wanted a woman for this job.” I said that’s fine, we talked a few more minutes and I left, after all a man can hire who ever he wants, after all it is his business. Just a side comment here, the want ads used to be broken down to “men wanted’ and “women wanted” but they passed a law a few years before that that was discriminatory, if the government would have stayed out of it, it would have saved both of us a lot of time.

If you noticed anything about those two stories, is that I understood the other persons point of view, whether it was the Greek real estate agent who was looking out for his neighborhood, or the business owner wanting a specific type of employee, I just moved on and got what I wanted some where else.

It’s a big world, if you can’t get what you want from one place, there will be another place down the road. It seems to me that every time the government tries to make it fair for one group, it makes it unfair to another, so the government needs to stay out. Should a Christian baker be compelled to deliver a cake to a same-sex wedding ceremony he finds objectionable? There are other bakeries, are there not?

Some Christians and Jews and Muslims will continue to oppose same-sex marriage because of their religion, that is their right, or it should be.

We can have a fair society or a free society, we cannot have both, it seems like America is turning away from the free society so not to hurt anyone’s feelings and it’s a shame.

“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.

quote-if-all-mankind-minus-one-were-of-one-opinion-mankind-would-be-no-more-justified-in-silencing-that-john-stuart-mill-126988

This is one man’s opinion.

Nothing says political like Selma!

Selma

The President went to Selma, Alabama to celebrate and commemorate the march across the bridge that helped bring civil rights to the forefront, into the living room of all Americans, and help move it forward. Yes, it was aimed at the black community, but as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. believed, all would be judged on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin… black, white, brown, or otherwise.

I say commemorate because the people involved in the Selma march (there were white folks there too) were not welcome there. They knew they could be killed. They knew they would have no place to sleep, probably not much food, and certainly not much help. They didn’t care. They knew that what they were fighting for was right and, as with our forefathers, believed it was worth losing everything for, even dying for. They deserve to be remembered and honored.

Unlike people today who say they are protesting about how they are being treated. “Hands up don’t shoot” turned out to be a lie. Any apologies to the policeman who had to quit and move out of town because of that LIE? Not so much.

These people would have made Dr. King proud, right? I am sure he would have encouraged them to loot and burn down buildings and beat up people in their communities, right? No, he would not have approved! He was for peaceful demonstrations, unlike the Reverend Al “Get-it-where-and-when-I-can” Sharpton. Rev. Al forgot that at his million marchers event in New York City. His followers chanted: “What do we want??…DEAD COPS!…When do we want them??…NOW!!!” A perfect example of Dr. King? I think not.

I say celebrate because we celebrate the sacrifices made that day in Selma by people of all colors, yes, mostly black, but many others as well. The actions of those people that day sparked and continued a movement that couldn’t and won’t be stopped!

Jump ahead 50 years. We have a black president, a black attorney general, and many positions of authority at the White House are filled by people who have black skin (sorry, I’m not calling them all “African American” because I have been told by many blacks that they are not all of African descent, some are from Belize, Jamaica, and so on). We have come a long way in 50 years. Are we perfect? No!

Read the rest at: TRS

Netanyahu’s Speech Before Congress

Netanyau.jpg (360×250)

obama_over_shoulder

When I heard Netanyahu’s speech before Congress I was completely mesmerized. It was a 40 minute speech that felt like two minutes I was so enraptured by what he had to say. He detailed the dangers Isreal faces daily with the threat of rockets being constantly hurled at them on a daily basis and the threats of Iran wiping them off the map with a nuclear bomb. He also noted that the U.S. faces the same danger from Iran if this deal goes thru. “This deal won’t be a farewell to arms, it will be a farewell to arms control … a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare,” Netanyahu said. Netanyahu is a real leader, the epitome of what we need in the white house now not like the wimpy treasonous community organizer that sits in there now.

I was appalled and disgusted at the fact Nancy Pelosi turned her back on him and released the statement saying Netanyahu’s speech was an insult to our intelligence. The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals and mutual interests. Ours is a deep and abiding friendship that will always reach beyond party. Americans stand shoulder to shoulder with the Israeli people. The state of Israel stands as the greatest political achievement of the 20th century, and the United States will always have an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security.

That is why, as one who values the U.S. – Israel relationship, and loves Israel, I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech – saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation.

Today, Prime Minister Netanyahu reiterated something we all agree upon: a nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable to both our countries. We have all said that a bad deal is worse than no deal, and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons is the bedrock of our foreign policy and national security. As President Obama has said consistently, all options are on the table for preventing a nuclear-armed Iran.

How dare she call his speech an insult to us..!!!!!  Other congressional dissenters said for him to go back to Isreal and called him a child. SHAME ON ALL OF  THEM!!!!!!!!!! They are the ones acting like children and bullies in a schoolyard. I have never seen such disrespect for a world leader.  As Rush Limbaugh  said  “Netanyahu is everything Obama is not.  Limbaugh called Netanyahu’s speech “historically important” and filled with “moral, ethical and legal clarity.”

“Nothing like that combination to focus the mind,” Limbaugh said. “And this speech was all about rallying and saving Western civilization, which is what is under assault.”

” Right on Rush!!!  Obama is even worse saying “His speech contained nothing new.’“Well we all know Obama stands with Hamas and the muslim brotherhood while saying he stands with Isreal. After all the billions in arms and money he gave them and it was he who is responsible for overthrowing our ally Mubarek in Egypt so the muslim brotherhood could  get in.

Netanyahu also showed how gracious he is by greeting Harry Reed and asking him how he was coming along after his fall and also thanked the U.S. for being a strong ally in his speech. I was also very moved by Netanyahu introducing  holocaust survivor  and author Elie  Wiesel  which was very symbolic of what Isreal is facing and the U.S. too as he said “Never again.”

Below is a comment I saw which is very fitting comparing Netanyahu to Obama.

AgLander • 16 hours ago

Netanyahu is not just a leader but a great leader. Obama is not a leader at all.

Netanyahu has a firm moral foundation. Obama has no moral foundation.

Netanyahu speaks with clarity and conviction. Obama speaks in meaningless, empty slogans.

Netanyahu is decisive. Obama dithers when decisiveness is called for.

Netanyahu actively engages when faced with a problem. Obama actively withdraws when faced with a problem. (Heads to the golf course)

Netanyahu loves his country and respects those countries and their leaders that have shared values. Obama has shown an inexplicable detachment from his own country and has not shown respect for those countries or their leaders that share American values.

Netanyahu is a great man. Obama is not a great man….Obama is not a man at all, but more like a petulant and immature child wearing men’s clothes.

Limbaugh: Netanyahu Everything Obama Is Not

 

 

Dnesh Is Right!!Obama is Forming A Global Caliphate!!

Obam prophet

obama-speech-e1342050505906

“I will side with the muslims if the winds should shift in a different direction”—Barack Obama.

“The future does not belong to those who slander the name of the prophet”-Barack Obama.

“I am an Iranian by birth and my Islamic faith. I am also an American citizen and I seek to make America a more Islamic country.”—Valerie Jarrett.

Somebody pinch me. Did I fall asleep and have a bad dream or is this really happening? Do the above quotes sound like somebody living in Americas or in an Islamic country?

When Obama was first elected and I heard him say “We are just days away from fundamentally transforming America and when I saw his muslim roots I put two and two together and figured he was planning on making us a muslim state.

As time went on and I saw how weak he was in attacking groups like ISIS and not speaking out against terrorism refusing to call it what it was my suspicions became clear. He is siding with the muslims like he said he would.

Dnesh D’Souza made two films praising America and explaining Obama’s roots. When he gave money to a friend to support a candidate he was immediately charged with a campaign finance felony and spent eight months in a community confinement facility. Is this still America land of the free that our forefathers and fathers and now soldiers fought and died for? Below is an article that appeared in Western Journalism describing D’souza’s situation and Obama’s agenda in making us a muslim state thus furthering the world wide caliphate.

Why do you think the Obama administration went after filmmaker Dinesh D’souza with federal charges, eventually convicting him of a campaign finance felony? D’Souza served eight months in a community confinement center, received five years probation, and paid a $30,000 fine, all for giving some money to a friend to donate to a candidate. Somehow, I think there are plenty of people federal prosecutors have not gone after so aggressively for a similar offense.

The reason the federal government went after D’Souza so forcefully was that Dinesh, in his first movie 2016: Obama’s America, hit the nail right on the head regarding our Dear Leader’s agenda. Obama could not let this continue. He had to attempt to silence Dinesh and buy more time to complete his goal—the creation of a global Islamic caliphate.

The evidence is just too overwhelming. There is no other conclusion any intelligent, thinking man can come to.

The New York Post reports today that Obama could not even acknowledge the concept of “Muslim Terrorists” at the extremist convention the administration threw together to act like they were doing something against the Islamic Jihadist threat.

They’re burning and beheading victims in the name of Islam, but President Obama delivered a major speech Wednesday on combating violent extremism — while refusing to use the words “Muslim terrorists.”

