It was brought to our attention that many of the findings and subsequent behaviors, in fact, have come true in America. We have gone to such lengths as using our Founding Fathers and the people of their generation as motivators. Moreover, we have used articles from “What would the Founders Do?” to illuminate what could be the potential downfalls within the American psyche if the government continued to disrespect the rights of every citizen and non-citizen in the country whilst running their ship lawlessly.
Certainly without hesitation we are implying that when the most powerful person in the world – the President – insidiously, arrogantly, and with little matter at all squashes the revered Founding documents of the United States most notably the U.S. Constitution and the laws thereto we believe that the citizenry experiences a form of cognitive dissonance.
The term cognitive dissonance is used to describe the feeling of discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs. When there is a discrepancy between beliefs and behaviors, something must change in order to eliminate or reduce the dissonance.
In other words the entire notion of cognitive dissonance is summed up in its definition. “As a state of psychological conflict or anxiety resulting from a contradiction between a people’s simultaneously held beliefs or attitudes.”
As children we are taught to respect our government. Moreover, we need to respect the leaders and their leadership tactics. We are also taught to love one another as we would love them. We are furthermore taught not to talk in church on Sunday’s, respect adults, and get the “best education” you can get.
Imagine the dissonance going on now when one of the most powerful organizations in the world – the very organization that manipulates your money as well as has the power to make one’s life be in danger or certainly impearled with the thoughts of hard jail time or loss of income, does exactly that – completely disregards your natural and civil rights amongst other things in order to make you see and do as they do.
Cognitive dissonance is concerned with an incompatibility in the relationship between two cognitions. This theory, first proposed by Leon Festinger, states that people need to maintain consistency among their beliefs, attitudes, and behavior. Contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, in order to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions and bring them back into a consistent relationship. (Please see further reading, click here.)
In other words – how are we supposed to respect a person who breaks the very rule of law by which you have been raised to accept? It gets worse – how are we supposed to follow a person or many people who knowingly and with all indignity don’t maintain the laws on the books now – such as the Attorney General of the US Eric Holder; look at the ridiculousness of the majority of those in the Senate; and we could always just charge the House of Representatives as condoning the likes of Charles Rangel or Nancy Pelosi.
But let’s face it here gang – most of those in leadership positions today don’t follow any consummated rules unless it is their own or a spin-off of someone who is higher in rank. Today at the Gallop Polling data center showed again where Obama’s approval rating has dropped – again. Albeit as for me I stand completely resolute in my own justifications – Barack Obama in order to have or save any.form of a legacy should resign, retire, or abdicate the Office of the President – Now!
We believe that the majority of our nation is in the process of some form of cognitive dissonance. We evidence this by identifying certain patterns of behavior, the well-being of the people, and a close look at what is causing the disorder within the society.
From 2009 to 2011, legendary guitar company Gibson Guitars was raided multiple times by federal regulators for “violating” the Lacey Act. Though the Lacey Act was originally passed to promote environmental conservation, Gibson’s guitars didn’t use endangered wood or put any animals at risk.
In fact, an obscure section of the law was abused to penalize the company for failing to comply with an Indian regulation that requires that the wood be manufactured into fretboards by workers in India, rather than in the United States.
Essentially, the US government conducted an armed raid on Gibson, shut down its factories, seized its property without due process, and then put the company through legal proceedings that costed hundreds of thousands of dollars, caused millions in damages, and led to widespread confusion among musicians as to which of their guitars they can take on international flights.
Now, in the wake of revelations about an IRS scandal in which Tea Party groups were unfairly targeted for additional scrutiny based on their political beliefs, Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz is alleging that his company was targeted for the same type of corrupt rationale, specifically Juszkiewicz’ political donations to Republican politicians.
However, today whilst reading over at the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) I came across this particular article that raised a few hairs on my back.
“Gibson Guitars has finally faced the music. After nearly a year of crying foul, running to the Tea Party for political backing, seeking audience with every possible media outlet and hiring a DC lobbying firm to change the law under which it was being investigated, Gibson Guitars has acknowledged that it did, in fact, import illegal wood in violation of the Lacey Act.”
