Lindsey Graham: “Fire the Politicians, Not the Soldiers” (Video)

Senator Lindsey Graham gave an emotional speech on the floor of the United States Senate, Thursday, about the negative impact sequestration will have on the United States military. He noted we have already committed to reducing defense spending by nearly $500 billion over ten years and the additional military spending cuts called for under sequestration would add another $600 billion on top of that figure, totaling 1.1 trillion dollars, which would essentially gut the finest military in the world. “What we’re doing in this sequestration proposal is ill-conceived, dangerous and despicable”, he railed.

“What came out of Bob Woodward’s reporting and common sense, Graham began, “is that this idea came out of the White House and the White House thought that it had created a penalty clause for Super Committee failure called sequestration, which would take 600 billion out of the 1.2 trillion out of the Defense Dept ….and  6oo billion out of non defense that would put pressure on the Super Committee to get the right result”

“Well, we’re going to spend 45 trillion over the next decade.  The question”,  he continued, “is can we save 1.2 trillion without destroying the Defense Dept. and raising taxes?  Yes we could if we tried…”

He went on to make an important point that many Republicans, (including me) have been missing about the money being cut from defense.

“2/3 of the budget (almost)is exempt from sequestration”, he noted….

“When you hear Republicans say, we can find 85 billion out of 3.5 trillion dollars in spending – to my Republican colleagues – stop saying that. That’s not accurate. We’re not cutting 85 billion out 3.5 trillion dollars.  We’re cutting 85 billion out of 1.3 or `1.2 and 1/2 because the budget Act took of the table 2/3 from the government from getting cut.”

“I guess that the Republican party feels like pell grants and food stamps and FAA and home mortgage interest deduction and all this other stuff in the federal government should be shielded, but those who have been fighting the war that protects us all from radical Islam should be on the chopping block.  Ronald Reagan should be rolling over in his grave. Shame on everybody who thought this was a good idea on our side. I can’t tell you how disgusted I am with the concept that when it comes time to cut because a bunch of politicians couldn’t reach an agreement, we fire the soldiers and keep the politicians and every other social program intact –  put half the cuts on those who are fighting the war.
So next time you go on a military base — good luck with looking those men and women in the eye —because I don’t see how you could. I don’t see how you go onto a military base or see somebody at the airport and shake their hand and thank them for their service given the fact that you’ve taken the Defense Dept, and made it something not so special anymore.” 

Senator Graham really seemed on the verge of tears at this point.

You could say he was not pleased with the Republican leadership, but he had even tougher words for the president.

“You are the Commander Chief of the United States”, he began, “they trust you, they need you, your primary goal is to  take care of those in uniform and their families. Mr. President, you have let them down…How you could have considered this as an acceptable outcome, just makes me sick to my stomach.”

 “How any Commander in Chief could have been comfortable with the idea that if the Super Committee fails we’re going to gut the military…and you haven’t lifted a finger in the last year to do anything about it – you finally go down to the Naval base down in VA after the election a few days before this kicks in. To me, this is a pathetic leadership by the Commander in Chief , this is an abandonment of the Republican party’s belief in peace through strength, this is the low point of my time in the US Congress….”

“I cannot tell you how ashamed I am of what we’ve done to those who have been busting their butt for the last eleven years, have been deployed time and time again, and to their families. The thanks you get from the President of the United States and Congress is we’re going to put your way of life on the chopping block. God, if we can’t do any better than that all of us should be fired”, he said. “Fire the politicians, not the soldiers.”

Posted in Repubs. 8 Comments »

Holder Shrugs Off Being Held In Contempt of Congress – He Has No Respect For Them, Either


Wow, this is really disturbing. We have an Attorney General who was held in criminal contempt of Congress, and who holds the United States Congress that did so, equally in contempt. He says that being held in contempt of Congress is no  biggie because he doesn’t respect the 255 House members (including 17 Democrats) who voted in favor of it.

We are not in a good place, America:

Via ABC News:

In a wide-ranging, exclusive interview Wednesday, ABC News’ Pierre Thomas asked Holder how he reacted when House Republicans voted with 17 Democrats to hold him in contempt of Congress last June over ATF’s “Fast and Furious” gun scandal.

“It’s something that I think was unfortunate,” Holder said. “I think it’s a result of this kind of partisan sport that I think we engage in here in Washington far too often.”

Holder said the votes it didn’t bother him, considering who cast them.

“But I have to tell you that for me to really be affected by what happened, I’d have to have respect for the people who voted in that way,” Holder told ABC News. “And I didn’t, so it didn’t have that huge an impact on me.”

That’s our highest law enforcement officer in the land, speaking. Presumably, he does have ample respect for the 100 Democrats who haughtily left the House floor during the vote.

Our government is completely dysfunctional.

John Boehner: “The Revenue Issue Is Closed”

 Speaker Boehner called Senate Democrats failure to pass a single Sequester replacement bill in 15 months, embarrassing, in a press release, today.

WASHINGTON, DC – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) released the following statement after the Democratic-controlled Senate failed to pass legislation replacing President Obama’s sequester:

“It’s embarrassing that after 15 months Senate Democrats still haven’t passed a single sequester replacement bill.  The American people deserve better.  Republicans in the House passed legislation almost a year ago in May, and again in December, to avert the president’s sequester and help put us on a path to a balanced budget.  Now that today’s political stunt to raise taxes has failed, it’s time for the president and Senate Democrats to do the hard work that is necessary to pass a bill in the Senate so we can begin to resolve this issue.”

He told Senate Democrats to do their jobs and pass a bill, noting that as of right now, the revenue issue is closed. He said, “any revenues generated by closing loopholes should be used to lower rates across the board for American families.”
The House has passed 5 bills to stop sequestration of DoD, including H Con Res. 112: Official House Republican Budget for FY2013; H.R. 5652: Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of 2012; H.R. 6365: National Security and Job Protection Act of 2012; H.R. 5872: Sequestration Transparency Act (now law).
For his part, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate to say that John Boehner is acting like a dictator. See if you can follow his logic.
Video via News Ninja
Now, via News Ninja, it looks like Obama’s starting to walk back some of his spastic hair-on-fire dire predictions regarding the sequester. He ain’t getting his tax hikes. These cuts are going to happen – now what?
Oh – “a lot of people may not notice”, he now says.

Lanny Davis: Obama WH Threatened Washington Times Over My Column

How many more reporters and pundits are going to come out of the woodwork in the coming days to spill the beans about the Obama thugocracy?

Big Journalism has the exclusive:

Lanny Davis, who served under President Bill Clinton as special counsel to the White House, told Washington, D.C.’s WMAL this morning that the Obama White House had threatened the Washington Times over his column, warning that the Times would suffer limited access to White House officials and might have its White House credentials revoked. Davis, a centrist Democrat, is sometimes critical of the Obama administration’s policies.

Davis was speaking with Breitbart News editor Larry O’Connor, who co-hosts a morning show on WMAL. Davis said he had never spoken publicly about the threats before, but they seemed relevant after the White House told legendary reporter Bob Woodward that he would “regret” insisting that the White House had come up with the idea of the budget sequester, which President Barack Obama is now urging Congress urgently to revoke.

The White House has vehemently denied the claim in Woodward’s book, though the claim has been in the public domain for several months since the publication of the book, The Price of Politics, in mid-2012. Democrats and a slew of sympathetic liberal journalists have joined the White House in attacking Woodward–a remarkable turn of events given his elite status in the media as part of the duo that brought down President Richard Nixon in 1973.

Audio here.


Yep, like I said: Ron Fournier: Yeah, I Got the Abusive Treatment From the WH and the Same ‘You Will Regret This’ Threat:

As editor-in-chief of National Journal, I received several e-mails and telephone calls from this White House official filled with vulgarity, abusive language, and virtually the same phrase that Woodward called a veiled threat. “You will regret staking out that claim,” The Washington Post reporter was told.Once I moved back to daily reporting this year, the badgering intensified. I wrote Saturday night, asking the official to stop e-mailing me. The official wrote, challenging Woodward and my tweet. “Get off your high horse and assess the facts, Ron,” the official wrote.
J Christian Adams: All the President’s Thugs:

Hey, Bob, you can’t say we didn’t warn you. We knew this White House was capable of attacking even the great Bob Woodward for telling the truth.

You could have listened to Michael Barone. He saw it coming even before Barack Obama was elected. In October 2008, he penned “The Coming Obama Thugocracy.”

I experienced it when DOJ press harpy Tracy Schmaler yelled at a half dozen reporters, as the White House official did to you, about my under-oath testimony involving the New Black Panther dismissal.  Her victims included Pete Williams, Quin Hillyer, and Sharyl Attkisson. After Schmaler’s thug tendencies were well known, she was nurtured and promoted within the Thugocracy instead of being canned, as any administration before this one would have done to her — Republican or Democrat.
Schmaler has since been appointed a Made Man of sorts, entering the rarefied private sector air of David Axelrod’s shop.

Schmaler’s story is typical of this gang. Her shouting, threats, and rants at reporters would have rendered her unqualified to serve in the press shop of a state department of agriculture.

But there is something unique about the Obama White House. It borrows tactics and standards from the darker figures in history — threats, projection, unrepentant dishonesty, towering columns in stadiums, and even bloody mayhem like Fast and Furious hatched for political purposes.

Another Day – Another Deceptively Edited Video Aired on MSNBC (Video)

But don’t worry, this time Rachel Maddow proudly admitted the deceptive edit to her audience, so like – it’s totally okay, you guys!

Via Newsbusters:

Speaking last week, Maddow aired footage of McCain addressing a constituent whose son was killed last year at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, who spoke to Senator McCain about her belief that “These assault weapons allow a shooter to fire many rounds without having to reload. These weapons do not belong on our streets.”
Maddow then played McCain’s edited comments, which show him saying, “I can tell you right now you need some straight talk. That assault weapons ban will not pass the congress of the United States.”
Wow, what an ogre, right?
Actually no….The complete clip, which Maddow didn’t bother to air, shows the exchange in the proper context:

 McCain tells the grieving mom, “First of all, can I say thank you and God bless . . . Our hearts and our prayers go out to you and your family. “I just had a town hall meeting yesterday in Tucson and the people who were affected by the terrible, tragic shooting there,” McCain continues. “I met with [retired astronaut] Mark Kelly and [his wife, former Arizona Rep.] Gabby Giffords in my office last week on this issue — as you know they are becoming, understandably, great advocates on this issue, and I will continue that conversation. “I can tell you right now — you need some straight talk — that assault weapons ban will not pass the Congress of the United States. It won’t. Now I owe it to you to give you my opinion because the majority of the members of Congress don’t support it . . . All I can tell you is . . . I will continue to work with the bipartisan group on both sides of the aisle representing all of America, not just California, and we will try to come up with ways to prevent this from happening again . . .


The only reason one would air the edited version of that clip would be to paint Senator McCain as an “insensitive and abrasive” boob. The longer clip shows that he demonstrated the proper sensitivity to the woman. It’s kind of hard to demonize someone who begins with,  “ thank you and God bless . . . Our hearts and our prayers go out to you and your family.” But because he didn’t allow the woman to “Absolute Moral Authority” him into taking a position he’s against, the left pounced. “Absolute Moral Authority” is supposed to cow people into submission, dammit!
But instead of cowering, he told her the truth – that the “assault weapons” ban has no chance of passing in Congress.  The 2nd Amendment folks applauded that political point, and gun control advocates jeered because they are for the ban.
Because MSNBC has been caught airing deceptively edited videos, so much, Maddow decided to preempt criticism with an impressive display of left-wing jiu-jitsu.  While pretending to be appalled by McCain’s “insensitivity” in the edited clip, she actually acknowledged that she was taking it out of context.  
A new low for MSNBC?
Previous MSNBC Hack Jobs:

Sperling Email To Bob Woodward revealed

Via Dan Riehl, and the Politico, here’s the entire email from Gene Sperling, economic adviser to the president, and Bob Woodward’s cordial response:

From Gene Sperling to Bob Woodward on Feb. 22, 2013


I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.

But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)

I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is diffferent. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.

My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.


Almost sounding like a character in The Godfather, Sperling cautions Woodward “As a friend” to rethink his position. He tells him that he thinks Woodward will “regret” his claim.

But he graciously allows at the end of the letter that it’s Woodward’s “call”.  What does that mean? Does Bob Woodward,  veteran Washington reporter, and consummate insider who has talked to all of the involved parties  really need to be told that?

From Woodward to Sperling on Feb. 23, 2013

Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob

For his part, Woodward does come off looking slightly two faced in his email response, saying  that he welcomed Sperling’s “personal advice”, but giving interviews afterward complaining that the letter made him “very uncomfortable.”

RUSH on Illegal Immigrant Prison Release: Obama Employing Tactics Used By Ceaușescu, Saddam Hussein, and Fidel Castro (Audio)

Obama is trying to separate himself from any of this latest scandal involving the release of illegal immigrant criminals from prison – he had nothing to do with it, you see, nor did Janet Napolitano. It was a rogue underling at Homeland Security.

Newsmax reported:

Arizona officials — from the statehouse to Capitol Hill — were outraged on Tuesday at the Obama administration’s release of hundreds of illegal immigrants held in local jails to save money as huge budget cuts loom.

“I’m appalled to learn the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has begun to release hundreds of illegal aliens from custody, the first of potentially thousands to soon be freed under the guise of federal budget cuts,” said Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who has long battled the White House on immigration matters. “This is pure political posturing and the height of absurdity, given that the releases are being granted before the federal sequestration cuts have even gone into effect.”

In Pinal County, about 70 miles north of the U.S.-Mexico border, Sheriff Paul Babeu told Newsmax that the release of hundreds of detainees over the weekend was “outrageous and unacceptable because there’s a direct and immediate impact to public safety of families in my county.”

“These are criminal illegals,” Babeu said. “They were headed for deportation — but now, they have received a budget pardon.”

Arizona Sen. John McCain told Newsmax, “We’re very concerned about this.”

Via Stand With Arizona:

A spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, an arm of the Department of Homeland Security, said the thousands of detainees selected for release over the past week – among an estimated 8,000 – 10,000 scheduled for release – were “noncriminals and other low-risk offenders who do not have serious criminal histories.”

This is a blatant lie. The aliens released by DHS are criminals, who will put families and communities at greater risk from coast-to-coast.

According to Jessica Vaughan of CIS, here are some categories of detainees who were released from ICE detention over the last week:

  • Aliens convicted of drug offenses, theft, identity theft, forgery, and simple assault;
  • Aliens who were arrested and charged with local crimes, but turned over to ICE for deportation in lieu of prosecution;
  • Aliens who were bonded out on local criminal charges and were placed in ICE custody as a result of a detainer (typically a public safety or flight risk); under new ICE detention priority purposes, these are “non-mandatory, non-criminal detainees”, because aliens are not considered to be dangerous or criminal until they have been convicted;
  • Repeat immigration offenders (despite ICE leadership claims that these are “enforcement priorities”); and
  • Recent border crossers (also supposedly an “enforcement priority”).

And DHS just released “thousands” of them, including 500 in a single weekend in a single Arizona countywithout even informing the Sheriff.

On his show, Wednesday, Rush Limbaugh was incredulous that the Regime is getting away with yet another horrifying scandal.

Via The Daily Rushbo


— The Associated Press has learned that the Homeland Security Department official in charge of the agency’s immigration enforcement and removal operations has resigned after hundreds of illegal immigrants were released from jails because of government spending cuts.

In an email obtained Wednesday by the AP, Gary Mead told coworkers that he was leaving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the end of April. Mead is the head of enforcement and removal operations at ICE.

Mead had told co-workers of his resignation in the email sent Tuesday, hours after U.S. officials had confirmed that a few hundred illegal immigrants facing deportation had been released from immigration jails due to budget cuts.

President Barack Obama’s spokesman said Wednesday the White House was never consulted but described the immigrants as “low-risk, non-criminal detainees.”

Gary Mead would be a good person for an aspiring journalist to talk to, wouldn’t he?

Linked by Ushanka, thanks!

White House Threatens Legendary Journalist, Bob Woodward

Can you believe this …. person is our president for four more years? God help us.


And Bob Woodward in not one to be trifled with. He’s not backing down and he’s not shutting up.

Here’s the interview Bob Woodward gave to Wolf Blitzer, today on CNN, where said “a very senior person” at the White House had warned him that he would “regret doing this” regarding his reporting on Obama’s handling of the sequester.

This is absolutely stunning:

Video via Greg Hengler, Townhall Tipsheet.

Via John Sexton at The Conversation, Woodward told Politico that the White House aide had “yelled at me for about a half hour” on the phone before he received the threatening email.

These types of threats and intimidation from Obama’s henchmen are  designed to silence his critics and have been going on since (at least) the ’08 campaign.

Very early in Obama’s presidency, on February 19, 2009 to be exact, I wrote a  post about how this thin skinned president was poised to silence critics of his regime.

We already knew about Obama’s history of intimidation, and character assassination.  We knew how he had tried to destroy his political enemies – at least regular readers of this site know, because I covered it while it was happening, here, and here, and here. While projecting an outward appearance of near messianic magnanimity, his underlings, lawyers, and political allies were always working feverishly to steamroll over critics, (and plaintiffs).


Fast forward over two years later, and nobody even bats an eye at White House enemies lists, lies, threats, intimidation, bullying, corruption, and  opposition research of anyone who looks like a threat to His Highness.

This is the new normal.

And his attack dogs in the left-wing media always trip over each other in their rush to sic these critics. Woodward is the latest “refusenik” getting the treatment:

The Left has been taking pot shots at Bob Woodward for a week over his stance on the sequester, but following Woodward’s claim on CNN tonight that a senior White House official told him he’d “regret” calling out the president on “moving the goal posts,” Obama’s water carriers had to kick  into high gear their campaign to discredit Woodward.

You may recall that  Sharyl Attkisson told Laura Ingraham on her radio show in October, 2011, that “a guy from the White House literally screamed” at her and “cussed” at her over the phone. She told Ingraham that person was WH communications flack,  Eric Schultz.

But Bob Woodward indicated that the culprit is a “very senior person” at the White House, so that eliminates Schultz.

Here’s Obama’s top White House staff:

  • Chief of Staff Denis McDonough
  • Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors
  • Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco
  • Counselor to the President Peter Rouse
  • Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett
  • Senior Advisor Dan Pfeiffer

Let the guessing games begin!


The shouter and threatening emailer has been identified as Gene Sperling, head of the National Economic Council.

 Woodward’s account of his recent testy exchange with the White House points to continued sensitivity over the issue of whose idea the sequester was.

A White House official said in an emailed response to Reuters that no threat was intended by the comment.

“The email from the aide was sent to apologize for voices being raised in their previous conversation,” the aide said. “The note suggested that Mr. Woodward would regret the observation he made regarding the sequester because that observation was inaccurate, nothing more.”

The BuzzFeed news website identified the official who tangled with Woodward as Gene Sperling, head of the National Economic Council. The White House did not respond to a request to confirm the identity of the official.

Yes, the Buzzfeed story was written by Ben “nothing to see here” Smith.

Nice Deb Nominated For People’s Choice Blog Award At 11th Annual Blogger Awards CPAC 2013


I just received word that I have been nominated for “The People’s Choice Award” at CPAC 2013hummina hummina hummmina!

Last year at CPAC, Right Wing News and hosted blogger awards.

This year, we’re doing the awards again and the winner of one of the categories will be determined by your votes here on The winner will get special linkage at the top of our website. They’ll also get a 5 consecutive days of links at Linkiest next week and of course, they’ll also receive a trophy at CPAC).

You can vote for your favorite blog among the nominees, here. (Hint hint – nudge nudge.)

VIDEO: Obama’s 13 Taxes on The Middle Class

Obama repeatedly promised the nation that he wouldn’t raise their taxes by “a single dime.” No, his raising them about 3000% more than that.

Via The Foundry:

President Obama is crisscrossing the country to scare Americans about sequestration. But what’s really frightening are the 13 Obama tax hikes that took effect in 2013.

These tax increases, which range from new Obamacare taxes to a payroll tax hike on workers, will slow the economy. Heritage Foundation President-Elect Jim DeMint warned on Fox News last night these tax hikes have the potential to cause more harm than the budget cuts that will happen as a result of sequestration:

Most of the media is so sold out to Obama that they’re missing the obvious. The policies the President has in place, especially the tax increases that just got in, are going to hurt our economy, probably actually bring it down. The President is desperate to blame it on Republicans. He wants to blame it on a reduction in government spending. But the taxes are taking almost two-and-a-half times more out of the economy than this sequester will.

So how do the Obama tax hikes compare to sequestration? It’s a whopping $149.7 billion in taxes vs. $85 billion in spending cuts.

Meanwhile, the Senate STILL refuses to pass a budget. The House Conference wants them to be held accountable for their pathetic failure:

Donna Brazile Searching For Answers: Why Did Her Health Care Premiums Go Up? They Were Supposed to Go Down by 3000%!

As recently as last March, Brazile was enthusiastically promoting Obamacare on Twitter.

Now this:

This one’s a toughie because as you may remember, Obama made extremely optimistic predictions regarding healthcare premiums under Obamacare, and we all know this president would never lie:

Yeah, who was hoodwinking who, there?

See Jim Geraghty at The Campaign spot for The ‘Good Answer’ on Rising Health Insurance Premiums:

I guess it depends upon your definition of a “good” answer. Once Obamacare requires insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions, kids under 26, birth control pills and so on, the companies will cover those costs by… raising premiums for all customers.

So that’s a “good answer” in the sense of explaining the situation. But I guess if you’re a fan of Obamacare, it’s not really a good answer.

Who would have ever guessed such a crazy thing!

Video: Hannity Tangles with Keith Ellison in “Waste of Time” Interview

I didn’t watch this contentious interview, live, but did hear my husband loudly reacting to it in the other room.

Right from the get-go, it seems, lefty congressman Keith Ellison launched into an angry tirade against Hannity, accusing him of being “immoral” and a liar.

He told Hannity he continuously says things that aren’t true, pointing to his consistently blaming the massive debt on President Obama. Hannity immediately stopped the interview at this point and told Ellison that having him on was a waste of time.
Ellison was on Hannity’s show to talk about the impending sequester cuts. In the midst of Ellison’s answer, Hannity cut him off to ask another question, but Ellison fired back, “No, wait a minute, you said I could rant, and I am.” Hannity said he’s had plenty of time to rant, but before he could get onto the next question, Ellison kept loudly talking. Hannity asked, “Why are you so angry?”

I’m not sure why I’m even posting this – the execrable Keith Ellison is a tough one to watch.

I really enjoyed his sycophantic mimicry of Obama Regime talking points, didn’t you? Especially the part about ending tax loopholes for yachts and jets.

Rush Limbaugh had a thing or two to say about the Regime’s plan to eliminate tax breaks for corporate and private jet owners a few days ago.

You’ve got Obama and the media and everybody running around trying to scare the hell out of people because these government people may lose their jobs.  These government departments may shut down.  This over here, that over there, it’s gonna be a disaster if we only spend $15 billion more.  Meanwhile, Obama has a tax change that he wants to implement that could literally throw thousands of people who manufacture corporate jets out of work.

I mean, this is real.  This is not some phony government sequester business.  If everybody in this sequester, if there is anybody, gets furloughed, they’re gonna get their back pay.  They always do, folks.  We had a federal employee yesterday who admitted it.  They get their back pay.  And the government shutdown of 1995, every federal employee who was laid off for a while, furloughed, got back pay as soon as they went back to work.  They get their Thanksgiving turkeys and all that.  So this is all smoke and mirrors.  But yet in the real world, where Obama’s policies are gonna cause people in the private sector to lose their jobs, well, that isn’t any big deal.

Jay Carney said, “‘I would say that making choices about budgets and deficit reduction always involves difficult choices.’  Carney then went back to the administration’s usual argument on how to avert the looming sequester — that the debate is a choice between ‘special’ tax breaks versus national defense, Head Start for children and jobs for teachers.”  That’s not what this is about.  There aren’t any special tax breaks anybody’s trying to defend here in the sequester.  The sequester’s all about government spending.


I’m tired of having my intelligence insulted.  What I want to focus on here is this.  This is the line from Jay Carney.  “When it’s a choice between laying teachers off or affecting our national security or, in the broader scheme, reforming our tax code in a way that eliminates these special interest tax breaks or subsidies … the question here is: What choices do we make? Do we choose to protect narrow special interest loopholes?”

So what Carney is saying here, the hell with private jet makers, the hell with the assembly line workers and everybody else involved in putting together and manufacturing, the hell with them.  We’re gonna side with teachers, and the federal government doesn’t even pay teachers.  We played this sound bite for you yesterday in a televised interview with KAKE TV Wichita.  Obama said paraphrasing, “Well, we want to give more tax breaks to all the aviation companies in Kansas so that they’re hiring here, producing there.  What we don’t want to do is give somebody who’s buying a corporate jet an extra tax break that ordinary people can’t get because they don’t need it.”

It’s none of his business who needs what.  It’s none of his business who needs or has what.  But he’s the world’s foremost authority.  He wants to determine who has enough and who doesn’t.  And then if somebody doesn’t have enough he’s gonna take from somebody he thinks does have enough, and he’s gonna give it away.  So if you happen to work at a company that makes jets, Obama is targeting your industry.  Again.  This is the second time.  The first time was shortly after he was inaugurated.  He’s doing it again.


Twitchy: Rep. Keith Ellison has epic meltdown on Hannity, name trends worldwide:

We’ve seen a lot of politicians get angry on TV, but Rep. Keith Ellison’s “I know you are but what am I?” six-minute hissy fit on tonight’s “Hannity” is one of the worst ever — so much so it got the Democrat’s name trending.

Hagel Confirmation a Done Deal

Chuck Hagel is set to become the next defense secretary having cleared a major hurdle this afternoon. Republicans had blocked his nomination for almost two weeks due to their objections to his noxious views on Middle East security. Today, the Senate voted 71–27  to end debate on Hagel’s nomination, and will hold a final vote on confirmation at 4:30 (Eastern) this afternoon.

At first, Republicans threatened a filibuster over demands that the White House turn over more information about the Sept. 11 attack on a U.S. consulate in Libya that left four Americans, including the ambassador, dead. As Obama officials turned over more information on that front, senior Republicans latched on to requests for more documents about the nominee’s private-sector life, including the source of funds from his numerous speeches in the more than four years since he left the Senate.

That prompted a nearly unified GOP caucus to block Hagel’s first filibuster vote Feb. 14, the first time a nominee for defense secretary faced such a partisan maneuver.

The White House and Democrats rejected those demands, and instead cited the lengthy background checks conducted by the FBI and the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In the minutes leading up to Tuesday’s vote, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said that he did not need any more information about Hagel’s finances, and instead said most Republicans simply objected to Hagel’s world view.

In what has become a familiar pattern with Obama, he went ahead with a divisive and distracting approach, knowing that controversy lay ahead with the Hagel nomination, rather choosing a more qualified candidate everyone could agree with.

U.S. Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) made this point on the Senate floor, today, when he spoke about his opposition to Hagel’s confirmation.

A group of Senate Republicans wrote a letter to the president, last week, calling on him to withdraw the nomination.

Fifteen Republicans senators wrote that Hagel lacks the bipartisan support and confidence to serve in the vital job of defense secretary.

‘‘The occupant of this critical office should be someone whose candidacy is neither controversial nor divisive,’’ wrote the senators — all opponents of Hagel.

None of that matters to Obama, whose only interest was finding a “Yes Man” to go along with his plans to downsize the Pentagon and help him manage the decline of US power in the world. If he can enrage and frustrate impotent Republicans while in the process, so much the better.

Shale Energy: A Game Changer (Video)

While Hollywood celebs and environmentalists fight tooth and nail against it, hydraulic fracturing is transforming America’s energy landscape for the better.

In this video, David Chavern, U.S. Chamber Executive Vice President points out that thanks to fracking, we now have at least 100 years of natural gas supplies and vast quantities of oil.

Workers in the shale energy sector earn over $50/hour, double the national average.

In next seven years, shale energy development is expected to:

  •  Support three million jobs
  • $417 billion in economic growth
  • $111 billion in annual revenue to governments


For more information, go to Shale Works For Us.

KC Winter Storm II: The View From My Deck

A second major winter storm in a week bore down on southern U.S. Plain states Monday and Tuesday, dumping more than a foot of snow in areas. Parts of Kansas and Missouri were still digging out from last week’s winter storm. The amount of snow we’ve gotten from these two storms is more than the yearly average. Here’s the view from my deck, this morning:



 In the Kansas City area – my neck of the woods – grocery store bread aisles were nearly bare and some stores ran out of shovels:

A Home Depot in Overland Park, Kansas, a Kansas City suburb, received 300 snow shovels Sunday night and nearly all were sold within an hour after the store opened Monday, a manager said.

Our Walmart bread aisle looked like this, yesterday:


The heaviest snow has already occurred, but an additional 1-3 inches of snow is expected, this afternoon, totaling up to 12 inches from the south Kansas City Metro area northeastward through North Central Missouri.

Yep, the kids are home from school, today.

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,616,155 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 516 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: