Skip to content

UN Preparing to draw the US in to the NWO… This will BLOW your Mind..

September 18, 2013

We will no longer be a sovereign nation.. READ IT and WEEP!
Friday, 13 September 2013

UN Sec’y Gen.: National Sovereignty Is a Gift of the United Nations

On September 11, the United Nations reasserted that it believes it has the exclusive and undeniable right to determine when a people is worthy of sovereignty and when the UN must step in and rule for them.

At an informal meeting of the General Assembly, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon declared the international body’s continuing commitment to protecting populations of member states from suffering under regimes that fail to “fulfill their obligations under the rule of law.” This includes Syria, Libya, and anywhere else in the world that isn’t toeing the one-world-government line.

Societies, said Ban, must “embrace diversity” or face the intervention of regional and international bodies that will step in to “protect and empower” the people living under the offending regime.

In order to impose its will and enforce its vision of “diversity,” the UN will prevent the governments of member states from passing laws, programs, and policies that prohibit the establishment of a UN-approved body of law.

Preventing governments from opposing the UN is a significant step toward the achievement of the UN’s ultimate aim: permanent aggregation of all national sovereignty into one global entity under the rule of globalists bureaucrats. Ban addressed this issue in his statement on September 11:

Prevention may sound abstract, but it is very concrete and specific. It means, among many things, that States translate obligations and standards set out in international law, notably international humanitarian and human rights law, into policies, programmes, laws and institutions that protect and empower their people.

This principle underlying this drive to force nations to, as U.S. UN Ambassador Samantha Power (shown) said, give up a “pinch of sovereignty” ( she means, a little pregnant?) in exchange for the United Nation’s version of peace and prosperity is known as Responsibility to Protect (R2P).

Power, it must be noted, played a significant role in the development of R2P. Her influence on President Obama and his nationally televised address on Syria was recognized by National Review Online. “This was a Samantha Power speech,” wrote Stanley Kurtz, referring to President Obama’s call for American intervention in Syria.

Americans committed to the maintaining our Republic, our Constitution, and our right to determine our own laws, regulations, and policies must become familiar with the Responsibility to Protect doctrine and the extraordinary lengths the UN will go to to impose its provisions.

In an address given in last September, the UN secretary-general promoted the global shadow government’s ultimate goal of eradicating national sovereignty by way of the R2P policy.

Agreed to by the UN General Assembly at a summit of world leaders in 2005, R2P purports to grant the global government power to decide whether individual nations are properly exercising their sovereignty.

UN literature describes R2P as the concept that holds “states responsible for shielding their own populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and related crimes against humanity and requires the international community to step in if this obligation is not met.”

That is to say, if the UN determines that a national government is not voluntarily conforming to the UN’s idea of safety, then the “international community” will impose its will by force, all for the protection of that nation’s citizens.

Lest anyone believe that the globalists at the UN are simply pacifists whose desire is to meekly encourage regimes to treat their people kindly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon took a more forceful posture at the conference held at the UN headquarters in New York:

We all agree that sovereignty must not be a shield behind which States commit grave crimes against their people. But achieving prevention and protection can be difficult. In recent years, we have shown how good offices, preventive diplomacy, mediation, commissions of inquiry and other peaceful means can help pull countries back from the brink of mass violence.

However, when non-coercive measures fail or are considered inadequate, enforcement under Chapter VII will need to be considered by the appropriate intergovernmental bodies. This includes carefully crafted sanctions and, in extreme circumstances,

the use of force.

Chapter VII of the UN Charter authorizes the Security Council to use force in the face of a threat to peace or aggression, taking “such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.” As there is currently no UN military, all such interventions are carried out by the national armed forces of member nations.

Faithfully, the United States, as the chief financial engine of the international body, has not only signed on to promote the Responsibility to Protect scheme, but President Obama has established a federal agency to ensure that it is executed effectively.

The agency is the White House Atrocities Prevention Board (APB), which was headed by Samantha Power until she was confirmed as the U.S. ambassador to the UN.

Exercising the powers he created for himself in Executive Order 13606, President Barack Obama demonstrated his support for the R2P program when he established the Atrocities Prevention Board.

The stated goal of the APB is to first formally recognize that genocide and other mass atrocities committed by foreign powers are a “core national security interest and core moral responsibility.”

Apart from the unconstitutionality of this use of the executive order, there was something sinister in the selection of ***Samantha Power*** to spearhead the search for atrocities.

One source claims that the very existence of the APB is due to Power’s own persistence in convincing the White House that discovering atrocities should be a “core national-security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.” The statement released at the time of the signing of the executive order demonstrates Power’s remarkable power of persuasion.

Samantha Power rose to prominence in government circles as part of her campaign to promote the Responsibility to Protect scheme.

Responsibility to Protect is predicated on the proposition that sovereignty is a privilege, not a right, and that if any regime in any nation violates the UN-approved code of conduct, then the international community is morally obligated to revoke that nation’s sovereignty and assume command and control of the offending country.

The three pillars of this UN sovereignty grab explain the provenance of this presumed prerogative:

1. A state has a responsibility to protect its population from mass atrocities;

2. The international community has a responsibility to assist the state if it is unable to protect its population on its own; and

3. If the state fails to protect its citizens from mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.

It is the habitual recourse to this purported “last resort” that has cost countless American lives and has propelled our Republic closer to becoming a mere regional administrative unit of the global government of the United Nations. This has been borne out in Mali, Libya, the Ivory Coast, and now, in Syria.

Using history as a guide, Americans know that the pseudo-pacifists running the United Nations believe that if the social contract fails, there’s always the option of deploying blue-helmeted soldiers to impose “peace” at the point of a gun.

To that end, Special Advisor of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide Adama Dieng recommended delegates work in their individual governments to contribute to an armed UN force under the command of the global government. Reciting the third point of R2P, Dieng pushed for more powerful tools to carry out the third pillar. “It is our collective responsibility to study the implications of the use of each of them, and to understand the conditions under which the potential of each tool can be maximized,” Dieng said. “It is also our responsibility to establish and strengthen the structures that will make third-pillar tools actionable and effective.”

No matter the frequency or ferocity of the moral outrage spewed by internationalists, the government of the United States does not have a constitutional responsibility to protect the citizens of the world from atrocities.

And nowhere in the Constitution is the president or Congress authorized to place the armed forces of the United States under the command of international bodies, regardless of treaty obligations or sovereignty-stealing “responsibilities” to the contrary.

At the September 11 meeting of the General Assembly, Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson echoed his boss’s call for intervention in Syria. “Everybody has a role to play. Nobody can do everything; and everybody can do something,” Eliasson said. “We pay an enormous price for waiting for conflicts to get worse,” he added.

Eliasson unwittingly gave Americans sound advice.

We all can do something, and the first thing we should do is immediately demand that our elected representatives support legislation that would get the United States out of the United Nations and get the United Nations out of the United States.

If we fail to do this, we will indeed pay an “enormous price” and the UN’s attacks on our sovereignty will only get worse. How long until the UN decides that the Bill of Rights (principally the freedom of religion and the right to keep and bear arms) is a violation of humanitarian law and send international forces to demand that those rights be suspended in the name of the responsibility to protect?

We must act now.

  1. September 18, 2013 1:15 am

    Today Marks The 16th American Mass Shooting Since Obama Became President

    When you add up the numbers, a very disturbing picture of Obama’s presidency begins to unfold. He was elected as the “racial uniter”, the Nobel Peace Prize president who was going to “stop the rise of the oceans” and “heal our planet.”


    (shedding phony tears for effect.. like he really cares about the people!)

    Yet his 4 and one half years of occupying the desk at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue hide a sinister statistic – America has had 15 mass shootings since he became president, and today’s massacre at the Navy Shipyard now brings that total to 16. And since this is a list of shootings only, it does not include the Boston Bombing Massacre that Obama used to roll out martial law for a 24-hour period in Boston.

    How do you explain that?

    A list of the 15 American mass shootings since 2009:

    1). December 14, 2012 — Newtown, Conn. – 27 dead (including gunman). The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary on Friday was the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history, leaving 27 dead — including 20 young children. President Obama gave an emotional address, calling for “meaningful action”

    2). September 27, 2012 — Minneapolis, Minn. – 7 dead (including gunman), 2 injured. Andrew John Engeldinger, a recently laid off employee of Accent Signage Systems, entered the office building and opened fire.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    3). August 5, 2012 — Oak Creek, Wis. – 7 dead (including gunman), 4 injured. White supremacist Wade Michael Page entered a Sikh Temple, opening fire on congregants. He later shot and injured a police officer responding to the scene.

    4). July 20, 2012 — Aurora, Colo. — 12 dead, 59 injured. During a midnight screening of “The Dark Knight Rises,” a gunman opened fire on the suburban Denver movie theater, killing 12 and injuring dozens of others. Two days later, Obama delivered a ten-minute speech from the University of Colorado that made no mention of gun control.

    5). May 31, 2012 — Seattle, Wash. – 6 dead (including gunman). A man opened fire in a cafe, fatally wounding four people, then killed another in a carjacking before killing himself.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    6). April 2, 2012 — Oakland, Calif. — 7 dead. A former student of Oikos University, a Korean college, entered a building on the campus and shot repeatedly at random targets.