Obama has not shown any leadership in Europe against Russian designs in Ukraine, or any other international conflict, because it’s just not important to him. It doesn’t fit with his long-term goals, so he just pays it lip service. He has to keep his eye on the ball.

The goal of this administration is to weaken American power so the United States cannot stop the formation of the caliphate from North Africa to Pakistan. Even more frightening is that Obama is attempting to radically change the population of the United States through illegal immigration so that eventually, a Muslim U.S.A. will join his new kingdom.

I have written again and again about the Obama administration’s agenda to allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel and bring the entire Levant into the caliphate. Israeli nuclear weapons stand in the way of this goal. A nuclear Iran will destroy the Jewish State.

The Jerusalem Post today reports that the State Department is mocking Israel and openly admits they are not including Israel in the negotiations that involve her very survival.

“Obviously, we work to protect sensitive information in the negotiations,” (State Department Spokeswoman Jen) Psaki continued. Asked pointedly whether the US is withholding information from inside the talks from the Israelis, she said, “Correct.” Washington’s acknowledgment of a gap in its briefings to Israel highlights growing space between the allies on the emerging agreement with Iran, aggressively sought by US President Barack Obama and opposed with equal vigor by Netanyahu.

Iran going nuclear, ISIS conquering the Middle East and threatening to invade Europe, terrorists actively being courted to enter the United States, Christians being slaughtered, Obama refusing to utter the words ‘Islamic terrorist’, Jihad being carried out in Paris and other European capitals, et cetera, et cetera, all point to Obama forming a global Islamic kingdom.

In my second novel, Sugar, I wrote about this corruption that is destroying America and fostering the formation of the Islamic State. The question is, when he leaves office, is Obama looking to become sultan of his new empire?

No,no,no,it can’t happen here you say.But it is!!!

In a speech before his Likud Party on Wednesday Feb.27th,Netanyahu said,

“I respect the White House and the president of the United States, but on such a fateful matter, that can determine whether or not we survive, I must do everything to prevent such a great danger for Israel,”

Netanyahu told his audience the Obama administration and the other world leaders negotiating with Iran no longer are willing to press the Islamic republic to surrender its nuclear ambitions.

“From the agreement that is forming it appears that they have given up on that commitment and are accepting that Iran will gradually, within a few years, develop capabilities to produce material for many nuclear weapons. They might accept this, but I am not willing to accept this,” Netanyahu said.

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/news/western-journalism-dinesh-was-right-obama-forming-global-caliphate

U.S.S. of A. – YouTube (check out this awesome video by the Rivioli Revue. “There’s a new world order coming to your town.We’ll no longer be the United States we’ll be the U.S.S.of A. The United Socialist States of America”)

 

Surprise! Top Obama Aid Thinks They’ve Had No Scandals

irs-tea-party-cartoon-mckee

David AxelrodDavid Axelrod, former top advisor to President Obama, made a revelatory comment on his book tour this week. In an appearance at the University of Chicago, touting his political autobiography, Axelrod said, “I’m proud of the fact that basically you’ve had an administration that has been in place for six years in which there hasn’t been a major scandal. I think that says a lot about the ethical strictures of this administration.”

Perhaps most surprising, Axelrod made the statement with a straight face. The only logical explanation for such a statement is that either he’s oblivious to what the administration has done over the past six years, or he’s completely detached from reality. At the very least, he clearly could have a promising future as an actor.

Equally alarming is the context within which Axelrod made the remark. He was responding to a question from an audience member on why Obama broke his promised ban on lobbyists in the White House. Axelrod replied that he didn’t “think that’s true.”

irs-tea-party-cartoon-mckeeLobbying scholar, Conor McGrath, has documented how inaccurate Axelrod’s perception is. In the latest issue of the Journal of Public Affairs, McGrath said, “President Obama’s public rhetoric on contact with lobbyists does not always accord with his private actions.” You’ll recall that on his first day in office Obama ostentatiously signed an Executive Order banning former lobbyists from working in his administration. That makes it even more difficult to disavow the reality that they hired 119 former lobbyists, including 60 in senior administration posts, according to McGrath.

hqdefaultSince Mr. Axelrod seems to be oblivious to the administration’s failure in regard to hiring lobbyists, he’s certainly left the door open to erroneous perceptions with regard to administration scandals, as well. So let’s take a look at some of the scandals that have not taken place over the past six years, per the former advisor.

Things like the IRS being used as a political enforcement arm of the administration in targeting opposition groups and taxpayers. And how about the three-fer of refusing to provide adequate protection of our ambassador to Libya, blaming his murder on a video that no one in Libya had seen before then, and then covering up everything from the State Department to the Pentagon and the White House to prevent the truth from being revealed.

