theodore M I R A L D I mpa ... editor, publisher, writer

Monday, September 30, 2013

NEWS! Obama bad mouths republicans again

 
 

 







EDITORIAL:

     President Obama takes to the airwaves to support the dysfunctions of the democratic party in his
ill advised attempt to blame Republicans for his party not wanting to delay the individual mandate.        Although he has given waivers to his supporters and all members of Congress and their staff. For the president, supported by the Senate leadership to tell the House that whatever they do will be rejected is not acting in good fair. 
    This president makes everything political, demonizing members of the opposition and certain media sources in his condescending manner. ObamaCare is a law that Obama
keeps changing at will. 
    In times of prosperity Americans tolerate the abuses of government waste. Where is Obama's voice about creating jobs, or the crippling regulations imposed by the EPA closing
powers plants across the nation. That is Obama's job plan.
    Put additional people out of work when creating jobs has become a campaign slogan. This theater is about the midterm elections, and the fear that the Republicans may win the Senate, 
    Nothing Obama says makes any logical sense. His concern about delaying the mandate was about women's contraceptives. Is this guy for real, or what?

theodore miraldi

Senate rejects ObamaCare delay

Senate rejects ObamaCare delay, bill to avert shutdown returns to House



The Senate voted Monday to reject a Republican-backed bid to delay ObamaCare as part of a crucial government spending package, sending the bill back to the House with just hours left on the clock until the government begins to shut down. 
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, as expected, moved to kill two House amendments that would have delayed the health care law and repealed its unpopular medical device tax. The Senate voted 54-46, along party lines, to do so. 
House leaders will now have to decide whether to make a counter-offer or accept the Senate bill. Without a resolution, the government is expected to start shutting down after midnight. 
Fox News has learned Republican House leaders are examining several options for what to present as a counterproposal. 
In a rare note of optimism, President Obama said earlier Monday that he's "not at all resigned" to a shutdown. 
But the path forward is not clear. With nothing less than the operation of government on the line, the battle in Congress over ObamaCare was shaping into a test of wills. 
Boehner had pressured Reid to accept his chamber's version. "It's time for the Senate to listen to the American people, just like the House has listened to the American people," House Speaker John Boehner said Monday morning. 
But Reid has outright stated he will not accept any measures that undermine the health care law as part of the budget bill. With the bill back on the House side, Boehner and Reid now face off with their final set of chess moves in a very narrow time frame. Lawmakers have until midnight to strike a deal. 
On Sunday, House Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy indicated his caucus might still have a few more plays left. 
"We have other options for the Senate to look at," he told "Fox News Sunday." 
There are a few other ideas floating around the Hill for targeting ObamaCare without going so far as to defund it -- which is what the first version of the House Republicans' bill did. 
But at this stage, a shutdown is highly possible, and congressional leaders are hard at work trying to assign blame. 
Democrats have already labeled this a "Republican government shutdown." But Republicans on Sunday hammered Reid and his colleagues for not coming back to work immediately after the House passed a bill Sunday morning. 
"O Senate, where art thou," said Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn, riffing on the movie "O Brother, Where Art Thou." 
Blackburn made her comments along with other members of the House Republican Conference at an informal press conference on the steps of Capitol Hill. 
"That the senators are not here ... is all that everyone needs to know," said Arkansas Republican Rep. Tim Griffin. "Democrats want to shut down the government. ... That's a scorched earth policy." 
Griffin and others tried to recast the blame for a possible shutdown on Democrats who have argued Republicans' insistence on tying a spending bill to ObamaCare is intended to force a shutdown. 
"Today we see where the Senate doors are shut," said conference Chairwoman and Washington Rep.
Cathy McMorris Rodgers. "Harry Reid says that a shutdown is inevitable." 
 

Compromise In Politics? No, Confront


 
Star Parker
 
Among the pearls of wisdom conveyed in Ecclesiastes is that everything has its time.
"A time to be born ... a time to die, a time to plant ... a time to uproot, a time for war ... a time for peace."
The founders of the United States drew up a Constitution to serve as an operating manual, in its checks and balances, for peaceful, deliberative government. They understood human nature and set up a system in which competing interests would have to give in. Compromise, they understood, is a necessary lubricant for the wheels of government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" to turn and allow us to move forward.
But compromise is meant for those competing interests -- not for the core principles of the country that the Constitution exists to protect and secure. When the principles of our free nation under God are under siege, it is a time for confrontation, not compromise.
The other day, I watched a short video of Rafael Cruz's presentation at a July event by FreedomWorks, a Washington, D.C.-based political action committee that usually supports tea party causes. Cruz is the father of the junior Republican senator from Texas, Ted Cruz, who is now in the spotlight.
Rafael Cruz is a self-made businessman, an immigrant from Casto's Cuba, and a born-again evangelical Christian pastor.
Most of the time when someone cites the Declaration of Independence, they mention its famous opening sentences. But Rafael Cruz, in this brilliant summation of what America is about, quoted the signers' closing words: "... with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."
Take a walk around Washington any evening. The fancy restaurants are filled with lobbyists and legislators.
Try to find anyone who would pledge his or her life and fortune for anything.
The American government is no longer about doing the business of the people while preserving and protecting the principles of a free nation. The principles of freedom have been drowned out by the power elite -- whether politicians, big business lobbyists or big media -- who use their influence to feather their own beds.
A Jeremiah-like Ted Cruz, ringing the alarm that things are not OK, is an annoyance to the comfortable establishment. As the class of "haves" protects its interests, it assures a dismal future for our young and for our poor. Its members play while the ship sinks.
There is no more powerful predictor of economic growth and prosperity than a nation's economic freedom.
The just-published "2013 Economic Freedom of the World Report" shows that the United States has dropped from being the world's second-most economically free in 2000 to number 17 in this year's report. The report comes from the Fraser Institute, a Canadian public-policy think tank.
Our economic arteries are clogged because of excessive government, which is dragging us down and ruining everything that made America great.
The Affordable Care Act is just the latest huge incursion into the freedom of American citizens in a long process of deterioration.
Every year, the trustees of Social Security and Medicare provide a report showing the dismal financial state of these huge entitlement programs. And every year, the political class in Washington ignores it, not having the courage to fight for real change, while things continue to worsen.
Now big business, unions and Congress are getting themselves exempted out of Obamacare, ready to leave the rest of country to be shepherded into socialized medicine.
But Sen. Cruz, like his brave father Rafael, is putting his life, his fortune and his sacred honor on the line to save our beleaguered country.
When Abraham Lincoln took office, he still believed that slavery could be purged from America through deliberation. But soon it became clear that only war would do it.
America must stand by Cruz and other brave tea party Republicans who understand the message of Ecclesiastes: that there is a time for everything, and that today is the time for confrontation.
 