    (No public comments from the president)

    7). February 22, 2012 — Norcross, Ga. — 5 dead (including gunman). A man shot and killed two of his sisters and their husbands and then himself in a Korean health spa.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    8). October 12, 2011 — Seal Beach, Calif. — 8 dead, 1 injured. Scott Evans Dekraai, 41, stormed a hair salon where his ex-wife worked and killed eight people.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    9). January 8, 2011 — Tucson, Ariz. — 6 dead, 14 injured. Jared Lee Loughner, 22, opened fire in a Safeway parking lot, killing six people and injuring others including U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in the head at point-blank range. Two months later, Obama addressed gun control issues in an op-ed for the Arizona Daily Star

    10). August 3, 2010 — Manchester, Conn. — 9 dead (including gunman), 2 injured. A driver for Hartford Distributors killed eight people and then himself in this workplace shooting.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    11). November 29, 2009 — Parkland, Wash. — 5 dead (including gunman). A Washington man walked into a coffee shop and shot four police officers execution-style.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    12). November 5, 2009 — Fort Hood, Texas — 13 dead, 30 injured (including gunman). In the deadliest shooting to ever happen on an American military base, an Army Major serving as a psychiatrist went on a shooting spree that killed 13.

    13). April 3, 2009 — Binghamton, N.Y. — 14 dead (including gunman), 4 injured. Jiverly Wong, a naturalized immigrant from Vietnam, gunned down students and employees at the American Civic Association, where he had been taking English lessons.

    14). March 10, 2009 — Geneva County, Ala. — 11 dead (including gunman), 6 injured. A 28-year-old man killed his mother then drove ten miles to kill several members of his extended family, neighbors and a bystander. The victims ranged in age from 18 months to 74 years old.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    15). March 29, 2009 — Carthage, N.C. — 8 dead, 3 injured (including gunman). A gunman opened fire on a nursing home, killing seven residents and a nurse.

    (No public comments from the president.)

    source – HuffPost
    Share Now!:


    Really? Putting the Fox in charge of the Hen House?

  2. Anonymous permalink
    September 18, 2013 8:00 am


    Why hasn’t all this global concern for public safety been extended to Japan’s Fukushima disaster?

  3. Ed Swezey permalink
    September 18, 2013 11:55 am

    Tellurian: The above article (National sovereignty is a gift of the UN) by an anonymous author is so full of it that it’s hard to get a grip on where it spins farthest off track. It’s obvious that the author has an ax to grind about the UN, because he or she leads up to a manifesto in support of “legislation that would get the US out of the UN and get the UN out of the US.”

    It really goes beyond the pale to twist Ban Ki-Moon’s words into a threat against US sovereignty.

    This silly statement, “…nowhere in the Constitution is the president or Congress authorized to place the armed forces of the US under the command of international bodies…” disregards the fact that nothing in the Constitution prevents that either, just as it is not illegal for the US to act in the company of other nations, or to play a leadership or peripheral role. These are strategic or tactical matters, and the simple fact is that the Constitution places no limitations on the use of military force, just that Congress must authorize it first.

    Responsibility to Protect – R2P – is not the responsibility of the UN but the responsibility of each state to protect its citizens against atrocities. If R2P becomes international law, it means that the UN will be able leverage what little power it has in dealing with countries where atrocities are committed by “good offices, preventive diplomacy, mediation, commission of inquiry” but also back up these efforts with a threat of military intervention, which will not necessarily be conducted by the US.

    Two past events (cited by the author) in which the UN gave a green light for military intervention were in Libya and Mali. Note that the United States was involved only on the periphery of each intervention, with no boots on the ground, and of its own free will.

    In sum, I think the R2P idea should be adopted by the UN and become international law. It will in no way affect US sovereignty or the Constitution.

  4. September 19, 2013 2:07 am


    Hello, Jeswezy. I would love to agree with your analysis of the article, but I can’t.

    “Tellurian: The above article (National sovereignty is a gift of the UN) by an anonymous author is so full of it that it’s hard to get a grip on where it spins farthest off track.”

    The author is and the opinion piece is written by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D. who basically is of a Libertarian bent. If anything, it was my error not giving him credit for the piece relying on the article’s link for soothing an inquiring minds like yours…. mea culpa…

    “It’s obvious that the author has an ax to grind about the UN, because he or she leads up to a manifesto in support of “legislation that would get the US out of the UN and get the UN out of the US.”

    Besides the bureaucrats and politicians, what average citizen supports an organization like the UN that mandates rules in writing then changes them ad hoc at their discretion exactly like the changes made by XO to The PA1 and 2? Another example is admitting to the UN membership a non-voting, non-existent country, Palestine? What kind of principled logic is that?

    Ordinary citizens, including myself want to disabuse themselves of entities having a totalitarian reach that affects their way of life. A dictatorial entity assuming what is best for the common good when we have/had a functioning Constitution in place that has been a working principle by and for the people for over 200 yrs.

    anyway- I appreciate your viewpoint however, I am less than convinced, the UN involving itself with concern for countries in the throws of civil war atrocities, it’s motive for doing so under the guise of a humanitarian facade, NWO or One World Government, is purely altruistic. (Whackadoodle, Samatha Power? Academic egotist husband, Cass Sunstein, author of a revised Constitution II?) You’re joking, of course…

    I will have sometime tomorrow to respond to the rest of your post… Thanks and good night..

  5. September 21, 2013 3:11 am

    Is it serendipitous or coincidence, so much information is leaking out to the press over the last few days about the UN agenda. None of it is good news, at least, not for us…

    The Canada Free Press has a good summary describing the conditions Americans will be living under in the future USofA.

    It sounds like they are on the right track..

    a short excerpt posted by TJ:

    “Citizens vociferously opposed such regionalism. “I am opposed to Seven50… to the loss of our property rights by U.N. Agenda 21, the new world order communist Marxist project.” According to Suzanne Eovaldi, a long line of speakers and refugees from former communist countries pleaded with “local elected officials to reject the takeover of Florida’s private property.” One speaker wondered, “Why am I arguing for what has always been my right… for all that made America great.”

    Large grants from HUD and the Obama administration divide the country into 11 nationwide regions, including the east coast of Florida. The Seven50 Regionalism Plan has already been adopted in the Gore triangle counties south of St. Lucie and Indian River counties. Vero Beach, IRC rejected the plan based on a “vertical authority flow chart” controlled by unelected federal bureaucrats influenced by globalist non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who plan to “stack-and-pack 200-foot dwelling spaces” and move citizens off their hard-earned private property. My family and I had experience with such social engineering and confiscation of property, forcibly being relocated off our land into tiny high rise apartments. Life in the 9-story concrete block apartments into which we were moved under
    protest and duress was very hard, especially since we did not have elevators to climb to our tiny cubicles. Sharing one bathroom and one kitchen with another family of four in a 600-square-foot apartment was dehumanizing.

    Suzanne Eovaldi describes the typical stack-and-pack living quarters in the 200 square foot aPodments building in Sammamish, Washington. Resident Judy Green “shares the kitchen with seven other tenants on the second floor.” To get to her loft cubicle, she must climb six flights of stairs in the absence of elevators. Cars are not allowed because of global warming. The micro-apartments are the size of a hotel room and rent for $600-900 per month. The micro-housing units increase the population density of the area tremendously. ”

    read more at the link:

  6. September 23, 2013 9:40 am

    Palin: Hillary Unfit for Presidency Because of Benghazi Scandal

    by Tony Lee


    Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Hillary Clinton is unfit to be president because of her role in the Benghazi scandal when she was Secretary of State on Fox News Sunday.

    In an interview with Fox News anchor Shannon Bream, Palin was asked by a Twitter user named “Michael” what she thought of “Hillary Clinton, and Hillary’s role in Benghazi.” Bream then asked Palin if she believed if it would have an impact in 2016 should Clinton pursue the presidency.

    Palin said “if it doesn’t have an impact on the 2016 presidential election if she is a candidate,” then she would have “disappointment” in the country’s electorate.

    Palin said that Clinton should “never be considered as Commander-in-Chief ” because she helped “throw away 200 years of military ethos” and left “our men behind to be murdered in Benghazi.” Clinton had initially claimed last year that the four Americans who were killed by terrorists died because of a YouTube parody video of Muhammad.

    “That’s why I am so grateful for Congress to be pursuing what happened in Benghazi, getting to the truth of it” Palin said. “It still makes a difference what happened in Benghazi.”

    Palin then said it was important to ask of a potential president whether they “support our military” and if they will “defend our Constitution and our republic.”

    “Anyone who doesn’t understand that and dismisses it as being indifferent… they should not be our Commander-in-Chief,” Palin said.

    House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) has threatened to call Clinton back to testify on the scandal. Last week, Issa’s committee heard testimony from the heads of the Benghazi Accountability Review Board, which Clinton conveyed, that did not feel the need to interview Clinton while they were investigating what happened last year at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

    If Hillary has made a deal with BO’s Administration keeping her mouth shut on Benghazi…Trading her silence for (BO’s) future campaign support. And, she continues to announce she supports this president no matter what dictates he creates by Executive fiat, no matter how many Wars he continues to justify at the expense of the American people… Then she might as well announce she will not be running in 2016 and instead settle for an alternative setting more conducive to her strengths rather than once again face embarrassing disappointment. People are beginning to fear you Hillary, afraid to support you if you are found out to have lied for Barry and aided in the cover-up of four dead Americans. People are growing impatient. There isn’t much time left for coming clean if you intend on salvaging what is left of your reputation clearing the air and moving on from there… You have to ask yourself: “Am I doing the right thing?”, “Am I doing it for myself, Obama, or What is right for our country?” Of course, there is only one right answer.

