.
11/1/13, "Nigeria: U.S. Firm Negotiates with Nigerian Pirates for Hostages' Release," AllAfrica.com, By Ekanem Etim-Offiong
"A United States maritime company is negotiating the ransom for two
American mariners kidnapped off the coast of Nigeria last week, U.S.
government officials told ABC News.
Sources briefed on the matter
said third-party agents had made contact with the hostage-takers, who
have not been publicly identified, and talks to free the men are under
way.The U.S. government is not considering any type of military
operation to rescue the seamen, officials said.
The kidnapped men, employees of the maritime transportation
company, Edison Chouest Offshore, have only been identified as the
captain and chief engineer of the C-Retriever, an oil supply vessel. The
U.S. government itself has a longstanding policy against complying with
ransom demands, but private companies are not subject to such a policy.
The FBI is assisting in the matter but is not negotiating directly with the kidnappers, sources said. Spokesmen
for the FBI have declined repeated requests for comment, saying they do
not want to jeopardise the safety of the captives.
The C-Retriever
was attacked in the wee hours of October 23 by an unknown number of
armed assailants who then separated the crew by nationality and made off
with the Americans, a Pentagon official told ABC News the day of the
attack.
In the days since, a proof-of-life call was made and the U.S.
government has verified that the two Americans are being held on land
as their fate is negotiated.
While globally piracy was down last year to its lowest levels in seven years, cases in Nigeria are on the rise.
According
to the International Maritime Bureau, pirate attacks off Nigeria's
coast have jumped by a third this year — allegedly perpetrated by
criminal gangs who are looking for cargo ships with commodities, and
seeking ransom for hostages. Around the world there have already been
more than 200 "incidents" involving piracy this year, including 11
hijackings, the IMB said." via Free Republic
.
Saturday, November 2, 2013
Friday, November 1, 2013
Romney campaign finance chair Spencer Zwick is prepared to 'work against' Utah Sen. Mike Lee. Rally for Sen. Mike Lee Sat., 11/2/13 in South Jordan, Utah (details)
.
10/31/13, On MSNBC: "She (Jon Huntsman's daughter Abby) noted that former Romney campaign finance chair Spencer Zwick is prepared to “work against” Lee. “I’ve got some insider Utah politics for you,” Huntsman continued. “I hear Mitt Romney’s son, Josh Romney, has been looking for an opening to run for office in Utah."
==========================
11/1/13, "Rally in support of Sen. Mike Lee, Utah. Details here," Mark Levin twitter
10/31/13, On MSNBC: "She (Jon Huntsman's daughter Abby) noted that former Romney campaign finance chair Spencer Zwick is prepared to “work against” Lee. “I’ve got some insider Utah politics for you,” Huntsman continued. “I hear Mitt Romney’s son, Josh Romney, has been looking for an opening to run for office in Utah."
==========================
11/1/13, "Rally in support of Sen. Mike Lee, Utah. Details here," Mark Levin twitter
"DAY AND TIME: This Saturday, 11:00 AM
LOCATION: Riverfront West Park
South Jordan, UT
(Near Lifetime Fitness)"
.
.
================================
.
.
10/31/13, “MSNBC’s Abby Huntsman Advises Josh Romney to Challenge Utah’s Mike Lee in Primary… From the Left,” Mediaite, Noah Rothman
.
.
==============================
.
.
10/15/13, “Boehner to Tea Party: Shut Yourself Down,” Bloomberg News, Margaret Carlson
“Somebody had to take on the Tea Party that has turned Boehner’s tenure as House speaker into a living hell….“Wacko Birds”…
Like (Michigan Rep. Justin) Amash, (Utah Senator Mike) Lee will be challenged from his left. Josh Romney and Dan Liljenquist are waiting in the wings. If Lee survives that primary contest, there’s an excellent chance that Democratic Representative Jim Matheson — who’s been gerrymandered into unwinnable districts twice but still wins — could win a statewide race in the reddest state in the country….
By 2012, the establishment was back in charge, and Bennett got a long and loud standing ovation. At that same convention, Senator Orrin Hatch easily won the nomination and re-election.
Here’s another suggestion for thank-you notes: “Dear Senator Bennett, thank you for taking one for the establishment. Signed, Senator Hatch.”"...
.
“Somebody had to take on the Tea Party that has turned Boehner’s tenure as House speaker into a living hell….“Wacko Birds”…
Like (Michigan Rep. Justin) Amash, (Utah Senator Mike) Lee will be challenged from his left. Josh Romney and Dan Liljenquist are waiting in the wings. If Lee survives that primary contest, there’s an excellent chance that Democratic Representative Jim Matheson — who’s been gerrymandered into unwinnable districts twice but still wins — could win a statewide race in the reddest state in the country….
By 2012, the establishment was back in charge, and Bennett got a long and loud standing ovation. At that same convention, Senator Orrin Hatch easily won the nomination and re-election.
Here’s another suggestion for thank-you notes: “Dear Senator Bennett, thank you for taking one for the establishment. Signed, Senator Hatch.”"...
.
========================
.
.
From Utah summit of political elites in June Josh Romney speaks to media about need for bipartisanship. [Translation: We're all democrats now so let's just get on with things. ed.]
.
.
6/7/13, "Romney’s Utah summit urges post-partisan cooperation," Salt Lake Tribune, Thomas Burr
"Seven months after losing the election, Mitt Romney urged a gathering in Utah of the nation’s political bigwigs and top business leaders to step past partisan bickering and discuss solutions to some of the nation’s pressing problems.
In a closed-door forum this week in Park City, the former Republican presidential nominee listed the many concerns facing America — from its debt to its economic instability — and suggested to a bipartisan crowd that they use their influence to tackle them.
