Obama to Democrats Facing Election: Do what you need to do, say what you need to say to win (video)

Tell ‘em what you need to tell ‘em, cash it in and all is forgiven on election day. Famed Democrat strategist Bob Beckel says that such a tactic is perfectly fine. It’s called lying.

This is what is happening with Democrats. Alison Grimes has been following this advice and  has been caught lying about her positions right and left.


If you wanted to see the key quote from Obama, here it is:

Posted in Lies, Propaganda | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Video: Alinsky Trained Agitator Shuts Down CNN News Crew (video)

This is a textbook example of Saul Alinsky style agitation via trained “community organizers”. See how he speaks about “the narrative”. Notice how the agitator hits on various talking points, some having to do with Ferguson and some not, and repeats them. This man is a trained agitator and most likely with Chicago Black Panthers who follow Jesse Jackson around.

It is also important to keep in mind that the Chicago Black Panthers have a long relationship with the church President Obama attended for years. Also remember that in multiple times when Black Panthers showed up to polling stations armed the Obama Justice Department saw to it that all charges were dropped.

October 20, 2014 – Ferguson protesters shut down CNN live broadcast & chase away reporter and camera:

Here is how it looked on CNN:

Posted in Propaganda, Thugs | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Guess What Ferguson Police Found on Missouri Anti-gun Democrat

Gun control is about “guns for me and not for thee”, never forget that.

Via The Blaze:

Missouri state Senator Jamilah Nasheed, a Democrat who was sponsored several “anti-gun” bills in her state, was arrested Monday night during a protest outside of the Ferguson Police Department. However, it’s what police officers found on her that is raising eyebrows.

Nasheed was carrying a loaded 9mm handgun and extra rounds of ammunition, according to Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson. She also refused to take a breathalyzer test after officers determined she “smelled strongly of intoxicants,” sources told KMOV-TV.

Read more HERE.

 

Posted in Firearms | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Government to Church: Celebrate Same-Sex Wedding or Go to Jail

And this is how political violence starts.

The Daily Signal:

For years, those in favor of same-sex marriage have argued that all Americans should be free to live as they choose. And yet in countless cases, the government has coerced those who simply wish to be free to live in accordance with their belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.

Just this weekend, a case has arisen in Idaho, where city officials have told ordained ministers they have to celebrate same-sex weddings or face fines and jail time.

The Idaho case involves Donald and Evelyn Knapp, both ordained ministers, who run Hitching Post Wedding Chapel. Officials from Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, told the couple that because the city has a non-discrimination statute that includes sexual orientation and gender identity, and because the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Idaho’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman, the couple would have to officiate at same-sex weddings in their own chapel.

The non-discrimination statute applies to all “public accommodations,” and the city views the chapel as a public accommodation.

On Friday, a same-sex couple asked to be married by the Knapps, and the Knapps politely declined. The Knapps now face a 180-day jail term and $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate the same-sex wedding.

A week of honoring their faith and declining to perform the ceremony could cost the couple three and a half years in jail and $7,000 in fines.

States must protect the rights of Americans and the associations they form—both nonprofit and for-profit—to speak and act in the public square in accordance with their beliefs. It is particularly egregious that the city would coerce ordained ministers to celebrate a religious ceremony in their chapel. The Alliance Defending Freedom has filed a motion arguing that this action “violates [the Knapps’s] First and 14th Amendment rights to freedom of speech, the free exercise of religion, substantive due process, and equal protection.”

Citizens must work to prevent or repeal laws that create special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity. We must also insist on laws that protect religious freedom and the rights of conscience.

Protecting religious liberty and the rights of conscience is the embodiment of a principled pluralism that fosters a more diverse civil sphere. Indeed, tolerance is essential to promoting peaceful coexistence even amid disagreement.

Posted in Culture War, Gangsta Govt, True Talking Points | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Robert Reich cold busted in naked political deception (video)

This is not the first time Robert Reich has engaged in this kind of chicanery, courtesy of the oh so gimme a break liars at Moveon.org.

