If ANYONE in the BO Maldministration Opens Their Mouth, WILL WE HEAR THE TRUTH??

Posted on Oct 3rd. It’s clear the Semi-News Presser held on Oct 3rd was a joke

My vote is never. Around past 4:30PM Today, Friday, a group of mouth movers trotted out on the White House Briefing Room stage to ASSURE there are NO PROBLEMS in Obolama Land (One thing I read from the Book BO learned from as a child in Indonesia, if a lie is necessary, by all means tell it). Which leads to the statements from the mouth movers that ALL Former Obolama outbreaks were conquered and stuffed out from the 70′s to last year. “Reassurance flowed from these jaw jackers. Then as is everything Obama, it didn’t quite ring TRUE. Yes, there were outbreaks in the years the mouth breathers said, but they quite haven’t matched today’s outbreak. (I know, what’s a small difference? Just semantics.

But our fellow Bloggers at the “Modern Survival Blog” did some research to challenge the Jaw Jackers. Here in part of an item from the MSB is this:

There’s Something Very Different About This Ebola
October 3, 2014, by Ken Jorgustin
Modern Survival Blog

The first case of Ebola was during 1976 which infected 318 people (280 died).
The second major Ebola outbreak was during 1995 with 315 cases (killing 254).
During 2003 Ebola infected 143 and killed 128.
In 2007 Ebola affected 264 individuals resulting in 187 deaths.
This time, in 2014, as of this post date, Ebola has been confirmed to have infected 7,000 and is expected to rise to 20,000 by November and perhaps 1.4 million by January 2015.
SOMETHING IS VERY DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS EBOLA

Continue Here PLEASE for the full article: (It’s worth it)
http://modernsurvivalblog.com/pandemic/theres-something-very-different-about-this-ebola/

Ken’s policy on “borrowing” his info is this
Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to ModernSurvivalBlog.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Anyway, the podium standers wanted DESPARATELY to DOWNPLAY this Obomala Issue. They cited with high dudgeon of reassurance this Obolama will be licked 1-2-3. But they stated the following:
The 1st case of Ebola was during 1976 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 318 people (280 died).
The 2nd case of Ebola was during 1995 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 315 people (254 died).
The 3rd case of Ebola was during 2003 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 143 people (128 died).
And the last case of Ebola was during 2007 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 264 people (187 died).

Now in 2014 as of Ken’s posting date, Ebola has been confirmed to have infected 7,000 and is expected to rise to 20,000 by November and perhaps 1.4 million by January 2015. It seems the earlier dated infected and eradicated in total is much smaller. A total of under 1,000 combined. It was just that little item left out of a LATE FRIDAY AFTERNOON PRESS CONFERENCE. But with all Campaign speeches of BO, Everything is OK, and we are much better off now than 6 years ago. (wink) OOOPS, but Obama does lie as he was taught when the Truth Becomes INCONVENIENT as his “Book” learning in Indonesia taught him.

I’m sure someday, if this doesn’t wipe us out, we might find the truth. (Or maybe the Border crashers brought it like the respitory disease that can paralyze people)

I think he inherited his father’s intelligence

From CNN:

Biden’s son discharged from Navy after testing positive for cocaine
By Eric Bradner, CNN | updated 7:51 PM EDT, Thu October 16, 2014

Washington (CNN) – The Navy Reserve discharged Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter this year after he tested positive for cocaine, U.S. officials confirmed.

The discharge of Biden, a 44-year-old lawyer and managing partner at an investment firm, was first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Thursday. He confirmed the report in a statement to CNN.

“It was the honor of my life to serve in the U.S. Navy, and I deeply regret and am embarrassed that my actions led to my administrative discharge. I respect the Navy’s decision. With the love and support of my family, I’m moving forward,” he said.

Biden was commissioned as an ensign in May 2013 and assigned as a public affairs officer in a Norfolk, Virginia-based reserve unit. A month later, he tested positive for cocaine, and he was discharged in February, according to the report.

Robert Hunter Biden and Vice President Joe Biden

A bit more at the link; emphasis mine. But Hunter Biden was privileged enough to have attended Georgetown University, where he earned his Bachelor of Arts, and was graduated from Yale Law School. He is a partner at Rosemont Seneca Partners, LLC and is Counsel to Boies, Schiller, Flexner, LLP, a New York based-law firm, and received an appointment to the board of the Ukrainian Energy Company Burisma Holdings, which is part of the vast business empire of Ihor Kolomoisky. He is, or has been, a member of all sorts of boards of advisers, a way for the well-connected to be funneled extra cash without doing any actual work, just in case. Quick translation: he’s making a clear pile of money, at least some of which is due to his father’s Senate career, and now Vice Presidency. Yet he was dumb enough to use cocaine. The son of privilege, who knew, knew! that the Navy tests everybody for illegal drug use, decided that snorting coke was somehow a wise decision.

And we aren’t talking about some kid here: Mr Biden was 43 years old when he tested positive for cocaine.

Drugs make you stupid, but it’s stupidity that leads to drug use.

Where are the liberal professional media when it comes to the government trying to shut down free speech?

Hat tip to Gretchen!

City subpoenas pastors’ sermons in equal rights ordinance case
By Katherine Driessen | October 14, 2014 | Updated: October 14, 2014 3:46pm

Mayor Annise Parker

Houston’s embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons given by local pastors who oppose the law and are tied to the conservative Christian activists that have sued the city.Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David Feldman wrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot. City attorneys issued subpoenas last month during the case’s discovery phase, seeking, among other communications, “all speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”

The subpoenas were issued to several high-profile pastors and religious leaders who have been vocal in opposing the ordinance. The Alliance Defending Freedom has filed a motion on behalf of the pastors seeking to quash the subpoenas.

Plaintiff Jared Woodfill said the subpoena impinges on protected religious freedoms.

“This is the city trampling on the First Amendment rights of pastors in their churches,” Woodfill said.

The city attorney’s office has not responded to requests for comment.

The Houston Chronicle is the largest circulation daily newspaper in Texas; we’re not talking about some low-circulation rag here. And lest you think that this doesn’t really mean sermons, from another Houston Chronicle story:

City subpoenas sermons in equal rights case
By Katherine Driessen | October 14, 2014 | Updated: October 14, 2014 10:11pm

Houston’s embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons given by local pastors who oppose the law and are tied to the conservative Christian activists who have sued the city.

Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David Feldman wrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.

City attorneys issued subpoenas last month as part of the case’s discovery phase, seeking, among other communications, “all speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”

More at the link.

The Bill of Rights

Now, let’s be clear here: a pastor, or anyone else, could state, openly and in public, that Mayor Annise Parker is a degenerate lesbian and that all queers are degenerates who are not only going to Hell but that he hoped that they’d get there very soon, and that would be speech which is fully protected by the First Amendment. It does not matter whether someone else does not like the speech, it does not matter whether someone else is offended by the speech, and it does not matter if someone else thinks that the speech encourages hatred; unless a speech is a plain, realistic and explicit threat to physical violence, it cannot be censored or prosecuted.

The First Amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Fourteenth Amendment has incorporated the First Amendment to apply to state and local government action, so Houston’s actions are clearly unconstitutional.

There is, of course, no greater advocate for the freedom of speech and of the press than The New York Times, right? Our major professional media — ABC, CBS, NBC, and the major daily newspapers — all depend upon the protection of the First Amendment to keep the paws of government from interfering with what they wish to say. Yet, oddly enough, when I googled Houston subpoena pastor, at 1:51 PM EDT today, I somehow couldn’t find any references to The new York Times or to the major networks, or to CNN, though Fox News was listed prominently. The Washington Times story was the second one listed, but the larger, more established Washington Post was not shown as having a story on the subject, nor did a site search produce a result. A site search on The New York Times’ website also turned up nothing. A local ABC station covered the story, but not ABC’s national news.

Well, maybe the whole story isn’t true, I thought, so, when I happened across the snopes.com story, I opened that one up, and found this:

According to the Houston Chronicle, both the City and the ADF face significant legal hurdles in proving their respective cases. South Texas College of Law professor Charles Rhodes told the paper that the city’s action was “unusual, but not unprecedented” and explained the burden of proof Houston will likely be forced to meet to be successful:

This is unusual to see it come up in a pure political controversy. The city is going to have to prove there is something very particular in the sermons that does not come up anywhere else.

City Attorney David Feldman told the outlet that if “someone is speaking from the pulpit and it’s political speech then it’s not going to be protected” by the First Amendment. Rhodes pointed out that the ADF will have difficulty arguing that sermons intended for broadcast or livestream fit the criteria of privileged communications, as anyone could attend or view the speech.

So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors’ sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.

Except, of course, there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about sermons including calls to political action. Mr Feldman’s statement that if “someone is speaking from the pulpit and it’s political speech then it’s not going to be protected” is simply false; it is certainly protected speech. A case could be made that such would disqualify a particular church from its tax-exempt status, but the speech itself is still protected.