"He’s kind of showing the way he would have led as president," son Josh Romney, a Utahn, told The Salt Lake Tribune after the event Friday. "It showed the kind of person my dad is and what kind of president he would have been, you know, [that] he would have got past the personal stuff, past the petty stuff and take the real issues head on."
"Seven months after losing the election, Mitt Romney urged a gathering in Utah of the nation’s political bigwigs and top business leaders to step past partisan bickering and discuss solutions to some of the nation’s pressing problems.
In a closed-door forum this week in Park City, the former Republican presidential nominee listed the many concerns facing America — from its debt to its economic instability — and suggested to a bipartisan crowd that they use their influence to tackle them.
"He’s kind of showing the way he would have led as president," son Josh Romney, a Utahn, told The Salt Lake Tribune after the event Friday. "It showed the kind of person my dad is and what kind of president he would have been, you know, [that] he would have got past the personal stuff, past the petty stuff and take the real issues head on."
The forum’s speakers included some of the
political classes’ leading luminaries, including President Barack
Obama’s top adviser, David Axelrod, and several potential White House
Republican contenders, such as Rep. Paul Ryan, Sen. Rand Paul, New
Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, as well as Democratic Colorado Gov. John
Hickenlooper.
.
.
The event was closed to the news media, though
Josh Romney said there were about 200 attendees and a solid discussion
of how folks from both sides of the aisle could find compromise."...
.
Wealthy out of state contributors and cash from union bosses eager for political favors have helped Democrat Terry McAuliffe to an $8 million advantage over Ken Cuccinelli for Virginia Governor. Nevertheless the race could still be close
.
10/31/13, "Why Unions Are Pouring Money Into Virginia & Why You Should Care," LaborUnionReport, RedState.com
"Union bosses and other out-of-state liberals–from Hollywood to New York–are pouring millions into the Virginia governor’s race. They are, without a doubt, hell-bent on defeating Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and putting long-time Democratic party boss and fund-raiser Terry McAuliffe into the governor’s seat.
More than that, however, the Left (just as they are targeting Texas and other Southern states) may be using the governor’s race to put the final nail in the coffin for Republicans in a state that has swung from reliably red to almost-but-not-quite blue.
While the polls in the seem to be tightening from a McAuliffe shoe-in to a too-close-to-call (were it not for the Libertarian candidate), according to the Washington Post, Democrat McAuliffe has collected $8 million more than Cuccinelli.
In addition to Democrat heavyweights like Bill Clinton ($100,000), Hollywood heavy hitters like the Weinstein Co. ($25,000) and noted author John Grisham ($75,000), Planned Parenthood donated over $1.5 million and many other liberal special interest groups have sent McAuliffe six-digit donations.
Given the amount of big out-of-state money and extraordinary efforts union bosses and their liberal cohorts are putting into the race, one must question how the Left will gain from a McAuliffe win.
Last month, the AFL-CIO resolved at its convention to develop a Southern Strategy. The intention is not just to expand union membership but to expand their political influence.
As the Hill noted:
If McAuuliffe wins, the biggest immediate threat to Virginia’s workers may be to their Right-to-Work. That is, workers’ right to work at a unionized company without being fired for failing to pay union dues.
While many think Virginia’s Right-to-Work status is safe even with a McAuliffe win, one need only look at Indiana or Michigan to see how quickly a state can flip from one to the other.
The reality is, if the state legislature becomes controlled by Democrats (either now or later), Virginia’s Right-to-Work status could go away with a simple vote or two in the statehouse and McAuliffe’s signature....
Union bosses would be ecstatic with a McAuliffe win and the possibility of stripping away Virginia’s Right-to-Work status.
In addition to the potential risk to Right-to-Work, as a recipient of big union money, as governor, McAuliffe would have the ability to steer public works projects to his union-boss allies through Project Labor Agreements.
Here is a summary of union money that has been donated to McAuliffe’s campaign efforts.
Writing on the United Steelworkers’ union expenditures, the National Right to Work Committee notes the difference between “in kind” support (which can be taken from union dues) and direct contributions to candidates (which cannot be taken without consent):
In sum, unions have nothing to lose if Cuccinelli wins and a heck of a lot to gain with a McAuliffe win.
If you want to help Ken Cuccinelli, there’s not a lot of time left. However, you can help by donating to his campaign, working the phones or, if you’re in Virginia, helping with Get Out The Vote efforts."
.
10/31/13, "Why Unions Are Pouring Money Into Virginia & Why You Should Care," LaborUnionReport, RedState.com
"Union bosses and other out-of-state liberals–from Hollywood to New York–are pouring millions into the Virginia governor’s race. They are, without a doubt, hell-bent on defeating Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and putting long-time Democratic party boss and fund-raiser Terry McAuliffe into the governor’s seat.
More than that, however, the Left (just as they are targeting Texas and other Southern states) may be using the governor’s race to put the final nail in the coffin for Republicans in a state that has swung from reliably red to almost-but-not-quite blue.
While the polls in the seem to be tightening from a McAuliffe shoe-in to a too-close-to-call (were it not for the Libertarian candidate), according to the Washington Post, Democrat McAuliffe has collected $8 million more than Cuccinelli.
In addition to Democrat heavyweights like Bill Clinton ($100,000), Hollywood heavy hitters like the Weinstein Co. ($25,000) and noted author John Grisham ($75,000), Planned Parenthood donated over $1.5 million and many other liberal special interest groups have sent McAuliffe six-digit donations.
Given the amount of big out-of-state money and extraordinary efforts union bosses and their liberal cohorts are putting into the race, one must question how the Left will gain from a McAuliffe win.
