At least it was not “very, very, very serious”

Eric Holder is a national embarrassment. By the way how confident should we feel that his Justice Department will be looking into the IRS scandal?

Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters Tuesday that the leak to the Associated Press that prompted the Justice Department to secretly obtain phone records for AP reporters and editors constituted a “very, very serious leak” that “put the American people at risk.”

The AP sent a scathing letter to the DOJ on Monday, after they were informed that the DOJ had secretly obtained two months worth of phone records from April and May of 2012, a period of time during which the AP reported on a covert CIA operation in Yemen to prevent an airplane bomb plot. The Justice Department had previously said it was investigating the leak.

“This was a very serious leak. A very, very serious leak,” Holder said Tuesday at a press conference. He added that it was possibly the most serious leak he had seen, or at least top two or three.

See, it was “very serious” In fact it was “very very serious”, in his personal top three very, very serious leaks it seems. I wonder if it was more, or less serious than selling guns to Mexican cartels?

 

Former SEAL blasts Bloomberg!

BRILLIANT!

Former Navy SEAL Dom Raso has a special message for NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others like him who are pushing for more gun control: “If you really cared about the American people, you’d stand up for more freedom for them, and not more power and status for yourself.”

The 12-year veteran is one of the newest NRA News contributors and has just released a diatribe against politicians who say they stand up for American safety but are quick to sacrifice essential freedom.

“It is unbelievable that politicians like Mayor Bloomberg think that they are experts on personal protection,” Raso says in the video. “Me and the guys I fought with, we didn’t go to war so that some politician could dictate whatever he thinks is best for the American people.”

“What have those guys ever accomplished that gives them any credibility on the subject of personal protection?” he adds later:

Go read the whole thing and check out the video

 

Thanks Barack… Nearly 50 Million Americans In Poverty, Worst Since LBJ

Nearly 50 Million Americans In Poverty, Worst Since LBJ – Big Government

Even as the Obama White House prepares for a star-studded White House concert featuring Queen Latifah, Cyndi Lauper, and Justin Timberlake, figures from the U.S. Census Bureau reveal that roughly 50 million Americans – one in six – now live below the poverty line.

.
…………………

Additionally, one in five American children have fallen below the poverty line; the last time poverty levels were this high, Lyndon Baines Johnson was president.

“In the last three years, there’s been a great change in the kinds of people we are serving,” said Director of Community Services at Catholic Charities of Baltimore Mary Anne O’Donnell. “There are increasing numbers of people who owned a home, lost their jobs, end up living in their car and are coming with children to our soup kitchen.”

The U.S. government defines a family of four earning under $23,021 as living in poverty. Income used to compute poverty status does not include non-cash benefits, such as food stamps and housing subsidies.

Welfare program enrollments have exploded under President Barack Obama. Americans on food stamps now outnumber the combined populations of 24 U.S. states, costing taxpayers more than double the amount spent on food stamps five years ago. In January 2009, 31.9 million Americans received food stamps. Today, that figure is 47.79 million.

The Obama Administration’s shift to looser eligibility requirements and lax oversight enforcement has also created what the Wall Street Journal dubbed a “food stamp crime wave.”

Also benefiting from the rapid rise in food stamps are companies like JP Morgan – which donated $808,799 to Obama’s 2008 campaign – who administer Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards. A recent report by the Government Accountability Institute found that since 2004, JP Morgan’s 24 state EBT contracts have totaled at least $560,492,596.02.

Other government programs, such as the disability program, have now morphed into proxy forms of welfare. A recent National Public Radio (NPR) investigation revealed that 14 million Americans now receive disability checks each month, costing taxpayers $260 billion annually. The report chronicled the rise of the “disability industrial complex,” a program fraught with fraud and abuse. In Hale County, Alabama, for example, one in four residents are now on disability.

