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 : How Quickly Can Obama Totally Destroy the US? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 12:56:35 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Jay Carney already did :




To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 12:57:47 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Judicial Watch: Carney is Lying, We Sued for Benghazi Talking Points

Washington Free Beacon ^
| 4/30/14



To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 1:17:05 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Attkisson: Benghazi Narrative Shows Admin Officials 'Were All Reading From the Same Page'

.........................................................................
Fox News Insider ^ | 4/30/14 | Hannity Show





To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 4:41:11 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Carney Can’t Answer Why Supposed Non-Benghazi Email Was In Benghazi FOIA

5/1/2014, 3:12:30 PM · by Sub-Driver · 34 replies
freebeacon.com ^



To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 4:48:26 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Carney: We dispute the GOP’s paid enrollment numbers, and no, we don’t have any numbers of our own

5/1/2014, 4:42:54 PM · by SeekAndFind · 1 replies
Hotair ^ | 05/01/2014 | AllahPundit





To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 9:24:57 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Dobson tears into Obama: 'Come and get me'

Christian leader refuses to bow to 'wicked regulations' of 'abortion president'


by Garth Kant 61, 2014
wnd.com


WASHINGTON – James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and Family Talk Radio, a harsh critic of President Obama and an opponent in court, on Thursday described him as the “abortion president” during an address at the National Day of Prayer.

Dobson, whose organization recently won a court fight against Obama over a mandate in Obamacare that would have required his ministry to pay for abortion pills, has not been shy about challenging the president on his abortion agenda.

At one point during the fight over the imposition of the abortion mandate, he said to the president: “Come and get me. I will not yield to your wicked regulations.”

The fact that Obama is more supportive of abortion than any other chief executive in the U.S. was touted by none other than Planned Parenthood.

In a report on his 2013 keynote address to a gala by Planned Parenthood, the largest player in the nation’s abortion industry, Cecile Richards, chief of the organization, said: “President Obama has done more than any president in history for women’s health and rights. He understands that access to birth control and preventive health care are economic issues for women and their families.

“We fought alongside him to ensure that women’s health access was expanded in the landmark Affordable Care Act, and now we have to fight hard to ensure that the full promise of health care reform is realized for millions of women.”

At the prayer day event, where he was one of several speakers, Dobson described how Obama said he would become the abortion president.

“He has made it so that every American will have to pay toward the support of abortion,” he said, noting the $250 million in taxpayer funds that already goes toward Planned Parenthood’s funding.


He implored listeners to “keep fighting.”

“We can win. And keep prayer because that’s what really made a difference here.”

WND reported just days ago when U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn issued an injunction preventing the federal government from imposing the abortifacient mandate or its penalties against Dobson and his radio ministry, Family Talk.

Dobson wrote then in a note to friends: “We are celebrating and thanking the Lord this morning. Victory is ours. We won our case against [former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen] Sebelius and the Obama administration.”

He continued: “Judge Blackburn wrote a powerful statement, which even used pro-life language, (i.e., referring to a ‘human fetus’). He defended my right to follow the dictates of my conscience. It was eloquent.”

Dobson explained then what the ministry and its few dozen employees were facing.

“The mandate requiring that we provide abortifacients such as the morning after pill would have begun on May 1st. After that, if we hadn’t prevailed, fines amounting to $800,000 per year would have kicked in,” he said.

“We would have closed our doors.”

See Dobson’s comments:

Dobson noted Alan Sears of the Alliance Defending Freedom, which handled the legal work for his ministry, called it one of the most significant religious liberty cases in American history, because never before has a citizen been required by a chief executive to take the life of another human being.”

He then recalled what he had written in a commentary about the issue.

“I believe in the rule of law, and it has been my practice since I was in college to respect and honor those in authority over us. It is my desire to do so now. However, this assault on the sanctity of human life takes me where I cannot go. I WILL NOT pay the surcharge for abortion services. The amount of the surcharge is irrelevant. To pay one cent for the killing of babies is egregious to me, and I will do all I can to correct a government that lies to me about its intentions and then tries to coerce my acquiescence with extortion. It would be a violation of my most deeply held convictions to disobey what I consider to be the principles in Scripture. The Creator will not hold us guiltless if we turn a deaf ear to the cries of His innocent babies. So come and get me if you must, Mr. President. I will not bow before your wicked regulation.”