If for no other reason – when the EIA writes publicly on their government website that the management at Gibson Guitars went “crying foul, running to the Tea Party for political backing…” also hiring a DC lobbying firm showed me beyond a reasonable doubt that many were targeted as a ploy by the Obama administration to victimize political opponents.
The conclusion on August 6 of the highly public investigation into Gibson’s trade practices was a watershed moment for the 2008 Lacey Act amendments, and for similar new laws in consumer nations designed to curb illegal logging and associated trade. Under the terms of a Criminal Enforcement Agreement with the US Department of Justice (DOJ), Gibson has agreed to pay over $600,000 in penalties, including the forfeiture of illegally imported rare wood from the protected forests of Madagascar.
Almost two years after Gibson Guitars was raided for violating an obscure law, Representative Marsha Blackburn (R–TN) is demanding a full explanation:
“The recent scandals surrounding this administration raise a number of questions about who they choose to target and why. The arrogance and lack of transparency displayed by this President and his cabinet officials in events such as the raids on Gibson Guitar and the IRS targeting of conservative groups show a complete disregard for the rule of law.”
As for the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) I almost could not contain myself with good humor after reading this proudly displayed on their homepage.
“The Environmental Investigation Agency’s Washington, DC office is a registered non-profit, tax-exempt charity under section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Donations are tax deductible to the extent allowed by U.S. law.”
In September 2011, Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee requested answers from the Departments of Justice and Interior, but the Obama Administration responded with no real information about the raid itself. This has been the standard when dealing with Obama’s Administration.
With recent scandals surrounding the Administration, a series of excessive government overreach has been unveiled. It’s no surprise Blackburn is revisiting the Gibson raids in an effort to keep President Obama accountable. Let’s hope this time he has some answers.
Scandals…what! Accountability Issues
Let’s look at simple accountability; and how it relates to transparency. For the longest period of time we have been writing about accountability on this site so much that it is the biggest “TAG” we have. Where we stand there is more than duty, honor, and trust when it comes down to holding public office in this country.
Anytime that a person – regardless of who they work for – accepts a position of leadership they also are accepting responsibility, liability, culpability, and answerability for issues that may occur in their charter of responsibility.
This is not a new concept. There is a reason why the POTUS carries the title of Commander-in-Chief. Most of all dimensions of government have been set up with accountability added in. Let us never forget the cliché, “That’s why you get the big bucks…”
Therefore knowing that accountability is part of the job what exactly does this mean. According to our dictionary being held accountable means taking the responsibility to somebody or for something. Furthermore, accountability lists the amplitude to explain what it is that has happened and every reason why.
Please join me in making the most heinous, make-shift accountable people, in the world known and let’s ask for some accountability.
We would be shirking in our own responsibilities if we did not at least mention Ann Coulter and what she pronounces in most all of her best-selling books. Just as in the way she describes how liberals will change (or try to change) the subject being debated to something that will better suit their needs and agenda than the original topic.
Let’s just have a look at some specifics using Ms. Coulter’s theory. The left has come up with the illusion of scandals that have been created and nurtured by those on the right. How could this possibly be?
The notion behind a scandal is a situation or event that causes public outrage or censure. Taking this definition just a bit further we find that a scandal is caused by public outrage as a consequence of a particular event. All of these illusions, situations, that cause public outrage as a consequence of an event that ends up being malicious talk; however, we would argue even more so that the malicious talk comes from one of the consequences of abusing a people’s trust.
So then who started all of the Benghazi-gate fiasco in the first place? Well I can assure you it wasn’t anyone from the right who concocted a story about an eight minute video that insulted Islam. Furthermore, I not going to try and make you believe that it was me who believed that the infamous “Talking Points” used by our Ambassador to the United Nations, Ms. Susan Rice, in a mass media situation. Just so you know those “Talking Points” were edited several times by the CIA, FBI, and members in the White House.
Therefore using a line of common sense how much of those talking points were used in the public disgrace offered up by Eric Holder and the Justice Department for gaining access to private information of James Rosen?