    What say you?

  7. September 23, 2013 12:08 pm

    It’s funny, when you hear the words of a Truth=teller, you innately know it!

  8. September 23, 2013 2:05 pm

    The Obamacare Chart Barack Obama Doesn’t Want You To See…

    by Ulsterman on September 23, 2013


    Perhaps Barack Obama didn’t read his own bill? A new report out from Forbes breaks down the true costs of Obamacare for the typical American family of four, and the numbers aren’t just startlingly bad, they’re downright catastrophic. Once again it becomes clear how Obamacare was NEVER about providing health care to the uninsured, but rather a massive, dangerous, and freedom killing power grab by the federal government.

    Obamacare Will Increase Health Spending By **$7,450 For A Typical Family of Four.**

    It was one of candidate Obama’s most vivid and concrete campaign promises. Forget about high minded (some might say high sounding) but gauzy promises of hope and change.

    This candidate solemnly pledged on June 5, 2008: “In an Obama administration, we’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year….. We’ll do it by the end of my first term as President of the United States.”

    Unfortunately, the experts working for Medicare’s actuary have (yet again[1]) reported that in its first 10 years, Obamacare will boost health spending by “roughly $621 billion” above the amounts Americans would have spent without this misguided law.

    What this means for a typical family of four-

    $621 billion is a pretty eye-glazing number. Most readers will find it easier to think about how this number translates to a typical American family—the very family candidate Obama promised would see $2,500 in annual savings as far as the eye could see.

    So I have taken the latest year-by-year projections, divided by the projected population and multiplied the result by 4.

    Simplistic? Maybe, but so too was the President’s campaign promise. And this approach allows us to see just how badly that promise fell short of the mark.

    Between 2014 and 2022, the increase in national health spending (which the Medicare actuaries specifically attribute to the law) amounts to $7,450 per family of 4.

    …Perhaps the next time voters encounter a politician making such grandiose claims, they will learn to watch their wallet.

    Until then, let’s spare strapped Americans from having to find $657 in spare change between their couch cushions next year. Let’s delay this law for a year so that policymakers have time to fix the poorly designed Rube Goldberg device known as Obamacare.

    For a nation with the most complicated and expensive health system on the planet, making it even more complicated and even more expensive never was a good idea. Forbes


    Truth and Justice posts this insiteful comment:

    The story comes together by looking through the keyhole at the theatrical acrobatics of the House and Senate memberships feigning representation to fool the American people into thinking, they are actualy doing their jobs…

    More about what Rep & Dem Leaderships don’t want you to know: We shall see……

    “How John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are Funding Obamacare”

    By: RedState Insider (Diary) | September 22nd, 2013

    Don’t be fooled by this political theater going on in Washington, DC. The fix is in and both sides are trying to fund ObamaCare while saving face.

    The whole of House Republican Leadership thinks you are stupid. They have passed a bill that they know will be changed by Harry Reid before it goes back to the House in a few days. The smoking gun will happen when Boehner allows a Senate passed government funding measure to come up in the House minus the provision defunding ObamaCare. You wait and see.

    Also, know that Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is in on this too. He is going to stand with Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) to save his Senate seat, but he knows that he has the power to stop this scheme.

    Here is how both Republican and Democrats in leadership are trying to fool you. The House passed a Continuing Resolution, a measure to fund the government for two and one half months, with two things attached. A measure to defund ObamaCare and another to reorder the debt payment priorities of the United States government to allow the federal government to operate if the debt limit forbids anymore federal borrowing. These amendments were grouped in a way making it very easy for the Senate to delete this provision. And that was by design.

    After the House passed the resolution, they had a big fake rally to make believe they were happy that they were funding the government while defunding ObamaCare. Yet Republicans in the House think we are stupid. Representatives like Peter King (R-NY) and Tom Cole (R-Oklahoma) either went on TV or yelled at Tea Party minded constituents to tell them why the House could not pass a budget bill that defunds ObamaCare, yet they did it. These moderates only supported the House effort because they knew it was without teeth and an effort to make believe they are fighting ObamaCare.

    The only reason why squishes in the House agreed to send a defund ObamaCare measure to the Senate is because they know the fix is in and the defunding of ObamaCare will never happen. Now I am not saying that these squishy members don’t want to repeal ObamaCare — they do — they are merely unwilling to put up any sort of a fight to repeal it.

    The bottom line is that Speaker of the House John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and House Whip Kevin McCarthy all know that the only way they could convince the House to pass a CR that defunds ObamaCare is if this was merely a messaging bill that would be changed by the Senate.

    We now have circumstantial evidence that the House Republican Leadership conspired with Senate Democratic Leadership to set up the theater to save ObamaCare while preserving House Republicans reputation for fighting ObamaCare. Why else would the media be openly talking about the complicated Senate procedure that is expected to be used to railroad this bill through the Senate.

    The Senate is about to embark on a debate on the CR. Here is how it is going to work. The Senate Republican Leader will move to proceed to a CR that kills ObamaCare. Senate Republican Leadership will urge members to vote to proceed and start debate and they will say “this is what you wanted’ — a CR that defunds ObamaCare. Yet all Senate Democrats are planning to vote for it.

    The fix is in.

    Once the Senate commences consideration of the House passed CR, then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will abuse his power as Majority Leader and block all amendments to the bill with the exception of his amendments. His amendment will be to strike the provision that defunds ObamaCare meaning that Reid will offer an Amendment to restore funding for ObamaCare.

    Reid will be filling the amendment tree, a hyper technical parliamentary tactic that allows the leader to block all amendments to legislation. The Senate is known as a body with extended debate and unlimited amendments. Reid will both block all amendments then he will file a cloture petition to shut down debate immediately upon offering the amendment.

    What will Republican Leaders to in the Senate to fight this abuse of power? Nothing.

    After this happens, because of the complicated procedure, Reid will need 6 Republicans to vote to shut down debate on the bill to get a vote on the Reid amendment. Now some Republicans will try to fool Tea Party minded voters and they will argue that the vote to shut down debate is a vote to support a final vote on defunding ObamaCare.

    They will be lying.

    If 6 Republican Senators squish and vote for cloture on the bill, then a vote will happen on Reid’s motion to strike later in the process.

    We all know it takes 60 votes to do anything in the Senate. Remember the Manchin-Toomey gun control amendment to the Reid gun control bill? The reason the bill failed is because liberals could not cobble together 60 votes to get Manchin-Toomey across the finish line. Every amendment and bill need 60 votes to pass, yet Reid has figured out a way to set up a vote that only needs 51 votes.

    If Senators vote for cloture on this funding bill, they are voting with all the Democrats to fund ObamaCare.

    The American people are not stupid and they are not going to believe that Republicans voting to shut off debate somehow want to defund Obamacare. If that were true why are all Democrats voting to shut off debate with a handful of Republicans?

    Because this is a rhetorical trick to protect Republicans who will vote with Harry Reid.

    Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) have been fighting to defund ObamaCare. They have a plan. Fight Reid’s motion to strike the provision to defund ObamaCare and force 60 Senators to shut down debate on that proposition. Republicans win that fight then Reid has a take it or leave it proposition with the House Continuing Resolution that defunds ObamaCare.

    The problem is that Cruz and Lee are being sabotaged by his own leadership. The House and Senate Republican leadership are to fearful of being blamed for a government shut down to fight this issue. They are running the white flag of surrender up the flag pole before a shot has even been fired.

    Squishy House Republicans and House Leadership want to embarrass Cruz and Lee when they fail to get the defunding of ObamaCare across the finish line. Boehner set our guys up for failure — that is a fact.

    Reid has all but told the world exactly what he is going to do and Republicans are rolling over in the Senate already.

    If Republicans don’t blink and block cloture on everything until Senate Majority Leader Reid promises that the rules will be followed and Reid will need 60 votes to shut down debate on his amendment to fully fund ObamaCare, our guys can win this.

    If squishy Senate Republicans make arguments that they are voting to defund ObamaCare when they are voting with Democrats to help Reid defund ObamaCare, we will lose.

    Tea Party minded voter are not stupid. The American people will not be fooled. Any Senate Republican who votes to shut off debate on this Continuing Resolution is helping Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to fund ObamaCare.

    Any Republican who is helping Reid, even if they vote right, are guilty of political treason. They need to be repealed and replaced.”

  9. September 25, 2013 12:05 am

    Really, Up to your old tricks again? Not letting the administrator of this forum post?

    I’ve followed all your suggestions- clear the catche… etc… but still you insist on censorship of my 1st Amendment rights…

    I will again, file a complaint with Word Press…

  10. September 25, 2013 12:06 am

    A short excerpt from DW Ulsterman’s first novel, Dominatus… Check out this LINK for more of his series of books castling a light on our future under Obama’s government mandates.


    “Life Unworthy Of Life” – A Story Of The Obamacare Mandates

    Given the battle currently being waged regarding Obamacare implementation – a glimpse into the potential horrors of Obamacare as detailed in my novel, DOMINATUS:

    ”Life unworthy of life, the very term the Nazis used for their own termination program…”


    …Dr. Miller gave a smile that appeared far more like a grimace.