See a longer version of the Dobson speech:



The Family Talk case was among more than 100 lawsuits brought by religious ministries, individuals and organizations and companies against Obama’s health-care takeover on the grounds it violates the religious rights of Christians by forcing them to pay for abortion-causing procedures.

When the lawsuit was filed on his behalf in 2013, Dobson, who founded Family Talk in 2010, explained: “We are suing [then-HHS Secretary] Kathleen Sebelius for forcing or trying to force all of us to give abortifacient medications to our employees, and I just absolutely refuse to do it. We’ll close down before I’ll do it.”

The vast majority of the rulings in the lawsuits have favored the Christians, but a federal precedent is expected to be set this year by the U.S. Supreme Court, which accepted for argument a pair of cases.

Oral arguments in the Conestoga Wood and Hobby Lobby cases already have been held.

The Obama administration had demanded that Family Talk’s third-party insurance administrator provide abortion-inducing drugs and devices to Family Talk employees
.

Whether the employees want the products is irrelevant under the Obamacare mandate, which requires the provision regardless of the beliefs of the employer and employees.

As a Christian ministry, Family Talk’s self-insured health plan excludes coverage of abortion-inducing drugs and devices. But the complaint notes that if Family Talk does not comply with the mandate’s requirements by May 1, it will be subject to fines up to $36,500 per employee annually.

“The government has put religious employers to a cruel choice: ‘Abandon your religious beliefs or be fined out of existence,’” said ADF lead counsel Matthew Bowman when the case was launched. “Thankfully, the Constitution and other federal laws don’t allow that.”

The Obama administration was asked to provide an exemption for religious employers, but officials defined the exemption so narrowly that workers at Christian colleges, nursing homes, soup kitchens and parachurch ministries are not protected.

“According to the administration, Family Talk is not ‘religious enough’ for an exemption,” said Martin Nussbaum of Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP, who is serving as co-counsel in the lawsuit. “Yet sanctity of life and protecting the unborn have long been core religious convictions for Dr. Dobson and Family Talk.”

Family Talk’s centerpiece is a daily 30-minute radio broadcast, “Dr. James Dobson’s Family Talk,” that seeks to reach young and old with the Judeo-Christian worldview of the family. Dobson previously founded Focus on the Family but is not longer affiliated.

The lawsuit charges the government violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the First and Fifth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Dobson said then his ministry “believes in living out the religious convictions we hold to and talk about on the air.”

The theme for the 2014 prayer observance is “One Voice, United in Prayer,” emphasizing the need for people, corporately and individually, to place their faith in the unfailing character of their Creator, who is sovereign over all governments, authorities and men.

To further highlight the message, the National Prayer Task Force chose Romans 15:6 as a theme verse: “So that with one mind and one voice you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The special observance was hosted by Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala.

Other speakers included Anne Graham Lotz (daughter of Rev. Billy Graham), Shirley Dobson, Vonette Bright, Bob McEwen, Rep. Mike McIntyre, Don Moen, Chaplain Father Patrick Conroy, Dick Eastman, David Butts and John Bornschein.

Rabbi Jonathan Cahn, author of runaway bestseller “The Harbinger,” also was a speaker for the 63rd annual National Day of Prayer on a date he tells WND holds a special significance in both his book and American history.

Read more at wnd.com



To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/1/2014 11:38:20 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
The BLM attempt to take Bundy’s property is similar to what happened in New Mexico at White Sands Missile Range. The following is from a oral history program conducted by New Mexico Farm and Ranch Heritage Museum: “Ranchers understood the need for use of their land during wartime, but they feared losing their livelihood; compensation was too low to allow them to start over elsewhere. Cattle prices dropped. The families did not receive funds for lodging or food during the move but funds for restoration were offered when the ranchers were allowed to go back, and during a co-use in the 1950s.

While Dave McDonald still had to vacate by the deadline, some who accepted the Army's offer may have left sooner; some left later—all were scrambling. Ranchers left equipment behind, believing it would be there when they returned, but things were stolen by locals or allowed to deteriorate.

Co-use lasted two years, although ranchers in the extension area had permanent co-use.

The taking was in constant court battles from its beginning, and in the '70s, the government announced the ranches would not be returned. Even after his father's 1982 standoff, nothing was done. Dave McDonald and his niece, Mary, had staged a widely reported armed reoccupation of the ranch to call attention to the ranchers' plight. Government officials promised to do something for the ranchers.

Fulwyler was commanding general of WSMR during the taking of the lands and McDonald's reoccupation.

Lawyers were hired to represent the ranchers in the Court of Claims, but nothing happened.

Fulwyler told McDonald that if he returned to the missile range, he'd be arrested. He refused an invitation from Fulwyler but later returned with the consultant.

The McDonalds got only about $60,000 for their patented land. Later, the McDonald ranch was appraised at $1.6 million. [Historically, grazing leases on ranches in New Mexico are considered ranch assets.] Ranchers whose land was taken for McGregor Range were treated differently. Consultant believes the government did not originally intend to keep the WSMR ranches.

The ranchers were devastated by the taking of the ranches—they lost trust in the government and children and siblings in the war, in addition to their homes. The consultant's father believed concerns over inadequate compensation would die with the ranchers. The taking affected people both physically and emotionally and may have caused early deaths. It affected the consultant's and his sister's quality of life as children.”

Here’s the link to the entire interview:

US Army and MacDonald Family at White Sands Missile Range



To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/2/2014 12:50:37 AM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
slowmo

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
 
The Benghazi Scandal Is Finally Blowing Up Big-Time

..............................................................................................
ClashDaily.com ^ | 5/1/14 | Donald Joy


Suddenly, the investigation into the 9/11/2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has taken an astonishing turn toward exposing the Obama administration’s cynical fraud and dereliction of duty in the weeks just before the last presidential election.

Yesterday, in a rare occurrence of mainstream journalistic integrity, ABC’s Jon Karl discovered his inner reporter and opened up a can of bitch-slap on Obama’s press prostitute, Jay Carney, over the damning revelations contained in emails which have finally been released. Carney’s lies got no traction as Karl delivered withering fire without letting up. Watch the glorious smackdown here:

Suddenly, the investigation into the 9/11/2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has taken an astonishing turn toward exposing the Obama administration’s cynical fraud and dereliction of duty in the weeks just before the last presidential election.

youtube.com

There’s more. Just this morning, former military commanders testified before congress that based on the totality of their intelligence, they knew immediately on the night in question that the incident was an organized, planned, Al-Qaeda related terrorist attack. They also testified that they knew the ensuing White House story about a protest over a video was completely bogus, and that the imperative that night should have been to try to get help to Stevens and the others at once, instead of standing down as they were ordered by the administration.

The bottom line is that the presidential election was less than two months away, and the democrats could not afford to have Obama’s claim that “GM is alive, and Al-Qaeda is vanquished!” be exposed to be the lie that it was. Nor could the administration afford to have the incident escalate even further, into a full-blown military combat operation, by sending help to the SEALS–that would draw unwanted attention to the still-looming problem of Obama’s and Clinton’s total bungling of the entire situation across the Muslim world–not good for Obama’s re-election prospects.

So Obama, Clinton, Rice, Jarrett, and the entire administration and democrat party all lied, and our men died. The video in question, which they insisted over and over was “reprehensible” and “heinous” and “extremely offensive” is actually none of these, as far as I can tell. I tried to watch it, but found it so boring and inconsequential that I couldn’t stay with it long enough to discover what alleged offenses it contains (but then, I consider any material which is anti-Islamic and anti-Mohammed to be good and true and right).

Hillary Clinton got in the Benghazi victims’ families’ faces and declared, with disgustingly feigned outrage, that the administration would “get” the maker of the video and “bring him to justice”, as if that was the heart of the matter–not the fact that our men were murdered by Muslim terrorists!


She lied right to the families, with the bodies of their loved ones lying in caskets only feet away. The hapless “Innocence of Muslims” movie-maker sits rotting in his U.S. jail cell over a technicality, and not a single one of the Benghazi terrorist attackers has been captured and brought to justice, despite ample opportunity to nail them.

What difference, at this point, does it make?

