Survey: Dems much more likely to talk about their guns

 

A new poll reveals that Democrats are far more likely to be willing to talk about their guns than Republicans or independents.

The revelation comes just as the American Academy of Family Physicians is launching a campaign to emphasize just that – talking about guns. Specifically the doctors say they oppose any restrictions on their discussions about guns with their patients, and they want to take a “public health approach” on the issue of weapons.

The new poll from The O’Leary Report and WND, done by Zogby Analytics, reports that 68 percent of Democrats who responded said they would respond truthfully to a national pollster asking them personal questions about gun ownership.

For independents, only 49 percent would follow that path, and the GOP generated an even lower level of cooperation to such questions, with only 44 percent agreeing to respond to those questions.

The poll asked the question, “If a national pollster asked you if you owned a firearm, would you determine to tell him or her the truth or would you feel it was none of their business?”

Bradley S. O’Leary is president of The O’Leary Report and author of books including “Shut Up, America!,” “The Audacity of Deceit,” “America’s War on Christianity” and others.

The poll was conducted through online interviews between Jan. 16-18 of 890 likely voters in the U.S. Based on a confidence interval of 95 percent, the margin of error is plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

Nationally, the poll revealed that 55 percent of respondents would talk with a pollster about such personal issues, while 36 percent would not. Nearly nine percent were uncertain.

Responses from men and women aligned closely with the national average, as did the pattern among the age groups and generations.

Among those who identified themselves with different ideologies is where the differences were stark. For those who self-identified as liberal, 75 percent said they would answer such questions, and only 18 percent thought it was private information.

For moderates, the split was 57 percent to 33 percent, and for conservatives more than half said they would refuse to reveal such information.

The physicians’ group, just this week, under the headline “Physician Free Speech,” announced a coalition effort involving a handful of professional organizations “in a call for policies to reduce firearm-related injuries and deaths in the United States and to protect physicians’ free speech rights to discuss gun ownership with patients.”

The campaign, which also involves the American Bar Association, the American Public Health Association and others, cites the incidence of gun deaths in the nation as a “public health crisis.”

The effort also seeks universal background checks, a ban on some weapons, more federal gun-injury research and other components, and says it does not conflict with the Second Amendment.

But it also likens the gun issue to the heavily regulated issues of motor vehicles, tobacco and hazardous materials and described it as a “public health crisis.”

The groups noted that “when public health research guides advocacy,” society is safer.

The issue with doctors’ conversations has included disputes when physicians make revealing such information mandatory, and patients refuse to comply.

More than 53 percent of those who called themselves “conservative on just about every issue” would tell a pollster with such a question “It was none of their business.” Only 15 percent of those who are liberal/progressive lined up in that column.

Regional, age, income and other factors didn’t have a significant impact on the answers to the question.

The poll also had asked whether respondents thought Hillary Clinton’s age – she would be 70 in her first year if elected – is a concern.

In fact, a plurality of Americans – even one in three Democrats – agrees that her age is a worry.

Overall, 46.5 percent of the respondents said the Democrats need to look at someone young. Only 33.4 percent said that was unneeded, and a significant one in five said they were not sure.

Among those ages 18-29, almost exactly half – 48.1 percent, said the Democrats needed to look at Hillary Clinton’s age as a factor. That was 46.8 percent for those ages 30-49 and 42.5 percent for those ages 50-64. For those over 65, it was 49.8 percent.

Another question in the survey was, “Do you agree or disagree that the United States should help certain Arab countries financially and militarily if their countries’ constitutions or laws make being a Christian or atheist a crime punishable by jail or even execution.”

The poll said nearly 63 percent of all respondents disagree with that funding.

Only about 16 percent said that should continue, while 62.6 percent disagreed. About 21 percent weren’t sure.

“According to the poll results Americans are more politically opposed to military and economic aid going to Arab countries that have religious bias,” said O’Leary.

Survey: Dems much more likely to talk about their guns
Bob Unruh
Sat, 28 Feb 2015 21:17:39 GMT

Read More

Republican rebels stand fast against Boehner, amnesty

 

House Speaker John Boehner

In the contentious voting over a Homeland Security funding bill Friday night, nearly 50 mostly conservative Republicans openly defied House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio – not once, but twice.