    “It didn’t work…not for the patients. Not for any doctor who still cared. It was like I said, the number crunchers had taken over the entire system. Every procedure was compartmentalized statistically, everything I or anyone else did had to fall into an approved category or you were not allowed to do it. So, if I had a man in his 60’s, obese, hypertension, perhaps a previous heart attack, and he’s now suffering from early stage liver cancer…all of that information was plugged into a system that would spit out what procedures were acceptable cost-wise. If there was a procedure, or a drug that would benefit this man, but the statistics put him below a sixty percent full recovery scenario, that patient would be denied that procedure, denied that drug…that treatment. The system was telling me, the physician, to let that man die. Give him a painkiller, something to make them comfortable, and let him die. His death was cheaper than trying to give him the opportunity for another five or ten years of life.

    Now that situation infuriated me. It infuriated a lot of us. It was immoral. It was cruel. Hell, I was telling my wife it was evil.”

    …Dr. Miller stopped walking again, as I sensed him reliving that time those many years ago.

    “Well, after I testified to Congress in 2014, the hospital was telling me to keep quiet. I wouldn’t do that. I would speak out against Obamacare every opportunity I had, radio, television, newspapers, whoever wanted to hear my experiences I was happy to share. Felt I had a moral obligation to do it. 2015 came around, and I was working on a book about the healthcare law. The hospital administrator calls me in, tells me he heard about my book. Tells me not to publish. He just got off the phone from a representative of the Department of Homeland Security…alleging I may be part of some kind of anti-government plot. Said perhaps I needed to take a break. Now I asked him if he was suspending me…he said no. He was hoping it wouldn’t come to that. So, I told him to go to hell. I kept working, as much as I could, and by April of that year, my book was finished and I had a publisher lined up to distribute it. By June it was out there. I called it Death of America- One Nation Under Obamacare. Within a week of its publication my license was suspended by the State of Illinois. I appealed, but that took…took almost a year. The appeal was overturned, but by then my wife and I were separated. She took the two kids, and I was living in a little studio apartment about a half mile from the hospital.

    …The doctor snapped his fingers for emphasis as he spoke.

    “But, in the end, my heart told me I was put on this earth to help people. It’s what drove me. It’s what made me speak out against the government takeover of our healthcare system. I wasn’t the only one, there were others too. But they were all silenced through intimidation, administrative bullying, whatever. You’d hear stories of resignations, traffic accidents, and suicide of course. So people, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, they just stopped fighting back. Stopped questioning, and put their heads down, filled out the forms, checked off the boxes, placed the patients in this category or that category, and let a whole bunch of them die. We no longer treated a whole section of patients, we just accommodated their death. Expedited it, to save on resources. These people were what the system started to call “expendables”. And the number of expendables as part of the overall population became larger and larger. Now that’s evil Mr. Neeson. They always call it “for the good of society”, but what we were doing in forcing people to die when we could have treated them, prolonged their lives, that’s real verifiable evil. Hell, I haven’t even started talking about the babies, the late term abortions…”

    The doctor’s voice trailed off as his gaze once again returned to the darkening clouds slowly making their way toward Dominatus.

    …We stopped walking again as the sound of approaching thunder rumbled across the landscape.

    “So she was being bribed, threatened – did she accept the deal?”

    “Yes, she did. Now part of me judges her harshly for that. She should have known better. But, it also must have been very intimidating having these forces pushing on her…she could have lost her clinic, her license, everything. Now she was going through all this right before the government started coming after me too, the manpower that the administration was using to get the entire medical care system to comply quickly with their mandates must have been massive. Tens of thousands of operatives all over the country doing exactly the kind of thing being done to my friend, and soon after, to me too.

    By the end of the summer, the summer of 2013, her clinic was providing abortion services. The normalization program was underway in the city of Chicago. Within a few weeks she learned what the title really meant – normalization. You see, that would indicate taking something society deems abnormal, and making it acceptable. That was her job, providing the service, something that up to that point was abnormal, and helping to make it…normal. It was…it was late term abortions, taken to the very extreme.

    Mr. Neeson, what they had her doing, was an abomination. I need you to really grasp what I am telling you here. That wonderful pediatric clinic of hers was turned into a slaughter house. That is not a term I’m using to exaggerate the truth…that is what was happening in there. Several times a week, people would come in…and walk out. A life taken from them, and their souls ripped from them too. Most were minorities, the poor, recent immigrants, some were from prisons, the new re-education facilities that were just starting to crop up all over the country.”

    ‘These were abortions, right? What was so different about these than what had been allowed in the United States since the 1970’s?“

    The doctor shook his head, his eyes lowering to the ground.

    “This wasn’t anything done, not legally anyways, in the United States. I told you, they took the concept of late term abortion…they took it to the very extreme. The clinic was performing post-birth executions. It was murdering human beings, infants.

    …When was the last time you saw a young person who was disabled Mr. Neeson? Mentally disabled…physically disabled. Can you recall seeing a person under the age of ten with those qualities in recent years?”

    I felt awareness coming down over me, a cold hard wind that gripped my heart, making breathing difficult. My stomach tightened, threatening sickness. The doctor looked at me with great sympathy, sensing I was realizing the truth that he had carried with him for so many years.

    “No children who are abnormally short, or weak, or intellectually deficient. That clinic in Chicago, it was the epicenter for the removal of the undesirables Mr. Reese. A cleansing of a segment of the population that a government deemed too expensive to provide services to over the course of their lifetimes. Far better, far more efficient, to simply have that life snuffed out at a far cheaper cost. That was the essence of Obamacare – absolute and total control over nearly every aspect of life and death. A child born with a heart ailment? Kill it. A mental deficiency? Gone. How about severe asthma? Not worth the trouble – snuff it out.

    …Do you want to know the process Mr. Neeson, the procedure the government used to so easily take human life? To kill its own children? Thousands…tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? Do you really wish to carry that knowledge with you?”

    “Yes, please tell your story.”

    “That Chicago clinic was the first. There are now at least two hundred across the nation, every major urban area, followed by expansion into the rural areas. Upon pregnancy, the Obamacare mandates, which were later reinforced by the New United Nations mandates…required genetic testing of parents within four weeks of pregnancy. People aren’t charged for the service…so they didn’t fight it. Not much anyways. The fetus is then tested as well at eight weeks, and again at 20 weeks. The results re placed into a basic matrix to determine likely post-birth outcomes. If there are factors indicated a greater than 55% chance of a negative outcome, the fetus was terminated and both parents were then placed under review for sterilization. That termination was mandatory, and the sterilization of the parents could be too if the review indicated that action. No exceptions. It was another form of the death panels. This was basically phase one of the normalization program. Phase two, that followed just a few years later.

    My friend, she began to piece together the program, peeked at patient files, transmissions from her clinic back to the Health and Human Services office in Washington D.C. As horrifying as phase one was, it was her discovery of phase two that…that was too much for her.

    Initially, as I said, we had genetic testing of the fetus at eight weeks, and twenty weeks…phase two then required an additional test at 34 weeks. Thirty four weeks Mr. Neeson is a fully viable fetus capable, particular given modern medical technology, it is a human life. Do you understand what I am saying? If at 34 there were any indications of what they simply labeled a “negative outcome”, the life was terminated. Phase two negative outcomes included more familiar medical challenges such as Down Syndrome, spina bifada, a cleft palate, or any congenital ailment. Other negative outcomes also included possible issues such as ADHD, Sickle Cell Anemia, Diabetes, PKU, or even a suggested genetic propensity toward violence.

    That was phase two of the normalization program. My friend, a few weeks before her death, learned of phase three…”

    The doctor’s voice trailed off, replaced again by the sound of the approaching storm. A cold wind blew across the small clearing we stood in.

    “What was phase three Dr. Miller?”

    “Phase three was, it IS…a mandatory genetic test of the child, performed within the first four weeks following birth. Again, the same criteria are utilized, from possible medical challenges to possible developmental and or behavioral challenges. Challenges that the government deems cost prohibitive over the course of a lifetime.”

    Dr. Lester Miller’s voice cracked, and I watched intently as tears began to form in the corners of his eyes. He raised himself up to his full six foot two inch height, his eyes staring into the abyss of a most painful memory.

    “At my friend’s Chicago clinic, while phase one and phase two were openly underway, there was little public outcry, people just, as they so often did by then, they just went along with it. But phase three, that remained out of sight of the general public. The parents who were, who experienced phase three were required to sign a non disclosure form. Refusal to sign, or to later be caught in violation of that form resulted in…in termination of their lives.”

    “They were killed? The parents?”

    “Yes Mr. Neeson, they were killed. Just like their child was killed. Babies, weeks old, if the genetic test came back with a negative outcome, that infant was given a dose of pentobarbital followed quickly by another lethal dose of potassium chloride. Once again…all under the guise of what is best for society. In that Chicago clinic alone, by 2017, there were nearly twenty phase three terminations taking place every month. The medical executions of children authorized by those who were then transitioning the United States into full compliance as part of the New United Nations. Across the nation, it was likely hundreds, possibly thousands of similar executions being carried out.