Inviting CAIR to Church

by Ryan Mauro


When a Unitarian church in Florida decided to teach its congregation about Islam around the time of this year’s anniversary of 9/11, it brought CAIR1in an extremist official from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) who has promoted 9/11 conspiracy theories. The group may no longer be embraced by the FBI, but CAIR’s list of published endorsements shows there are plenty of Christian and Jewish leaders happy to work with it.
CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in the country’s largest terrorism financing trial and is listed by federal prosecutors as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s secret Palestine Committee. A federal judge ruled in 2009 that there is “ample” evidence tying CAIR to Hamas. The organization was recently accused of using money laundering to hide its foreign financiers.
Perhaps the most damning official statement about CAIR comes from a 2007 court filing. Federal prosecutors said: “From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists…the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.”
In response to Pastor Terry Jones’ plan to burn of Qurans on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Lakeland, Florida booked a guest speaker teach them about Islam. That speaker was Hassan Shibly, the executive-director of CAIR’s Florida chapter.
Lately, Shibly has been making the FBI sound like anti-Muslim murderers for the shooting death of an associate of one of the Boston bombers.
In 2004, Shibly was detained at the Canadian border after he and some colleagues attended the Reviving Islamic Spirit Conference in Toronto. The U.S. government said they were questioned because of “credible intelligence that conferences similar to the one from which these individuals were leaving were being used by terrorist organizations to fundraise and to hide the travel of terrorists themselves.” Shibly subsequently sued the Department of Homeland Security and it has been dismissed.
In 2010, I wrote an article about how Shibly had been repeatedly used as a guest speaker by Clarence High School in New York. In his communication with me, Shibly refused to condemn Hamas as a whole or call them a “terrorist” group. He had previously said that “Hezbollah is absolutely not a terrorist organization” and “any war against them is illegitimate.”
He “liked” radical clerics on Facebook and promoted conspiracy theories suggesting that the 9/11 attacks carried out by Israel and that the U.S. and U.K. were instigating sectarian violence in Iraq. Shibly also wrote a post titled, “Former American Terrorist Denounces American Terrorism” where a U.S. soldier says the U.S. military in Iraq are the real terrorists and are racist.
Unitarians have been particularly receptive to CAIR and its allies. The Unitarian Universalist Service Committee and First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles teamed up with CAIR to sue the National Security Agency.
The Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations is an official interfaith partner of the Islamic Society of North America, CAIR’s fellow unindicted co-conspirator and U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. It is also a member of the ISNA-allied Shoulder-to-Shoulder interfaith coalition.
CAIR has a list of treasured interfaith friends and is sure to flatter them with honors at fundraising events. A number of these friends have provided quotes for CAIR’s website.
Rev. Dr. Bernice Powell Jackson, pastor of the First United Church of Tampa and President of the North American region of the World Council of Churches, gave CAIR an award in 2011.
The Faith Action Network, created by the Lutheran Public Policy Office and Washington Association of Churches, awarded CAIR’s Washington state chapter with its “Connecting Communities” award in 2011.
The Central United Methodist Church’s 7th Annual Peace and Justice Banquet honored the executive-director of CAIR’s Michigan chapter, Dawud Walid with the “Pastor’s Award” in 2011.
The Investigative Project on Terrorism documents, “In response to FBI raids, arrests and prosecutions, Walid has repeatedly responded with virulent comments alleging FBI misconduct.” He once said the FBI is “manufacturing their own terrorism suspects to give the appearance that they’re actually doing something tangible in the so-called ‘War on Terrorism.’”
Pastor Warren Clark of Tampa said in 2007, “As a Christian pastor, I support the work of CAIR…We need groups like CAIR in these fear-mongering times.”
Hannah Schwarzschild of the Philadelphia chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace said CAIR-PA is “engaged in some of the most urgent civil rights work…” in 2007. An organizer of a Muslim Brotherhood-linked rally boasted of the “friendship” of Jewish Voice for Peace after Egyptian President Morsi was overthrown.
Rev. John C. Wagner of the United Methodist Church and Professor Emeritus of the United Theological Seminary praised CAIR-OH in 2006 “for their credible, gracious and courageous witness to the Muslim experience in Ohio.”
CAIR recently honored Dr. Sayyid Syeed of ISNA with a Lifetime Achievement Award. Syeed is the orchestrator of ISNA’s very successful interfaith engagement. As we documented last week, Syeed’s resume shows he has hopped from one U.S. Muslim Brotherhood front to the next.
CAIR’s interfaith hero was recorded in 2006 saying, “Our job is to change the constitution of America.” The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities have said what their motivation is, if only their non-Muslim allies would pay attention.
 
 
 