Only a last-minute change of heart by Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., spared the Republican speaker from an embarrassing defeat and a possible shutdown of part of the DHS.

At issue was whether the three-week spending bill backed by GOP leadership would be passed with or without funding President Obama’s executive action lifting the threat of deportation from millions of illegal immigrants. Many in Boehner’s party were not willing to pass a bill paying for what they’re calling Obama’s unconstitutional “amnesty” action.

“It does not make any difference whether the funding is for three weeks, three months or a full fiscal year,” argued Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., who voted against the measure. “If it’s illegal, it’s illegal.”

Fifty-one other Republicans joined Brooks in voting against the measure, leading to a 224-203 defeat for Boehner and the GOP leadership.

Join the “Don’t Be Yellow: Dump Boehner Now!” campaign!

Later in the evening, the proposal was put forward to pass a bill funding the DHS for just one week, and this time, 55 Republicans voted against the measure.

Pelosi, however, rallied Democrats to switch their votes and agree to what she called “a 7-day patch.”

“Your vote tonight,” Pelosi wrote in a letter to fellow Democrats, “will assure that we will vote for full funding next week.”

Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., however, continued the resistance from within the Republican Party, voting against the funding for a second time.

“Passing bills that do nothing but kick the can down the road is something that has become commonplace in Washington,” Salmon said. “I pledge to continue this fight in one week, so we can responsibly fund the Department of Homeland Security without funding the president’s unconstitutional actions.”

The Senate immediately passed the one-week funding measure in a voice vote, and President Obama signed the bill just before midnight.

Democrats have been tight-lipped on what brought about the sudden change of heart, and Boehner spokesman Michael Steel firmly denied rumors that a deal was cut between Boehner and Pelosi to get the measure passed.

“We did not make any such ‘deal’ or promise,” Steel said.

Republicans who voted against the three-week measure are listed in alphabetical order below:

1. Justin Amash, R-Mich.
2. Brian Babin, R-Texas
3. Lou Barletta, R-Pa.
4. Joe Barton, R-Texas
5. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.
6. Dave Brat, R-Va.
7. Jim Bridenstine, R-Okla.
8. Mo Brooks, R-Ala.
9. Curt Clawson, R-Fla.
10. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla.
11. Scott DesJarlais, R-Tenn.
12. Sean Duffy, R-Wis.
13. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas
14. Stephen Fincher, R-Tenn.
15. John Fleming, R-La.
16. Randy Forbes, R.Va.
17. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.
18. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas
19. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.
20. Morgan Griffith, R-Va.
21. Jody Hice, R-Ga.
22. Richard Hudson, R-N.C.
23. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas
24. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.
25. Robert Hurt, R-Va.
26. Sam Johnson, R-Texas
27. Walter Jones, R-N.C.
28. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio
29. Steve King, R-Iowa
30. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho
31. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo.
32. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga.
33. Thomas Massie, R-Ky.
34. Mark Meadows, R-N.C.
35. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C.
36. Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas
37. Pete Olson, R-Texas
38. Steve Pearce, R-N.M.
39. Scott Perry, R-Pa.
40. Ted Poe, R-Texas
41. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas
42. Tom Rice, R-S.C.
43. Phil Roe, R-Tenn.
44. Thomas Rooney, R-Fla.
45. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz.
46. Mark Sanford, R-S.C.
47. Lamar Smith, R-Texas
48. Mark Walker, R-N.C.
49. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio
50. Roger Williams, R-Texas
51. Rob Wittman, R-Va.
52. Kevin Yoder, R-Kansas

In the second vote, nine additional Republicans resisted the one-week extension, while six who voted against the three-week funding bill agreed to the one-week “patch.” The roll call on the second vote can be found by clicking here.

Obama has vowed to veto any legislation that undercuts his immigration action.

Recruit your friends, neighbors, and fellow commuters to the “Don’t Be Yellow: Dump Boehner Now” campaign with this exclusive bumper sticker.

Republican rebels stand fast against Boehner, amnesty
Drew Zahn
Sat, 28 Feb 2015 21:29:59 GMT

Read More

GOP 'pretty fired up' about blocking ObamaNet

 

Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., is leading the first legislative effort to roll back the federal government’s decision to start regulating the Internet as a utility, calling Thursday’s action by the Federal Communications Commission the start of the “Obamanet” and a guarantee of more taxes for Internet consumers.