    By then my own medical career had been pretty much wiped out by the authorities, but my friend was able to get word to me of what she discovered. I was in Spokane by then, like I told you. It was a letter of warning about what was being done, her regret at not being able to stop it…regret for letting herself be used, her words indicated she was going through some very serious emotional trauma. It wasn’t a message by someone who was coping, it was a message by someone no longer willing to live in a society that so easily killed the most innocent of its people. She included something in that message that…it haunts me every day. Every day I hear the phrase in my head…”Life unworthy of life”. That was the official file name for the normalization program. Life unworthy of life, the very term the Nazis used for their own termination program”…


  11. September 25, 2013 12:12 am

    Posted by:


    September 24, 2013 at 10:49 pm

    Call McConnell and Coryn First…thry are blocking and trying to take Cruz down…

    CALL tell them DEFUND

    Turn up the heat…and put on the pressure …Call….Demand…DEFUND OBAMACARE…every call matters…

    Stand Up for America


    AK Murkowski, Lisa 202-224-6665
    AL Sessions, Jeff 202-224-4124
    AL Shelby, Richard 202-224-5744
    AR Boozman, John 202-224-4843
    AZ Flake, Jeff 202-224-4521
    AZ McCain, John 202-224-2235
    FL Rubio, Marco 202-224-3041
    GA Chambliss, Saxby 202-224-3521
    GA Isakson, Johnny 202-224-3643
    IA Grassley, Chuck 202-224-3744
    ID Crapo, Mike 202-224-6142
    ID Risch, Jim 202-224-2752
    IL Kirk, Mark 202-224-2854
    IN Coats, Dan 202-224-5623
    KS Moran, Jerry 202-224-6521
    KS Roberts, Pat 202-224-4774
    KY McConnell, Mitch 202-224-2541
    KY Paul, Rand 202-224-4343
    LA Vitter, David 202-224-4623
    ME Collins, Susan 202-224-2523
    MO Blunt, Roy 202-224-5721
    MS Cochran, Thad 202-224-5054
    MS Wicker, Roger 202-224-6253
    NC Burr, Richard 202-224-3154
    ND Hoeven, John 202-224-2551
    NE Fischer, Deb 202-224-6551
    NE Johanns, Mike 202-224-4224
    NH Ayotte, Kelly 202-224-3324
    NJ Chiesa, Jeff 202-224-3224
    NV Heller, Dean 202-224-6244
    OH Portman, Rob 202-224-3353
    OK Coburn, Tom 202-224-5754
    OK Inhofe, Jim 202-224-4721
    PA Toomey, Pat 202-224-4254
    SC Graham, Lindsey 202-224-5972
    SC Scott, Tim 202-224-6121
    SD Thune, John 202-224-2321
    TN Alexander, Lamar 202-224-4944
    TN Corker, Bob 202-224-3344
    TX Cornyn, John 202-224-2934
    TX Cruz, Ted 202-224-5922 Opposes Cloture
    UT Hatch, Orrin 202-224-5251
    UT Lee, Mike 202-224-5444 Opposes Cloture
    WI Johnson, Ron 202-224-5323
    WY Barrasso, John 202-224-6441
    WY Enzi, Mike 202-224-3424

    Please report what you hear from these senators to:



    Call the Commie Pipsqueak Harry Reid

    Call his three offices …. Nevada offices, in Las Vegas, Reno, and Carson City. Please locate the office closest to you. If you need to contact me directly, please go here.

    Carson City
    600 East William Street, #304
    Carson City, NV 89701
    Phone: 775-882-7343 / Fax: 775-883-1980

    Las Vegas
    Lloyd D. George Building
    333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 8016
    Las Vegas, NV 89101
    Phone: 702-388-5020 / Fax: 702-388-5030

    Bruce R. Thompson Courthouse and Federal Building
    400 South Virginia Street, Suite 902
    Reno, NV 89501
    Phone: 775-686-5750 / Fax: 775-686-5757

    Rural Nevada
    If you live in Esmeralda, Lincoln, or Nye Counties:
    Phone: 702-388-5020 / Fax: 702-388-5030
    If you live in Churchill, Douglas, Elko, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander, Lyon, Mineral, Pershing, Storey or White Pine County:
    Phone: 775-686-5750 / Fax: 775-686-5757

    522 Hart Senate Office Building
    Washington, DC 20510
    Phone: 202-224-3542 / Fax: 202-224-7327
    Toll Free for Nevadans: 1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343) – Restricted to calls originating from area codes 775 and 702

    Reid Newsroom
    Sen. Reid’s Nevada Press Office 202-224-9521 (for inquiries from Nevada media)
    Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Center 202-224-2939

  12. September 28, 2013 2:14 am

    Whoever it is at WP that continues monitoring and censoring this site needs to read and memorize the Constitution… Particularly the 1st amendment relating to Freedom of Speech… Reporting….

  13. September 28, 2013 2:19 am

    Another Barry Boo-Boo! I am sure the Iranians are pleased they have received a 7th C. artifact seized by US Customs a decade ago……


    However, Mark Eckenwiler
    @kpoulsen: Upon careful inspection, I’ve determined that the provenance of the article isn’t Iran; it’s USBekistan.

    NBC covers the story with baffling BS…

    Spit in the face for being snubbed?

    NBC covers the story with baffling BS!

  14. October 1, 2013 5:11 pm

    Subject: Wudda you think?

    Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots

    by Jeff Foxworthy:

    A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots

    If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If you have to get your parents’ permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If, in the nation’s largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If an 80-year-old woman or a three-year-old girl who is confined to a wheelchair can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is “cute,” but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion, while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If the government’s plan for getting people back to work is to provide incentives for not working, by granting 99 weeks of unemployment checks, without any requirement to prove that gainful employment was diligently sought, but couldn’t be found — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more “safe” according to the government — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

    What a country!

    How about we give God a reason to continue blessing America !

    (Thank you Jeff)

  15. October 2, 2013 2:58 am

    Besides the “good” news of the failed launch of the much vaunted signatory ObamaCare today- Another ray of sunlight appeared shining brightly on the horizon on what must have been a very dark cloudy day at the WH.

    George Will has left ABC News and will be appearing regularly on Fox News.

    George Will Bolts ABC for Fox News

    By Cathy Burke

    Washington Post columnist and conservative commentator George Will is leaving his longtime slot at ABC News and joining Fox News, his new network announced Tuesday.

    Will has been with ABC since the early 1980s — and a panelist on “This Week” since the program began in 1981, said the Daily Caller, which first reported the news.

    The Daily Caller noted Will has been absent recently from his spot on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”

    Will — a Pulitzer Prize winner for commentary for his newspaper writing — will be doing analysis and commentary for Fox News, including on the panels of “Special Report with Bret Baier” and “Fox News Sunday,” the network said.

    “We are delighted to have someone of George’s stature join Fox News,” Michael Clemente, the network’s senior vice president for news, said in a statement. “His wisdom is enduring and his achievements are far too long to list.”

    Will joins fellow Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer in the Fox News stable.
    Before joining ABC News, Will was the Washington editor of National Review and on the staff of former Senator Gordon Allott, R-Colo., from 1970 to 1972.

    He’s also written books on political theory including, “Statecraft as Soulcraft: What Government Does,” “The New Season: A Spectator’s Guide to the 1988 Election” and “Restoration: Congress, Term Limits and The Recovery of Deliberative Democracy” — and a best-selling book on baseball titled “Men at Work.”

    Granted, I have tuned out most of BIG media’s news analysts and relied on my own research for the Truth (in news) gaining confidence along the way in few opinion makers, one of them is Charles Krauthammer. Happy to hear, George Will is joining Fox. Although, I haven’t been a Will’s fan, I believe there is a chance for lively, intelligent, in depth discussions between these two. Looking forward to watching this interesting dynamic unfold on the Fox channel.

    We rewatched Spielberg’s “Lincoln” tonight. The question mulling through my mind for those two and a half hours was- ‘How did America’s political system become so disengaged from it’s lofty beginnings to today’s universally corrupted system under the Obama administration?’ The brilliant quotes authored by Abraham Lincoln in the mid 1800s stand alone to this day, as true as they were. the day he said them. Frightening, more than tragic, how far in the last five years this country has fallen away from the ideals set long ago by America’s former presidents. Beginning with Washington, America’s presidents served as the artisans of the first democracy, molding and shaping a value system of rules ie. ‘American Values’- We Stood for Something- Freedom and Justice/
    The Founders carefully crafted a Constitution defining the very structure of our democratic government. And The Declaration of Independence intentionally steeped in the belief that every citizen born in this country is endowed with an inherent, God given inalienable right to Freedom Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

    Access and read the Happiness link… an interesting find that crossed my path tonight as it always happens when you’re researching something else.. and to boot, the subject matter relates to an 18th century Ulsterman… an Irish reverend and philosopher, Francis Hutcheson.

  16. October 2, 2013 12:09 pm


    Armstrong explains. “He says they are considering going ahead with the trip even if the government is still on shutdown, but when he called the parks service, he was told they would face arrest. “I said, are you kidding me? You’re going to arrest a 90/91-year-old veteran from seeing his memorial? If it wasn’t for them it wouldn’t be there. She said, ‘That’s correct sir.'”

    When Armstrong asked for her name, he says she did not give it to him and then promptly hung up the phone.


    Obama admin. knew about WWII veterans’ request and rejected it


    The White House and the Department of the Interior rejected a request from Rep. Steven Palazzo’s office to have World War II veterans visit the World War II memorial in Washington, the Mississippi Republican told The Daily Caller Tuesday.