[Editor's Note: Yes we said liars. So many political operatives lie so brazenly that the time for calling the simple truth what it is has come.]

Nice video, but… now, the rest of the story courtesy of The Right Scoop who described this pretty well:

In short, reconciliation is a Senate rule that allows passage of a budget bill with a simple majority, bypassing the normal process that requires 60 votes.

It’s also been dubbed the ‘nuclear option’ in the past.

So lets fast-rewind back to 2010 for a sec and read a quote by the same Mr. Reich who wrote an article in the Huffington Post:

“My free advice to the president: If you want to get health care enacted you must use reconciliation and quickly…

Explain to the American people you understand their impatience. The Constitution does not require 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation. A majority will do. That’s called democracy.”

Of course we know that the Senate did use reconciliation on Obamacare, even though it wasn’t a budget bill. They violated the rule of reconciliation in order to pass Obamacare with a simple majority (or ram it down our throats) and Robert Reich was a major advocate of this.

But now, when Democrats are about to lose the Senate, he warns against Republicans using reconciliation – even properly – to pass their right-wing destructive agenda. What’s good for the goose is not good for the gander if you’re a hypocritical Democrat.

For more past hypocrisy of Democrats on reconciliation, read here.

 

Posted in Budget, Communications Theory, Lies, Propaganda, True Talking Points, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Chuck Woolery: Obama, the great illusionist (video)

In this video Chuck nails one of the biggest problems in politics today, creating the illusion that you are doing something and all is well. It is just another form of kicking the can down the road.

Case in point, remember when Obama sent in the bombers to take away ISIS’s oil revenue? Well, so much for that:

Islamic State Militants Are Raking In $800 Million A Year From Black Market Oil Sales

http://www.businessinsider.com/islamic-state-is-raking-in-800-million-from-black-market-oil-sales-2014-10

Posted in Communications Theory, Obama, Propaganda | Tagged | Leave a comment

NYT: $6,000 Obamacare deductibles makes seeing a doctor unaffordable

The we told you so’s just keep coming. Obama won a second term so now the NYT prints what we told you years ago. If it weren’t for term limits we doubt this article would have been in the New York Times.

Via the New York Times:

 Patricia Wanderlich, who suffered a brain hemorrhage in 2011, had to forgo a brain scan this year because of the Obamacare high deductible.

Patricia Wanderlich, who suffered a brain hemorrhage in 2011, had to forgo a brain scan this year because of the Obamacare high deductible. (Credit Rob Hart NYT)

Patricia Wanderlich got insurance through the Affordable Care Act this year, and with good reason: She suffered a brain hemorrhage in 2011, spending weeks in a hospital intensive care unit, and has a second, smaller aneurysm that needs monitoring.

But her new plan has a $6,000 annual deductible, meaning that Ms. Wanderlich, who works part time at a landscaping company outside Chicago, has to pay for most of her medical services up to that amount. She is skipping this year’s brain scan and hoping for the best.

“To spend thousands of dollars just making sure it hasn’t grown?” said Ms. Wanderlich, 61. “I don’t have that money.”

About 7.3 million Americans are enrolled in private coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces, and more than 80 percent qualified for federal subsidies to help with the cost of their monthly premiums. But many are still on the hook for deductibles that can top $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for families — the trade-off, insurers say, for keeping premiums for the marketplace plans relatively low. The result is that some people — no firm data exists on how many — say they hesitate to use their new insurance because of the high out-of-pocket costs.

Insurers must cover certain preventive services, like immunizations, cholesterol checks and screening for breast and colon cancer, at no cost to the consumer if the provider is in their network. But for other services and items, like prescription drugs, marketplace customers often have to meet their deductible before insurance starts to help.

While high-deductible plans cover most of the costs of severe illnesses and lengthy hospital stays, protecting against catastrophic debt, those plans may compel people to forgo routine care that could prevent bigger, longer-term health issues, according to experts and research.