Last month, the AFL-CIO resolved at its convention to develop a Southern Strategy. The intention is not just to expand union membership but to expand their political influence.
As the Hill noted:
Labor will embark on an expansive organizing campaign in America’s union-scarce South that, if successful, could bring about serious political upheaval.McAuliffe’s union ties go back a long way–all the way to the Clinton years–and he is known for rewarding his friends.
If McAuuliffe wins, the biggest immediate threat to Virginia’s workers may be to their Right-to-Work. That is, workers’ right to work at a unionized company without being fired for failing to pay union dues.
While many think Virginia’s Right-to-Work status is safe even with a McAuliffe win, one need only look at Indiana or Michigan to see how quickly a state can flip from one to the other.
The reality is, if the state legislature becomes controlled by Democrats (either now or later), Virginia’s Right-to-Work status could go away with a simple vote or two in the statehouse and McAuliffe’s signature....
Union bosses would be ecstatic with a McAuliffe win and the possibility of stripping away Virginia’s Right-to-Work status.
In addition to the potential risk to Right-to-Work, as a recipient of big union money, as governor, McAuliffe would have the ability to steer public works projects to his union-boss allies through Project Labor Agreements.
Here is a summary of union money that has been donated to McAuliffe’s campaign efforts.
- $536,549 Service Employees International Union
- $390,106 United Steelworkers of America
- $343,530 American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
- $250,000 Firefighters – International Assn
- $250,000 Laborers’ International Union of North America
- $200,000 United Food & Commercial Workers
- $150,000 Communication Workers of America
- $125,000 American Federation of Teachers
- $100,000 National Education Assn
- $50,000 United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry
- $50,000 United Steelworkers of America Dist 8
- $25,000 Machinists Non-Partisan Political League
- $25,000 Office and Professional Employees International Union Voice of Electorate PAC
- $20,000 Intl Brotherhood of Teamsters
- $20,000 Va AFL-CIO
- $15,000 International Brotherhood of Boilermakers
- $10,000 Intl Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen
- $10,000 Service Employees International Union – Local 32BJ
- $5,173 Va Education Assn
- $5,000 American Fed State County Mun Employees – Maryland Council 2
- $5,000 Firefighters – Local 2068
- $5,000 Intl Longshoremen’s Assn
- $5,000 National Rural Letter Carriers Assn
- $5,000 United Mineworkers of America (UMW)
- $5,000 Va Governmental Employees Assn
- $4,298 AFL-CIO
- $3,000 Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
Writing on the United Steelworkers’ union expenditures, the National Right to Work Committee notes the difference between “in kind” support (which can be taken from union dues) and direct contributions to candidates (which cannot be taken without consent):
…since the end of August USWA kingpins have funneled nearly $300,000 in forced union dues-funded “in-kind” support to the McAuliffe campaign, plus $50,000 in cash. Of the “in-kind” support, $256,000 was donated in the form of “staff time” and “personnel costs.”As union bosses work at strengthening their toehold in the South, it appears that getting Terry McAuliffe elected in Virginia may be the first step in executing that strategy.
What that means is that forced-dues money forked over by USWA-controlled employees in states where the Right to Work is unprotected is being used to pay travel expenses, salaries, and benefits for union officials as they electioneer in Virginia.
In sum, unions have nothing to lose if Cuccinelli wins and a heck of a lot to gain with a McAuliffe win.
If you want to help Ken Cuccinelli, there’s not a lot of time left. However, you can help by donating to his campaign, working the phones or, if you’re in Virginia, helping with Get Out The Vote efforts."
.
Rhetoric on gov. ‘shutdown’ from Fox, MSNBC, Boehner, Reid, et al. bordered on insane viciousness such as heard on Radio Rwanda in the 1990′s-Koire
.
Polite concerned citizens today are often labeled terrorists. Free speech was once championed by those in government.
--------------------
10/7/13, “Are we the Hutus and the Tutsis? Democrats vs Tea Party? What’s next?“ Democrats Against UN Agenda 21
The rhetoric coming from Fox, MSNBC, Boehner, Reid and full cast of characters borders on the insane viciousness of Radio Rwanda in the 1990′s that drove neighbors into murderous rage. All orchestrated and it will continue.
“Who is the Tea Party?”
“It seems that just as people in this nation began to become fully engaged in examining their government’s actions they were corralled and claimed…. These people are being vilified. The issues that they are concerned about are being buried under mountains of accusations of obstructionism, racism, and careless cruelty. It’s starting to feel like ‘The Two Minutes of Hate’ in George Orwell’s ’1984.’
We need to remember that all Americans have a duty to question their government and to demand transparency and full analysis for all programs that affect us.”…
=======================
Comment: One is left to conclude that things are much worse in this country than one can imagine or are of much greater financial import than one can imagine. There's no other explanation for 'powers that be' unleashing such hateful slander to prevent citizens from discussion, examination, and taking stock of what many see as years of bad decisions by government. Being an ordinary concerned citizen today means you're a Tea Party supporter and a terrorist. The establishment can't accept that our government is any of our business. Matters that effect my life and my country should be decided by self appointed royals, not me. To silence us once and for all the bigs have among other things convinced others that people like me are worse than mass-murdering, head slicing, suicide bombing, Muslim terrorists:
"Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims."...
6/27/13, "26% of Obama Supporters View Tea Party as Nation’s Top Terror Threat," Rasmussen Reports
"Half of all voters consider radical Muslims the bigger terrorist threat facing the nation, but supporters of President Obama consider the Tea Party to be as big a danger.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters consider radical Muslims to be the bigger threat to the United States today. Thirteen percent (13%) view the Tea Party that way, and another 13% consider other political and religious extremists to be the larger danger. Six percent (6%) point to local militia groups. Two percent (2%) see the Occupy Wall Street movement as the bigger terrorist threat. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
However, among those who approve of the president’s job performance, just 29% see radical Muslims as the bigger threat. Twenty-six percent (26%) say it’s the Tea Party that concerns them most. Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims.
As for those who disapprove of Obama’s performance, 75% consider radical Muslims to be the bigger terrorist threat. Just one percent (1%) name the Tea Party.
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on June 22-23, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Interestingly, while the Occupy movement was allegedly targeting the “one percent”, upper income Americans are more likely than others to see the Tea Party as the bigger terror threat.
Among those who earn six-figure incomes, 21% consider the Tea Party the bigger threat, while just two percent (2%) say the same of the Occupy movement. Among Americans who earn less than $30,000 a year, 12% see the Tea Party as the bigger threat, and seven percent (7%) say that description best applies to the Occupy movement.
The Tea Party received a boost in popularity earlier this year following revelations that the Internal Revenue Service targeted it and other conservative groups. Most voters believe the targeting was politically motivated and that the decision was made in Washington.
Conservatives overwhelmingly see radical Muslims as the greater terror threat. Liberals are fairly evenly divided between radical Muslims and the Tea Party.
Twenty percent (20%) of government workers see the Tea Party as the nation’s bigger terror threat. Twelve percent (12%) of private sector workers hold that view.
Most voters today believe the federal government is a threat to individual rights.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of voters think it is at least somewhat likely that terrorist groups will soon gain access to nuclear weapons, including 34% who feel it is Very Likely.
However, 57% believe economic challenges represent the biggest threat to the United States. Half as many (27%) see terrorist attacks as the biggest threat."
===========================
"The vast majority of “laws” governing the United States are not passed by Congress but are issued as regulations, crafted largely by thousands of unnamed, unreachable bureaucrats....The shift of authority has been staggering. The fourth branch now has a larger practical impact on the lives of citizens than all the other branches combined."
5/24/13, "The rise of the fourth branch of government," Washington Post, Jonathan Turley, opinion
"The growing dominance of the federal government over the states has obscured more fundamental changes within the federal government itself: It is not just bigger, it is dangerously off kilter. Our carefully constructed system of checks and balances is being negated by the rise of a fourth branch, an administrative state of sprawling departments and agencies that govern with increasing autonomy and decreasing transparency.
This exponential growth has led to increasing power and independence for agencies. The shift of authority has been staggering. The fourth branch now has a larger practical impact on the lives of citizens than all the other branches combined.
For much of our nation’s history, the federal government was quite small. In 1790, it had just 1,000 nonmilitary workers. In 1962, there were 2,515,000 federal employees. Today, we have 2,840,000 federal workers in 15 departments, 69 agencies and 383 nonmilitary sub-agencies.
The rise of the fourth branch has been at the expense of Congress’s lawmaking authority. In fact, the vast majority of “laws” governing the United States are not passed by Congress but are issued as regulations, crafted largely by thousands of unnamed, unreachable bureaucrats. One study found that in 2007, Congress enacted 138 public laws, while federal agencies finalized 2,926 rules, including 61 major regulations.
This rulemaking comes with little accountability. It’s often impossible to know, absent a major scandal, whom to blame for rules that are abusive or nonsensical. Of course, agencies owe their creation and underlying legal authority to Congress, and Congress holds the purse strings. But Capitol Hill’s relatively small staff is incapable of exerting oversight on more than a small percentage of agency actions. And the threat of cutting funds is a blunt instrument to control a massive administrative state — like running a locomotive with an on/off switch.
The autonomy was magnified when the Supreme Court ruled in 1984 that agencies are entitled to heavy deference in their interpretations of laws. The court went even further this past week, ruling that agencies should get the same heavy deference in determining their own jurisdictions — a power that was previously believed to rest with Congress. In his dissent in Arlington v. FCC, Chief Justice John Roberts warned: “It would be a bit much to describe the result as ‘the very definition of tyranny,’ but the danger posed by the growing power of the administrative state cannot be dismissed.”
The judiciary, too, has seen its authority diminished by the rise of the fourth branch. Under Article III of the Constitution, citizens facing charges and fines are entitled to due process in our court system. As the number of federal regulations increased, however, Congress decided to relieve the judiciary of most regulatory cases and create administrative courts tied to individual agencies. The result is that a citizen is 10 times more likely to be tried by an agency than by an actual court. In a given year, federal judges conduct roughly 95,000 adjudicatory proceedings, including trials, while federal agencies complete more than 939,000.
These agency proceedings are often mockeries of due process, with one-sided presumptions and procedural rules favoring the agency. And agencies increasingly seem to chafe at being denied their judicial authority. Just ask John E. Brennan. Brennan, a 50-year-old technology consultant, was charged with disorderly conduct and indecent exposure when he stripped at Portland International Airport last year in protest of invasive security measures by the Transportation Security Administration. He was cleared by a federal judge, who ruled that his stripping was a form of free speech. The TSA was undeterred. After the ruling, it pulled Brennan into its own agency courts under administrative charges.
The rise of the fourth branch has occurred alongside an unprecedented increase in presidential powers — from the power to determine when to go to war to the power to decide when it’s reasonable to vaporize a U.S. citizen in a drone strike. In this new order, information is jealously guarded and transparency has declined sharply. That trend, in turn, has given the fourth branch even greater insularity and independence. When Congress tries to respond to cases of agency abuse, it often finds officials walled off by claims of expanding executive privilege.
Of course, federal agencies officially report to the White House under the umbrella of the executive branch. But in practice, the agencies have evolved into largely independent entities over which the president has very limited control. Only 1 percent of federal positions are filled by political appointees, as opposed to career officials, and on average appointees serve only two years. At an individual level, career officials are insulated from political pressure by civil service rules. There are also entire agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — that are protected from White House interference.
Some agencies have gone so far as to refuse to comply with presidential orders. For example, in 1992 President George H.W. Bush ordered the U.S. Postal Service to withdraw a lawsuit against the Postal Rate Commission, and he threatened to sack members of the Postal Service’s Board of Governors who denied him. The courts ruled in favor of the independence of the agency....
The shift of authority has been staggering. The fourth branch now has a larger practical impact on the lives of citizens than all the other branches combined. The marginalization Congress feels is magnified for citizens, who are routinely pulled into the vortex of an administrative state that allows little challenge or appeal. The IRS scandal is the rare case in which internal agency priorities are forced into the public eye. Most of the time, such internal policies are hidden from public view and congressional oversight. While public participation in the promulgation of new regulations is allowed, and often required, the process is generally perfunctory and dismissive.
.
In the new regulatory age, presidents and Congress can still change the government’s priorities, but the agencies effectively run the show based on their interpretations and discretion. The rise of this fourth branch represents perhaps the single greatest change in our system of government since the founding.
.
We cannot long protect liberty if our leaders continue to act like mere bystanders to the work of government."
"Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University."
.
Polite concerned citizens today are often labeled terrorists. Free speech was once championed by those in government.
--------------------
10/7/13, “Are we the Hutus and the Tutsis? Democrats vs Tea Party? What’s next?“ Democrats Against UN Agenda 21
The rhetoric coming from Fox, MSNBC, Boehner, Reid and full cast of characters borders on the insane viciousness of Radio Rwanda in the 1990′s that drove neighbors into murderous rage. All orchestrated and it will continue.
“Who is the Tea Party?”
“It seems that just as people in this nation began to become fully engaged in examining their government’s actions they were corralled and claimed…. These people are being vilified. The issues that they are concerned about are being buried under mountains of accusations of obstructionism, racism, and careless cruelty. It’s starting to feel like ‘The Two Minutes of Hate’ in George Orwell’s ’1984.’
We need to remember that all Americans have a duty to question their government and to demand transparency and full analysis for all programs that affect us.”…
=======================
Comment: One is left to conclude that things are much worse in this country than one can imagine or are of much greater financial import than one can imagine. There's no other explanation for 'powers that be' unleashing such hateful slander to prevent citizens from discussion, examination, and taking stock of what many see as years of bad decisions by government. Being an ordinary concerned citizen today means you're a Tea Party supporter and a terrorist. The establishment can't accept that our government is any of our business. Matters that effect my life and my country should be decided by self appointed royals, not me. To silence us once and for all the bigs have among other things convinced others that people like me are worse than mass-murdering, head slicing, suicide bombing, Muslim terrorists:
"Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims."...
6/27/13, "26% of Obama Supporters View Tea Party as Nation’s Top Terror Threat," Rasmussen Reports
"Half of all voters consider radical Muslims the bigger terrorist threat facing the nation, but supporters of President Obama consider the Tea Party to be as big a danger.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters consider radical Muslims to be the bigger threat to the United States today. Thirteen percent (13%) view the Tea Party that way, and another 13% consider other political and religious extremists to be the larger danger. Six percent (6%) point to local militia groups. Two percent (2%) see the Occupy Wall Street movement as the bigger terrorist threat. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
However, among those who approve of the president’s job performance, just 29% see radical Muslims as the bigger threat. Twenty-six percent (26%) say it’s the Tea Party that concerns them most. Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims.
As for those who disapprove of Obama’s performance, 75% consider radical Muslims to be the bigger terrorist threat. Just one percent (1%) name the Tea Party.
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on June 22-23, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Interestingly, while the Occupy movement was allegedly targeting the “one percent”, upper income Americans are more likely than others to see the Tea Party as the bigger terror threat.
Among those who earn six-figure incomes, 21% consider the Tea Party the bigger threat, while just two percent (2%) say the same of the Occupy movement. Among Americans who earn less than $30,000 a year, 12% see the Tea Party as the bigger threat, and seven percent (7%) say that description best applies to the Occupy movement.
The Tea Party received a boost in popularity earlier this year following revelations that the Internal Revenue Service targeted it and other conservative groups. Most voters believe the targeting was politically motivated and that the decision was made in Washington.
Conservatives overwhelmingly see radical Muslims as the greater terror threat. Liberals are fairly evenly divided between radical Muslims and the Tea Party.
Twenty percent (20%) of government workers see the Tea Party as the nation’s bigger terror threat. Twelve percent (12%) of private sector workers hold that view.
Most voters today believe the federal government is a threat to individual rights.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of voters think it is at least somewhat likely that terrorist groups will soon gain access to nuclear weapons, including 34% who feel it is Very Likely.
However, 57% believe economic challenges represent the biggest threat to the United States. Half as many (27%) see terrorist attacks as the biggest threat."
===========================
"The vast majority of “laws” governing the United States are not passed by Congress but are issued as regulations, crafted largely by thousands of unnamed, unreachable bureaucrats....The shift of authority has been staggering. The fourth branch now has a larger practical impact on the lives of citizens than all the other branches combined."
5/24/13, "The rise of the fourth branch of government," Washington Post, Jonathan Turley, opinion
"The growing dominance of the federal government over the states has obscured more fundamental changes within the federal government itself: It is not just bigger, it is dangerously off kilter. Our carefully constructed system of checks and balances is being negated by the rise of a fourth branch, an administrative state of sprawling departments and agencies that govern with increasing autonomy and decreasing transparency.
This exponential growth has led to increasing power and independence for agencies. The shift of authority has been staggering. The fourth branch now has a larger practical impact on the lives of citizens than all the other branches combined.
For much of our nation’s history, the federal government was quite small. In 1790, it had just 1,000 nonmilitary workers. In 1962, there were 2,515,000 federal employees. Today, we have 2,840,000 federal workers in 15 departments, 69 agencies and 383 nonmilitary sub-agencies.
The rise of the fourth branch has been at the expense of Congress’s lawmaking authority. In fact, the vast majority of “laws” governing the United States are not passed by Congress but are issued as regulations, crafted largely by thousands of unnamed, unreachable bureaucrats. One study found that in 2007, Congress enacted 138 public laws, while federal agencies finalized 2,926 rules, including 61 major regulations.
This rulemaking comes with little accountability. It’s often impossible to know, absent a major scandal, whom to blame for rules that are abusive or nonsensical. Of course, agencies owe their creation and underlying legal authority to Congress, and Congress holds the purse strings. But Capitol Hill’s relatively small staff is incapable of exerting oversight on more than a small percentage of agency actions. And the threat of cutting funds is a blunt instrument to control a massive administrative state — like running a locomotive with an on/off switch.
The autonomy was magnified when the Supreme Court ruled in 1984 that agencies are entitled to heavy deference in their interpretations of laws. The court went even further this past week, ruling that agencies should get the same heavy deference in determining their own jurisdictions — a power that was previously believed to rest with Congress. In his dissent in Arlington v. FCC, Chief Justice John Roberts warned: “It would be a bit much to describe the result as ‘the very definition of tyranny,’ but the danger posed by the growing power of the administrative state cannot be dismissed.”
The judiciary, too, has seen its authority diminished by the rise of the fourth branch. Under Article III of the Constitution, citizens facing charges and fines are entitled to due process in our court system. As the number of federal regulations increased, however, Congress decided to relieve the judiciary of most regulatory cases and create administrative courts tied to individual agencies. The result is that a citizen is 10 times more likely to be tried by an agency than by an actual court. In a given year, federal judges conduct roughly 95,000 adjudicatory proceedings, including trials, while federal agencies complete more than 939,000.
These agency proceedings are often mockeries of due process, with one-sided presumptions and procedural rules favoring the agency. And agencies increasingly seem to chafe at being denied their judicial authority. Just ask John E. Brennan. Brennan, a 50-year-old technology consultant, was charged with disorderly conduct and indecent exposure when he stripped at Portland International Airport last year in protest of invasive security measures by the Transportation Security Administration. He was cleared by a federal judge, who ruled that his stripping was a form of free speech. The TSA was undeterred. After the ruling, it pulled Brennan into its own agency courts under administrative charges.
The rise of the fourth branch has occurred alongside an unprecedented increase in presidential powers — from the power to determine when to go to war to the power to decide when it’s reasonable to vaporize a U.S. citizen in a drone strike. In this new order, information is jealously guarded and transparency has declined sharply. That trend, in turn, has given the fourth branch even greater insularity and independence. When Congress tries to respond to cases of agency abuse, it often finds officials walled off by claims of expanding executive privilege.
Of course, federal agencies officially report to the White House under the umbrella of the executive branch. But in practice, the agencies have evolved into largely independent entities over which the president has very limited control. Only 1 percent of federal positions are filled by political appointees, as opposed to career officials, and on average appointees serve only two years. At an individual level, career officials are insulated from political pressure by civil service rules. There are also entire agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — that are protected from White House interference.
Some agencies have gone so far as to refuse to comply with presidential orders. For example, in 1992 President George H.W. Bush ordered the U.S. Postal Service to withdraw a lawsuit against the Postal Rate Commission, and he threatened to sack members of the Postal Service’s Board of Governors who denied him. The courts ruled in favor of the independence of the agency....
The shift of authority has been staggering. The fourth branch now has a larger practical impact on the lives of citizens than all the other branches combined. The marginalization Congress feels is magnified for citizens, who are routinely pulled into the vortex of an administrative state that allows little challenge or appeal. The IRS scandal is the rare case in which internal agency priorities are forced into the public eye. Most of the time, such internal policies are hidden from public view and congressional oversight. While public participation in the promulgation of new regulations is allowed, and often required, the process is generally perfunctory and dismissive.
.
In the new regulatory age, presidents and Congress can still change the government’s priorities, but the agencies effectively run the show based on their interpretations and discretion. The rise of this fourth branch represents perhaps the single greatest change in our system of government since the founding.
.
We cannot long protect liberty if our leaders continue to act like mere bystanders to the work of government."
"Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University."
.
Smog from China engulfs Korea, Chinese gov. won't reveal data about its pollutants-Chosun
.
11/1/13, "Toxic Smog from China Engulfs Korea," english.chosun.com
"Heavy smog blanketed Korea this week blown in by northwesterly winds
from China. The concentration of ultrafine particles is often at its
worst between December and March, with most of the smog comes from
Beijing and surrounding Hebei Province.
The smog crosses the West Sea and reaches the Korean peninsula anywhere between six hours and a day later. Meteorologists say the smog is diluted as it crosses the West Sea, but 40 to 50 percent still reaches Korea.
On Thursday, the concentration of ultrafine particles in Dongducheon, Gyeonggi Province north of Seoul, reached 255㎍/㎥, five times the normal level in the region. It stood at 138 ㎍/㎥ in Incheon and 112㎍/㎥ in the capital. ...
Winter smog carries more ultrafine particles and is more hazardous than the sandstorms that blow over here in spring. According to the National Institute of Environmental Research, around 20 to 30 percent of sandstorms consist of ultrafine particles, but smog contains 60 to 70 percent....
It is difficult to predict smog levels since it is not clear where it originates and how many pollutants it contains. The Chinese government does not reveal data about the origin of pollutants, but the most polluted parts of China are along the east coast, which is near Korea."...images Reuters, via Free Rep.
11/1/13, "Toxic Smog from China Engulfs Korea," english.chosun.com
The smog crosses the West Sea and reaches the Korean peninsula anywhere between six hours and a day later. Meteorologists say the smog is diluted as it crosses the West Sea, but 40 to 50 percent still reaches Korea.
On Thursday, the concentration of ultrafine particles in Dongducheon, Gyeonggi Province north of Seoul, reached 255㎍/㎥, five times the normal level in the region. It stood at 138 ㎍/㎥ in Incheon and 112㎍/㎥ in the capital. ...
Winter smog carries more ultrafine particles and is more hazardous than the sandstorms that blow over here in spring. According to the National Institute of Environmental Research, around 20 to 30 percent of sandstorms consist of ultrafine particles, but smog contains 60 to 70 percent....
It is difficult to predict smog levels since it is not clear where it originates and how many pollutants it contains. The Chinese government does not reveal data about the origin of pollutants, but the most polluted parts of China are along the east coast, which is near Korea."...images Reuters, via Free Rep.
Lindsey Graham approval drops 30 points in South Carolina. George and Jeb Bush naturally are contributing to Graham's campaign. Maybe that's why he's losing. The Bush family remains best weapon of crony capitalists
.
10/30/13, "Polls: Lindsey Graham approval drops in South Carolina," Politico, Tal Kopan
"Sen. Lindsey Graham’s approval is slipping in South Carolina, two new polls show, but the challengers for his Senate seat still aren’t offering him a significant threat.
Graham’s approval in his home state has dropped nearly 30 points among conservatives in a new Winthrop University poll. Among Republicans and GOP leaners, 45.2 percent approve of the job Graham is doing, down from 71.6 percent in February. His approval among all registered voters stands at 37.4 percent, with 48.5 percent disapproving."...
=============================
George and Jeb Bush contribute to Lindsey Graham campaign. The Bushes aren't finished destroying this country:
10/25/13, "George W. Bush contributes to Sen. Lindsey Graham's re-election effort," Washington Times, Seth McLaughlin
================
2/10/13, "Jeb Bush helps Lindsey Graham raise re-election cash in Coral Gables," Tampa Bay Times, Alex Leary
"Sen. Lindsey Graham dropped by the Biltmore in Coral Gables on Sunday to raise money for his 2014 re-election campaign. The event was hosted by Jeb Bush, Cesar Alvarez, Al Cardenas, Manny Kadre, Ana Navarro and Remedios Diaz-Oliver."
(image from Tampa Bay Times)
Cronies Obama and Jeb Bush, 2/15/11, at the White House. photo CS Monitor
=========================================
George Bush should be in prison for the rest of his life. He destroyed the US, committed massive crimes against us, and increased the influence of radical Islam. Obama obviously made things even worse:
10/31/13, "US has left Iraq broken and regional strong men emboldened," BBC
"Ten years on, a study by Brown University concluded that the war cost the United States $2.2 trillion."...(subhead 'Corruption endemic')
.
10/30/13, "Polls: Lindsey Graham approval drops in South Carolina," Politico, Tal Kopan
"Sen. Lindsey Graham’s approval is slipping in South Carolina, two new polls show, but the challengers for his Senate seat still aren’t offering him a significant threat.
Graham’s approval in his home state has dropped nearly 30 points among conservatives in a new Winthrop University poll. Among Republicans and GOP leaners, 45.2 percent approve of the job Graham is doing, down from 71.6 percent in February. His approval among all registered voters stands at 37.4 percent, with 48.5 percent disapproving."...
=============================
George and Jeb Bush contribute to Lindsey Graham campaign. The Bushes aren't finished destroying this country:
10/25/13, "George W. Bush contributes to Sen. Lindsey Graham's re-election effort," Washington Times, Seth McLaughlin
================
2/10/13, "Jeb Bush helps Lindsey Graham raise re-election cash in Coral Gables," Tampa Bay Times, Alex Leary
"Sen. Lindsey Graham dropped by the Biltmore in Coral Gables on Sunday to raise money for his 2014 re-election campaign. The event was hosted by Jeb Bush, Cesar Alvarez, Al Cardenas, Manny Kadre, Ana Navarro and Remedios Diaz-Oliver."
(image from Tampa Bay Times)
Cronies Obama and Jeb Bush, 2/15/11, at the White House. photo CS Monitor
=========================================
George Bush should be in prison for the rest of his life. He destroyed the US, committed massive crimes against us, and increased the influence of radical Islam. Obama obviously made things even worse:
10/31/13, "US has left Iraq broken and regional strong men emboldened," BBC
"Ten years on, a study by Brown University concluded that the war cost the United States $2.2 trillion."...(subhead 'Corruption endemic')
.
Chamber of Commerce takes aim at Tea Party in Alabama district #1 race, mighty Beltway Establishment proudly organizes against the Tea Party-Erick Erickson
.
10/31/13, "In Alabama, the Chamber of Commerce Fires Shots Against the Tea Party," Erick Erickson, RedState
"I have not really paid attention to the race between Bradley Byrne and Dean Young in Alabama’s first congressional district. But it suddenly flew onto my radar yesterday with news that the Chamber of Commerce is using it as its first base of operations to repel the tea party.
The only polling I’ve seen has Young slightly ahead but I am not sure about the quality of polling and my gut tells me that Byrne, an experienced politician, is ahead. He’s got the money and name ID to be ahead.
In any event, the Chamber of Commerce is spending $185,000.00 at the end to help Bradley Byrne.
They want credit for repudiating the Tea Party even in Alabama. The NBC poll that just came out shows 30% of Americans would vote for a third party over 28% for the GOP. A lot of that angst is conservatives ready to bolt.
Before they bolt, they’re going to fight it out in primaries. It looks like, whether tea party activists want to or not, this race in Alabama is where they’ll meet their first organized resistance by the establishment.
The election is Tuesday." via Mark Levin
================================
To the Chamber of Commerce: In 2012 you lost 10+ crucial US Senate races (listed below) in tandem with the same GOP establishment who brought you terrible results in 2006 and 2008. They even insisted ObamaCare’s architect, Mitt Romney, lead your ticket in 2012:
“In the past two election cycles, he (Rove) and his acolytes have personally helped Barack Obama get elected and yet made millions in the process. You tell me who the dummy is—Rove or the people who keep listening to him and funding him?”…11/16/12
.
After his defeat, Romney’s son Tagg said his father had no desire to be president and never wanted to run in the first place (parag. 15). This may explain why Romney refused to loan any of his highly publicized millions to his 2012 campaign when it desperately needed it.
Like a battered wife, the Chamber plans to double down in 2014 with the same GOP establishment so adored by democrats. You spend precious resources on behalf of small and medium sized businesses across America who otherwise have no voice. Haven’t you failed them long enough?
.
Ten+ 2012 US Senate races backed and lost by the Chamber of Commerce and the GOP establishment:"...
=============================
Comment: The Chamber of Commerce is the only voice for small and medium sized businesses in the US. Big business already has many voices. Since the Chamber has apparently abandoned the voiceless, it really should change its name to the Chamber of Crony Big Business Commerce.
.
10/31/13, "In Alabama, the Chamber of Commerce Fires Shots Against the Tea Party," Erick Erickson, RedState
"I have not really paid attention to the race between Bradley Byrne and Dean Young in Alabama’s first congressional district. But it suddenly flew onto my radar yesterday with news that the Chamber of Commerce is using it as its first base of operations to repel the tea party.
The only polling I’ve seen has Young slightly ahead but I am not sure about the quality of polling and my gut tells me that Byrne, an experienced politician, is ahead. He’s got the money and name ID to be ahead.
In any event, the Chamber of Commerce is spending $185,000.00 at the end to help Bradley Byrne.
They want credit for repudiating the Tea Party even in Alabama. The NBC poll that just came out shows 30% of Americans would vote for a third party over 28% for the GOP. A lot of that angst is conservatives ready to bolt.
Before they bolt, they’re going to fight it out in primaries. It looks like, whether tea party activists want to or not, this race in Alabama is where they’ll meet their first organized resistance by the establishment.
The election is Tuesday." via Mark Levin
================================
The US Chamber of Commerce lost 10+ crucial US Senate races in 2012 by partnering with the GOP establishment. It plans to double down with these same losers in 2014 which is a great tragedy for America’s small and medium sized businesses
.
“In the past two election cycles, he (Rove) and his acolytes have personally helped Barack Obama get elected and yet made millions in the process. You tell me who the dummy is—Rove or the people who keep listening to him and funding him?”…11/16/12
.
After his defeat, Romney’s son Tagg said his father had no desire to be president and never wanted to run in the first place (parag. 15). This may explain why Romney refused to loan any of his highly publicized millions to his 2012 campaign when it desperately needed it.
Like a battered wife, the Chamber plans to double down in 2014 with the same GOP establishment so adored by democrats. You spend precious resources on behalf of small and medium sized businesses across America who otherwise have no voice. Haven’t you failed them long enough?
.
Ten+ 2012 US Senate races backed and lost by the Chamber of Commerce and the GOP establishment:"...
=============================
Comment: The Chamber of Commerce is the only voice for small and medium sized businesses in the US. Big business already has many voices. Since the Chamber has apparently abandoned the voiceless, it really should change its name to the Chamber of Crony Big Business Commerce.
.
Jon Huntsman Sr. was source for Harry Reid claim that Romney hadn't paid income taxes for 10 years-NY Magazine
.
10/31/13, "The Huntsmans Lied Their Way Through the 2012 Race," NY Magazine, Dan Amira
"Just as Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas suspected all along, Jon Huntsman Sr., the billionaire father of the 2012 presidential campaign's least successful candidate, was the source for Harry Reid's bombshell claim that Mitt Romney hadn't paid any income taxes for ten years. That's according to Double Down: Game Change 2012, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin's yet-to-be-released look at the 2012 race. Huntsman Sr. flatly denied the accusation at the time, and the rumor was eventually proven utterly false. The book also reveals that, while serving as ambassador to China, Huntsman the Younger "repeatedly assured top White House officials that he was not considering a Republican presidential bid, even as he was meeting with potential campaign strategists during a trip to his Washington home around Christmas 2010."
10/31/13, "The Huntsmans Lied Their Way Through the 2012 Race," NY Magazine, Dan Amira
"Just as Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas suspected all along, Jon Huntsman Sr., the billionaire father of the 2012 presidential campaign's least successful candidate, was the source for Harry Reid's bombshell claim that Mitt Romney hadn't paid any income taxes for ten years. That's according to Double Down: Game Change 2012, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin's yet-to-be-released look at the 2012 race. Huntsman Sr. flatly denied the accusation at the time, and the rumor was eventually proven utterly false. The book also reveals that, while serving as ambassador to China, Huntsman the Younger "repeatedly assured top White House officials that he was not considering a Republican presidential bid, even as he was meeting with potential campaign strategists during a trip to his Washington home around Christmas 2010."
Ironically, when Huntsman did run, he spent much of the campaign speaking out against America's "trust deficit."" [NYT]
.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)