There are plenty of conservative sites covering this story, but I have to wonder: where are the left, where are the people who are (supposedly) the intellectual heirs of the free speech movement of the 1960s? Apparently, they are nowhere to be found. It’s almost as though the left is perfectly happy with the government trying to suppress or intimidate speech, as long as it’s a government run by liberals, and the speech in question comes from conservatives.

Economics 101: Eventually, you have to pay your bills!

Via msnmoney:

Americans face post-foreclosure hell as wages garnished, assets seized
Reuters | By Michelle Conlin | October 14, 2014

NEW YORK – Many thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the housing bust, but have since begun to rebuild their finances, are suddenly facing a new foreclosure nightmare: debt collectors are chasing them down for the money they still owe by freezing their bank accounts, garnishing their wages and seizing their assets.

By now, banks have usually sold the houses. But the proceeds of those sales were often not enough to cover the amount of the loan, plus penalties, legal bills and fees. The two big government-controlled housing finance companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as other mortgage players, are increasingly pressing borrowers to pay whatever they still owe on mortgages they defaulted on years ago.

Using a legal tool known as a “deficiency judgment,” lenders can ensure that borrowers are haunted by these zombie-like debts for years, and sometimes decades, to come. Before the housing bubble, banks often refrained from seeking deficiency judgments, which were seen as costly and an invitation for bad publicity. Some of the biggest banks still feel that way.

But the housing crisis saddled lenders with more than $1 trillion of foreclosed loans, leading to unprecedented losses. Now, at least some large lenders want their money back, and they figure it’s the perfect time to pursue borrowers: many of those who went through foreclosure have gotten new jobs, paid off old debts and even, in some cases, bought new homes.

“Just because they don’t have the money to pay the entire mortgage, doesn’t mean they don’t have enough for a deficiency judgment,” said Florida foreclosure defense attorney Michael Wayslik.

More at the link; emphasis mine. And while the article continues to note that some larger banks are pursuing some of the foreclosures for deficiency judgements, the most aggressive is the federal government:

Perhaps the most aggressive among the debt pursuers is Fannie Mae. Of the 595,128 foreclosures Fannie Mae was involved in – either through owning or guaranteeing the loans – from January 2010 through June 2012, it referred 293,134 to debt collectors for possible pursuit of deficiency judgments, according to a 2013 report by the Inspector General for the agency’s regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

It is unclear how many of the loans that get sent to debt collectors actually get deficiency judgments, but the IG urged the FHFA to direct Fannie Mae, along with Freddie Mac, to pursue more of them from the people who could repay them.

Using the numbers given in the article, Fannie Mae (FNMA) is pursuing 49.3% of all of the foreclosed upon loans in debt collection procedures. If the American working class thought that they had a friend in President Obama, they had better think again!1

Now, don’t misunderstand: your Editor thinks that all of this is a good thing! When borrowers default on their loans, whether mortgages or otherwise, costs increase for the rest of us. The mortgage interest rates for everybody, despite them being very low these days, are still slightly higher than they have to be, because lenders have to insulate themselves from loans which will, or already have, go into default. If you are paying your mortgage right now, on time, you are also paying something for those people who aren’t paying their mortgages.2

Now, it wasn’t just homebuyers taking out irresponsible loans: banks and other lenders gave out loans far too easily before the housing bubble burst, and they are paying for that now. But that the banks fouled up doesn’t mean that borrowers didn’t as well, and they ought to have to pay up, too.
_____________________

  1. Your Editor is working class, too, but he was never stupid enough to think that Barack Hussein Obama was ever a friend of the working man.
  2. Your Editor has a mortgage, which is, and always has been, current on his primary home; our mortgage payment comes out of our bank account automatically on the 10th of the month, so we can’t just forget. The retirement home we purchased in September was paid in cash, and we have no mortgage on that.

October 14, 1066: The Battle of Hastings

Harold Rex Interfectus Est

On this date, 948 years ago, a battle was fought which has shaped the history of Great Britain, and eventually the United States, ever since. William the Conqueror, of Normandy, defeated the Anglo-Saxon forces of King Harold II Gowdinson, setting up the Norman dynasty and the transformation of our mother country into something which would eventually become the leading power on earth. No one can know what would have happened had it been William of Normandy who had taken an arrow in the eye rather than King Harold; our history would have been unguessably different.

Never let a crisis go to waste!