“They will cause some people to not get care they should get,” Katherine Hempstead, who directs research on health insurance coverage at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, said of high-deductible marketplace plans. “Unfortunately, the people who are attracted to the lower premiums tend to be the ones who are going to have the most trouble coming up with all the cost-sharing if in fact they want to use their health insurance.”

Deductibles for the most popular health plans sold through the new marketplaces are higher than those commonly found in employer-sponsored health plans, according to Margaret A. Nowak, the research director of Breakaway Policy Strategies, a health care consulting company. A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that the average deductible for individual coverage in employer-sponsored plans was $1,217 this year.

In comparison, the average deductible for a bronze plan on the exchange — the least expensive coverage — was $5,081 for an individual and $10,386 for a family, according to HealthPocket, a consulting firm. Silver plans, which were the most popular option this year, had average deductibles of $2,907 for an individual and $6,078 for a family.

Posted in Health Law | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

New Taylor Swift parody brilliantly describes everything that’s gone bad with the Obama presidency (video)

Shake it Off: Obama Version (w/ Remy) via Reason:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

History Channel Special: Armageddon – What to do in the SHTF scenario

Not that we are too worried about Ebola or the latest boogeyman. But having some knowledge can’t hurt.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Congressman Darrell Issa Slams FBI Director Comey’s Efforts to Ban Encryption

Darrell Issa to FBI Director Comey and the Administration on criticisms of legitimate businesses using encryption:

You reap what you sow. Americans have watched their government mislead the public about data collection and resist necessary oversight. The FBI and Justice Department must be more accountable — tough sell for them to now ask the American people for more surveillance power.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Good Employees Quit

This article is a complete home run. We would add Mary’s first reason by stating that in a lower paying job where there is zero hope for a raise no matter how hard you work, that leaves ho hope and no incentive to work well. We have all seen too many employers who pay minimum wage and are constantly pounding the desk to work harder but make it clear that no matter how good you get only a minimum wage increase in the law will get you another dime.

Via Mary Davis:

Sure, there are many reasons why people quit, such as: employee mis-match, work/life balance, co-worker conflicts, relocation, family matters, lack of good communication, micro-managers, etc. I could go on and on but here are my top four reasons why good employees leave the workplace:

1. Poor reward system. It’s not always about having a big paycheck (although it doesn’t hurt either!). Rewarding an employee can be shown in many ways, such as corporate recognition both internally and externally (company website or press release), an additional paid mini-vacation, an opportunity to take the lead on a new project, a promotion, a donation in their name to a charity they support or the most popular form of reward, a bump in pay or an unexpected bonus. While these represent some of the ways an employer can reward workers, they don’t work without one key element; communication. What money represents to one employee may be of no concern to another. The key here is to find out what your employee’s value most and work from there.

2. Management. You know the saying: “People don’t leave companies, they leave their managers”. There is truth to this! Here’s my reasoning. When there is work to be done, its management’s duty to enforce, engage, and often times implement reward systems to keep employees satisfied and loyal. Sure, the supervisor, middle manager or team leader may implement recognition on a small scale for workers who have reached goals or helped the team in some way, but that doesn’t replace the recognition and reward employees need from upper management to stay committed.

Not everyone is skilled enough to manage processes or lead people. Just because someone is good at what they do does not mean they will be a great manager, and that’s perfectly OK! When people who are not fit to lead are put into positions of leadership it can create a catastrophic circumstance in the workplace leading to high turnover and low employee morale. So please, stop slapping “Manager” on every good worker’s name and put people in those positions only if they have the characteristics necessary to influence workers to execute the company vision and those willing to work together to get the job done.

3. Hiring/Promotions. When good workers see people who do not contribute as much as they do or they see schmoozers who do little but socialize a lot land positions they don’t deserve, it’s much like a slap in the face. Especially when those workers are busting their butts, not taking vacation, rallying the team and exceeding expectations the last thing they want to see is some Joe Schmo just waltz in and take a senior position, one they are clearly not qualified to do. You have to expect good employees will leave if you decide to hire your best friends’ cousin who has no idea what the heck they are doing, and then you have the audacity to put them in a leadership position over experienced workers. Come on! Hiring and promoting for favoritism is a major way to alienate good workers.

