Friday, October 26, 2012

Beck’s Emotional Response to Bombshell ‘Stand Down’ Libya Allegations: ‘Today Officially Is the Day That I No Longer Recognize My Country’

October 26, 2012
The Blaze

Aside from showing his personal horror after learning the new details, he repeatedly asked, “What have we turned into?” and proclaimed: “Today officially is the day that I no longer recognize my country.”

The Blog Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus

October 26, 2012
Weekly Standard
By William Kristol

Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”

So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.

It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?

POWERFUL: Father of former SEAL killed in Benghazi says whoever refused to send help murdered his son, but he forgives them

The Right Scoop

"This is a powerful interview with Charlie Woods, father of former Navy SEAL who was killed in Benghazi, who says that those who refused to send ready and available help to his son murdered his son. But he’s not saying that out of malice and hatred. In fact he tells them directly on this phone call that he forgives them, but they need to stand up and change the direction of their lives."

Watch Video

The Lying President and his administration

EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to "stand down," according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to "stand down."

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

Read more:

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Was Syrian weapons shipment factor in ambassador’s Benghazi visit?

October 25, 2012
Fox News

A mysterious Libyan ship -- reportedly carrying weapons and bound for Syrian rebels -- may have some link to the Sept. 11 terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Fox News has learned.

Through shipping records, Fox News has confirmed that the Libyan-flagged vessel Al Entisar, which means "The Victory," was received in the Turkish port of Iskenderun -- 35 miles from the Syrian border -- on Sept. 6, just five days before Ambassador Chris Stevens, information management officer Sean Smith and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed during an extended assault by more than 100 Islamist militants.

On the night of Sept. 11, in what would become his last known public meeting, Stevens met with the Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and escorted him out of the consulate front gate one hour before the assault began at approximately 9:35 p.m. local time.

Although what was discussed at the meeting is not public, a source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi to negotiate a weapons transfer, an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists. And although the negotiation said to have taken place may have had nothing to do with the attack on the consulate later that night or the Libyan mystery ship, it could explain why Stevens was travelling in such a volatile region on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

When asked to comment, a State Department spokeswoman dismissed the idea, saying Stevens was there for diplomatic meetings, and to attend the opening of a cultural center.

A congressional source also cautioned against drawing premature conclusions about the consulate attack and the movement of weapons from Libya to Syria via Turkey -- noting they may in fact be two separate and distinct events. But the source acknowledged the timing and the meeting between the Turkish diplomat and Stevens was "unusual."

According to an initial Sept. 14 report by the Times of London, Al Entisar was carrying 400 tons of cargo. Some of it was humanitarian, but also reportedly weapons, described by the report as the largest consignment of weapons headed for Syria's rebels on the frontlines.

"This is the Libyan ship ... which is basically carrying weapons that are found in Libya," said Walid Phares, a Fox News Middle East and terrorism analyst. "So the ship came all the way up to Iskenderun in Turkey. Now from the information that is available, there was aid material, but there were also weapons, a lot of weapons."

The cargo reportedly included surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles, RPG's and Russian-designed shoulder-launched missiles known as MANPADS.

The ship's Libyan captain told the Times of London that "I can only talk about the medicine and humanitarian aid" for the Syrian rebels. It was reported there was a fight about the weapons and who got what "between the free Syrian Army and the Muslim Brotherhood."

"The point is that both of these weapons systems are extremely accurate and very simple to use," Fox News military analyst Col. David Hunt explained. He said the passage of weapons from Libya to Syria would escalate the conflict. "With a short amount of instruction, you've got somebody capable of taking down any, any aircraft. Anywhere in the world."

The Foundation for Human Rights, and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) -- the group accused of moving the weapons -- disputed the claims and in published Turkish reports said it "will take legal action against this article which was written without concrete evidence. It is defamatory, includes false and unfair accusations and violates publishing ethics."

Information uncovered in a Fox News investigation raises questions about whether weapons used to arm the Libyan rebels are now surfacing in Syria.

In March 2011, the Reuters news service first reported that President Obama had authorized a "secret order ... (allowing) covert U.S. government support for rebel forces" to push the Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi from office.

At a hearing on March 31, before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, several lawmakers raised concerns about the finding reported by the Reuters news service and whether the Obama administration knew who constituted the rebel forces and whether Islamists were among their ranks.

"What assurances do we have that they will not pose a threat to the United States if they succeed in toppling Qaddafi?" Republican Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., asked. "There are reports that some opposition figures have links to Al Qaeda and extremist groups that have fought against our forces in Iraq."

While the source of the weapons used to attack the consulate is part of an ongoing investigation, former CIA Director Porter Goss told Fox News there was no question some of the weapons that flooded Libya during the uprising are making their way to Syria -- adding that the U.S. intelligence community must be aware, given their presence in Benghazi.

"Absolutely. I think there's no question that there's a lot of networking going on. And ... of course we know it."

A month after the October 2011 death of Qaddafi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in Tripoli that the U.S. was committing $40 million to help Libya "secure and recover its weapons stockpiles." Earlier this year, Assistant Secretary of State for Political and Military Affairs Andrew Shapiro expressed concerns that the situation on the ground was far from under control.

Speaking to the Stimson Center in Washington D.C., on Feb. 2, Shapiro said: "This raises the question -- how many are still missing? The frank answer is we don't know and probably never will."

The President Is Lying To You

‘People Will Go to Prison’: Beck Breaks Down Obama’s ‘Lying’ on Libya in Fiery Segment

October 25, 2012
The Blaze

“This president is lying to you about Benghazi in such [a] spectacular fashion that I believe people will go to prison. This is impeachable. The president might go to prison for this one,” he said. “What’s happening in Benghazi is so far beyond lying, it is ​staggering.”

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Glenn Beck Connects the Dots in Benghazi Attack: ‘This Is Fast and Furious Times 1,000′

October 24, 2012
The Blaze

During his show on TheBlazeTV Wednesday night, Glenn Beck said President Barack Obama has “crossed a line” concerning the “lies” about the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi on Sept. 11. In fact, he claims “Benghazi-gate” is “Fast and Furious times 1,000.”

“I don’t think that we are going to have time to be able to get this out to the American people before the election, because the press is of no help,” Beck said. “You need to try to listen and get your friends to listen next door because this isn’t about politics. This truly is about the future of the country because we are in grave, grave danger.”

Beck explained that America has had three major scandals in the White House: Former President Richard Nixon’s Watergate, the Iran-Contra scandal with former President Ronald Reagan and former President Bill Clinton’s sex scandal with Monica Lewinsky.

But in those cases, “as the old catchphrase goes, When Clinton lied, no one died,” Beck said. In Benghazi, four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, were killed in a horrific manner.

Speaking from the model Oval Office in his Dallas studio, the host said “when you’re in this office” every lie told matters.

“[President Obama] is putting American lives in dangers and he doesn’t seem to care about the consequence of his own actions,” he added. “The Libya story hasn’t passed the smell test with me from the beginning but it keeps getting worse.”

Beck went on to discuss Tuesday night’s explosive report that revealed 300 to 400 national security officials received emails detailing the Benghazi terrorist attack as it was happening on 9/11, raising fresh questions about the truth behind the Benghazi attack.

