Bill Clinton calls Obamacare ‘crazy system,’ just as people who understand basic economics said since 2010

bill_clinton-abc-screenshot

A really weird thing happened in Flint, Michigan on Monday: Bill Clinton criticized The [not so] Affordable Act just as Republicans have since 2010.

This blog said years ago that anyone who understood basic economics could predict exactly what would happen with the passage of Obamacare — and now the former president is on the campaign trail for his wife sounding like your friendly neighborhood blogger.

Here is what he said:

You’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half. It’s the craziest thing in the world.”

I worked for three different organizations since The [not so] Affordable Care Act was signed into law, and the cost of insurance plans spiked at all of them. Early on, I was trying to live inside the Beltway on less than $40,000 a year while trying to pay off students loans from USC and American University. (Try making that work with a morning commute into the city while paying rent.)

“The people that are getting killed in this deal are small business people and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies,” Mr. Clinton added at one point.

Indeed! I and millions of other hard-working Americans knew the feeling all too well. And, yes Mr. Clinton, I was working well over 60 hours per week at the time.

The funny thing is, the next step will be to call for a total takeover of the health care system by the federal government. Republicans claimed that Obamacare was a Trojan Horse for socialized health care, and they were called conspiracy theorists. But that is exactly what is happening.

The Wall Street Journal reported Sept. 13:

It looks like 2017 will be ObamaCare’s worst year yet. The three major insurers, along with many smaller plans, are largely exiting the health-insurance exchanges, leaving more than half of U.S. counties with only one or two health-plan choices, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Nearly 36% of ObamaCare regions may have only one participating insurance carrier offering plans for 2017, according to health-care analytics firm Avalere Health. Data from analysts at Barclays and Credit Suisse project that health-insurance premiums are expected to rise at least 24% in 2017.

To rescue President Obama’s health-care law, Hillary Clinton has proposed resurrecting the “public option.” This failed idea—a government-run health-care plan to compete with private insurers—can’t save ObamaCare. But introducing it across the country would move the U.S. much closer to the single-payer system progressives have always longed for. …

In 2011 Vermont tried to use this waiver process to introduce a public option, only to abandon it three years later when it became clear that the scheme would yield skyrocketing taxes on small businesses.

If you think health care is expensive now, then just wait until it’s “free.” And if you don’t think that will happen, then simply take a step into the the Douglas Ernst Blog Time Machine and consider the following: There will always be men like Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber on call for the next Democrat president.

Mr. Gruber told an audience at the University of Pennsylvania in November 2014:

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. So it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said healthy people are going to pay in — it made explicit the healthy pay in and the and sick people get money — it would not have passed. Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.”

Yep. That actually happened — and it’s only a matter of time before the next “Gruber” gives it a shot with socialized health care.

Democrats like Jonathan Gruber need people to be stupid to get signature pieces of legislation passed. They want people to be stupid. Consider that as you walk into the voting booth in November, and then again when your Democrat neighbor bashes charter schools.

Related:

‘Hope and Change’ sticker shock hits America: ‘I was all for Obamacare until I found out I was paying for it’

Harvard professors who championed Obamacare now livid over rising health care costs

Harry Reid acts as if the Internet doesn’t exist: ‘All’ Obamacare horror stories are untrue

Listen to Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber and then think about Obama’s call for Net Neutrality

Advertisements

James Comey’s decision on Hillary Clinton: Welcome to Animal Farm!

Hillary Clinton Snapchat email joke

Americans everywhere should do themselves a favor and buy George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” today because FBI Director James Comey made clear this afternoon that we are living in it: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

There really is no way to describe the Twilight Zone-like press conference Mr. Comey gave today regarding Hillary Clinton’s private email server. The man personally and professionally destroyed the former secretary of state for nearly 15 minutes and then concluded with, “no reasonable prosecutor” would seek charges in this instance.

Consider just the following snippets from Mr. Comey’s address to the nation:

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent. …

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.

Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it. …

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. …

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

Objective Americans know that if they were guilty of a fraction of the negligence shown by Mrs. Clinton during her time as secretary of state that they would be rotting in a jail cell this very moment. The fact that nothing — nothing — will be done to the woman is proof that our country has gone over a cliff. It’s over. The future of the United States is going to be a very dark place, even if there are countless citizens who do not realize they are living in a very real version of Animal Farm.

There are millions of Americans right now who are a.) so blindly partisan that they do not care how dangerous this moment in history is, or b.) so stupid and lazy that high-speed internet streams of NFL football, cat videos, and naked women keep them placated. It would take a miracle of epic proportions to save the country at this point, but at the same time it is right and just for America to reap what it has sown.

This afternoon I tried to discuss the FBI’s decision with a friend and instead of getting visibly angry my eyes just teared up and I thanked God I was behind a computer screen. My wife and I live comfortable lives and we know that we are fortunate to be the right kind of “animal” on this Orwellian estate. My tears are not for myself or the woman I love, but for the generations of Americans to come who will live in country where there are special rules for the elite and well-connected, and then there are rules for everyone else.

If you have a moment, then watch Mr. Comey’s press conference from earlier today. If it turns your stomach, then feel free to throw up your feelings in the comment section below.

 

Loretta Lynch echoes Richard Gere’s 9/11 advice: Combat Islamic terror with ‘love’

Loretta Lynch

Actor Richard Gere was booed by firefighters at The Concert for New York shortly after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks when he said the best “medicine” for al Qaeda was “love.” The story always stuck with me for its herculean weirdness, which is why Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s very same advice for victims of the June 12, 2016, terrorist attack in Orlando immediately caught my ear on Tuesday.

“To the LGBT community — we stand with you,” Mrs. Lynch said while at a press conference in Florida. “The good in this world far outweighs the evil. Our common humanity transcends our differences, and our most effective response to terror is compassion, it’s unity and it’s love. We stand with you today because we grieve together, and long after the cameras are gone will continue to stand with you as we grow together in commitment and solidarity and in equality.”

Terrorist Omar Mateen pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group as he killed 49 people and wounded 53 others in a gay nightclub. The organization he adored throws gay men off tall buildings and takes women as sex slaves.

Question: Could anything be more distasteful than essentially telling Christian sex slaves in Iraq, Syria, and North Africa: “You’re not loving them hard enough,“?

The response to Islamic terrorism on American shores — the battlefield has no borders in this war —by President Obama is to a.) go Orwellian by censoring any information that helps citizens define the enemy, and b.) pretend as though scary-looking rifles are to blame.

For those who weren’t paying attention to the news on Monday, the FBI tried to release transcripts of Omar Mateen’s 911 calls without any reference to ISIS, Allah, etc. National mockery forced the agency to backtrack.

USA Today reported Monday:

The FBI and Department of Justice released a full transcript of the Orlando gunman’s 911-call on Monday afternoon amid outrage that the original transcript omitted reference to the terror group ISIL.

In a joint statement, officials said they released the partial transcript and omitted any reference to ISIL so as not to provide the terror group with additional publicity, which could be used for “hateful propaganda” purposes.

The White House is so determined to expunge the idea that Islam has something to do with Islamic terrorism that it now finds itself trying to go full 1984. Never go full 1984…

If you don’t believe your friendly neighborhood blogger, then perhaps you will believe the Department of Homeland Security.

The Homeland Security Advisory Council ordered officials just days before the Orlando massacre:

  1. Do not use the word “jihad.”
  2. Do not use the word “sharia.”
  3. Do not use the word “takfir.”
  4. “Reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English.”

If someone is trying to kill you and they say they are doing it to bring the world into accordance with Sharia law, then it is incumbent upon you to know what Sharia law means.

If officials refuse to familiarize civil society with the terminology used by enemies of the state, then they are putting countless lives at risk.

  • Imagine if officials refused to discuss Nazism during World War II.
  • Imagine if officials refused to discuss Communism during the Cold War.

It would be madness, wouldn’t it? That’s because intelligent people know that you cannot mobilize a population for a giant and prolonged undertaking without accurately defining the task at hand.

America has a commander in chief who would rather muddle and confuse the population to daunting security challenges than to inform them of uncomfortable truths. The president has greater fidelity to political correctness than to life-saving clarity, and for that the citizenry should be livid.

Christians are told to turn the other cheek, but one cannot do that when the head is separated from the neck.

It is right to pray for one’s enemies, but it is also just to defeat them on the field of battle.

The current administration is not up to the job of safeguarding liberty for future generations, and for that reason its allies deserve to be soundly defeated at the ballot box.

‘Islamophobia’ lecture follows Brussels terror attack

Brussels Belgium terror attack

Anyone who wants further evidence that Western Civilization is in its death throes should have been on Twitter Tuesday morning. The smoke had not yet cleared after attacks by the Islamic State group in Brussels, Belgium, when “Islamophobia” was trending on the social media platform.

Kiran Mazumdar Shaw Belgium terror

BHH Brussels tweet

Somewhere in a subway station in Brussels a man was trying to keep his entrails from spilling out into broken glass after an Islamic terror attack, and women like Kiran Mazumdar Shaw and “@localblacktivist” all over the world were literally worrying about “Islamophobia.”

CNN reported Tuesday:

Three explosions that ripped through the Belgian capital of Brussels on Tuesday killed at least 26 people and wounded 130 more, according to Belgian media, and raised the reality of terror once again in the heart of Europe.

“We were fearing terrorist attacks, and that has now happened,” Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel told reporters.

Belgian federal Prosecutor Frederic Van Leeuw said it was too soon to know exactly how many people died in the bombings. Yet the Brussels Metro Authority reported that 15 died and 55 were wounded in the subway station blast. And Belgian media report at least 11 more people were killed in the two blasts in the Brussels Airport departure hall.

People wonder why someone like Donald Trump is popular, but it only takes a few minutes of watching world leaders react to Islamic terror attacks to understand his support.

Take, for instance, President Obama’s reaction to the Islamic terror attack in San Bernardino, California, last year. In a diplomatic way, Mr. Obama accused the media of spreading “Islamophobia” for ratings.

The president told CNN on Dec. 22, 2015;

“If you’ve been watching television for the last month, all you have been seeing, all you have been hearing about is these guys with masks or black flags who are potentially coming to get you,” Obama said Monday, CNN reported. Look, the media is pursuing ratings. This is a legitimate news story. I think that, you know, it’s up to the media to make a determination about how they want to cover things.”

The reason why news stories about Islamic terrorists “coming to get” westerners exist is because ISIS, al Qaida, and their ideological allies do precisely that. That isn’t a ratings grab — that is reality. We should never be paralyzed by fear, but we shouldn’t sacrifice honesty at the alter of political correctness, either.

Brussels Attack

Tuesday’s attack in Brussels comes less than six months after the Nov. 13, 2015, massacre in Paris, France, that killed 130 and wounded countless others. If this is what “contained” looks like — as Mr. Obama infamously said at the time — it is safe to say that world “leaders” are not doing their job.

Christopher Marquez, war hero, attacked in D.C. — Obama silent

Chris-Marquez

George Orwell’s Animal Farm is famous for the quote “Some animals are more equal than others.” Someone should write an update called American Farm that includes the line “Some hate crimes are more equal than others” after the Washington, D.C., attack of war hero Christopher Marquez.

Most media outlets have not covered the Feb. 12 attack of Marquez, who served eight years on active duty between 2003 and 2011. In short, the Bronze Star recipient sat down to eat in a McDonald’s in the nation’s capital and was accosted by a group of teens demanding to know if he thought “black lives matter.”

Like most sane people, he tried to ignore them and just eat his burger. He was promptly ambushed and robbed upon exiting the restaurant.

“I believe this was a hate crime and I was targeted because of my skin color,” Marquez told the Daily Caller Feb. 15. “Too many of these types of attacks have been happening against white people by members of the black community and the majority of the mainstream media refuses to report on it.”

Marquez-Marine-attack-suspects
Suspects arrested in connection with Christopher Marquez’s assault and robbery will not be charged with a hate crime, despite harassing him with racial questions prior to their attack. (Photo: D.C. Metropolitan Police Department)

There are two very interesting facts about Marquez’s case:

  1. Cops finally arrested and charge two individuals in connection with the incident, but they will not be charged with a hate crime — even though they were explicitly harassing him about race and calling him “racist” before the attack.
  2. President Obama, who always seems eager to weigh in on race-related crimes, somehow can’t find his voice when it comes to Black Lives Matter supporters who beat a Marine veteran unconscious and stole $400, a VA medical card, and three credit cards from his back pocket just miles from the White House. What did his assailants spend the stolen cash on, you ask? Answer: liquor, a Five Guys burgers, and products from Walmart.

Regular readers of this blog may remember the case of Allen Haywood, who was attacked by a similar group of kids on the DC Metro Green Line in 2011. They may also remember my own tale on the Green Line from September 17, 2011.

I wrote then:

As I came home late from work on the D.C. Metro Green line, an inebriated older man approached me. I stood towards the back of the Metro minding my own business. The stranger crept up beside me, but just enough to my rear to obscure his actions. There was almost no one else on the train. I angled slightly towards him and he whispered in my ear,  “Why don’t you sit down? Don’t you like black people?” I ignored him. He raised his voice: “Why don’t you sit down? Don’t you like black people?” Again, I ignored him. Since the third time around is a charm I finally answered, “I’ve been sitting all day.”

He didn’t believe me.

The man continued to ask me the question, and when I ignored him some more (all the while paying close attention to his position and body language) he turned his question into a statement. Then, he squared up, stated that I didn’t like black people and pushed his palm into my shoulder, which I immediately swiped down with a force that surprised him. He approached again, reaching out his hand to push my shoulder and I swiped it hard enough to make him stutter-step backwards.

On his third attempt to escalate the situation he came at me from the side and bumped me. I responded by shoving him to the other side of the Metro car with enough force so that, should I have chosen to pounce, the backward momentum with which he was stumbling would have put him at a distinct disadvantage.

At this time the Metro stopped, the man gave me a few hard glares and left the train car.

This is an ongoing problem in Washington, D.C., whether the mainstream media wants to admit it or not.

I used to take the Green Line home from work on a regular basis, and groups of kids would act like psychopaths — almost daring someone to speak up. They would also look for women who possessed zero situational awareness and then steal their cell phones right before the Metro doors closed at any given stop.

In my case I was just singled out by a drunk man who, like the teenagers, has convinced himself that any white person who doesn’t greet him with giant smiles after a long day of work is somehow racist and worthy of a physical confrontation.

Incidents like this regularly get swept under the rug, yet the media cannot get enough of the 2012 shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida; the 2014 shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri; or the April 2015 death of Freddie Gray in Baltimore, Maryland.

Meanwhile, a Marine veteran who literally helped inspire the iconic war memorial “No Man Left Behind” at Camp Pendleton, California, is ambushed — on American soil — and there is deafening silence.

No-Man-Left-Behind

For those who do not remember, Marquez was in Fallujah’s “Hell House” in 2004 when he helped aide Marine Sgt. Maj. Brad Kasal with lance corporal Dane Shaffer. The image of the three men, which went viral, was sculpted into the memorial by Vietnam veteran John Phelps in November 2015.

No-Man-Left-Behind-Memorial

The moral of the story here is that no group naturally has a monopoly on hate, but for whatever reason American media outlets are obsessed with filling certain subsets of the population with it.

Christopher Marquez, who now attends American University, will be fine in the long-run. Your friendly neighborhood blogger, who also attended American University, has fared rather well since 2011.

My guess is that the drunken man on the Green Line and the McDonald’s attackers — all filled with racial animosity towards guys like us — will have a slew of needlessly rough days ahead. Perhaps they should have enlisted in the Army like me or the Marines like Mr. Marquez.

At a minimum, minorities in Washington, D.C., would be wise to stop listening to race activists, whose careers are dependent upon keeping as many people as possible in a perpetual state of anger and confusion.

’13 Hours’: Michael Bay does Benghazi victims justice

John Krasinski 13 Hours

I have never seen a single Transformers movie because Michael Bay movies irritate me that much. The fact that I saw 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi should tell readers how much the coverup of the September 11, 2012, terror attack in Benghazi, Libya, means to me. In short, Mr. Bay proved to the world that it is possible for him to direct a movie that is worthy of box office success and critical praise.

13 Hours

Ambassador Christopher Stevens, foreign service officer Sean Smith, and CIA contractors Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods died four years ago in Benghazi and then the government tried to cover it up. President Obama and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to blame what happened on an obscure video. The man who made that video was arrested and sat in jail in a scenario straight out of NBC’s “The Blacklist” — only it was real.

If it wasn’t for Michael Bay, the world would only have denial after denial after denial by the people who set the stage for bad things to happen and then watched while good men died. Bay uses Navy SEAL Jack Silva, played by John Krasinski, to tell the tale. The verdict is in: The guy from “The Office” does not disappoint.

13 Hours trailer

The fortunate thing for Bay is that like Lone Survivor or similar tales, 13 Hours does not need much character development. Bay’s stock in trade is action, so as long as the audience believes Krasinski and his crew are special operators, the heavy lifting has been accomplished.