On Thursday, by a party line 3-2 vote, the FCC approved a plan commonly known as net neutrality, but which critics like Blackburn see as unnecessary government intrusion into the private sector.

“This is the day the ObamaNet was born,” said Blackburn, who is vice chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “The Internet is not broken. It does not need the FCC’s help and assistance in order to be productive or profitable.”

Coverage and analysis of the FCC’s net neutrality decision has been fairly limited, with both experts and consumers finding the issue very complicated. Blackburn said the impact of this is clear and very significant.

“The FCC will now reclassify broadband services from an information service to a telecommunications service. They will do this under a 1930s-era law, the Telecommunications Act. They will thereby subject the Internet to taxes, regulation, international considerations that are now put on our wire-lined phones. So this is a step backward; it is not a step forward,” said Blackburn, who stresses that the private market was serving consumers just fine.

“It’s a sad day when you see the Federal Communications Commission coming in and preceding your Internet service provider, your ISP, in the governance of the Internet,” she said. “Basically, what you’re going to see is the FCC will now be able to assign priority and value to content because they will be in charge of controlling pricing and fees.”

Blackburn said higher taxes on Americans’ Internet bills are not a possibility but a guarantee. And how much more will Americans be paying?

“You’ve got estimates that run from a few billion dollars in additional taxes to as high as $15 billion,” she said. “So at this point, I think it’s ‘pick a number,’ but everybody agrees the cost is going to go up because of taxes and fees.”

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.:

In short, Blackburn said the government is stepping in to control something that didn’t need rescuing.

“Whether it is packaging and pricing or the availability of broadband, you now have given the control over this to the FCC to decide what areas of the country get what speeds, what type of businesses get access to what speeds,” Blackburn said. “It allows the FCC to now begin picking winners and losers.”

Blackburn is launching the first piece of legislation aimed at rolling back the FCC plan, joining with Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., to repeal a specific provision that trumps their states’ laws on broadband service. The FCC upheld petitions from Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Wilson, North Carolina, that would allow their broadband rules to be placed on residents outside their jurisdictions.

“Let’s say you have County A that goes in and they work with the FCC and they get a grant that helps them stand up a municipal broadband network. Well, they decide, ‘We need more customers on this network,’ so they go into adjoining counties B, C and D and say, ‘We will provide this service for you. What you have then done is to make counties B, C and D subject to the governing body of County A,” said Blackburn, noting that county would then have the power to set pricing and speed levels for people who do not live within its borders.

Her bill with Sen. Tillis would block that.

“The legislation that Sen. Tillis and I filed [Thursday] would prohibit these municipal broadband networks from going into these other areas and expanding their footprint,” she said, while again slamming the federal government for needlessly trying to trump state law.

“If they want to do it for their own constituents within their own footprint, then fine,” she said. “But it doesn’t take the federal government coming in and pre-empting state law and pre-empting local law to do that. They have no right to do that and they ought not to be doing that.”

The net neutrality controversy comes at the same time members of Congress are fiercely debating whether President Obama had the power to unilaterally approve the legalization of five million adults in the U.S. illegally. Blackburn, who calls the FCC a group of “unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats,” sees a disturbing pattern.

“It is more of this overreach and, quite frankly, I think the American people are growing weary of this,” she said. “They don’t think one city ought to be able to override another and get into the broadband business competing with the private sector.”

While she isn’t sure if the Senate will find the votes to pass her bill or others likely to be drafted in response to the FCC, Blackburn said Republicans are ready to fight over her bill and the larger issues at stake.

“I think they’re pretty fired up, and you’re going to see us move forward with our legislation,” she said. “Of course, I’ve had the bill that would block net neutrality for about three-and-a-half years, so it’s time to move it forward now so we can nip this in the bud before they get a chance to put it on the books.”

GOP 'pretty fired up' about blocking ObamaNet
Greg Corombos
Sat, 28 Feb 2015 00:51:51 GMT

Read More

John Bolton: Hillary 'unfit to command'

 

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. – Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton told CPAC that Hillary Clinton was “unfit” to be president, arguing her foreign policy record is indistinguishable from the Obama administration’s record of foreign-policy failures.