And no! Hell no it is not considered piling on when we find out that the nation’s keeper of the money has been targeting not only organizations but individuals as well. This is a matter that caused the resignation of President Nixon.
Now then…back to good old fashioned accountability. Enough of the “I don’t recall, or I don’t know” a la Eric Holder and back to Fast & Furious. Now we have people within the IRS saying the exact same thing albeit they are still being paid and receiving promotions.
There’s no chance President Barack Obama knew nothing of the IRS targeting conservative groups, says political pundit Dick Morris. Why else would IRS Commissioner Douglas Schulman have visited the White House at least once a week?
“The incredible frequency of the White House visits — essentially weekly — indicate that Obama must have been deeply involved with the inner workings of the audits and harassment of conservative groups,” Morris writes on his website, DickMorris.com.
Morris asks what other reason would have brought Schulman to the White House 157 times during the period that groups with “tea party,” “patriot” and other conservative buzzwords in their names were being targeted for extra scrutiny.
As for our staff here at The Contemplative Thinker stand in basic agreement with Mr. Morris.
One has to understand that (1- this is an extraordinary amount of visits to the White House…for any person for any reason. (2- We feel uncomfortable that the POTUS would have this kind of time for anyone or anything. (3-Insofar as Benghazi-gate was an all out effort to deceive the American people and the world, collectively with flying Green Cards being issued at will, we feel that the President intentionally set these actions going so as to shield other attempts at voter fraud and of course, the campaign process.
It is important to note that during that period of time July to November 2012 that the President was spreading a lot of increase tax information just about in any way to disrupt the average American taxpayer.
Interestingly Mr. Morris uses an agency chief scenario “Not ObamaCare. Not without having (Health and Human Services) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in attendance, you wouldn’t,” Morris says. “About Treasury issues? Deficit reduction? Not without Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.”
The reason, Morris says, is that Obama was following the IRS actions with an “obsessive, personal involvement.”
The Citizens United ruling galvanized Obama into action, Morris says, and “tapped so deeply into his psyche that he was determined personally to supervise the castration of the wealthy people and groups whose access to the political system was opened wide by the U.S. Supreme Court.”
We believe that this has been the agenda of the Obama White House since. We are not sure that there has ever been another President in history that has colluded so much against wealthy people whilst holding envy toward those who have money. Furthermore, this POTUS has ignored any and all standards of the U.S. Constitution when it has pleased him.
Schulman held a subordinate, non-policy making position, Morris said, so to have seen him 157 times, Obama had to have been “a president on a mission.”
The scandal is not one of a rogue agency, Morris says, but one of a rogue president using the agency for his personal purposes. “This action clearly indicates an instrument of vengeance, or self-defense, and of political influence.”
President Richard Nixon was doomed, Morris says, when the public realized that his own paranoia had infected his entire administration.
“When Chuck Colson led the plumbers unit to investigate leaks and to use the IRS to terrify and intimidate his enemies, we realized that he was operating as Nixon’s man doing Nixon’s bidding based on the needs of Nixon’s psyche,” he writes.
A little noticed provision of the Obama health law is likely to become a big roadblock to immigration reform. Obamacare makes legal immigrants eligible for subsidized private health plans on the exchanges, regardless of how recently they arrived.
The Gang of Eight immigration plan is expected to double the number of legal immigrants coming into the country with permanent visas over the next decade. That would add at least $100 billion to the cost of Obamacare health plan subsidies, depending on how many new arrivals aren’t covered through an employer.
Actually this started off for us by a minute or so public service announcement (PSA) provided by Fox News. The PSA covers a short story of a 50 year old woman who swam across the Rio Grande River from Mexico to Texas and then she’s relocated to the state of Florida.
The individual is now collecting about $240.00 per month in food stamps; lives in government housing, collects a minimum of $700.00 per month from the Social Security Administration; and, her navigator states that she receives some assistance for Medicaid and other incidentals.
So naturally those of us who saw this PSA which after review is a topical advertisement for State Inspired Insurance Exchanges and the new “Navigators” who are placed in charge of illegal immigrants making the transfer from illegal status to legal residents.