    Palazzo helped the veterans commit an act of civil disobedience against the Park Service Tuesday, when the heroes stormed through barricades around the closed memorial. (Related: WWII vets storm closed memorial as GOP congressman reportedly distracts cops)

    The veterans were visiting the memorial as part of Honor Flight, a non-profit that provides veterans free transport to the nation’s capital to visit the memorials to the wars they fought in.

    “We got the heads up that they will be barricaded and specifically asked for an exception for these heroes,” Palazzo told TheDC. “We were denied and told, ‘It’s a government shutdown, what do you expect?’ when we contacted the liaison for the White House.”

    Palazzo’s office was in touch with the heads of the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior and the Capitol Police. He says all these officials rejected his request to allow the veterans, many of whom are octogenarians and some of whom are in poor health, to attend.

    Palazzo, a Gulf War Marine veteran who has participated in all five of the Honor Flights, blames the White House for making it harder on veterans and playing politics. “At first I thought it was a huge bureaucratic oversight,” Palazzo told The Daily Caller, “but having talked with the officials I can’t help but think this was politically motivated. Honor Flights, which bring WWII veterans to the nation’s memorials, are planned a year in advance and cost anywhere between $80,000 to $100,000. How low can you get with playing politics over our nation’s veterans?”

    In a statement, Palazzo noted that he is introducing legislation to ensure that all Honor Flights are granted access this week. “This is an open-air memorial that the public has 24/7 access to under normal circumstances — even when Park Service personnel aren’t present,” Palazzo said in the statement. “It actually requires more effort and expense to shut out these veterans from their Memorial than it would to simply let them through. My office has been in touch with NPS officials and the Administration to try to resolve this issue.”

    Follow Charles on Twitter

    read the comments @ :

    Yes, Team Obama/Jarrett, LIKE the SHUTDOWN because they get a sick sense of satisfaction seeing Americans hurting… They rationalize it’s perfectly acceptable to arm Syrian rebels paid for with our money for the ouster of Assad but they feel War Veterans DO NOT deserve the respect accorded them by their president and his staff to visit a WWII Memorial bought and paid for with their own dollars. Something is definitely wrong with this picture…

  17. October 2, 2013 1:10 pm

    Perhaps this old news report has something to do with it? Could be at times you felt Obama’s behavior odd for a sitting (heck any former) American president. This report brought to the fore by Pat Dollard as recently as last year may answer your questions or at worst, pose more questions you have thought about over the last five years wondering ‘why now’ with this president is our country cumbling and falling apart?

    Why are things the way they are? Why so much violence, racism and chaos in our country.. Why has our economy stagnated to the point of almost shifting backwards into reverse? WHY are there NO JOBS?

    I doubt this report received any attention back in 08, as Big Media covered for Obama since the day he announced.. However, the information is verified reliable and footnoted from public and private sources…


    “Bombshell Obama Vetting: 1979 Newspaper Article By Valerie Jarrett Father-In-Law Reveals Start Of Muslim Purchase Of U.S. Presidency”


    Saudi King

    Why would Muslim oil billionaires finance and develop controlling relationships with black college students? Well, like anyone else, they would do it for self-interest. And what would their self-interest be? We all know the top two answers to that question: 1. a Palestinian state and 2. the advancement of Islam in America. The idea then was to advance blacks who would facilitate these two goals to positions of power in the Federal government, preferably, of course, the Presidency. And why would the Arabs target blacks in particular for this job? Well, for the same reason the early communists chose them as their vanguard for revolution (which literally means “change”) in America. Allow me to quote Trotsky, in 1939: “The American Negroes, for centuries the most oppressed section of American society and the most discriminated against, are potentially the most revolutionary element of the population. They are designated by their historical past to be, under adequate leadership, the very vanguard of the proletarian revolution.” Substitute the word “Islam” for the words “the proletarian revolution,” and you most clearly get the picture, as Islam is a revolutionary movement just like communism is. (Trivia: it is from this very quote that communist Van Jones takes his name. Van is short for vanguard. He was born “Anthony”). In addition, long before 1979, blacks had become the vanguard of the spread of Islam in America, especially in prisons.

    Interestingly, in context with the fact that this article was written by her father-in-law, Valerie Jarrett has an unusual amount of influence over Obama (along with personal security that may be even better than his, another unusual and intriguing bit of business here). And equally interesting is that Obama, who may have been a beneficiary of this Muslim money, and may now be in this Muslim debt, has aggressively pursued both of the Muslim agendas I cited above. And, also equally interesting, is that Obama has paid a king’s ransom for court ordered seals of any such records of this potential financing of his college education, and perhaps, of other of his expenses.

    Lastly, it’s very important to note that the main source for the article is Khalid Mansour, “the same lawyer who allegedly helped arrange for the entrance of Barack Obama into Harvard Law School in 1988.” (Valerie Jarrett, by the way, was born in Iran. The one country protected by Obama from the sweep of the Arab Spring.) Now all of this may seem sensational, but let’s face facts. What makes it most disturbing is that not only is it all logical, but it suddenly makes a lot of previously confusing things make perfect sense. – Pat Dollard

    Excerpted from Daily Interlake: Searching old newspapers is one of my favorite pastimes, and I have tried to use them many times to shed light on current events — or to inform readers about how the past is prologue to our very interesting present-day quandaries.

    Recently, I came across a syndicated column from November 1979 that seemed to point 30 years into the future toward an obscure campaign issue that arose briefly in the 2008 presidential campaign.

    Though by no means definitive, it provides an interesting insight, at least, into how Chicago politics intersected with the black power movement and Middle Eastern money at a certain point in time. Whether it has any greater relevance to the 2012 presidential campaign, I will allow the reader to decide. In order to accomplish that, I will also take the unusual step of providing footnotes and the end of this column so that each of you can do the investigative work for yourself.

    The column itself had appeared in the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Evening Independent of Nov. 6, but it was the work of a veteran newspaperman who at the time was working for the prestigious Chicago Tribune and whose work was syndicated nationally. (1)

    So far as I know, this 1979 column has not previously been brought to light, but it certainly should be because it broke some very interesting news about the “rumored billions of dollars the oil-rich Arab nations are supposed to unload on American black leaders and minority institutions.” The columnist quoted a black San Francisco lawyer who said, “It’s not just a rumor. Aid will come from some of the Arab states.”

    Well, if anyone would know, it would have been this lawyer — Donald Warden, who had helped defend OPEC in an antitrust suit that year and had developed significant ties with the Saudi royal family since becoming a Muslim and taking the name Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour.

    Al-Mansour told Jarrett that he had presented the “proposed special aid program to OPEC Secretary-General Rene Ortiz” in September 1979, and that “the first indications of Arab help to American blacks may be announced in December.” Maybe so, but I looked high and wide in newspapers in 1979 and 1980 for any other stories about this aid package funded by OPEC and never found it verified.


    You would think that a program to spend “$20 million per year for 10 years to aid 10,000 minority students each year, including blacks, Arabs, Hispanics, Asians and native Americans” would be referred to somewhere other than one obscure 1979 column, but I haven’t found any other word of it.

    Maybe the funding materialized, maybe it didn’t, but what’s particularly noteworthy is that this black Islamic lawyer who “for several years [had] urged the rich Arab kingdoms to cultivate stronger ties to America’s blacks by supporting black businesses and black colleges and giving financial help to disadvantaged students” was also the same lawyer who allegedly helped arrange for the entrance of Barack Obama into Harvard Law School in 1988.

    That tale had surfaced in 2008 when Barack Obama was a candidate for president and one of the leading black politicians in the country — Percy Sutton of New York — told an interviewer on a Manhattan TV news show that he had been introduced to Obama “by a friend who was raising money for him. The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas. He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.” (2)

    This peculiar revelation engendered a small hubbub in 2008, but was quickly dismissed by the Obama campaign as the ditherings of a senile old man. I don’t believe President Obama himself ever denied the story personally, and no one has explained how Sutton came up with this elaborate story about Khalid al-Mansour if it had no basis in fact, and in any case al-Mansour no longer denies it. (3)

    Back in 2008, while actually supporting Hillary Clinton in the New York primary, Percy Sutton was interviewed on TV and said that he thought Barack Obama was nonetheless quite impressive. He also revealed that he had first heard about Obama 20 years previously in a letter where al-Mansour wrote, “there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?”

    Sutton concluded in the interview, “I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly.”

    Until now, there really has been no context within which to understand the Sutton story or to buttress it as a reliable account other than the reputation of Sutton himself as one of the top leaders of the black community in Manhattan — himself a noted attorney, businessman and politician. But the new discovery of the 1979 column that established Khalid al-Mansour’s interest in creating a fund to give “financial help to disadvantaged students” does provide a clue that he might indeed — along with his patron, Arab Prince Alwaleed bin Talal — have taken an interest in the “genius” Barack Obama.

    It also might be considered more than coincidence that the author of that 1979 newspaper column was from Chicago, where Barack Obama settled in 1986 a few years after his stint at Columbia University. It is certainly surprising that the author of that column was none other than Vernon Jarrett, the future (and later former) father-in-law of Valerie Jarrett, who ultimately became the consigliatore of the Obama White House.

