Visit Counter

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Obamacare Should Remind Us We Are Not 'Subjects,' We Are People





On a tip from

Ed Kilbane 







Opinion from Professor Laura Hollis-Notre Dame




Laura Hollis is a professor at the University of Notre Dame






The unveiling of the dictatorial debacle that is Obamacare absolutely flabbergasts me. It is stunning on so many levels, but the most shocking aspect of it for me is watching millions of free Americans stand idly by while this man, his minions in Congress and his cheerleaders in the press systematically dismantle our Constitution, steal our money, and crush our freedoms.


The President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid (with no small help from Justice John Roberts and now rinos Boehner and McConnell) take away our health care, and we allow it. They take away our insurance, and we allow it. They take away our doctors, and we allow it. They charge us thousands of dollars more a year, and we allow it. They make legal products illegal, and we allow it. They cripple our businesses, and we allow it. They announce by fiat that we must ignore our most deeply held beliefs – and we allow it.


Where is your spine, America?


Yes, I know people are complaining. I read the news on the internet. I read blogs. I have a Twitter feed. So what? People in the Soviet Union complained. People in Cuba complain. People in China complain (quietly). Complaining isn't the same thing as doing anything about it. In fact, much of the complaining that we hear sounds like resignation: Wow. This sucks. Oh well, this is the way things are. Too bad.


Perhaps you need reminding of a few important facts. Here goes:


1. The President is not a king. Barack Obama does not behave like a President, an elected official, someone who realizes that he works for us. He behaves like a king, a dictator – someone who believes that his own pronouncements have the force of law, and who thinks he can dispense with the law's enforcement when he deigns to do so. And those of us who object? How dare we? Racists!


And while he moves steadily "forward" with his plans to "fundamentally transform" the greatest country in human history, he distracts people with cheap, meaningless trivialities, like "free birth control pills"! (In fact, let's face it: this administration's odd obsession with sex in general - Birth control! Abortion! Sterilization! Gay guys who play basketball! -- is just plain weird. Since when did the leader of the free world care so much about how people have sex, who they have it with, and what meds they use when they have it? Does he have nothing more important to concern himself with?)


2. It isn't just a failed software program; it is a failed philosophy. People are marveling that Healthcare.gov was such a spectacular failure. Well, if one is only interested in it as a product launch, I've explained some of the reasons for that here. But the larger point is that it isn't a software failure, or even a product failure; it is a philosophy failure.


I have said this before: Obama is not a centrist; he is a central planner. And this – all of it: the disastrous computer program, the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, the lies, the manipulation of public opinion, the theft of the public's money and property, and freedom (read insurance, and premiums, and doctors) -- IS what central planning looks like. 


The central premise of central planning is that a handful of wunderkinds with your best interests at heart (yeah, right) know better than you what's good for you. The failure of such a premise and the misery it causes have been clear from the dawn of humanity. Kings and congressmen, dictators and Dear Leaders, potentates, princes and presidents can all fall prey to the same imperial impulses: "we know what is good the 'the people.'


And they are always wrong.


There is a reason that the only times communism has really been tried have been after wars, revolutions, or coups d'état. You have to have complete chaos for people to be willing to accept the garbage that centralized planning produces. Take the Soviet Union, for example. After two wars, famine, and the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, why wouldn't people wait in line for hours to buy size 10 shoes? Or settle for the gray matter that passed for meat in the grocery stores?


But communism's watered-down cousin, socialism, isn't much better. Ask the Venezuelans who cannot get toilet paper. Toilet paper. !Viva la Revolución!


Contrary to what so many who believe in a "living Constitution" say, the Founding Fathers absolutely understood this. That is why the Constitution was set up to limit government power. (Memo to the President: the drafters of the Constitution deliberately didn't say "what government had to do on your behalf.") They understood that that was the path to folly, fear, and famine.


3. Obama is deceitful. Just as the collapse of the computer program should not surprise anyone, neither should we be shocked that the President lied about his healthcare plan. Have any of you been paying attention over the past few years? Obama has made no secret of his motivations or his methods. The philosophies which inspire him espouse deceit and other vicious tactics. (Don't take my word for it: read Saul Alinsky.) Obama infamously told reporter Richard Wolffe, "You know, I actually believe my own bullshit." He has refused to be forthcoming about his past (where are his academic records?). His own pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, told author Ed Klein, that Obama said to him, "You know what your problem is? You have to tell the truth."


Did Obama lie when he said dozens of times, "If you like your plan, you can keep it. Period!"? Of course he did. That's what he does.


4. The media is responsible. And had the media been doing their jobs, we would have known a lot of this much, much earlier.


The press is charged with the sacred responsibility of protecting the people from the excesses of government. Our press has been complicit, incompetent, or corrupt. Had they vetted this man in 2008, as they would have a Republican candidate, we would have known far more about him than we do, even now. Had they pressed for more details about Obamacare, Congress' feet would have been held to the fire. Had they done their jobs about Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS scandal, NSA spying - or any of the other myriad betrayals of the public trust that this administration has committed, Obama would likely have lost his 2012 reelection campaign. (A fact that even The Washington Post has tacitly acknowledged. Well done, fellas! Happy now?)


Instead, they turned a blind eye, even when they knew he was lying, abusing power, disregarding the limits of the Constitution. It was only when he began to spy on them, and when the lies were so blatant that the lowest of low-information voters could figure it out that they realized they had to report on it. (Even in the face of blatant, deliberate and repeated lies, The New York Times has the audacity to tell us that the President "misspoke.") They have betrayed us, abandoned us, and deceived us.


5. Ted Cruz was right. So was Sarah Palin. The computer program is a disaster. The insurance exchanges are a disaster. What's left? The healthcare system itself. And this, of necessity, will be a disaster, too.


Millions of people have lost their individual insurance plans. In 2015, millions more will lose their employer-provided coverage (a fact which the Obama administration also knew, and admitted elsewhere).


The exorbitant additional costs that Obamacare has foisted on unsuspecting Americans are all part of a plan of wealth confiscation and redistribution. That is bad enough. But it will not end there.


When the numbers of people into the system and the corresponding demand for care vastly exceed the cost projections (and they will, make no mistake), then the rationing will start. Not only choice at that point, but quality and care itself will go down the tubes. And then will come the decisions made by the Independent Payment Advisory Board about what care will be covered (read "paid for") and what will not.


That's just a death panel, put politely. In fact, progressives are already greasing the wheels for acceptance of that miserable reality as well. They're spreading the lie that it will be about the ability of the dying to refuse unwanted or unhelpful care. Don't fall for that one, either. It will be about the deaths that inevitably result from decisions made by people other than the patients, their families, and their physicians. (Perhaps it's helpful to think of their assurances this way: " If you like your end-of-life care, you can keep your end-of-life-care.")


6. We are not SUBJECTS. (or, Nice Try, the Tea Party Isn't Going Away). We have tolerated these incursions into our lives and livelihoods too long already. There is no end to the insatiable demand "progressives" have to remake us in their image. Today it is our insurance, our businesses, our doctors, our health care. Tomorrow some new crusade will be announced that enables them to take over other aspects of our formerly free lives.


I will say it again: WE ARE NOT SUBJECTS. Not only is the Tea Party right on the fiscal issues, but it appears that they are more relevant than ever. We fought a war once to prove we did not want to be the subjects of a king, and the Boston Tea Party was just a taste of the larger conflict to come. If some people missed that lesson in history class, we can give them a refresher.


The 2014 elections are a good place to start. Call your representative, your senator, your candidate and tell them: "We are not subjects. You work for us. And if the word "REPEAL" isn't front and center in your campaign, we won't vote for you. Period."



Share/Bookmark

Monday, December 16, 2013

Trading Places


Hail to the Chief…wait.. which one is it?































A picture is better than a thousand words.









Share/Bookmark

Saturday, December 14, 2013

Sky miles redefined










Share/Bookmark

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Is the Government Spying On You Through Your Own Computer’s Webcam Or Microphone?








I've been warning about loosing our freedom and our right to privacy ever since I saw my first red light camera. Most Americans just sat by saying and doing nothing. Now look at where we are! No one can tell me we have to spy on every American to prevent terrorism. The fact that we are steadily loosing more and more of our freedoms is a sign the terrorists have won. This is the 4th Amendment. It is plain, it is simple. Even a fool like me can clearly see it has been violated.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

-------------------------------------





Washington's Blog
June 25, 2013

We documented earlier today that - if you are near your smart phone – the NSA or private parties could remotely activate your microphone and camera and spy on you.

This post shows that the same is true for our computer.

Initially, the NSA built backdoors into the world's most popular software program – Microsoft Windows – by 1999.

