Race War: Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision, Illegal Immigration ‘Reform’, Plus Pothead Barack Obama’s Pothead Son Trayvon Martin

Update II: Prepare for Obama race-baiting. This news is breaking: Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act. It’s a 5-4 decision in a case brought by Shelby County, Alabama. Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act declared unconstitutional!:

“Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, reauthorized by Congress in 2006, gives the federal government the ability to pre-emptively reject changes to election law in states and counties that have a history of discriminating against minority voters. The law covers nine states and portions of seven more, most of them in the South. The formula used to decide which states are subject to this special scrutiny (set out in Section 4 of the law) is based on decades-old voter turnout and registration data, the justices ruled, which is unfair to the states covered under it.

The Justice Department used Section 5 of the law to block voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina last year, and it also struck down early voting restrictions in five counties in Florida. [snip]

Another argument against Section 4’s constitutionality was that it’s unclear whether minority voters in Southern states are more likely to face discrimination at the polls than they are in other states.”

This decision was expected since at least 2009. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion.

—————————————————————

Update: We wrote Deny It All You Want But Immigration Reform Is Dead back in April. Many dispute our contention and point to the Senate distraction and the Big Media myth making machine to discourage everyone into thinking that “immigration reform” is a done deal.

Today Fawn Johnson at National Journal writes Time’s Up. Immigration Won’t Pass This Year
:

“Plenty of effort will be devoted to reform over the next month, but it will die in August, just like last time.

Nothing less than a miracle will get major immigration legislation through Congress this year. [snip]

Indeed, the House might not kill the bill outright, but the GOP players are passing the ball around until the clock runs out.

What’s that clock look like? After senators get the bill done – probably in time to make their weekend barbeques — they have a weeklong July 4 break. And then they get to wait for colleagues on the other side of the Capitol who will have four weeks – four weeks – to deliberate before Congress takes off for an even lengthier recess in August. Once Washington meets autumn, immigration falls off the priority track thanks to the reemergence of fiscal crisis. [snip]

Then comes August, the month in which legislation dies. The last time the Senate passed a major immigration bill in 2006, House Republicans used the August recess to kill it by staging a series of hearings around the country that did nothing but rile up conservatives against it.

Let’s not forget the health care bill, which only passed after President Obama forced it through the Senate with Democratic votes using a parliamentary tactic that isn’t available on immigration. [snip]

When lawmakers return to the Capitol in September, they will be facing another financial crisis as they debate raising the country’s debt ceiling. The four- to six-week countdown toward extreme limitations on government payments to Social Security or military operations will do two things: It will suck all the life out of any deliberative legislative effort, immigration included, and it will polarize the political parties.”

Immigration “reform” is dead even as there will be an attempt in the Senate to flim-flam the country into believing it is going to happen. It’s not.

Hey! Greta Van Susteren has a real immigration reform plan that addresses the problem. But we doubt that will pass or even be proposed by the chuckleheads in congress.

So, is
immigration reform doomed
? Sarah Palin says ‘You betcha‘.

————————————————————

This coming week is going to be an explosive seven days in American history. On Monday the Jorge Zimmerman trial begins with one Latina and five white women on the jury. The Supreme Court will issue, starting on Monday, opinions which will likely lead to the end of race based “affirmative action” in undergraduate college admissions. The Supreme Court will also decide the fate of a key section of the Voting Rights Act. On Monday the Senate will start the process to try to pass another mess of a bill – this one the race-baiting amusement called “Immigration Reform“. Throw in the Supreme Court weighing in on gay marriage and the pot is boiling over.

The result of all these events hitting Barack Obama will be race-baiting of an intensity not seen since the embers of race riots from an earlier age scarred the nation – and the Barack Obama campaign of 2008 against Hillary Clinton. “Why?” is simple to answer.

* * * * * *

Survey the sociopolitical landscape and there is disaster everywhere. The answer from Barack Obama and his White House Down team will not be to respond to the disasters but to race-bait. Race-baiting is all Barack Obama and his minions have left in their arsenal of hate, fear, and smear.

The White House Chicago gang is aware that hypocrites on the left continue to voice support for their idol, But they are also aware that as independents turn hostile, Republicans remain hostile, even Barack Obama supporters are upset with Obama. So the way to get antsy Obama supporters back on board with their glorious leader is to race-bait. Shouting “RACISM!” and “RACISTS!” will force Obama supporters back on the farm like nothing else will. Race-baiting is the only answer left for Barack Obama as all goes from bad to Barack and a hard place.

Look around the world as Barack Obama confronts the reality of the mess he has made. The economic “glimmers of hope”, the green shoots of hope and optimism are scorched by last week’s stock market freeze. The future of the nation is so dire it is no longer a prosperous California of decades past, nor even the flailing California of the decade past. The nation’s economic future is bankrupt Detroit – already threatening the municipal credit markets.

American leadership? That is gone on a worldwide basis and nations like China know weak Obama will weaken America further.

Such is the contempt China has for Barack Obama that this morning this bit of news breaking: Snowden leaves Hong Kong for Russia and parts unknown. In the press release announcing the departure of Snowden the Chinese mentioned that the Hong Kong officials want the American government to explain the hacking of Chinese computers.

The Chinese government press release mocked the American government request to detain Snowden as not fully complying with Hong Kong law. Of course if China or Hong Kong wanted to detain Snowden they could have detained him for any series of trumped up charges such as littering or spitting on the sidewalk. The intent of such language is to slap Barack Obama in the face.

Snowden is a problem for Obama because many of his supporters in their heart of hearts like whistle-blowers and leakers. Hells Bells, even Obama thug Robert Gibbs states the White House has to come clean on the NSA scandal. The DailyKooks and assorted crackpots who support Barack Obama don’t want to voice support for Snowden but they die a little bit more every time they see Obama hunting down Snowden. How to get these DailyKook Snowden admirers back on the farm? Race-bait for Obama.

China slapped Barack Obama in the face. Russia kicked him in the dried out raisins which pose as Obama’s testicles. Picture Putin fresh from giving Obama the skunk eye at the G-8 as he spat his contempt for Obama on the front pages of the world by allowing Snowden to land in Moscow in a quest for freedom. Remember when dissidents fled to America not from America? WikiLeaks says they are helping Snowdon find “political asylum in a democratic country“. That “democratic country” is the United States Ecuador.

If you see Obama sweating some more this week it is not because he is still in Berlin embarrassing himself and this suffering nation. Nation after nation is slapping Obama on the face like a circus clown pelted with pies.

Russia not only defies Obama on Syria but declares they will not allow a “no-fly” zone in Syria. Barack Obama’s ‘Arab Spring’ is rapidly turning into nuclear winter having already manifested itself in Syria as a chemical fall.

Turkey which was supposed to supply weapons to the Syrian rebels has rebels of its own to suppress. Those weapons, many suspect, were to come from Libya but that plan failed at Benghazi. Yes Benghazi, the unforgotten scandal.

Benghazi is only one of the scandals that will slap Obama this week, especially if the Erdogen government in Turkey persists in its brutality. Who can forget Obama forced Israel to apologize to Erdogen for doing what Israel should have done in its own defense?

The other scandals are alive and well still. The IRS scandal has even awoken Big Pink hating Peggy Noonan from her Obama inspired slumbers. Ol’ Peg is accurately writing that Obama thugs purposefully blocked the Tea Party in order to protect Obama in election year 2012 after the beating Obama got from the Tea Party in 2010. Obama will get no let-up from scandals this week.

The Department of Justice scandal (not the other ones) with Obama targeting reporters shook Big Media. Big Media loves Obama but Big Media loves itself even more. The Obama response to this is the answer Obama will have this week: race bait. Declare the racists are winning. Distribute Joan Walsh’s race-baiting article attacking Sarah Palin. Race-bait, race-bait, race-bait.

As the ObamaCare fiasco reveals itself to be a bigger disaster than previously known, race-bait, race-bait, race-bait. Race-baiting might even get those idiot young people, who are healthy but not particularly bright, to sign up for ObamaCare and put aside their financial interests in order to buck up Obama at the cost of thousands of dollars a year.

Yes, that’s the ticket, race-bait.

To that end, enter pothead Trayvon Martin.

* * * * * *

Remember that party you went to? You were either 18 or 38. You were wearing a tie-dyed T-shirt with love beads or was it a Chanel suit with gold piping? Your conversation was effervescent and sparkling – just like the Champagne in your flute glass, or was it a paper cup with some horrid Portuguese wine? But then, horror! You noticed as you spoke people began to fall asleep.

At first you thought “Was it me? Was my cleverness tiresome and it caused this narcolepsy?” Then you realize there are food remnants clearly visible from those nodded out on the sofa. You clutch your pearls, or is it your love beads, and realize “I’m at a pot party.”

This traditional notion of pot smokers (that’s marijuana for you readers more adept at the culinary arts rather than botanical narcotics) is about to be tested.



The stereotypical notion of pot smokers is they smoke, get the “munchies”, then fall asleep. Trayvon Martin is about to test that assumption.

Assuming that Trayvon Martin was high on pot not some other chemically induced high, the defense of Jorge Zimmerman is going to have to get around the calming reputation of pot. Is it really possible that a pot smoker could be so into Mixed Martial Arts and brutally beating up someone – not nodding out on a sofa after consuming copious amounts of junk baked goods? We’re about to find out.

This week the Jorge Zimmerman trial begins. We expect the defense to mention the toxicology reports from the Trayvon Martin autopsy with regularity. We expect the toxicology report mentions will be twined with references to Zimmerman telling police that the man he saw that rainy night looked like he was on drugs.

All of these mentions will be made in order to goad the prosecution into saying something like “Trayvon was a good boy” and thereby, forcing the court to allow opening up an examination of Travyon Martin’s past. That past is one of school suspensions, pot smoking and selling, fight club experience, and the nasty emails and twitter account comments. And then there are the cell phone pictures of Trayvon with a gun, marijuana plants, finger gestures, gold teeth, in other words a portrait wholly different from the picture of that cute little boy Big Media and Barack Obama race-baited with, with such dexterity.

For Barack Obama, the former head of the Choom gang, the Trayvon Martin, Jorge Zimmerman trial is a golden opportunity to light up. Barack, like his “son”, loved tokes on the weed. Obama smoked all day and all night. Fortunately for Obama he was never arrested as so many pot smokers do and are carted off to jail. But let’s not digress into another instance of Barack Obama hypocrisy.

The Jorge Zimmerman trial is a golden opportunity for Barack Obama to race-bait. It’s not just the death of his “son” at the hands of the bloodied Jorge Zimmerman. Sure, Barack Obama will have the Martin family and the Al Sharpton’s of MSNBC screaming “RACISM!”. Barack Obama’s DailyKooks/Netroots Nation segregated white boys and girls will join the chorus too. “RACISM! RACISTS!” they will shout. The shouts might even drown out the plane as Snowden jets to a “democratic country”.

In this epochal moment for race-baiting Barack Obama will have an ally. The Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has not been very good to Obama this year. In case after case the Supreme Court has decided against the government this year. Barack Obama’s very name has been mentioned with contempt at the court this term.

We differ with most opponents of ObamaCare in our analysis of the Supreme Court ObamaCare decision. We’ll have much more to say when we open fire on ObamaCare this summer and into fall as the campaign of deception by ObamaCare proponents is in full swing. What we are in the majority on is that the Supreme Court has legally beaten up on Obama this term.

But the Supreme Court, due to timing might in the short run help Barack Obama this week in the campaign to race-bait, race-bait, race-bait.

This week the Supreme Court will eye Barack Obama at the White House, Eric Holder at the Justice Department and at long last in all likelihood begin to get rid of race based affirmative action, first in college admissions and later in all other aspects of American life. The Voting Rights Act will likely also be gutted.

Barack Obama and his Chicago advisers will see this conjunction of the Jorge Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin circus in Seminole County, Florida, the Shelby County, Alabama VRA case, along with the Fisher-University of Texas case as grand opportunities to race-bait. Divide and conquer. Keep the Obama supporters on the farm with a divisive campaign of fear and smear.

An added bonus is that the Supreme Court has already agreed to hear another affirmative action case in the fall. This will be another opportunity to divide, smear, and race-bait – at the very moment that ObamaCare begins it’s reign of terror.

Race-baiting season, like the new born summer season, has just begun. It’s going to be a long hot summer of hate from the Barack Obama merchants of fear, smear, and racial division.

Share

215 thoughts on “Race War: Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision, Illegal Immigration ‘Reform’, Plus Pothead Barack Obama’s Pothead Son Trayvon Martin

  1. The new movie “White House Down” stars Jamie Foxx as a Barack Obama type president. Jamie Foxx has made quite a career out of race-baiting (see his comments about killing white people around the time of the film “Django”).

    This article from politico sounds like Jamie Foxx and Barack Obama as presidents are remarkably similar:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/click/2013/06/foxx-tatum-on-politics-166805.html?hp=r6

    Jamie Foxx for president? Only on the big screen.

    The actor, who plays the commander in chief in “White House Down,” says the political world is way too “polarizing” for him.

    “You can’t get anything done, so I would rather be on the outside,” he told POLITICO at the action flick’s D.C. premiere on Friday.

    While he enjoyed the role, Foxx said that — between the two of them — President Barack Obama is the much better man for the job.

    “I would be taking a whole lot of vacations and there would be a whole lot of afterparties,” he joked.

    Foxx’s co-star, Channing Tatum, who plays a Capitol police officer in the movie, said he’s not too keen on politics, either.

    “Everybody just spins everybody else’s words and it’s frustrating,” Tatum complained. But People’s “Sexiest Man Alive” still loves Washington, he said.

    “I love D.C.,” Tatum said. “D.C. is amazing. D.C. doesn’t mean politics.”

    “White House Down” opens in theaters nationwide on Friday, June 28.

    Is race-baiter Jamie Foxx already president? 🙂

  2. AFP: U.S. State Department says whistleblower Edward #Snowden should “not be allowed” to travel further

    ……………………………

    Yeah thats gonna scare the pants of them…..

  3. 2×4 Chuck Schumer agrees with us that Putin slapped Barack Obama’s face:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/06/schumer-slams-russia-over-snowden-166815.html?hp=l1

    Sen. Chuck Schumer on Sunday blasted Russian President Vladimir Putin, accusing him of “sticking a finger” in the eye of the U.S. by allowing Edward Snowden to land in Moscow.

    “The bottom line is very simple: allies are supposed to treat each other in decent ways and Putin always seems almost eager to put a finger in the eye of the United States, whether it is Syria, Iran and now of course with Snowden,” Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “That’s not how allies should treat each other and I think it will have serious consequences for the United States-Russia relationship.”

    When did Russia become an “ally”?

    http://freebeacon.com/schumer-slams-putin-for-allowing-snowden-to-land-in-moscow/

    Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the third-ranking Senate Democratic leader, said Sunday that Russia will face “serious consequences” if it harbors Edward Snowden, who has been charged with espionage.

    “What’s infuriating here is Prime Minister [Vladimir] Putin of Russia abetting Snowden’s escape,” Schumer said in a CNN “State of the Union” interview. “I think it will have serious consequences for the United States-Russia relationship.” …

    Schumer said Putin likely approved Snowden’s flight to Russia and certainly knew of it.

    “Something at this level in a state- controlled country, the minute Aeroflot got the notification he would be coming, I believe that Putin, it’s almost certain he knew, and it’s likely he approved it,” he said.

    Video at link.

  4. Admon: The White House Chicago gang is aware that hypocrites on the left continue to voice support for their idol, But they are also aware that as independents turn hostile, Republicans remain hostile, even Barack Obama supporters are upset with Obama. So the way to get antsy Obama supporters back on board with their glorious leader is to race-bait. Shouting “RACISM!” and “RACISTS!” will force Obama supporters back on the farm like nothing else will. Race-baiting is the only answer left for Barack Obama as all goes from bad to Barack and a hard place.
    ————————————
    “Toynbee’s question is now answered. The motive force of pure democracy is not love of others. It is the hate of all outside the tribe, faction, party or nation. The general will predicates total war, and hate is the most puissant of recruiters.”–Maj.General J.F.C. Fuller, The Conduct of War.

    The founding fathers understood this propensity of human nature. They knew it had the capacity to enslave us. Consequently,they took steps to reign it in: separation of powers, federalism, the bill of rights, fair elections, trial by jury and sovereignty itself. That is why demagogues like Obama are keen to corrupt those institutions. And they have the tools to do that. The situation today demands reform. But they will do whatever they can to suppress it.

  5. Putin always seems almost eager to put a finger in the eye of the United States, whether it is Syria, Iran and now of course with Snowden,” Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “That’s not how allies should treat each other and I think it will have serious consequences for the United States-Russia relationship.”
    ————————
    Correction: Putin is eager to put the finger in the eye of OBAMA, and I applaud him for doing so. Do you really believe he would do that to Cheney? Do you? Putin is a predator and a survivor. When he smells weakness, he moves in instinctively, while people like Schumer and his fellow travelers big media revel in their wet dream about Obama and his lofty speeches. Putin has no obligation to rescue this ship of fools. And neither do I. They chose the captain, they plotted the course, and if they ignore the storm warnings what happens to them is not my problem. What happens to us, is my problem, but until we reform the system, there is nothing we can do about any of this. It is too far gone./

  6. “serious consequences”
    ————————-
    Schumer has no clue what he is talking about. This is pure rhetoric. For one thing he is a wus. But more important his light of luv Obama is an even bigger wus. Schumer is all mouth and gutwind. When the time comes to do something risky, he won’t do more than spit.

  7. “The founding fathers understood this propensity of human nature. They knew it had the capacity to enslave us.”
    ******
    Snowden has exposed a fundamental fault line in American politics and it’s not Liberal/Conservative but Constitution/Totalitarian. It seems that members of the Uniparty, despite their roles in the political street theater, are united in calling Snowden a traitor. It is a marker of how far we have fallen that there are so few calling bullshit on the Bush/Cheney/Obama Police State.

  8. Prelude to the death announcement i think.

    South African Presidency says Nelson Mandela’s condition has become critical over the past 24 hours

  9. Schumer: “sticking his finger in America’s (sic Obama’s) eye . . . is not how allies should treat each other”.
    ————————-
    What are we to conclude from this piece of mawkish tripe?

    Are we to believe that this grease ball has suddenly become a moralist?

    Does he believe that Russia will renounce its strategic interests, in favor of Obama’s cloud cuckoo land vision for the world?

    Or is he simply running from the truth which is that Putin knows a loser when he sees one–or two if you throw in this greaseball?

  10. Remember the time when people used to take flight to the west to get freedom…how times have changed.

  11. I have always believed that affirmative action is ipso facto reverse discrimination, as John Marshall Harlan termed it. I have never believed that the circle of inequality would be broken by shifting the inequities from one innocent man to another, as the Chief Justice of my own state supreme court opined in the Defunis Case, which was fought tooth and nail by our RINO Attorney General and later US Senator Slade Gordon.

    Today, the principle of reverse discrimination has been embedded into the culture and institutions of our society, and we have witnessed a corresponding decline in their efficay. Affirmative action has always been unconstitutional, but the court had authorized it with a wink, a nod, and a between the lines explanation that is was a political necessity. Now, with 50 million people poised to enter this country in the next twenty years according to a study I read, it would be too destabilizing to overturn it. But more to the point it would give false hope where there is no hope, and it would lead to a situation where ignorant armies would clash by night. And, it would be a disingenuous attempt to rehabilitate a moral coward named John Roberts with the conservative legal community.

  12. moononpluto
    June 23, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    Remember the time when people used to take flight to the west to get freedom…how times have changed.
    ——————————–

  13. MoonOnPluto, what is Obama thinking now regarding Nelson Mandela?

    On the one hand if Mandela dies this week Obama will be furious because Obama likes to the the bride at the wedding and the corpse at the funeral. Obama won’t like giving Mandela the spotlight especially because Mandela unlike Obama had to work for what he accomplished.

    Then again if Mandela dies while Obama is in Africa Obama will be able to maximize the publicity stunt of his eulogy for Mandela. Then again if Mandela dies after Obama’s trip Obama will be seen as an interloper and a nuisance waiting for Mandela to die.

    We can be sure Obama will utilize Mandela, whatever happens, to race bait. If Mandela dies while the Zimmerman case is on and on the day the Supreme Court rules on affirmative action and/or the VRA case, Obama will win the trifecta of race baiting.

    If Mandela survives past this week Obama will be furious that Mandela deprived him of a publicity stunt opportunity. Also every inch of print, every second of broadcast time, spent on Mandela will stick in Obama’s craw.

    Right now Michelle Obama is ripping sleeves off those she has hoeing her vegetable patch. It’s an ugly thought we know, but Michelle is riled that her free 100 million dollar vacation might turn into a “serious” trip that will not allow her to put on freakish costumes made by Gaultier seasons or decades ago for David Bowie.

    Barack is tiptoeing around White House hallways in his socks today trying to avoid a beating from Michelle. “Everything you touch turns to sh*t” shouts Michelle. “Please don’t beat me anymore Moochie” cries Barack – sounding to all the world like George Zimmerman as Trayvon beats the sh*t out of him.

    Poor Barack.

  14. “I have always believed that affirmative action is ipso facto reverse discrimination, as John Marshall Harlan termed it.”
    *******
    The first organized affirmative action at the university level, that I am familiar with, was at the Ivy League colleges during the late 1920s. The president of Harvard proposed an affirmative action program to solve the “Jewish” problem at the Ivy league. Mid-West Protestants were recruited in order to give “geographic diversity” to the student bodies. Over a period of just a few years, the percentage of Jews dropped from double digits to low single digits. Today, it is likely that Asian students are most negatively affected by similar programs in the name of diversity.

  15. Bob Woodward on Immigration Reform: ‘Absurd’ if Congress Passes Unread Bill
    53
    1
    40

    Email Article
    Print Article Send a Tip
    by Matthew Boyle 23 Jun 2013, 10:51 AM PDT 42 post a comment
    Legendary Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward criticized the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill process, and the new rush to pass the repackaged bill with the amendment from Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and John Hoeven (R-ND), on Fox News Sunday.

    “You can’t have a Congress that is kind of going around picking this and picking that and that fails and that fails and this fails,” Woodward said in the online post-show panel of Fox News Sunday this weekend.

    Woodward added that “when you pass complicated legislation and no one has really read the bill” then “the outcome is absurd.”

    Woodward is the veteran journalist who, with Carl Bernstein, broke the Watergate scandal that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon, and has remained a force at the Post over the past several decades.

  16. The first organized affirmative action at the university level, that I am familiar with, was at the Ivy League colleges during the late 1920s. The president of Harvard proposed an affirmative action program to solve the “Jewish” problem at the Ivy league. Mid-West Protestants were recruited in order to give “geographic diversity” to the student bodies. Over a period of just a few years, the percentage of Jews dropped from double digits to low single digits. Today, it is likely that Asian students are most negatively affected by similar programs in the name of diversity.
    ——————-
    I am well aware of that history and posted it here before. Learned Hand took issue with it. It was the issue which eventually divided the ACLU, whereupon the half I was in sympathy with, led by William Van Alystne at Duke, who opposed affirmative action as racial quotas, bolted from the organization.

  17. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/20/194513/obamas-crackdown-views-leaks-as.html

    Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

    Insider Threats

    By Marisa Taylor and Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Washington Bureau

    WASHINGTON — Even before a former U.S. intelligence contractor exposed the secret collection of Americans’ phone records, the Obama administration was pressing a government-wide crackdown on security threats that requires federal employees to keep closer tabs on their co-workers and exhorts managers to punish those who fail to report their suspicions.

    President Barack Obama’s unprecedented initiative, known as the Insider Threat Program, is sweeping in its reach. It has received scant public attention even though it extends beyond the U.S. national security bureaucracies to most federal departments and agencies nationwide, including the Peace Corps, the Social Security Administration and the Education and Agriculture departments. It emphasizes leaks of classified material, bb>ut catchall definitions of “insider threat” give agencies latitude to pursue and penalize a range of other conduct.

    Government documents reviewed by McClatchy illustrate how some agencies are using that latitude to pursue unauthorized disclosures of any information, not just classified material. They also show how millions of federal employees and contractors must watch for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers and could face penalties, including criminal charges, for failing to report them. Leaks to the media are equated with espionage.

    “Hammer this fact home . . . leaking is tantamount to aiding the enemies of the United States,” says a June 1, 2012, Defense Department strategy for the program that was obtained by McClatchy.

    The Obama administration is expected to hasten the program’s implementation as the government grapples with the fallout from the leaks of top secret documents by Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor who revealed the agency’s secret telephone data collection program. The case is only the latest in a series of what the government condemns as betrayals by “trusted insiders” who have harmed national security.

    “Leaks related to national security can put people at risk,” Obama said on May 16 in defending criminal investigations into leaks. “They can put men and women in uniform that I’ve sent into the battlefield at risk. They can put some of our intelligence officers, who are in various, dangerous situations that are easily compromised, at risk. . . . So I make no apologies, and I don’t think the American people would expect me as commander in chief not to be concerned about information that might compromise their missions or might get them killed.”

    As part of the initiative, Obama ordered greater protection for whistleblowers who use the proper internal channels to report official waste, fraud and abuse, but that’s hardly comforting to some national security experts and current and former U.S. officials. They worry that the Insider Threat Program won’t just discourage whistleblowing but will have other grave consequences for the public’s right to know and national security.

    The program could make it easier for the government to stifle the flow of unclassified and potentially vital information to the public, while creating toxic work environments poisoned by unfounded suspicions and spurious investigations of loyal Americans, according to these current and former officials and experts. Some non-intelligence agencies already are urging employees to watch their co-workers for “indicators” that include stress, divorce and financial problems.

    “It was just a matter of time before the Department of Agriculture or the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) started implementing, ‘Hey, let’s get people to snitch on their friends.’ The only thing they haven’t done here is reward it,” said Kel McClanahan, a Washington lawyer who specializes in national security law. “I’m waiting for the time when you turn in a friend and you get a $50 reward.”

    The Defense Department anti-leak strategy obtained by McClatchy spells out a zero-tolerance policy. Security managers, it says, “must” reprimand or revoke the security clearances – a career-killing penalty – of workers who commit a single severe infraction or multiple lesser breaches “as an unavoidable negative personnel action.”
    Employees must turn themselves and others in for failing to report breaches. “Penalize clearly identifiable failures to report security infractions and violations, including any lack of self-reporting,” the strategic plan says.

    b><The Obama administration already was pursuing an unprecedented number of leak prosecutions, and some in Congress – long one of the most prolific spillers of secrets – favor tightening restrictions on reporters’ access to federal agencies, making many U.S. officials reluctant to even disclose unclassified matters to the public.

    The policy, which partly relies on behavior profiles, also could discourage creative thinking and fuel conformist “group think” of the kind that was blamed for the CIA’s erroneous assessment that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction, a judgment that underpinned the 2003 U.S. invasion.

    “The real danger is that you get a bland common denominator working in the government,” warned Ilana Greenstein, a former CIA case officer who says she quit the agency after being falsely accused of being a security risk. “You don’t get people speaking up when there’s wrongdoing. You don’t get people who look at things in a different way and who are willing to stand up for things. What you get are people who toe the party line, and that’s really dangerous for national security.”

    Obama launched the Insider Threat Program in October 2011 after Army Pfc. Bradley Manning downloaded hundreds of thousands of documents from a classified computer network and sent them to WikiLeaks, the anti-government secrecy group. It also followed the 2009 killing of 13 people at Fort Hood, Texas, by Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, an attack that federal authorities failed to prevent even though they were monitoring his emails to an al Qaida-linked Islamic cleric.

    An internal review launched after Manning’s leaks found “wide disparities” in the abilities of U.S. intelligence agencies to detect security risks and determined that all needed improved defenses.

    Obama’s executive order formalizes broad practices that the intelligence agencies have followed for years to detect security threats and extends them to agencies that aren’t involved in national security policy but can access classified networks. Across the government, new policies are being developed.

    There are, however, signs of problems with the program. Even though it severely restricts the use of removable storage devices on classified networks, Snowden, the former NSA contractor who revealed the agency’s telephone data collection operations, used a thumb drive to acquire the documents he leaked to two newspapers.

    “Nothing that’s been done in the past two years stopped Snowden, and so that fact alone casts a shadow over this whole endeavor,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the non-profit Federation of American Scientists’ Project on Government Secrecy. “Whatever they’ve done is apparently inadequate.”

    U.S. history is replete with cases in which federal agencies missed signs that trusted officials and military officers were stealing secrets. The CIA, for example, failed for some time to uncover Aldrich Ames, a senior officer who was one of the most prolific Soviet spies in U.S. history, despite polygraphs, drunkenness, and sudden and unexplained wealth.

    Stopping a spy or a leaker has become even more difficult as the government continues to accumulate information in vast computer databases and has increased the number of people granted access to classified material to nearly 5 million.

    Administration officials say the program could help ensure that agencies catch a wide array of threats, especially if employees are properly trained in recognizing behavior that identifies potential security risks.

    “If this is done correctly, an organization can get to a person who is having personal issues or problems that if not addressed by a variety of social means may lead that individual to violence, theft or espionage before it even gets to that point,” said a senior Pentagon official, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly.

    Manning, for instance, reportedly was reprimanded for posting YouTube messages describing the interior of a classified intelligence facility where he worked. He also exhibited behavior that could have forewarned his superiors that he posed a security risk, officials said.

    Jonathan Pollard, a former U.S. Navy intelligence analyst sentenced in 1987 to life in prison for spying for Israel, wasn’t investigated even though he’d failed polygraph tests and lied to his supervisors. He was caught only after a co-worker saw him leave a top-secret facility with classified documents.

    “If the folks who are watching within an organization for that insider threat – the lawyers, security officials and psychologists – can figure out that an individual is having money problems or decreased work performance and that person may be starting to come into the window of being an insider threat, superiors can then approach them and try to remove that stress before they become a threat to the organization,” the Pentagon official said.

    The program, however, gives agencies such wide latitude in crafting their responses to insider threats that someone deemed a risk in one agency could be characterized as harmless in another. Even inside an agency, one manager’s disgruntled employee might become another’s threat to national security.

    Obama in November approved “minimum standards” giving departments and agencies considerable leeway in developing their insider threat programs, leading to a potential hodgepodge of interpretations. He instructed them to not only root out leakers but people who might be prone to “violent acts against the government or the nation” and “potential espionage.”

    The Pentagon established its own sweeping definition of an insider threat as an employee with a clearance who “wittingly or unwittingly” harms “national security interests” through “unauthorized disclosure, data modification, espionage, terrorism, or kinetic actions resulting in loss or degradation of resources or capabilities.”
    “An argument can be made that the rape of military personnel represents an insider threat. Nobody has a model of what this insider threat stuff is supposed to look like,” said the senior Pentagon official, explaining that inside the Defense Department “there are a lot of chiefs with their own agendas but no leadership.”
    The Department of Education, meanwhile, informs employees that co-workers going through “certain life experiences . . . might turn a trusted user into an insider threat.” Those experiences, the department says in a computer training manual, include “stress, divorce, financial problems” or “frustrations with co-workers or the organization.”

    An online tutorial titled “Treason 101” teaches Department of Agriculture and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration employees to recognize the psychological profile of spies.

    A Defense Security Service online pamphlet lists a wide range of “reportable” suspicious behaviors, including working outside of normal duty hours. While conceding that not every behavior “represents a spy in our midst,” the pamphlet adds that “every situation needs to be examined to determine whether our nation’s secrets are at risk.”

    The Defense Department, traditionally a leading source of media leaks, is still setting up its program, but it has taken numerous steps. They include creating a unit that reviews news reports every day for leaks of classified defense information and implementing new training courses to teach employees how to recognize security risks, including “high-risk” and “disruptive” behaviors among co-workers, according to Defense Department documents reviewed by McClatchy.

    “It’s about people’s profiles, their approach to work, how they interact with management. Are they cheery? Are they looking at Salon.com or The Onion during their lunch break? This is about ‘The Stepford Wives,’” said a second senior Pentagon official, referring to online publications and a 1975 movie about robotically docile housewives. The official said he wanted to remain anonymous to avoid being punished for criticizing the program.

    The emphasis on certain behaviors reminded Greenstein of her employee orientation with the CIA, when she was told to be suspicious of unhappy co-workers.
    “If someone was having a bad day, the message was watch out for them,” she said.
    Some federal agencies also are using the effort to protect a broader range of information. The Army orders its personnel to report unauthorized disclosures of unclassified information, including details concerning military facilities, activities and personnel.

    The Peace Corps, which is in the midst of implementing its program, “takes very seriously the obligation to protect sensitive information,” said an email from a Peace Corps official who insisted on anonymity but gave no reason for doing so.
    Granting wide discretion is dangerous, some experts and officials warned, when federal agencies are already prone to overreach in their efforts to control information flow.

    The Bush administration allegedly tried to silence two former government climate change experts from speaking publicly on the dangers of global warming. More recently, the FDA justified the monitoring of the personal email of its scientists and doctors as a way to detect leaks of unclassified information.

    But R. Scott Oswald, a Washington attorney of the Employment Law Group, called the Obama administration “a friend to whistleblowers,” saying it draws a distinction between legitimate whistleblowers who use internal systems to complain of wrongdoing vs. leakers, who illegally make classified information public.

    There are numerous cases, however, of government workers who say they’ve been forced to go public because they’ve suffered retaliation after trying to complain about waste, fraud and abuse through internal channels or to Congress. Thomas Drake, a former senior NSA official, was indicted in 2010 under the Espionage Act after he disclosed millions of dollars in waste to a journalist. He’d tried for years to alert his superiors and Congress. The administration eventually dropped the charges against him.

    The Pentagon, meanwhile, declined to answer how its insider threat program would accommodate a leak to the news media like the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam that showed how successive administrations had misled the public and Congress on the war.

    “The danger is that supervisors and managers will use the profiles for ‘Disgruntled Employees’ and ‘Insider Threats’ to go after legitimate whistleblowers,” said the second Pentagon official. “The executive order says you can’t offend the whistleblower laws. But all of the whistleblower laws are about retaliation. That doesn’t mean you can’t profile them before they’re retaliated against.”

    Greenstein said she become the target of scrutiny from security officials after she began raising allegations of mismanagement in the CIA’s operations in Baghdad. But she never leaked her complaints, which included an allegation that her security chief deleted details about safety risks from cables. Instead, she relied on the agency’s internal process to make the allegations.

    The CIA, however, tried to get the Justice Department to open a criminal case after Greenstein mentioned during a polygraph test that she was writing a book, which is permitted inside the agency as long as it goes through pre-publication review. The CIA then demanded to see her personal computers. When she got them back months later, all that she’d written had been deleted, Greenstein said.

    “They clearly perceived me as an insider threat,” said Greenstein, who has since rewritten the book and has received CIA permission to publish portions of it. “By saying ‘I have a problem with this place and I want to make it better,’ I was instantly turned into a security threat,” she said. The CIA declined to comment.

    **********************************************

    this sounds like a very paranoid dictatorship…focused on knowing every move of everyone…and turning the citizens into fearful snitches who act like stepford wives and stepford husbands…

  18. Just to complete the point about affirmative action, a policy which is undemocratic to the core (corpse?), if we get 50 million or 100 million more illegals after passage of amnesty and a pathway to citizenship, the major challenge of the next thirty years is to move them up the economic food chain as quickly as possible, because if they remain at the bottom, there will be a revolution. Again, I am thinking like John Roberts would–to hell with the constitution, etc. The only way to do that is to give them a healthy dose of affirmative action, so they come out of the shadows. And since the whites will be disadvantaged by those same policies, their best response is to stop paying taxes. That way, everybody is happy. Especially John Roberts.

  19. But R. Scott Oswald, a Washington attorney of the Employment Law Group, called the Obama administration “a friend to whistleblowers,” saying it draws a distinction between legitimate whistleblowers who use internal systems to complain of wrongdoing vs. leakers, who illegally make classified information public.
    ———————
    What a fool. What a fool. Is he dumb enough to believe that or is he looking to advance the business interests of his firm. Who did he vote for? Who did he contribute to? Does he really think that line of separation will hold. I can tell you right now, it will not. Suppose you are a “legitimate” whistle blower, as this clown defines the term. Suppose further that you complain to your supervisor as he suggests. And finally, suppose that your supervisor refuses to act, and so does his supervisor. And suppose this is an issue of grave importance. How now brown cow? What do you do then? Crickets from R.Scott Oswald. But that is the point is it not?

  20. that’s it wbboei…O and the Intelligence Surveillance community have all corners covered…they are going to get anyone they want one way or another…

    whistleblowers are ostracized and demonized and then they are run out of dodge…

    you keep hearing the establishment reporters on TV ask…”isn’t there anyone they (the whistleblower) could go to…a member in Congress?”

    yeah, right…and then what…Congress…who in Congres has the guts or strength to fight off the insider Intelligence community track…

    the O admin has been the death knoll for whistleblowers…or even independent thinkers…and the irony is that Snowden’s actions have pulled the curtain on O the so called “friend of the whistleblowers”…and it isn’t pretty…

  21. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/wikileaks-snowden-asylum/2013/06/23/id/511398

    Ecuador Confirms Snowden Asylum Request; Ambassador to Meet US Fugitive

    Fugitive former U.S. spy agency contractor Edward Snowden is seeking asylum in Ecuador, the Quito government said on Sunday, after Hong Kong let him leave for Russia despite Washington’s efforts to extradite him on espionage charges.
    In a major embarrassment for the Obama administration, an aircraft thought to have been carrying Snowden landed in Moscow, and the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks said he was “bound for the Republic of Ecuador via a safe route for the purposes of asylum.”

    Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino, visiting Vietnam, tweeted: “The Government of Ecuador has received an asylum request from Edward J. #Snowden.”

    The United States warned countries in the Western Hemisphere that Snowden might travel through or take refuge in not to let the former spy agency contractor go anywhere but home, a State Department official said on Sunday.

    “The U.S. is advising these governments that Snowden is wanted on felony charges, and as such should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel, other than is necessary to return him to the United States,” the official said in a written statement.

    The State Department did not identify any of the countries.

    Ecuador has been sheltering WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange at its London embassy for the past year, and Ecuador’s ambassador to Russia said he expected to meet Snowden in Moscow on Sunday.

    snip

    Ecuadorean Ambassador Patricio Alberto Chavez Zavala told reporters at a Moscow airport hotel that he would hold talks with Snowden and Sarah Harrison, a WikiLeaks representative.

    snip

  22. wbboei
    June 23, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    Bob Woodward on Immigration Reform: ‘Absurd’ if Congress Passes Unread Bill
    _____________________________

    They do things bass ackwards in DC they pass the bills so they can find out what is in them. 👿

  23. S
    June 23, 2013 at 5:47 pm

    …so glad Hillary is not a State during this fiasco…so glad…
    _______________________________

    Yes!!! Me too. 🙂

  24. wbboei
    June 23, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    Bob Woodward on Immigration Reform: ‘Absurd’ if Congress Passes Unread Bill
    _____________________________

    They do things bass ackwards in DC they pass the bills so they can find out what is in them

    —————————–
    That is fine. Then we have no obligation to abide by them unless we want to. The source of the law is legitimacy. If there is no legitimacy then enforcement efforts will all be in vain. If a legislator votes yes on a bill he has never read, is that informed consent? If not, how can that law have any legitimacy? He cannot be deemed to represent the people, any more than that RINO jackass from Nevada who replaced the disgraced John Ensign?

  25. Fresh on the heels of Obama’s declaration of submission to the Taliban, the devout Muslim group slaughtered 10 tourists (inclduing one American). They took the money and passports from the tourists and then gunned them down, said the official.

    The Obama Administration announced that it will meet with the Taliban in Doha for “peace talks” while the Taliban continued to orchestrate insider attacks, killing our soldiers. They continued to poison girls’ schools across Afghanistan, kidnap Red Cross workers, enforce the most brutal and extreme ideology on the face of the earth (the Sharia), and call for the defeat of American and coalition forces.

    These jihadists behead Afghan children, slaughter Afghans who dare to attend a party where dancing takes place, and mean to run Mullah Omar for President, despite the fact that there is still a $10-million-dollar reward on his head. Omar sheltered Osama bin Laden prior to the 9/11 attacks; he had a hand in the 9/11 attacks; and he has directed the Taliban’s ongoing war against U.S.-led NATO forces. On what basis could a peace conference move forward? It is, in fact, a surrender.

    The Taliban surprised and angered the US and Afghanistan with a poster proclaiming its new office in Doha was for the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, rather than a political office for peace talks.

    http://bit.ly/1a53cks

  26. The United States warned countries in the Western Hemisphere that Snowden might travel through or take refuge in not to let the former spy agency contractor go anywhere but home, a State Department official said on Sunday.
    ———————-
    Paper tiger, unless . . . no, that is silly . . . sure it is silly, but in the age of Obama, that is hardly a disabling condition . . . alright then what are you suggesting, you fool . . . I am not the fool here . . . or even if I am, then there are others who deserve that accolade more than I do . . . alright whom then are you referring to . . . bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran and we will be in there for 100 years . . . I am not here to play knock knock jokes, tell me who you are talking about or stop wasting my time . . . I mean the senior senator from Arizona and RINO of the century (the last century–or the one before it) John McCain. Right now he is probably calling out the F-16’Ss for a joy ride to Quito, sort of a consolation prize for not getting the presidency or his way on Iran. Hell with Assagne and now Snowden there in one place, John will argue it is like shooting fish in a barrel.

    All kidding aside, it looks like a beautiful country, and it protects the rights of nature, which will surely include Snowden. A friend of mine was talking about this as a great place to retire, for those of us who have led far less interesting and heroic lives than Snowden. He has given a gift to this country, if not this country and I think he is a hero. Technology always outstrips social wisdom, hence the latter needs to catch up. The logic of Dr Stangelove was brought home to me by a friend who died of cancer, but during his career her worked with Teller, and according to him, he invented the trigger for that device. I have no proof of that other than his word. But what he did say was that he failed to realize the moral downside of his work, because he like he rest of his colleagues were so immersed in beating the Soviets. The same behavioral blindness among computer technocrats is in evidence today.

  27. Again, if you conflate this government with this country, then there is no way to excuse or condone what Snowden has done. None whatsoever. But if you see them as separate and opposing entities, then he is a hero. Specifically, if you see this country in terms of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, then Sowden is the canary in the cave–warning us that our oxygen supply is being depleted and liberty will die. And if you see this government using the threat of terrorism as an excuse to turn this nation into a police state, then you will see the value in what Snowden has done, and wish him god speed. I remember a statement by Bush in the aftermath of 911, wondering why we were attacked. He gave a simpleton answer, because they hate our freedom. I thought it had more to do with the fact that the westernization we promote to advance our economic empire threatened their culture and what they believe in. But let us assume he is right, and stipulate that they reason they fight us is because they hate our freedom. The question then becomes whether they hate our freedom more than Bush and Obama do?

  28. foxyladi14
    June 23, 2013 at 6:43 pm
    ———————
    I loved his dad, Irving Kristol. He was a former leftist turned conservative and every line he wrote in his prolific essays was true. Never thought much of Bill however–Project for a New American Century, the neo con Bible

    But not, for one brief shining moment and on this narrow point–read before you sign on I say, bravo.

    Now . . . let me tell you the tactical reason why I say that, because I have been there and done that.

    When you want to sell a national program you go to the weakest member of the opposition and offer them a little bacon to bring home to their constituents, which is legitimate under the rules of the game. So you start with RINO freshman Senator Houven (R-Wi). You know he is a weak sister with no values since he has gone from democrat to independent to Republican in two short years. You offer him 30 pieces of silver and tell him he ought to be on Broadway, and zap the deal is done. Then you move to the next weakest RINO freshman Heller (R-Nv) and you offer him 30 pieces as well, but he has already heard about the deal you made with Houven but he wants 40 pieces of silver and star billing on Broadway, and you give it to him so he will support your bill. The next thing you know, your cell phone rings, and it is Houven. He has heard about the deal you cut with Heller, he is mad and he now wants a new deal which is better than Heller’s. You give it to him and then Heller calls and says me too etc. Ad seriatum, ad nauseum.

    If the Senators can be persuaded to delay the vote until they have read the bill they will see the booby traps they are signing onto, the indefensible positions they will be forced to defend in their next election, in short the ghost of Christmases to come. And they will learn that in this Casbah of horsetrading and prostitution, the only thing you can be sure of is if you got a good deal somebody else got a better one. But nobody said this better than Shakespeare:

    MACBETH If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well
    It were done quickly: if the assassination
    Could trammel up the consequence, and catch
    With his surcease success; that but this blow
    Might be the be-all and the end-all here,
    But here, upon this bank and shoal of time,
    We’ld jump the life to come. But in these cases
    We still have judgment here;
    that we but teach
    Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
    To plague the inventor:

    this even-handed justice

  29. Wbboei says:

    But if you see them as separate and opposing entities, then he is a hero. Specifically, if you see this country in terms of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, then Snowden is the canary in the cave–warning us that our oxygen supply is being depleted and liberty will die. And if you see this government using the threat of terrorism as an excuse to turn this nation into a police state, then you will see the value in what Snowden has done, and wish him god speed.

    **********************************************

    so well said and true…

  30. Anybody else get one of these notes in their email?

    Running for president of the United States isn’t easy. I saw it first hand in 2003.

    But what drives you. What pushes you. What makes you do more than you thought was possible are the supporters behind you.

    I know from personal experience that having a group of supporters ready to go before I even jumped into the race made a tough decision much easier.

    That’s exactly the message we need to send Hillary Clinton today. She needs to know that if she decides to run for president, then she’ll have an army of supporters behind her. I’m going to be Ready for Hillary. Will you be?

    Can you make a $5 donation so we can reach 5,000 donors before the FEC filing deadline on June 30th and send a strong message that we stand with Hillary?

    When Hillary Clinton took over as Secretary of State, America’s image around the globe was badly damaged. Since then, we’ve ended the war in Iraq. We’re winding down in Afghanistan. We decimated al-Qaeda’s leadership, and helped democracy grow in the Middle East.

    Supporting Hillary is an easy decision for me. I know she’ll steer us straight at home and represent us right abroad. We all know that Hillary would make the best president for our country.

    But it’s up to us to build an organization that can actually take her to the White House. There is absolutely no substitute for a real grassroots organization that can raise funds, organize supporters, and take the campaign’s message to the people.

    Thanks so much for your help,

    General Wes Clark

  31. S
    June 23, 2013 at 4:41 pm
    ADMIN…no one pulls it all together and says it better…

    ——–
    Yup, and that’s why we are all here after so many years of flaming bags of dog poo left on our porches.

    Admin keeps us sane, at least part of the time 😉

  32. S
    June 23, 2013 at 5:47 pm
    …so glad Hillary is not a State during this fiasco…so glad…


    I was thinking the same thing.

  33. SHV
    June 23, 2013 at 3:38 pm

    “The founding fathers understood this propensity of human nature. They knew it had the capacity to enslave us.”
    ******
    Snowden has exposed a fundamental fault line in American politics and it’s not Liberal/Conservative but Constitution/Totalitarian. It seems that members of the Uniparty, despite their roles in the political street theater, are united in calling Snowden a traitor. It is a marker of how far we have fallen that there are so few calling bullshit on the Bush/Cheney/Obama Police State.
    ___________

    Exactly. And, I’ve been surprised at the number of regular people who just haven’t much of an opinion about this issue, some of them saying that government leaders have probably done that kind of stuff ever since they had the tech capability to do so – like it’s no big deal. No doubt there have been abuses through the years, with government becoming more invasive as capability increased, but to be ok with the invasion of privacy and indifferent about Snowden, or worse, to feel antipathy for Snowden and his actions, as some have expressed, including and especially, as we have seen some in government and the media do, is just mind-boggling.

    Damn, talk about your wusses. To feel no more ownership over the rights guaranteed by the constitution, and no outrage at their violation by the people elected to uphold and defend it, is just disturbing.

    Then, again. It may be the helplessness factor. I think about how outraged Hillary supporters grew, in 2008, as the rigged primary unfolded, with Obama being the media darling, and the deck stacked for him in every way. We all felt pretty outraged then, and worked like hell to turn things around, not knowing until the final weeks just how rigged it all was. We were totally powerless to prevent Hillary from having the nomination forcibly removed from her, and awarded to Barack.

    I guess some people feel they have no power anyway, so why get worked up. And, that’s a scary thought.

  34. Gack, every time I refresh this thread I get Candy’s ugly ass voice blaring at me. Wish that her video didn’t come on automatically and then I have to hunt back to the video to shut if off.

  35. Go Snowden, Go

    By Larry Johnson on June 23, 2013 at 11:47 AM in Current Affairs

    I am thoroughly disgusted by the hysterical hyperventilating of politicians and pundits, who have a vested interest in protecting and promoting a burgeoning national security bureaucracy, feigning righteous indignation over the antics of NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden. The smearing of Snowden is not remarkable, it is how the damn Washington political/media establishment works to discredit anyone who won’t play ball with them.

    Just saw the pompous horse’s ass, David Gregory of Meet the Press, carrying water for the Obama Administration and challenging Glen Greenwald’s status as a journalist because he is publishing Snowden’s material. Gregory whines he was just asking a question (yet framed the question about whether Greenwald should be prosecuted as a co-conspirator in the same way someone would ask, “Do you enjoy beating your wife?”), but Gregory clearly was sending Greenwald a signal that he is not a “real” journalist.

    Gregory is pissed at Greenwald because Greenwald is not part of the “club.”

    What is a real journalist in Washington? They relish the art of political fellatio. They suck it in deep and swallow load and load of bullshit and deception. Happy to do so though, as long as they get to fly on Air Force One and attend the White House Christmas Party.

    America, in general, and Washington, DC, in particular, is a genuine threat to the security of the world. That is the ugly truth that Edward Snowden exposed.

    We saw George W. Bush do it and now we see Barack Obama doing it–wrapping himself in the mantle of national security, insisting that the President is only trying to save American lives. Yet, instead of saving life, Obama is pursuing policies and actions that have the opposite effect. Instead of strengthening civil liberties and the protection of individual rights, Obama, like Bush, is pushing intelligence policies that give the US Government direct access to your private communications despite the proscriptions of the Fourth Amendment. Instead of securing that national welfare, Obama, like Bush, is pursuing secret wars that do nothing to enhance America’s security. Instead of promoting freedom of the press, Obama, more extreme than Bush on this count, is prosecuting journalists for doing their job.

    The smugness of Americans when it comes to national security and our ostensible freedoms is totaling sickening. We like to sing, teary-eyed, “God Bless America.” We get chills when we hear Lee Greenwood croon, “I’m Proud to Be An American.” Yet we wantonly and recklessly pursue policies in other countries that promote death and destruction. If you supported the war in Iraq then you are an enabler of terrorism. I don’t want to hear a damn complaint from you about Iran and its potential threat in the Middle East. You helped create that problem by backing the invasion of Iraq.

    If you are backing Barack on Syria, then screw you too. That policy is beyond madness and insanity. It is an act of suicide for America. We are arming radical jihadists, in the name of freedom, in order to oust a leader that we see as a proxy for Iran. And to achieve what? Ensure the control of Sunni extremists in the Middle East. At the same time we insist that we must have robust National Security Agency intrusion into the private affairs of anyone for the purpose of stopping terrorism. Of course, the terrorism threat comes predominantly from the very Sunni extremists that we are backing in Syria. You do not have to be a math major to appreciate that this equation does not add up.

    Until we come to grips with our own entrenched hypocrisy, we will continue to victimize ourselves and the world. I am not proud to be that kind of American. I am ashamed.

    In that spirit, I wish Edward Snowden well. He is not a traitor. Exposing uncomfortable truths is the act of a patriot.

    http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/76044/go-snowden-go/#more-76044

  36. The smearing of Snowden is not remarkable, it is how the damn Washington political/media establishment works to discredit ANYONE who won’t play ball with them.
    ————————
    Truer words were never spoken.

  37. The 3 Days of the Condor reminds me of a little vignette:

    A prominent Harvard lawyer I know went to high school in Tallahassee with Faye Dunaway. They played leading boy and leading girl in one of those dreadful high school plays. I assumed from the way he talked about her that she inspired in him his first dirty thoughts. He told me ruefully that after high school she went to New York city, and moved in with Lenny Bruce, who was no stranger to drugs. He raved about her so often, that I began to wonder whether he had had the same hypnotic effect on her. Well, as often happens, fate stepped in and answered my question.

    A friend of mine happened to be on an airplane from God knows where to the City of the Angels. As luck would have it, sitting next to him was the remains of Faye Dunaway. My friend introduced himself to her, ordered her a glass of champagne and told her hi on behalf of that prominent attorney, whom he referred to by name. She frowned and said I have never heard of him. As you might expect, that prominent attorney was very deflated when we gave him that bit of bad news. It would have been unchristian, unseemly and uncivilized not to.

  38. McConnell is up for re-election next year. His constituents need to know he could stop this immigration deform in the Senate IF he wanted to. How? The bill needs 60 votes and the dims have only 55. If McConnell leaned on the republican side of the gang of eight plus the two rookies who they have co-opted to give them the magic number, then it would go down. I understand that commitments have been made, so he must not expect them to walk them back. Instead he should tell everyone on his side to vote know if Reid tried to shove it through now, before they have had a chance to read it. He should tell Reid the same thing. The thinking is that once they read it and saw the trouble it will pose to them, they will reject it. But McConnell will not do that, because he is a RION. Eighteen months from now, and ex . . .

  39. I don’t know if this comment will make it past the dreaded black hole but David Gregory got his ass handed to him by Greenwald:

  40. freespirit

    June 23, 2013 at 10:59 pm

    Then, again. It may be the helplessness factor. I think about how outraged Hillary supporters grew, in 2008, as the rigged primary unfolded, with Obama being the media darling, and the deck stacked for him in every way. We all felt pretty outraged then, and worked like hell to turn things around, not knowing until the final weeks just how rigged it all was. We were totally powerless to prevent Hillary from having the nomination forcibly removed from her, and awarded to Barack.

    I guess some people feel they have no power anyway, so why get worked up. And, that’s a scary thought.
    ____________________________________________________

    Free, that is it in a nutshell. Obama is not about Hope and Change but Helplessness and More of the Same. Maybe the truth was too long for a bumpersticker.

  41. Monday with a bang:

    http://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-takes-rating-actions-on-nine-Hong-Kong-banks–PR_275029

    Hong Kong, June 24, 2013 — Moody’s Investors Service has changed the outlooks for the bank financial strength ratings (BFSRs)/Baseline Credit Assessments (BCAs) of eight Hong Kong banks to negative from stable, and one bank’s BFSR outlook to stable from positive.

    In addition, Moody’s has lowered Wing Lung Bank’s BFSR by one notch, and affirmed all other ratings of the nine banks.

    Moody’s has affirmed the deposit ratings of all the nine banks involved in this rating action. However, it has changed the outlooks on the deposit ratings for five of the nine banks concerned to negative from stable, while those for the other four banks are unchanged at stable.

    DOW futures are down well over 100.

  42. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_WHATS_LEFT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-24-07-53-32

    The Supreme Court has 11 cases, including the term’s highest profile matters, to resolve before the justices take off for summer vacations, teaching assignments and international travel.

    The court is meeting Monday for its last scheduled session, but will add days until all the cases are disposed of.

    A look at some of the cases:

    Gay Marriage: Actually two cases. One is a challenge to California’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. The other is an attack on a provision of federal law that prevents legally married gay couples from receiving a range of tax, health and pension benefits.

    Affirmative action: A white woman denied admission to the University of Texas seeks to overturn the school’s consideration of race among many factors in filling the last quarter of its freshman classes. A broad ruling could end the use of race in college admissions nationwide.

    Voting rights: A suburb of Birmingham, Ala., wants the court to end the nearly 50-year-old requirement for some state and local governments, mainly in the South and with a history of discrimination in voting, to get the advance approval of any changes in the way they hold elections.

    Native American adoption: A wrenching dispute over who gets custody of Native American girl, her biological father or the adoptive couple who cared for her until she was 2. The case involves the interpretation of a 1978 law intended to prevent American Indian children from being taken from their homes and typically placed with non-Indian adoptive or foster parents.

    Generic Drugs: The industry is asking the Supreme Court to extend protections that makers of generic drugs have from state court lawsuits if federal officials have approved the design of the brand-name version the generic drug copied.

    Private property: A Florida property owner wants compensation, under the Constitution’s requirement that the government must pay if it takes your property, for a local government’s refusal to issue a development permit.

    Workplace discrimination: Two cases test different aspects of federal law barring discrimination on the basis of race. In one, the court has to decide what level of responsibility it takes to be considered a worker’s supervisor in a discrimination complaint. The other asks whether an employer’s action can be considered retaliation against an employee who complains of racial harassment if retaliation was a motivating factor, or must it be the only factor.

  43. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-23/historic-week-opens-as-high-court-saves-biggest-cases-for-last.html

    “In the court’s modern history, I don’t think there has ever been one week with so much at stake,” said Tom Goldstein, a Supreme Court lawyer whose Scotusblog website tracks the court and is sponsored by Bloomberg Law. “We have four pending cases that may be cited for at least a century.” [snip]

    Even before the court issues its first decisions, it may announce a blockbuster case for its 2013-14 term. At 9:30 a.m. the justices will release a list of new cases, potentially including a showdown over President Barack Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.

    The affirmative action dispute is the court’s longest-pending case. The delay since the Oct. 10 argument has fueled questions about the maneuvering that may be going on behind the scenes and the impact that may have on the outcome.

    The dispute involves the University of Texas, which admits three-quarters of its freshman class on the basis of high school class rank. Because many Texas high schools are either heavily Hispanic or heavily black, the system ensures a significant minority presence at the state’s flagship public university. The issue for the Supreme Court is whether the university may consider race in admitting the rest of its class.

    The October argument suggested the court’s Republican-appointed majority, including likely swing vote Anthony Kennedy, was poised to strike down the Texas policy without necessarily barring affirmative action at other universities.

    Eight months of wrangling have given the justices time to explore other options, including a more sweeping ruling. They could overrule all or part of the 2003 Supreme Court decision that said universities may consider race in admissions to ensure a “critical mass” of minorities on campus.
    ‘Critical Mass’

    The court could also sidestep the affirmative action case in what would be a disappointment to opponents of racial preferences. The justices could conclude that Abigail Fisher, the rejected white applicant challenging the policy, now lacks the legal right to press the case because she has already graduated from a different university.

    The court will also rule on the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which opened the polls to millions of Southern blacks. An Alabama county is challenging the provision that requires that all or parts of 15 states get federal “preclearance” before making any change to their voting rules.

    As with affirmative action, the conservative majority cast doubt on preclearance during February arguments, questioning whether it was still needed to protect minorities. Those same justices were also skeptical when they scrutinized the law four years ago. The justices later delivered a lesson on the hazards of predicting outcomes based on arguments when they reached a compromise ruling that spared the preclearance requirement.

    The two gay-marriage cases are the first the court has ever considered. The justices are reviewing California’s Proposition 8, a 2008 ballot initiative that banned same-sex marriage after a state court decision had permitted it for five months. The high court could limit its ruling to California or issue a nationwide decision.

    The second case tests the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, which denies federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples. Gay marriage is legal in 12 states and the District of Columbia.

    Both clashes offer the justices procedural options that would let them avoid ruling on a whether the Constitution requires equal treatment for gay men and lesbians. In the California case, the justices spent much of the March 26 argument debating whether the defenders of Proposition 8 had the legal right to appeal.

    The court has a similar option in the DOMA case. The Obama administration’s decision to oppose the law, even while continuing to enforce it, has created questions about the jurisdiction of federal appeals courts to review the measure.

    A decision throwing out the DOMA challenge on jurisdictional grounds would leave the law in a state of disarray, potentially applying in some parts of the country. It would also be a blow to gay-rights advocates whose hopes were raised after Kennedy voiced skepticism about the law during arguments in March.

    The prospect of a jurisdictional ruling on DOMA received renewed attention in recent days after Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles, wrote that he had heard speculation among Washington lawyers about that potential outcome.

    A year ago, last-minute speculation about the fate of Obama’s health-care law proved correct. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s four Democratic appointees in voting to uphold the measure.

    A jurisdictional decision on DOMA “would be bad for the law,” Winkler said. “It would be bad for the gay-rights movement. It would be bad for the Obama administration.”

  44. Some commments on Larry Johnson’s article posted above:

    Greenwald tweeted out after the interview:

    “Who needs the government to try to criminalize journalism when you have David Gregory to do it?”

    David Gregory exposed, completely, as the liberal tool he is. Bravo Glenn Greenwald!

    Didn’t Thomas Paine say something to the effect:

    “The definition of a true patriot is one who protects his country from his govt”

    as for Gregory –> DC ELITE ASSHOLE

    and this Greenwald guy, at least he’s consistent in his principles.

    Hey, Thomas Paine is a dead white guy. Non importa.

  45. As if there wasn’t enough news to cover today already. Now there’s this from Egypt:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57590623/egypts-army-delivers-an-ominous-warning/

    Egypt’s army delivers an ominous warning

    Egypt’s army chief warned on Sunday that the military is ready to intervene to stop the nation from entering a “dark tunnel” of internal conflict.

    Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi spoke a week ahead of mass protests planned by opponents of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi. There are fears the demonstrations calling for Morsi’s ouster will descend into violence after some of the president’s hard-line supporters vowed to “smash” them. Others declared protesters were infidels who deserve to be killed.

    El-Sissi’s comments were his first in public on the planned June 30 protests. Made to officers during a seminar, they reflected the military’s frustration with the rule of Morsi, Egypt’s first freely elected president who completes one year in office on June 30.

    His comments, posted on the military’s Facebook page, could add pressure on Morsi as he braces for the protests after he spent his first year in office struggling with a host of problems that he is widely perceived to have failed to effectively tackle, like surging crime, rising prices, fuel shortages, power cuts and unemployment.

    El-Sissi also appeared to lower the threshold for what warrants intervention by the military. Earlier he cited collapse or near collapse of the state.

    He said that while the military has recently stayed out the political fray and focused instead on its combat capabilities, its patriotic and moral responsibility toward Egyptians obliges it to intervene and stop Egypt from “slipping into a dark tunnel of conflict, internal fighting.” He said sectarian violence and the collapse of state institutions would also justify intervention. [snip]

    In a thinly veiled warning to Morsi’s hard-line backers, el-Sissi said: “It is not honorable that we remain silent in the face of the terrorizing and scaring of our Egyptian compatriots. There is more honor in death than watching a single Egyptian harmed while his army is standing idly by.”

    El-Sissi also warned that the military will no longer tolerate any “insults” to the armed forces and its leaders, a reference to a series of comments by leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Morsi hails, that were perceived by the military as insults.

  46. So True….

    If Snowden were Chinese or Iranian, had leaked info about their spying and then sought asylum in US, we’d grant it and call him a hero.

  47. I can see the army intervening and taking back Egypt quite easily….i wish the Turkish army was still able too and not riddled by 10 years of Erdogan putting his men in place and arresting the ataturk generals.

  48. The question Gregory posed to Greenwald, i.e. why he should not be prosecuted as a journalist for aiding and abetting Snowden was a hostile and accusatory one. He deserved the very personal rebuke he received from Greewald in response: Greenwald accused Gregory of not being a journalist himself, but rather an apologist for the Administration. Gregory tried to deflect those comments by claiming that the question did not necessarily reflect his own feelings on the subject, and it was simply a question others he did not name were asking. But it was obvious from the tone and tenor of the question and the way he posed it to Greewald that it did in fact reflect his view that Greenwald should be prosecuted. If the had prefaced his question with those disclaimers, the impression would have been different. By failing to do so, a reasonable person could easily discern what who Gregory is, what he was up to, and how he got caught with his pants down. (

  49. Latest “Deal” from the Senate: Pass Amnesty First, Read the Bill Later

    By: Senator Ted Cruz (Diary) | June 23rd, 2013 at 11:09 PM | 27

    RESIZE: AAA

    On Monday at 5:30pm, the United States Senate will vote on the most sweeping immigration reform proposal it has considered in almost 3 decades – and it will do so having only seen the nearly 1200 pages of text for approximately 72 hours. Americans – including myself, my fellow senators and our staffs – are still trying to figure out exactly what is in the new Schumer-Corker-Hoeven “deal.”

    Sound familiar? Pass it to find out what’s in it? Reminiscent of Obamacare, the lengthy amendment to replace the Gang of 8’s original bill was crafted behind closed doors and introduced late on Friday, after many members had left town. In the 2007 immigration debate, close to 50 amendments were considered. But this year, we have only debated 9 – with some of us being completely shut out.

    Given only a weekend to review the language, we will now vote on whether to end a debate that never really began. To be clear – this is not a difficult vote. On process alone, we should all vote “no.“ This was by design – the President, Harry Reid and the Gang of 8 preferred all along to ram through a “deal,” and not have a real debate – just like Obamacare. Worse, just like Obamacare, the “deal” involved lots of horse-trading and buying off of votes at the last minute – a display of everything that is wrong with Washington, and one of the things I specifically campaigned against.

    But, on substance – the vote is even easier. There are too many troubling provisions of the bill to list, such as de facto affirmative action hiring for current illegal immigrants due to Obamacare and huge amounts of discretion for the DHS Secretary to waive deportation and inadmissibility. And for all the talk, the new Schumer-Corker-Hoeven “deal” is nothing new at all. It’s the same amnesty-before-false-promise-of-security of the Gang of 8 and the bills of debates past.

    That is why we started this petition, so that Americans can speak out and let Senators know that they oppose the legalization-first bill offered by the Gang of 8 and Schumer-Corker-Hoeven.

    Here’s what we know that the bill does:

    Grants Immediate Amnesty with Empty Promise of Border Security

    Although we are told that it fixes border security, the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amendment maintains the Gang of 8’s flawed framework of guaranteed and immediate legalization, followed by an empty promise of eventual border security. This structure repeats the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty, which, as noted by former Attorney General Edwin Meese, is precisely the same as this “deal,” and only encourages more illegal immigration.

    The Schumer-Corker-Hoeven compromise demonstrates that Congress is not serious about meaningful border security. The first amendment considered by the full Senate in this debate, offered by Senator Grassley, would have required effective control of the border for six months before legalization. Democrats and the Gang of 8 refused to even consider the merits of that proposal, voting to table it without real consideration. The Senate then rejected five additional amendments that would have enhanced border security, including completion of additional border fencing and implementation of the biometric entry/exit US-VISIT system required by current law, both before legalization.

    Provides No Real Border Security at All

    Now, the same proponents who led the charge against those amendments say, “Trust us.” A closer look at their border security plan, however, reveals gaping holes. Most notably, the amendment’s security enhancements are not contemplated until almost ten years after the bill’s enactment; none would be in place before amnesty. Moreover, the signature “border surge” that would double the Border Patrol does not require that a single new agent be added before amnesty is granted just six months after the bill becomes law.