    It is also noteworthy that Vernon Jarrett was one of the best friends and a colleague of Frank Marshall Davis, the former Chicago journalist and lifelong communist who moved to Hawaii in the late 1940s and years later befriended Stanley and Madelyn Dunham and their daughter Stanley Ann, the mother of Barack Obama. (4)

    And to anyone who has the modicum of a spark of curiosity, it is surely intriguing that Frank Davis took an active role in the rearing of young Barack from the age of 10 until he turned 18 and left Hawaii for his first year of college at Occidental College in Los Angeles. (5)

    It is also at least suggestive that Obama began that college education as a member of the highly international student body of Occidental College in 1979, the same year when Vernon Jarrett was touting the college aid program being funded by OPEC and possibly Prince Alwaleed. The fact that President Obama has studiously avoided releasing records of his college years is suggestive also, but has no evidentiary value in the present discussion. (6)

    The nature of Vernon Jarrett’s relationship to Khalid al-Mansour is likewise uncertain, but it is very likely they had known each other as leaders of the black civil-rights movement for many years. Under his previous name of Donald Warden, al-Mansour had founded the African American Association in the Bay Area in the early 1960s. He had also helped inspire the Black Panther Party through his association with black-power leaders such as Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. Seale, of course, had a famous association with Chicago later, when he was part of the Chicago Eight charged with conspiracy and inciting to riot at the Democratic National Convention in 1968. (7)

    In any case, it doesn’t matter if Vernon Jarrett and Khalid al-Mansour had a personal relationship or not. For some reason, al-Mansour had used Jarrett as the messenger to get out the word about his efforts to funnel Arab oil money to black students and minority colleges at about the same time that Barack Obama began his college career. That doesn’t mean either Jarrett or al-Mansour knew Obama at that time, but eight years later when Obama was a rising star in Chicago, a friend of Bill Ayers and Valerie Jarrett, it is much more likely that he did indeed have the assistance of very important people in his meteoric rise. The words of Percy Sutton about what al-Mansour told him regarding Obama certainly have the ring of truth:

    “His introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends back there… Would you please write a letter in support of him? (That’s before Obama decided to run.) … and he interjected the advice that Obama had passed the requirements, had taken and passed the requirements necessary to get into Harvard and become president of the Law Review. That’s before he ever ran for anything. And I wrote a letter in support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them that I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly…” (2)

    What possible significance could all this have? We may never know, but Vernon Jarrett, back in 1979, thought that OPEC’s intention to fund black and minority education would have huge political ramifications. As Jarrett wrote:

    “The question of financial aid from the Arabs could raise a few extremely interesting questions both inside and outside the black community. If such contributions are large and sustained, the money angle may become secondary to the sociology and politics of such an occurrence.” (1)

    He was, of course, right.

    As Jarrett suggests, any black institutions and presumably individuals who became beholden to Arab money might be expected to continue the trend of American “new black advocacy for a homeland for the Palestinians” and presumably for other Islamic and Arabic interests in the Middle East. For that reason, if for no other, the question of how President Obama’s college education was funded is of considerably more than academic interest.

    Percy Sutton on Obama and Khalid Mansour

  18. October 2, 2013 1:47 pm

    Remember Dr. Ben Carson? The lovely man giving a speech on the status of and publicly criticizing ObamaCare while the president was seated next to him as he spoke at the podium? Oh, well! Valjar did say: “All who criticized the president’s policies before the election would receive pay back after the election!”

    Ben Carson’s Obama Critique Prompts IRS Visit


    Former Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon Ben Carson reportedly got a surprise visit from the IRS after he sharply criticized Washington public policy, including Obamacare, at a gathering that included President Barack Obama.

    Carson told business leaders and elected officials in Alabama on Monday night that his first-ever “encounter” with the agency followed his fiery speech at a National Prayer Breakfast in February, Yellow Hammer News reported.

    Dr. Ben Carson: ‘I had my first encounter with the #IRS’ after prayer breakfast with Obama via @YHPolitics

    — Douglas Ernst (@douglasernst) October 1, 2013

    The February speech went viral on YouTube because the biting critique of major White House policies, including taxation and Obamacare, was calmly delivered with Obama sitting just a few feet away, The Daily Caller reported Tuesday.

    Although the speech made him a conservative darling, it apparently earned him a little attention from the taxman as well. The embattled agency came under attack just three months later, in May, when it was accused of singling out tea party groups for scrutiny.

    Carson never divulged the outcome of his visit from the IRS.

    The scandal-scarred IRS, however, continues to be very much on the minds of Americans, a new poll showed.

    According to Rasmussen’s survey, most Americans think the IRS broke the law by targeting tea party groups for harassment, but few expect it to be punished.

    Fifty-three percent think the IRS broke the law by targeting the tea party and other conservative groups, like the voter-integrity organization True The Vote; 24 percent disagreed. But only 17 percent said it is even somewhat likely that anyone will be charged, while 74 percent said criminal charges are unlikely.

    Veteran IRS official Lois Lerner retired last month amid congressional investigations into the conservative targeting by the taxman.

  19. October 2, 2013 3:55 pm

    OBAMA’S SHOWING HIS TEETH! HE HATES AMERICA, AMERICANS especially the military. Those who have fought in wars and those still fighting and following orders they do not believe in because they do not reflect American values.

    Obama Administration Decided to Block Access to Memorials

    by Mike Flynn

    The Obama Administration has decided to block access to public memorials on the National Mall as a result of the government shutdown. Like its decision to end White House tours when the sequester cuts took effect, there is no rational reason for this. The Park Police, nominally in charge of monitoring these spaces, isn’t even effected by the shutdown. Shutting off access to these sites is gratuitous and petulant.

    On Monday, the first day of the government shutdown, a number of WWII veterans showed up at a memorial to their service to find that access had been blocked. The memorial is in a public space and is open 24/7, with almost no oversight from Park Police personnel. (Who, by the way, are exempt from the government shutdown.) The White House was, according to reports, informed of the veterans’ visit and chose to block access.

    Having lived in DC for 18 years, I can tell you, the WWII Memorial is simply an architectural structure in an open public space. There is no official “access” to it. There are no guards. It’s a building in a park. Yet, the Obama Administration tried to block veterans from viewing the public memorial, even after hearing about the planned visit.

    Fortunately, the “greatest generation” was having nothing of this and easily overcame the government barricades. (Do we yet again have to rely on this generation to show the promise of America?)

    On Wednesday, the veterans’ group is planning to visit the Lincoln Memorial, which the Obama Administration has also vowed to close to visitors. I have regularly visited this memorial at one or two in the morning. At those hours, it is a peaceful and reflective place. It is an open space. There is no access that needs to be blocked. It is only by a conscious decision, and a great deal of work, that access would be blocked.

    This is nothing more than a petulant response by the Obama Administration to the government shutdown. Over the next week, more than 500 WWII veterans are expected in DC to visit the memorial dedicated to their sacrifice. If the Park Police again try to erect barricades to this public space, it will be another sign that the Obama Administration has made an affirmative decision to separate itself from the American public.

    Obama chose this pass. He ought to be made to own it.

    Reading the comment section… The Giant is on his feet standing there with both hands on his hips evaluating the situation… hmmm…

  20. October 3, 2013 1:21 pm

    Just when we thought Obama and his political crone’s couldn’t lower the INTEGRITY bar any lower… SURPRISE! “Integrity” at the Obama WH is subterranean, a cesspool of LIES and corruption. He and his minions demonstrate there are no lengths they will not go to for having their way with the American People. Our country is no longer a country governed by a democracy. This is TYRANNY in it’s raw form. Our government is devolving into a Totalitarian system preparing us for a Global takeover by a World government, unofficially called, the (New) United Nations.



    Sen. Dick Durbin gave false facts about his own daughter in Obamacare speech


    Sen. Dick Durbin movingly described his sick child’s preexisting condition as a reason to support Obamacare last week, but the Illinois Democrat neglected to mention that his late daughter was easily covered by existing insurance, and that he used taxpayer money to reward the hospital that treated her.

    Despite her preexisting condition, Christine Durbin, who suffered from a lifelong heart condition and died at age 40 in 2008, was eligible for coverage under existing laws in multiple states, including the senator’s state and the state she ultimately settled in.

    Durbin also neglected to mention that he sent his daughter to one of the best children’s hospitals in the country, to which he earmarked millions of dollars from 2002-2010.

    “I’ve had a situation in my family — a child — who had serious physical problems, who could not have qualified but for group health insurance available to me as a member of Congress,” Durbin said in response to a pointed question to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

    “If I had gone on the open market to buy a policy I’m not sure I could have bought one for my family to cover my child,” said Durbin, who was first elected to Congress in 1982 when his Christine was fourteen.

    In fact, Durbin wasn’t sure about buying a policy on the open market because he never had to, having been a state employee from 1969 to 1982 and a federal employee from 1982 to now. His daughter, Christine, who was born in 1968, never went without the cushy government benefits offered to government workers and their families.

    State law also addressed the problem of individuals in the open market suffering from preexisting conditions. In 1987, Illinois passed the Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan (CHIP, which covered any Illinoisan who could not “obtain individual coverage from private insurance companies because of medical conditions.” Thirty-five other states have similar programs, including Maryland, where Christine ultimately settled.

    Durbin also sent his daughter to the very expensive Children’s Memorial Hospital for care. Durbin was able to pay Children’s Memorial Hospital back with U.S. taxpayers’ money, giving the hospital over $650,000 in just one earmark in 2002.

    “This new state of the art facility will enhance Children’s Hospital’s reputation as one of America’s best pediatric hospitals,” Durbin told the Chicago Tribune in 2012, at the opening of a new 23-story building.

