SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 1:47:27 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1578161
 
Lax enforcement producing gusher of illegal immigration from Central America...



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 1:48:08 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1578161
 
Attkisson: When I'd Begin Investigating an Obama Scandal, CBS Would Pull Me Off...



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 2:09:44 PM
From: joseffy3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bill
FJB
TideGlider

  Respond to of 1578161
 
True the Vote Calls Out Rep. Cummings for Role in IRS Targeting Scandal



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 2:18:24 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1578161
 
Sen. Sessions: 'Deliberate Plan by Obama to Collapse U.S. Law Enforcement System
...............................................................................................
April 10, 2014 By Craig Bannister
cnsnews.com



Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said today that Americans need to stand up to "a deliberate plan by the president of the United States" to collapse the nation's law enforcement system regarding illegal immigration.

In a Senate speech, Sessions said:

"Our law enforcement system is in a state of collapse, and it's a deliberate plan by the president of the United States, and it's wrong. And, people need to be aware of it and need to stand up to it and I believe the American people are beginning to do so."

Sen. Sessions rebuked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Vice President Joe Biden for their pro-amnesty efforts:

"So, you come into the country illegally and the attorney general of the United States declares that these individuals have a civil right to amnesty. How can this possibly be: the chief law enforcement officer in America?

"Vice President Biden recently said, quote: 'You know, 11million people live in the shadows; I believe they're already American citizens.' Eleven million undocumented aliens are already Americans? Goodness. The vice president of the United States would make such a statement. It's stunning beyond belief."



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 4:38:04 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1578161
 
Shakedown: Treasury seizing tax refunds from adult children to pay parents' Social Security debts

................................................................................................
Hotair ^ | 04/11/2014 | AllahPundit




To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 6:10:54 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Bill

  Respond to of 1578161
 
Obama decries ‘bogus’ voter fraud complaints
................................................................................


Friday, April 11, 2014
The Hill ^




To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/11/2014 11:09:20 PM
From: joseffy3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bill
D.Austin
FJB

  Respond to of 1578161
 
Eric Holder Publicly Declares That Those Who Question His Actions Are Racist
........................................................................................................
by Ulsterman on April 9, 2014 with 10 Comments in News
theulstermanreport.com



Knew some version of this was coming, but man, does Eric Holder go full on race card here.

Here is a man who promotes government officials responsible for Fast and Furious, has to date, refused to go after those responsible for the Benghazi Massacre (despite repeated promises from both him and Barack Obama to do so, ignores the still rampant abuses of the IRS, wants gun owners to essentially be “tagged” to allow government monitoring, and then cries “RACISM” when anyone brings these, or any number of other serious shortcomings up for questioning.

Make no mistake, this Obama administration has further divided America against itself and set race relations back decades, which sadly, appears all too likely to have been according to plan as some warned us years ago…



(via WHD)

Holder Goes Racial Attorney General Holder dropped the race card on the table today, throwing down a clear suggestion that the mistreatment he thinks he’s getting from Republicans is based not on the content of his character – which actually, it is – but on the color of his skin.


From remarks today at Al Sharpton’s National Action Network convention in New York City:

I am pleased to note that the last five years have been defined by significant strides and lasting reforms, even in the face of unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly, and divisive adversity.

If you don’t believe that – forget about me – you look at the way the Attorney General of the United States was treated yesterday by a House Committee. It had nothing to do with me. Forget about that. What Attorney General has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment? What President has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?



I think, given he was doing Al Sharpton’s gig – with Al knowingly nodding behind him – and the “strides and lasting reforms” he’s talking about were to benefit minorities, it’s safe to assume he is charging racism.

Now that’s really unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly, and divisive, isn’t it? LINK

_________________________

It is also dripping with irony that Holder’s race baiting defense was spoken at an Al Sharpton event, the very man stories are now indicating was a government informant who signed up for the gig decades ago to avoid a drug charge rap.