The emails show that the Libyan radical Islamic group Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility for the attack just two hours after it began via social media. White House officials told CBS News that an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Libya, providing Washington with a live feed to the chaos that unfolded.

“Everyone had these emails, everyone,” Beck said, holding a hard copy of the emails in his hands. “These emails were accompanied with video and links to be able see everything live as it was happening. It makes it very, very clear. This was a terrorist attack conducted by a terrorist organization. There’s nothing in here about a YouTube video.”

Beck explained that if the administration was really working off the “facts,” the White House would have never mentioned the anti-Muslim YouTube video.

But one of the most disturbing developments involves the Obama administration’s response to the assault, according to Beck.

“Why would he choose not to send in a quick response force?” he asked. “Why were they not dispatched to Benghazi? Why were people in the situation room standing around watching our people get killed. Help could have been there within the hour.”

A frustrated Beck lamented the fact that there are still more questions than answers regarding the Benghazi attack.

On the most dangerous day of the year, in one of the most dangerous cities in the world, Beck said, four Americans were at a CIA safe house. However, we still don’t know why.

Beck says Americans deserve answers.

He then delved into the distressed message left by U.S. diplomat Sean Smith, who was killed in the attack, on a gaming website, a strange place to post a message like this: “Assuming we don’t die tonight, we saw one of our ‘police’ that guard the compound taking pictures.”

“I believe this is a place where he said ‘listen if I’m in trouble I will let you know on this site.’”, Beck said. Thirty four minutes later, when the Americans in the CIA safe house already knew something was wrong, U.S. Ambassador Stevens took a meeting with the Turkish ambassador.

“What’s bizarre is, he comes in while they are under threat…and here comes the Turkish ambassador.”

The Turkish ambassador leaves with no incident, unharmed. Hours later, the attack began. The fight lasted for seven hours, until the break of dawn. The live feed was streamed to the White House Situation Room.

“The picture is frightening and you need to share it with your friends,” Beck concluded.

Watch Beck’s entire analysis via TheBlazeTV here:

Watch Beck explain his gun-running theory and why he believes the president is lying:

Ed Klein: Bill Clinton ‘Urging’ Hillary to Release Benghazi Documents That Would ‘Exonerate’ Her, Destroy Obama’s Re-Election Hopes

October 24, 2012

The Blaze

Ed Klein: Bill Clinton ‘Urging’ Hillary to Release Benghazi Documents That Would ‘Exonerate’ Her, Destroy Obama’s Re-Election Hopes

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered additional security for the U.S. mission in Benghazi ahead of the terrorist attack but the orders were never carried out, according to “legal counsel” to Clinton who spoke to best-selling author Ed Klein. Those same sources also say former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.

Appearing on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” on Wednesday night, Klein told host Andrew Wilkow that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been having “big fights” for “two or three weeks” about the issue, according to his two sources on Clinton’s legal counsel. While Bill Clinton wishes his wife would “exonerate” herself by releasing the documents that show she wasn’t at fault for the tragic security failure in Libya, the secretary of state refuses to do so because she doesn’t want to be viewed as a traitor to the Democratic party.

On Glenn Beck’s radio show earlier on Wednesday, Klein said his information comes from two “very good” sources.

Wilkow pointed out the obvious, that the Obamas and the Clintons have a “very behind the scenes, tense relationship” — to put it lightly.

“I said to you last night, and I think I stand corrected, that it seemed like Obama out-Clintoned the Clintons,” Wilkow said. “But Clinton seems to have gone along with all of this because he knew that Hillary would be exonerated in the end.”

He then asked Klein whether he thought Clinton would resign over the Libya scandal and expose the truth.

“No,” the author said immediately. “I can’t imagine that she would resign. It would bring down the entire administration. [Obama] would lose the election and she would be essentially blamed by the left-wing base of the party.”

“She will not be tarred with the blame for bringing down this administration,” Klein added.

Watch the segment via TheBlazeTV below:

In an exclusive interview with TheBlaze, Klein confirmed that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been engaging in “heated discussions” where the former president has urged his wife to “release the documents that would exonerate her.” He reiterated that Clinton has refused to do so because she fears she would look like a “Judas,” or a traitor, in the administration and it might hurt her chances for a presidential nomination in 2016.

If the claims turn out to be true and Clinton did suggest more security be sent to Benghazi, it is appropriate to ask: why didn’t it happen?

Klein said Clinton’s request for beefed up security would have to go through CIA special ops and or the Pentagon.

“But none of that would happen with the National Security advisor to the president of the United States Tom Donnellan going to the president and saying, ‘We want to send reinforcements to Libya because our ambassador is in jeopardy,’” Klein explained.

Ultimately, he indicated the ultimate authority would have been President Obama.

Wilkow and Klein also discussed what role Obama’s closest advisor, Valerie Jarrett, played in the Benghazi cover-up.

By Obama’s own admission, Klein said, the president never makes a big decision without first consulting with Jarrett.

“We have to assume that Valerie Jarrett, who is also by the way hooked into the Chicago campaign…that she was part of this cover-up in the White House.”

He continued: “The CIA got cables, the Department of Defense got cables, the NSA got cables during the attack on Benghazi, in addition to the emails that have since been made public. We know that there are cables that we haven’t seen yet, confirming the State Department cables that this was an al-Qaeda linked attack.”

These new revelations, following Tuesday night’s explosive report that 300 to 400 national security officials received emails detailing the Benghazi terrorist attack as it was happening, raise fresh questions about the truth behind the Benghazi attack.

The emails revealed that the Libyan radical Islamic group Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility for the attack just two hours after it began. White House officials told CBS News that an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Libya, providing Washington with a live feed to the chaos that unfolded.

Sunday, October 7, 2012

O'Reilly vs. Stewart The Rumble 2012 part 2/9 [REAL DEAL]

‘No Holds Barred’: Jon Stewart and Bill O’Reilly Debate Everything From Big Bird to Libya During Epic ‘Rumble’

Friday, October 5, 2012

Obama is the Liar and Absent Sleeze Chief

Obama Raises $150M in September, Tries to Block 'Blockbuster' Donor Scandal

October 5, 2012

"President Barack Obama’s campaign raised more than $150 million in September, which was a record haul for the 2012 cycle, but the campaign may be actively trying to block a story in the works about a “blockbuster donor scandal” that could put its fundraising numbers under intense scrutiny." Read More

CNBC Anchor Confronts Labor Sec. About Allegations Jobs Numbers Were ‘Fixed’: ‘I’m Insulted’

October 5, 2012
The Blaze

There’s no doubt that there is plenty of skepticism after the Labor Department released the September jobs numbers and the there was a dramatic drop ahead of the election (see our initial report here). So on Friday morning, CNBC anchor Carl Quintanilla confronted Obama Labor Secretary Hilda Solis over the allegations that numbers were “fixed” to make the administration look good. Her response? She’s “insulted” by the suggestion and think it’s “ludicrous”:

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Video: Preview of Univision’s “bombshell” report on Fast & Furious

Sept 30, 2012
Hot Air

The Obama administration clearly hoped that the Department of Justice’s Inspector General report on Operation Fast and Furious would be the last word on the scandal. which has been tied to hundreds of deaths in Mexico and the murders of two American law-enforcement officials. However, a new report from Univision to be broadcast tomorrow, previewed here by ABC News, may put the issue back on the front pages. One source called Univision’s findings the “holy grail” that Congressional investigators have been seeking:

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Obama and the Threat to Israel

A mini-documentary by Right Change puts everything together on how the Obama administration is just hot air when it comes to supporting the state of Israel.