We broke this scheme of arrangement down to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or the medium in which the entitlement of Food Stamps is funded. (Please read this sections article.)
The Affordable Care Act includes a variety of provisions designed to promote accountability, affordability, quality, and accessibility in the health care system. Yet, that’s not all it does… The Affordable Care Act creates new competitive private health insurance marketplaces – called the Affordable Insurance Exchanges or “Exchanges” – that will provide millions of Americans with opportunities.
Exchanges will help individuals and small employers shop for, select, and enroll in qualified health plans. Exchanges will also assist eligible individuals to receive premium tax credits and cost sharing reductions or help individuals enroll in other Federal and state health care programs such as Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Although through a pinnacle campaign promise – those of a different working man’s Washington, no back room deals, and the campaign was alleged to support the most transparent government in modern history – we ask you have you received transparency or the complete lack thereof with a monstrous executive branch agency targeting conservative and who knows what other industries as in the case of the IRS.
Additionally, we wonder how many of you were aware of the implications of Obamacare during the health reform’s courtship. Section 1311(i) of the Affordable Care Act requires each Exchange to develop and implement Navigator grant programs. This funding opportunity announcement (FOA) is open to eligible entities and self-employed individuals (see Section 1311(i)(2) of the Affordable Care Act) applying to serve consumers in States with an FFE or State Partnership Exchange.
It seems to be getting deeper and deeper into the dung heap…
The Washington Post is confounded by its own poll. Only 18 percent of Americans support the Gang of Eight’s legalization-first approach to illegal immigration, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll. Yet the Post began its story on the poll with, “Comprehensive immigration reform moves to the Senate floor next week with solid overall support from the public.”
Now hopefully, although doubtful just maybe the Washington Post as well as those 100 elite senators could come to the realization that not only are they sounding extremely stupid but confused as well.
What we find as pathetic is in the notion that one of the nation’s largest and leading newspapers let something so terribly disgusting as a super low percentile factor completely slip through the hands of an editorial staff that many claim has no rivals.
Even more egregious is the reporter had to get it from somewhere – and in this case it was no doubt a member of the Gang of Eight. If we were to look at the congressional approval rating still hovering at a 34 year low, and consider that the members of the Senate and their glorified attitudes of we’ll get it done with blazing speed just slowed down to see what it is the American people want.
Subsequently, that is the problem we are faced with currently. Whilst other agencies of the US government are embarrassing themselves with scandal amid another greater one and still lying about what really happened let’s admit it – from the White House to the Justice Department to the State Department onward to the Internal Revenue Service and wind that up with an Attorney General that can’t keep his fabrications straight on a day-by-day basis.
What we, the American people need to do is to tell these paper-mache blowhards who are allegedly supposed to be representing us – the people – in fact paid by the people to get the cushiest seat for bribing, lying to, or even exhorting members of the various special interest groups.
How does 18 percent translate into “solid overall support”? The Post reporters drew their conclusion based on 58 percent of poll respondents saying they would support “a program giving undocumented immigrants now living in the United States the right to live here legally if they pay a fine and meet other requirements.”
That is even worse! There is clear evidence that reporters should not be involved in surveying or polling in any way – in this case they have responded to an incorrect statement [right to live/remain in the USA legally once fines and fees are met], furthermore, they only cited a little more than half [58 percent] to support a very stupid assertion.
Time for how others feel – this is a great comment that indeed inspired mine as well as over 3600 more at The Washington Post Social Reader comments section:
How ironic that the clueless Washington Post still portrays the immigration bill debate as being between “liberals” and “conservatives”. It’s more like between Washington’s clueless elites and the entire rest of the country that has to do deal with the real world and hard-core concerns about economics and survival, you know, like jobs and wages. That means liberals, conservatives and moderates together. And you wonder why your subscriber base and readership are shrinking so severely?
This corrupt immigration bill would increase non-immigrant guest worker visas so much that American workers, already facing high unemployment, decreased wages and worsening debts from student loans and other factors would be placed in even worse shape. That’s especially the case with the ridiculous H1-B visa which would get massively increased while corporations would have a pass to ignore American workers altogether. That’s also the case with other guest-worker visa types, it’s all about cheap labor. You really think that this is something that liberals or Independents (let alone conservatives) would support?