The same Al Sharpton whose own race baiting allegations caused New York rioting that led to the 1991 death of a Jewish visitor from Australia.

Days before that death, Sharpton was screaming out about the Jews as “diamond merchants” with the “blood of babies on their hands”.

THAT is the man the current Attorney General of the United States sat next to today while crying out his own allegations of racism against those who would question his crimes.

Cut from the same cloth indeed… -

_________________________



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/13/2014 6:02:45 AM
From: joseffy2 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
THE WATSONYOUTH

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578161
 

The National Disgrace of Ft Hood ... Mark Steyn


.......................................................................
Steyn Online ^ | 11 Apr 2014 | Mark Steyn

In After America (available here, he pleads, and the profits of which go to support my free-speech pushback against Michael E Mann), I write inter alia about Fort Hood, and in particular the disgraceful statement by General Casey, and the Pentagon's absurd decision to classify what happened as "workplace violence":

In the days after the slaughter, the news coverage read like a satirical novel that the author's not quite deft enough to pull off, with bizarre new Catch-22s multiplying like the windmills of your mind: If you muse openly on pouring boiling oil down the throats of infidels, then the Pentagon will put that down as mere confirmation of your long-established "research interests". If you're psychotic, the Army will make you a psychiatrist for fear of provoking you. If you gun down a bunch of people, within an hour the FBI will state clearly that we can all relax, there's no terrorism angle, because, in a micro-regulated credential-obsessed society, it doesn't count unless you're found to be carrying Permit #57982BQ3a from the relevant State Board of Jihadist Licensing.

And "Allahu akbar?" That's Arabic for "Nothing to see here".

Pace General Casey, what happened was not a "tragedy" but a national scandal.

Anwar al-Awlaki and his comrades have bet that such a society is too sick to survive. Watch the nothing-to-see-here media driveling on about "combat stress" and the Pentagon diversicrats issuing memos on "workplace violence" like gibbering lunatics in a padded cell, and then think whether you'd really want to take that bet. The craven submission to political correctness, the willingness to leave your marbles with the Diversity Café hat-check girl, the wish for a quiet life leads to death, and not that quietly. When the chief of staff of the United States Army has got the disease, you're in big (and probably terminal) trouble. And when the guy's on the table firing wildly and screaming "Allahu akbar!", the PC kindergarten teachers won't be there for you.

That's true not just during the attack but for the ensuing half-decade: General Casey and the other "parade generals" (in that useful British phrase) and the vast swollen Pentagon bureaucracy have not been there for them. Mariah Blake has a piece in Mother Jones, of all places, that lays out in painstaking detail how, for Major Hasan's victims, the United States Government has spent the last four-and-a-half years adding insult to the injuries he inflicted.

Full disclosure: If Ms Blake's name rings a bell with readers, she's the lady who interviewed me for the Mother Jones story about Mann vs Steyn. I wasn't too thrilled with the way that turned out, if only because it made me sound a bit of a loon. But, on reflection, I am a bit of a loon, so maybe Ms Blake just zeroed in on the salient feature. Be that as it may, her Fort Hood piece is unsparing in its bleak portrait of what happens after the President, the cabinet secretaries and the other bigshots have departed the memorial service and you've outlived your usefulness as photo-op prop. Take Army reservist Keara Bono-Torkelson, who was shot in the back by Hasan:

She recalls the nurse at the Army hospital where she was rushed for treatment patting her on the head and telling her she was fine. Only weeks later, when she visited her family doctor in Missouri, did she discover that she also had a bullet lodged in her head.

With her injuries, Torkelson—who suffers from back spasms, PTSD, and crippling headaches—?found it difficult to do her job. Rather than send her to a special unit for wounded soldiers, as it usually does with reservists wounded in combat, the Army pulled her off active duty and sent her home. She says her paycheck subsequently shrank from $1,400 a month to roughly $200 and she lost her military health insurance, leaving her no access to medical care. ?

So who did provide her with "access to medical care"? Ross Perot:

The billionaire Texas businessman and former presidential contender paid for Torkelson to go to the Mayo Clinic, where doctors quickly pinpointed the source of her headaches: Besides the slug that had been removed from her scalp, she had multiple bullet fragments in her skull—something her military doctors could have detected with a simple x-ray.

If only they'd bothered. I was in a car accident a few months back - nothing too serious, I thought. But the doctor was concerned enough to make me have a CT scan. Yet, if you're shot in the head by a terrorist at a military base, an x-ray is too much trouble: Take four Aspirin and call me in a year.

Staff Sergeant Alonzo Lunsford took seven bullets, one in the head:

Several months after the incident, Lunsford tried to check into an Army PTSD clinic near El Paso. But he says he was turned away on the grounds that he wasn't injured in combat. Eventually, Lunsford, who served in the Army for 22 years, managed to get into a Navy clinic in San Diego. The Army was supposed to pick up the tab. But instead, he says, it deducted most of the expenses from his paycheck.

Those strictly enforced PTSD rules are fascinating, if only because, when Major Hasan opened fire, much of the media was eager to put it down to "stress". From After America again:

Newsweek called the mass murder "A Symptom Of A Military On The Brink":

"A psychiatrist who was set to deploy to Iraq at the end of the month, Hasan reportedly opened fire around the Fort Hood Readiness Center," wrote Andrew Bast. "It comes at a time when the stress of combat has affected so many soldiers individually that it makes it increasingly difficult for the military as a whole to deploy for wars abroad."

No mention of the words "Islam" or "Muslim," but Mr Bast was concerned to "get at the root causes of soldier stresses". As in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Operative word "post": you get it after you've been in combat. Major Hasan had never been in combat.

But, just as they effortlessly extended the subprime mortgage crisis to explain the Times Square bomber, the same conformicrat "experts" redefined "post-traumatic stress disorder" to apply to a psychiatrist who'd never been anywhere near a war zone. Until November 5th 2009, PTSD was something you got when you returned from battle overseas and manifested itself in sleeplessness, nightmares, or, in extreme circumstances, suicide. After November 5th, PTSD was apparently spread by shaking hands and manifested itself in gunning down large numbers of people while yelling "Allahu akbar!"

The Government of the United States eventually decided, with a straight face, that the mound of corpses at Fort Hood was the result of an outbreak of "workplace violence":

Nine months after Major Hasan's killing spree, the Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered "a series of procedural and policy changes that focus on identifying, responding to and preventing potential workplace violence".

Last week we learned how well that worked out for Fort Hood. But for the victims of the first attack the designation of "workplace violence" was to have profound consequences. From Mariah Blake's report:

Since the attack, Lunsford, who also received help from Perot, has retired because of his injuries—he's missing half his intestines, is blind in one eye, and has trouble walking (a side effect of the bullet lodged in his thigh). He also suffers from bouts of debilitating pain. "Sometimes, I'm immobile in bed for a month," he says. "I can't even go to the bathroom by myself. My wife literally has to wipe me."

If his wounds were classified as combat or terrorism related, he would get three quarters of his active-duty pay, on top of his modest VA disability payments, for the rest of his life. But as it stands, he isn't eligible.

Why not? Fort Hood is no different from Pearl Harbor: That's to say, in both cases domestic military bases were attacked by agents of avowed enemies of the United States. Why should a soldier have to scrape by on 200 bucks a month because euphemizing a jihadist attack as "workplace violence" is more politically convenient for the government?

In her story on the Mann vs Steyn litigation, Ms Blake and Mann's counsel commented on my own public statements about the case. So I note mordantly one detail from her Fort Hood piece - that Army lawyers leaned on the victims not to go public with their dissatisfactions on the grounds supposedly that it would "prejudice" the case against Major Hasan. This is beyond pathetic. Hasan's first words at the eventual trial were: "The evidence will clearly show that I am the shooter."

A couple of paragraphs back, I compared Fort Hood and Pearl Harbor as enemy attacks on US military bases. They're different in one key respect, of course: These days a sclerotic republic can't even convict a confessed killer in less time than it took to win the Second World War. Pearl Harbor to the Japanese surrender: three years, eight months, eight days. Fort Hood to the opening of Hasan's trial: three years, nine months, one day.

Do read Mariah Blake's story in full. These people are invisible because they're inconvenient to the official lies agreed by the government, advanced by the media, and acquiesced in by too many of these soldiers' fellow Americans:

Private First Class Amber Gadlin, who was 19 at the time, braved gunfire to drag other soldiers to safety, even after being shot in the back. During the 2009 Fort Hood memorial, the president praised her for her valor.

That and $4.95 will get you a decaf latte:

Gadlin, who says she can only sit for a half hour at a stretch because of severe back pain, scrapes by on her $1,400 a month disability payment from the Department of Veterans Affairs and has struggled to get treatment for her depression and PTSD. "Having to fight for benefits on top of the injuries and the money worries has made things far worse," says her mother, Lisa Bahr Pfund. "There have been plenty of times I've been expecting a phone call saying she's gone. Meaning, you know, she's taken care of her problems permanently."

It is striking to me that a country responsible for over 40 per cent of the planet's military spending apparently has no money to treat its returning warriors with a modicum of dignity. That it should do the same to men and women gunned down by a traitor who set off every alarm bell and was still allowed to proceed to that table at Fort Hood is an absolute disgrace.






To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/14/2014 1:03:39 PM
From: joseffy2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bill
FJB

  Respond to of 1578161
 
Obama 'champion' Amnesty activist scrubbed from WhiteHouse.gov after indictment
........................................................................................................................................
Published: 20 hours ago
by Aaron Klein
wnd.com

Indicted immigration activist Bonnie M. Youn

Without any explanation, the White House has scrubbed from its website an amnesty advocate who was honored by President Obama but who was then indicted for immigration fraud.

Immigration attorney Bonnie M. Youn was picked by the White House as one of 11 Cesar Chavez “Champions of Change”
activists who purportedly embody the spirit and legacy of Chavez, a labor leader and civil rights activist.

According to a Breitbart report, however, on April 1, Youn was indicted on three criminal counts related to harboring illegal aliens. The charges included perjury, harboring an illegal alien for commercial and private financial gain and tampering with the witness testimony of an illegal alien.

In touting her as one of Obama’s 11 “Champions of Change,” the White House website originally listed Youn as “a recognized Asian American & Pacific Islander (AAPI) community leader in Georgia.”

Without any explanation or recognition of the alteration, however, the White House website quietly sliced the 11 “Champions of Change” to only 10 so-called champions.


“The White House honors 10 community leaders who embody the spirit of Cesar E. Chavez’s legacy,” reads the new WhiteHouse.gov text.


The online link for Youn’s bio now brings readers to a page that states: “UPDATE We’re updating the White House privacy policy, which will go into effect on April 18.”

Youn’s name, however, is still visible on the page as one of the “Champions of Change” (highlighted in red below):



With research by Brenda J. Elliott.

Read more at wnd.com



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/14/2014 1:07:08 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1578161
 



To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/14/2014 1:15:13 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1578161
 
How Obama's Justice Department Selectively Blocks Mergers By Republican CEOs
..........................................................................
Forbes ^ | 4/14/2014 | Kerri Toloczko

Like all mergers, the proposed $45.2 billion Comcast CMCSA +1.63% merger with Time Warner Cable TWC +1.3%—the largest and second largest cable providers in the nation—has its advocates and critics. There are certainly important questions about what impact the merger would have on consumers—but there are equally significant issues associated with the highly politicized approval process.


The Obama Department of Justice, led by Eric Holder
, must review the merger and decide whether to approve or block it.

Unfortunately, the Obama Administration and Justice Department have a long track record of pushing the rule of law aside and making decisions based on politics.

Will the proposed Comcast merger with Time Warner TWX +0.88% Cable receive the scrutiny it deserves, or simply be fast-tracked for approval based on politics?

Let’s look at some history—which is detailed in a new Frontiers of Freedom report. In 2009, the Obama Administration gave Solyndra, a failing California solar panel firm, a $536 million “loan.” Shortly thereafter, Solyndra was fully bankrupt.

Prior to the loan, Solyndra executives and board members gave generously to Barack Obama, including Tulsa oil billionaire and Obama bundler George Kaiser, one of Solyndra’s main investors.

United Health Group is expecting higher earnings thanks to ObamaCare. After United supported passing the plan, one of its subsidiaries, Quality Software Services, Inc. won a contract of $90 million for the rollout of Healthcare.gov. United Health’s Executive Vice President Anthony Welters and his wife are significant Obama donors and bundlers. The Administration did not perceive any conflict of interest in providing the nation’s largest health insurer with the keys to Healthcare.gov.

If money buys favors from the Obama Administration, a lack of it produces the opposite.

In 2011, AT&T announced it would seek permission from the government for a $39 billion merger with T-Mobile. Processing the application was expected to take at least twelve months. But within five months, the Department of Justice announced it had filed a lawsuit blocking the friendly merger.

Enter AT&T CEO Randall L. Stephenson, well known to be a free market Republican favoring pro-growth tax reform and opposing Obama-style redistributing income from the working class. Mr. Stephenson has a long history of Republican giving, and averaging the three election cycles between 2006–2010, AT&T employees supported Republican candidates by 60%.

Key government players during merger talks were Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski and Renata Hesse, now Deputy Attorney General for Anti Trust at DOJ, and of course, Attorney General Eric Holder, who runs the most blatantly politicized DOJ in history.

FCC Chairman Genachowski is a longtime technology advisor for Barack Obama, serving on his transition team. Obama appointed him FCC Chairman in 2009. He and his wife, another Obama appointee, are long time Obama donors. Ms. Hesse, then in charge of the AT&T merger at FCC, has donated more than $6K to Obama for America. In a policy forum last year, Ms. Hesse stated the Obama Administration’s approach to antitrust was “vigorous enforcement.” But does that apply evenly across all merger applications?

On February 14, 2014, Comcast announced intent to acquire Time Warner Cable in a deal worth $45.2 billion—$6 billion more than the AT&T/T-Mobile deal. This merger would also result in an approximate 40% market share. Overseeing this application at DOJ will be vigorous enforcer Deputy AG Hesse. As with AT&T, will the FCC and Department of Justice deny the Comcast merger, and in record time?

If AT&T is “red,” Comcast and Time Warner Cable are deep “blue.” In 2012, Comcast employees donated $465K to the Democrat National Committee vs. $114K to the Republican National Committee and supported Obama over Republican Mitt Romney by nearly four to one. Time Warner donations were $442K Obama and $28K Romney.

Comcast also has two Obama cronies working the merger. CEO Brian Roberts is an Obama golfing buddy whose political giving is 90% Democratic. Overseeing the merger is Comcast Executive Vice President David Cohen.


Cohen and his wife have given upwards of $500Kto Obama while raising another $2.2 million. During a Democrat fundraiser at Cohen’s house, President Obama quipped, “I have been here so much the only thing I haven’t done in this house is have Seder.”

Obama once publicly stated, “we’re gonna punish our enemies and … reward our friends.” Executive Branch action on the Comcast/Time Warner deal will demonstrate if this caveat applies to merger policy. A number of Congressional Committees will review the merger, including a Senate Judiciary hearing on April 9.

In addition to analyzing financial details of this merger, Administration history of crony capitalism screams for Congressional inquiry to determine if the Executive gives preferential treatment to corporations with friendly donors. Merger approval or denial should be based on objective analysis, not which political party enjoyed the loudest clink in its campaign jar.

If that’s the case, no matter what merger wins, consumers will always lose.

Kerri Toloczko is a senior fellow at Frontiers of Freedom, a public policy institute dedicated to promoting individual freedom, limited government and free enterprise.






Follow Comments






Print
Report Corrections
Reprints & Permissions







Post Your Comment
Please log in or sign up to comment.


Enter Your Comment

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.




Comments Called-Out Expand All Comments


Follow Comments















To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/14/2014 5:14:53 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1578161
 
Blistering New Book on DOJ and Voting Section (Obama's Enforcer)
....................................................................................................................................
Election Law Center ^ | April 14, 2014 | Christian Adams


On June 10, a blistering new book on the Justice Department and the shenanigans inside the DOJ Voting Section is released. "Obama's Enforcer" by John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky will detail abuses of power at Holder's Justice Department. It has disturbing stories from inside the Department about Justice Department staff both giving a pass to criminal election activity as well as naming the names of those inside the Civil Rights Division who engaged in criminal activity. Amazon link here.






To: Bill who wrote (778712)4/15/2014 10:44:54 AM
From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578161
 
Cliven Bundy's Cattle Battle: Harry Reid, China and Agenda 21
......................................................................................................
04/14/2014
news.investors.com



A Chinese solar farm that fries birds is OK, as is redrawing tortoise habitat boundaries to benefit political donors. But an American rancher grazing his cattle brings feds with sniper rifles. It appears Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy has, at least temporarily, won his "range war" with the paramilitary wing of the Bureau of Land Management. Fearing another Waco, BLM has announced it will no longer enforce a court order and stop stealing Bundy's cows, called "trespass cattle" by the feds, accused of grazing free on part of the 84% of Nevada that is federal property.

If the forces deployed in and around the Nevadan's ranch had been deployed to Benghazi, it's likely Glen Doherty, Ty Woods, Sean Smith and Ambassador Christopher Stevens would be alive today.

If illegal aliens were grazing on the disputed property, there would not have been federal snipers perched nearby with American citizens in their sights.

The government that has detonated hundreds of nuclear weapons in the Nevada desert claimed a rancher's meandering cattle threatened a protected species.

BLM, one of the myriad federal agencies armed to the teeth these days, would have us believe the 67-year-old rancher is a trespassing bitter clinger who isn't paying his federal grazing fees as his cattle munch on government-owned vegetation and threaten the endangered desert tortoise.

So BLM SWAT teams descended on the ranch west of Mesquite, Nev., where cattle and the tortoise have lived in harmony for over 100 years. BLM claims Bundy owes them grazing fees dating back to 1993; he says his grazing rights predate the BLM. The desert tortoise in fact is so "endangered" in this area that the government is planning to euthanize some of them.

Nevada Sen. Harry Reid may have another reason for getting pesky cattle ranchers like Cliven Bundy out of the way. As Reuters has reported, "(Reid) and his oldest son, Rory, are both involved in an effort by a Chinese energy giant, ENN Energy Group, to build a $5 billion solar farm and panel manufacturing plant in the southern Nevada desert." To mitigate this commercial land use, other land had to be set aside. That land was Bundy's ranch.

Does the government really need to own 30% of the U.S., with the percentage in Western states much higher? The government's agenda in this and many other land-confiscation activities is motivated by a desire to comply with a U.N. "rewilding" program that advocates pushing humans out of rural areas and into densely packed urban zones to promote what the U.N. calls "sustainable development."

"Land ... cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market," says the U.N.'s Agenda 21 action plan. "Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes."

But our land can be controlled, apparently, by Harry Reid's donors and relatives and former staffers as well as assorted globalists and Chinese investors. In their view, this land is not your land, it's their land.

Bundy, who lives in a country founded by armed Americans resisting a tyrannical government, has objected, reviving the long-simmering Sagebrush Rebellion between residents of the West and a land-grabbing federal government.

In the end, Bundy and the people who rallied to his cause, some of whom carried firearms of their own while demonstrating , proved what the Second Amendment is all about.


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: news.investors.com