The Surrealism of the Bullet


By Mark E. Fitch

Andre Breton, artist and author of The Surrealist Manifesto, once said that the simplest act of surrealist art would be to go out into the street with a revolver and start shooting indiscriminately into the crowd. Despite violent crime as a whole being down, incidents of young men walking into the street and opening fire seems to be more and more common. The causes of these incidents are legion and are regularly touted or ignored in the media. Being that this is happening on a fairly regular basis -- the U.S. Navy Yard, Sandy Hook, Aurora, and Tucson, to name a few -- the Surrealist concept of art expressed in this horrifying prophetic phrase might be worth examining. This is, of course, not to imply that a painting by Salvador Dali or a poem by Rimbaud is directly responsible in any way for these incidents of mass murder. But the Surrealist movement, what it stood for, what it was born of, and what it influenced may shed some light on the current state of our social dilemma of young men taking to the streets, guns in hand.
The surrealist movement was the offspring of Dada, a nihilistic form of art born out of the horror of World War I that rejected reason, rationality, and meaning. Surrealism continued this rebellion against Rationalism by championing a form of irrationalism that could be somewhat characterized by the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche, namely, casting off the old conceptions of life and morality and becoming a god unto yourself, molding the world as you see fit. Thus, Surrealist art can be seen as a rearrangement of life, a blending of the real world and the dream world where either ecstasy or agony, dream or nightmare were brought into being. In essence, most Surrealist art looks like an LSD trip in which your perception is molded into a new virtual reality; the surrealist world is not what you expect, it is the strange and the bewildering and the completely irrational amongst the common, the everyday, and mundane. Hence, Salvador Dali's clocks drip and melt, Vladamir Kush's windmills are actually giant butterflies, and Rene Magritte's "Son of Man," is an anonymous being in a bowler hat whose face is hidden by an apple. There are no boundaries of reality in Surrealism; all is transcended by the will to power.
Likewise, the mass shooter transcends all laws, values, and norms of conduct and fires indiscriminately in places where violence is so unexpected as to appear almost dream-like in its execution. It is a surreal moment, watching the video of Aaron Alexis stalking through the offices of the Naval Seas System Command. Even more sinister and devastating is the image of jetliners smashing into the World Trade Center on a bright blue Tuesday morning. It is the brutal invasion of our rational, mundane world by the irrational and insane.
Albert Camus offered a blistering critique of Surrealism: "The essential thing is that every obstacle should be denied and that the irrational should be triumphant. What, in fact, does this apology for murder signify if not that, in a world without meaning and without honor, only the desire for existence, in all its forms, is legitimate?... Everything that stands in the way of desire -- principally society -- must therefore be mercilessly destroyed." If the world is without meaning, without the grounding of rational thought and a belief in truth that transcends our subjective definitions, then there is no boundary to inflicting our wildest whims and desires on society, because we, gods onto ourselves, have so determined that this is what must be done to satisfy those desires.
But what does this irrationality have to do with today? For starters, the Surrealist movement was a great influence on what became known as Postmodern philosophy, a philosophy which denies any transcendent notions of truth, justice, etc. and is currently in vogue at your local university and has been for quite some time now. That is a subject that has been well tackled by Alan Bloom, Roger Kimball, and numerous others. Possibly more important however, is the collision between the irrational and the rational. Take, for instance, the segment of shooters that have been American born but clearly mentally ill at the time of the shooting: Adam Lanza of Newtown, CT; Jared Lee Loughner of Tucson, AZ; James Holmes of the Aurora, CO shooting; and Seung-Hui Cho of Virginia Tech. All of these individuals showed sure signs of delusional psychosis, schizophrenia, and other possible mental disorders. The world of a schizophrenic or delusional psychotic is one in which irrationality reigns; disambiguated voices, strange visions, paranoia, and a breakdown of reality. Take this passage from the true memoir Autobiography of a Schizophrenic Girl: "Suddenly, as I was passing the school, I heard a German song; the children were having a singing lesson. I stopped to listen, and at that instant a strange feeling came over me, a feeling hard to analyze but akin to something I was to know too well later -- a disturbing sense of unreality. It seemed to me that I no longer recognized the school, it had become as large as a barracks; the singing children were prisoners, compelled to sing. It was as though the school and the children's song were set apart from the world."
No more a surrealist image could be painted or written, except, perhaps that of a delusional shooter who sees it as his mission to "liberate" those children being forced to sing. No one knows exactly what was playing through these young men's minds when they snapped but there were plenty of indications that they were not only unstable, but verging on explosion. Yet these warnings were denied or ignored. Society chose to turn a blind eye rather assert that there was something inherently wrong and thereby make a judgment based on social norms, values, and rationality.
But there is another form of insanity that has manifested in the form of terrorism based on religious zealotry. As much as Western society likes to scoff at the benign irrationalism of Christians who believe that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs five thousand years ago, there is surprisingly little commentary or ridicule of religious fundamentalists that impose death and destruction in the name of an irrational ideology. What could be stranger or more surreal than an Army officer shouting "Allahu Akbar" while gunning down his fellow soldiers at a military base in which the soldiers themselves are devoid of guns? Or a man trying to detonate his own underwear aboard a trans-Atlantic flight? Or perhaps the sexy Rolling Stone image of a young man who was raised in the American welfare system, slacked off in school, and then built bombs out of pressure cookers? All of these can be seen as a triumph of the ultimate form of Surrealism -- that of going into the street and firing indiscriminately into the crowd.
What does it mean for a society that these forms of irrationalism have bubbled to the surface and have continued unabated? Being that the stated goal of Surrealism was the dismantling of society that had been built on rationality, the persistence of these random acts of insanity -- religious and otherwise -- and Western civilizations' refusal to confront it, may just indicate that the Surrealist project be reaching its ultimate conclusion. Some Surrealist artists decided to take their philosophy to its ultimate conclusion and took their own lives. Likewise, a society that refuses to impose limitations, norms of conduct, or assert its own values commits a form of cultural suicide that manifests in strange, surreal moments of shooting in the streets.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/the_surrealism_of_the_bullet.html#ixzz2gNh2dhmH

I Will Not Comply

By Matthew May


Like most members of the Congress that passed it and, undoubtedly, the president of the United States who signed it, I have not read the entirety of the ill-named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  Yet there is one aspect concerning that legislation of which I am certain: I will not comply.

I will not comply because I am a free citizen of the United States, not a subject of its government.  I consider non-compliance with this monstrosity and the tens of thousands of pages of regulations that are to be enforced by an unelected bureaucracy, and that have left a gigantic carbon footprint on our environment and the United States Constitution, a duty.

Non-compliance is my executive order, and that order reads in part that I do not recognize any government's claim on my action or inaction in the marketplace, nor upon any personal information I am unwilling to divulge.

I will not submit to a cabal who read George Orwell's 1984 not as a terrifying warning, but as an instruction manual.  Nor will I submit to the dictates of those who attempt to trample the right of free speech of others in the halls of government who are warning us about the looming tyranny.  I refer to those sons of liberty who, as Camus wrote, "are not all legitimate or to be admired. Those who applaud it only when it justifies their privileges and shout nothing but censorship when it threatens them are not on our side."

If (when) the IRS or HHS or any other such entity attempts to extort a tax or fee of any kind for not participating in mandated commerce, they will be met with resistance.  I will not pay any such tax or fee.

I live in Massachusetts, where, once upon a time, a spirit of resistance and independence animated much of the citizenry.  But many here have devolved from the shot heard round the world to sheltering in place.  Not I -- nor many of my fellow Bay Staters, who are outnumbered but undaunted.

Refusing to comply with the dictates of an illegitimate law that is selectively enforced, and from which the privileged few are exempted, is not, in the annals of American history, brave or difficult.  Those who refuse to comply are not barefoot in the snows of Valley Forge, crying out in agony at Gettysburg, or rushing the cockpit of Flight 93.  While there will be consequences to civil disobedience in defiance of oppression, any difficulties can be and will be overcome.

We are, however, drawing a line that the forces of repression, socialism, and tyranny must not cross.  Some might even color the line red.  Yet unlike a certain other, this red line is immovable.  I yield nothing on the plane of freedom.  I will not take any small step that is, in actuality, one giant leap backward to the darkness we thought we had vanquished.

Who is with me?

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/i_will_not_comply.html#ixzz2gNe9JHSW

Obama falls for Iran’s fake fatwa

Obama falls for Iran’s fake fatwa against nuclear weapons, according to MEMRI

Neil Munro

No documentary evidence backs up President Barack Obama’s claim that Iran’s theocratic rulers have issued a religious edict against the development of nuclear weapons, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, which monitors and translates news reports from Arab and Persian outlets.
The claim is an eight-year old hoax promoted since 2005 by Iran’s diplomats and by Turkey’s Islamist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, says MEMRI.
The Islamic “fatwa,” or religiously-justified law, “was never issued by [Iran’s] Supreme Leader [Ali] Khamenei and does not exist; neither the Iranian regime nor anybody else can present it,” MEMRI reported on Sunday.
Obama is expected to face media questions on Monday when he holds a meeting about Iran’s nuke programs with Israel’s prime minister Bibi Netanyahu.
Obama claimed on Friday that the fatwa does exist, and could lead to a deal with Iran to end its development of nuclear weapons.
“I do believe that there is a basis for a resolution [because] Iran’s Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons,” he told reporters from the White House’ press podium.
Obama’s decision to continue international nuclear discussions with Iran has resulted in yet another round of talks over Iran’s weapons program.
Those talks have been underway since 1992, when the International Atomic Energy Agency visited Iran to gauge compliance with anti-proliferation regulations. Since then, Iran has developed its own missiles, and has begun manufacturing the critical fuel for nuclear bombs.
The renewed talks are generally opposed by Israel and various Arab countries, who fear they will not stop Iran’s weapons development, but will stop military strikes similar to the 1981 strike that wrecked Iraq’s nuclear weapons program.
In April 2012, MEMRI reported that the fatwa is not mentioned on Khameni’s official website, and an official comment evaded a question about the existence of the supposed fatwa.
That comment answered a March 2012 question, asking, “in light of what is written in Surat Al-Anfal, Verse 60… is it also forbidden to obtain nuclear weapons, as per your ruling that their use is prohibited?”
Khameni’s answer, according to MEMRI, was “your letter has no jurisprudential aspect. When it has a jurisprudent position, then it will be possible to answer it.”
The no-comment side-stepped a direct clash between the supposed anti-nuke fatwa and one of the many aggressive verses in the Koran, which is believed to be verbatim directions from the Muslim deity, Allah.
The questioner cited “Verse 60” in the Anfal chapter of the Koran, which orders Muslims to “prepare against [non-Muslims] whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah.”
A list of 493 Iranian fatwas was published in July by a Iranian website linked to the theocratic regime military guard, according to an Aug. 13 report issued by MEMRI.
“These fatwas cover a wide range of issues, from political and cultural to religious, and include such topics as the treatment of Baha’is, trade with Israeli companies, religious purity and uncleanness, the status of women, and more…. [but the supposed nuclear fatwa] is not included in this compilation,” MEMRI said.
The fatwas bar the use of a toilet if an Islamic religious item falls into it, require worshippers to “purify” themselves only once if they fart during prayer, allows people to take alcohol-infused medicine if they don’t know about the alcohol, and proscribe lying to non-Muslims during commercial transactions, according to MEMRI.
The fatwa’s existence was first claimed in 2005 by an Iranian diplomatic Sirus Naseri, during a meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors.
The claimed was repeated in April 2012 in a Washington Post op-ed by by Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi. “Almost seven years ago, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei… issued a religious edict — a fatwa — forbidding the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons,” Salehi wrote. The article did not provide a link or an image of the supposed fatwa.
In April 2102, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also cited the supposed fatwa, but noted that its nature and purpose were unclear.
“The other interesting development which you may have followed was the repetition by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei that they would – that he had issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons, against weapons of mass destruction,” Clinton told attendees at a NATO conference in Norfolk, Va.
“Prime Minister Erdogan and I discussed this at some length, and I’ve discussed with a number of experts and religious scholars… If it is indeed a statement of principle, of values, then it is a starting point for being operationalized, which means that it serves as the entryway into a negotiation,” she said.
Erdogan is an Islamist, has supported the international Muslim Brotherhood, including its HAMAS affiliate in Gaza and has bitterly criticized Israel on many occasions. Turkey borders Iran, and both share some trade and security interests.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/30/obama-falls-for-irans-fake-fatwa-against-nuclear-weapons-according-to-memri/#ixzz2gNcGVniI

Nation’s small business owners split on shut down

Nation’s small business owners split on whether the government should shut down



Carolyn Kaster/AP - Government leaders are running out of time to hammer out a new spending plan — but not all business owners are concerned.
 
By J.D. Harrison
 
Down to the final days of the nation’s current spending plan, with negotiations over a new one at a standstill, nearly half of small business owners are in favor of shutting the government down, according to a new poll.
Researchers at Pepperdine University’s Graziadio School of Business and Management conducted the survey, which found that 48 percent of business owners support at least a temporary government shutdown, compared to 42 percent who say policymakers should hurry up and strike a deal. Of the poll’s 1,387 respondents, more than 90 percent own businesses with no more than 200 workers.
Half of respondents said they could get behind a shutdown for up to a month, and nearly a third would support shuttering the government for up to three months.
Beyond that, three in four business owners worry their firms would start to be affected by the closure, and nearly all believe the economy would start to suffer. Among employers with less than $5 million in annual revenue, 41 percent said a shutdown of more three months would force them to pull back on their hiring plans.
Meanwhile, on what has become one of the more critical questions for some elected officials — which party would be at fault — business owners spread the blame around evenly, with 28 percent of employers saying they would fault Democrats and 27 percent pointing fingers at Republicans. Forty-three percent would blame the two parties equally, according to the poll.
At the root of the current stalemate are disputes over issues like the federal debt ceiling, tax increases and, most importantly, funding for the health care reform law, known as Obamacare. House Republicans have threatened to shoot down any agreement that continues to finance the health care overhaul, while Senate Democrats refuse to take up any measure that would impede rollout of the legislation.
If the two parties cannot find common ground by the end of the day Monday, most federal government operations will come to a halt.
And while some employers clearly support that move, others say it could have a devastating impact on their companies.
“A shutdown would immediately suspend approval of Small Business Administration loan guarantees, and you can imagine the disruption and potentially fatal impact that could have on start-up businesses,” Betsy Burton, a bookstore owner in Salt Lake City, Utah, told On Small Business. “This is a particularly critical issue in the last quarter of the year when we must pay for inventory we’ve acquired for the holiday season.”
Burton called the threat of a shutdown a potential “disaster, one we might not survive.”
Frank Knapp, president of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce, says Burton’s company is not alone. On Main Street, he explained, employers rely on business from both the government and its employees.
“The possibility of nearly 3 million federal workers including military being told to either stay home or work with delayed pay will cause severe problems for many small businesses in large and small communities across the country,” Knapp said.
“If Congress wants to hurt our small businesses, shutting down the government will do it,” he added.
 