4. Too much work! The moment employers see employees who have good work ethic or are great in performing or rallying a team of people they begin to slap on more projects, more responsibility to those who they believe can handle it. And maybe good workers can handle more work but it becomes a problem when they begin to feel that they can’t escape from work because of the amount of responsibility and attention they receive from management. Being an excellent worker can be a blessing and a curse. It’s great for a boss to recognize employees are good, but the reward for that shouldn’t always be to pour on the workload. Since good employees tend to have a higher workload, it’s important to ensure they don’t feel overwhelmed causing them to burn out.

Ultimately the culture of an organization determines the scope of employee retention efforts which requires strategic decision making and planning. But to get good employees to stay, it’s simple; ask them what it will take. If you see someone doing great work, recognize it and reward it but don’t’ forget to find out how you can empower them to continuously deliver.

Mary V. Davids is Principal Consultant at D&M Consulting Services, LLC, a consultancy specializing in employee engagement, leadership coaching, career development and personal branding. Follow Mary’s blog or follow her on twitter @MVDavids.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

$20/hr Minimum Wage Endorsing Socialist Group Posts $13/hr Job Listing

Do as I say, not as I do…

Via Ben Swann:

Seattle’s Freedom Socialist Party, which has endorsed a $20-per-hour minimum wage, recently posted a job listing for a web content manager position that only pays $13 per hour.

The website of Seattle’s Freedom Socialist Party lists its most recent presidential candidate Stephen Durham’s political positions, which include the party’s effort to “raise the minimum wage to $20 an hour.” The group also avidly supported a successful push for a $15-per-hour minimum wage in Seattle, which passed this year. However, as Zenon Evans at Reason pointed out, that same political party just got caught posting a $13-per-hour job listing seeking a web content manager with web development skills.

Opponents of increases to the minimum wage often cite unintended consequences like price inflation, the elimination of jobs for unskilled workers, and small businesses‘ inability to pay higher wages as reasons for opposing such measures. As a small non-profit, the Freedom Socialist Party would certainly be wise to limit its labor expenses to the extent possible considering the fact that it is competing with organizations like the Republican and Democratic parties that have exponentially bigger budgets.

However, the Freedom Socialist Party promised that its push for a $15-per-hour Seattle minimum wage would “leave no one behind.”

Continue reading HERE.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Lead US Ebola Medical Center Laid Off Staff Due To Obamacare, Suffers Staff Constraints

Via the Daily Caller:

The Nebraska hospital at the center of U.S. medical efforts to fight Ebola recently laid off staff due to budget cuts caused by Obamacare, and its Ebola-fighting resources are now limited due to staff constraints.

The Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha recently treated journalist Ashoka Mukpo after the NBC News freelancer contracted Ebola. The center is one of the only hospitals in the country that can adequately treat Ebola patients in its biocontainment units. The center is used as an example by officials who favor the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s plan of having a dedicated Ebola hospital in every state.

But the center’s Ebola-fighting capacity is limited due in part to staff constraints.

“That’s pretty much the level of staffing that we have as well,” said the center’s biocontainment unit nursing director Shelly Schwedhelm, referring to the center’s capability to hold only two or three Ebola patients at once.

The Nebraska Medical Center announced 38 layoffs, including those of top officials, in October 2012 with more possible layoffs to come. The center directly blamed the layoffs on decreased revenue from Obamacare’s reduction of Medicare reimbursement rates.

“The lay-offs at Nebraska Medical Center. Is this a sign of things to come under Obamacare?” asked Nebraska radio station 1110 KFAB in December 2012.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jenny Beth Martin: A Mandate To Govern

Jenny Beth Martin via The Hill:

Ronald Reagan ran for reelection in 1984 with a conservative vision of free-market economic growth and tough foreign policy to confront the Soviet Union. His opponent, Walter Mondale, ran a conventional liberal campaign, going so far as to actually promise to raise taxes if elected. Result? Reagan won 49 states.

In 1994, popular outrage at the overreach of the Clinton administration led to Republicans nationalizing the midterm election with the Contract With America, a clear counterpoint to the Big Government campaigns of many Democrats.  Result? The GOP captured 54 seats in the House of Representatives and, for the first time in more than a century, defeated the sitting Speaker of the House in his race for reelection.

Sixteen years later, the nation was mired in the Great Recession; hundreds of billions of tax dollars were being spent on corporate bailouts, people were losing their homes, and Obamacare was a reality.  These events gave rise to the Tea Party movement and demands for more fiscally responsible policies.  Result? After the votes of November 2, 2010, were counted, Republicans picked up an astonishing 63 House seats.

These historic landslides were not the result of timidity. They were earned by principled conservatives who gave the nation a clear and unambiguous vision that encompassed personal freedom, economic freedom and a debt-free future; a vision that drew a stark contrast with the liberal status quo of the moment. Today, we are living in another of those moments.

Republicans are ideally positioned to provide this alternative vision; the question is whether they will.  If public opinion polling is to be believed, the GOP is on the brink of capturing a majority in the Senate while expanding its numbers in the House.  Not surprisingly, the conventional wisdom among the Republican consulting class is to lay low, keep quiet and let the GOP wave roll in next month.  It’s a safe strategy but they can do so much better.

Reagan did not win 49 of 50 states by laying low.  Republicans did not register historic congressional gains in 1994 and 2010 by keeping quiet.  These landslides were won because conservatives proudly announced their ideas for a better, stronger America.  They did not merely win by virtue of not losing; they earned a mandate by boldly offering an alternative vision.

Continue reading HERE.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Barney Frank: President Obama Lied About Obamacare

Daily Signal:

It’s one thing for President Obama to win an award for “Lie of the Year” for promising Americans “if you like your [health insurance] plan, you can keep it.” It must sting a bit more when a political ally like Barney Frank, the former congressman, flat out says the president “just lied to people.”

In an interview with Huffington Post, the veteran Massachusetts Democrat said he was “appalled” at the “bad” rollout of Obamacare last October.

“I don’t understand how the president could have sat there and not been checking on that on a weekly basis,” Frank said, then added:

But, frankly, he should never have said as much as he did, that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it. That wasn’t true. And you shouldn’t lie to people. And they just lied to people.

Before passage and implementation of the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, the president repeatedly promised Americans that they would be able to keep their current insurance plans and doctors if they so chose.

But the Obamacare rollout brought cancellation notices from insurance companies to more than 10 million Americans, who learned their plans didn’t meet minimal requirements outlined in the new law.

According to several reports, the Obama administration was aware millions would lose their plans. The president’s broken “if you like your plan, you can keep it” promise earned him the dubious honor of “Lie of the Year” from the fact-checking journalism project PolitiFact.

Although Frank supports the law and voted to pass Obamacare in 2010, he said Obama should have told Americans that the plans required under the health care law would be better than their old ones:

He should have said, ‘Look, in some cases the health care plans that you’ve got are really inadequate, and in your own interests, we’re going to change them.’ But that’s not what he said.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

FactCheck.org Blows It On Iraq WMD.

The problem with sites like Politifact and FactCheck.org is that they, a little too often, omit certain facts to harm conservatives. They also often misreport economics news as journalists tend to make poor economists.

A mistake that is far more common than political bias throughout the journalism profession is the failure to cross check sources. It is all too easy to fabricate a story relying on press reports from others instead of taking the time to look through source material. Laziness is one of the biggest problems in journalism today. Those who take on the mantle of “Fact Checker” are obligated to step up and do the homework.

In light of the news from the New York Times and Wikileaks showing the evidence that Saddam’s Iraq did have a WMD stockpile and the cleanup from 2004-2011 has resulted in American casualties, we thought it wise to go back and look at some of the elite media reports which said “No WMD”, “Bush lied people died”, etc. .