    Weakens Fencing Requirement

    Regarding a southern border fence, Schumer-Corker-Hoeven provides for only single-layer fencing, instead of the double-layer fencing that was required under the Secure Fence Act of 2006. It leaves in place the Department of Homeland Security’s asserted discretion to decide whether and where double-layered fencing is appropriate and leaves open the possibility that no fencing may be built at all. As a result, the United States is simply unprepared to deal with the influx of immigrants who will seek to enter this country illegally in pursuit of a path to U.S. citizenship during the two-and-a-half year amnesty period, when deportations and enforcement are virtually halted.

    Weakens Current Law on Entry-Exit System

    Schumer-Corker-Hoeven also weakens current law with respect to an entry/exit system, requiring only biographic — rather than biometric — identification.

    Current law requires implementation of a biometric entry/exit system (called US-VISIT) – that is, a system that checks individuals’ biological characteristics, such as a fingerprint. But this biometric system has never been setup. Rather than enforce this current law, Schumer-Corker-Hoeven weakens it by requiring ports to use only a biographic entry/exit system – a system that checks only non-biological characteristics, like an individual’s name or date of birth. It is much easier to falsify biographic information, which is precisely why current law requires a biometric system.

    Avoids any Metric for Measuring True Border Security

    It also drops the current requirement that 100% of the border be under operational control (the ability to detect and respond to all cross-border illegal activity), adopting instead the Gang of 8’s flawed “effectiveness rate” metric to measure success. The “effectiveness rate” metric is based on subjective estimates of the number of illegal border crossing, so it does not provide an accurate measure of whether the border is secure.

    Assumes Future Significant Illegal Entry

    By its own terms, the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amendment recognizes that illegal immigration will remain a problem in the future. It mandates that as many as 1,000 distress beacons be placed in areas along the border where deaths are known to occur. It also directs the enhancement of “training, resources, and professionalism” for border officials in Mexico and Central American countries, as well as an educational campaign about the perils of the journey to the United States, for nationals of those countries.

    Fails to Measure Up to Alternatives

    A number of my colleagues have offered, or are ready to offer, far superior approaches. For example, besides the Grassley Amendment I already noted, Senator Thune offered an amendment to require additional border fencing before legalization, and Senator Vitter offered an amendment to require implementation of the US-VISIT biometric entry/exist system before legalization. Both were rejected.

    In addition, I offered but have been refused a vote on, a simple, five-page amendment that stands in stark contrast to the mess created by Schumer-Corker-Hoeven and avoids the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty by ensuring a truly secure border before legalization is granted. My amendment would: triple the Border Patrol; quadruple equipment and assets to monitor the border; complete all fencing required by the Secure Fence Act of 2006; fully implement US-VISIT; and establish operational control over 100 percent of the southern border. In addition, it would require that these things be completed or a portion of DHS’s budget would be block-granted to states for border security. Finally, it would pay for border security by offsets against federal spending rather than taxes and deficits. This clear plan leaves Americans no doubt about what to expect and, most importantly, ensures that we put a stop to illegal immigration.

    Requires American People to Stand up and say No

    Of course, Americans will not get this kind of real security if they do not demand it. Sponsors would have us believe that as many as 70 of my colleagues will support the Gang of 8 bill, as amended by Schumer-Corker-Hoeven. Rarely do we see so transparently how votes in the Senate are bought and sold, but the laundry list of buyoffs in this deal details plainly the path to amnesty. The last-minute introduction and overwhelming page count are by design, and this exercise has become more about politics than principle. This is Washington at its worst, and America deserves better. The proponents of this bill are squandering an opportunity to fix our legal immigration system responsibly and finally secure our borders. Instead, they are jamming through amnesty that undermines the rule of law and harms those who will desperately seek it.

    Tell your Senator to vote “no.”

  50. admin
    June 23, 2013 at 11:25 pm
    Shadowfax, we did not realize that was happening. We have now muzzled Candy and 2×4 Chuck.

    <Thank you Admin!!!!

  51. Mouse vs. man in new Cold War
    By MICHAEL GOODWIN

    Posted: 12:54 AM, June 23, 2013

    Michael Goodwin

    The photo of President Obama and Russian boss Vladimir Putin sitting glum-faced at the G8 summit sparked talk of a new Cold War. Let’s hope not, because we would lose this time.

    Looking at them, I had one thought: In a showdown, my money is on Putin. In fact, whether negotiating over Syria or arm-wrestling, I want a Putin on our side.

    He knows his country’s national interests and is prepared to pursue them. We, on the other hand, have a president who increasingly lives over the rainbow.

    World disorder is growing by the day, and Obama seems not to notice or care. His big moment in Berlin — a speech at the Brandenburg Gate — was noteworthy for his profuse sweating.

    News reports focused on the small crowd, which was a fraction of the rock-star-sized turnout he got there in 2008. But Obama’s topic struck me as the cause for alarm.

    He proposed cutting Russian and American nuclear arms by a third, an idea so loopy it had the feeling of a bait-and-switch. He had to know Putin would say nyet, and the timing made no sense with chemical weapons floating around in Syria and the rise of new nuclear powers, including Pakistan, India and North Korea.

    Even worse, Iran’s scramble for the bomb and the warning from Saudi Arabia and others that they will want their own nukes made Obama’s choice an embarrassment. It was as if he was trying to turn attention away from the present dangers by floating a tired vision of Hope & Change.

    Forget the world as it is, let’s dream about the world we want. Maybe throw a little pixie dust in the air and wish for a pony, too.

    Dreaming has its time and place, but it is no substitute for action that might make the world safer here and now.

    His pathetic performance raises questions: Is our president giving up on containing the chaos? Have the world’s problems overwhelmed him?

    Actually, I suspect something far more dangerous. He doesn’t have a clue about how bad things are.

    Obama has never appreciated America’s unique standing in the world. Coming out of the blame-America-first faculty lounge, he believes the planet would be a better place if we took a smaller role in it.

    That’s the vision he has followed by sounding the retreat across the globe. “Leading from behind” is how one aide described it, but it’s not leading at all, unless you call running for the exits leading.

    The result hasn’t been a rise of the good guys who were supposedly held back by our heavy hand. Instead, the vacuum is being filled by Iran and its agents in the Mideast, assorted Islamists in North Africa and tyrants and sociopaths everywhere. Obama is so consumed with his own navel that he hasn’t noticed the world isn’t cooperating with his vision.

  52. The Supreme Court announced it will hear the appointments case next term. This is an appeal from a devastating loss for Obama on his appointments to the Labor Relations Board. The DC court ruling was a sweeping rebuke.

    On the Zimmerman court case, the prosecution is delivering its opening statement.

    The DOW is down over 200 points.

  53. “It is not honorable that we remain silent in the face of the terrorizing and scaring of our Egyptian compatriots. There is more honor in death than watching a single Egyptian harmed while his army is standing idly by.”

    WOW!

  54. Wbb, your article by Goodwin makes many cogent points. I particularly liked his analysis of why Obama has failed as the leader of this country:

    “Dreaming has its time and place, but it is no substitute for action that might make the world safer here and now.

    His pathetic performance raises questions: Is our president giving up on containing the chaos? Have the world’s problems overwhelmed him?

    Actually, I suspect something far more dangerous. He doesn’t have a clue about how bad things are.”

    *******************

    Hillary talked about Barack’s magical thinking in 2008, and the ineffectiveness of having lofty ideals, with no workable plan – indeed, no inkling of how to deliver on the grand vision.

    She knew, as did we all, that there was absolutely no evidence on which to base the belief that Obama could effectively lead this country. Hell, there was no real evidence on which to base the assumption that he could or would do anything. The reason for that is obvious. He never really did anything.

    But, the important thing, of course, was not what he could do, or what he had done, but what his parents had done – created a bi-racial person. Barack’s most important qualification to his adoring fans has always been his race. The crazy left convinced itself that Barack embodied all of the qualities needed to take this country exactly where they thought it should go. And, to top it all off, he was half-black! How wonderful it would be.

    The more BS he fed them, the more they loved him, the more they loved him, the more he believed his own BS. The final result being – well, nothing. Just one big, sad, scary illusion.

  55. THERE IS NO LUKE WARM HELL . . .
    —————————————————

    Conservatives Must Use Immigration Deform Like Obamacare in 2014

    By: Daniel Horowitz (Diary) | June 24th, 2013 at 10:17 AM | 4

    RESIZE: AAA

    For quite some time, I’ve deemed the Senate a lost cause. In recent years, Democrats have shown a remarkable sense of discipline, getting every member – even those from red states – to vote for the most radical pieces of legislation. Moreover, roughly half the GOP conference is worthless and couldn’t care less about their constituents, and there is certainly no leadership from Mitch McConnell. The fix was in a long time ago on the bill. That’s why we must work on forming a backstop in the House.

    In order to strengthen the resolve of conservatives in the House, we need to begin focusing on the source of this capricious pursuit of amnesty-first at all costs. These people don’t care about good policy, so all we can do is blow up the irrational political argument that is fueling this political suicide.

    In addition to lacking any core principles, the GOP consultant class is completely tone deaf to the electoral tea leaves of their own politically-motivated positions. In their alternative universe, if the Senate passes an amnesty bill, Republicans in the House are in deep trouble with 8.5% of the electorate. In the real universe, it’s the Democrats who should be in trouble with 91.5% of the electorate – if Republicans would only take the initiative to campaign against them on this issue.

    The grave error of the indolent consultant class is rooted in their misreading of the 2012 election. As Sean Trende noted last week, the real story of last November was the number of white voters, particularly working class, who failed to turn out and vote for Romney, even though they have been completely disenchanted with the Democrat Party. Although Romney offered some parsimonious tough talk on immigration when pressed about it during the primary debate season, he refused to campaign on the issue during the general election.

    In fact, when Obama issued the illegal administrative amnesty in middle of the presidential race, Romney showed weakness by ostensibly agreeing to the premise of amnesty. Romney failed to run a single TV ad on this issue during the campaign. He should have been in Youngstown, Ohio inveighing against this out-of-touch end-run around Congress, while promising to stand with the American worker. But, alas, Romney said nothing about the issue, and in fact, evinced an image much closer to that of a Zuckerberg corporatist than a conservative populist.

    Hence, in pursuit of voters who are largely out of reach, Republicans are leaving millions of white working class voters on the table – voters who are eminently within reach. Additionally, all the recent polling has shown that Blacks are against this amnesty bill. [Remember, a majority of Blacks voted for Prop 187 in California.] Were Republicans to go on offense and actually embrace a conversation on illegal immigration and enforcement-first during the 2014 midterms, they can drive a wedge between some black voters and the Dems, while crushing them with white working class voters. Poll after poll shows that Independent voters favor enforcement-first by a wide margin.

    And what about the Hispanic vote? To the extent that there is a large portion of them who are within reach, it certainly won’t occur with the brand of stuffed-shirt Republicanism that is peddled by the consultant class, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner. It will be through Tea Party populism.

    Arizona provides a great example of a favorable outcome for Republicans when they actually choose to engage on a wedge issue and return fire. In Arizona, there is no ambiguity about the Republican position on immigration. After all of the GOP-backed enforcement laws, every voter knows where they stand on the issue. Even John McCain and Jeff Flake are forced to lie to the voters during election years.

    So what happened in 2012?

    Despite the fact that Hispanics comprised 18% of the electorate (more than Florida and Colorado), Romney outperformed McCain’s 2008 showing in the state. He received 25% of the Hispanic vote, only slightly below his national average. Incidentally, Jan Brewer received 28% in 2010. But here’s the kicker: Romney blew out the white vote by a whopping 34 points! There wasn’t even much of a gender gap; he won the white women vote by 30. He won 12% of Democrats and 51% of Independents. Indys comprise a larger share of the electorate than either party in the state.

    In 2008, McCain carried the white vote by 19 points, 15 points less than Romney. It’s clear what’s going on in Arizona. This is one state where Republicans fought back against the one-sided push for amnesty. They articulated the problems with our porous border and the burden on our safety net and public funds. So while Obama’s race-baiting has netted him some extra votes with Hispanics, he got crushed with white voters. That’s why Axelrod’s early bragging about going after Arizona died down so quickly, despite the increase in Hispanic turnout.

    As this debate heads to the House, Republicans have two options. They can quiver in their proverbial boots and shirk from the fight while offering pale-pastel alternatives to the same false premise. They can bail Obama out of the scandals by granting him his biggest legislative victory of the second term. They can help change the face of the country and create a permanent Democrat majority. Or they can galvanize the American people and the American worker against this travesty and hit the Democrats every day until the 2014 Midterms.

    House Republicans must remember that when it comes to wedge issues, there is no lukewarm hell. You either drive the narrative or become a victim of the narrative. Just ask Mitt Romney.

  56. Zimmerman trial back on after recess.

    The prosecutor’s opening statement appears to sum up their case thusly: Zimmerman profiled Travyon Martin on the basis that he was a criminal. Most people will hear the word “profile” and assume it is racial. But the prosecution appears to be arguing that when Zimmerman said “fu#king punks get away with everything” he was profiling Trayvon Martin and thereby stalked him. Who knew being against criminals is now a crime?

    The defense is up now with their opening statement. Money quote “Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin in self defense”. Now using visual aid of a map the area.

  57. http://www.redstate.com/2013/06/24/heres-the-whip-list-for-immigration/
    ———————————-
    I called their offices, and in most cases, it goes to an answering machine. Corker and Alexander have taken their phones off the hook. McConnell has a recording which says I am busy, go to my website, no way to leave any message. Mary Landieu’s mailbox is full. Other than telling all of them that this bill is inimical to the interests of the nation, and therefore they must vote against it, and telling Heller and Houven’s people how disappointed I am in them for selling out the country for thirty pieces of silver, I learned very little in these mostly one sided exchanges, except that Senator Coburn shares my concerns over border security and will oppose the bill, and that Bernie Sander is concerned that the HB-1 visas program will disadvantage American workers. There is simply no way to put lipstick on this pig–it gives affirmative action to illegals over US citizens. I left a message at Joltin Joe Manchin’s office reminding him about 2008, and by inference his failure to endorse Hillary after he promised to endorse the winner of the primary. I asked him to do the right thing for the American People on this legislation, but it is highly doubtful that he will, unless he they have the 60 votes they are shooting for and then Joe will vote against it to insulate himself.

  58. The Supreme Court Goes Small on Affirmative Action

    While Justice Thomas condemns it in a strongly worded opinion

    While the court as a whole did not have much to say on affirmative action in the decision, Justice Clarence Thomas in his opinion said that he personally would’ve overturned the use of race in making admissions decisions in higher education:

    I write separately to explain that I would overrule Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306 (2003), and hold that a State’s use of race in higher education admissions decisions is categorically prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/the-supreme-court-goes-small-on-affirmative-action-20130624

  59. As this debate heads to the House, Republicans have two options. They can quiver in their proverbial boots and shirk from the fight while offering pale-pastel alternatives to the same false premise. They can bail Obama out of the scandals by granting him his biggest legislative victory of the second term. They can help change the face of the country and create a permanent Democrat majority. Or they can galvanize the American people and the American worker against this travesty and hit the Democrats every day until the 2014 Midterms.
    —————————————————
    Trouble is, I know John. On this issue as with others when big business pulls his chain. How do I know? The same way I know that a mule with a 2×4 at its rear and a carrot at its mouth will go forward. With RINOs in charge and big business in control of the money train, neither party is capable of serving the interests of the American People. That conclusion is beyond cavil. Simply put, this immigration bill trumps every other issue on the subject of national decline.

    The other problem is when the bill passes the Senate, Obama will re-emerge like a conquering Caesar, claim credit and monopolize the agenda. And big media will stand up, cheer and revert to the old familiar media of greatest president evah and the comeback kid. This is all set to happen, later this week. The issues which implicate his leadership will move to the back burner and his approval rating will be back over 50%. The only hope is a stock market drop which gets the elites paying attention and worrying like they are not worrying now. At this point they believe even if the country fails they will be protected.

  60. 😆 YES!!!!

    How many different single words can you think of to describe President Obama? With the way he seems to be attracted to scandals and simply lies his way through the process of governing, there are probably plenty of choice words you may be able to think of. But a new Pew Research Center survey finds that after tracking the descriptions used for President Obama for a number of years, the most popular now are “incompetent” and “liar”. As if that’s a big surprise.

    Honestly, it seems like the President is so daily embroiled in chipping away at the very foundation of the fabric of our nation and is so infected with scandal that the main stream media ignores more often than not, we here at IsThatBaloney.com do find it tough at times to find the adjectives to fully describe what we are thinking of The Dear Great Leader. We may just have to start making up words to elucidate his utter incompetentness.

    Read more below on the Pew survey from the Washington Times and then use your own words in the comments below to describe Barack Hussein Obama:

  61. It only took about seven seconds for MSNBC to realize that it needed a seven-second delay for its coverage of George Zimmerman‘s trial for the murder of Trayvon Martin. During opening arguments, prosecutor John Guy began his argument with a few seconds of “May it please the court” pleasantries, then got right to it: “Fucking punks,” he bluntly stated. “These assholes, they always get away.”

    “Those were the words in that grown man’s mouth as he followed, in the dark, a 17-year-old boy who he didn’t know,” Guy continued. “And excuse my language, but those were his words, not mine.”

    After excusing his language, Guy hit the note again, “Fucking punks. These assholes. They always get away. Those were the words in that man’s chest when he got out of his car armed with the fully loaded semiautomatic…”

    At that point, NBC News’ Chuck Todd cut in to sheepishly apologize. “Well, we’ve decided we have to institute a seven-second delay,” he said. “I want to apologize for that language that came out. If you give us a second here, we’ll put in a seven-second day. We will now head back to the courtroom.”

    http://bit.ly/12dya4U

  62. “Fucking punks, These assholes”… I don’t hear a reference to race in that statement. Actually, those terms could apply to many different groups of people, who “always get away…”: Obama’s young supporters and staffers, the media, delinquent gangs – oops, redundant.

  63. I see no material difference between Schumer and a third world dictator. Both are willing to sell out the interests of their country and its people for money, and both cling to power through the apparatus of an authoritarian state. I look at him and all I see is a lard ass who would sell out his wife and children if the price was right. It is remarkable indeed that the liberal poseurs in big media who are so willing to condemn the third world dictator, are glad to embrace Schumer and ask him no embarrassing questions, refuse to confront his treachery. It proves that they are part of that treachery and conspiracy to disenfranchise the American People. Why then does anyone give them their eyeballs, unless they too are part of the conspiracy, or dumb as a post?

  64. The LA Obama lovin’ Times has this group of nitwits talking about Snowden. One is an ex-FBI guy, so you know what side all of them are taking on this…

    Edward Snowden, a step ahead of the U.S. government, eludes arrest

    The 30-year-old NSA leaker manages to make Washington seem stumped as he slips out of Hong Kong and lands in Russia, apparently planning to end up in Ecuador.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-snowden-20130624,0,1088900.story

  65. “Fucking punks, These assholes”… I don’t hear a reference to race in that statement. Actually, those terms could apply to many different groups of people, who “always get away…”: Obama’s young supporters and staffers, the media, delinquent gangs – oops, redundant.
    —————————
    Correct.

    But let us assume that it was a racial comment. It is a known fact that the crime rate for blacks is much higher than other ethnic groups. And there representation in the inmate population is exceedingly high. This is an objective statistic. The causes are debatable but the statistic is not.

    In 1993, Jessee Jackson told an inner city group in Chicago. “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery ”then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”

    In other words, the fear of young black men in strange neigborhoods raises suspicion. That does not mean they should not be allowed to enter such neighborhoods, or be subjected to assault or death when they do. It merely means that the statement itself is reflective of collective experience rather than a specific intent.

    By the same token, many black people do not like whites. And from time to time they do act upon that animus, especially in a gang setting–the attack on Goetz, the Central Park jogger, and so many other reported incidents of that nature.

    Therefore, even if you assume the statement was to Martin’s race, as opposed to his hostile behavior, all it really does is provide a motive to follow, not a motive to kill.

    The question of self defense will turn on whether at the moment he shot Martin the defendant was in imminent fear of bodily harm, and was therefore acting in self defense. That is what the defense will focus upon, and also the nature and extent of defendant’s injuries which were underreported by big media.

  66. Update: We wrote Deny It All You Want But Immigration Reform Is Dead back in April. Many dispute our contention and point to the Senate distraction and the Big Media myth making machine to discourage everyone into thinking that “immigration reform” is a done deal.

    Today Fawn Johnson at National Journal writes Time’s Up. Immigration Won’t Pass This Year
    :

    “Plenty of effort will be devoted to reform over the next month, but it will die in August, just like last time.

    Nothing less than a miracle will get major immigration legislation through Congress this year. [snip]

    Indeed, the House might not kill the bill outright, but the GOP players are passing the ball around until the clock runs out.

    What’s that clock look like? After senators get the bill done – probably in time to make their weekend barbeques — they have a weeklong July 4 break. And then they get to wait for colleagues on the other side of the Capitol who will have four weeks – four weeks – to deliberate before Congress takes off for an even lengthier recess in August. Once Washington meets autumn, immigration falls off the priority track thanks to the reemergence of fiscal crisis. [snip]

    Then comes August, the month in which legislation dies. The last time the Senate passed a major immigration bill in 2006, House Republicans used the August recess to kill it by staging a series of hearings around the country that did nothing but rile up conservatives against it.

    Let’s not forget the health care bill, which only passed after President Obama forced it through the Senate with Democratic votes using a parliamentary tactic that isn’t available on immigration. [snip]

    When lawmakers return to the Capitol in September, they will be facing another financial crisis as they debate raising the country’s debt ceiling. The four- to six-week countdown toward extreme limitations on government payments to Social Security or military operations will do two things: It will suck all the life out of any deliberative legislative effort, immigration included, and it will polarize the political parties.”

    Immigration “reform” is dead even as there will be an attempt in the Senate to flim-flam the country into believing it is going to happen. It’s not.

    Hey! Greta Van Susteren has a real immigration reform plan that addresses the problem. But we doubt that will pass or even be proposed by the chuckleheads in congress.

    So, is
    immigration reform doomed
    ? Sarah Palin says ‘You betcha‘.

    ————————————————————

  67. Russia gives Barry another kick in the ass…

    Snowden whereabouts unknown as Russia resists U.S. pressure

    Reuters) – Former U.S. spy agency contractor Edward Snowden’s whereabouts were a mystery on Monday as Russia resisted White House pressure to send him back to the United States or stop him continuing on his journey to escape U.S. prosecution.

    Snowden, whose exposure of secret U.S. government surveillance raised questions about intrusions into private lives, was allowed to leave Hong Kong on Sunday despite Washington asking the Chinese territory to arrest him on espionage charges.

    Julian Assange, the founder of anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks which is assisting Snowden, said the 30-year-old had fled to Moscow en route to Ecuador and was in good health in a “safe place” but did not say where he was now.

    There are no direct flights to Ecuador from Moscow and reports that he would fly there via Cuba were put in doubt when witnesses could not see him on the plane, despite tight security before take-off. A WikiLeaks spokesman muddied the waters by saying an approach had also been made to Iceland for asylum.

    Ecuador, which is already sheltering Assange at its London embassy, said it was considering Snowden’s request for asylum and that human rights were its main concern.

    “He didn’t take the flight (to Havana),” a source at Russia’s national airline Aeroflot told Reuters.

    As speculation grew about where he would go next, Washington was stung by Russian defiance.

    Snowden’s flight to Russia, which like China challenges U.S. dominance of global diplomacy, is an embarrassment to President Barack Obama who has tried to “reset” ties with Moscow and build a partnership with Beijing.

    The White House said it expected the Russian government to send Snowden back to the United States and lodged “strong objections” to Hong Kong and China for letting him go.

    U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said during a visit to India that it would be “deeply troubling” if Moscow defied the United States over Snowden, and said the fugitive “places himself above the law, having betrayed his country”. [I am so glad Hillary isn’t under Barry’s web of lies any longer and wouldn’t have to struggle with this.]

    But the Russian government ignored the appeal and President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary denied any knowledge of Snowden’s movements.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/24/us-usa-security-flight-idUSBRE95M02H20130624

  68. “But the Russian government ignored the appeal and President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary denied any knowledge of Snowden’s movements.”

    Well, Barack can surely understand this reasoning. Putin has no knowledge. Putin is unaware. Putin was not informed. There you have it. Nothing else need be said. And, if it gets right down to it, and it’s revealed that one of Putin’s surrogates knows of Snowden’s whereabouts in Russia, he or she can just take cover under the fifth amendment – If Russia actually had that protection.

    Lie and deny – it’s not fun when other people copy your excuse, is it?

  69. This will just NOT go away!!!! 🙂
    General Carter Ham to testify about Benghazi
    ———————-
    If I understand the facts, this was the guy who wanted to do the right thing, which was to rescue the troops, and was fired when he attempted to do exactly that. He was fired by Dempsey at the behest of Panetta to cover for Obama, which led in turn to the cover-up.

  70. freespirit
    June 24, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    “But the Russian government ignored the appeal and President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary denied any knowledge of Snowden’s movements.”
    —————————-

    How apropos.

    Obama plays checker, while Putin plays chess.

    A community organizer sent into the ring to spar with a KGB operative on security matters.

    Oh I am sure Oliver Stone could cast Obama in the role of Seigfried, but the production would have to be in the theater of the absurd.

    The national security state could not have a weaker front man. Evah.

  71. “But the Russian government ignored the appeal and President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary denied any knowledge of Snowden’s movements.”


    I read another site that claims Snowden is sitting in a Russian airport while his supporters try to find a safe escape route for him out of Russia.

    If this is true, Putin saying he knows nothing about where Snowden is…is a big fat middle finger salute to the King of the Oval Office.

  72. reespirit
    June 24, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    “But the Russian government ignored the appeal and President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary denied any knowledge of Snowden’s movements.”
    ———————-
    Then let me suggest a back-up plan that will force Putin to play ball with Obama.

    Secretary of State Kerry goes on a hunger strike until Putin cries uncle.

    Won’t work you say?

    Perhaps not.

    But we will never know unless Kerry tries.

    Come on you Skull and Bones prick.

    We need you to do one for the Gipper.

    And just to show this is not a stunt, do it without a net.

  73. Shadowfax
    June 24, 2013 at 1:48 pm
    ———————-
    I find Putin’s plausible deniability plausible.

    I find Obama’s plausible deniablity to be highly implausible.

    Obamas statements are yet another lie, in an unending stream of lies.

    Which never ceases to titillate big media.

    And half the dumb as a post electorate as well.

    Nevertheless it is nice to see Precious get some of his own medicine.

  74. President Obama says he is following all legal channels in Snowden case and working with other countries to ensure rule of law is observed

    ………………..

    Obama would not know the rule of law if it bit him on the ass…only when it suits him.

  75. Hillary seems to have a difficult time answering this question without taking herself out of the equation:

    Hillary: It’d send an awesome signal if we elected a woman president sometime soon

  76. Then let me suggest a back-up plan that will force Putin to play ball with Obama.

    Secretary of State Kerry goes on a hunger strike until Putin cries uncle.
    wbboei

    Won’t work you say?

    Perhaps not.

    But we will never know unless Kerry tries.

    Come on you Skull and Bones prick.

    We need you to do one for the Gipper.

    And just to show this is not a stunt, do it without a net.

    __________

    LMAO!

  77. Hillary Clinton’s 2016 boosters push rival super PACs

    Harold Ickes, a longtime fixture in Democratic politics and a confidant of the Clintons, predicts super PACs to support Hillary Clinton’s potential 2016 presidential candidacy may soon be “popping up like mushrooms in the spring.”

    Well, the proliferation has begun. At least three super PACs have registered with the Federal Election Commission using Clinton’s name in their titles — raising the specter of supporters inadvertently working against her political interests and muddying the landscape.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/24/hillary-clintons-2016-boosters-push-rival-super-pacs/

  78. So, the Obama Administration made a mistake in the arrest request, causing Hong Kong to sidestep the request for extradition? Yes, a mistake. It must have been Kerry’s mistake, because the Messiah does not make mistakes. Whenever he appears to make a mistake it was the fault of somebody else and you need only look under the bus to discover who the scapegoat, I mean mistake maker was. China does not want a propaganda war with Obama, but Putin relishes one. He relishes the idea of turning Obama into a punching bag, and his boxing gloves leave KGB prints all over them. Ouch says Obama. Oh that hurt. Again. Ouch that hurt. Again. Vladimir has found himself a soft target and will not take I am sorry for that my country has done by Obama. Hence, Obama finds himself in a defenseless posture. Time for another well earned $100 million vacation. Brian Williams wants an elephant ride, Obama says who do you think you are. Williams responds I am your whore. The rest of big media springs to their feet and says me too.
    ————————————————–

    By KELVIN CHAN

    Snowden’s HK exit shows Chinese anger over spying

    Hong Kong says Snowden has left for third country

    HONG KONG (AP) — Officially, admitted leaker Edward Snowden was able to leave Hong Kong because U.S. authorities made a mistake in their arrest request, but the semiautonomous Chinese city also indicated displeasure over Snowden’s revelation that the former British colony had been a target of American hacking.

    Beijing, meanwhile, says it had nothing to do with allowing the former National Security Agency contractor to fly to Russia on Sunday. But analysts believe the move was orchestrated by China to avoid a prolonged diplomatic tussle with the U.S. over his extradition.

  79. Obama’s Troubles Change Thinking on Immigration

    Imagine what the immigration measure lumbering its way through the Senate would have looked like if six months ago, Republicans could have seen the headlines of today.

    No, not the ones about conservative attacks on the legislation and allegations of duplicity against the members of the bipartisan team trying to get the behemoth bill out the door. Those were easily foreseen.

    Burned before, voters are now hostile to massive “comprehensive” legislation. They do not have the requisite trust in the federal government and Congress to believe that their interests or even the national interest are being pursued whenever lawmakers and lobbyists start cranking out thousands of pages of anything.

    “Too big to fail” used to work for Congress in the days of earmarks and flush highway funds. If you get to an impasse, just expand the scope of the legislation. If Senator Sputtersworth has a complaint, just toss in some goodies for his state – maybe a research center bearing his name at the university.

    But now, deeply in debt, those old practices are harder to come by. The goodies in President Obama’s 2010 health law were vestiges of that dying era.

    What really has killed “comprehensive” legislation, though, is the Internet. When then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that Congress needed to pass Obama’s health law so the public could find out what was in it, she wasn’t being ridiculous, just ridiculously out of date.

    The old way of working was for lawmakers to hash out deals that they believed (or said they believed) were in the best interests of their constituents with only minuscule, Beltway-bound news coverage.

    Pelosi came up in a political world without broad public oversight, not one with crowd-sourced scrutiny for controversial legislation.

    Washington still hasn’t found a better way to do it. The Republican House, created in large part by the backlash against the health law and the secretively slapdash way in which it was constructed, has had only marginal success at implementing the new approach.

    The result has been a return to old methods when the chips are down, e.g. the “fiscal cliff,” but an inability to pass big bills under the new protocols, e.g. the recent debacle over farm subsidies and food stamps. The virtues of transparency and regular order play well with voters, but Washington has not found a way to make them work.

    And so whatever the Senate extrudes (if anything) on immigration after the addition of an amendment on border security that itself is some 33 times longer than the bill that created the Social Security program, the House is highly unlikely to pass anything comprehensive.

    Obama’s speech on nuclear weapons and global warming in Berlin last week has become a metaphor for his second term: trapped in a box and sweating through his shirt.

    As we saw on the bill for farm subsidies and food stamps, Democrats are quite unwilling to help Speaker John Boehner on tricky legislation. And if they couldn’t get the job done for their friends in agribusiness and welfare recipients, it seems even less unlikely that they will do it on illegal immigration. Democrats believe the issue is a good one for them and love seeing Republicans squirm.

    But all of that was predictable and even knowing all that has come to pass – seeing all of the headlines on the right side of the Internet – Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio would likely have proceeded. Republicans rightly believe that the issue is a toxic one for them and needs to be addressed before the 2016 cycle is fully underway.

    No, the headlines that would have changed the party’s thinking on how to proceed on immigration would have nothing to do with border security or pathways to citizenship.

    It would have been ones like: “Russia defiant as US raises pressure over Snowden,” “IRS supervisor admits scrutinizing applications from Tea Party groups,” “Pressure mounts for Holder resignation,” “Obamacare causing nearly half of small businesses to freeze hiring,” “Obama hits a wall in Berlin” and on and on.

    When the process of building the immigration deal began, it was not unreasonable to think that Obama, who had defied political gravity for so long, would also be able to defeat the second-term curse. As it turns out, Obama was due for a karmic crackdown of epic proportions.

    Obama’s speech on nuclear weapons and global warming in Berlin last week has become a metaphor for his second term: trapped in a box and sweating through his shirt.

    Watching world leaders delight in ignoring his demands – stop arming Syrian butchers, hand over the NSA leaker, quit building coal-fired power plants, etc. – shows us how far Obama’s stock has fallen.

    The idea that the president, whose permanent campaign arm has so far proven more effective at soliciting money from his well-heeled corporate benefactors than making progress for his initiatives, will be leading any movements from the White House has gone from plausible to risible in the span of six months.

    Obama keeps trying to skip ahead to the phase of his presidency in which he bequeaths his vision to a nation trapped in darkness and forges a new, more moderate Republican Party from the ashes of the one he destroys. But he can’t bring the heat anymore.

    Had Republicans known just how quickly things would have soured for Obama, they would have certainly started with enforcement on immigration and let Democrats defend a broken system. Border security wouldn’t have been an amendment, it would have been the start of the bill.

    Now, Republicans are trying to recalibrate for the new political realities. They may not do it in time or may overcorrect when it comes time for the House to make its case on the subject. But whatever happens, the idea that Obama, under fire left, right and center, will be doing much more than kiester covering for the foreseeable future is sounding very out of date indeed.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/24/obamas-troubles-change-thinking-on-immigration/#ixzz2XANhH5Lr

  80. Not often i agree with Susan Sarandon but on this i will….

    http://www.amnestyusa.org/emails/W1306EACPR2.html

    Freedom of expression is a right I deeply value and must defend.

    Today, this right is under serious attack in Turkey.

    Join me in supporting Amnesty International in demanding justice for the thousands of peaceful protesters who have been injured in police violence in Turkey.

    Since the clashes in Taksim Square began on May 28, Turkish police have used shocking levels of force to disperse peaceful protesters. Despite harsh international criticism, Turkish authorities have failed to step in to curb police abuse and help their own citizens.

    Thousands of activists have been injured and unjustly imprisoned.

    Over the weekend, police were seen firing tear gas directly at makeshift hospitals and detaining doctors and other medical personnel who were treating injured protestors. Recently, just as scores of lawyers were preparing to make a statement about the protests, they were arrested. People have also been detained simply for posting protest information on social media.

    This must stop now.

    Join me in petitioning the Turkish government to respect the fundamental human rights of its people.

    Peaceful dissent should never be stifled with violence.

    I support the nonviolent demonstrators in Turkey who, despite the risks, continue to take to the streets to call for basic human rights, including freedom of speech and for their right to be heard.

    I urge you to give them your support, too.

    Sincerely,

    Susan Sarandon

  81. Boehner: Obama climate proposal ‘absolutely crazy.’ “The Ohio Republican was incredulous when asked to react to reports that the White House plans to regulate carbon emissions from power plants as part of its climate change strategy. “I think this is absolutely crazy,” Boehner said at his weekly press conference. “Why would you want to increase the cost of energy and kill more American jobs at a time when American people are asking, ‘Where are the jobs.’

    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/306831-boehner-obama-climate-change-proposal-absolutely-crazy

  82. The article above reminds me of the line in the poem Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold. The political system in general and the RINO in particular is caught between two worlds, one dead, the other powerless to be born. Nevertheless, I feel his assessment is over optimistic.

  83. When I called Collins office this morning, I told her staffer that there was a rumor that she would vote aye of the Gang of 8 proposal, with that hideous Corker amendment. They told me she had not made up her mind, and I knew that was bullshit. I also knew she had not read the bill. She just voted aye.

    It was just like the time when Boxer promised support Hillary if Hillary won the California primary, Hillary won that primary, and Boxer reneged on her prior commitment. Their commitments to voters are nothing but lies. The only commitments that count are those to their donors or to Obama.

    The end result is not representative government. It is oligarchy.

  84. Hiring an amnestied immigrant lets the employers off the hook for ObamaCare because the amnestied immigrants aren’t eligible for it. …so, in essence, an employer can save up to $3,000 per year. ….ok, anybody else see the issue with this and is pissed off now?? – Wolf

    – Under the Gang of 8’s backroom immigration deal with Senators Schumer, Corker and Hoeven, formerly illegal immigrants who are amnestied will be eligible to work, but will not be eligible for ObamaCare. Employers who would be required to pay as much as a $3,000 penalty for most employees who receive an ObamaCare healthcare “exchange” subsidy, would not have to pay the penalty if they hire amnestied immigrants.

    Consequently, employers would have a significant incentive to hire or retain amnestied immigrants, rather than current citizens, including those who have recently achieved citizenship via the current naturalization .

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/24/Schumer-Corker-Hoeven-Bill-Incentivizes-Employers-To-Fire-Americans-and-Hire-Amnestied-Immigrants

  85. No matter how many important things are in the news. Barry has to upstage them. 🙄
    ——————
    He stole the stage by getting beaten down by Obama. How long will it be before Big Media tells us that Putin is a racist?

  86. Shadowfax
    June 24, 2013 at 1:48 pm

    ***********************************************

    re: snowden…and faking out the reporters on plane from moscow to cuba…and his whereabouts now…

    I just had a thought…a hunch…yesterday I saw a clip of the Ambassador from Equador slipping into the I think Moscow airport and they said he disappeared…

    hmmm…what if the Equador Ambassador met up with Snowden and they took a private plane and hightailed it out of there…and are already en route or in Equador…

    possible…

  87. Senate Minority Whip Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) ripped Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s rush to bring the new version of the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill across the finish line without transparency in a Senate floor speech on Monday.

    http://bit.ly/177FTCU

  88. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/michael-hastings-car-hacked_n_3492339.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

    Was Michael Hastings’ Car Hacked? Richard Clarke Says It’s Possible
    Posted: 06/24/2013 6:03 pm EDT | Updated: 06/24/2013 6:17 pm EDT

    The peculiar circumstances of journalist Michael Hastings’ death in Los Angeles last week have unleashed a wave of conspiracy theories.

    Now there’s another theory to contribute to the paranoia: According to a prominent security analyst, technology exists that could’ve allowed someone to hack his car. Former U.S. National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism Richard Clarke told The Huffington Post that what is known about the single-vehicle crash is “consistent with a car cyber attack.”

    Clarke said, “There is reason to believe that intelligence agencies for major powers” — including the United States — know how to remotely seize control of a car.

    “What has been revealed as a result of some research at universities is that it’s relatively easy to hack your way into the control system of a car, and to do such things as cause acceleration when the driver doesn’t want acceleration, to throw on the brakes when the driver doesn’t want the brakes on, to launch an air bag,” Clarke told The Huffington Post. “You can do some really highly destructive things now, through hacking a car, and it’s not that hard.”

    “So if there were a cyber attack on the car — and I’m not saying there was,” Clarke added, “I think whoever did it would probably get away with it.”

    Authorities have said that it may take weeks to determine a cause of death for Hastings, but that no foul play is suspected.

    Hastings was driving a 2013 Mercedes C250 coupe when he crashed into a tree on Highland Ave. in Los Angeles at approximately 4:30 am on June 18. Video posted online showed the car in flames, and one neighbor told a local news crew she heard a sound like an explosion. Another eyewitness said the car’s engine had been thrown 50 to 60 yards from the car. There were no other vehicles involved in the accident.

    The fire was so all-consuming that it took the Los Angeles County coroner’s office two days to identify Hastings’ body, but Clarke said a cyber attack on the vehicle would have been nearly impossible to trace “even if the dozen or so computers on board hadn’t melted.”

    Hastings practiced a brand of no-holds-barred journalism that tended to anger powerful people. His 2010 profile of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, published in Rolling Stone, was so damaging that it ostensibly prompted President Barack Obama to fire the general (the president denied that the article had a role in his decision).

    In the days before his death, Hastings was reportedly working on a story about a lawsuit filed by Jill Kelley, who was involved in the scandal that brought down Gen. David Petraeus, according to the LA Times. KTLA reported that Hastings told colleagues at the news site BuzzFeed that he feared the FBI was investigating him. On June 20, the FBI denied that any investigation was under way.

    “I believe the FBI when they say they weren’t investigating him,” said Clarke. “That was very unusual, and I’m sure they checked very carefully before they said that.”

    Clarke worked for the State Department under President Ronald Reagan and headed up counterterrorism efforts under Presidents George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He also served as a special adviser on cyberterrorism to the younger Bush and published a book on the topic, Cyber War, in 2010.

    “I’m not a conspiracy guy. In fact, I’ve spent most of my life knocking down conspiracy theories,” said Clarke, who ran afoul of the second Bush administration when he criticized the decision to invade Iraq after 9/11. “But my rule has always been you don’t knock down a conspiracy theory until you can prove it [wrong]. And in the case of Michael Hastings, what evidence is available publicly is consistent with a car cyber attack. And the problem with that is you can’t prove it.”

    Clarke said the Los Angeles Police Department likely wouldn’t have the expertise to trace such an attack. “I think you’d probably need the very best of the U.S. government intelligence or law enforcement officials to discover it.”

  89. Correction: OBAMA stole the stage by getting beaten down by PUTIN. How long will it be before Big Media tells us that Putin is a racist?

    I was particularly intrigued by the thoughtful comments by the Equadorian foreign minister. He said he is reviewing the request for sanctuary by Snowden in light of the privacy risk that US intelligence poses to the people of all countries. The reason that interests me is because it suggests that maybe someone should tee this case up before the International Court of Justice. The Court could not proceed on the case unless the Obama Administration consented to its jurisdiction over the matter, but the refusal by Obama to entrust this particular matter to an international body, when the entire thrust of his foreign policy has been to entrust important parts of our sovereignty to such bodies could have tremendous propaganda value for anyone wishing to embarrass him.

    I do not think it is hyperbole to say we are in a cold war with many state actors, and hot war with non state actors. Nor do I think it is wrong for us to fight that war with all available tools. But when the Obama Administration turns those same capabilities on the American People, only an idiot would fail to see that a bright line has been crossed. A line which is defined by the Constitution. I do think Judge Vincent made a serious mistake in permitting this to happen, and I am sorry for him because I admire him in all other respects. But in the end, it all comes back to the Obama Administration.

    How can anyone with common sense trust this man? Every assurance he gives us rings hollow. Every promise he makes turns out to be a lie. Far from the reformer naive believed he was he is an instrument of a corrupt establishment. And these scandals call to mind the story of the outlaw John Wesley Hardin. After dispatching his 19th victim, and claiming self defense, Wild Bill Hickock performed a pro forma investigation, and concluded: I reckon it was self defense alright. But I will be damned if I ever met a man who required so much self defending.

    Bottom line: if you give the grant the military the right to surveil the American People without a warrant, then sure as God made little green apples, the Obama people will get that information. Maxine Waters has intimated as much. Holder has demonstrated blatant contempt for the Constitution. And, the presence of Eric Schmidt and Google in the government surveillance efforts and the Obama campaign virtually ensures that cross-pollinization will happen. It cannot be otherwise.

    Knowing that, I cannot give this kind of surveillance by the government a pass. They need to pass Constitutional muster. National security is not a defense.

    Of course Krauthammer would rail against this for reasons I can understand if we had a pro-American president. In the past, I believed that the threat to our liberty came from other countries, and non state actors. Today, everything that I see indicates that the greater threat, in terms of immediacy and destructive force comes from Obama and the people behind him. For that reason, I cannot accept at face value the chicken little routine I hear from the Obama loving Washington DC establishment. At one time they were credible to me, whereas now I see them as deceptive self serving liars.

  90. S

    I do think some undercover maneuvers are going on to hide Snowden from the corrupt Barry machine.

    I think Wikileaks folks are tossing out, “…he might be going here…” like,

    “Look, a squirrel.”

    …while Snowden escapes in the opposite direction.

    I think he would be in the hands of the CIA/FBI by now if he were on his own, but he is a hero to many and they are all trying to help him.

    I hope he stays free and safe.

  91. He knocked Gregory for a loop and then tweeted another good clean headshot, just for good measure. They ought to hang a sign on Gregory which reads:
    “Who needs the government to try to criminalize journalism when you have David Gregory to do it?” Better yet, who needs David Gregory?
    ——————————-

    The reporter who helped break the story over the U.S. government’s broad surveillance programs lit into NBC News host David Gregory on Sunday for asking why the reporter shouldn’t be charged with a crime.

    “I think it’s pretty extraordinary that anybody who would call themselves a journalist would publicly muse about whether or not other journalists should be charged with felonies,” Glenn Greenwald shot back on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

    Greenwald was the first to report, in The Guardian, about the government’s widespread collection of U.S. phone data. Both The Guardian and The Washington Post have used leaked materials from former National Security Agency contractor and now-fugitive Edward Snowden for their reports.

    Gregory, in a provocative question at the end of his interview Sunday with Greenwald, asked the following:

    “To the extent that you have aided and abetted Snowden, even in his current movements, why shouldn’t you, Mr. Greenwald, be charged with a crime?”

    Greenwald said the “assumption” in the question was “without evidence.”

    He cited the very-recent controversy over the Justice Department’s decision to seize the email records of Fox News correspondent James Rosen. In doing so, the government submitted an affidavit that called Rosen a likely criminal “co-conspirator” as part of an unauthorized leak. Rosen was never charged, though the alleged source of the leak was.

    Amid widespread outcry and under President Obama’s direction, the Justice Department is now taking a second look at its policies for cases that involve journalists.

    Greenwald said the administration was effectively trying to “criminalize investigative journalism” and told Gregory: “If you want to embrace that theory, it means that every investigative journalist in the United States who works with their sources, who receives classified information is a criminal, and it’s precisely those theories and precisely that climate that has become so menacing in the United States.”

    Gregory said he wasn’t “embracing anything,” just posing a question that was “raised by lawmakers.”

    Greenwald did not appear to accept the explanation. He later took to Twitter to further criticize Gregory.

    “Who needs the government to try to criminalize journalism when you have David Gregory to do it?” he tweeted

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/24/reporter-who-exposed-surveillance-slams-nbc-host-for-asking-whether-should-be/?intcmp=trending#ixzz2XB96r7d0

  92. #McCainAnswerYourPhone

    As a long time Senator from the border state of Arizona, John McCain knows all too well the negative ramifications that illegal immigration has had on his state. From drug trafficking to an overburdened welfare system and a overwhelmed school system to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and Phoenix being the #1 kidnapping city in the world, his state knows the negative, destructive side of illegal immigration like no other.

    http://www.tpnn.com/mccainansweryourphone/

  93. It has been a long time since I have seen a pundit wacked as hard as Greenwald hit Gregory. And at that time, it was not nearly as artful.

    Forty years ago, Admiral Rickover, father of our nuclear submarine program, and a bona fide American hero, albeit a very eccentric one, was put in a bait and switch situation by one of Gregory’s predecessors at NBC. The Admiral asked him whether he was a journalist. The David Gregory type responded yes, and he just had to put the cherry on top of the sundae and invoke the public right to know. Whereupon, Rickover told the David Gregory self professed journalist aka asshole that he was nothing but a soap and deodorant salesman (the reference being to NBC’s sponsors), and then informed him that the interview was over.

  94. Turkish riots aren’t just about a park

    As you might have suspected, the riots in Istanbul over the past few weeks aren’t just about a park. They’re about the efforts of President Obama’s Best Friend Forever, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to erase secularism from Turkey’s history.

    The government’s plan to destroy Gezi Park, a section of Taksim Square, and build a replica Ottoman Army barracks and mall set off weeks of violent street protests, presenting Mr. Erdogan with the greatest political crisis he has faced in more than a decade in power. But the plan to build a large mosque in the square is, in the eyes of many analysts here, the real nub of the dispute.

    The building of such a mosque is a decades-old hope of Turkey’s Islamists, and even played a role in the last military intervention in Turkish politics in 1997, when army generals maneuvered to overthrow an Islamist prime minister.

    Now that the people ­ rather than the army ­ have risen up against the current Islamist government’s urban development plans, analysts have suggested that one of the consequences of the unrest is that Mr. Erdogan will ultimately be unable to realize his vision for Taksim.

    If so, it will represent the second time he has tried and failed to build the mosque, and at serious political costs. As the mayor of Istanbul in 1997, he saw the same dreams dashed by the military’s intervention.

    Not that he has given up. As the protests engulfed his government, Mr. Erdogan backed off from the plans for a shopping mall in Taksim, but he continued to promote the mosque.

    “A mosque will be built in Taksim,” he said, in a recent speech. “I do not need permission from the main opposition and a few looters. We have been granted authority by those who voted for us at the ballot box.”

    Read More @ http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2013/06/turkish-riots-arent-just-about-park.html#links

  95. Leanora
    June 24, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    #McCainAnswerYourPhone

    As a long time Senator from the border state of Arizona, John McCain knows all too well the negative ramifications that illegal immigration has had on his state. From drug trafficking to an overburdened welfare system and a overwhelmed school system to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and Phoenix being the #1 kidnapping city in the world, his state knows the negative, destructive side of illegal immigration like no other.

    http://www.tpnn.com/mccainansweryourphone/
    ——————–
    Excellent link, Leanora. I think the man is mad as a hatter. I mean mentally unsound. There is no rational basis for what he says and does. One day we will probably find him wading through the Reflection Pool looking for Wilbur Mills.

    Mills was involved in a traffic incident in Washington, DC at 2 a.m. on October 9, 1974.[3] His car was stopped by U.S. Park Police late at night because the driver had not turned on the lights. Mills was intoxicated, and his face was injured from a scuffle with Annabelle Battistella, better known as Fanne Foxe, a stripper from Argentina. When police approached the car, Foxe leapt from the car and jumped into the nearby Tidal Basin in an attempt to escape.[3] She was taken to St. Elizabeth’s Mental Hospital for treatment.

    Despite the scandal, Mills was re-elected to Congress in November 1974 in a heavily Democratic year with nearly 60% of the vote, defeating Republican Judy Petty. On November 30, 1974, Mills, seemingly drunk, was accompanied by Fanne Foxe’s husband onstage at The Pilgrim Theatre in Boston, a burlesque house where Foxe was performing. He held a press conference from Foxe’s dressing room.[3] Soon after this second public incident, Mills stepped down from his chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee, acknowledged his alcoholism, joined Alcoholics Anonymous, and checked himself into the Palm Beach Institute in West Palm Beach, Florida.[4]

  96. Re Snowden aka Pimpernel

    They seek him here, they seek him there,
    Obama seeks him everywhere.
    Is he in heaven? — Is he in hell?
    That damned, elusive Pimpernel

  97. Hitler could not have enough Wagner.

    Erdogan cannot have enough Mosques.

    And Precious, aka BHO . . .

    Cannot have enough fundraisers and vacations

    The only two things he is good at.

  98. Restraining the ambitions of the State

    By: John Hayward | June 24th, 2013 at 06:39 PM

    Here we are, on the verge of passing a distorted mess of a bill that not one Senator has yet read in its entirety, and Rubio assures us that yes, we’ll get legalization right away, but we’re also getting “the Republican Border Surge Plan” to put another 20,000 agents on Border Patrol duty, so you can take security to the bank. And if that check happens to bounce when you take it to the bank, well, the powerful “triggers” will kick out like fuses blowing in Dr. Frankenstein’s lab during an electrical storm, and then something or other will happen to the amnesty plan. Nobody in Washington wants something or other to happen to that amnesty plan, so they’ll never dare the wrath of the triggers.

    Washington simply does not work the way he seems to think it does, and after a few months of backseat driving from the likes of Senator Chuck Schumer, you’d think he would know it better than anyone.

    His first trigger is the “completion of at least 700 miles” of border fence. Completion, you say? How long has this particular project been awaiting completion? Let me give you a hint: the enabling legislation is called the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006. The “new and improved” 2012 promise to do something Congress already promised to do in 2006 is less impressive than the originally planned fence. And anyway, like most of the rest of these border security enhancements, the whole affair is placed at the discretion of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who has already made it very clear she intends to build no more border fencing. She’s also made it clear the border is as secure as she thinks it needs to be. Her department says it’s not even trying to measure border security by objective standards any more. All she has to do is exercise the vast discretion granted her in the Gang of Eight bill to decide that fence construction is not an “appropriate use of resources,” and that’s it, no fence, no trigger, no nothing.

    How about that Republican Border Surge? Well, they won’t be showing up until 2021, and the Gang of Eight bill doesn’t actually appropriate any money to hire them. It only authorizes the appropriation. 2021 comes well into the second term of Barack Obama’s successor. It’s not going to happen, folks. There will be a budget crisis between now and then – you can count on it. And Democrats will gleefully throw the Republican Border Surge into the pile of “unnecessary” spending that should be sequestered right out of the budget, because the government will have once again given itself top marks for border security, even though the Congressional Budget Office doubted the Gang of Eight bill would reduce the flow of illegals by more than 25% or so.

    The idea that fancy new technology is necessary to crack down on visa overstays is ludicrous; that’s 18th-century basic record keeping. The government that’s monitoring the rest of us in a thousand ways – the government that will hammer every individual and small business in America with penalties for failure to comply with ObamaCare – can’t figure out when people stay longer than their government-issued visa paperwork says they have to leave?

    The E-verify system will “make sure that there is no future for those who live in our country illegally?” Senator Rubio, I’ll see your E-verify and raise you the Democrat Party, plus the open-borders wing of the Republican Party, plus Republicans terrified by special-forces teams of consultants into believing that they must pander to the growing illegal vote at all costs. Those who live in our country illegally have a fine future. There is absolutely zero chance they’ll get hauled across the border en masse because of E-verify, or because they don’t pay their amnesty fines, or because they don’t speak English.

    This whole debate has the concept of “triggers” exactly backward. Instead of fanciful notions of triggers stopping an amnesty program once it’s under way, we should have triggers that activate the legalization process. If illegal immigration is reduced by this amount, and the population of illegal aliens has been attenuated by that percentage, then in 2014 or 2016 we can talk about legalization. Requiring ironclad results in the near term is the only way to restrain the ambitions of the State. As with the perennial promises of spending cuts someday in exchange for tax increases right now, no promise extending beyond the end of the current Congress is meaningful. And the idea of trusting this particular Administration to honor any commitment it finds inconvenient is absolutely ludicrous.

    Ten- and twenty-year immigration projections are as silly as ten-year deficit reduction plans. The State is a special interest, and it has no interest in making big sacrifices to placate uneasy citizens, especially when it’s confident that the electoral strength of its allies will overwhelm them. Every step of the way, border security has been portrayed as the castor oil Big Government has to swallow, before it gets the delicious meal of amnesty that it really wants. That attitude is just about the only honest element of the comprehensive immigration reform debate. The only way to make Big Government do something it doesn’t want to do is to insist upon immediate and total compliance… because once the ruling class gets what they want, We the People have no further leverage over them.

  99. Laura’s analysis here is spot on. I urge you to watch it.

    There is no luke warm hell. The RINOS who supported this bill have written the obituary of the middle class, and their own obituary as well.

    We need a third party which represents the American People not the lobbyists.

    That cannot be accomplished within the existing system, where money is the controlling factor.

    I become more sure of this with every passing day.

    In the absence of a third party alternative, their supporters and independents need to stay home.

    In that case, the party itself will shrink to the size of the one and only constituency it now represents–the District of Columbia.

    The true conservatives in the party, who opposed this bill, must of course be saved.

    They will be needed to form the core of a third party once everything else falls in line.

    It may take 20 years for that new party to win the election, and the country may well go down the tube, as a result.

    But at least this is an honorable course, as opposed to believing and listening to a pack of liars.

    I used to wonder how the Mafia families could ignore external threats and obsess over their own internal politics. It seemed so stupid.

    I have a better understanding of this now.

    I see it on how my attention has shifted from external threats to internal ones and the corrupt nature of a political party I once supported.

    The big picture tends to lose its relevance when your own house is on fire.

    Again, please listen to what Laura says in the above link. It is the truth about what is going on in the other party.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/2503713994001/how-moderate-republicans-are-killing-the-party/?playlist_id=940325740001

  100. This outs former Tea Party Senator Pat Toomey, PA. Obama has agreed to purchase him.
    Entering with rather impressve credentials at his side.
    “…Now, the executive vice-president of Comcast is holding a fundraising reception at his home for Pennsylvania Republican U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey. The event is scheduled for July 9, from 6 to 7:30 p.m., according to the invitation.
    Sharing top billing as chairs of the event are Carl Buchholz, a lawyer and former official in the George W. Bush administration; Republican businessman Richard Vague; and Gail and Alan Kessler, Democrats who raised major funds for former Gov. Ed Rendell….”
    http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/big_tent/Dem-powerbroker-Cohen-raising-cash-for-Toomey.html

  101. I hate to see FOX call the Republicans who voted for this obscene piece of legislation “moderate”. It is not moderate to violate the constitution. It not moderate to lower the wages and raise the unemployment of the American working class. And it is not moderate to sell your soul for 30 pieces of silver. That is what these people did, and it is materially misleading to call them moderates. What they are is people who ignore or dismiss the American People and govern around a calculus of Washington DC interests which are inimical to the country. They need to be called what they are: corrupt unprincipled elitists. There is probably an even more descriptive word, but offhand I cannot think of it without venturing into profanity. This country fought a revolution to rid itself of people like this.

  102. The word I was trying to think of to describe these people is “unscrupulous”. The word moderate does not fit. Moderate refers to political philosophy, and the political philosophy of these people has nothing to do with it. It is a defect of character which affects everything the do. No promise is sacred with these people. They would sell their grandmother if the price is right. If anything, they are immoderate.

  103. Dana Loesch ✔ @DLoesch

    Wait to see what happens as this bill progresses and actions in the House before declaring the GOP dead to you.
    ————————
    May—be.

    The more urgent question is how do we remove those RINOS who voted for this bill. There are two possible answers. Vote democrat if you can do that. If not, then stay home. But do not under any circumstance pull the lever for these corrupt people. And tell everyone you talk to that they cannot be trusted to defend the constitution or the rights of the American People. At this point that portion of the GOP is dead to me, and there is no way that will change. If you are a Republican (or a Democrat) you can deal with your adversary because you know where he stands. The one thing you cannot deal with however, is the traitor in your own ranks who pretends to be something he is not until the moment of truth arrives. We know from today’s vote that there are 15 RINOs in the Senate who fit that description. Thus, for the good of the country, the categorical imperative is to ensure they are retired.

    In all my born days, I have never seen a political party so stupid as to cannibalize its own base. They are like the Donner Party in that respect, only they do this without the specter of starvation and freezing temperatures. On the contrary, they do it in posh restaurants inside the beltway, over $300 bottles of wine.

  104. holdthemaccountable
    June 24, 2013 at 9:42 pm
    ——————–
    This guy Toomey was never credible.

    The guy I wanted and supported was the Democrat, Admiral Joe Sestak.

    He was a man of principle and a big Hillary supporter.

    I hope he runs against this nevish Toomey.

    I think the Tea Party would gladly switch their alliances to Joe.

  105. This is dangerous and foolish. Just what you would expect of the naive Barack Obama. The Russian military is present and active in neighboring Syria. Putting these two forces in such close proximity runs a serious risk of escalating the Syrian civil war into a genuine World War.

    All of this for what? To oust a secular leader who just happens to be friends with Iran and replace him with Islamic extremists. We featured one the other day–a fanatic who happily ate the still beating heart of a Syrian soldier and declared him an infidel.

    http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/76053/more-on-the-looming-syrian-morass/#more-76053

    ——————————–
    This is literally Dr. Strangelove stuff.

  106. “EU General Affairs Council decided to open ch22 in accession talks with Turkey, any postponement is out of question.”

    Hell of a way of telling a dictator off EU….never met a dictator they didnt like when they needed him…totally disgusting, instead of sending a message to Erdogan by suspending it…what is wrong with these idiots, talk about handing the guy a political endorsement of his actions at the highest level. What else would i expect from that cabal of thieves and gangsters for that is all the EU is now, showed its true face.

  107. wbb: This guy Toomey was never credible. The guy I wanted and supported was the Democrat, Admiral Joe Sestak.
    ———————————
    Alas I did not see the warning signs. I used Sestak to get rid of Specter, then switched to Toomey. However Sestak has not given up; campaign mail from him arrived very recently. It is sitting in the “to be burned” section here. Think I will retrieve it.

    While the philly.com piece I cited headlined Democratic support for Toomey, there are two Republican hosts and another Democrat husband & wife tea.. UniParty. Ugly.
    —————————
    Then I have this placed here not becase I take joy in the news, but because it is Big Dawg. I do enjoy that he led the pledge to our flag there in 2000. I challenge Obama to do the same.

    But I left the rest for you to look up if you care to. I did not like the tone.

  108. oops. Forgot. I’m very despondent over politics today.
    Bill Clinton coming to Constitution Center
    BY JESSICA GLAZER, Daily News Staff Writer glazerj@phillynews.com, 215-854-5907Posted: June 24, 2013
    FORMER PRESIDENT Bill Clinton will return to the National Constitution Center tomorrow [6/25]. The first time Clinton set foot at the center was in 2000 when, as president, he led the Pledge of Allegiance at the building’s groundbreaking ceremony. The upcoming visit will be more substantive. http://articles.philly.com/2013-06-24/news/40168082_1_bill-clinton-groundbreaking-ceremony-national-constitution-center

  109. Admin: as I have said many many times over the past six years, I have the highest regard for your opinion. I know you believe there will be no immigration reform bill this year, and possibly not next year either, with elections coming in November, for various reasons including scheduling. Perhaps not. But here are my concerns, in other words, my reasons for believing otherwise. First of all, the monied interests in both parties are clearly committed to this objective, and they have been rather explicit about it. Second, the Senate Minority Leader, McConnell, claims to be against this bill, but has provided no leadership on it, and appointed half of the Gang of Eight. Third, and this is the rub, while it is unlikely that the House will vote in support the Gang of Eight Bill, in point of fact it is impossible, it is possible, indeed quite likely that the same political forces that compel them to reject that bill, will cause them to offer up their own bill which is tough on border security, in every way that the Gang of Eight Bill is not, since this will give them something to go back to their constituents next year and campaign on, to show that unlike their counterparts in the Senate they are on the side of the American People. At that point, IF I understand the process the two bills will go to reconciliation. At that point,John Boehner will need to hold the line, and refuse to accept amnesty. I do not know if anyone else here knows John, but I do, and I can assure you he is not the man for the job. Holding the line against the dictates of big money is not in his character.

  110. This article from John Cassidy posted at Common Dreams, points to (as we all have been saying for years, now) the failure of media to investigate and challenge government. The article questions why MSM has sided with the Obama Administration, and joined Obama in condemning Snowden.

    I guess the best answer to Cassidy’s question is – why the hell would you think they would disagree with the Obama Administration? Have they ever gone against their Barack? If so, such a show of independence has been rare.

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/25-0

    Demonizing Edward Snowden: Which Side Are You On?
    by John Cassidy

    snip

    “It is easy to understand, though not to approve of, why Administration officials, who have been embarrassed by Snowden’s revelations, would seek to question his motives and exaggerate the damage he has done to national security. Feinstein, too, has been placed in a tricky spot. Tasked with overseeing the spooks and their spying operations, she appears to have done little more than nod.

    More unnerving is the way in which various members of the media have failed to challenge the official line. Nobody should be surprised to see the New York Post running the headline: “ROGUES’ GALLERY: SNOWDEN JOINS LONG LIST OF NOTORIOUS, GUTLESS TRAITORS FLEEING TO RUSSIA.” But where are Snowden’s defenders? As of Monday, the editorial pages of the Times and the Washington Post, the two most influential papers in the country, hadn’t even addressed the Obama Administration’s decision to charge Snowden with two counts of violating the Espionage Act and one count of theft.”

    (snip)

    “To get a different perspective on Snowden and his disclosures, here’s a portion of an interview that ABC—the Australian Broadcasting Company, not the Disney subsidiary—did today with Thomas Drake, another former N.S.A. employee, who, in 2010, was charged with espionage for revealing details about an electronic-eavesdropping project called Trailblazer, a precursor to Operation Prism, one of the programs that Snowden documented. (The felony cases against Drake, as my colleague Jane Mayer has written, eventually collapsed, and he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor.)

    INTERVIEWER: Not everybody thinks Edward Snowden did the right thing. I presume you do…

    DRAKE: I consider Edward Snowden as a whistle-blower. I know some have called him a hero, some have called him a traitor. I focus on what he disclosed. I don’t focus on him as a person. He had a belief that what he was exposed to—U.S. actions in secret—were violating human rights and privacy on a very, very large scale, far beyond anything that had been admitted to date by the government. In the public interest, he made that available.

    INTERVIEWER: What do you say to the argument, advanced by those with the opposite viewpoint to you, especially in the U.S. Congress and the White House, that Edward Snowden is a traitor who made a narcissistic decision that he personally had a right to decide what public information should be in the public domain?

    DRAKE: That’s a government meme, a government cover—that’s a government story. The government is desperate to not deal with the actual exposures, the content of the disclosures. Because they do reveal a vast, systemic, institutionalized, industrial-scale Leviathan surveillance state that has clearly gone far beyond the original mandate to deal with terrorism—far beyond.”
    (snip)

    *********
    GO SNOWDEN GO !!

  111. The Stories They Told

    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | June 25th, 2013 at 04:30 AM | 25

    Republicans (and red state Democrats) used to tell voters amazing things about their opposition to amnesty. Then they got elected and supported legislation that actually weakens border security and puts people on a path not just to legalization, but to citizenship, before ever securing our borders.

    1. Rubio: “I would vote against anything that grants amnesty because I think it destroys your ability to enforce the existing law and I think it’s unfair to the people who are standing in line and waiting to come in legally. I would vote against anything that has amnesty in it.”

    2. Corker: “We need a new immigration policy that reflects America’s values. First, secure this border. Allow people to work here but only if they’re legal. No amnesty. Those employed but here illegally must go home and return through legal channels.”

    3. Wicker: “I agree that illegal immigration is a major issue that needs to be addressed. However, I oppose amnesty as the solution.”

    4. Ayotte: “For the people who are here illegally, I don’t support amnesty; it’s wrong. It’s wrong to the people who are waiting in line here, who have waited for so long. And we need to stop that because I think that’s where the Administration is heading next.”

    5. Flake: “I’ve been down that road, and it is a dead end. The political realities in Washington are such that a comprehensive solution is not possible, or even desirable given the current leadership. Border security must be addressed before other reforms are tackled.”

    6. Hatch: “We can no longer grant amnesty. I fought against the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli bill because they granted amnesty to 3 million people. They should have to get in line like anybody else if they want to come into this country and do it legally.”

    7. Heller: “I believe it is an amnesty program, a back-door amnesty program for the 12 to 15 million people who are here illegally.”

    8. Alexander: “We cannot restore a system of legal immigration – which is the real American Dream – if we undermine it by granting new benefits to those who are here illegally.”

    9. Collins: Before 2008 reelection, voted no on McCain-Kennedy amnesty

    10. Hoeven: Hoeven said the U.S. needs to secure its borders and crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

    11. McCain: “Complete the danged fence.”

    12. Graham: Amid withering criticism from his constituents, Graham — who is up for reelection next year — began to argue that it was time to approach the immigration problem in stages. On Thursday, he likened the decisive vote to pass his amendment to “having been robbed 12 million times and finally getting around to putting a lock on the door.”

    13. Kirk: “The American people believe our borders are broken. It is a fundamental duty of our government to know who is entering the country, making illegal entry nearly impossible. In the coming Congress, we have an overwhelming bipartisan consensus to restore confidence in the security of our borders — before we pursue other immigration proposals.”

    14. Murkowski: “With regard to undocumented aliens, I believe that those who illegally entered or remained in the United States should not be granted amnesty. Granting amnesty to illegal aliens sends the wrong message and is not fair to the vast majority of immigrants who abided by U.S. immigration laws. Granting amnesty would only encourage further illegal immigration.”

    15. Chisea: Joined most other Republicans, including opponents of the legislation, in supporting a proposal — which was defeated largely along party lines — that would have blocked legalization until the government can prove U.S. borders are secure. Chiesa said he sees border security as a top priority given his law enforcement background, and has yet to decide his stance on citizenship for immigrants without authorization.

    Red State Democrats

    1. Pryor: “I voted against the president’s immigration plan today because the border security and enforcement measures are inadequate and the bill fails to effectively address the individuals who are already here illegally.” Pryor says it’s time for changes, “It’s time for a new approach. I advocate that we strengthen and implement the enforcement measures in this bill and show we can fully enforce immigration laws.”

    2. Tester: He wants secure borders and no amnesty for law breakers.

    3. Landrieu: “Sen. Landrieu is a leader in the U.S. Senate fighting against illegal immigration,” Schneider said. “She has fought against amnesty for illegal immigrants and to provide more resources for border security. The new NRSC attack is designed simply to mislead voters about Sen. Landrieu’s record.”

    4. Donnelly: “Eliminate amnesty because no one should ever be rewarded for breaking the law.”

    5. Hagan: Hagan said she supported increased border security and opposed amnesty.

    6. McCaskill: Claire does not support amnesty. As a former prosecutor, Claire believes people who break the law should be held accountable, both illegal immigrants and the employers who exploit them for cheap labor. Claire does not believe we need any new guest worker programs undermining American workers.

    7. Stabenow: Do you support path to citizenship for illegal immigrants? STABENOW: I voted no, because it went too far and cost us jobs. I do think it’s important to have border security and legal system that is fair and effective. My focus is on our jobs that we’re losing because of failed policies

  112. New Immigration Bill Has Taxpayer Subsidized ObamaCars for Youths

    Breitbart News has learned there is a provision included in the immigration bill that could be used to give free cars, motorcycles, scooters or other vehicles to young people around the country over a period of 15 months after the bill passes. The new provision is a result of the latest addition to the Corker-Hoeven amendment, which is essentially an entirely new version of the bill.

    The Washington Examiner’s Byron York uncovered the new Obama stimulus program that Gang of Eight members and other Senate Republicans inserted into the bill as a sweetheart deal for liberal Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). The left leaning Senator was previously critical of the legislation.

    “The original Gang bill ended with a section designated Title IV, which was headlined REFORMS TO NON-IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAMS,” York wrote on Sunday. “The Hoeven-Corker version of the bill added a Title V, with the headline JOBS FOR YOUTH. The measure would provide $1.5 billion in the next two years to provide jobs for Americans between the ages of 16 and 24. It was originally pushed by Democratic Sen. Bernard Sanders, who wanted to come to the aid of young workers who were ‘hard hit by the Wall Street-caused recession.’ Now, Sanders says immigration reform will further damage youth job prospects.”

    Read More @
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/24/ObamaCar-handout-for-taxpayer-subsidized-vehicles-for-kids-built-into-immigration-bill-too

  113. Supreme Court: Shelby!

    Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act declared Unconstitutional!

    No more preclearance from Justice Department.

    Prepare for Obama race-baiting.

  114. Obama to Egyptian Christians: Don’t Protest the Brotherhood

    As Egyptians of all factions prepare to demonstrate in mass against the Muslim Brotherhood and President Morsi’s rule on June 30, the latter has been trying to reduce their numbers, which some predict will be in the millions and eclipse the Tahrir protests that earlier ousted Mubarak. Among other influential Egyptians, Morsi recently called on Coptic Christian Pope Tawadros II to urge his flock, Egypt’s millions of Christians, not to join the June 30 protests.

    While that may be expected, more troubling is that the U.S. ambassador to Egypt is also trying to prevent Egyptians from protesting­including the Copts. The June 18th edition of Sadi al-Balad reports that lawyer Ramses Naggar, the Coptic Church’s legal counsel, said that during Patterson’s June 17 meeting with Pope Tawadros, she “asked him to urge the Copts not to participate” in the demonstrations against Morsi and the Brotherhood.

    The Pope politely informed her that his spiritual authority over the Copts does not extend to political matters.

    Read More @
    http://frontpagemag.com/2013/raymond-ibrahim/u-s-asks-egypts-christians-not-to-oppose-morsi/

  115. The prevailing assumption by Republican strategists is that they can sell out their base without losing them because where else will they go. It is the same assumption that the Democrat strategist make vis a vis the blacks.

    But it is different with the Republican base. They do not want to live on a state run plantation known as the welfare state. They want freedom and reject the idea of the dole.

    If that is true, then Rove and his fellow strategists have miscalculated on an even grander scale than they did in 2012, and are headed for an even greater political disaster, which will make them politically irrelevant at the national level.

    At one time, Karl rejected an offer by Jim Hoffa to bring in the AFL-CIO in exchange for certain concession and told him I do not need them, because I have a superior get out to vote army at my disposal–grasss roots conservatives.

    Now I guess, he can say I do not need the grass roots conservatives because I have a superior force at my disposal, billions of Hispanic Republicans eager to support RINOS. All I can say to Karl and his fellow delusionals is this: good luck with that one.

    If they think this is an idle threat, they need only reflect on what occurred in 2012 when 3 million Republicans stayed home, rather than vote for a RINO. At that time, RINOs in the Senate had not betrayed their promise on immigration and Obama was the bette noire. In 2016, there will be twice as many, because by this single act of betrayal, they have compromised their brand.

  116. If you listened closely to what Laura Ingram said in the above clip, it was telling. She said she did not see how the Republican COALITION could go on in the after supporting a bill which is certain to lower wages and increase unemployment for the American Working class.

    These are the people who believe in the American way, and supported the Republican Party because of it. These people are the ground game of their party, yet the Republican leadership is content to throw them under the bus.

    At that point, what is left in their coalition? Neocons, big business interests, wealthy American and not a hell of a lot more. That is not enough/

    They think they can still win by taking the fight to the airways. But what is true in military matters is equally true in politics. You cannot win by air power alone. You must have troops on the ground. And by their support for this bill, they have just lost them.

  117. Update II: Prepare for Obama race-baiting. This news is breaking: Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act. It’s a 5-4 decision in a case brought by Shelby County, Alabama. Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act declared unconstitutional!:

    “Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, reauthorized by Congress in 2006, gives the federal government the ability to pre-emptively reject changes to election law in states and counties that have a history of discriminating against minority voters. The law covers nine states and portions of seven more, most of them in the South. The formula used to decide which states are subject to this special scrutiny (set out in Section 4 of the law) is based on decades-old voter turnout and registration data, the justices ruled, which is unfair to the states covered under it.

    The Justice Department used Section 5 of the law to block voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina last year, and it also struck down early voting restrictions in five counties in Florida. [snip]

    Another argument against Section 4’s constitutionality was that it’s unclear whether minority voters in Southern states are more likely to face discrimination at the polls than they are in other states.”

    This decision was expected since at least 2009. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion.

    —————————————————————

  118. 6. Referral to Other Chamber:

    When the House or the Senate passes a bill it is referred to the presiding officer of the other chamber – the speaker of the House or the president of the Senate – where it usually follows the same route through committee and floor action. This chamber may approve the bill as received, revise it, reject it, or fail to take action on it.
    7. Conference Committee Action:

    Both houses of Congress must approve identical language before it can be sent to the president. If the other chamber only makes minor changes to a bill, it is common for the legislation to go back to the first chamber for concurrence. However, when the actions of the other chamber significantly alter the bill, a conference committee, composed of members of both chambers, is formed to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate versions.

    The speaker of the House and the presiding officer of the Senate select conferees. There are generally three recommendations that can be made in attempting to reconcile the two versions of a bill: 1) that the other chamber withdraw its provisions; 2) that their own chamber withdraw its provisions and accept those of the other chamber or 3) that both chambers compromise by withdrawing some provisions in exchange for keeping others. The conferees are not supposed to insert any provision that was not part of one bill or the other.

    If the conferees are unable to reach agreement, the legislation dies. If agreement is reached, a conference report is prepared describing the committee members’ recommendations for changes. Both the House and the Senate must approve the conference report.

    http://www.aacn.org/wd/practice/content/publicpolicy/intro.pcms?menu=

  119. Here is the key to it. Boehner’s action in the reconcilliation process is not final. Thank God for that much.

    8. Final Floor Action:
    After a bill is revised in conference, both the Senate and the House must pass the amended bill again. If both chambers vote to accept the final language, the bill is put in its final form, signed by the speaker of the House and president pro tempore of the Senate, and sent to the president for his signature.

  120. The following response, by Greenwald, to the personal attacks upon him for speaking truth to power, should be cast in bronze and hung over every school of journalism in the country, with the admonition to thy own self be true. It shows how much of a thugocracy big media has become. WOW!
    —————————————————–
    UPDATE: Sorkin apologized to Greenwald Tuesday, saying he didn’t mean what he said.

    Along with NBC’s David Gregory and Chuck Todd, you can now add CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin to the list of journalists (and NBC journalists) floating the idea that one of their own, The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald, has done something illegal in reference to his work with NSA leaker Edward Snowden:

    My personal suggestion to Gregory, Todd, and Sorkin is that before they throw these kinds of baseless accusations around, they might want to clean up their own backyard. With their selectively edited videos and audio, NBC News is currently a hotbed of journalistic malpractice unlike anything I have ever seen before.

    Greenwald responded to Sorkin and Gregory via the Washington Post’s Erik Wemple:

    I’ve purposely made myself an outsider by very aggressively and harshly criticizing not just the culture itself but the most prominent members of it, including David Gregory and Andrew Ross Sorkin, who this morning suggested on CNBC that I be arrested.*

    Some of what is driving this hostility from some media figures is personal bitterness. Some of it is resentment over my having been able to break these big stories not despite, but because of, my deliberate breaching of the conventions that rule their world.

    But most of it is what I have long criticized them for most: they are far more servants to political power than adversarial watchdogs over it, and what provokes their rage most is not corruption on the part of those in power (they don’t care about that) but rather those who expose that corruption, especially when the ones bringing transparency are outside of, even hostile to, their incestuous media circles.

    They’re just courtiers doing what courtiers have always done: defending the royal court and attacking anyone who challenges or dissents from it. That’s how they maintain their status and access within it. That’s what courtiers to power, by definition, do.

    The only thing Greenwald might not have right is that if Bush or any Republican were president, he would currently be enjoying ticker tape parades thrown by his colleagues, not scorn.

    While NBC commits seven outright acts of journalistic malpractice in open service to Obama and the State, it is only those who dare ding Obama or the Cause that find themselves facing the media’s wrath: Bob Woodward, Howard Kurtz, and now Greenwald.

  121. It was Unconstitutional 60 years ago to enforce Federal Sovereignty over only a select group of states and it still is.

    Either we all bow down to the DOJ or none of us do. They targeted the South because it was politically expedient to do so.

  122. The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that states can no longer be judged by voting discrimination that went on decades ago, in a decision that marks the end of a major civil-rights era reform.

    The 5-4 ruling rewrites a key tool of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which for five decades has given the federal government unprecedented say in everything from how some states draw their congressional maps to where they place polling locations.

    —-> Map of states that were effected by this hand in the voting pie:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/voter-rights-chartjpg/

  123. Leanora
    June 25, 2013 at 12:02 pm

    It was Unconstitutional 60 years ago to enforce Federal Sovereignty over only a select group of states and it still is.

    Either we all bow down to the DOJ or none of us do. They targeted the South because it was politically expedient to do so.
    ——————-
    The Radical Republicans did the same thing after the War Between The States, through the Articles of Reconstruction, which were abolished by Hayes in 1876. In this case, it took not eleven years, but 50. This decision does not preclude Congress from revisiting the issue, based on current data. But data that is 50 years old? In political terms, that is beyond the memory of living men.

  124. Putin slaps Barry and his gang of thugs around again!

    Putin says Snowden at Russian airport, signals no extradition

    (Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday former U.S. spy agency contractor Edward Snowden was still in the transit area of Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport, was free to leave and should do so as soon as possible.

    Putin told a news conference during a visit to Finland that he hoped the affair would not affect relations with Washington, which wants Russia to send him to the United States, but indicated Moscow would not hand him over.

    “We can only hand over foreign citizens to countries with which we have an appropriate international agreement on the extradition of criminals,” Putin said, adding that Snowden has committed no crime in Russia.

    He dismissed U.S. accusations against Moscow over the case as “ravings and rubbish”, saying that Russian security agencies had not worked with Snowden but added that he hoped the affair would not hurt relations with the United States.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/25/us-usa-security-putin-idUSBRE95O0VE20130625

  125. The 5-4 ruling rewrites a key tool of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which for five decades has given the federal government unprecedented say in everything from how some states draw their congressional maps to where they place polling locations.
    —————————
    No rational human being would justify federal overreach based on a set of assumptions that are 60 years old, when society has undergone the fundamental changes we have seen in the South over the past fifty years. Yet four members of the Court, apparently, were prepared to do exactly that. Two reasons are likely: either they are hard core ideologues, to whom facts do not matter. In that case, they cannot be entrusted with the role of fairly interpreting the Constitution and are in violation of their judicial oath. Or else, they have taken a look at the politics of congress as it stands today, and concluded that it is unlikely that a new piece of legislation can be agreed up, hence they would rather leave the old imperfect one in place, than to have no federal oversight/overreach at all. But if that is their reasoning, then they have overlooked the fact that there are other remedies, ignored the cost of continuing oversight, and gotten down into the trenches of politics, where the Supreme Court is never ever supposed to venture. By doing so, they have assumed the role of a bevy of Platonic guardians.

  126. Shadowfax
    June 25, 2013 at 12:40 pm
    ———————
    How ironic. Today we get the truth out of a former KGB agent, and lies out of a US President. Barry and his big media buttboys are all for abandoning sovereignty on issues which have clarity and meaning to the Constitution, but highly defensive of sovereignty when it comes to spying. Holmes said it best: a dirty business.

  127. “Greenwald responded to Sorkin and Gregory via the Washington Post’s Erik Wemple:”
    ******
    Greenwald seems to be an example of how the system should work; Principles, Integrity, Courage first, differences in social/political theory second. The Liberals and Conservatives in Congress are a vanishing breed, maybe less than 10?

  128. wbboei
    June 25, 2013 at 1:22 pm

    Shadowfax
    June 25, 2013 at 12:40 pm
    ———————
    How ironic.

    —–
    Yup Wbb, and Putin just said that he didn’t know where Snowden was hours before. 😉

  129. Today (June 25) is George Orwell’s birthday.

    Happy Birthday George!

    “All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.”…George Orwell, “Animal Farm”

  130. NBC News is currently a hotbed of journalistic malpractice unlike anything I have ever seen before.
    ————————
    I thought the purchase of NBC by comcast would put an end to this “journalistic malpractice”. Evidently it has not. Evidently, comcast is just as corrupt as they are. Before now, I thought they were merely a lousy cable provider and monopolist. It appears now that it is a bit more.

  131. Honestly, who does he think he is…..

    Pres. Obama just called on people to “divest” from investments that generate greenhouse gases.

  132. oh god holy crap, talk about a crock of shit journalism……..

    Dutch news is reporting that Mandela opened his eyes when he was told Obama is coming to see him.

    ……………

    Someone fetch me a bucket, i need to hurl.

  133. Well, Paula Deen had better buy her an asbestos suit. MSM will really stoke the fires now, sacrificing her as a burnt offering to appease the two faced god of anti-racism.

    If she can be destroyed because of an attitude and or comments from 25 years ago, that pretty much invalidates the notion that human beings grow, change, and learn from their errors of the past. I don’t know how valid the reports are, but I’ve read that she is absolutely not a racist.

    I do know, however, that Eric Holder is a racist. Barack is a racist. Truth is, it’s ok to be racist, if the racism is from blacks toward whites.

  134. They are devious!
    *****

    Dem Strategy: Climate Change Opponents Must Be ‘Ridiculed’

    Democrats have a new plan for pushing climate change legislation that would severely damage the US economy: ridiculing climate change opponents. “These people have to ridiculed,” explained Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) to Netroots Nation. “They have to be run out of town rhetorically.” Dave Weigel of Slate.com helpfully reports, “If denying climate change becomes as dangerous to talk about as abortion, voila, they can start tripping up the other side. They needed to try, because nothing else worked.”

    Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) agreed with Schatz, stating, “When you make fun of people – here’s an example. In Indiana last year, a conservative candidate lost the Senate race because he said something stupid about rape.” Waxman added that Obama might take unilateral action on climate change. “He’s not running for re-election,” Waxman noted.

    Clearly, Waxman and Schatz haven’t been watching Al Gore, who has attempted this strategy for years.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/23/Dems-climate-change-ridicule

  135. President Obama today said he was “deeply disappointed” by a Supreme Court ruling that states could no longer be judged by standards nearly 50 years old to determine whether their voting procedures require federal oversight.

    Deeply disappointed? Really? Have we made no progress in five decades? Are we really at this point in danger of slipping back to the kind of voter discrimination blacks experienced in the 1960s and before?

    The Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia, Alaska, Arizona, and parts of seven other states to receive “pre-clearance” from either the attorney general or federal judges before making changes to voting laws.

    The Court didn’t invalidate the principle that some states or areas require federal scrutiny. It merely said we’ve advanced enough as a society that new standards must be written based on current conditions, and that the punishment of states for what was done even before the civil rights era must be stopped.

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/06/25/obama-deeply-disappointed-voting-rights-ruling/

  136. I’m from the Deep South, and at one point in our history, the accusations of racism were valid, and the need for monitoring to assure equal rights was indeed, valid. While I’m sure racism still exists to some extent – just as it does in all regions of this country, with various races, ethnic groups, and religions holding some antipathy for groups and individuals who differ. However, I don’t believe there would be wholesale intent – or even desire on the part of the white community to deny members of the black community the unobstructed right to vote.

    Great effort has been made by both blacks and whites to rectify the injustices of the past, and to prevent such injustices from occurring in the future.

    I will have to say, however, since Barack has tried to make everything about race – for his own advantage, not for that of either race, racial tension has increased.

  137. I keep trying to see how the Supremes voted on the Voting Rights Act, I can guess who voted to keep things as there were.

  138. President Obama today said he was “deeply disappointed” by a Supreme Court ruling that states could no longer be judged by standards nearly 50 years old to determine whether their voting procedures require federal oversight.

    …………………………………..

    President Obama needs to look at the corrupt states like Illinois, NY, NJ, California,Virginia, Florida, you know the ones where voting is like multiple voting in a banana republic especially if your a democrat. I’d be more concerned about those.

  139. Yup Moon, I was shocked to see CA and FLA were in the mix. Amazing that Hillary was able to win in CA in 2008, against the cheating machine.

  140. Here comes the race-baiting from Brazillenut and the DNC is profiting off of it.

    The Democratic National Committee was swift to slam the Supreme Court’s decision to gut the Voting Rights Act as “an injustice.” And they’ve already started to raise money off the decision, with plans to target Republicans they claim are fighting voters’ rights.

    “We faced a setback with the Supreme Court’s decision today, that’s for sure. I can’t sugarcoat that. But I hope you won’t give up, because let me tell you — I am most certainly not giving up. Stand with Democrats who are fighting Republican attacks on voting rights,” urged DNC member Donna Brazile Tuesday in her note posted below.

    Friend —

    The Voting Rights Act, first signed into law in 1965, was a keystone victory of the civil rights movement. American citizens withstood beatings, fire hoses and dogs to see the law passed. Some even gave their lives.

    And for decades since, the law has protected the right to vote for millions of America’s citizens — regardless of faith, color or creed.
    Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

    Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court striking down parts of this important law is more than a disappointment — it’s an injustice. But we can’t let it discourage us or force us out of this fight.

    more crap:
    http://washingtonexaminer.com/dnc-already-raising-money-on-courts-injustice-on-voting-rights-act/article/2532364

  141. Here ya go Wbb, Snowden was smart on doing this:

    Greenwald: Snowden’s Files Are Out There if ‘Anything Happens’ to Him

    Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian journalist who Snowden first contacted in February, told The Daily Beast on Tuesday that Snowden “has taken extreme precautions to make sure many different people around the world have these archives to insure the stories will inevitably be published.” Greenwald added that the people in possession of these files “cannot access them yet because they are highly encrypted and they do not have the passwords.” But, Greenwald said, “if anything happens at all to Edward Snowden, he told me he has arranged for them to get access to the full archives.”

    The fact that Snowden has made digital copies of the documents he accessed while working at the NSA poses a new challenge to the U.S. intelligence community that has scrambled in recent days to recover them and assess the full damage of the breach. Even if U.S. authorities catch up with Snowden and the four classified laptops the Guardian reported he brought with him to Hong Kong the secrets Snowden hopes to expose will still likely be published.

    A former U.S. counterintelligence officer following the Snowden saga closely said his contacts inside the U.S. intelligence community “think Snowden has been planning this for years and has stashed files all over the Internet.” This source added, “At this point there is very little anyone can do about this.”

    The arrangement to entrust encrypted archives of his files with others also sheds light on a cryptic statement Snowden made on June 17 during a live chat with The Guardian. In the online session he said, “All I can say right now is the U.S. government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me. Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped.”

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/25/greenwald-snowden-s-files-are-out-there-if-anything-happens-to-him.html

    His poor parents must be worried sick about him.

  142. More from my link above on Snowden…

    [snip]

    However, Greenwald said that in his dealings with Snowden the 30-year-old systems administrator was adamant that he and his newspaper go through the document and only publish what served the public’s right to know. “Snowden himself was vehement from the start that we do engage in that journalistic process and we not gratuitously publish things,” Greenwald said. “I do know he was vehement about that. He was not trying to harm the U.S. government; he was trying to shine light on it.”

    Greenwald said Snowden for example did not wish to publicize information that gave the technical specifications or blueprints for how the NSA constructed its eavesdropping network. “He is worried that would enable other states to enhance their security systems and monitor their own citizens.” Greenwald also said Snowden did not wish to repeat the kinds of disclosures made famous a generation ago by former CIA spy, Philip Agee—who published information after defecting to Cuba that outed undercover CIA officers. “He was very insistent he does not want to publish documents to harm individuals or blow anyone’s undercover status,” Greenwald said. He added that Snowden told him, “Leaking CIA documents can actually harm people, whereas leaking NSA documents can harm systems.”

    Greenwald also said his newspaper had no plans to publish the technical specifications of NSA systems. “I do not want to help other states get better at surveillance,” Greenwald said. He added, “We won’t publish things that might ruin ongoing operations from the U.S. government that very few people would object to the United States doing.”

    In this sense Greenwald is applying a more traditional journalistic approach to publishing classified information than WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization that published hundreds of thousands of sensitive diplomatic cables and intelligence reports from Afghanistan and Iraq—initially without removing the names of individuals who were placed at risk after their interactions with U.S. officials in dangerous places were made public. “I am supportive of WikiLeaks, but I am doing something different,” Greenwald said.

  143. More racism..

    Democratic lawmaker hits justice as ‘Uncle Thomas’

    A Democratic lawmaker from Minnesota criticized Tuesday’s Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act by calling Justice Clarence Thomas “Uncle Thomas,” then saying he didn’t know “Uncle Tom” was a racist epithet.

    On his Twitter account Tuesday, state Rep. Ryan Winkler called the justices’ 5-4 ruling striking down a part of the law racist, and the work of “four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas.” Justice Thomas, who is black, was one of the five justices in the majority.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/democratic-lawmaker-hits-justice-uncle-thomas/

  144. Nice! Texas Immediately Restores Its Voter ID Law After Supreme Court’s Voter Rights Act Decision…

    Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott announced Tuesday his state will re-establish its voter ID law after the Supreme Court struck down a section of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that required certain states to seek federal approval before changing the electoral process.

    Congress must devise a new racial calculus to determine which counties and states must petition the federal government to change election laws, the majority announced.

    Texas greeted the ruling with plans to implement its suspended voter ID laws and district maps.

    “With today’s decision, the State’s voter ID law will take effect immediately. Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government,” Abbott’s statement read.

    http://weaselzippers.us/2013/06/25/nice-texas-immediately-restores-its-voter-id-law-after-supreme-courts-voter-rights-act-decision/

  145. Shadowfax

    “Greenwald: Snowden’s Files Are Out There if ‘Anything Happens’ to Him”

    __________________

    A smart move.

    **********

    GO SNOWDEN GO!

  146. Shadowfax
    June 25, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    Here ya go Wbb, Snowden was smart on doing this:

    Greenwald: Snowden’s Files Are Out There if ‘Anything Happens’ to Him

    ———————————–
    I figured he would do that, and mentioned it four days ago.

    wbboei
    June 21, 2013 at 11:03 pm

    Secret courts, giving secret opinions, and secret criminal indictments….If Snowden is brought back to the US, he will be placed in solitary and it will be unlikely that lawyers will be granted a high enough level of clearance that they can give him representation.
    ————————————–
    I suspect he has thought of that already, and has reduced what he he knows and suspects to some form of diary, which he has given to someone he trusts with instructions to turn it over to whoever the US would fear having that information in the event of his untimely death or disappearance. If I were in his shoes, I would do that in order to create leverage. And, if I were an FBI agent, I would operate on that assumption. This is another variant of the prisoners dilemma. Snowden is a very smart guy, and a good planner, so I suspect he has thought this whole thing through to a much deeper level than I have.

  147. I figured he would do that, and mentioned it four days ago.

    —-
    Yup, that’s why I said, “Here ya go Wbb.” 😉

  148. I agree. 🙂

    What Obama is asking is illegal. Rendition without due process for Mr. Snowden is not the legal procedure for extradition. Obama only obeys the laws that he likes and ignores those he doesn’t. That is not how a free country is supposed to work.
    Justice for all requires that the government is ruled by laws and not by men (and women). “That’s not who we are” Mr. President.
    So stop just saying that Mr. Snowden broke the law. He is entitled to due process. Obama cannot just throw a tantrum and demand his return.
    Mr. Snowden where ever he is; is entitled to an extradition hearing and a ruling by a judge. He has many legitimate legal arguments to oppose his extradition to the US.
    One is that rendition is a violation of international law, since the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ratified by the U.S. Congress making it the law of the land in the US under our Constitution.
    The UN Convention also specifically says that it is illegal under international and US law for one country to “expel, return, or extradite a person to another state where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture”.
    On only need to look at how Bradley Manning has been treated which rises to the level of torture to realize that Mr. Snowden would be in grave danger of being tortured by the US.
    President Obama as the president and the commander of the military is responsible for the illegal torture by those under him. He is the torturer in chief for knowingly having allowed Bradley Manning to be subjected to torture.
    With the many other known and documented proofs that the US engages in torture, especially against so-called enemies of the state, it would be illegal under international and US law to return Mr. Snowden to the US.

  149. Bullshit race baiting again……..

    Rev. Jesse Jackson: Democracy was stabbed in the heart by Supreme Court ruling

    I wish this guy would just crawl off into a hole somewhere.

  150. Putin is laughing his butt off

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that Snowden will not be extradited to the United States

    Russia helping an American escape political persecution in the States..??
    This is priceless entertainment 😆

  151. Drudge is pushing our buttons with two new articles –

    Barry in SuperO’man suit, out to save the planet

    Weaner ‘thrusts into lead’

  152. 🙂

    Who sucks more?

    Bill Ayers says Mayor Rahm Emanuel “has been a catastrophe for the schools in Chicago.”

  153. Among foreign leaders, Obama is a complete joke.

    It isn’t just his leading from behind crap, which is a code word for no leadership at all.

    It is the fact that the bastard is forever apologizing to everyone for the United States.

    As the saying goes: never apologize. It is a sign of weakness.

    The more he apologizes the weaker he becomes, and the more he is vulnerable to predators.

    Who smell his weakness and move in to take advantage of it.

  154. Has anyone else heard speculation that the Russians would probably hold Snowden, and attempt to extract, by whatever means possible, any info he might know that could be of use to the Russian govt?

    I don’t believe that’s a likely scenario, but just wondering how wide-spread this speculation is.

  155. foxyladi14
    June 25, 2013 at 6:42 pm
    ————————-
    You bet it is funny.

    In the glorious age of Obama everything is upside down.

    America is a persecuting nation.

    Russia gives persecuted US citizens sanctuary.

    The hope and change hits just keep coming.

    Obama is truly a transformational leader.

    As Eugene Robinson opined, an intelligent man in an intelligent white house in an intelligent city, etc.

    If only there weren’t all those racists running around, thwarting his efforts to bring wisdom and brotherly love to the planet.

  156. wbboei
    June 25, 2013 at 7:25 pm
    Among foreign leaders, Obama is a complete joke.

    It isn’t just his leading from behind crap, which is a code word for no leadership at all.

    It is the fact that the bastard is forever apologizing to everyone for the United States.

    As the saying goes: never apologize. It is a sign of weakness.

    The more he apologizes the weaker he becomes, and the more he is vulnerable to predators.

    Who smell his weakness and move in to take advantage of it.

    ***********************************************************

    foreign leaders can see O is a poser…they can see that he reads from a teleprompter and would be lost without it…they do not owe him the adoration that his followers indulge in with their denial here…

    foreign leaders can see that he is lazy and does not work…they can easily see that he is no Clinton…O is not Bill Clinton and O is not Hillary Clinton…both Clintons are known all over the world for being workhorses…two individuals that will be the last to leave the room to solve a problem…

    …whereas, O has a reputation from walking out on meetings…farming out all the hard work…he is a figurehead…everyone knows it…and each and every day American leaders are waking up to it…no one fears him…he will go down as the MIA President…eight years of ‘voting present’ while going off golfing…

    Essentially he shows up to read a speech from a teleprompter…that about sums it up…

  157. foxyladi14
    June 25, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    And the Black Panthers will help him. 🙄
    _______________

    Just as they did in PA in 2008, wielding clubs, and intimidating voters, and Holder, yet again, will instruct no prosecution. He will protect efforts to obstruct whites from voting, but not blacks.

    Robert’s opinion re the Voting Rights Act today indicated that there are more registered African American voters in Alabama and Mississippi than whites. That seems a little odd, since in Alabama, 70.1% of the population is white, while 26.5% is black. And, in MS 60% of the population is white, 37.3% is black.

    Maybe Eric needs to check this out. Seems like some voter registration irregularities have really been occurring in these two states.

  158. freespirit
    June 25, 2013 at 7:46 pm
    ————————-
    No. Putin is having too much fun being the sanctuary nation. Why spoil it with antediluvian KGB tactics. The people who would love to torture Snowden are in the Obama Administration. Like Brennan.

  159. “Dutch news is reporting that Mandela opened his eyes when he was told Obama is coming to see him.”

    Moon, he was probably wondering if he had not already suffered enough, without having to arise from his sick bed and bow down to the Great Obama.

  160. Wbb, that was my response, as well. I hope this guy can find a way to stay safe, and eventually, have some semblance of a decent life.

    No doubt, the wrath he has incurred from both the Left and the Right, as well as American media will thoroughly discourage other potential whistle-blowers, who otherwise, might want and need to come forward with information that would expose corruption, violations of law, violations of human and civil rights. The message has been – “Keep your mouth shut, or we’ll hunt you down, and do whateverthehell we want with you – and there is no one in the US who can and will protect you”.

  161. wbboei
    June 25, 2013 at 7:57 pm

    foxyladi14
    June 25, 2013 at 6:42 pm
    ———————-
    It is customary for foreign governments to conduct due diligence on the US leaders they will be dealing with. You can be certain that Putin’s people have done a complete psychological profile on Obama, and have come to the identical conclusion about him that Israeli intelligence has, namely that he is a narcissist, and if you put him under enough pressure the ossified angry child of his youth will come out. They also know that he can be bullied in circumstances beyond the reach of his campaign machine. And they have seen him draw lines in the sand and then retreat, hesitate at the moment of decision, and blink. We see that, and you can be sure they see it far more clearly than we do. They have got his number. Consequently they can toy with him with impunity, and there is nothing he can do about it. This is the price he must pay for giving up on the doctrine of American exceptionalism and pursuing a foreign policy worthy of Neville Chamberlain.

  162. Caitlin Hayden, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, said the absence of a treaty should not matter.

    “While we do not have an extradition treaty with Russia, there is nonetheless a clear legal basis to expel Mr. Snowden, based on the status of his travel documents and the pending charges against him,” she said. “Accordingly, we are asking the Russian Government to take action to expel Mr. Snowden without delay and to build upon the strong law enforcement cooperation we have had, particularly since the Boston Marathon bombing.”
    ———————————
    Caitlin Haden, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council CHALLENGES Vladimir Putin, former KGB Chief and the head of the Russian state? Is that the right protocol? Sorry. I forgot. In the age of Obama everything is upside down. And the meek shall inherit the earth–unless they are white, in which case they must be made to pay slavery reparations. But the second part of it is even more absurd. She demands that Putin build upon the strong law enforcement cooperation which the United States has had with Russia since the Boston Bombing???? Oh, you mean the several tips Russia gave to the United States about the Boston bomber which the FBI failed to heed. Any spokeswoman with common sense would not want to make reference to that embarrassment. I can hear the Russians laughing at that one all the way from Moscow. The Obama Administration is providing far better comedy material these days than that dullard David Letterman. I commend them for that, and nothing else, because nothing else they do is commendable. It is embarrassing.

  163. Someone in my family had tuned the TV to CNN – a violation in my house – and there was Piers Morgan, showing a large graphic of the covered body of Trevon Martin, while slamming Jorge Zimmerman. I absolutely hate the fact that American media can try people on TV. It’s impossible for defendants to receive a fair trial after Nancy Grace, Piers, and other media “stars” broadcast their opinions and the opinions of “experts”, sometimes revealing information that would not be admissible in court. They influence the general population, which has to filter over into the minds and memories of jurors, the judge, the prosecution, and the attorney for the defense.

    Zimmerman deserves a fair trial. Every citizen of this country is so entitled. Those who approve of the ant-Zimmerman media coverage, because they believe he is guilty, and should pay, should be very cautious. At some point, they or someone they care about could be on the receiving end of a media prosecution. If and when that happens, they may not feel it’s quite so appropriate. If it’s fair and right for Zimmerman to receive this treatment, it’s fair and right for everyone.

    When a crime as serious as murder or manslaughter has occurred, justice for both the defendant and the victim is better served by a fair trial in a court of law – not by Piers, Nancy, or anyone else who exploits both victim and defendant for entertainment purposes.

  164. Yea, you are right Admin. We could have had a trifecta here:

    But you know that striking down of the voting rights section is more of a problem for Holder than ending affirmative action. If Zimmerman gets off too, then the stage is set. Maybe they can burn Detroit again, like they did in 1967. That would avoid a bankruptcy proceeding. Then they can borrow the money to rebuild from Jerry Brown in California. He could issue Moonbeam bonds to pay for it, and George Clooney inter alia could line up to buy. He could sell a little of his property in Tuscany for a worthy cause. Isn’t it wonderful what like-minded people can do to help each other. Just stay out of the taxpayers pockets.

    Incidentally, I happened to look up the bio on Cordell Hull, who was FDR’s secretary of state, from the great state of Tennessee which has given us scumbags like Bob Corker. I was surprised to learn that Hull was the author of the Income Tax Act of 1913 and 1916, and the Inheritance Tax. I now think less of the man. I can only wonder what he would think of our current IRS, which his legislation made possible.

  165. I found the link to this article in a comment at Craw Dad Hole blog. The comment accompanying the link was something like – “What Hillary couldn’t say.”

    The article is more than a month old, and link may have previously been posted her, if so, I’ve just forgotten about it, so just ignore this and move on – nothing to see. 🙂

    *******

    “It’s Time To Discuss The Secret CIA Operation At The Heart Of The US Mission In Benghazi”

    Michael Kelley and Geoffrey Ingersoll May 17, 2013, 10:33 AM 30,915 65

    (snip)

    ‘At its heart a CIA operation’

    In January, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Congress that the CIA was leading a “concerted effort to try to track down and find and recover … MANPADS [man-portable air defense systems]” looted from the stockpiles of toppled Libyan ruler Muammar Qaddafi.

    The State Department “consulate” served as diplomatic cover for the previously-hidden annex.
    The top-secret presence and location of the CIA outpost was first acknowledged by Charlene Lamb, a top official in the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, during Congressional testimony in October.
    (snip)

    ‘Other intriguing details’

    This week Nancy Youssef of McClatchy reported that Ambassador Stevens twice turned down offers for additional security, despite specifically asking for more men in cables to the State Department”.

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-secret-cia-mission-in-benghazi-2013-5#ixzz2XHsd8iNT

  166. caught two segments of Greta tonight…she had on Thune and Issa and some woman…

    the most upsetting and alarming info disgusted…first…the latest on the IRS and the millions more they are spending of our taxpayer money in credit cards to themselves and charging porn, wine, stuff for babies, etc…

    then…what I have been screaming about alot…this thing evidently called the Obama Hub…where all…and I mean ALL OF OUR PRIVATE INFO is going…in the name of Ocare…and it is going to be exposed to many, many people…

    your tax returns, private health info…everything…and alot of people are going to have access to it…people that are not even in the govt…and there is something called “The Navigators” which are also going to have access to all your private info…

    and all of this also goes thru the IRS…

    Why are people not screaming at the top of their lungs about this?

    Why are democrats standing up for our freaking privacy?

    This is beyond…beyond the beyond…and if someone does not stop this craziness…all our private info is going to be up for grabs to everyone…

    I cannot even believe this is being considered…much less allowed to happen…

    this is the NSA story on steroids…and it just is an extension of the NSA and IRS story and control over our lives…it is UnAmerican…

  167. S, currently, health care professional, at least in some states, (I’m not sure if others require this) have the option to choose whether to post patient info online, in a “secure” portal, in order for other health care professionals and/or mental health care professionals to be able to access it electronically (I suppose, with patient consent). At this point, in some states, incentives being are offered by some of the insurance companies to professionals who elect to participate.

    I may be wrong, but I believe that this will eventually be standard practice under Obamacare. While obviously, it can be to patients’ advantage, particularly if they have numerous health care providers, for all of their doctors to have access to important information, but in view of recent developments, this does seem to involve significant security risks, as well.

    At this point, I don’t think many of us really want our private medical and mental health treatment information floating around in cyberspace. The potential for privacy violations and misuse of the information seems all too real.

  168. Why are democrats NOT standing up for our freaking privacy?
    ——————————————————–
    Toynbee studied history for seventy years and concluded that all of it could be explained in term one thing, and one thing alone>

    Love of the in group

    Hatred of the out group

    It is the exceptional individual who puts principle ahead of group loyalty.

    Group loyalty trumps principle, national loyalty and everything else in the eye of the common herd and the elites alike.

  169. “I may be wrong, but I believe that this will eventually be standard practice under Obamacare.”
    ******
    It the best of worlds, computerized patient records are a positive. In the Obamacare law, it was sold as a significant cost saving program. It turns out that digitizing patient records makes billing an collection more efficient and increases the costs. As I understand the current requirements, there is little or no mandate that the various software packages are able to “talk” to each other so data on competing proprietary software must be re-entered “by hand.” At the bottom line, it was another payoff to corporate supporters. The Rand Corp. study that was used by Obamacare supporters to validate the “It will save me money” was paid for by several of the major medical software companies and GE.

  170. …the way I understand what is coming at the “HUB” is way more than ‘computerized patient records’

    the ‘HUB’ is going to be a central location where at least 7, SEVEN, Federal Agencies are going to report and have access to our tax returns, income, health records, social security info, etc…one centralized, federal HUB with all this personal information on us…

    and it keeps evolving, as it was just announced that the ‘HUB’ will be keeping our tax returns for at least 10 YEARS

    the agencies that were mentioned that will be viewing this info are, IRS, SSA, Defense, Veterans Admin, Peace Corp,

    the people that will have access to our personal information include…contractors, guarantees, law enforcement, govt officials, etc…

    (you know, the likes of the mentality working at the IRS)

    all these people will have access under the notion of having to verify information for the exhanges…

    Representative Diane Black was on Greta after some man that explained a lot of this…she will be returning with more frightening information regarding people called “The Navigators”…god only knows what power they will have

    http://black.house.gov/

    as I said…alot of this is hidden in the thousands of pages of Ocare…that no one read…and many of them…even in the Congress have no idea is happening…and whoever is running the show within HHS is actually adding new mandates and regulations as they go along to the other thousands that are already hidden in this monstrosity…

    an example of this…is at first “they” said they would not be keeping our tax records…and recently they changed it to the ‘HUB’ will now be keeping our tax records…for many people to see…for ten years…

    How do you feel about strangers from all different angles with who knows what status, etc having access to your private financial and health info…

  171. btw…there are interviews with Black and Varney on that website that spells out alot of this…

    ADMIN…I know you mentioned you are planning a big piece on Ocare in the future…I hope you will cover some of this…because this is getting at the crux of the scam…at it ties in with all the other survellience we have been discussing…

    the NSA, the IRS and the the icing on the cake…under the guise of healthcare…Ocare…what is that expression…three leg chair or something like that…well Ocare is the final leg to finish off any privacy left in our lives…they are going to mandate and force people to pay for their lives being under a magnifying glass from birth to grave…

  172. Jesus, those new yorkers…..really is he the best you could come up with.

    http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Anthony-Weiner-Frontrunner-NYC-Mayoral-Race-Poll-Christine-Quinn-213008841.html

    Democratic mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner has surged ahead of his opponents in a new NBC 4 New York/Wall Street Journal poll, transforming himself in just a few weeks from disgraced has-been to mayoral front-runner.

    Weiner, who entered the race two years after resigning his congressional seat amid a sexting scandal, now leads City Council Speaker Christine Quinn in the crowded Democratic primary, setting up a new phase in what could end up being a remarkable political comeback.

    Weiner leads Quinn 25 percent to 20 percent among registered Democrats, the poll by Marist found. That’s a flip-flop from the last survey in May, when Quinn, the longtime front-runner, led Weiner 24 percent to 19 percent.

    Just as telling is the number of registered New York voters who said they might vote for Weiner. Forty-nine percent said they’d consider it, up from 40 percent two months ago, before Weiner entered the race. Those who said they wouldn’t consider voting for him dropped from 52 percent to 45 percent.

  173. An interesting and lengthy article appears in Jewish Journal about HRC’s speech in Universal City, at
    http://www.jewishjournal.com/los_angeles/article/hillary_clinton_private_citizen_reflects_on_israel_middle_east_unrest

    She talked mainly about Israel and the Middle East but also had the following remarks about Benghazi:

    …. Asked by Wexler about the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the American compound in Benghazi, Libya, and the murder of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three others, a tragedy that plagued her and President Obama in the last days of his first administration, she spoke at some length. “This was an expeditionary post,” she said, “not an embassy, not a consult,” a place to “establish a presence” for the United States. “Chris Stevens believed it was important to be in Libya,” she said, but the post was reliant upon a Libyan militia, in large part, for protection, along with “a large CIA contingent with professional security.”

    Stevens, she said, “knew better than anyone that there had been some attacks, but he believed it was important to be there.” Yet on the day of the attack, she said she “called the president of Libya and he had nobody to send” to rescue the Americans. “The militia did not stay and defend our compound.” It was, she added, a day of demonstrations taking place across the Arab world, from “North Africa to Indonesia.” And after the death of Stevens, she said, “it was surprising to see some people politicize the events.”

  174. Well she finally got booted out….

    Julia Gillard ousted by Kevin Rudd as leader of Australian Labor Party and will be new PM soon.

    Gillard will resign parliamentary seat at election and retire.

Comments are closed.