 

Obamacare: Wrong in Practice, Wrong in Theory

Even if the implementation can be improved, it’s still bad for Americans’ health

By James Pethokoukis

President Obama admits that the new health-insurance exchanges are going to be buggy. He could hardly say otherwise. Small businesses won’t be able to shop online for at least a month. Some online marketplaces will be unable to verify whether applicants qualify for federal subsidies, so they are defaulting to the honor system. Some exchanges will lack the ability to calculate the size of those subsidies or Medicaid eligibility or both. Others are displaying misinformation about private insurance plans.
Meanwhile, a government audit found that key cybersecurity measures likely won’t be ready. The American Enterprise Institute’s Scott Gottlieb tells CNBC’s Larry Kudlow that “if there is one thing that could really put Obamacare in trouble, it’s going to be massive data-security breaches, and there is a real possibility for that.”
But, hey, stuff happens. As Obama said reassuringly last week, “Like any law, like any product launch, there are gonna be some glitches as this unfolds.” So be cool, people.

Let’s call this the Disneyland Defense, first offered by John Hammond, the fictional billionaire CEO of genetic-engineering company InGen and creator of the infamous Jurassic Park resort. Even as cloned dinosaurs run amok and start chomping people in the 1993 film, the pollyannaish Hammond keeps the faith: “This is just a delay, that’s all this is. All major theme parks have had delays. When they opened Disneyland in 1955, nothing worked, nothing.” To which math genius and chaos theorist Dr. Ian Malcolm replies, “But, John, if the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don’t eat the tourists.”
Indeed, the Magic Kingdom’s debut was pretty glitchy. Newspaper columnists called opening day “Black Sunday.” As the Associated Press reported: “Tickets had been counterfeited. Fantasyland was closed because of a gas leak. Decks of the Mark Twain riverboat were awash because of overcrowding. Rides broke down from too many passengers. Women’s spiked heels stuck in the sun-softened asphalt of Main Street. Food and drink disappeared after a few hours.” Some disgruntled customers even accused Walt Disney of purposely installing too few water fountains so the park could sell more soda.
But Disneyland was soon operating smoothly, and within seven weeks it had attracted a million visitors. Perhaps the Obamacare exchanges will follow a similar arc. Then again, Uncle Sam is not nearly the efficiency expert that Uncle Walt was. And the exchanges pose a pretty gnarly IT challenge. The federal data hub will have to seamlessly link the Departments of the Treasury and Homeland Security with state databases and private insurers, while also conducting various eligibility and subsidy-level calculations and ensuring user privacy. What could possibly go wrong?
Obamacare supporters point to the Medicare Part D rollout as recent example of a massive government program that won over skeptics and confused users despite a buggy launch. A less cited comparison is the FBI’s decade-long attempt to modernize its computer system. The 9/11 terrorist attacks highlighted the agency’s information-sharing woes. The first attempted fix, a project called Virtual Case File, was abandoned in 2005 after wasting three years and $170 million. Its $450 million successor, Sentinel, finally went live in 2012 after going over budget and suffering three years of delays.
Look, Obama might be right, and before we know it exchanges will work as smoothly as Amazon or Expedia. But what about the malfunctioning economic theory at the heart of Obamacare, the one that relies on bureaucratic schemes rather than market forces to lower costs, create value, and generate innovation? A new analysis from the Clayton Christensen Institute outlines the way many aspects of Obamacare discourage the sort of disruptive innovation that makes previously pricey and complicated products more accessible to more people. For instance, the highly regulated exchanges “essentially put a floor on the low end of coverage, thus limiting opportunities for entrants to provide different types of coverage and methods of care delivery.”
Obamacare’s operating system might be fixable; its faulty economic logic surely isn’t.
 

GOP leader asks: Where's the Senate?


Artist Unknown

By Julian Pecquet

House Republicans' fourth-ranking member put the blame for the looming government shutdown squarely on Senate Democrats on Sunday. 
Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-Wash.), the chairwoman of the Republican Conference, said the House was in session past midnight to vote on a spending bill that delays President Obama's healthcare law. The Senate is not scheduled to come back to vote on the measure until Monday.

“This is unacceptable that [Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said 'oh, we're not even going to come back today,' ” McMorris-Rodgers told CNN's "State of the Union." “Oct. 1 is right around the corner. Why isn't the Senate here?”
Senate Democrats and President Obama have said the healthcare law delay is unacceptable, all but ensuring a government shutdown starting Tuesday.
McMorris-Rodgers said Republicans have a duty to delay the law, arguing that it's not ready for prime-time and that people are “panicked.” She refused to get trapped into saying whether delaying the law is worth a shutdown, however, sticking to the GOP line that Senate Democrats “are the ones threatening a shutdown.”
“They need to have this debate in the Senate,” she said. “People are panicked in this country over higher premiums, lack of access.
“It's really up to the Senate. The Senate needs to act, they need to act quickly.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/video/sunday-shows/325341-gop-leader-wheres-the-senate#ixzz2gNT8oD6a

Sunday, September 29, 2013

As Congress fights over the budget, agencies shop

As Congress fights over the budget, agencies go on their ‘use it or lose it’ shopping sprees


(Astrid Riecken/ For The Washington Post ) - Air Force Col. Kurt A. Bergo, director of contracting at Joint Base Andrews, speaks about the importance of using the Federal Acquisition Regulation manual.
(Astrid Riecken/ For The Washington Post ) - Air Force Col. Kurt A. Bergo, director of contracting at Joint Base Andrews, speaks about the importance of using the Federal Acquisition Regulation manual.
 
By David A. Fahrenthold
 
This past week, the Department of Veterans Affairs bought $562,000 worth of artwork.
In a single day, the Agriculture Department spent $144,000 on toner cartridges.
 
Government shutdown
Find out how federal agencies and workers might be affected. Click for agency-level details.
 
Graphic
Agencies are rushing to spend their remaining budget before Sept. 30.
Click Here to View Full Graphic Story
 
Agencies are rushing to spend their remaining budget before Sept. 30.
And, in a single purchase, the Coast Guard spent $178,000 on “Cubicle Furniture Rehab.”
This string of big-ticket purchases was an unmistakable sign: It was “use it or lose it” season again in Washington.
All week, while Congress fought over next year’s budget, federal workers were immersed in a separate frantic drama. They were trying to spend the rest of this year’s budget before it is too late.
The reason for their haste is a system set up by Congress that, in many cases, requires agencies to spend all their allotted funds by Sept. 30.
If they don’t, the money becomes worthless to them on Oct. 1. And — even worse — if they fail to spend the money now, Congress could dock their funding in future years. The incentive, as always, is to spend.
So they spent. It was the return of one of Washington’s oldest bad habits: a blitz of expensive decisions, made by agencies with little incentive to save.
Private contractors — worried that sequestration would result in a smaller spending rush this year — brought in food to keep salespeople at their desks. Federal workers quizzed harried colleagues in the hallways, asking if they had spent it all yet.
“The way we budget [money] sets it up,” said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.). “Because instead of being praised for not spending all your money, you get cut for not spending all your money. And so we’ve got a perverse incentive in there.” But, Coburn said, “nobody’s talking about it but me and you.”
Coburn said he had meant to mention it in his floor speech Wednesday. Then, when he got to the podium, he forgot.
“Use it or lose it” season is not marked on any official government calendars. But in Washington, it is as real as Christmas. And as lucrative.
And — it appears — about as permanent.
“We cannot expect our employees to believe that cost reduction efforts are serious if they see evidence of opportunistic spending in the last days of the Fiscal Year,” President Lyndon B. Johnson wrote to underlings in May 1965. Even then, Johnson said an end-of-year binge was “an ancient practice — but that does not justify it or excuse it.”
Today, government spending on contracts still spikes at the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.
In 2012, for instance, the government spent $45 billion on contracts in the last week of September, according to calculations by the fiscal-conservative group Public Notice. That was more than any other week — 9 percent of the year’s contract spending money, spent in 2 percent of the year.
Much of it is spent smartly, on projects that had already gone through an extensive review.
But not all of it.
In 2010, for instance, the Internal Revenue Service had millions left over in an account to hire new personnel. The money would expire at year’s end. Its solution was not a smart one.
The IRS spent the money on a lavish conference. Which included a “Star Trek” parody video starring IRS managers. Which was filmed on a “Star Trek” set that the IRS paid to build. (Sample dialogue: “We’ve received a distress call from the planet NoTax.”)

 
 

DHS adviser: Persecuted Christians incited Muslims

Islamic leader appointed to post by Janet Napolitano  
             
 
Aaron Klein
 
JERUSALEM – An adviser to the Department of Homeland Security has used his Twitter profile to defend the Muslim Brotherhood while accusing Egypt’s persecuted Christian minority of inciting against Islam.
Earlier this month, Mohamed Elibiary, who was appointed to the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council by then-secretary Janet Napolitano in 2010, tweeted that he was reappointed and even promoted.
The Investigative Project on Terrorism reported Elibiary’s tweets about Egypt’s Coptic Christians.
“For decade since 9/11 attack extremist American #Coptic activists have nurtured anti #Islam & anti #Muslim sentiments among AM RT wing,” Elibiary wrote.
Earlier, Elibiary attacked the U.S. Coptic community for its protests against a wave of Muslim attacks on their relatives in Egypt.
 

Mohamed Elibiary
 
“Good read by @mwhanna1 on need to reform #Coptic activism in #US including stop promoting #Islamophobia,” he wrote Sept. 14.
Michael Meunier, president of Egypt’s Al-Haya Party and a Coptic activist, reacted to Elibiary’s tweets.
“I think the Obama administration should be ashamed to have had someone like this in their administration,” he said. “This underscores the thinking inside the Obama administration.”
WND further found Elibiary tweeted in defense of the Muslim Brotherhood and its U.S. offshoots in an exchange with the Investigative Project.
“I treat MB objectively & w/ nuance. You define MB term too broadly, advocate 4 shutting down US Muslim orgs &treat all as ‘FACSISTS,’” he wrote.
Supporter of radicals
Elibiary is a strong supporter of the radical Islamist theologian who calls for “war” with the non-Muslim world and whose teachings inspired and continue to govern al-Qaida and Islamic terrorist organizations worldwide.
As WND reported, he spoke at a conference that honored the anti-U.S. founder of the Iranian Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini.
Elibiary has strongly criticized the government’s persecution of fundraisers for Hamas and is a defender of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
He fervently endorses the teachings of Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb, who is widely considered the father of the modern Islamic terrorist movement. Osama bin Laden and jihadist groups worldwide rely on Qutb for their fatwas and ideology.
Elibiary, meanwhile, has criticized the U.S. government’s prosecution and conviction of the Holy Land Foundation and five former officials for providing more than $12 million to Hamas, depicting the case as a defeat for the United States.
He wrote an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News suggesting the convictions were part of a U.S. government policy of “denying our civil liberties and privacy at home” while pursuing anti-terror policies that have “left thousands of Americans dead, tens of thousands maimed, trillions of taxpayer dollars squandered and our homeland more vulnerable than ever.”
The Homeland Security Advisory Council, part of the executive office of the president, was formed by an executive order by President Bush in 2002.
Qutb, executed in 1966 on charges of attempting to overthrow the Egyptian government, called for the creation of a worldwide Islamic state.
Qutb declared: “There is only one place on earth which can be called the home of Islam (Dar-ul-Islam), and it is that place where the Islamic state is established and the Shariah is the authority and God’s limits are observed.”
Qutb labeled the non-Muslim world the Dar-ul-Harb – the house of war.
“A Muslim can have only two possible relations with Dar-ul-Harb: peace with a contractual agreement, or war,” wrote Qutb.
“A country with which there is a treaty will not be considered the home of Islam,” he said.
Elibiary has regularly upheld the teachings of Qutb. He writes that he sees in Qutb “the potential for a strong spiritual rebirth that’s truly ecumenical allowing all faiths practiced in America to enrich us and motivate us to serve God better by serving our fellow man more.”
After Dallas Morning News editorial page editor Rod Dreher criticized Qutb’s writings, Elibiary engaged in a lengthy, published email debate in which he repeatedly defended Qutb.
In one exchange, Elibiary wrote, “I’d recommend everyone read Qutb, but read him with an eye to improving America not just to be jealous with malice in our hearts.”
Speaker at Khomeini conference
In 2004, as WND reported, Elibiary was one of seven advertised speakers at an Irving, Texas, conference titled “A Tribute to the Great Islamic Visionary,” celebrating the 16th anniversary of Khomeini’s death. Under a heading “Selected sayings of Holy Prophet,” one advertisement read: “Allah has made Islam to prevail over all other religions.”
In an interview with WND at the time, Elibiary claimed he was not aware of the event’s general theme and “tribute” to Khomeini.
WND directed him to an ad for the seminar posted on the Metroplex Organization of Muslims in North Texas website, which included a photo of Khomeini alongside a message speaking of “Islamic revolution.”
 
The leader of Iran’s Islamic revolution in 1979, Khomeini famously viewed the U.S. as the “Great Satan” and said, “Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males … to prepare themselves for the conquest of countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.”
Elibiary insisted it was the first time he had seen the flyer and, when asked, said he disagreed with the thrust of the message, a declaration of Islamic supremacy over the world.
It read:
“Neither east nor west” is the principal slogan of an Islamic revolution in a world of hunger and oppression and outlines the true policy of non-alliance for the Islamic countries and countries that in the near future, with the help of Allah SWT, will accept Islam as the only school for liberating humanity and will not recede or sway from the policy even one step.
“I don’t know what they mean by revolution,” Elibiary commented to WND, “but I see myself as a Westerner.”
Asked his view of Khomeini, Elibiary, reared in the U.S., said he didn’t know much about the Shiite leader and his revolution.
“All I know is what I grew up learning about it, the hostage crisis,” he said. “All I know about him is negative stuff. I have never read his writings. I never bothered to learn any positive stuff about his history.”
One speaker at the conference, reported Dallas–Fort Worth TV station KTVT, was a Washington, D.C., imam, Mohammad Asi, known for his radical views. Asi issued a strongly worded anti-American, anti-Jewish speech in which he said American imperialism and pro-Israel Zionism are “diabolical, aggressive, bloodthirsty ideologies that are trying to take over the world and destroy Islam.”
Another speaker at the conference, a 10-year-old boy, opened the tribute by praising Khomeini for reviving “pure” Islamic thinking and saving the religion from being conquered by the West, reported CBS-11. The boy called President Bush “the greatest enemy of the Muslim Ummah,” or community, KTVT reported.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/dhs-adviser-to-persecuted-christians-you-incited-muslims/#WIAlui7tu6bBg5hk.99

Monckton: Push 'reset' on dollar

'One takes a deep breath and reboots the entire system'

 
John Griffing
 
Christopher Monckton of Brenchley – who advised Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, wrote for the Yorkshire Post, was managing editor of the Telegraph Sunday Magazine and is now a columnist for WND – long has warned that the West is on a terminal financial course, from which recovery eventually will not be possible.
In a recent commentary, he wrote that it’s not a matter of “whether but when.”
More than a year ago, he told WND that the financial collapse of the West was plausible based on its path at the time. He then adjusted the forecast from “plausible” and “likely” to “imminent.”
Specifically, he believes President Obama’s financial policies of unprecedented borrowing and spending, trillion-dollar deficits and massive outlays for social engineering are an “existential threat.”
“The gravy train has now tipped into the gulch. The cash for such criminal indulgences has run out. It is now time for governments everywhere to get a grip on the costs inflicted upon taxpayers by governmental employees at every level. Unless this is done, and very soon, the West will fail,” he said.
Now he’s moved beyond.
“Forget the dollar. It is finished. America needs a sound currency. The easy option would be to adopt the Canadian dollar, for hard-headed, common-sense Canada avoided the foofaraw of nonsensical credit-default swaps and dodgy derivatives that brought down the sillier banks,” he said in a recent interview.
Monckton doesn’t stop with suggestions of Canadian monetary integration, however. He suggests a complete “reset” of the American financial system.
“There is a more dirigiste solution, which I prefer much less than the free-market solution. … It is possible simply to cancel all public and private debt and tell everyone to start again. One takes a deep breath, presses the RESET button and reboots the entire system,” he said.
“The Emperor Augustus did this in ancient Rome, and the result was 400 years of prosperity, notwithstanding the flashy and often spectacularly incompetent absolute tyrants who succeeded him,” he said. “Again, the more recent precedent is in postwar West Germany in 1948, when Mr. Erhardt, then the finance minister, waited until the occupying Allied commanders were away for a weekend’s shooting and called in the Reichsmark, replacing it with the Deutsche Mark. Everyone was given 50 new Deutsche Marks and told to get on with it.”
Financial analysts are aghast at the idea, but Monckton dismisses such concerns, again reaching into history.
“When Gen. Clay, the U.S. commander of the occupying forces, got back after his weekend and found out what had been done [in Germany], he called at the Finanzministerium and said, ‘Herr Erhardt, my advisers tell me you’re making a terrible mistake.’ Erhardt’s famous reply: ‘Don’t worry, general: mine tell me the same.’ Again, the rest is history. Germany, even after enduring the staggering cost of rebuilding East Germany upon the happy reunification of the nation, remains Europe’s economic powerhouse.”
In addition to advancing currency reset as a serious option to save the American economy, Monckton also cautions average Americans that their government is not being honest about the implications of its lopsided financial relationship with China.
As Monckton explains, America’s present position is that of foreclosure, and the bank is repossessing.
“The mandarins of Peking know that there is a growing likelihood – make that a near-certainty – that any money they now lend to the United States will never be repaid. In the commercial world, when it becomes clear that a debtor may never be able to repay, the creditor demands a debenture by way of fixed and floating charge over the entire assets and undertaking of the debtor. Has Obama granted to China a debenture over the assets and undertaking of the United States?”
The Chinese central bank already is taking action, forming bilateral currency swap arrangements with other trade partners, drastically reducing the number of dollars that will be used in global commerce.
Russia also has been reducing its reserve holdings of dollars for some time and is publicly advocating, along with China, international control of the dollar’s value or that some international monetary unit be devised to replace the dollar.
Total net American liabilities to the rest of the world now stand at more than $80 trillion. At the same time, the Net International Investment Position (NIIP) now stands at negative $2 trillion.
WND has reported that China now owns significant public infrastructure in the contiguous United States and has requested public land and “special economic zones” free from U.S. labor controls as collateral on future loans.
Gao Xiqing, head of the largest Chinese public owner of U.S. debt, had this to say in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse, echoing Monckton’s sentiments: “I have great admiration for the American people. Creative, hard-working, trusting, and freedom-loving. But you have to have someone tell you the truth. And then, start realizing it. And if you do it, just like what you did in the Second World War, then you’ll be great again. … But many people are betting on the other side.”
Gao, president of China Investment Corp., recently told Atlantic Monthly: “Think about the way we’ve been living the past 30 years. Thirty years ago, the leverage of the investment banks was 4-to-1. …Today, it’s 30-to-1. …This is a change of fundamental thinking. People, especially Americans, started believing that they can live on other people’s money. … First, other people’s money in your own country. And then the savings rate comes down, and you start living on other people’s money from outside. …Okay, we’d love to support you guys – if it’s sustainable. But if it’s not, why should we be doing this?”
Monckton ultimately believes that whatever the fate of the U.S. dollar, and whatever solution America adopts, the real problem is not economic or political but moral.
“The crisis of the West is not primarily a financial crisis, or a crisis of democracy, though these crises are real and existential. It is, above all, a crisis of morality.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/monckton-push-reset-on-dollar/#ymcFOxS3TjhAmvy1.99