Thursday, September 27, 2012

US officials knew Libya attack was terrorism within 24 hours, sources confirm

Sept 27, 2012
Fox News

Sources confirm to Fox News that the Obama administration knew from day one that the Sept. 11 attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans was an act of terror — directly challenging the administration's 'spontaneous reaction' explanation. Read More

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Controversial Billboard Message Now On Bumper Stickers

Dr. Barbara Bellar Candidate for Illinois State Senate, District 18 sums up Obamacare in one sentence.

The video, “Obamacare Summed Up In One Sentence” features Dr. Barbara Bellar, a Chicago woman who is also running for a State Senate seat in Illinois.

Dr. Bellar is not your typical politician and certainly does not fit the mold of a “Chicago” politico. In fact, she’s:

An ex-nun
An Army Reserve vet
A family practice physician (as she says, “from cradle to grave, from diapers to diapers, from womb to tomb”)
A lawyer
A motorcycle-riding, animal lover

Friday, September 7, 2012

Eastwood says his convention appearance was 'mission accomplished'

“President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,” Eastwood told The Pine Cone this week.


Published: September 7, 2012

AFTER A week as topic No. 1 in American politics, former Carmel Mayor Clint Eastwood said the outpouring of criticism from left-wing reporters and liberal politicians after his appearance at the Republican National Convention last Thursday night, followed by an avalanche of support on Twitter and in the blogosphere, is all the proof anybody needs that his 12-minute discourse achieved exactly what he intended it to.

“President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,” Eastwood told The Pine Cone this week. “Romney and Ryan would do a much better job running the country, and that’s what everybody needs to know. I may have irritated a lot of the lefties, but I was aiming for people in the middle.”

Breaking his silence

For five days after he thrilled or horrified the nation by talking to an empty chair representing Obama on the night Mitt Romney accepted the Republican nomination for president, Eastwood remained silent while pundits and critics debated whether his remarks, and the rambling way he made them, had helped or hurt Romney’s chances of winning in November.

But in a wide-ranging interview with The Pine Cone Tuesday from his home in Pebble Beach, he said he had conveyed the messages he wanted to convey, and that the spontaneous nature of his presentation was intentional, too.

“I had three points I wanted to make,” Eastwood said. “That not everybody in Hollywood is on the left, that Obama has broken a lot of the promises he made when he took office, and that the people should feel free to get rid of any politician who’s not doing a good job. But I didn’t make up my mind exactly what I was going to say until I said it.”

Eastwood’s appearance at the convention came after a personal request from Romney in August, soon after Eastwood endorsed the former Massachusetts governor at a fundraiser in Sun Valley, Idaho. But it was finalized only in the last week before the convention, along with an agreement to build suspense by keeping it secret until the last moment.

Meanwhile, Romney’s campaign aides asked for details about what Eastwood would say to the convention.

“They vet most of the people, but I told them, ‘You can’t do that with me, because I don’t know what I’m going to say,’” Eastwood recalled.

And while the Hollywood superstar has plenty of experience being adored by crowds, he said he hasn’t given a lot of speeches and admitted that, “I really don’t know how to.” He also hates using a teleprompter, so it was settled in his mind that when he spoke to the 10,000 people in the convention hall, and the millions more watching on television, he would do it extemporaneously.

“It was supposed to be a contrast with all the scripted speeches, because I’m Joe Citizen,” Eastwood said. “I’m a movie maker, but I have the same feelings as the average guy out there.”

Eastwood is a liberal on social issues such as gay marriage and abortion, but he has strongly conservative opinions about the colossal national debt that has accumulated while Obama has been president, his failure to get unemployment below 6 percent, and a host of other economic issues.

“Even people on the liberal side are starting to worry about going off a fiscal cliff,” Eastwood said.

Last minute decisions

But what — exactly — would he say to the Republican delegates about the $16 trillion national debt and 8.3 percent unemployment rate?

Friends and associates weren’t as much help as he had hoped.

“Everybody had advice for me, except the janitor,” Eastwood said.

Early Thursday morning, when Eastwood left San Jose Airport on a private jet headed for Florida, he was still making up his mind. And even with his appearance just a few hours away, all Eastwood could tell Romney’s campaign manager, Matt Rhoades, and his aides, was “to reassure them that everything I would say would be nice about Mitt Romney.”

It was only after a quick nap in his hotel room a few blocks from the convention site, Eastwood said, that he mapped out his remarks — starting with his observation about politics in Hollywood, then challenging the president about the failure of his economic policies, and wrapping up by telling the public “they don’t have to worship politicians, like they were royalty or something.”

But even then, with just an hour before he appeared on stage, it still hadn’t occurred to Eastwood to use an empty chair as a stand-in for the president.

“I got to the convention site just 15 or 20 minutes before I was scheduled to go on,” he said. “That was fine, because everything was very well organized.”

After a quick trip through airport-style security, he was taken to a Green Room, where Archbishop Dolan of New York sought him out to say hello. Then he was taken backstage to wait for his cue. And that was when inspiration struck.

“There was a stool there, and some fella kept asking me if I wanted to sit down,” Eastwood said. “When I saw the stool sitting there, it gave me the idea. I’ll just put the stool out there and I’ll talk to Mr. Obama and ask him why he didn’t keep all of the promises he made to everybody.”

He asked a stagehand to take it out to the lectern while he was being announced.

“The guy said, ‘You mean you want it at the podium?’ and I said, ‘No, just put it right there next to it.’”

Then, with the theme song from “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” as a musical introduction, and a huge picture of him as Josey Wales as the backdrop, Eastwood walked out to tremendous applause.

“The audience was super enthusiastic, and it’s always great when they’re with you instead of against you,” he said.

‘Enjoying themselves’

Speaking without any notes, Eastwood recalled the good feelings the whole nation had when Obama was elected, but said they had been dashed as the economy stayed in the doldrums despite massive stimulus spending. He decried the “stupid idea” of closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and putting terrorists on trial in New York City, joked about Vice President Joe Biden’s intellect and quizzed empty-chair Obama about what he says to people about his failed economic policies. He pretended Obama told Romney to do something “physically impossible” to himself, said it’s time to elect a “stellar businessman” as president instead of a lawyer, and, as a final point, told the people, “You own this country.”

When an elected official doesn’t “do the job, we’ve got to let ‘em go,” he said, and the crowd ate it up.

“They really seemed to be enjoying themselves,” Eastwood said.

Originally, he was told he could speak for six or seven minutes, and right before he went on, he was asked to keep it to five, but he said, “When people are applauding so much, it takes you 10 minutes to say five minutes’ worth.”

Also, there were no signals or cues of any kind, so “when you’re out there, it’s kind of hard to tell how much time is going by.”

He also said he was aware he hesitated and stumbled a bit, but said “that’s what happens when you don’t have a written-out speech.”

As he wrapped up his remarks, he was aware his presentation was “very unorthodox,” but that was his intent from the beginning, even if some people weren’t on board.

“They’ve got this crazy actor who’s 82 years old up there in a suit,” he said. “I was a mayor, and they’re probably thinking I know how to give a speech, but even when I was mayor I never gave speeches. I gave talks.”