Still, Obama promises that jobs and opportunity are on the way. “We’re going to fix our economy,” said Obama last week in Miami, Florida. “We’re going to fix our immigration system, we are going to make sure that our young people are getting a great education, we’re going to prevent them from being victims of gun violence, and we are going to make sure that everybody in this country has a fair shot and is doing their fair share.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

I think the Founders would approve

The Founders would use more eloquent language, but I think A Nod to the Gods has captured their spirit here

 

 

 

 

 

 

To those who will argue that I should use more “respectful” language I would pose one question. Do those miscreants seeking to deprive Americans of the right of self-defense have “respect” for our rights, or for the Constitution? Do they respect the truth when they deliberately lie about the number of times Americans use firearms to defend themselves? Do they respect honest debate when they seek to ram through legislation that would limit, or eliminate entirely my God-given natural rights? Do they show me any respect when they paint me, and other gun owners as nuts? Do they show us respect when they falsely seek to blame us for horrific tragedies like Newtown? The answer is no. So, why do I owe tyrants, seeking to rob my natural rights any damned respect?

 

——————————————————————————————————————————–

.
Ed’s interjection:

Indeed, “fuck you” is the very sentiment which spawned this great nation. If it hadn’t been for our forefathers’ “fuck you” mentality, the Boston Tea Party never would have happened. Saying “fuck you” to authority is what America is all about. In fact, the U.S. citizenry is the most profoundly “fuck you”-oriented society on Earth… by tradition. Hell, “fuck you” was the thought that finally motivated Rosa Parks to move to the front of the bus. Our general “fuck you” attitude has helped sustain us as a people for generations, and if by chance you don’t happen to agree with everything I just wrote, then “fuck you” too!

LA Times Worried About Those “White Conservative Gun Owners”

Your pathetic op-ed of the day, week, month, year

There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.

They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.

And the source the LA Times gathers this from? The Left-Wing SPLC

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been tracking hate groups for 30 years, released its latest report on the growth of these organizations this week. Its findings were, to say the least, alarming. The center divides its subjects into militias, which are mostly groups of weekend warriors who train for combat against imaginary foes; hate groups, which target minorities; and “patriot” groups, whose beef is with the U.S. government. Patriot groups first began surfacing after the massacre of a bizarre sect by federal agents in Waco, Texas, in the early 1990s. They showed their teeth in 1995, when a patriot adherent blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City.

Ah yes,the SPLC, which has as much credibility as MSNBS does. It is a Leftist group that tries to stay relevant by playing the Race Card as often as possible, oh and the Neanderthal Card too of course

What can be done to reverse this tide of belligerent ignorance? Not much. The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, and in fact most patriot activity consists of venting steam by meeting with like-minded Neanderthals and firing off blog posts threatening civil war.

The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, in other words, these people are LAW-ABIDING, and love their country, yet the LA Times is more worried about them than Jihadists?

 

Record 89,304,000 Americans ‘Not In Labor Force’… 296,000 Fewer Employed Since January

Record 89,304,000 Americans ‘Not In Labor Force’… 296,000 Fewer Employed Since January – CNS

The number of Americans designated as “not in the labor force” in February was 89,304,000, a record high, up from 89,008,000 in January, according to the Department of Labor. This means that the number of Americans not in the labor force increased 296,000 between January and February.

……….

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) labels people who are unemployed and no longer looking for work as “not in the labor force,” including people who have retired on schedule, taken early retirement, or simply given up looking for work.

The increase marks the second month in a row, after rising in January from 88.8 million in December. Those not in the labor force had declined in December from 88.9 million in November.

The nation’s unemployment rate decreased to 7.7 percent in February, down from 7.9 percent in January. Overall unemployment “has shown little movement, on net, since September 2012,” the Labor Department said.

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 236,000 in February, according to the report.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

City Councilman Freaks Out Shows His Ass Over Veteran Packing Heat With Concealed Carry Permit

Via Donald Douglas This shows clearly that some people do not belong in a y position of authority

Candy ass, he should keep walking if he does not believe in the right of self-defense. And let me, and Michelle Malkin remind you all how much the Left hates your guns, and YES, they are definitely looking to confiscate your guns

What happens when cheap sex replaces love?

Everything has a price, and yes, the hook up culture has had a price. It is costing us things like romance, love, real intimacy, and made dating, and being single much more difficult than it should be. It has cheapened, male/female relations, and twisted how we think about sex, traditional gender roles, marriage, and I believe has robbed us of a beautiful thing. Hey, as The Other McCain points out messing with nature has consequences and yes, quoting Jimmy Buffet helps prove the point

I really do appreciate the fact you’re sitting here.
Your voice sounds so wonderful,
But you face don’t look too clear.
So bar maid bring a pitcher, another round of brew.
Honey, why don’t we get drunk and screw?

Is this what they’re teaching in Women’s Studies classes nowadays? Evidently so, according to one young British feminist:

The idea that my generation are unhappy and sexually unfulfilled because, thanks to the dwindling of traditional gender roles, we’ve been able to have sex on our own terms, makes absolutely no sense to me. Especially as in Britain, we never really had a dating culture to begin with. Americans are complaining because “dinner and a movie” has been replaced with “hanging out”, when on this side of the Atlantic people have been flinging themselves at one another outside the pub following last orders since time immemorial, and it’s worked fine. Likewise, while the Americans see the classic “are u out?” fishing text as evidence of shallow promiscuity, we see it as a convenient way of minimising social embarrassment by ensuring both parties are too drunk to attempt a conversation capable of, let’s face it, shattering the illusion whose maintenance is so essential for successful coitus.

OK, so if getting “too drunk to attempt a conversation . . . is so essential for successful coitus,” how is this a triumph for women? Is this what being “able to have sex on our own terms” means?

Or does it mean, you’re getting played?

Making the bar/club/party scene your native habitat makes you a potential prey for the practicioners of “game.” And if he’s good at it, you won’t realize you’ve been played until it’s too late. Ladies, if want to know what the players really think of you, you should read their blogs:

What is a bar? It’s a social venue where women can receive attention from men at predictably constant rates. Every approach performed will increase her worth. Every hot stud who lays pipe inside her via a one-night stand will reinforce in her mind that she deserves Mr. Perfect. These men feed her ego like an IV bag nourishes a surgery patient.
The effect of all this is cumulative so that a 30 year old woman who is well past her prime will put out attitude multiple times higher than a hot 18 year old who just started going to clubs. Since the older woman simply can’t forget all those men who have approached her and wanted to take her home, she won’t receive your approach unless you’re nearly the best of what has attempted to f–k her in the past, even though the number of guys willing to wife her up has decreased exponentially. Nightlife venues give average women near unlimited choice and attention, causing a sharp degradation in her attitude, warmth, and even her appearance. . . .

More at the link. I am no Puritan, never will be. I am not condemning pre-marital sex either.What I am saying is that society has lowered its standards for women and their behavior. And that has resulted in too many women lowering their standards for themselves, both in who they date, and how they conduct themselves. And this really bad for men, and even worse for women. If you are happily married you might not notice, but, if like me, you are single, and dating, trust me you have noticed.

What Would the Father of the Constitution say to gun grabbers?

Gun control you say? The Left is pushing hard to negate much of the second amendment, and part of that is to call anyone who defends that amendment as a lunatic. Well are these people who say the Constitution MEANS what it says loony? Let us consult THE expert on the Constitution, James Madison. Via Steve

James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper #46:

But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole. The same combinations, in short, would result from an apprehension of the federal, as was produced by the dread of a foreign, yoke;and unless the projected innovations should be voluntarily renounced, the same appeal to a trial of force would be made in the one case as was made in the other. But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity. In the contest with Great Britain, one part of the empire was employed against the other. The more numerous part invaded the rights of the less numerous part. The attempt was unjust and unwise; but it was not in speculation absolutely chimerical. But what would be the contest in the case we are supposing? Who would be the parties? A few representatives of the people would be opposed to the people themselves; or rather one set of representatives would be contending against thirteen sets of representatives, with the whole body of their common constituents on the side of the latter.

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

Go read the rest. As a side note, it is amazing that more and more liberals are openly saying we need to scrap, or at least IGNORE the Constitution. I have long-held that destroying the Constitution is the end goal of the Left. For years, Liberals would scoff at such a suggestion. But, as the Left becomes more sure that they can render the Constitution, in this case the second amendment mute, they begin to be more honest about their disdain for our founders and their principles. The truth is the Left is as far removed from our Founders as the East is from the West. And their masks are slipping.

What happens when a political party runs out of ideas?

 

The Democrats have a big problem. Their ideological tank is on fumes, they have no ideas, they have nothing to offer, nothing to campaign on except race baiting, class warfare, and of course recycled ideas that have failed miserably in the past. This has been apparent to Conservatives for a very long time now, but, Democrats have been able to hide this ugly truth, until last night. Last night, President Obama had to run away from, or spin his economic record, and his energy policies because he has failed so miserably that he cannot defend either. the president spent as much, if not more time, looking down like some school boy being scolded, or gazing at the debate moderator than he did debating. Maybe he was wishing it was still 2008.

In 2008, Obama could hide, and, with the economy turning, and President Bush taking the flack for it, Obama could run a campaign based on empty promises, and baseless rhetoric. He, and his party had all the cards in their hands back then. But, then, something terrible happened to the Democrats, they won both houses and the White House. Swept into power, they had to govern. They had to lead, and even worse for them, they had to keep their promises to the American people. That is when the seeds for the 2010 elections were planted.

The Democrats, after bemoaning the “partisan politics” of the GOP, engaged in the most bitterly partisan politicking in recent memory. Instead of tackling job losses, they instead dove head first into taking over the nation’s health care, which poll after poll showed the nation did not want. Democrats could have insured their party majorities for years to come, but they let their power blind them. Obama ignored Republican plans to fix healthcare, and accused Republicans of not cooperating. They forced the health care bill through, showing their disdain for the people, and for the Constitution. President Obama’s promises to run a transparent administration, and to close Gitmo, and to not allow lobbyists access to his White House all melted away under the glare of Liberal power grabs. And the economy, got worse, and worse, and the discontent of Americans grew worse, and worse.

Then, the policies began to take effect. Obama, unable to pass cap-and-trade, bypassed Congress ordering his EPA to do what Congress would not. Obama used the BP oils spill to further hamstring drilling in the Gulf, he closed large areas to exploration. His policies have put more effort into increasing the food stamp rolls than into creating jobs. And the people have noticed. Last night, President Obama had to wear that suit of clothes for tens of millions of Americans to see. He could not use empty slogans, or hide behind the message of 2008. He could not blame bad economics on someone else, even though he tried. What last night forced Obama to do was to look into the mirror with America watching.

 

Justice Roberts Judicial Contortionist

Paul Ryan nails Justice Roberts for “contorting the law”

ABC reported:

“I’m very disappointed in the ruling. I think the chief justice had to contort logic and reason to come up with this ruling,” he said. “So one man decided against the dissenting opinion, against what I, you know, thought were his — his principles and judicial jurisprudence, he decided to leave this up to the American people. So now the stakes of this election could not be higher.”

…Ryan said this morning that he believes that a House vote to repeal President Obama’s health care reform law will take place later this month

I like the prospect of Paul Ryan as the VP more every day. He is a bright guy who has the ability to convey the Conservative message like few others.

How can we KNOW that voting Dick Lugar out was the right thing to do?

Well, it is really pretty easy actually. Since Lugar lost to Mourdock, the only people expressing sorrow are Leftists like Senator Weasel Dick!

The Senate’s top Democrat paid tribute to long-time Republican Sen. Richard G. Lugar (Indiana) on the Senate floor Thursday, offering the kind words in the midst of a blast at the tea party right that ousted the six-term senator in a primary Tuesday.

In his first public comments since Lugar’s loss, Senate Majority LeaderHarry M. Reid (D-Nevada) said Lugar was “has always been willing to extend a hand to colleagues across the aisle.”

“His first priority has always been getting things done for the American people, whether that means keeping the world safe from nuclear war or looking out for Hoosiers back home,” Reid said.

Lugar was defeated by Indiana state treasurer Richard Mourdock, who argued that the longtime senator had proven too willing to compromise with Democrats.

Democrats now see opportunity to make the red state competitive, as their party’s candidate, Rep. Joe Donnelly (D), argues Mourdock’s election would only contribute to Washington’s painful gridlock. Concluding his tribute to Lugar, Reid–eager to maintain his majority in November–pressed that message

“Throughout the history of this country, even in the most trying times, that’s times of great social and political unrest, our elected representatives have worked together despite their differece to do what’s right for all Americans,” he said. “So I worry when I see dedicated patriot like Sen. Lugar drummed out by tea party zealots for being too willing to cooperate. But that’s what happened on Tuesday.”

What senator Weasel dick REALLY means is that Lugar was a classic RINO that Democrats could count on to act like their tool! Good Riddance DICK!

Good news for Ron Paul. He is no longer the nuttiest person running for president!

Nope, not by a long shot!

WASHINGTON (AP) — Roseanne Barr said Thursday she’s running for the Green Party’s presidential nomination – and it’s no joke.

The actress-comedian said in a statement that she’s a longtime supporter of the party and looks forward to working with people who share her values. She said the two major parties aren’t serving the American people.

“The Democrats and Republicans have proven that they are servants — bought and paid for by the 1% — who are not doing what’s in the best interest of the American people,” Barr said.

Occupy Wall Street protesters popularized the “We are the 99 percent” slogan in their fight against economic disparity and perceived corporate greed.

Barr has submitted paperwork to the Green Party for her candidacy. The party’s presidential nominee will be selected at a convention in Baltimore in July.

Americans Blame Wasteful Government Spending For Deficit

Americans Blame Wasteful Government Spending For Deficit – Gallup

The large majority of Americans say spending too much money on unneeded or wasteful federal programs is to blame for the federal budget deficit, while 22% say the deficit is a consequence of not raising enough in taxes to pay for needed programs.

These results are based on an April 20-23 USA Today/Gallup poll. Given a forced choice, Republicans almost uniformly place blame for the deficit on too much federal spending, rather than a shortage of tax revenue. Majorities of independents and Democrats agree, albeit by somewhat smaller margins.

Accordingly, Americans generally favor spending cuts rather than tax increases as the way for Congress to reduce the deficit going forward.

This question asks Americans to choose among five ways of reducing the federal deficit, ranging from a total reliance on spending cuts to a total reliance on tax increases. The responses cluster at the “spending cuts” end of the spectrum. About half (48%) of Americans say reducing the deficit should be done mostly or only with spending cuts. Another 37% say it should be done equally with spending cuts and tax increases. Eleven percent say mostly or only with tax increases.

Thus, overall, 85% of Americans explicitly favor spending cuts as at least part of the solution to reducing the federal deficit, with more than half of these favoring only or mostly using cuts. This compares with 48% who explicitly favor tax increases as at least part of a deficit reduction strategy — a number consisting mostly of those who want an equal emphasis on spending cuts and tax increases.

The major partisan distinctions in response to this question reflect the choice between mostly/only spending cuts versus the equal use of spending cuts and tax increases. Republicans are most likely to favor the former; Democrats, the latter. Independents’ views are between these two extremes. Relatively few Americans of any partisan identification favor mostly or only using tax increases to reduce the deficit.

Implications

Given a choice, Americans of all political persuasions are more likely to say that too much wasteful and unneeded government spending is the cause of the federal budget deficit, rather than too little tax revenue. Americans of all political persuasions also say cutting back on federal spending should be a major focus of efforts to reduce the deficit going forward.

Still, some emphasis on tax increases is part of the solution for almost half of Americans. Thus, it appears Americans would most likely tell their elected representatives to attack the federal deficit primarily using spending cuts, but with a secondary reliance on raising tax revenue.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Wyoming gets it on gun rights!

Via Bluegrass Pundit

Via The New American:

An important step was taken yesterday in Wyoming toward restoring the constitutionally protected right of Americans to keep and bear arms, as that state became the second in less than a year to enact legislation affirming the right of its citizens to carry a concealed firearm without a special government-issued license.

Following adoption in the state Senate, the vote of the House in the Wyoming legislature approved the bill by a vote of 48–8 several weeks ago, and Gov. Matt Mead signed it into law on March 3.

The right to carry a concealed firearm without a special license issued by the state is often referred to as “constitutional carry.”

Outstanding!