FactCheck.org:

Q: Were there really weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when the U.S. invaded in 2003?

A: No. The Iraq Survey Group determined that Iraq had abandoned its quest to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and that it had already destroyed all of its existing stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons.

Actually, the Iraq Survey Group Report (ISG) says exactly the opposite and all someone had to do was read the Key Findings right at the beginning of the report to see it.

FactCheck.org propagated a lie by doing one or both of the following:

A - Like several other elite media outlets such as CNN and the Washington Post, FactCheck cherry picked certain lines in the ISG report about parts of certain WMD programs Saddam had not made concerted efforts to restart, and then presented those snippets as if they represented all of Saddam’s WMD capability and intent ti make it look like the ISG verified the Democrat’s talking points. [Note: It is important to remember that CNN admitted to deliberately propagandizing for Saddam in exchange for access.]

B - FactCheck trusted CNN and the Washington Post’s identical deception about the contents of the report, which FactCheck linked to in their published “fact check”, and instead of cross checking for verification they just reworded the spin of others.

Here is what the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) had to say in its Key Findings straight from the report itself. What you see below is on the first page of their final report by ISG Lead Inspector Charles Duelfer:

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf

Saddam Husayn so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone. He wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted.

• Saddam totally dominated the Regime’s strategic decision making. He initiated most of the strategic thinking upon which decisions were made, whether in matters of war and peace (such as invading Kuwait), maintaining WMD as a national strategic goal, or on how Iraq was to position itself in the international community. Loyal dissent was discouraged and constructive variations to the implementation of his wishes on strategic issues were rare. Saddam was the Regime in a strategic sense and his intent became Iraq’s strategic policy.

• Saddam’s primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have UN sanctions lifted, while maintaining the security of the Regime. He sought to balance the need to cooperate with UN inspections—to gain support for lifting sanctions—with his intention to preserve Iraq’s intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face. Indeed, this remained the goal to the end of the Regime, as the starting of any WMD program, conspicuous or otherwise, risked undoing the progress achieved in eroding sanctions and jeopardizing a political end to the embargo and international monitoring.

• The introduction of the Oil-For-Food program (OFF) in late 1996 was a key turning point for the Regime. OFF rescued Baghdad’s economy from a terminal decline created by sanctions. The Regime quickly came to see that OFF could be corrupted to acquire foreign exchange both to further undermine sanctions and to provide the means to enhance dual-use infrastructure and potential WMD-related development.

• By 2000-2001, Saddam had managed to mitigate many of the effects of sanctions and undermine their international support. Iraq was within striking distance of a de facto end to the sanctions regime, both in terms of oil exports and the trade embargo, by the end of 1999.

Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.

• Iran was the pre-eminent motivator of this policy. All senior level Iraqi officials considered Iran to be Iraq’s principal enemy in the region. The wish to balance Israel and acquire status and influence in the Arab world were also considerations, but secondary.

• Iraq Survey Group (ISG) judges that events in the 1980s and early 1990s shaped Saddam’s belief in the value of WMD. In Saddam’s view, WMD helped to save the Regime multiple times. He believed that during the Iran-Iraq war chemical weapons had halted Iranian ground offensives and that ballistic missile attacks on Tehran had broken its political will. Similarly, during Desert Storm, Saddam believed WMD had deterred Coalition Forces from pressing their attack beyond the goal of freeing Kuwait. WMD had even played a role in crushing the Shi’a revolt in the south following the 1991 cease-fire.

Can it get any more opposite than that?

All Fact Check had to do was actually open up the report and start reading. Or here is a crazy idea, they could have watched ISG Lead Inspector Charles Duelfer’s televised under oath testimony:

And while most elite media such as CNN and Washington Post chose to lie about the contents of the report some news outlets were quite honest in their reporting. A fine example of which was published in the New York Sun:

Saddam Gamed U.N. Oil Scheme in Bid for Arms

WASHINGTON – Saddam Hussein personally approved the distribution of oil vouchers to raise funds for the purchase of weapons material, the final report of the American team of weapons inspectors in Iraq will say this week.

According to internal talking points drafted by the National Security Council and obtained by The New York Sun, chief weapons inspector Charles Duelfer has concluded that the Iraqi dictator used a U.N. sanctions program that was aimed at curbing his desire for weapons of mass destruction to buy off countries and individuals to help Iraq weaken the sanctions.

“The report shows U.N. sanctions eroding and increasingly ineffective. Saddam Hussein intended to reconstitute the weapons of mass destruction programs once they were eliminated. The Iraqi ministry of oil with the personal approval of Saddam Hussein used a secret oil voucher distribution system to attempt to influence other nations and individuals to support Iraq’s goals,” the talking points say.

At the same time, Mr. Duelfer concludes that Iraq had significantly dismantled its nuclear program and was not producing chemical weapons at the time the American-led coalition launched the campaign in March 2003 to oust him from power. The report, however, says that Saddam preserved the intellectual capital of his old nuclear program and was only six months away from producing mustard gas.

Mr. Duelfer’s report essentially confirms America’s charge that Saddam was not in compliance with the U.N. resolutions requiring that he disarm, according to the talking points. “At the start of operation Iraqi Freedom, Saddam Hussein had the capacity to produce sulfur mustard within six months and the capability to produce nerve agents in significant quantities within two years,” the talking points say. It also says that his development of long-range missiles, banned under the 17 sanctions resolutions passed against Iraq between 1991 and 2003, continued unabated.

Even though CNN chose to lie about the contents of the ISG Final Report in its prime time reporting, a simple internet search would have revealed to FactCheck that CNN actually printed the text of the Iraq Survey Group Preliminary Report by David Kay which was also most revealing:

We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN.

With regard to Iraq’s nuclear program, the testimony we have obtained from Iraqi scientists and senior government officials should clear up any doubts about whether Saddam still wanted to obtain nuclear weapons. They have told ISG that Saddam Hussein remained firmly committed to acquiring nuclear weapons.

A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.

Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists’ homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).

Was FactCheck simply lazy, failing to check original sources while gleefully jumping on the bandwagon by simply reporting the lies of CNN and Washington Post? Or did they skim the report with a word-search tool looking for keywords and phrases that could be used to go along with the Democratic Party’s false talking points?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

NYT Confirms American Casualties From WMD in Iraq 2004-2011; 5,000 Warheads Found

So much for no WMD’s…

New York Times:

From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

NYT Iraq Chemical Weapons Incidents 2004 2011

NYT Iraq Chemical Weapons Incidents 2004 2011

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Millions of French flee to escape government policy, taxes, unemployment

Socialism usually has two effects on wealth, destroying it and distributing what is left from the people to the government and their cronies.

Via the UK Independent:

The land of 400 cheeses, the birthplace of Molière and Coco Chanel, is facing an unprecedented exodus. Up to 2.5 million French people now live abroad, and more are bidding “au revoir” each year.

A French parliamentary commission of inquiry is due to publish its report on emigration on Tuesday, but Le Figaro reported yesterday that because of a political dispute among its members over the reasons for the exodus, a “counter-report” by the opposition right-wing is to be released as an annex.

Centre-right deputies are convinced that the people who are the “lifeblood” of France are leaving because of “the impression that it’s impossible to succeed”, said Luc Chatel, secretary general of the UMP, who chaired the commission.

There is “an anti-work mentality, absurd fiscal pressure, a lack of promotion prospects, and the burden of debt hanging over future generations,” he told Le Figaro. However, the report’s author Yann Galut, a Socialist deputy, said the UMP was unhappy because it had been unable to prove that a “massive exile” had taken place since the election of President François Hollande in 2012.

What is certain is the steady rise in the number of emigrants across all sections of society, from young people looking for jobs to entrepreneurs to pensioners.

According to a French Foreign Ministry report published at the end of last month, the top five destinations are the UK, Switzerland, the US, Belgium and Germany. The French consulate in London has estimated that up to 400,000 French nationals live in the capital, a number equal to the population of France’s sixth largest city.

The Foreign Ministry recorded 1.6 million expats at the end of last year. But that figure only includes people who had registered at French consulates abroad. “So the real figure is twice as high,” says Hélène Charveriat, the delegate-general of the Union of French Citizens Abroad.

She told The Independent that while the figure of 2.5 million expatriates is “not enormous”, what is more troubling is the increase of about 2 per cent each year.

“Young people feel stuck, and they want interesting jobs. Businessmen say the labour code is complex and they’re taxed even before they start working. Pensioners can also pay less tax abroad,” she says.

France’s unemployment rate is hovering around 10 per cent. As for high-earners, almost 600 people subject to a wealth tax on assets of more than €800,000 (£630,000) left France in 2012, 20 per cent more than the previous year. Manuel Valls, the Prime Minister, announced in London this week that the top income tax rate of 75 per cent would be abolished next January after a number of business tycoons and celebrities moved out.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why ISIS is a bigger threat than Al-Qaeda in Six Sentences

David French via NRO:

Let’s make this simple, shall we?

1. Al-Qaeda carried out the deadliest attack on American soil in American history and the most devastating foreign attack against an American city since the British occupied and burned Washington during the War of 1812.

2. ISIS is more brutal than al-Qaeda.

3. ISIS has more financial resources than al-Qaeda.

4. ISIS controls more territory — and possesses more firepower – than al-Qaeda.

5. ISIS has seized uranium in sufficient quantities to make a radiological weapon, a dirty bomb.

6. The leader of ISIS declared to his former American captors, “See you in New York,” and ISIS militants have pledged to raise the black flag of jihad over the White House.

In other words, ISIS is more capable in every way than the terrorists that hit America so hard on 9/11. Pinprick strikes weren’t enough to stop a much weaker Osama bin Laden. They will not be enough to stop a much stronger Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Princeton Study: Wealthy Interest Groups Control Policy Outcomes, Voters Have Near Zero Influence

Via Natural News, The Hill, and Princeton University:

One of Americans’ most cherished civil rights is also one of its most underused, which is a major reason why we are governed by some of the worst misfits and miscreants among us.

According to a startling new piece of research by a pair of political science professors, ordinary Americans have virtually no impact at all on the making of national policy. By contrast, reports The Hill, “The analysts found that rich individuals and business-controlled interest groups largely shape policy outcomes in the United States.”

The study should serve as a crystal clear clarion call to the vast majority of Americans who are simply bypassed by a government that was supposed to be, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, “of the people, by the people, for the people” — not “of the special interests and by the special interests.”

In order to reclaim the promise of American-style republicanism and democracy, the pair warn, citizens must act positively and decisively to change the relationship between them and their elected leaders.

‘Nearly no influence at all’

As noted by The Hill:

The new study, with the jaw-clenching title of “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens,” is forthcoming in the fall 2014 edition of Perspectives on Politics. Its authors, Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University, examined survey data on 1,779 national policy issues for which they could gauge the preferences of average citizens, economic elites, mass-based interest groups and business-dominated interest groups. They used statistical methods to determine the influence of each of these four groups on policy outcomes, including both policies that are adopted and rejected.

They found that, when controlling for the power of financial elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registered at a “non-significant, near-zero level.”

The political scientists further noted that rich individuals and business-dominated interest groups vastly dominate the legislative and policy-making process. But the mass-based interest groups had minimal influence when compared to those who are business-related.

The study further debunks the belief that the policy preferences of business and the rich tend to reflect the views of ordinary Americans. The researchers found to the contrary, in fact; such preferences mostly sharply diverge, and when they do, which is often, the economic and business elites nearly always win the day and ordinary Americans lose.

The researchers also said that, given the limitations of tapping into the full-power elite in the country and their policy preferences, “the real world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater” than even the study’s alarming findings indicate.

The authors note:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

 

Sources:

http://www.breitbart.com

https://www.princeton.edu [PDF]

http://thehill.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment