What bias? CNN doesn’t appear to understand the meaning of “fact check”
Yes, the above screen capture is an actual graphic from the
news Obama cheerleading organization CNN. The only options for Obama’s statements are “True” and “Mostly True.” This is kind of like asking, “Is Obama A) amazing or B) just kind of great?”
Sorry, CNN, that’s not how fact checking works.
10:06 am • 30 January 2014 • View comments
28-year-old survivor of fist-sized brain tumor gets a nasty surprise from Obamacare
Amanda Pratt is only 28 and is the survivor of a fist-sized brain tumor. She has already had five surgeries to remove the tumor and is still in recovery, requiring vigilant monitoring and regular check-ins with her physicians.
Obamacare just delivered her some devastating news, and now she’s now sure how she’s going to be able to afford her treatments.
from the Blaze:
Initially, Pratt said she noticed that her insurance premiums went down — $14 per month to be exact. She received a 30-or-so-page booklet detailing in small print the changes to her plan that would come under Obamacare. But she didn’t look closely enough to avoid her recent sticker shock.
Last week Pratt visited her primary care physician with a sore throat. It was strep. At the receptionist’s window and afterward at the pharmacy to fill a prescription, Pratt learned just how much more she would be paying for care.
“My copay for seeing the doctor went up $30 to $60. My copay for prescriptions went up $20 to $60 as well,” Pratt told TheBlaze.
But that’s not even the kicker. Having an MRI, something Pratt will need once a year for the next five years to monitor her brain, went from an $800 copay to $2,200.
read the rest
Pratt is now fighting two battles: the first is just to finish defeating the brain tumor that has disrupted her life. The second is now trying to navigate the treacherous wasteland of Obamacare to figure out how to afford the treatments she needs to live a healthy life.
9:56 am • 30 January 2014 • View comments
MSNBC forced to apologize for outrageous race-baiting tweet aimed at Conservatives
The hateful spew above is what came from the official MSNBC twitter account. Slandering the “rightwing” as racist haters of bi-racial families didn’t exactly sit will with Conservatives out here in the real world.
Proud right wingers began flooding MSNBC with photos of their bi-racial families:
There are even more awesome responses over at Twitchy. Ironically, it was less than a month ago that MSNBC’s own Melissa Harris Perry was mocking Mitt Romney’s bi-racial family. As usual, the vile left-wingers over at MSNBC can’t see the branch growing out of their own eye while trying to throw a speck into the eyes of Conservatives.
MSNBC has since deleted the tweet and apologized:
MSNBC’s executive editor Dick Wolffe also issued an apology on his personal Twitter account:
Actually, Mr. Wolffe, that’s exactly who you are, and we all know it.
9:31 am • 30 January 2014 • View comments
There are two kinds of people: Minimum wage hike proponents and those who understand economics
There’s been a lot of (coordinated) talk about the “wage crisis” in America. But unfortunately, most people, especially those who should understand the terrible consequences of minimum wage legislation, don’t. Make no mistake, politicians understand what minimum wage does to the economy but they’ll tell the uneducated what they want to hear in exchange for votes. It’s for this reason, we wanted to write a short, simple explanation of just what raising the minimum wage would do (and has done). This is by no means exhaustive, but it should help the average person understand why you should be opposed to raising it too.
The logic is so beautifully simple it should be common sense. If you raise the price of labor, fewer people will have jobs, especially those working entry level, minimum wage positions. Companies will simply choose not to hire them in order to maintain their profit margins. This will obviously hurt—not help—the poor. Unfortunately, however, there are still millions of theoretically intelligent Americans who don’t understand this.
Secondly, if the minimum wage is the answer to eliminating poverty, why not make it $20 an hour? How about $100? $1,000? $10,000? After all, everyone could be millionaires after a week of work. It’s a legitimate question. The obvious answer is that it would result in massive inflation, making money worth much less which would, again, hurt the poor (especially those without assets, i.e., the poor). But if raising the minimum wage to $10,000 an hour would cause massive amounts of inflation, wouldn’t raising it slightly also increase inflation proportionately? (Hint: Yes). Eventually there will simply be more inflation and even if the poor were somehow magically helped by a higher minimum wage, they’ll be proportionally right back where they started once inflation takes hold.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, what business is it of the federal government to dictate the details of a private agreement between two entities? If I want to work for $6 per hour, I should be able to, plain and simple. It is no one’s business what I choose to work for—especially the government’s.
Check out this hypothetical scenario from the Matt Walsh blog:
Worker: “Hi, I’d like to work for you.”
Employer: “Sorry, the government says we have to pay everyone at least 10.10 an hour. We don’t have any money in our budget to hire more workers at that rate.”
Worker: “Well, I still need a job. I’ll gladly work for 6 dollars an hour. Deal?”
Government: “Hold on! You can’t do that. You’re not allowed to sell your services for less than 10.10 an hour!”
Worker: “But… I’d rather make under 10.10 than be unemployed. Why can’t I enter into a private employment contract with this establishment if we both feel that the arrangement benefits us? We are both consenting parties, aren’t we?”
Government: “Because that isn’t fair.”
Read the Rest (It’s good)
Look, the minimum wage hurts the economy, raises production costs, raises labor costs, causes inflation and creates an influx of people, who were once self-sufficient and learning a trade, to become dependent on the government, etc. The poor will become poorer, government’s debt will increase and the nation will become less productive.
11:27 am • 29 January 2014 • View comments
Al Gore: Africa needs “fertility management” to prevent overpopulation and “extreme weather”
The liberal mind is a twisted place, a dark space where pseudoscience gives one a self-righteous excuse to advocate population control over an entire continent. Such is the mind of Al Gore, who is now openly advocating “fertility management” in Africa in order to prevent “extreme weather.”
Stopping overpopulation is one way the dangers of climate change can be mitigated, according to two of the most prominent believers in global warming.
Former Vice President Al Gore and Microsoft founder Bill Gates said at the World Economic Forum in Davos that contraception is a key in controlling the proliferation of unusual weather they say is endangering the world.
"Depressing the rate of child mortality, educating girls, empowering women and making fertility management ubiquitously available … is crucial to the future shape of human civilization," said Gore, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for his work on global warming.
Gore said Africa’s population is expected to surpass India’s and China’s by the mid-21st century and will be more than both combined by the end of the century.
read the rest
This is not really a new idea for liberals. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger openly advocated the abortions and sterilization to prevent the overpopulation of “undesirable” races. Global Warming is just the liberal’s new excuse for population control.
There’s a word for this kind of warped thinking: evil.
11:57 am • 28 January 2014 • View comments
Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio teaming up with…Sheila Jackson Lee?
Yes, you read that headline correctly. And what issue could possibly unite two of the most conservative members of the Senate with one of the most liberal members of Congress?
from the Hill:
Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Ted Cruz (Texas), two possible GOP White House contenders, are making education reform their next big policy focus.
Rubio recently told donors that he will focus on education in the next several weeks.
He is planning to deliver a major speech on the issue in the near future that will likely concentrate on reforms to higher education. He recently stressed to allies the importance of making education accessible to people through reforms to career, college and community college education.
“That’s been his focus for a while now,” said a Rubio aide.
Cruz teamed up with Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), one of the most outspoken liberals in the House, on Saturday to call for school choice at a rally in Houston.
“School choice is the civil rights issue of the 21st century. Every child in America deserves a fair chance at a quality education,” Cruz told KTRK, Houston’s ABC television affiliate.
Republicans in recent months have recognized they need to broaden their agenda to appeal to lower- and middle-income voters who voted overwhelmingly against Mitt Romney, then the Republican presidential nominee, in 2012.
Cruz, who along with other conservatives wants to expand charter schools and voucher programs, has been at the forefront of the push among influential Republicans for an agenda that resonates more broadly with working-class voters.
In August, he told conservative activists at the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, that Romney should have been more inclusive of lower-income Americans.
"Every policy we think about, we talk about, should focus like a laser on opportunity, on easing the means of assent up the economic ladder — on how it impacts the least well off among us,” he said.
An aide to Cruz said reforms to give low-income students a greater variety of educational options has “been one of his strong policy preferences since he first entered the public arena and it’s something he’ll continue to talk about.”
Rubio last year introduced legislation to help families apply for more school options though a new tax credit.
President Obama and Democrats have made income inequality a primary theme of the 2014 election year and have criticized Republicans for repeatedly bashing ObamaCare instead of offering constructive proposals for improving economic opportunity for all classes.
read the rest
School choice is an issue that I think most sane people can unify around. Americans should have a choice on where their tax dollars go, especially with regards to the education of their children. American families pay billions for public education, only to have their children sentenced to sub-standard public schools with no way out.
The school choice movement is a clear path to ending the vice grip that the Department of Education and the teachers unions have on education in the United States.
10:05 am • 28 January 2014 • View comments
Obama to issue executive order raising the minimum wage for PRIVATE companies with Federal contracts
In an act of fiscal irresponsibility, President Obama is preparing to use an executive order to raise the minimum wage for workers of private companies who hold government contracts.
from the Hill:
President Obama will announced plans to use his executive authority to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour for federal contract workers during the State of the Union address, the White House said Tuesday.
Federal workers like janitors, construction workers and dishwashers hired under new federal contracts would benefit from the new order, which the White House calls an example of how the president can “lead by example.”
"Boosting wages will lower turnover and increase morale, and will lead to higher productivity overall," the White House said in a statement. "Raising wages for those at the bottom will improve the quality and efficiency of services provided to the government."
Earlier this year, 15 senators and 17 members of the House sent Obama a letter urging him to exercise his executive authority on the issue.
The White House will also look to pressure Congress into passing a bill that would set the federal minimum wage at $10.10 per hour and index it to inflation.
read the rest
Can the President legally do this? Of course, but that’s beside the point. Obama is talking about altering any new contracts between the Federal Government and private companies. In order to have a bid considered by the Feds, a private company would have to agree to pay its workers at least $10.10 per hour.
So, here’s what’s wrong with this approach. In doing this, Obama will arbitrarily increase the cost of doing business for a Federal Government who already spends more of the taxpayer’s money than it can count. Federal contractors will simply begin raising their bids proportionally to the wage increase, and the taxpayers will (as usual) be on the hook. Alternatively, private companies with Federal contracts may begin downsizing their staff in order to offset the wage increase, thereby worsening the long-term unemployment situation in the US.
An executive order to raise the minimum wage? It might sound nice, but the economics behind this decision simply don’t make any sense. In the end, ordinary Americans will be the ones paying the price for Obama’s “generosity.”
9:47 am • 28 January 2014 • View comments
Yes kids, the NSA is mining your personal data from Angry Birds
The Obama administration once again proves that there is no limit to how far they will dig into American’s privacy (and no end to what they’ll lie about). A joint investigative piece in the New York Times and Guardian revealed today that the NSA is mining personal data from the popular app Angry Birds.
from Pro Publica:
When a smartphone user opens Angry Birds, the popular game application, and starts slinging birds at chortling green pigs, spy agencies have plotted how to lurk in the background to snatch data revealing the player’s location, age, sex and other personal information, according to secret British intelligence documents.
In their globe-spanning surveillance for terrorism suspects and other targets, the National Security Agency and its British counterpart have been trying to exploit a basic byproduct of modern telecommunications: With each new generation of mobile phone technology, ever greater amounts of personal data pour onto networks where spies can pick it up.
According to dozens of previously undisclosed classified documents, among the most valuable of those unintended intelligence tools are so-called leaky apps that spew everything from users’ smartphone identification codes to where they have been that day.
The N.S.A. and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters were working together on how to collect and store data from dozens of smartphone apps by 2007, according to the documents, provided by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor. Since then, the agencies have traded recipes for grabbing location and planning data when a target uses Google Maps, and for vacuuming up address books, buddy lists, phone logs and the geographic data embedded in photos when someone sends a post to the mobile versions of Facebook, Flickr, LinkedIn, Twitter and other services.
read the rest
When asked about it today in his daily press briefing, White House paid liar Jay Carney deflected and lied (of course):
“I’m not in a position to discuss specifics on intelligence collection,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said during his daily press briefing. “But to be clear, as the president said in his Jan. 17 speech, to the extent data is collected by the NSA through whatever means, we are not interested in the communications of people who are not valid intelligence targets. And we are not collecting the information of ordinary Americans.”
Carney’s (and Obama’s) statement about not collecting the information of ordinary Americans is blatantly false, and we all know that by now. But the White House continues to follow their rule: if you keep repeating a lie, perhaps Americans will begin to believe it.
6:29 pm • 27 January 2014 • View comments
VIDEO: Watch the part of Ted Cruz’s Face the Nation interview that got cut out by CBS
Yesterday, Senator Ted Cruz appeared on CBS’s Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer. The network decided to trim some of Cruz’s most powerful comments about the Obama administration completely out of the broadcast. Towards the end of the broadcast, Schieffer asked Cruz if he was going to run for President. Cruz (like most politicians) deflected the question and gave an indirect answer about where his current focus is.
But CBS apparently didn’t like what Cruz had to say…
First, here’s what aired:
And here’s what didn’t make the air:
partial transcript via NewsBusters (with deleted portions in bold):
SCHIEFFER: “Will you run for President?”
CRUZ: “My focus is on the abuse of power of this President. Let’s take something like the IRS scandal-“
SCHIEFFER: “Do I take that as a yes or a no?”
CRUZ: “What you can take is that my focus is standing and fighting right now in the Senate to bring back jobs and economic growth. Let me tell you something that is deeply concerning—the abuse of power from this Administration. We’ve seen multiple filmmakers prosecuted and the government’s gone after them. Whether it’s the poor fellow that did the film that the President blamed Benghazi and the terrorist attacks on, turns out that wasn’t the reason for the attack but the Administration went and put that poor fellow in jail on unrelated charges. Just this week it was broken that Dinesh D’Souza, who did a very big movie criticizing the president, is now being prosecuted by this Administration.”
CRUZ: “Can you image the reaction if the Bush Administration had went, gone and prosecuted Michael Moore and Alec Baldwin and Sean Penn?”
CRUZ: It should trouble everyone the government uses government power and the IRS in particular to target their enemies and you are talking a new minutes to Chuck Schumer—“
SCHIEFFER: “We are going to leave this for another day, senator. Thank you for joining us and we’ll talk to you again.”
read the rest
Let this be a lesson. If you’re a conservative, you can go on all the talk shows you want, but you’re just not allowed to say anything substantive.
11:54 am • 27 January 2014 • View comments
VIDEO: You might be eligible to be a plaintiff in an Obamacare class-action lawsuit
There is a class-action lawsuit against Obamacare that has been brewing under the radar for quite some time, and you might be eligible to be a plaintiff. The details are slightly complicated. I’ll let the attorney general from Oklahoma clear things up.
Here’s the video (from Dec 6, 2013):
From Stephen Tucker blog:
The Illinois Policy Institute has teamed up with the Liberty Justice Center to seek plaintiffs for a lawsuit against the PPACA – Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – a.k.a. “Obamacare”. It will take every legal and legislative avenue at their disposal to stop Obamacare. Your information will be totally confidential, and there is no cost involved. They’re looking for people to join a lawsuit that will challenge an IRS rule that extends Obamacare health insurance subsidies and the Obamacare “employer mandate” to states like Illinois where they shouldn’t apply because the state government hasn’t established its own insurance exchange.
As a result of this unlawful IRS rule, many people who would otherwise be exempt from the Obamacare individual mandate will be forced to buy insurance they don’t want.
Read the Rest (Click through to see eligibility rules)
I’m shocked, shocked to learn that the entire thing is caused because the IRS acted unlawfully.
10:43 am • 27 January 2014 • View comments
Washington Post/ABC News poll: 63% have “no confidence” in Obama’s ability to make decisions
The polling for President Obama remains dismal, as the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll reveals. Take a look at some of these numbers:
Only 37% of Americans approve of Obama’s handling of Obamacare. Nobody likes this law, and nobody likes the implementation. Yet somehow, the Republican establishment can’t find will to launch a full-throated opposition of the law.
The most astounding stat comes towards the end of the poll:
That is a resounding rebuke of a US President. The American people have virtually no confidence in Obama’s decision making, and why should they?
10:04 am • 27 January 2014 • View comments
Want to make a quick $1 billion? Fill out a perfect March Madness bracket
In case you missed it, billionaires Warren Buffett and Dan Gilbert are offering $1 billion (yes, with a ‘b’) to anyone who picks every march madness game correctly. Now, as far as I know, no one has ever filled out a perfect bracket. After all, the chances are around 1 in 9.2 quintillion. But I say Bring. It. On.
From Business Insider:
Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway and Dan Gilbert’s Quicken Loans are partnering to award anyone who fills out a perfect 2014 Men’s NCAA Tournament bracket with $1 billion.
Quicken is running the contest, and is paying Berkshire to serve as “insurer,” which means they’ll be the ones paying out if someone wins.
The prize will be paid out in 40 annual installments of $25 million. If there’s more than one winner they’ll have to share. The winner or winners can also take or split up an immediate $500 million lump sum payment.
Read the Rest
Now, while the chances of picking a perfect bracket are officially 1 in 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (2^63), one can obviously increase their chances drastically by simply selecting teams based on their respective seeds. This should increase the chances of winning to, say, 1 in 100 trillion or so. Doable.
So, while you consider what you’d do with a cool billion, remember that the federal government will spend that in the next 2 and a half hours.
2:03 am • 27 January 2014 • View comments
VIDEO: Obama’s new ambassador to Norway knows almost nothing about Norway (but he’s a big donor)
To be a foreign ambassador in Obama’s cabinet, is it a job requirement to know a little bit of something about the country to which you are appointed? No…not at all. You just have to have donated a lot of money to the Obama campaign.
Here’s this video of Obama’s embarrassing pick to be the US Ambassador to Norway:
from the Blaze:
The biggest, most glaring admission of ignorance during the hearing came when Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) asked Tsunis, a businessman and top Democratic Party donor, about Norway’s anti-immigration Progress Party, which has now joined the country’s ruling coalition.
“You get some fringe elements that have a microphone and spew their hatred. And I will tell you Norway has been very quick to denounce them,” Tsunis said.
This is incorrect. The Progress Party is in good standing with the country’s government.
“The government has denounced them? The coalition government — they’re part of the coalition of the government,” McCain noted.
“I stand corrected. I would like to leave my answer at … it’s a very, very open society and the overwhelming amount of Norwegians and the overwhelming amount of people in parliament don’t feel the same way,” the president’s nominee responded.
Tsunis furthered McCain’s frustration by referring at one point to Norway’s “president.”
Norway doesn’t have a president; it’s a constitutional monarchy.
read the rest
Tsunis’s nomination and performance his confirmation hearing has set off a firestorm in the Norwegian press. Some columnists in the country have called Obama’s pick of Tsunis “nothing less than an insult against Norway.”
Tsunis donated over $278,000 to the Democratic party in 2010 and bundled over $1 million for the Obama campaign in the last election.
4:23 pm • 24 January 2014 • View comments
Conservative activist James O’Keefe targeted by NY Department of Labor
Fresh after saying that Conservatives have no place in his state, NY Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Department of Labor has launched an investigation into the finances of activist James O’Keefe whose undercover videos famously brought down ACORN and exposed criminal activity in various government offices.
"Governor Cuomo’s shocking words this past week aren’t simply words," O’Keefe said in a statement. "Governor Cuomo and the New York Department of Labor are on a witch hunt, demanding all documents and financials since our founding. … His goal, of course, is to harass us and limit our effectiveness by tying us up in court. Just like President Obama used the IRS to target and suppress conservatives, Governor Cuomo is using his Department of Labor to do the same exact thing."
Cuomo was referring to the prospects of far-right political candidates in the deeply Democratic Empire State, not the prospects of his own far right constituents. Nevertheless, conservative talkers like Sean Hannity said they were moving out of state, conservative bloggers called for a boycott of state businesses and products, and New York Republicans demanded an apology.
Now James O’Keefe, the conservative activist whose deceptively edited videos helped bring down ACORN and led to the resignation of top brass at National Public Radio, says that Cuomo’s administration is in fact trying to run him out of the state.
O’Keefe’s organization, Project Veritas, has had its headquarters in Westchester County, just north of New York City, since 2011. And O’Keefe says that the state’s Department of Labor is now demanding two and a half years worth of financial and payroll documents and threatening them with a subpoena.
“Despite the fact that Project Veritas’s finances are meticulously maintained to the penny, Governor Cuomo and the New York Department of Labor is on a witch-hunt, demanding all documents and financials since our founding,” reads a post on the group’s website. “This is nothing more than meritless, politically-driven targeting. Governor Cuomo said it himself–we don’t belong in New York.”
read the rest
Add James O’Keefe to to the long list of conservatives being targeted by Democrats in every level of government.
12:54 pm • 24 January 2014 • View comments
Obama critic Dinesh D’Souza indicted
Dinesh D’Souza, maker of “2016: Obama’s America” has been indicted on charges related to campaign finance laws. Coincidence, I’m sure. Kind of like the maker of the anti-Muslim movie was arrested for violating his parole. Yep. Parole.
From the Hollywood Reporter:
Dinesh D’Souza is accused of giving too much money to a candidate who sought to replace former New York Sen. Hillary Clinton. Producer Gerald Molen tells The Hollywood Reporter the charges are politically motivated.
Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, whose documentary 2016: Obama’s America took a critical look at President Barack Obama and was a surprise hit in 2012, will be arrested in New York on Friday for allegedly violating campaign-finance laws, The Hollywood Reporter has learned.
Federal authorities accuse D’Souza of donating more than is legal to the campaign of Wendy Long, who ran in 2012 for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton but lost to now-Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Long, though, is not mentioned in an indictment obtained by THR on Thursday.
Read the Rest
Remember, don’t question, criticize or mock the regime or you will be punished. This is getting scary, people. Seriously. This president and those under him (ostensibly at his command) are literally targeting those with whom the President disagrees. Gone are the days when we could study, listen, debate and argue about differing opinions as free people without fear of any tyrannical actions by our government. Now the
Emperor President simply uses one of the arms of the massive federal government he has at his disposal to simply punish those he doesn’t like. This kind of abuse of power should scare everyone. Even Obama-loving progressives.
One could make the point that Dinesh D’Souza might actually be guilty and that those in power are simply doing their job (although, my initial response to that would be to ask why campaign finance laws exist in the first place. We should let people to be free to donate to whom they will. My secondary reaction is that because of the unfathomable amount of federal laws on the books, we are all guilty of violating some federal law every day. The feds could literally come after anyone if they wanted to. So even if D’Souza is guilty, he still was likely singled out for political reasons. But I digress). This might be a valid argument if this were anything near an isolated incident. But it’s not. Not by a long shot. This president is lawless, plain and simple. He can do whatever he wants whenever he wants because he knows the media will let him. In short, he is a king, not a president.
For just a few current examples of the Obama administration’s targeting of political enemies (or as they would call them, “coincidences”), visit AoSHQ
1:21 am • 24 January 2014 • View comments