That was Rahm Emanuel’s advice, and, for the Obama Administration, it’s a well-learned lesson:

Unreal — NIH Director: We’d Probably Have An Ebola Vaccine If It Wasn’t For GOP Budget Cuts…

Remember these headlines from Obama’s NIH?

Dr. Francis Collins, the head of the National Institutes of Health

BETHESDA, Md. — As the federal government frantically works to combat the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, and as it responds to a second diagnosis of the disease at home, one of the country’s top health officials says a vaccine likely would have already been discovered were it not for budget cuts.Dr. Francis Collins, the head of the National Institutes of Health, said that a decade of stagnant spending has “slowed down” research on all items, including vaccinations for infectious diseases. As a result, he said, the international community has been left playing catch-up on a potentially avoidable humanitarian catastrophe.

“NIH has been working on Ebola vaccines since 2001. It’s not like we suddenly woke up and thought, ‘Oh my gosh, we should have something ready here,’” Collins told The Huffington Post on Friday. “Frankly, if we had not gone through our 10-year slide in research support, we probably would have had a vaccine in time for this that would’ve gone through clinical trials and would have been ready.”

A bit more at the link; internal hyperlinks added by the Editor.

And from National Review:

Miserly GOP House Passed Budget Increasing CDC Spending 8.2%
By 
October 13, 2014 4:15 PM
Comments

The DCCC unveiled advertising declaring “Republicans voted to cut CDC’s budget to fight Ebola. Republicans protect tax breaks for special interests.”

In January, that allegedly miserly and cruel and callous GOP-controlled House also approved a budget that increased CDC’s budget by a lot:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will see an 8.2 percent budget increase for fiscal 2014, thanks to a $1.1 trillion spending bill announced by Congress Jan. 13.

This influx of cash will raise the CDC budget to $6.9 billion, which is $567 million more than it received in 2013. This is more than the agency anticipated, because the president’s fiscal year 2014 budget request for it was just $6.6 billion — a decrease of $270 million from fiscal 2012.

Of the $6.9 billion, $1.3 billion was allocated to protect the United States from foreign and domestic threats, both intentional and naturally occurring. $255 million will go to support bio-defense efforts, and $160 million will be set aside for states to address their most pressing public health needs. The CDC will get $30 million for Advanced Molecular Detection (AMD), which will help identify potential disease outbreaks earlier and more accurately.

The harsh, merciless tightwad House of Representatives passed the omnibus spending bill 376 to 5.

And if health funding is so vital, no matter the circumstances… remember when House Republicans introduced a bill to fund the National Institutes of Health during the government shutdown, and the Senate Democrats refused to consider it?

More at the link.

So, while the Obama Administration has the National Institutes for Health spending money tying to figure out why lesbians are tubby, the Director of the NIH is blaming the wicked Republicans for not spending enough to fight ebola. I wonder what could have happened if they’d hadn’t been so very concerned about zaftig homosexuals and put that money into research on ebola?

Oh, I’m sorry; simply asking that question is almost certainly homophobic, right? But, since the Congress actually increased funding for the Centers for Disease Control above what the President had asked, shouldn’t an shortfall in past spending be on the President, and not the GOP? Oh, sorry again; asking that question is almost certainly racist!

So, we have an Administration which will not stop travel from ebola-ravaged countries, then trotting out a bureaucrat to say that it’s all the Republicans’ fault. And, of course, we’ll have the weak-minded Democratic voters — please, pardon the redundancy — believing that bovine feces.

The twitter hashtag #TookMoneyFromEbolaResearch has plenty of other examples. But if Dr Collins is doing such a great job as Director, why didn’t he reorganize NIH’s spending priorities? He has the authority to do just that, within the confines of his appropriations.

One good way to save a couple hundred thousand dollars from the NIH budget would be to fire Dr Collins.

Rule 5 Blogging: Do not mess with them!

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Gwyneth Paltrow in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude. This week: American soldiers. Click any photo to enlarge.

On duty

On duty

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: Do not mess with them!’ »

Nothing says freedom . . .

. . . like an American flag mounted on a flagpole made from a gun barrel.

I wish that I could have found a photo of it, but it was shown at a home in North Pole, Alaska, on the Discovery Channel show, Buying Alaska, this evening between 9:00 and 9:30 PM EDT; the homeowner had constructed a flagpole out of .50 caliber machine gun barrels. It would have driven the left absolutely nuts!

What is it about telling the truth that so bothers Democratic candidates?

The First Street Journal has already noted Secretary of State Alison Grimes’ (D-KY) refusal to answer a simple yes-or-no question, not wanting to do something really radical like tell the truth to the voters, and now we have The Philadelphia Inquirer, a solid editorial supporter of Democrats, noting that the Democratic gubernatorial nominee in Pennsylvania doesn’t want to be honest with the voters either:

Fuzzy Math
Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial Board | Posted: Friday, October 10, 2014, 1:08 AM

Tom Wolf. Photo by Keith Srakocic / AP

In the last debate of the gubernatorial campaign Wednesday and a meeting with the Inquirer Editorial Board Thursday, Democratic nominee Tom Wolf reiterated his refusal to detail his plans for the state income tax. Indeed, Wolf’s studied vagueness on the subject has become familiar enough to be routine. But that shouldn’t make it any less troubling.

The York County businessman has proposed making the state’s constitutionally mandated flat tax progressive by exempting an unspecified amount of income and raising the rate. He says he would hold total revenues neutral and that the dividing line between those paying more and those paying less would be in the range of $70,000 to $90,000 in individual income. But Wolf maintains that he can’t be specific about any of those numbers without state fiscal data to which he isn’t privy.

Polls suggest Wolf has a substantial lead over Gov. Corbett, so political calculations may well dictate that he avoid committing to a controversial policy that might cut into his advantage. But his failure to engage in a concrete discussion of the numbers is difficult to take from a successful businessman and former state revenue secretary – much less one who claims to represent a departure from politics as usual.

Wolf has taken to saying that given the information he has, it would be “dishonest” to explain his plan in detail. On the contrary, honesty would dictate exactly that.

Why, it’s almost as though Mr Wolf believed that telling the truth would cost him votes!

Tom Wolf is a successful businessman, something he claims as the reason Pennsylvanians should vote for him, and was the Secretary of Revenue for the Commonwealth from April 25, 2007 until November 30, 2008; if any man ought to know and understand revenue and income numbers, Mr Wolf should be that man. But, instead, despite having announced his candidacy for governor 18 months ago, he still doesn’t have an solid numbers on what he intends to do concerning taxes. He has been an declared candidate for governor for only 30 days fewer than his entire tenure as Secretary of Revenue,1 so it’s rather difficult to think that, in all of that time, he couldn’t have come up with some numbers, even provisional ones.

The Philadelphia Inquirer almost always supports Democrats. Yet here we have the spectacle of the Inquirer’s Editorial Board telling us that the man they will almost certainly endorse is being less than honest with the voters.

Mrs Grimes is a probable loser in Kentucky, while Mr Wolf is currently favored to win in the Keystone State, but they have one thing in common: an aversion to telling the truth. In Mrs Grimes’ case, it concerns a matter of not very much importance, and serves only to illustrate what a poor candidate she is, but in Mr Wolf’s case, it concerns a serious matter of policy, and an issue on which the voters ought to be informed.

  1. April 25, 2007 through November 30, 2008 = 586 days; April 2, 2013 through October 10, 2014 = 556 days.

From Around the Blogroll

We always seem surprised when a Hollywood liberal says something like this, but we really shouldn’t be.

Gwyneth Paltrow: useful idiot for Liberal Fascism
Posted by: Phineas on October 10, 2014 at 1:24 pm

Ready for dictaorship

So, yesterday President Obama screwed up traffic here in Los Angeles so he could attend a(nother) fund-raiser at the California ATM, hobnobbing over $1,000 a plate meals with the Hollywood glitterati  at the home of actress and Obama fan-girl Gwyneth Paltrow. As Politico reports, her introduction of the President was cringe-worthy on several levels:

Gwyneth Paltrow wants President Barack Obama to know: she’s just like everyone else.

She makes $16 million per movie, sure, but that doesn’t mean that she’s not worried about Obama getting equal pay legislation through Congress.

At a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee held at her house in Brentwood Thursday evening, she called the issue “very important to me as a working mother.”

In front of a crowd that included fellow actors Julia Roberts (who took her picture in front of the presidential limo on her way out) and Bradley Whitford (that’s Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”), Paltrow told Obama she is “one of your biggest fans, if not the biggest.”

Reminding Obama that she hosted an expat fundraiser for him in London when she was living there, Paltrow described Obama as a president who would be studied for generations, and a role model for everyone of this generation.

“It would be wonderful if we were able to give this man all of the power that he needs to pass the things that he needs to pass,” she told the crowd.

More at the link. Of course, there really was a President who was given all the power to pass the things he needed to pass, and the Hollywood left just swooned over him; his name was Hugo Chavez, who received authority from the Venezuelan Congress to rule by decree.

And now, onto the blogroll!