“Remember Benghazi? Hillary stuck with the story that the attack was over an Internet video when she had contrary evidence even as the attack was going on,” Bolton said.

“She left her desk at the State Department to go home while the attack at Benghazi was still going on and Americans at U.S. embassies in North Africa and all across the Middle East were at risk,” he said.

“No boss I ever worked for at the State Department would have left their desk while Americans were in danger,” said Bolton. “Every boss I had at the State Department would have been at their State Department desk and on the phone every 15 minutes.”

Bolton summed up his view of Clinton’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stephens and three other Americans were killed.

“Our people at Benghazi were left to die in a terrorist attack,” he said.

“How did we evacuate our people from Libya? By the United States Navy? No, we had to rent a Greek ferry boat to come to Tripoli to get our people out, and even after that lesson, Hillary Clinton failed to take adequate steps to protect embassy personnel in the region from what happened at Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012.”

Bolton said Benghazi must never be forgotten.

“Terrorists around the world have learned from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that you can kill an American ambassador and do it with impunity,” he said. “That’s Hillary Clinton’s lesson.”

Bolton charged that Clinton left Americans to die at Benghazi without taking any steps to find out what military means might have been available to save them.

He then turned to the U.S. relationship with Israel and the controversy surrounding the invitation by House Speaker John Boehner to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress while Obama has chosen not to meet with him.

“Barack Obama has had the worst relationship with Israel of any American president since the state of Israel was created in 1948,” Bolton said. “I congratulate Speaker Boehner for inviting this ally to speak to a joint session of Congress. Obama’s reaction is reprehensible, and if Hillary Clinton is ever to show any daylight between her foreign policy and Barack Obama’s, she should welcome Netanyahu here and offer to work with him.”

Bolton recalled that he said in 2008, when Obama ran for president for the first time, that Obama was not qualified to be president on matters of national security.

He still believes Obama is unqualified, “and we have two more years to go.”

“This is why foreign policy must be at the center of the 2016 presidential campaign, and I intend to play a role in that discussion,” he said.

Bolton expanded on his assertion that Clinton’s foreign policy record makes her unfit to be president.

He noted that Clinton, as secretary of state, supported Obama’s decision to pull out of Iraq in 2011, calling it “the single most significant decision to explain the chaos in the Middle East, the rise of ISIS, and the creation of a new state out of what used to be Syria and Iraq.”

He also held Clinton responsible for what he characterized as “the consistent mishandling of the Arab Spring, refusing to recognize it was not a new flower of democracy, but the onset of a new wave of international terror, the fruit of which we are now seeing.”

He blamed Clinton for failing to see that “ISIS would rise not only in Iraq and Syria, but also in Libya where Isis has just beheaded 21 Coptic Christians.”

“It is now depressingly clear that Hillary Clinton is likely to be the Democratic Party’s candidate for president in 2016,” Bolton concluded. “I feel I have a civic obligation to escort Hillary and Bill Clinton to the exit door of American politics.”

John Bolton: Hillary 'unfit to command'
Jerome R. Corsi
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:05:09 GMT

Read More

Rick Perry: America will survive Obama as it did Carter

 

Texas Gov. Rick Perry

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. – President Obama’s unwillingness to enforce immigration laws is as great a foreign policy failure as his administration’s inability to defeat the Islamic jihadist army ISIS, declared former Texas Gov. Rick Perry at the Conservative Political Action Conference Friday morning.

“No one should be surprised when dictators decide, like Assad in Syria, to cross President Obama’s red lines, because Assad knows President Obama will note even defend the line that divides the United States from Mexico,” Perry said.

“There are no real consequences when dictators and adversaries defy America, and this must change,” said Perry, a presidential candidate in 2012 who has not declared his intentions for 2016

“For the world to be safer, America must be stronger. And for America to be safer, our border must be secure. Drug cartels and transnational gangs smuggle guns, drugs and people. They are a clear and present danger to the health and safety of all Americans. Any conversation about comprehensive immigration reform must begin with comprehensive border security,” Perry said.

“That’s exactly why last summer I looked President Obama right square in the eye and said, ‘If you won’t secure our border with Mexico, Texas will,’” Perry related to strong applause from an enthusiastic CPAC audience.

Perry joined other presidential hopefuls at CPAC in echoing President Ronald Reagan’s belief that America’s best days lie ahead.

“America survived a civil war, two world wars, a great depression,” he argued. “We even survived Jimmy Carter. We will survive the Obama years, too. There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be fixed by a change in leadership.”

Perry said it’s “time for America to lead the world.”

“It’s time to build an America worthy of leading the world, an America where our citizens and their children can dream again. Let’s roll up our sleeves, let’s go to work, and let’s revive this great nation once again,” he said.

Perry also encouraged the conservative movement to become an agency of change, willing to demand that every government agency be able to justify every penny of taxpayer money spent.

“Our nation is involved with generational theft,” Perry charged. “Opportunity and security have been replaced with anxiety at work. The cost of health care and college tuitions have gone up faster than inflation, with student debt at an all time high, and this has to change.”

Perry said it’s “time to restore hope and opportunity to the middle class, and we can start with our tax code.”

“It’s time to stop regulation by runaway federal agencies. It’s not a surprise when one out of five Americans are on food stamps when one out of 10 Americans are either unemployed, underemployed or just so discouraged they have quit looking for work,” he said.

Perry said that in Texas under his leadership, the welfare state has been replaced with what he called the “freedom state.”

“Our formula was simple,” he explained. “You control the taxes and spending, and you provide smart regulations. You develop an educated workforce and you stop lawsuit abuse at the courthouse.”

Perry claimed that in his 14 years as Texas governor, the state created one-third of all private sector jobs created in America, noting that in the last seven years, Texas has created 1.4 million jobs.

“You take those jobs out of the equation,” he continued, “minus the jobs created by Texas, this country lost a quarter of a million jobs. It’s time to bring economic revival to every state in America with policies that limit government instead of expanding it.”

Rick Perry: America will survive Obama as it did Carter
Jerome R. Corsi
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:32:06 GMT

Read More

Middle East experts: It is a religious war

 

Syrian Christians

President Obama spent days at a White House summit emphasizing the U.S. is not at war with Islam, that he wants to protect the Muslim population from being blamed for the acts of radical Muslims across the Mideast and that violence is done in the name of all religions, not just Islam.

But a number of Middle East experts contend it’s clear that the motivation of the people who use the tactics of beheading, crucifixion, burning and slaughter to instill terror and take over territory in the name of Allah is religious.

Spokesman David Curry of Open Doors USA, which has worked for decades in the Middle East, said all of the administrations policy statements and evaluations of the conflict seem to be “leaving out the religious content.”

“It is religious,” he told WND. “These people have a religious motivation. … They are attacking Christians. Their goal is to eliminate Christianity and faith in their caliphate and beyond, and that’s what they’re attempting to do.”

Earlier this month, ISIS released a video of its members beheading 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians on a Libyan beach and another of a captured Jordanian pilot of Muslim heritage being burned alive in a cage.

This week, Syrian human-rights activists reported the number of Christians abducted by ISIS in Syria and Iraq reached more than 250.

The abductions have come during Islamic terror attacks on villages in the region that have prompted thousands more to flee and become refugees, USA Today said.

Osama Edward of the Assyrian Human Rights Network said he fears the Assyrian Christians captured would be treated like the Coptic Christians captured earlier in Libya and beheaded.

ISIS has paraded prisoners through city streets in metal cages, like the Jordanian pilot who was burned to death.

While the U.S. State Department and White House issued a condemnation of the kidnappings, Obama was insisting to attendees of the violent extremism summit that “no religion is responsible for terrorism – people are responsible for violence and terrorism” and “Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding.”

Curry said, however, the fighting in Syria and Iraq is not merely a civil war but is “religiously motivated.”

“We are going to continue to see these kinds of attacks,” he said.

CBS reported the abductions have been in the Hassakeh province, which borders Turkey and Iraq.

ISIS has been attacking the villages and seizing people, “including many women and children.”

Curry said ISIS is setting up a medieval caliphate based on its interpretation of Islam.

He said while that interpretation may be considered “extreme,” and “people may be horrified by it, that’s what they’re doing.”

And, he said, “they’re justifying their behavior through their religious lens.”

He emphasized that Open Doors is not a political group, and it reaches out to help all sorts of needy people. But he said the Obama administration needs to understand the Islamic motivation.

American Center for Law and Justice Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow said Obama needs to lead an effort to “stop the slaughter of Christians.”

“It is unacceptable for President Obama, the West and the United Nations to stand idly by and watch the systematic elimination of Christians by radical Islamists,” he said.

“How many more Christians must be murdered because of their religious beliefs? Without a specific strategy to eliminate this evil, ISIS remains emboldened and continues to use these tragic events to recruit more radical jihadists.”

Sekulow said it’s clear ISIS “intends to continue to target and execute Christians.”

“It is time for President Obama to exercise leadership to assemble a global coalition and put an effective strategy into action to stop the slaughter of Christians, to put an end to this jihadist war against Christians.”

Joining the conversation was Todd Daniels of International Christian Concern.

He told WND the latest conflict also has forced thousands of Christians to flee to nearby cities.

The religious motivation seems apparent, he said, and his organization has seen Christians concentrating in more protected regions or leaving the country altogether.

The attackers see themselves as pursing religious goals, he said.

BBC News quoted a source saying 285 people were seized this week by ISIS.

“In areas under their control, Christians have been ordered to convert to Islam, pay jizya (a religious levy), or face death,” the report said.

Middle East experts: It is a religious war
Bob Unruh
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 00:45:20 GMT

Read More

Sarah Palin: Obama's VA 'killing our veterans'

 

Sarah Palin

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. – Former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin devoted her Thursday afternoon speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference to a critique of President Obama’s foreign policy, warning of the consequences of “weakness” and “retreat,” and of the Veterans Administration health-care scandal, which has burdened the very citizens who are risking their lives for the nation’s security.

“How many have done more for America than this generation in uniform, with tens of thousands wounded and more than 1,600 dead fighting radical Islamic terrorism?” she asked.

She noted that in Iraq and Afghanistan, an initial deployment was 45 months, placing a huge burden on families.

“I realized, as so many mothers of combat veterans have had to realize, that we could pray, but we would not be there to protect them in the battlefield,” she said. “Too many come home wounded, broken in body and spirit.”

She declared: “We’re here to collect on the promises made by Washington, and we can’t wait any longer for D.C. to fix the bureaucratic messes in the Veterans Administration.”

She said the VA bureaucracy “is killing our veterans.”

“Our veterans come home and have to wait for months and years for the medical treatment they deserve to receive immediately,” she said. “With corrupt government in Washington, our veterans are losing hope the Veterans Administration will ever be fixed.”

Watch Palin’s speech:

Palin demanded solutions, including the federal government providing veterans with vouchers that can be redeemed in the private health-care system.

“Instead of illegal immigrants cutting in line to demand government benefits, we must demand the vets are first in line,” she said, drawing a standing ovation.

Second, Palin insisted veterans re-entering the private economy should be allowed to “test out” to receive certification that can be used in seeking jobs in the private economy, documenting the technical skills they achieved in the military.

Third, Palin wants Congress to restore the veterans’ benefits that Congress cut last year in the process of increasing benefits Congress voted for itself.

“We need an honorable commander in chief who can provide our troops the political will to win, getting rid of politically correct rules of engagement that put our troops in danger,” she said.

“ISIS crucifying Christians and beheading children, the only thing standing between us and barbarity is the red, white and blue, the United States of America,” said Palin. “The consequences of weakness, retreat and defeat are unimaginable in the war against radical Islam, with terrorists planning to bring their violence to our shores.”

She said pretending radical Islamic terrorism doesn’t exist won’t make it go away, “and it won’t stop ISIS from killing Christians.”

“Stop blaming the victims, Mr. President,” she said. “The State Department tells us we can’t win a war by killing the enemies. Really? Well, tell that to the Nazis. But I forgot. We can’t tell that to the Nazis because we killed them all in World War II.”

Sarah Palin: Obama's VA 'killing our veterans'
Jerome R. Corsi
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 01:53:37 GMT

Read More

If you like your Internet ...