And a government expert told the Washington Post that the government "quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type" (confirmed). Even that is just "the tip of the iceberg", according to a congress member briefed on the NSA's spying program.

The New York Times reported in 2011 that German police were using spyware to turn on the webcam and microphone on peoples' computers:


A group that calls itself the Chaos Computer Club prompted a public outcry here recently when it discovered that German state investigators were using spying softwarecapable of turning a computer's webcam and microphone into a sophisticated surveillance device.

The club …announced last Saturday it had analyzed the hard drives of people who had been investigated and discovered that they were infected with a Trojan horse program that gave the police the ability to log keystrokes, capture screenshots and activate cameras and microphones.

Reuters documented last year that the U.S. and Israeli governments can remotely turn on a computer's microphone:


Evidence suggest that the virus, dubbed Flame, may have been built on behalf of the same nation or nations that commissioned the Stuxnet worm that attacked Iran's nuclear program in 2010 [i.e. the U.S. and Israel], according to Kaspersky Lab, the Russian cyber security software maker that took credit for discovering the infections.

Kaspersky researchers said they have yet to determine whether Flame had a specific mission like Stuxnet, and declined to say who they think built it.

Cyber security experts said the discovery publicly demonstrates what experts privy to classified information have long known: that nations have been using pieces of malicious computer code as weapons to promote their security interests for several years.

***

The virus contains about 20 times as much code as Stuxnet, which caused centrifuges to fail at the Iranian enrichment facility it attacked. It has about 100 times as much code as a typical virus designed to steal financial information, said Kaspersky Lab senior researcher Roel Schouwenberg.

Flame can gather data files, remotely change settings on computers, turn on PC microphones to record conversations, take screen shots and log instant messaging chats.

Kaspersky Lab said Flame and Stuxnet appear to infect machines by exploiting the same flaw in the Windows operating system and that both viruses employ a similar way of spreading.

***

"The scary thing for me is: if this is what they were capable of five years ago, I can only think what they are developing now," Mohan Koo, managing director of British-based Dtex Systems cyber security company.

PC Magazine tech columnist John Dvorak writes:


From what we know the NSA has back door access into Apple, Microsoft [background], and Google. What kind of access we don't know, but let us assume it is similar to what they did about 7 years ago to AT&T. They had a secret room at Fulsom St. in San Francisco and the AT&T engineers had no control and no access to a room full of NSA equipment that had direct access to everything AT&T could do.

Microsoft is the source of the operating system for Windows and Windows cell phones. Apple controls the OS for Macs, iPhones, and iPads. Google controls the Chrome OS, Chrome Browser, and Android cell phones. The companies regularly push operating system upgrades and security updates to users on a regular basis.

Imagine however that the NSA has access to these updates at the source and has the ability to alter these update in order to install some sort of spyware on your phone, tablet, or computer. The software could turn on your camera or microphone remotely, read all your private data, or erase everything and brick your phone or computer.

Moreover – as documented by Microsoft, Ars Technica, cnet, the Register, Sydney Morning Herald, and many other sources – private parties can turn on your computer's microphone and camera as well.

Cracked noted in 2010:


All sorts of programs are available to let you remotely commandeer a webcam, and many of them are free. Simple versions will just take photos or videos when they detect movement, but more complex software will send you an e-mail when the computer you've installed the program on is in use, so you can immediately login and control the webcam without the hassle of having to stare at an empty room until the person you're stalking shows up.

The bottom line is that – as with your phone, OnStar type system or other car microphone, Xbox, and other digital recording devices – you shouldn't say or do anything near your computer that you don't want shared with the world.

Postscript: You could obviously try to cover your webcam and microphone when you don't want to use them. 

But if you really want privacy, take a lesson from spy movies: Go swimming with the person you want to speak with … since electronics can't operate in water.

Yet!







Share/Bookmark

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Trey Gowdy Demands Answers On Benghazi



He poses some excellent questions holding the MSM’s feet to the fire as they blatantly protect “the one”. Same can be said for Barry calling the IRS scandal “outrageous” and how he was going to “get to the bottom of it”. So far not one person who was targeted has ever been contacted by the FBI. Why? Because in all likelihood he was the one who instigated it. This is what happens when the MSM stopped objective, investigative, reporting and adopted the Socialistic philosophy of the Democratic party. To site an example.

 Compare the Abu Ghraib coverage where no one died... to 4 Americans killed in Benghazi.

Everyone and their f------ brother knows it wasn't the video. Yet the MSM refuses to dispute it.
Why?



(If video won't load click post title)

video

Video 62





Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Obama relative avoids deportation




Obama relative gets personal special deal on immigration in Boston court 

According to this judge if you're a liar and lived in this country illegally for 50 years (most of it on welfare) and been arrested only once that entitles you to citizenship. Thank God we have such high standards!

PS: PAID INCOME TAX?

 Last time I checked Onyango and his illegal sister Zeituni are on welfare and Section 8.

An article from of all places the Barry loving Huff Post.





Read this below and weep.

Judge Leonard Shapiro made the decision after Onyango Obama, 69, testified that he had lived in the U.S. for 50 years, been a hard worker, paid income tax and been arrested only once.

Asked about his family in the U.S., he said he has a sister and two nieces, then added, "I do have a nephew." Asked to name the nephew, he said, "Barack Obama," then added, "He's the president of the United States."

President Obama's illegal-alien uncle has been granted the right to remain in the United States after going before a judge today to seek permanent residency and quash a decades-old deportation order. Leonard I. Shapiro – the same judge who granted asylum in 2010 to Obama's sister, Zeituni Onyango – the president's aunt."

Shapiro found Obama to be "of good character," though he noted Obama's "2011 drunk driving arrest and the fact that he may have lied about his citizenship status to a federal investigator during questioning in 1984."

Shapiro ruled that "Obama's ties to the community, his work ethic and the fact that he paid taxes made up for any other misdeeds.

Obama, the half-brother of President Obama's late father, had been living quietly in Framingham and working as a liquor-store clerk until the 2011 OUI [Operating Under the Influence] arrest brought his immigration status to light. The OUI case was continued without a finding."

You ever wonder why the American taxpayer has to support Barry's illegal relatives? 

Isn't this his responsibility? I mean...it's not like the most transparent, lying, SOB is broke.






Share/Bookmark

Thursday, November 28, 2013

ObamaCare...taking from the have's... to give to the have not's





In order to better serve their policyholders truthfully and be compliant with the ObamaCare guidelines one company has saw fit to make a change.















Share/Bookmark

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Deal reached on Iranian nuclear program





You have to wonder...how many times can Iran (not to mention North Korea) lie to us... yet we falling for this crap. 


Kerry said, "It will make our partners in the region safe. It will make Israel safer."

What a f*****g joke!


Netanyahu's response:

"What was agreed last night in Geneva is not a historic agreement, it is a historic mistake. Today the world has become much more dangerous because the most dangerous regime in the world took a significant step to getting the most dangerous weapon in the world."



All one has to do is read the last paragraph.

If Iran's nuclear program was geared to "medical research" like they said... what are they doing with 440 lbs of weapons grade uranium?


------------------------------------------------------------------------



November 23, 2013: President Barack Obama speaks in the State Dining Room at the White House about the nuclear deal between six world powers and Iran that calls on Tehran to limit its nuclear activities in return for sanctions relief.(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)


 The parties to the P5+1/Iran talks in Geneva, Switzerland (Pool Photo)                                                                       

Iran and six world powers reached a deal early Sunday that would halt parts of Iran's nuclear program in exchange for what was described by the Obama administration as "modest relief" from international sanctions.

Obama, speaking from the White House while Secretary of State John Kerry helped ink the agreement in Geneva, called it a "first step toward a comprehensive solution."

The deal, while historic, is a six-month agreement. Republican senators in Washington warned shortly after the terms were announced that western powers were giving up too much in exchange for too little, in hopes of a longer-term deal. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said it would give a leading sponsor of terror "billions of dollars in exchange for cosmetic concessions."

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said that the agreement "makes a nuclear Iran more, not less, likely," and called the deal "a blow to our allies in the region who are already concerned about America's commitment to their security and it sends the wrong message to the Iranian people, who continue to suffer under the repressive rule of their leaders who have only their own self-preservation in mind." 

But Obama insisted the sanctions relief is reversible if Iran doesn't live up to its end of the bargain.

"The broader architecture of sanctions will remain in place and we will continue to enforce them vigorously," said Obama, who urged Congress not to pass new sanctions against Iran in light of the agreement, saying "doing so would derail this promising first step, alienate us from our allies, and risk unraveling the coalition that enabled our sanctions to be enforced in the first place."  

Under the terms of the agreement, which concluded days of negotiations in Geneva, Iran committed to halt enrichment above a 5 percent threshold and dismantle the technical connections required to enrich uranium above that threshold.

Iran is also required to neutralize its stockpile of near 20 percent enriched uranium, and halt progress on its enrichment capacity. In return, the six world powers (the U.S., Great Britain, France, Germany, China, and Russia), have agreed to not impose any new sanctions, suspend sanctions on certain sectors of Iran's economy, and potentially unfreeze $4.2 billion in revenue from oil sales if Iran meets other conditions.

A White House statement also said Iran's nuclear program will be subject to "increased transparency and intrusive monitoring."

Speaking from the White House late Saturday night, Obama said that the terms of the deal were "substantial limitations which will help prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon. Simply put, they cut off Iran's most likely paths to a bomb."

However, Obama warned that sanctions relief was dependent on Iran living up to its end of the agreement, saying, "In these negotiations, nothing will be agreed to until everything is agreed to. The burden is on Iran to prove to the world that its nuclear program will be for exclusively peaceful purposes."

Iran President Hassan Rouhani endorsed the agreement in a nationally broadcast speech Sunday, saying the accord recognizes Iran's "nuclear rights" even if that precise language was kept from the final document because of Western resistance.

"No matter what interpretations are given, Iran's right to enrichment has been recognized," said Rouhani, who later posed with family members of nuclear scientists killed in slayings in recent years that Iran has blamed on Israel and allies.

Saying "trust is a two-way street," Rouhani insisted that talks on a comprehensive agreement should start immediately.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who led his country's delegation, called on both sides to see the agreement as an "opportunity to end an unnecessary crisis and open new horizons."

But reaction in Israel was strongly negative. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Nentanyahu called the deal "a historic mistake" in remarks to his cabinet Sunday. Earlier in the day, Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz, who is responsible for monitoring Iran's nuclear program, said the deal was based on "Iranian deception and self-delusion."

The deal came after the personal intervention by Kerry and other foreign ministers whose presence had raised hopes for a breakthrough.

"The purpose of this is simple," said Kerry, who spoke early Sunday morning, Geneva time.  "Requiring Iran to prove the peaceful nature of its nuclear program and prove it does not have a nuclear weapon.

"It will make our partners in the region safe. It will make Israel safer."

"Agreement in Geneva," Kerry had tweeted. "First step makes world safer. More work now."

The deal marks a milestone between the two countries, which broke diplomatic ties 34 years ago when Iran's Islamic revolution climaxed in the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Since then, relations between the two countries had been frigid to hostile.

Although the deal lowered tensions between the two countries, friction points remain -- notably Iran's support of the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad. The United States also has said Iran supports terrorism throughout the region and commits widespread human rights violations.

Since it was revealed in 2003, Iran's enrichment program has grown from a few dozen enriching centrifuges to more than 18,000 installed and more than 10,000 operating. The machines have produced tons of low-enriched uranium, which can be turned into weapons grade material.

Iran also has stockpiled almost 440 pounds of higher-enriched uranium in a form that can be converted more quickly to fissile warhead material than the low-enriched uranium. Its supply is nearly enough for one bomb.


Share/Bookmark

Saturday, November 23, 2013

How true




If 26 million signed up as opposed to 26,000 on the government website he would still be calling it ObamaCare.



(If video won't load click post title)


video

Video 61






Share/Bookmark

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Second wave of health plan cancellations looms



The first paragraph below indicates the likely decimation of  Democrats (similar to the 2010 midterm) and the Senate should join the House... both  Republican. Even by some fluke, and said scenario did not occur, Barry's days are over when it comes to passing any meaningful legislation. People are beginning to realize you can't elect a community organizer to do a president's job. 

Hope and Change is decidedly Smoke and Mirrors.




--------------------------------------------------------------------

Update:

In a blatant political maneuver, fooling only the brain-dead, Barry delays the employer mandate until 11 days after the mid-term election.



A new and independent analysis of ObamaCare warns of a ticking time bomb, predicting a second wave of 50 million to 100 million insurance policy cancellations next fall -- right before the mid-term elections.

The next round of cancellations and premium hikes is expected to hit employees, particularly of small businesses. While the administration has tried to downplay the cancellation notices hitting policyholders on the individual market by noting they represent a relatively small fraction of the population, the swath of people who will be affected by the shakeup in employer-sponsored coverage will be much broader.

An analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, shows the administration anticipates half to two-thirds of small businesses would have policies canceled or be compelled to send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges. They predict up to 100 million small and large business policies could be canceled next year.

"The impact I'm mostly worried about is on small young, entrepreneurial firms that will suddenly face much higher health insurance premiums if they want to offer health insurance to their employees," said AEI resident scholar Stan Veuger. "I think for a lot of other businesses ... they can just send their employees to the exchanges or offer them a fixed subsidy every month to buy health insurance themselves."

Under the health care law, businesses with fewer than 50 workers do not have to provide health coverage. But if they do, the policies will still have to meet the benefit standards set by ObamaCare.

As reported by AEI's Scott Gottlieb, some businesses got around this by renewing their policies before the end of 2013. But the relief is temporary, and they are expected to have to offer in-compliance plans for 2015. According to Gottlieb, that means beginning in October 2014 the cancellation notices will start to go out.


Then, businesses will have to either find a new plan -- which could be considerably more expensive -- or send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges.

For workers, their experience could mirror that of the 5 million or so on the individual market who already received cancellation notices because their plans did not meet new standards under the Affordable Care Act.

President Obama announced last week that insurance companies could offer out-of-compliance plans for another year. But that only means the cancellation notices will resume late next year.

Obama met Wednesday with state insurance commissioners about the change. In a statement afterward, National Association of Insurance Commissioners President Jim Donelon voiced concern with the change but said: "We will work with the insurance companies in our states to implement changes that make sense while following our mandate of consumer protection."

The business community has already been hit with another side effect from ObamaCare. Because the law will require businesses with more than 50 full-time workers to offer health coverage, there are reports that companies are shifting employees to part-time status to avoid hitting the threshold.

Though the administration describes these accounts as anecdotal -- and has already delayed the employer mandate by a year -- studies suggest otherwise.

The International Franchise Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have studied the impact and say the president's health care law has resulted in higher costs and fewer full-time positions.

A survey showed 31 percent of franchise businesses, and 12 percent of non-franchise businesses, have already reduced worker hours. It also showed 27 percent of franchise businesses, and 12 percent of non-franchise businesses, have replaced full-time workers with part-time employees.









Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

What scandal?






Bob: "Did you hear about the Obama administration scandal?
 
Jim: "You mean the Mexican gun running?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "You mean the State Dept. lying about Benghazi?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "You mean voter fraud?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "You mean the military not getting their votes counted?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "You mean the drones in our own country without the benefit of the law?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "Giving high tech battery maker A 123 inc. $300 Million and right after that bail-out it declared bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "You mean Obama arming the Muslim Brotherhood?"
 
Bob: "No the other one:.
 
Jim: "The IRS targeting conservatives?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The DOJ spying on the press?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "Sebelius shaking down health insurance executives?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "Giving SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 months later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The president's ordering the release of nearly 10,000 illegal immigrants from jails and prisons, and falsely blaming the sequester?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The president's threat to impose gun control by Executive Order in order to bypass Congress?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The president's repeated violation of the law requiring him to submit a budget no later than the first Monday in February?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The 2012 vote where 115% of all registered voters in some counties voted 100% for Obama?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "The State Department interfering with an Inspector General investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?"
 
Bob: "No, the other one."
 
Jim: "Clinton, the IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?"
 
Bob: "No, the other  one."
 
Jim: "I give up! ... Oh wait, I think I got it! You mean that 65 million low-information voters who don't pay taxes and get free stuff from taxpayers and stuck us again with the most pandering, corrupt administration in American history?
 
Bob: "THAT'S THE ONE!"


 Sit back and imagine Barry was a white Republican. 

Just one glaring example of media bias.

Abu Ghraib - wall to wall coverage number killed zero.

Benghazi - no coverage (except FOX) number killed... four dead Americans. The MSM was only to happy to go along with the..."it was the video" bullshit.

Oh... and if Ft. Hood was workplace violence... then this statement:


“In the name of Almighty Allah, the most gracious and the most merciful, my name is Nidal Hasan, Major Nidal Hasan, and I would like to convey a message to the world,” runs more than six pages.

Hasan also says he regrets his years in the Army, claiming that his service was inconsistent with his religious beliefs. “I would like to begin by repenting to Almighty Allah and apologize to the (Mujahideen), the believers, and the innocent. I ask for their forgiveness and their prayers. I ask for their forgiveness for participating in the illegal and immoral aggression against Muslims, their religion and their lands,” he said.



  proves clearly Nadal Hasan is a closet Presbyterian.




Share/Bookmark