The audience wants to see these men come face-to-face with death. The audience wants to feel what it’s like on the modern battlefield. The audience wants to hear all the sights and the sounds that Ambassador Stevens experienced in his last horrifying moments, and on every level Bay delivers.

Perhaps the most haunting part of 13 Hours was the a drone circled overhead while wave after wave of Islamic terrorists destroyed Stevens’ diplomatic compound and then attempted to do the same to a nearby CIA annex.

I explained it to my wife like this: Imagine you’re in the middle of the ocean on a giant ship and you fall overboard with only a small life preserver. You look up at the ship and yell for help at a man who stands over you with his arms crossed — but he says nothing.

Then sharks begin to circle and you yell some more — but he remains silent.

Then the sharks start bumping your legs under the water and you kick and thrash and scream — but the man refuses to move.

You are cut and bruised and broken and you barely survive the whole ordeal when, miraculously, another boat comes by and aids in your rescue.

When you go home and tell reporters what happen the man finally speaks, but he provides an entirely different account of your fight with the sharks. Millions of people believe the man did everything in his power to help you, and when he tells them to forget about your testimony they dutifully obey.

Michael Bay’s decision to bring 13 Hours to the big screen was a godsend for anyone who cares about the truth. Orwellian agents of the government will continue to try and revise history, but 13 Hours now exists and will make their job exponentially harder.

If you liked Lone Survivor and even movies like Blackhawk Down, then you should really see 13 Hours during its theatrical release.

Take a bow, Michael Bay. You earned it.

Editor’s Note: Yours truly will now begin reviewing movies for Conservative Book Club. I gave them a different review for 13 Hours that you can check out here.

Iran makes mockery of Obama, U.S. with seized sailors

Obama under stress

The Iranian government seized 10 U.S. sailors and two ships in the Persian Gulf shortly before President Obama’s final State of the Union address on Tuesday. GPS equipment was taken from the ship, the U.S. issued an apology, the sailors were eventually returned this morning, and now the White House is preparing to unfreeze $100 billion in Iranian assets as part of the summer’s nuclear deal. Iran’s actions were meant to send a message to the world: The United States is a joke. Sadly, it’s hard to argue.

CNN’s Jake Tapper was flabbergasted when White House press secretary Josh Earnest shrugged off the actions of Obama’s diplomatic “partner” as no big deal.

“What do you say to people who say Iran fired upon, not hit, but fired a warning shot of sorts toward an American ship in the last couple of weeks … they test-fired a ballistic missile in the past couple of weeks, and yet, in a few days, they are scheduled to have the relief of all those sanctions?” Tapper said Tuesday night. “The basic question being: This does not seem like a country that is ready to be welcomed back to the community of nations.”

Earnest’s response: But…but…we got a nuclear deal with Iran! A deal, man. Cut us some slack.

“[This] is why the United States and this president made it a priority to organize the international community to reach an agreement with Iran that will prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” said Earnest.

“I hear you, but they have 10 American sailors in custody right now, Josh. I think there are probably a lot of Americans watching right now that are wondering why we are about to give them sanctions relief when they have 10 Americans – wherever they have them. In a boat, in a cell, whatever,” Tapper replied.

To add insult to injury, Iran scolded the U.S. upon the sailors’ return.

“This incident in the Persian Gulf, which probably will not be the American forces’ last mistake in the region, should be a lesson to troublemakers in the U.S. Congress,” Major General Hassan Firouzabadi, head of Iran’s armed forces, was quoted as saying by Tasnim news agency, Reuters reported.

There were about 10,000 ways Iran could have responded to two U.S. vessels that drifted too close or into its territorial waters, and it chose one of the most aggressive ways possible. It literally took U.S. forces captive and confiscated their equipment.

Ask yourself this question: For all of George W. Bush’s faults, would Iran have pulled a stunt like that under his watch — on the night of the State of the Union, no less?

The answer is “no.”

The country is in a sad place when Iran can seize American sailors with impunity and then laugh as a U.S. president oversees the release of $100 billion in Iranian assets just days later.

Iran seizes sailors

Obama, delusional, blames media for ISIS fears

Obama on media CNN screenshot

President Obama gave an interview with National Public Radio before heading off for vacation that should send chills down the spine of anyone who cares about national security. The president blamed the media for Americans’ fears of the Islamic State group instead of a.) the Dec. 2 terror attack in California, the deadliest on U.S. soil since 9/11, b.) the resiliency of ISIS, and c.) an aimless “strategy” to defeat the terror group.

“If you’ve been watching television for the last month, all you have been seeing, all you have been hearing about is these guys with masks or black flags who are potentially coming to get you,” Obama said Monday, CNN reported. Look, the media is pursuing ratings. This is a legitimate news story. I think that, you know, it’s up to the media to make a determination about how they want to cover things.”

How delusional does a man have to be to question media coverage of a terror group only weeks after 14 Americans were slaughtered in San Bernardino by its supporters?

How tone-deaf does a man have to be to question media  coverage of a terror group just weeks after it killed 130 during an attack inside Paris, France?

To add insult to injury,  Abdirizak Mohamed Warsame, 20, was arrested in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on Dec. 9 and charged with trying to join ISIS. He is the 10th Twin Cities resident facing such charges.

The president’s comments also come in the middle of a world-wide refugee crisis fueled by the U.S.-led coalition’s failure to destroy ISIS in Iraq, Syria, and parts of North Africa. Millions of people are scattered across the globe, ISIS explicitly says it wants to use the chaos to filter its members into western nations, and Mr. Obama wonders why networks are covering the story.

In short, Mr. Obama’s comments can be translated: “Can’t you guys just cover Steve Harvey screwing up the 2015 Miss Universe pageant? You’ll get ratings and protect my reputation at the same time! Come on, what do you say? You just need to cover for me one more year and I’ll be out of here.”

Steve Harvey ABC screenshot

The president did everything within his power to ignore the Middle East since 2008. He believed his own hype — that the world’s terrorism-related ills could primarily be traced by to George W. Bush — and in doing so he allowed al Qaeda’s mutation to thrive and grow.

The fear Americans have of ISIS is a rational response to a reality that Mr. Obama helped create. If the president is unhappy with news coverage now, then he should not have dismissed ISIS as a “JV” team on Jan. 27, 2014.

White House: Stripping constitutional rights for gun control ‘common sense’

Trey Gowdy

The San Bernardino terror attack on Dec. 2 has caused gun-control activists to go into hyperdrive. President Obama and his administration have now latched on to using terror watch lists — those same lists once derided by his supporters — to strip Americans of constitutionally-protected rights. Yours truly and others have already mentioned just how dangerous of an idea that is, but it was perfectly illuminated Thursday during a House Oversight Committee hearing.

In one corner we have Kelli Burriesci, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Screening Coordination, Office of Policy of the United States Department of Homeland Security. (Quite a mouthful of a title there, so one would hope she would know her stuff…)

In another corner we have South Carolina Rep. Try Gowdy.

Here is how it all unfolded:

Trey Gowdy: Let me ask you a question about the terrorism list. What process is afforded a U.S. citizen — not someone who overstayed a visa, not someone who crossed a border without permission — but an American citizen?  What process is currently afforded an American citizen before they go on that list?

DHS: I’m sorry, there is not a process afforded the citizen prior to getting on the list. There is a process should someone feel they are and unduly placed on the list.

Gowdy: Yes there is. And when I say ‘process,’ I’m actually using half of the term due process, which is a phrase we find in the Constitution — that you cannot deprive people of certain things without due process.

So I understand Mister Goode’s idea, which is wait until you’re right has been taken from you and then you can petition the government to get it back. I understand that that’s his idea. My question is can you name another constitutional right that we have that is chilled until you find out it’s chilled, and then you have to petition the government to get it back? Is that true of the First Amendment?

DHS: Sir, there are strict criteria before any gets put on the list.

Trey Gowdy:That’s not my question ma’am. That is not my question. My question is what process is afforded a United States citizen before that person’s constitutional right is infringed? He’s fine when do it with the Second Amendment. My question is, ‘How about the First?’ How about we not let them set up a website or Google account? How about we not let him join a church until until they can petition the government to get off the list. How about not get a lawyer? How about the Sixth Amendment?

How about you can’t get a lawyer until you petition the government to get off the list? Or my favorite — how about the Eighth amendment? We’re going to subject you to cruel and unusual punishment until you petitioned the government to get off the list. Is there another constitutional right that we treat the same way for American citizens that we do the Second Amendment? Can you think of one? **pause** Can you think of one?

DHS:I don’t have an answer for you, sir.

She. Doesn’t. Have. An. Answer.

Burriesci

How is it possible for someone at the Department of Homeland Security, who is advocating on behalf of stripping American citizens of constitutionally-protected rights, to not have an answer to those questions?

As Rep. Gowdy points out, the Obama administration’s own logic dictates that if the Second Amendment can be stripped without due process, then there is no reason why any other rights can’t be taken as well.

Listen to White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s comments on the issue Friday, and then ask yourself how comfortable you are with giving the federal government a blank check to do whatever it wants under the guise of national security.

Mr Earnest said:

“I think it’s common sense, the president believes it’s common sense and it is in our national security interest to prevent those who are deemed by the government ‘too dangerous to board an airplane’ that we should pass a law that prevents those people from purchasing a gun — until such time as they can resolve the concerns the government has about their  potential links to terrorism. There is a process administered by the Department of Homeland Security for those concerns to be considered and resolved. When it comes to gun safety, that seems like a pretty common sense step.

In response to Sen. Rubio, I guess I would simply say: Is he suggesting we should wait until someone who is on the no-fly list walks into a gun[store], purchases a firearm and kills a whole bunch of Americans before we pass a law preventing it? I don’t think that passes the common sense test either.”

To recap:

  • The Department of Homeland Security does not know how many of your constitutional rights can be stripped without due process.
  • President Obama wants to give women like Kelli “I don’t have an answer for you, sir” Burriesci the ability to deny you constitutionally-protected rights (The Second Amendment…for now.)
  • The Department of Homeland Security officials will “consider” not infringing upon your constitutionally-protected rights if you go through its petition process and it feels like changing its mind.

In the same press briefing where Josh Earnest created a giant Straw Man argument for Sen. Rubio, the White House Press Secretary admitted that none of the recent mass shooters were on the no-fly list. He also stammered and stuttered when a reporter pointed out that none of the current gun-control measures being talked about would have prevented the mass shootings in the first place.

Right now the federal government is asking for power that its own officials don’t know how to justify because they know that what they want to do is unconstitutional.

Whether you are a gun owner or not, it should terrify you that the same argument used in favor of stripping Americans of Second Amendment rights without due process can be applied to any right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. 

If you cannot see the danger this poses to future generations of Americans, then I weep for your children.

Obama’s delusional demand for Air Force a gift for ISIL

Obama hands AP image

President Obama has a demand for U.S. Air Force personnel that is so delusional that it is hard not to question his mental health. The Islamic State group hides among civilians. It holds large swathes of territory in Iraqi and Syrian cities. Mr. Obama, however, expects the U.S. Air Force to prosecute an air campaign with zero civilian casualties.

Rep. Ed Royce, R-California, told the Washington Free Beacon Nov. 18 that roughly 75 percent of the clear shots on ISIL targets are called off due to the president’s rules of engagement.

“You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordnance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,” Rep. Royce, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said. “I don’t understand this strategy at all because this is what has allowed ISIS the advantage and ability to recruit.”

Things got downright scary when retired four-star U.S. general Jack Keane detailed the president’s impossible demand:

He told the Free Beacon:

“When we agreed we were going to do air power and the military said, this is how it would work, he [Obama] said, ‘No, I do not want any civilian casualties.’ And the response was, ‘But there’s always some civilian casualties. We have the best capability in the world to protect from civilians casualties.’ [Obama’s response], ‘No, you don’t understand. I want no civilian casualties. Zero.’ So that has driven our so-called rules of engagement to a degree we have never had in any previous air campaign from desert storm to the present.”

If the president of the United States is not willing to seriously use ground troops — if he is reliant on air strikes for his anti-ISIL strategy to succeed — he cannot realistically ask the U.S. Air Force for zero civilian casualties.

Mr. Obama is either completely detached from reality, or militarily twiddling his thumbs until his time in office ends. Instead of showing real leadership against an enemy who quickly adapts to changing battlefield conditions, the president seems content to vote “present” on the world stage.

The safety and security of the American people has now been abdicated to men like Russian President Vladimir Putin. Mr. Obama asked for an then accepted a job he was ill-equipped to handle. His fantasy-land demands for the U.S. military will result in dead Americans (possibly on U.S. soil), and when that happens much of the blame will rest on his shoulders.