 

If you like your Internet ...
-NO AUTHOR-
Thu, 26 Feb 2015 22:07:08 GMT

Read More

American Sniper Verdict Is...

GUILTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you God... Now fry that sack of sh*t!

Read More

Democrats flip-flop to save Obama's amnesty

 

WASHINGTON – Democrats aren’t letting their own words get in the way of voting the party line in the showdown over defunding President Obama’s amnesty.

Eight Democrat senators and one independent, all of whom criticized Obama’s executive action to grant amnesty to five million illegal immigrants, have nonetheless voted to block legislation that would defund the amnesty while keeping the rest of the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, fully funded.

WND contacted each one of those senators, quoted their own words criticizing the executive action granting amnesty and then asked two questions:

• Why won’t you now vote to defund the president’s executive action while keeping DHS fully funded?

• Would you kindly explain how this is not choosing party politics over protecting the constitutional separation of powers?

Not one senator responded or provided any explanation for the flip-flop.

Sixty votes needed are needed for the legislation to proceed to a simple majority vote in the Senate and bypass any filibuster by Democrats.

There are 54 Republicans in the Senate, one of whom voted against the bill. So, if just seven of the nine Democrats and independent stick to their anti-amnesty guns and switch their votes, the legislation would go to the president’s desk.

Why did those senators flip-flop on amnesty when push came to shove?

One Senate Democrat aide said, “I think it’s about making clear really early that we’re not going to play along with any of these games.”

But the real reason appears to be pure politics.

Comments by Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, suggest Democrats believe obstruction of the bill will pay off because the GOP will get the blame for the bill’s failure.

“History would tell us that Republicans would get more blame,” said Cuellar, referring to the 2013 government shutdown over Obamacare. “It’s a replay of the same movie.”

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas

That could indicate there has been arm-twisting behind the scenes by Democratic Party leadership to keep senators who have criticized amnesty from voting to defund it.

To counter that, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., announced he will switch tactics in an effort to flush out those senators who criticized executive amnesty but would not vote to defund it.

He now intends to bring a bill to the floor that would specifically block funding for the executive amnesty. Another bill fully funding the DHS could then be moved forward separately.

Republicans hope that Democrats who opposed Obama’s executive amnesty would then be put on the spot if they did not vote for the bill to defund it.

Here’s what those Democrats and the independent who criticized amnesty said before refusing to vote to defund it:

• Sen. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind.: “It is clear the immigration system in this country is broken, and only Congress has the ability to change the law to fix it. … I am as frustrated as anyone that Congress is not doing its job, but the president shouldn’t make such significant policy changes on his own.”

• Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.: “I have concerns about executive action. … This is a job for Congress.”

• Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D.: “I’m disappointed the president decided to use executive action at this time on this issue, as it could poison any hope of compromise or bipartisanship in the new Senate before it has even started. It’s Congress’ job to pass legislation and deal with issues of this magnitude.”

• Sen. Angus King, I-Maine: “I worry that his taking unilateral action could in fact inflame public opinion, change the subject from immigration to the president. I also have constitutional concerns about where prosecutorial discretion ends and unconstitutional executive authority begins.”

• Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V.: “I disagree with the president’s decision to use executive action to make changes to our immigration system.”

• Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo.: “Our immigration system is broken, and I support a comprehensive plan to fix it, but executive orders aren’t the way to do it.”

• Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H.: “Immigration reform is a national challenge that requires a long-term, comprehensive solution by Congress.”

• Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.: “I would prefer that Congress act.”

• Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va.: “A big issue like immigration, the best way to get a comprehensive solution is to take this through the legislative process.”

Before McConnell announced he would offer separate legislation, Sens. Heitkamp, King, Manchin and McCaskill all vowed to stick with party leadership and oppose any DHS funding bill that would defund amnesty.

“Democrat after Democrat goes to the Senate floor to give speeches about how important the Department of Homeland Security is, and yet they don’t seem to be struck by the irony that it is Democrats who are preventing the Senate from taking up funding for DHS at a time when global threats are only growing,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told National Journal last week.

“It is both reckless and irresponsible,” he added.

Follow Garth Kant @DCgarth

Democrats flip-flop to save Obama's amnesty
Garth Kant
Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:39:46 GMT

Read More