Maybe wake up one day from your delusional fantasy world, and realize that the 99% of Americans don’t care about the stupid inside-the-Beltway horse races or politicking. They care about jobs and wages above all else, and this arrogant immigration reform bill is an attack on the basic support structures of American communities. Any politicians, of either party, who support this disgusting bill are dooming their political careers and their private careers once they’re ousted, because they will hounded for such an arrogant attack on American workers.
People do support reasonable immigration policies, which the President can accomplish with Executive Action to better enforce the law. But look at the labor force participation rate, the the U-6, the number of Americans in poverty and using food stamps (hint– they’re all records) and maybe you’ll see why Americans oppose this.
That was brought to you by me, compliments of malagasy.
A recent US News & World Report article set out to unveil the “facts” about food stamps.
What are the so-called “facts”?
For one, the article claims that the food stamps program is not “bloated,” but rather, the surge in participation and spending is a result of the program “doing what it’s supposed to do.”
But what is it “supposed to do”?
Food stamps (or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), as it is now called) were designed to ensure that Americans without the ability to provide for themselves are able to receive basic nutrition. However, application loopholes and policy changes over the past decade or so have allowed recipients to bypass income and asset tests, meaning many people are receiving food stamps that would not have been eligible under the program’s original purposes.
Sound familiar to anyone? Let’s try this one on. During the late 1980s through the 1990s and just about through the first decade of 2000 people were held to fewer circumstances (income and asset tests) that those receiving food stamps today, albeit working with banks on home ownership.
We really don’t care what it is called meaning a recession or the housing bubble exploded. We don’t like to muddy the waters – orders given by politicians to bankers, investment bankers, and those given over to securities transactions – to literally lower the standards when purchasing a home is just plain wrong.
It seems very real and very possible that humankind will go for anything that’s not bolted down. Food stamps, housing, and other entitlements are definitely included. This blatant disrespect for one that uses these hand-outs (for those not needing them) is surely making its way into some kind of culture. One specific culture that we would prefer not to be aligned with.
One of the changes in eligibility requirements is “broad-based categorical eligibility.” This type of eligibility means that an individual who receives any service under another welfare program, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)—even something as small as a TANF brochure—can be deemed eligible for food stamps. A full 50 percent of all food stamp recipients now enroll in the program through this broad-based categorical eligibility procedure.
In addition, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has operated substantial outreach programs to pull more people onto the food stamp rolls. Some states have gone so far as to hire food stamp recruiters, tasked with filling a monthly quota of new food stamp enrollees.
What’s more, food stamps are just one of roughly 80 federally funded means-tested welfare programs. The total cost of government welfare spending has been on a nearly continual climb over the past five decades and has increased 16-fold, to nearly $1 trillion annually, since the 1960s. Welfare is the fastest growing part of government spending, and under Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget, total welfare spending will permanently increase from 4.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to 6 percent of GDP.
In addition it should be noted “as a fact” that those receiving food stamps are those who work. However, a significant portion of able-bodied recipients of food stamps perform little to no work. Of the roughly 10.5 million households receiving food stamps containing an able-bodied, non-elderly adult (there are approximately 20 million households receiving food stamps total), more than half—5.5 million—performed no work during a given month in 2010. Another 1.5 million to 2 million performed fewer than 30 hours of work per week. This isn’t unique to the recession, but is typical even during good economic times.
Programs like food stamps should be reformed to promote self-reliance through work, empowering individuals and families to become free from government dependence.
Other topics that we are raring at the bit to get too is one the U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder; however it does take time sifting through all of his lies.
The other one we wanted to get to today….(time permitting) is the lifting of the arms embargo so that the Syrian opposition rebels can put together an overwhelming offensive on the current regime.
The Alabama Republican offered 17 amendments, championed the concerns of border-enforcement employee unions, and decried the cost to taxpayers. Ahead of a Senate Judiciary Committee vote, Sessions produced a letter denouncing the proposal signed by opinion makers such as Laura Ingraham.