Clearly Axelrod doesn’t think Obamacare’s a scandal, but there are a great number of Americans who believe differently. What else can it be called when a president promises our health insurance would drop by $2,400 and we could all keep the policies that we like, but then prices rise by an average of 78% in four years, and tens of millions of Americans lost that insurance they were promised they could keep? In a normal person’s lexicon, that would be considered scandalous, especially since it was all obviously based on a lie.

polcartoon_obama_greenAnd let’s not forget Axelrod’s “non-scandal” of dozens of our veterans losing their lives, and tens of thousands of them being deprived requisite healthcare because of internal politics within the Veteran’s Administration. When policies lead to one unnecessary and innocent death, isn’t that scandalous? So why is it not when it leads to over 40 deaths?

In banana republics, politicians giving money to their political cronies, and vice versa, is considered graft and corruption. This administration has proven one of two things: either the U.S. is now a banana republic, or such graft and corruption is now acceptable in the most powerful republic in the world. How else can we classify the billions of “stimulus” dollars that went to administration friends at Solyndra, NextEra, Ener1, Solar Trust, and dozens of other well-connected companies, which all subsequently went bankrupt?

103026_600Typically, when a government illegally (according to its own laws) operates a gun-running operation, putting guns purposefully into the hands of drug cartels and their goons, leading to the deaths of government law enforcement agents, it would be considered a scandal. Perhaps Mr. Axelrod just thinks that the DOJ’s “Fast and Furious” operation was just business as usual.

We could go on and on, including the EPA’s collusion with the green lobby, the 25 documented unconstitutional actions of the administration after taking an oath to uphold it, the massive debt and deficit spending that threatens our economic stability, and the Bowe Bergdahl fiasco of trading five of the most hardened jihadists for an army deserter. And then, in the case of the latter, having the temerity to claim the “Taliban is an armed insurgency; ISIL is a terrorist group. So we don’t make concessions to terrorist groups.”

I’m sure that a major component to Axelrod’s ignorance of administration scandals is the fact that the mainstream media has virtually ignored all of them. To a media that has ignored the myriad of administration scandals, failures, lies, and incompetency, if they don’t report them, the scandals apparently never occurred. Kind of like the old philosophical question of a tree falling in a forest; if there’s no one to hear it, does it make any noise? To the media, if they don’t report it, it didn’t happen, and the administration affirms the nonevent.

Then again, perhaps it’s just a characteristic of sycophancy. If Axelrod denies the scandals occurred, they didn’t. For perception rarely approximates reality in a sycophant’s mind. Such detachment from reality may be laudable in Hollywood, but certainly not in the top echelons of government.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

Like Obamacare? You’ll Love what New FCC Rules will do to the Internet

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai holding new Net Neutrality rules.

Like a cancerous growth spreading throughout an otherwise healthy body, government overreach, regulation, and control of every aspect of our free-market system continues to expand, infesting and damaging economic activity one organ, or industry, at a time. The Internet, that bastion of freedom and entrepreneurship, is about to become the government’s newest victim.

fcc-chief-on-net-neutrality-trust-meFederal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman, Tom Wheeler, an Obama appointee, is presenting the president’s “net neutrality” plan for the commission’s vote in two weeks. As promoted publicly by the administration, even on the White House website, the concept sounds meritoriously egalitarian, preventing internet providers from doling out more bandwidth to some paying customers, like Netflix, than others. But it’s clearly designed to facilitate much more.

The administration’s plan calls for reclassification of the Internet, in toto, as a Title II telecommunications service. Such a designation would allow the government to regulate the Internet based on the Communications Act of 1934, just like the telephone industry.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai holding new Net Neutrality rules.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai holding new Net Neutrality rules.

The 332 page proposal has not yet been made public, though the recommendations are widely known. The “net neutrality” proposal wording was enough for one FCC commissioner to conduct a news conference this week to warn the public of the “secret plan to regulate the Internet.” FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai said the plan was even “worse than I imagined,” and will invariably lead to “rate regulation and taxes.”

The full report and recommendation will not be released to the public until after the FCC approves it at their Feb. 26th meeting. FCC Chairman Wheeler must subscribe to the Nancy Pelosi regulatory and legislative mantra, that it has to be passed so we can know what’s in it. Yet another administration slap in the face of “transparency.”

As reported in National Journal, commissioner Pai acknowledged that the actual regulations take up just eight pages of the document. Another 79 pages are citations of the Communications Act, which will also dictate the practices of broadband providers. The rest of the document is a summary of public feedback and reasoning for the FCC’s decision, which Pai said is “sprinkled” with unofficial rules.

87293_600According to Pai, about the worst part of the proposal is exercising FCC dominion based on Title II. By implementing “net neutrality” under Title II, regardless of the prima facie reason for the new order, the FCC is “giving itself the authority to determine whether a variety of practices—including prices—are ‘just and reasonable.’” In other words, it’s the camel nose in the tent door metaphor. Pretty soon the camel (government regulators) occupies the tent and the providers are out on their ears.

The evidence seems to be on Pai’s side. He explains specifically, “The plan repeatedly states that the FCC will apply sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act, including their rate regulation provisions, to determine whether prices charged by broadband providers are ‘unjust or unreasonable.'”

Commissioner Pai cautioned that not only does the proposal “open the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband,” but that with the Title II reclassification, technically the government could exercise control over content, as well.

net-neutrality-comic-3Current broadband consumption illustrates how ludicrous the proposal is. According to Sandvine data, “in home data consumption is approximately 150 to 200 times greater than mobile consumption. Google (including YouTube) and Netflix account for 45% of fixed broadband traffic. iTunes, Facebook, Amazon and Hulu account for 6% in aggregate. Google and Facebook account for 42% of mobile data. Netflix, Pandora and iTunes take an additional 14%.”

According to the new rules, broadband usage must be shared equally, without allowing providers the ability to adjust for consumption and demand, and other factors. So if you think you’re sick of seeing the spinning “buffering” wheel when watching video online, you “ain’t seen nothin’ yet!” Welcome to the world of net neutrality, a euphemism for broadband socialism – everyone gets their “fair share.”

These are the reasons John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, said, “To go back to a 1950s voice mentality with Title II and net neutrality would be a tremendous mistake for our country… this is a very bad decision. I think the whole country has to rally [against it]. This will cost the country jobs and economic leadership.”

The first step of governmental encroachment into an area of the private sector is always the most crucial. For once the proverbial foot is in the door, they just keep pushing and shoving until the door is clear off the hinges, and they control the industry. We’ve seen it time and time again, from banking, telephony, energy, manufacturing, and most recently, health care insurance. The promises are always minimalist, yet the eventuality always exceeds even extreme expectations. Consequently control increases, costs of production and services increase, and those costs are passed from companies in the private sector down to consumers. And the process always seems most costly and punitive to the middle and lower classes.

156139_600Ronald Reagan explained this governmental cycle years ago. “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” Except in the case of “net neutrality,” they’re regulating it first, and then will come the taxation, the fees, and perhaps even control over accessibility and content.

We’ve seen just recently how governmental control over private sector services changes an industry dramatically, a la Obamacare. It appears we’re about to see “Obamacare” for the Internet, if the FCC rules go into effect. But don’t worry, they promise us that everything will be just fine. If you like your broadband, you can keep it. That sounds eerily familiar.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

Obama: Europe Just Isn’t Being Nice Enough to Muslims.. or something

obama_praying

AFP is reporting that President Obama’s plan to reduce Islamic terrorism in Europe is for Europe to be nicer to the Islamic population as a whole.

Shake your head, bang your forehead on the keyboard, beat your head against a wall or just yell at the sky – your President is following in the footsteps of the appeasers of generations past.

Supposedly educated and intelligent, the American President is suggesting that Europe would have fewer Islamic attacks if they would just be nicer to them:

The US leader said the 2013 Boston marathon bombing showed that the United States was not entirely safe from Islamic militant cells, but suggested that it had had more success than others in integrating minorities.

Naive as usual, the American President ignores obvious facts. The EU is MUCH closer to Islamic nations than the U.S. and has even friendlier immigration laws. Perhaps being friendly has done the opposite of what Mr. Obama suggests.

Being nicer to enemies is something Europeans remember with disdain. Appeasing Hitler was a gigantic historical mistake that cost millions their lives. The fact that Obama is suggesting the same strategy with an even more dangerous enemy is frightening.

Sen. Boxer to Call it Quits as Senate Goes Republican

800px-Barbara_Boxer_2005

800px-Barbara_Boxer_2005Famed anti-gun and far-left extreme Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has decided that this term in the Senate will be her last.

In an interview with Hillary Clinton’s nephew, Zachary Rodham, Sen. Boxer says, “Zach, I am never going to retire. The work is too important. But I will not be running for the Senate in 2016,” Boxer said. “I have to make sure the Senate seat stays progressive. That is so critical. And I want to help our Democratic candidate for president make history.”

After decades of illogical attacks on the second amendment, Sen. Boxer is out of Congress, but intends to continue her relentless progressive attacks on the freedom and security of Americans.

« Older Entries