In Hillary Clinton’s now-famous tirade before the senate, I’d like you to notice something that nobody seems to have pointed out. She screams her implied position that it really doesn’t make any difference as to the cause of the fatal incident in Benghazi. But in the very same breath (her immediate next words, in fact), she pounds the table and screeches, “It is our job to figure out what happened…”

youtube.com

Well, which is it, Hillary? If it doesn’t really matter what happened, then why does she simultaneously exclaim that they are there to find out what happened?

I say it makes all the difference in the world, considering that another pathological liar might possibly become the next president of the United States.



To: slowmo who wrote (10040)5/2/2014 1:04:20 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Internal Emails: State Dept. Immediately Attributed Benghazi Attacks to Terrorist Group

........................................................................................
sharylattkisson.com ^ | May 1, 2014 | by Sharyl Attkisson,


A newly-released government email indicates that within hours of the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on Americans in Benghazi, Libya; the State Department had already concluded with certainty that the Islamic militia terrorist group Ansar al Sharia was to blame.

The private, internal communication directly contradicts the message that President Obama,
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice and White House
press secretary Jay Carney repeated publicly over the course of the next several weeks.
They often maintained that an anti-Islamic YouTube video inspired a spontaneous
demonstration that escalated into violence.

The email is entitled “Libya update from Beth Jones. Jones was then-Assistant Secretary
of State to Hillary Clinton. According to the email, Jones spoke to Libya’s Ambassador at
9:45am on Sept. 12, 2012 following the attacks.

“When [the Libyan Ambassador] said his government suspected that former Qaddafi regime
elements carried out the attacks, I told him the group that conducted the attacks—Ansar
Al Sharia—is affiliated with Islamic extremists,”
Jones reports in the email.

There is no uncertainty assigned to the assessment, which does not mention a video or
a protest
.

The State Department provided the email to Congress in Aug. of 2013 under
special conditions that it not be publicly released at that time. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah)
sought and received permission to release it Thursday.

“If the video was a cause, why did Beth Jones of the State Department tell the
Libyan Ambassador that Ansar Al Sharia was responsible for the attack?”
said Chaffetz.


Among those copied on the emails: Deputy Secretary William Burns; Under Secretary for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman; Jake Sullivan, then-Deputy Chief of Staff (now promoted to national security advisor to Vice President Joe Biden); Under Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy; Cheryl Mills, then-Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff (now on the board of directors of the global investment firm BlackRock); and Victoria Nuland, then-State Dept. spokesperson (now promoted to Asst. Secretary of State).

Two days after the email, documents show that Nuland raised concerns about an early draft of talking points in which the C.I.A. disclosed that it had warned of possible impending attacks. Nuland wrote that the C.I.A.’s disclosure to the public "could be abused by members of Congress to beat the State Department for not paying attention to [C.I.A.] warnings so why would we want to seed the Hill."


The language about prior warnings was subsequently removed by then-Deputy C.I.A. Director Mike Morell over the objection of his then-boss, C.I.A. Director David Petraeus. That's according to testimony last month from Morell, who has since been hired by Beacon Global Strategies, a PR communications firm dominated by former Clinton and Obama officials, and also works as an analyst for CBS News (where I was employed until March). Petraeus retired just after President Obama’s re-election amid allegations of a sex scandal.

Another State Department email sent at 5:55pm on Tues. Sept. 11, 2012, while the attacks were underway, includes a report that “the extremist group Ansar Al Sharia has taken credit for the attack in Benghazi” and that U.S. officials asked the offices of the [Libyan] President and [Prime Minister] to pursue Ansar al Sharia.” Four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the Benghazi attacks.

The following month, the State Department designated Ansar al Sharia as “an alias” for the terrorist group “Al-Qaeda” in the Arabian Peninsula.
In Jan. of 2014, the State Department designated the Benghazi chapter of Ansar Al Sharia as a foreign terrorist organization.

Two days after the State Department told Libyan officials that Ansar al Sharia was at fault, Secretary of State Clinton instead evoked the YouTube video at the ceremonial return of the victims’ bodies.

“This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with,” said Clinton.


Obama administration officials have not fully explained who was responsible for deciding to advance the incorrect video narrative eight weeks before the Presidential election. They have said that they were acting on “the best intelligence available at the time” and that they clarified the story as they got more information. However, the vast majority of government witnesses and documents released over the past year and a half indicate there was widespread belief from the start that the attacks were the work of terrorists, not protesters.