Backstage, it was all congratulations and glad-handing, he said. And then he returned to the Green Room, where he listened to speeches by Marco Rubio and Mitt Romney. It wasn’t possible for him to watch the media coverage of his presentation.

But the country was listening as the television reporters and commentators covering his speech reacted to it. And they hated it.

“I have to say, as a fan, a movie fan, this was exceedingly strange. It just seemed like a very strange, unscripted moment,” said a shocked Andrea Mitchell on NBC.

“That was the weirdest thing I’ve ever seen at a political convention in my entire life,” said Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, barely concealing the condescension in her voice.

Bob Schieffer of CBS said it was “a big mistake to put Clint Eastwood on before Mitt Romney.”

On the Washington Post website, reporter Chris Cillizza wrote that “‘awkward’ may be the kindest term we can think of” to describe Eastwood’s speech.

“He hemmed. He hawed. He mumbled. He rambled,” Cillizza wrote.

And on CNN, Piers Morgan said Eastwood was “going bonkers” on the stage and said his presentation “looked like complete chaos.” He pressured his guests with questions like, “Weren’t you in pain while he was up there?”

But Eastwood wasn’t aware of any of it, and after the speeches were over, Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, came backstage to thank him.

“They were very enthusiastic, and we were all laughing,” Eastwood said.

When he went outside to his car, a large crowd cheered and chanted lines from his speech.

An overnight rebellion

Back at his hotel, Eastwood had a room service dinner and went to bed. The next morning, he got up early and went straight to the airport, still unaware that his appearance was the No. 1 political topic in the nation.

“I read the Tampa newspaper, and every article said something negative about the convention, but there wasn’t much about me,” Eastwood said.

He had no idea that overnight, a rebellion had erupted online against the media’s condemnation of him, with thousands of bloggers, Twitterers and commentators calling him, “a genius,” “1,000 times more brilliant than the media,” and saying he’s “only gotten better with age.”

They also started posting their own versions of Eastwood’s empty chair in droves (“eastwooding”), and, on YouTube, replays of his remarks at the convention were being viewed millions of times.

Even into his 80s, Eastwood has an unprecedented record of success in Hollywood, and is still making two movies a year. He’s currently starring in “Trouble with the Curve,” and is about to direct a remake of “A Star is Born” — things he obviously couldn’t do if he were a befuddled senior citizen. To locals who know him, the idea that he is uninformed or senile is laughable.

Nevertheless, the bitter criticism has continued.

On Tuesday, Democratic Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, called Eastwood “the perfect icon of the Republican tea party: an angry old white man spewing incoherent nonsense.”

Eastwood said people, including reporters, who were shocked by his remarks “are obviously on the left,” and he maintained that, while many Americans didn’t like the way he handled his convention appearance, millions more have something else on their minds.

“A lot of people are realizing they had the wool pulled over their eyes by Obama,” Eastwood said.

Saturday, September 1, 2012

Rains wash away Mount Obama in Charlotte, N.C.

Sept 1, 2012
Washington Times

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A torrential downpour that struck Charlotte Saturday afternoon damaged the Mount Rushmore-style sand sculpture bust of President Obama — an ominous beginning to what many fear is a plagued convention.

Workers were trying Saturday afternoon to reform the base of the sculpture, built from sand brought in from Myrtle Beach, S.C., pounding and smoothing out the sand that had washed off the facade of the waist-up rendering of the chief executive.

The sand sculpture was protected from above, and Mr. Obama's face didn't see too much damage. But the storm was so strong that its heavy winds blew the rain sideways, pelting the president's right side and leaving the sand pockmarked and completely erasing his right elbow.

Democrats' choice of Charlotte has drawn criticism from unions who don't like North Carolina's labor laws, and the state seems to be tilting away from Democrats politically.

The large Rushmore-style sculpture drew comparisons to Mr. Obama's 2008 convention in Denver, when he accepted his party's nomination on a stage that looked like a Greek temple.

Ramirez on the empty-chair Presidency

Sept 1, 2012

Earlier today, I wrote about the apparent (but preliminary) vindication of the Clint Eastwood strategy, in terms of viewership and impact on voter choice. However, the cultural impact of Eastwood’s empty-chair routine might be the biggest gain for Republicans from his appearance. Paul Ryan had a brilliant line about college graduates being stuck in their childhood bedrooms, staring at “faded posters” of Barack Obama and Hope and Change. This cycle, we have the empty-chair Presidency, thanks to Eastwood, and Investors Business Daily’s Michael Ramirez puts his Pulitzer Prize-winning talents to expanding on that theme.

The editors at IBD join their colleague:

Eastwood highlighted the empty chair and the empty promises and policies that failed to lower both the sea level and the unemployment rate, stuck at more than 8% for 42 months, a post-Depression record. Meanwhile, President Obama jets to college campuses in the carbon-gushing Air Force One to prattle on about student loans to college students who won’t be able to find jobs.

Obama and his administration officials have made 435 taxpayer-funded visits to college campuses or other events targeting students since March 2011. Included have been 164 trips to battleground states, a new study shows, leaving him too busy to meet with his jobs council to find these kids work.

Eastwood’s empty chair reminds us of the poem by William Hughes Mearns that goes in part: “Last night I saw upon the stair, A little man who wasn’t there, He wasn’t there again today, Oh, how I wish he’d go away .. .”

Eastwood suggests that in November we can make our invisible president do just that.

About the only thing that Eastwood needed was to place an empty suit in that empty chair.

Meanwhile, Bill Whittle eschews the empty chair imagery for Obama in his new Afterburner and uses another — The Incredible Shrinking Man. The man who four years ago commanded arenas of adoring crowds now can’t fill his own nomination-speech venue. Instead of engaging the political media, Obama now has descended to magazines like People and Glamour. It’s a strange diminishment of an incumbent President, who should be engaging on the broadest possible stage to diminish his challenger. Instead, as this weekend’s sudden dash for New Orleans showed, Romney is beginning to successfully diminish Obama:

Obama’s Kardashian media strategy signals that his campaign is pretty sure he’ll lose if only the politically engaged and savvy vote. That’s a telling, if tacit, admission.

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Syria And Iran Dominos Lead To World War

August 22, 2012
By Brandon Smith

Almost three years ago I wrote an analytical piece on the concept of deliberately engineering wars, big and small, by elitists to distract the masses away from particular global developments that work to the benefit of the establishment power structure. That article was entitled ‘Will The Globalists Trigger Yet Another World War?’:

In that analysis, I concluded that since at least 2008, the power’s that be (whether posing as Republicans or Democrats) had set in a motion a series of events that revolved around Iran, and most disturbingly, Syria, which could be used to trigger a vast global war scenario. Today, unfortunately, it seems my concerns were more than valid, and circumstances evolving in that particular region are dire indeed.

Now, some may argue that circumstances in the Middle East have always been “dire” and that it does not take much to predict a renewal of chaos. Admittedly, for the past six years alone the American public has been treated to one propaganda campaign after the other testing the social waters to see if a sizable majority of the citizenry could be convinced to support strikes against Iran. The U.S. and Israeli governments have come very close on several occasions in rhetoric and in the build up of arms, to just such an event. However, I would submit that the previous threats of war that came and went are absolutely nothing in comparison to the danger today.

Syria’s civil war has developed into something quite frightening, well beyond the blind insurrections of the so-called “Arab Spring”. So many outside interests (especially U.S. interests) are involved in the conflict it is impossible to tell whether there are actually any real revolutionaries in Syria anymore. This unsettling of the country’s foundation has taken a turn which I warned about recently, namely, the removal of UN monitors from the area, which was announced only days ago:

The removal of UN monitors is a sign that some kind of strike is near the horizon.

Accusations of potential “chemical weapons stores” in Syria are being floated by the Department of Defense as a clear cut rationale for invasion, and Israel has essentially admitted that an attack on Iran is not only on the table but beyond planning stages into near implementation. Even Israeli citizens are openly worried that their government is “serious” this time in its calls for preemptive attack, stockpiling gas masks and even protesting against the policy:

The tension of the atmosphere surrounding this crisis is unlike anything the Middle East has seen in decades, and that includes the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

But before we can understand the true gravity of this situation, we must first confront some misconceptions…

Firstly, I realize that there are many people out there who have natural and conditioned inclinations towards the hatred of Muslim nations. There are also just as many people out there who are inclined to distrust the intentions of the government of Israel. Both sides make good points on occasion, and both sides also have a tendency to get lazy, painting with a ridiculously broad brush and blaming all the woes of the world on one side or the other so that they don’t have to think through the complexities of globalism and the one world technocratic club, or accept that “Al-Qaeda” is not the biggest threat to peace and stability. It’s much easier to convict an entire race, or an entire religion, than it is to comprehend the mechanizations of an elite minority that plays both sides off each other.

Whatever side you may favor, simply know that in the end the sides are irrelevant. We could argue for months about who is just, who is right, who was there first, etc. Again, it’s irrelevant. What does matter, though, are the potential consequences of an exponential conflict in the region, which no one can afford.

Sadly, there are still plenty of Americans out there that believe the U.S. is the “richest nation on the globe” and has finances beyond reckoning with which to wage endless wars.

Here are the facts. Here is exactly what will happen if the U.S., NATO, or Israel, enter into a hot war with either Iran or Syria, and the results are not optimistic:

1) Syria And Iran Will Join Forces

In 2006, Iran and Syria signed a mutual defense treaty in response to the growing possibility of conflict with the West. Both countries are highly inclined to fulfill this treaty, and it would seem that Iran is already doing so, at least financially, as Syria spirals into civil war. In fact, the U.S. supported insurgency in Syria was likely developed in order to strain or test the mutual aid treaty. Given that the CFR is now applauding Al-Qaeda for its efforts in destabilizing the country, I hardly find it outlandish to suggest that the entire rebellion is being at least loosely organized by NATO interests to either draw Iran into open military support of Assad and a weakening proxy war, or to remove Syria from the equation in preparation for a strike on Iran itself (take notice that whenever the mainstream media shows images of Syrian rebels, they are always smiling or looking valiant with guns held high; a typical subliminal tactic used to paint them as “the good guys”):

2) Iran Will Shut Down The Strait Of Hormuz

With all the grandstanding at the Department of Defense, you would think that the Hormuz is a non-issue. This is a mistake. The strait is around 21 miles wide at its narrowest point which lays right off the coast of Iran, however, of that 21 miles only two safe shipping lanes are available, each measuring a miniscule 2 miles across. Hormuz is one of two of the most vital oil transit checkpoints in the world, and approximately 20% of all oil produced passes through it. The logistics for blocking the two working shipping lanes on the strait are simple given the existence of the new Ghader Missile System, which Iran tested successfully this year. The weapon is specifically designed as a “ship-killer” with the ability to travel at Mach 3, and evade most known radar methods:

In the tightly boxed in waterways of the Hormuz, a large scale and difficult to track missile attack would be devastating to any Navy present, and would turn the sea lanes into a junk yard impossible to navigate for oil tankers. Result? A catastrophic inflationary event in oil around the world, making gasoline unaffordable for most people and most uses. The EU’s recent move to stockpile oil in preparation for an Iran strike reveals the seriousness of the situation:

3) Israeli Action Will Draw In The U.S.

Forget what the U.S. Joint Chief of Staff General Martin Dempsey says; the U.S. will absolutely involve itself militarily in Iran or Syria following an Israeli strike. To begin with, there is no way around a supporting or primary role, especially when Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz. With 20% of the world’s oil supply on hiatus, at least half of the American populace will be crying out for U.S. military involvement. Guaranteed. Dempsey’s claim that Israel may not get American support is simply a charade meant to infer that the subversion of Syria and Iran is not necessarily a joint venture, which it absolutely is. There is zero chance that an Israeli strike will not be met with frantic calls by the Pentagon and the White House to open the floodgates of U.S. military might and protect one of our few “democratic allies” in the Middle East.

4) Syria Will Receive Support From Russia And China

The Russian government has clearly stated on numerous occasions that they will not step back during a strike against Syria, and has even begun positioning naval ships and extra troops at is permanent base off the coast of Tartus, a development which I have been warning about for years:

Tartus is Russia’s only naval base outside the periphery of its borders, and is strategically imperative to the nation. Action by the U.S. or Israel against Syria would invariably ellicit, at the very least, economic retaliation, and at the most, Russian military involvement and possible widespread war.

China, on the other hand, will likely respond with full scale financial retaliation, up to and including a dump of U.S. Treasury Bonds (a move which they have been preparing for since 2005 anyway). With oil prices skyrocketing due to increased Middle Eastern distress, multiple countries including the BRIC trading bloc nations and most of the ASEAN trading bloc will have the perfect excuse to dump the dollar, allowing for the introduction of the IMF’s newly revamped SDR (Special Drawing Rights) global currency mechanism to take hold.

Syria is the key to what I believe will be an attempt on the part of globalists within our government to actually coax a volatile conflict into being, a conflict that will create ample cover for the final push towards global currency, and eventually, global governance.

5) Economic Implosion Will Become “Secondary”…To The Banksters’ Benefit

In the minds of the general public, the economic distress that we will soon face regardless of whether or not there is ever a war with Iran and Syria will be an afterthought, at least for a time, if the threat of global combat becomes reality. The fog of war is a fantastic cover for all kind of crime, most especially the economic kind. Sizable wars naturally inhibit markets and cause erratic flux in capital flows. Anything, and I mean anything, can be blamed on a war, even the destruction of the U.S. economy and the dollar. Of course, the real culprits (international and central banks) which have been corrupting and dismantling the American fiscal structure for decades will benefit most from the distraction.

Syria and Iran are, in a way, the first dominos in a long chain of terrible events. This chain, as chaotic as it seems, leads to only one end result: Third world status for almost every country on the planet, including the U.S., leaving the financial institutions, like monetary grim reapers, to swoop in and gather up the pieces that remain to be fashioned into a kind of Frankenstein economy. A fiscal golem. A global monstrosity that removes all sovereignty whether real or imagined and centralizes the decision making processes of humanity into the hands of a morally bankrupt few.

For those on the side of Israel, the U.S., and NATO, and for those on the side of the Middle East, Russia China, etc., the bottom line is, there will be no winners. There is no "best case scenario". There will be no victory parade, for anyone. There will be no great reformation or peace in the cradle of civilization. The only people celebrating at the end of the calamitous hostilities will be the hyper-moneyed power addicted .01%, who will celebrate their global coup in private, laughing as the rest of the world burns itself out, and comes begging them for help.

Friday, August 10, 2012

Obama's Political Mob Hit. Mark Levin best rant every

August 9, 2012
The Right Scoop

MUST LISTEN – "Mark Levin goes nuclear over Obama ad, ends in fantastic rant. Obama released another ad today that has already been debunked, but that will obviously propel the propaganda media into hours of discussion about it. But with the country on the line, Levin has had enough of this crap and just goes into this fantastic rant.
I know it’s a little long but it is so satisfying:"

Mark Levin expresses my disdain for Obama better than anyone. Word for Word this is a fantastic rant...well worth listening to.  If I could put this on a PA system and blast throughout my boarding house I would!

To Listen

Mark Levin calls Obama out for lying about his mother’s death again

August 9, 2012
The Right Scoop

"Mark Levin says once again that Obama is a pathological liar because every time he speaks he lies. Yesterday, like he has in the past, Obama lied about his mother’s death again, saying that if she had insurance and didn’t have to worry about how she was gonna pay for it, then maybe the doctor would have caught her cancer earlier and there might have been a different outcome.

But Levin says it’s been proven that his mom’s health was covered by insurance and Levin is tired of the lies."

To Listen

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

SHADE: The Motion Picture

August 8, 2012

Never before has the New World Order been exposed to the degree that Shepard Ambellas and Jason Bermas do in the film SHADE the Motion Picture.

Once again the elites have something to fear as their sinister Master Plan for Global Domination is exposed.

Unbound Media and the filmmakers of SHADE the Motion Picture, both Shepard Ambellas (the founder & director of and Jason Bermas (maker of the film “Loose Change”) are charging full throttle to the top of the pyramid with the epic release of their long awaited film trailer.

About the Film

Full-scale depopulation procedures have been implemented as Population Reduction, Geoengineering, Land Grabs, and Criminal Banking Scams rule the populace.

All human activity will soon be under surveillance and the remaining world population of 1 Billion will exist in Mega-Cities controlled by oligarchs tracking the RFID Chipped Population – the “Useless Eaters” as the elite have termed us.

The future of humanity will be a world in which oligarchs decide who lives and who dies.

Webster Tarpley, Alex Jones, Dan Dicks, Shepard Ambellas, Jason Bermas, and Mark Dice set the tone of this ominous presentation.

Shot from multiple locations such as Maui Hawaii, Chantilly Virginia, several locations in Arizona, Texas, and more, the filmmakers stop at nothing to bring you the compelling details of an overarching diabolic agenda. Read More

Friday, August 3, 2012

Phillip Phillips Gets Big Olympic Boost!

Thanks to some well-placed promotions during NBC's Olympic coverage, season 11 winner Phillip Phillips is enjoying a resurgence.

Phillip's coronation song "Home" (which was first released with his win in May) has been played during features and promotions for the Games' marquee event -- women's gymnastics. On Wednesday morning, it topped iTunes. On Thursday, a music video was released -- perfect timing as the song is burning up the charts (to the tune of 150,000+ downloads).

Friday, July 27, 2012

Mark Levin interviews Paul Kengor who connects Jarrett, Axelrod, and Obama to communist mentors

The Right Scoop

"This is a fantastic interview and the longer it goes the more interesting it gets. In fact it was so interesting that Levin had him on for the following segment which hadn’t been planned. But the short of it is that Kengor connects a few dots between the card carrying Communist Frank Marshall Davis who mentored Obama and other Communists in Chicago who mentored David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett."

To Listen

Mike Kelly: “Take the heavy boot off the throat of American job creators!”

July 27, 2012

Obama Built That


Monday, July 23, 2012

Mark Levin interviews Andy McCarthy about the Muslim Brotherhood

July 23, 2012
The Right Scoop

"Mark Levin had Andy McCarthy come on the show tonight to discuss the Muslim Brotherhood and the attacks on Michele Bachmann by McCain and others who are standing on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood. It runs 21 minutes but it’s a great interview and well worth your time:"


Saturday, July 21, 2012

Obama's Rhetoric

July 21, 2012
By Thomas Sowell

Barack Obama's great rhetorical gifts include the ability to make the absurd sound not only plausible, but inspiring and profound.

His latest verbal triumph was to say on July 13th, "if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own." As an example, "Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

Let's stop and think, even though the whole purpose of much political rhetoric is to keep us from thinking, and stir our emotions instead.

Even if we were to assume, just for the sake of argument, that 90 percent of what a successful person has achieved was due to the government, what follows from that? That politicians will make better decisions than individual citizens, that politicians will spend the wealth of the country better than those who created it? That doesn't follow logically – and certainly not empirically.

Does anyone doubt that most people owe a lot to the parents who raised them? But what follows from that? That they should never become adults who make their own decisions?

The whole point of the collectivist mindset is to concentrate power in the hands of the collectivists – which is to say, to take away our freedom. They do this in stages, starting with some group that others envy or resent – Jews in Nazi Germany, capitalists in the Soviet Union, foreign investors in Third World countries that confiscate their investments and call this theft "nationalization."

Freedom is seldom destroyed all at once. More often it is eroded, bit by bit, until it is gone. This can happen so gradually that there is no sudden change that would alert people to the danger. By the time everybody realizes what has happened, it can be too late, because their freedom is gone.

All the high-flown talk about how people who are successful in business should "give back" to the community that created the things that facilitated their success is, again, something that sounds plausible to people who do not stop and think through what is being said. After years of dumbed-down education, that apparently includes a lot of people.

Take Obama's example of the business that benefits from being able to ship their products on roads that the government built. How does that create a need to "give back"?

Did the taxpayers, including business taxpayers, not pay for that road when it was built? Why should they have to pay for it twice?

What about the workers that businesses hire, whose education is usually created in government-financed schools? The government doesn't have any wealth of its own, except what it takes from taxpayers, whether individuals or businesses. They have already paid for that education. It is not a gift that they have to "give back" by letting politicians take more of their money and freedom.

When businesses hire highly educated people, such as chemists or engineers, competition in the labor market forces them to pay higher salaries for people with longer years of valuable education. That education is not a government gift to the employers. It is paid for while it is being created in schools and universities, and it is paid for in higher salaries when highly educated people are hired.

One of the tricks of professional magicians is to distract the audience's attention from what they are doing while they are creating an illusion of magic. Pious talk about "giving back" distracts our attention from the cold fact that politicians are taking away more and more of our money and our freedom.

Even the envy that politicians stir up against "the rich" is highly focussed on those particular high income-earners whose decisions the politicians want to take over. Others in sports or entertainment can make far more money than the highest paid corporate executive, but there is no way that politicians can take over the roles of Roger Federer or Oprah Winfrey, so highly paid sports stars or entertainers are never accused of "greed."

If we are so easily distracted by self-serving political rhetoric, we are not only going to see our money, but our freedom, increasingly taken away from us by slick-talking politicians, including our current slick-talker-in-chief in the White House.

Friday, July 20, 2012


By Dr. Laurie Roth
July 20, 2012

Goal – De population

Pharmaceutical companies will control and make you dependent on their medicine of choice. Monsanto will engineer seeds and control food supplies. Obama, the U.N. and his new world order handlers will manage and control it all.

Long before Obama’s tyrannical and controlling rule on America we were viewed as cattle to be forced into shuts to either brand or slaughter. Underneath our noses and beyond most people’s understanding, food, medicine, property rights and even the length of our life span has been assaulted, designed and planned.

You thought all this time you had the right to live, breath, grow food and function as you felt lead??? Aren’t you a precious little cow? Obama, Monsanto and the New World order crowd believe they have that right to control you, not you. You are simply in the way other than being trained and pushed around as a good little ‘surf’ that creates income for the elite international power brokers. Read More

Thursday, July 19, 2012


July 19, 2012
American Thinker
By William L. Gensert

Barack Obama is the worst thing to happen to America in my lifetime. Yet he lacks the work ethic and intellectual rigor necessary to destroy us -- despite actions which are purposely malevolent or moronically unintentional.

He has forced his will upon us through:

Legislative chicanery -- the abomination of ObamaCare.
Policy excess -- Dodd-Frank financial reform, which reforms nothing but makes it impossible for business to borrow and citizens to get mortgages.
Crony capitalism -- the green energy roach motel, where our money goes in, but nothing ever comes out, except for Obama campaign bundlers, with bundles for his campaign.
Executive orders and regulatory fiat -- the war on fossil fuels and small business.
Disastrous policy preferences -- resulting in the destruction of the economy, lower employment, decreasing freedom, and a tenuous, less prosperous future for our children.

After three and a half years of the dismal, abysmal slow-motion implosion, the ship of state is certainly damaged and debased. Yet rumors of our demise are premature. Destruction of the nation is still beyond his reach -- and it always will be.

I'm not sure that Obama's intent has been to destroy America -- more likely, he wants to remake the country in his own image, ignorant that who he is is not what we aspire to be. Yet even if his intentions were indeed bad, as a faux great man (or is it a great faux man), accomplishing this task is simply not within the scope of Obama's "brilliance."

You see, America is blessed.

Read more:

Where Is The Line For Revolution?

July 19, 2012
By Brandon Smith

The subject of revolution is a touchy one. It’s not a word that should be thrown around lightly, and when it is uttered at all, it elicits a chaotic jumble of opinions and debates from know-it-alls the world over. The “R” word has been persona non grata for quite some time in America, and until recently, was met with jeers and knee-jerk belligerence. However, let’s face it; today, the idea is not so far fetched. We have a global banking system that is feeding like a tapeworm in the stagnant guts of our economy. We suffer an election system so fraudulent BOTH sides of the political spectrum now represent a hyper-rich minority while the rest of us are simply expected to play along and enjoy the illusion of choice. We have a judicial body that has gone out of its way to whittle down our civil liberties and to marginalize our Constitution as some kind of “outdated relic”. We have an executive branch that issues special orders like monarchical edicts every month, each new order even more invasive and oppressive than the last. And, we have an establishment system that now believes it has the right to surveil the citizenry en masse and on the slightest whim without any consideration for 4th Amendment protections.

There are plenty of pessimists out there who would assert that Americans are totally oblivious to these developments. I have not found that to be true at all. Millions of people are awake to such issues, and millions more are, at the very least, angry at the state of things, though they may not fully understand the source of their distress.

Only a fool would deny that a fight is in the air… Read More

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Waste and corruption behind stimulus-funded "Green jobs."

July 18, 2012
Project Vertius

WASHINGTON, DC - Project Veritas, the group headed by James O'Keefe and known for their undercover video operations on ACORN, NPR and voter fraud, has released a new video that exposes waste and corruption behind stimulus-funded "Green jobs."

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Obama birth record 'definitely fraudulent,' Sheriff Joe Arpaio says

July 17, 2012
Fox News

PHOENIX – Investigators for an Arizona sheriff's volunteer posse have declared that President Barack Obama's birth certificate is definitely fraudulent.

Members of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's posse said in March that there was probable cause that Obama's long-form birth certificate released by the White House in April 2011 was a computer-generated forgery.

Now, Arpaio says investigators are positive it's fraudulent.

Read More

FOX 10 News - Phoenix, AZ | KSAZ-TV

Beck Literally Runs & Screams After Hearing Romney Is Considering Pawlenty as VP: ‘You Will Lose!’

Is Obama Ripping Off the Mask?

July 17, 2012
American Thinker
By James Lewis

American candidates for president have a predictable trajectory. They begin by telling the party troops that they are really coming from the honest-to-gosh right or left, and then they move steadily toward the great fuzzy middle, so that by election time they end up sounding like Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee.

But Obama has been going off the standard script -- most recently by attacking capitalism in radical terms. Namely, "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

Democratic senators are reportedly "horrified" by Obama's behavior.

Last week, an Obama surrogate was accusing Mitt Romney of being a felon.

This is a new low in presidential hardball politics -- at least since LBJ accused Barry Goldwater of wanting to explode nuclear weapons on little girls picking daisies.

Ben Shapiro of Breitbart reports the following Obama transcript: Read More

Chicago and The Obama Way

Monday, July 16, 2012

‘He’s Wasting Our Time’: Glenn Beck Slams Obama’s Anti-Business Speech in Electrifying Segment

Obama speech causes Pat to run around studio screaming

Art Laffer: Obama discriminating against successful people with tax plan, says it’s crazy what he’s doing

July 16, 2012
The Right Scoop

"This may be the most animated I’ve ever seen Art Laffer in a news interview. When talking about Obama’s new tax plan, he said “it’s just crazy what Obama is doing, it’s just crazy!” He says Obama’s new tax plan discriminates against economically successful people who are doing exactly what we want everyone in America to do and that the economy can’t be taxed into prosperity. He also adds that to suggest that we are eliminating a tax cut is nonsense, that these have been the tax rates for 10 years now."

Watch the clip

‘This Man Hates This Country’: Limbaugh Excoriates Obama for Telling Business Owners ‘You Didn’t Build That’

July 16, 2012

Friday, July 13, 2012

Republicans accuse HHS of gutting welfare reform with quiet policy change

July 13, 2012
Fox News

Republicans are accusing the Obama administration of unilaterally gutting welfare reform after the Department of Health and Human Services quietly notified states that they may seek a waiver for the program's strict work requirements.

HHS made the announcement in a policy memo Thursday, news that slipped well below the radar amid a raucous day on the presidential campaign trail. But a few prominent GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill picked up on the change, and accused the administration of overhauling one of the most important bipartisan agreements of the past several decades.

"President Obama just tore up a basic foundation of the welfare contract" Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, D-Ohio, said in a statement. He also called the move a "blatant violation of the law."

Mitt Romney on Friday spoke up on the change, saying: "President Obama now wants to strip the established work requirements from welfare." He said "the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."

How exactly the HHS change will play out is unclear. In Thursday's policy directive, the department said the states may seek a waiver from the work component of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, in order to "test alternative and innovative strategies, policies and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families."

HHS stressed that any alternative should still aim to get welfare recipients into gainful employment. Any plan that "appears substantially likely to reduce access to assistance or employment for needy families," will not be approved, the memo said.

But HHS is suddenly allowing for more flexibility in a program known -- and in many circles, lauded -- for its rigid framework. Currently, states have to have 50 percent of their caseload meet certain work participation requirements, though there are ways around that as many states fall short.