There was an additional name mentioned in Senator Sessions’ letter and after careful reasoning I have decided to place it in this writing. It is Michelle Malkin who was included as being an opinion maker. And justifiably so – not only did Ms. Malkin produce in advance of every other person a best-selling warning Americans about Obama’s Culture of Corruption. Even more important is Ms. Malkin’s plethora of knowledge of America’s complete immigration status including the original Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).
It is not just that Ms. Malkin is knowledgeable about immigration affairs – she has also written one could only presume was a best-seller titled, Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores. Copy written in 2002 Malkin leaves not bush, rock, even a pebble unturned.
With all due respect to Senator Jeff Sessions rather than put the hex on those experts who certainly could hold their own at any Senate Judiciary Committee meeting seems to me that those arrogant Senators should be enlisting the help of any and all experts they can find.
In fact when are these quasi-leaders going to understand what’s at stake here? An aptly named old fogies list of Senators, “The Gang of Eight” bills themselves out at nothing other than bipartisan politics hence the name – four Democrats and four Republicans that are as reliable and viable as Senator Leahy’s statement, “I intend to proceed to comprehensive immigration reform with all deliberate speed.”
Far be it from me but isn’t Leahy actually saying no compromises, no public opinion, I will in all due haste go out deliberately with speed and little input from the other 330 million or so Americans. And serve those special interest groups such as La Raza, MALDEF, and any number of advocacy groups that want open borders and folks walking in and out of what used to be considered a sovereign country.
Senate supporters of immigration reform think they emerged from the judiciary panel’s hearings in a strong position, adopting key amendments to help mitigate criticisms. In 2007, when a bipartisan group offered a bill, Senate leaders avoided the committee process and took the legislation directly to the floor, where opponents quickly fractured the coalition with “poison pill” amendments.
The committee vote was only the first skirmish in a long battle ahead for a bill that represents the most sweeping overhaul of immigration law in nearly three decades, its prospects buoyed in part by Republican worries over a lack of Latino support.
I can’t help but believe in my heart of hearts that what the Senate is trying to do is to make up for over three decades of doing absolutely nothing concerning immigration reform. And as far as Republican worries over a lack of Latino support, just shows their mutual arrogance by not giving Hispanics/Latino’s credit for what they know.
I will share this with you, my dedicated readers, Hispanics/Latino’s know about systemic politics. They know that they are getting free Obamacare, which it is going to cost the US taxpayers in excess of $6.5 Trillion dollars, as well as all of the accumulated entitlement costs.
The goal, in many cases, was not necessarily to alter the legislation but rather to force the four Gang of Eight members on the committee — Democrats Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Republicans Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.) — into difficult votes on issues where Democrats and Republicans are ideologically opposed.
“Horrible customer service.” That’s what the newly fired IRS commissioner averred was the agency’s only sin in singling out conservative political groups for discriminatory treatment, writes Charles Krauthammer.
In such grim proceedings one should be grateful for unintended humor. Horrible customer service is when every patron in a restaurant finds a fly in his soup. But when the maitre d’ screens patrons for their politics and only conservatives find flies paddle wheeling through their consommé, the problem is not poor service. It is harassment and invidious discrimination.
President Obama on Wednesday demanded and accepted the resignation of the acting commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Steven T. Miller, as part of a multi-pronged effort to quell controversies that threaten to dominate his second term.
The action was Obama’s first substantive step to address a political uproar stemming from the IRS’s disclosure that it had targeted conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. It capped a day when the White House tried to dampen two other furors that had put Obama on the defensive — the Justice Department’s seizure of Associated Press phone records and the administration’s editing of talking points about the deadly attacks in Benghazi, Libya, last year.
In a brief but fiery evening statement in the East Room of the White House, Obama labeled the IRS’s actions “inexcusable.” Had any member of this organization would have asked and vehemently so – which transgression is “inexcusable.”
Considering all that has happened in a relatively short period of time – Benghazi-gate started literally on September 11-12, 2012 which is yet a mere 255 days ago. Now our contention with this man and his administration is how does a person or many people get straight into an IRS ethics violation and the Justice Department’s obscene seizure of constitutionally protected material regarding AP’s phone records and members of the press.
Notwithstanding the President is once again pointing whilst not addressing those fingers that point directly at him. This person in so many pathological ways finds it easy to assess someone else’s wrongdoing; however, when it clearly comes to his own we believe that he would use anything from videotapes to “I don’t know…” to try to convince the public he has done no wrong.
Listening to Kimberly Guilfoyle last evening on FNC’s The Fives, she had the kind of reasoned anger that any civilized person should have and she put it out so wonderfully saying, “…the people [Steven Miller, Shulman, and Lois Lerner of the IRS] are paid public servants…and they are on television with indignant attitudes because the people (who pay their salaries) want to know why these organizations were targeted…”
Talk about eloquence – that wonderful lady could tell anyone to go straight to Hades and have them say “thank you.” However our point is that how do these people – including the worst offender of them all (POTUS) justify one saying that what they’ve done is inexcusable while at the same time the atrocities they are committing are worse.
Interesting to come up with the figures, yet how many of you believed that the Presidency of Barack H. Obama would have the kind of investigations, scandals, and other ugly rubbish going on within the Obama administration.
Now if you don’t mind just because it’s Friday and all of us do have some issues we’d like, or better still, be honored to discuss with you. First this President and the sobering affects he literally used to swindle the swindler’s. Second, how about an expose on voting? And taking the more realistic turn, third let’s take a look at the NAACP.
Can we come to a consensus about how Barack Obama used those who’s who of Hollywood to either be linked-up with the Fabricator-of-Filth or dare I say, used for their mutually gained “I’m cool and so are you” belongingness.
I remember as though it was yesterday the weeks that were for photo opts only and then who would come to their Facebook page and actually support the bull squat not only what he’d already done…nah, these opts were for do me twice – Obama Two.
I literally thought some of my quasi-acquaintances, quasi-celeb-friends, and some of the “Elites” would never have stood to do what they did and glowingly autographed the photographs with each one either in the East Room, or lounging a bit in the Blue Room, or trying to be cool somewhere near the South Portico. How do they each feel now?
Iranian authorities on Tuesday announced the approval of eight candidates who will be allowed to compete in the June 14 presidential election. The Guardian Council, which vetted the candidates, made sure that Iran’s next president will be a pliable servant of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Six of the eight remaining presidential candidates are closely linked to the Supreme Leader. The frontrunner appears to be Saeed Jalili, a longtime adviser to Khamenei who now serves as Iran’s negotiator on the nuclear issue. Jalili is an uncompromising revolutionary who lost a leg in the Iran–Iraq war. A western diplomat noted that Jalili “specializes in monologue”—not dialogue.
Other prominent hard-line candidates include Tehran Mayor Mohammad Qalibaf, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, and former Revolutionary Guard commander Mohsen Rezai.
Two centrists were also allowed to run: Hassan Rowhani, an ally of Rafsanjani, and Mohammad Reza Aref, who served as vice president under former President Mohammad Khatami. Both of them will be sure to mute their criticism of the hard-line establishment candidates. After all, Mir Hossain Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi, reformist candidates who protested the 2009 rigged elections, are still under house arrest.
The election will have little impact on the issues that Washington is most concerned about: Iran’s nuclear program, terrorism, and hostile foreign policy. All of these policies are set by the Supreme Leader, who has the final say on all important issues in Iran.
Khamenei also controls the election process, as has been made clear once again this week. Six of the eight presidential contenders are closely associated with him. Iran’s next president will be determined far more by his selection than through a genuine election.
Have you ever wondered what others’ may be saying about our archaic elections.
Remember when the Congressional Black Caucus was all over the Republicans “suppressing” the minority vote? Looks like they were the guilty party! So when Obama brought in the UN to “monitor” our elections, you know what they took away from it.
They found no suppression at all, BUT they were shocked by the fact that there was no VOTER ID and questioned how the election could be fair. Go figure. A little side note; Soros just dropped another million on the NAACP to gear up for 2014. Someone, anyone, whomever…what is not discriminatory about a Black Caucus.