Heist of the Century

Obama and Thugs Pulled Off the Heist of the Century

Wayne Allyn Root

It is increasingly clear that the 2012 elections, both presidential and senate, were stolen by Obama, the Democratic Party, the IRS, and government employee unions. It’s right out of a mob movie like “The Godfather.”
The Obama Crime Family could give the mob lessons. Don Obama plays for keeps. The Don gets what he wants and when he found himself in danger of losing his power and control, Obama went to his enforcers – the IRS.
In a story reminiscent of the mob fixing union elections, the IRS enforcers conspired to destroy Don Obama’s main competition – the Tea Parties and other conservative fundraising groups.
Lois Lerner was only one of many IRS big shots in DC who gave orders to IRS offices across the U.S. to “kill” the Tea Parties and other conservative groups. Their goal – steal the election. As if only days ago, the “fall gal” retired from the IRS. We can only guess what kind of massive payoff she received from Obama’s donors.
The 2010 elections were the biggest embarrassment suffered by a U.S. President in modern history. The power, energy and passion of the Tea Party won the GOP an amazing 63 House seats, six Senate seats, six Governorships, and 680 seats in state legislatures. It was an historic landslide. Obama’s entire agenda was threatened.
Yet, the mainstream media expects us to believe that only two years later (2012) that Tea Party energy and passion was gone…overnight. Or, perhaps they changed back to fans of Obama and the Democratic Party. What a fairytale.
The real story is that the Obama administration ordered the IRS to delay, distract, hound, harass, and intimidate Tea Party groups across the U.S. Without IRS attacks and interference, Tea Parties would have had the same influence and momentum as 2010 – when their raging energy and passion led to a shocking landslide defeat for Obama and his allies.

There is no need to question or debate any longer. We now have emails from IRS officials stating exactly that – the Tea Parties had to be stopped if Democrats wanted to win the election. 
And, conservative donations had to be stalled if Democrats wanted to retain control of the U.S. Senate.
Instead of massive Tea Party rallies and record-setting fundraising for conservative candidates, Tea Party groups were busy being distracted, hounded, harassed, and intimidated by the IRS. They were busy being asked about the names of their members, names of their speakers, content of their Facebook posts, and even the content of their prayers.
Conservative media personalities (like yours truly) were attacked with IRS audits, as were Pro-Life, Pro-Israel, and Pro-Constitution groups. The tax-deductible status of Tea Party groups was purposely stalled so they could not raise money for the 2012 election.
What the biased liberal mainstream media refuses to do is connect the dots. None have the courage to state that “the fix” was in. That a fraud perpetrated by government employees handed control of the United States of America to Obama, a politician who supports government employees and their unions.
What did the IRS get out of this? The answer is pure bribery. Republicans, and especially Tea Parties, believe in limited government, smaller budgets, fewer government employees, and cutting bloated salaries, obscene pensions, and early retirement for government employees. Another Tea Party landslide would have threatened the power of government employee unions. Many government employees would have been laid off.
Does anyone believe it a coincidence that Obama met with IRS union boss Colleen Kelley at the White House the day before the targeting of Tea Parties by the IRS began? If you do, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.
Barack Obama was fraudulently re-elected. Our country was hijacked by government employees protecting their cushy lifetime jobs, bloated salaries, obscene pensions, and powerful unions.
Think I’m wrong? Evidently IRS officials don’t. Several of them have been busy hiring famous and expensive law firms to defend themselves.
Where are they getting the money? Is Obama arranging for big Democratic donors like George Soros, or union political funds, to pay their legal bills? Is Obama scared to death of what these IRS bosses will say under oath? Could their testimony end his Presidency and destroy his legacy?
In the end it’s clear to anyone who hasn’t been brainwashed by government schools or bribed by government checks that the 2012 election was fraudulently stolen by Barack Obama.
What did Obama, Democrats, and the IRS gain?
1. The right to continue to loot the treasury with bailouts, stimulus, corporate welfare, and government contracts to his friends, donors, loyal media lackeys, and corrupt union bosses.
2. The right to continue to redistribute income from the business owners (who vote Republican) to Obama’s voters (the poor, unions, and government employees).
3. The ability to save Obamacare and unionize 15 million healthcare workers – thereby raising $15 billion in union dues to elect Democrats. And of course to overwhelm middle class families with $20,000 annual health insurance bills they can’t pay, thereby addicting them to government handouts.
4. The IRS itself gains tremendously. They are now in charge of policing Obamacare – a huge, new bureaucracy. It also adds thousands of new IRS agents, thereby greatly enriching the IRS union.
5. The opportunity to pass immigration amnesty, thereby producing 10 to 20 million new loyal Democratic voters.
6. The opportunity to bankrupt business owners and permanently weaken the private sector, thereby drying up donations for conservative candidates and causes.
7. The opportunity to weaken American influence internationally (see Egypt, Libya, Syria).
Obama’s re-election also means he may serve long enough to appoint one or two more Supreme Court justices, whose radical leftist views will ensure America is permanently transformed to a big government socialist nation.
This wasn’t just any theft, folks. It was a trillion dollar theft. The Obama Crime Family (so far) has gotten away with the greatest and most daring act of fraud in world history. They stole the election.