The latest department directive suggested alternative plans could "combine learning and work" to fulfill the work requirement, or let "vocational educational training or job search /readiness programs" count as well.

The hard-fought welfare reform agreement in 1996 was struck between the Bill Clinton administration and a Republican-led Congress. It is still considered a signature legislative achievement from that period.

The number of people on TANF has decreased dramatically since 1997, but roughly 4 million people are still enrolled according to federal figures. The change comes in the middle of a competitive election fight between Obama and Romney.

Rep. Dave Camp, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, have written to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking for a more detailed explanation of the change and her authority for making it. Both expressed concern that the change would strip the crux of the 1996 welfare reform deal.

"This ends welfare reform as we know it," Camp said in a statement.

"I'm disappointed that after years of sitting on their hands and failing to propose any significant improvements to the TANF programs, the Obama Administration is once again over-stepping their authority and attempting to circumvent Congress through an unprecedented bypass of the legislative process," Hatch said.

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Americans no longer trust their country

Trust Is a Two-Way Street: Beck Gives What Could Be The Most Powerful Oval Office Speech Yet

The Man Is a Liar...Barack Obama

July 11, 2012
American Thinker
By William L. Gensert

The man is a liar. Every time Barack Obama gives a speech or makes a statement and then turns to walk away from the podium, I expect to see another set of lips on the back of his head, flapping out the opposite of whatever the front of him just finished blabbing.

It's not a tax, it is a tax, it's not a tax. Not only does it make you dizzy, but you have to wonder if Obama thinks America comprises complete morons and nothing else. With respect to anyone who still believes a word out of his mouth, I would agree with him: those rarified few are certainly morons, or at the very least delusional and perhaps in need of intensive medication therapy -- or as the famous black racist Charles Barron would say, at least a good "slap" -- if only for our collective sanity. Oh, and I would remove Barron's requirement that the person being slapped be white. After all, it's possible for anyone to be an Obama sycophant. Delusion is colorblind.

With Chief Justice Roberts' contortions at creating constitutionality in support of ObamaCare, you would think that in victory our president would at least accept the terms of surrender. But even that is a bridge too far for the Punahou dissembler.

He rejoices in the affirmation of ObamaCare as constitutional on the basis of the power of congress to tax, and then turns around and says the ObamaCare mandate is still not a tax.

But then, the man is a serious, serial dissimulator -- examples of the storyteller's stories abound.

"If you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it."

We have all seen how that's turned out. I'm sorry, but doesn't this guy read prepared text from a teleprompter? He makes my doctor sound like a puppy. "Can I keep it, Barack? Please?"

"Since I've been president, federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years."

Well...I guess adding $5 trillion to an already $10-trillion national debt in less than four years is merely responsible stewardship and not excessive. In any case, what does "lowest pace" mean? Can you have a low pace? Who is writing this stuff for him? Barack, I'm available...but no, I would just make you sound like an idiot, and you certainly don't need any help with that.

"And then you got their plan, which is let's have dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance."

Yes, that's it: people who disagree with your policies want dirtier air and water...and I would have said "fewer" people and "then you have their plan," but I'm not a genius like Barack.

"I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office."

He has run deficits in excess of a trillion dollars in each of his years in office, while proposing budgets, which failed to garner a single vote two years in a row, including-trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see.

In 2007, the last year the House of Representatives and the Senate were under Republican control, the deficit was $161 billion. Who would have thought at the time that this was a high point, or something to aspire to?

Also, I probably would have said "in half before the end of my first term."

I know I'm just being petty, and with my grammar and syntax, who am I to throw stones? But it is so much fun after eight years of disquisitions on the dumbness of George W. Bush to now hear the most brilliant man to ever walk the face of the earth -- if you don't believe me, just ask him -- speak as if he is a tad simple, assuredly undeserving of his previous post as president of the Harvard Law Review.

My experience has been that speaking and writing correctly is a requirement of being an editor and a president...of anything, especially these Untied States of America. Perhaps Harvard lowered the bar for a man who, even then, was so obviously the epochal intellect of his era.

I could go on and on, but there are so many lies and only so much space. Besides, every time I list

another falsehood, a bell rings in my head and an angel gets his wings...see, this stuff makes me crazy.

He's the Humpty Dumpty of politics -- words mean exactly what he says they mean, nothing more and nothing less. I don't know about you, but right about now, I would dearly love a shot at cracking Humpty Dumpty's shell of lies. Then I would tell all the king's horses and all the king's men not to bother trying to put the pieces back together again, because the result will certainly be less than the sum of its parts.

What Barack Obama has done in three and a half years of his presidency is cut Americans off from promise. The promise of a better life was always a given in the pre-Barack era. But since his ascendency, the possibility of improving one's lot has been replaced with the realization that at best, we are all hoping to not suffer too much as we sink deeper into the Obama morass.

All this he has done with self-serving hubris in pursuit of his dream of a transcendent legacy. He wants his name emblazoned in the history books as the man who long as it's there. And if people are not happy with the results, then too bad for them -- they don't count anyway when compared to who he is.

You see, what Obama has attempted to do is to destroy America's spirit. How else would we ever accept him as our savior? But what he will eventually find out, whether on this November 6 or four years later, is that Americans are a special lot. And when I say Americans, I mean anyone who stands up and says that he is American. I don't care where you were born or when you came here, or, as Barack Obama is fond of saying, "what you look like." We are tough and resilient; we will survive this most awful of presidents and keep the American dream alive -- as the last best hope for humanity.

Barack Obama may not know it yet, but he will never be more than a footnote in the saga of history's most open, most prosperous, and most successful experiment with freedom and liberty.

Obama may envision a legacy laden with accolades and accomplishment, but he will never be more than a demagogue -- who was lying to a nation and himself when he thought he was bigger than the dream.

New documentary explores President Obama's past

Thursday, July 5, 2012

The Socialization Of America Is Economically Impossible

"A country that feels the need to socialize has, in my view, already failed culturally. It is an open admission by the public that they are unwilling or unable to take responsibility for their own prosperity."

July 5, 2012
By Brandon Smith

I understand the dream of the common socialist. I was, after all, once a Democrat. I understand the disparity created in our society by corporatism (not capitalism, though some foolish socialists see them as exactly the same). I understand the drive and the desire to help other human beings, especially those in dire need, and the tendency to see government as the ultimate solution to all our problems. That said, let’s be honest; government is in the end just a tool used by one group or another to implement a particular methodology or set of principles. Unfortunately, what most socialists today don’t seem to understand is that no matter what strategies they devise, they will NEVER have control. And, those they wish to help will be led to suffer, because the establishment does not care about them, or you. The establishment does not think of what it can give, it thinks about what it can take. Socialism, in the minds of the elites, is a con-game which allows them to quarry the favor of the serfs, and nothing more.

There are other powers at work in this world; powers that have the ability to play both sides of the political spectrum. The money elite have been wielding the false left/right paradigm for centuries, and to great effect. Whether socialism or corporatism prevails, they are the final victors, and the game continues onward…

Knowing this fact, I find that my reactions to the entire Obamacare debate rather muddled. Really, I see the whole event as a kind of circus, a mirage, a distraction. Perhaps it is because I am first and foremost an economic analyst, and when looking at Obamacare and socialization in general, I see no tangibility. I see no threat beyond what we as Americans already face. Let me explain… Read More