    Managed by the politically-connected Crown family, Children’s Memorial Hospital is one of the hospitals that has received the most federal earmarks of any hospital in the country, having received millions from Durbin and then-Sen. Barack Obama.

    Durbin pays off the hospital with your money.

  21. October 4, 2013 3:18 am

    Ron Paul: “The Country Is Bankrupt… The People Are Being Bamboozled”

    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/02/2013

    “The American people are being bamboozled into believing that you have to keep spending for ever,” Ron Paul exclaims, as “neither side is truly looking for spending cuts.” As he explains they all know that increasing spending is all that can maintain the status quo. In this brief CNBC clip, Paul says playing the blame game is ignorant of the reality that both sides are “rigid with bad ideas,” dismissing Obama’s ‘faction’ comments. For a glimpse at the chaos underlying the status quo (that is being exposed this week), Paul blasts that “it is a philosophy of government that is to blame; Keynesianism, Militarism, and Interventionism, and the funny-money system that we use. All that has come together and the country is bankrupt and nobody wants to amid it.”

    “Why in the world can’t the people have an option to opt-out?” is the middle ground possibility that Paul suggests…

    “While more are waking up to it (especially in light of the non-essential services furloughs currently), there is still an appetite for big government – people are afraid to give up on it.”

    The Democrats are just as “rigid” as the Republicans.. “They are rigid with bad ideas too in that “deficits don’t matter, the government has to spend, and the government has to take care of us, and you should print money when you need it.”

    Paul goes on to discuss Gold “all central banks work together – they collude”

    .. Moral convictions, “right or wrong”, and “the only thing that really counts is what the American people believe the role of government should be… and if deficits don’t matter, it will not be a shutdown of government but a breakdown of government that occurs”

    I agree with this commentator:

    “It sure feels like the beginning of a new era in DC, seeing as we all know everybodys cards now. There is a new group in town who stand on principle, who won’t back down and won’t be bought off with favors, and all the rest of the usual prostitutes who it is simply a matter of haggling over their price. Get your popcorn ready. The default is simply a matter of timing anyway, who in their right mind thinks all that is getting paid back. It has not trickled down to mainstreet anyway, it is all a matter of will we keep shoving our debt in Wall Streets feeding trough. When you are broke, it is awfully hard to get any brokerer. The same cannot be said for our overlords.

    Here we are, right back where we started with Thomas Jefferson (sought a republic) and Alexander Hamilton (sought a monarchy with private central bank). This is why the NY times writes pieces like this:

    Demonizing Thomas Jefferson

    and Talking up Alexander Hamilton

    Alexander Hamilton worked hard for the banks. This argument is brought to the forefront yet again, only growing out of it is now impossible.

    And here is the ‘Chicago Plan’ from the IMF to do the worlds largest debt for equity swap once the pile of debt gets big enough. And low and behold the senator from Chicago is doing his damnedest to build that pile of debt.

    ***The gist is this, we are selling our sovereignty off to the banks,*** who at the appropriate time will offer the worlds biggest debt for equity swap, where we trade our sovereignty, our roads, our national lands, in trade for our debt. And then it will be complete, just as the forefathers warned we will wind up homeless and penniless (eventually) on the ground our men died to preserve for us. Wake up people!


    To be clear…. This isn’t really a “WE” thing…The selling of America is being done by our bought and paid for politicians led by the Obama Administration. Unfortunately, by the time enough people realize this and plan to gear up to do something about it, it will be too late!

  22. October 4, 2013 3:43 am


    Marc Levin defends our Veterans…

  23. Anonymous permalink
    October 4, 2013 2:38 pm

    The cheap tricks of the game.. ( for hurting the American people)

    The games politicians play: Barack Obama is having a lot of fun using the government shutdown to squeeze the public in imaginative ways. The point of the shutdown game is to see who can squeeze hardest, make the most pious speech and listen for the applause. It’s a variation on the grade-school ritual of “you show me yours, and I’ll show you mine.”

    President Obama is not a bad poker player, but the man with all the chips always starts with the advantage (and he gets all the aces). He has closed Washington down as tight as he dares, emphasizing the trivial and the petty in making life as inconvenient as he can for the greatest number. It’s all in a noble cause, of course. Access to most of the memorials is limited, and often in curious ways. The Lincoln Memorial is easy to reach, with the streets around it remaining open. But the Martin Luther King Memorial is made difficult to reach, relegating it, you might say, to the back of the bus. Not very nice.

    The Park Service appears to be closing streets on mere whim and caprice. The rangers even closed the parking lot at Mount Vernon, where the plantation home of George Washington is a favorite tourist destination. That was after they barred the new World War II Memorial on the Mall to veterans of World War II. But the government does not own Mount Vernon; it is privately owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association. The ladies bought it years ago to preserve it as a national memorial. The feds closed access to the parking lots this week, even though the lots are jointly owned with the Mount Vernon ladies. The rangers are from the government, and they’re only here to help.

    .“It’s a cheap way to deal with the situation,” an angry Park Service ranger in Washington says of the harassment. “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”

    The Republicans, fighting with smaller-bore weaponry, keep trying to get some things reopened with carefully targeted legislation. The Senate, under the thumbs of Sen. Harry Reid and the White House, refuses to budge from the trivial and the petty. It says here that Harry Reid’s critics, and they are legion, should give the guy a break. No man in Washington is under the pressure he is, and it doesn’t seem quite cricket to do that to an old man, even one who deserves it.

    Harry is at the breaking point, weary from exhausting his thesaurus for synonyms for “arsonist” and “terrorist” and “pillager.” Everyone could see the cracks in his exchange with Dana Bash, a reporter for CNN, who asked why, if he is concerned about children with cancer who are unable to enter clinical trials for new drugs because Mr. Obama shut down the National Institutes of Health, why stifle Republican attempts to grant a little relief?

    “If you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?” the reporter asked. “Why would we want to do that?” Mr. Reid snapped back. “I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force Base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own. This is — to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless.”

    Over the next two days, Mr. Reid tried to take back, change, adjust and recalibrate his remarks. It’s all John Boehner’s fault. The senator cares not just about the National Institutes of Health, but the Centers for Disease Control, too. The senator likes babies. In fact, he’s quite a stud. And he thinks Dana Bash is “a fine reporter.”

    “Listen, I gave a speech on the [Senate] floor, talking about babies, 30 babies. I have 16 of my own grandchildren, and five children.” So suffer the little children, and they will inherit the kingdom of heaven; they just can’t come unto the Senate while Harry stands in the door. (If what happens in Las Vegas is supposed to stay in Las Vegas, how did Harry get out?)

    Frustration turned violent Thursday, when a (mentally depressed) woman rammed her car into a barricade at the White House and then led 20 police cruisers up Pennsylvania Avenue to take a run at the Capitol. Shots were fired. It was not quite clear what she was mad about, but there’s no shortage of prospects. No targets of her rage were hurt, though the cops killed her. (an unarmed woman with a child in the car?) It was an unhappy third day of Obamacare. (not really- he was sitting for a portrait of himself)

    Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.

    Read more:
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

  24. October 9, 2013 1:33 am

    Watch and listen to Obama’s words as he explains how HC is in ‘crisis’ and how beneficial the HCA will be for the Middle Class…. ( particularly from min 10:54 on this video ) interview with former president Bill Clinton…


    Now, read this report as the rollout of ObamaCare becomes every American’s reality:

    Rage Building Over Barack Obama’s Middle Class LIE…

    Barack Obama repeated and repeated OFTEN the claim that “typical” American families would see their annual healthcare costs reduced by “up to $2500 a year.” Those who have been able to get onto the miserably inept “Affordable Healthcare Act” website are finding out a very different reality – Barack Obama lied, and he lied BIG TIME. (ht/Ulsterman

    Obama Sold Voters Bill of Goods on Health Care

    As a candidate for president, Barack Obama sold his signature universal health care plan with the promise that it would “cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

    Now that the exchanges are open for business, people who already have individual coverage have something new not to like: sticker shock. The Affordable Care Act isn’t affordable after all.

    Last week, I began hearing from readers whose individual policy premiums are going up, not down. A local architect sent me a notice he received from Kaiser Permanente informing him that his individual coverage will increase by $199.95 per month, or 78.9 percent. When he added his two sons, the percentage increase was even greater.

    A freelance journalist told me she made $98,000 last year. But she and her retired husband, both 51, wouldn’t pay $7,200 in premiums for high-deductible coverage. It’s cheaper to pay the fine, she said. Besides, she added, “we’re healthy.”

    A reader wrote that her premiums will rise considerably, and she doesn’t think she qualifies for a subsidy.

    It is becoming increasingly clear that while poor working families will have access to their own health care policies at affordable rates — affordable because they are subsidized — middle-class and affluent people stand to pay more. Forget that $2,500 savings.

    …With his slick, deceitful sales pitch about lowering people’s premiums, Obama now has to contend with voter expectations. Democrats sold this package as a big bonanza for American families who have been squeezed too hard. Now many are finding out not only that there is no $2,500 in savings but also that instead, surprise, their premiums just went up.

    The administration won’t say how many people have enrolled. Wonder why.

    Voters never should have believed that Washington could offer more health care benefits to more people and that it would end up saving families thousands of dollars. It was too good to be true, and now the bill is coming due.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: