US airstrikes kill at least 250 ISIS fighters in convoy outside Fallujah, official says

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Published June 29, 2016

FoxNews.com

Facebook Twitter livefyre Email

NOW PLAYING

Iraq: Fallujah 'fully liberated' from ISIS

A series of American airstrikes killed at least 250 ISIS fighters driving in a convoy outside Fallujah on Wednesday, a senior U.S. defense official confirmed to Fox News.

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

The strikes occurred on the outskirts of the Iraqi city in "southern Fallujah," a second U.S. defense official told Fox News.

"There was a strike on a convoy of ISIS fighters trying to leave a neighborhood on the outskirts of southern Fallujah that we struck," the official said.

At least 40 vehicles were destroyed in the airstrikes, a U.S. official told Reuters, which was first to report the air assault.

The U.S. airstrikes come roughly 24 hours after the Istanbul airport bombings where ISIS is considered the prime suspect, according to top U.S. officials.

CIA Director John Brennan on Wednesday said the attack "bears the hallmarks of ISIL's depravity."

"If anybody here believes the U.S. homeland is hermetically sealed and that ISIL would not consider that, I would guard against it," Brennan said, using another acronym for the group.

Earlier this month, Brennan told Congress that the U.S. battle against the Islamic State has not yet curbed the group's global reach and that they are expected to plot more attacks on the West and incite violence by lone wolves.

He said ISIS has a large cadre of Western fighters who could potentially act as operatives for attacks in the West.

Fox News' Lucas Tomlinson and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

©2016 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.Privacy - Terms - FAQ

Trump refers to alleged Bill Clinton sexual indiscretions as 'rape'

| Fox News

www.foxnews.com

 

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump used the word "rape" Wednesday evening to describe alleged sexual misconduct by former President Bill Clinton. 

Trump made the comment during an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity. The real estate mogul was answering questions about an unflattering story published this past weekend by The New York Times involving his relationships with women when he turned his attention to Bill Clinton.

"By the way, you know, it's not like the worst things, OK," Trump said. "You look at what Clinton's gone through with all of the problems and all of the things that he's done."

Hannity went on to question whether the newspaper would interview women including Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey. All three have accused Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct.

"In one case, it's about exposure. In another case, it's about groping and fondling and touching against a woman's will," Hannity said.

"And rape," Trump responded.

2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →

"And rape," Hannity repeated.

In response, Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill said Trump was "doing what he does best, attacking when he feels wounded and dragging the American people through the mud for his own gain. If that’s the kind of campaign he wants to run that’s his choice."

Allegations of womanizing, extramarital affairs and abuse have trickled out over the course of Bill Clinton's political life, including what his campaign referred to as "bimbo eruptions" when he first ran for president in 1992.

More allegations of misbehavior emerged after investigators in 1997 started looking into Clinton's sexual encounters with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Clinton was impeached over the Lewinsky affair.

In 1998, he agreed to an $850,000 settlement with Jones, an Arkansas state worker, who had accused Clinton of exposing himself and making indecent propositions when Clinton was the state's governor. The settlement included no apology or admission of guilt.

Broaddrick, a nurse, in 1999 claimed she was raped by then-state Attorney General Clinton at a Little Rock hotel in 1978. Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer, claimed Clinton fondled her when she met privately with him at the White House in 1993 to seek a job.

Clinton denied the allegations by Broaddrick and Willey.

Trump has made clear in recent weeks that he intends to make Bill Clinton's sexual history a key campaign issue, describing him at rallies and on social media as "the worst abuser of women in the history of politics" and labeling his wife an "enabler."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

COMMENTS

Milwaukee school officials say budget item listing $471G for Black Lives Matter a misunderstanding

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

By Perry Chiaramonte

Published May 16, 2016

FoxNews.com

Facebook Twitter livefyre Email

Milwaukee school officials say they are not paying Black Lives Matter $471,073, even though the 2017 budget lists the item. (AP)

An item in the Milwaukee Public Schools' proposed budget listing $471,073 for Black Lives Matter has critics fuming, but district officials said Monday it is all a misunderstanding.

ADVERTISEMENT

Although the budget draft lists the controversial activist group, whose members have called for attacks on police officers, as the recipient of the funds, school officials said much of the money would go to hiring and training three social studies teachers.

“No funding is going to any Black Lives Matter organization,” Tony Tagliavia, a spokesman for Milwaukee Public Schools told FoxNews.com in a statement. "The specific expenditures, which are also outlined in the budget proposal, are for three social studies teachers and staff development for other employees.”

The funding would also pay for a “cultural studies curriculum” which aims to “[ensure] that culturally responsive teaching practices are in place at all schools, enhancing the district vision for student participation in a wide range of after-school activities..."

 

Related Image

Nearly $500,000 of taxpayer dollars in Milwaukee will be going towards the creation of a “cultural studies curriculum” based on the tenets of the Black Lives Matter movement which will pay for not only the salaries of three teachers dedicated to the program, but for training as well.

When asked what role Black Lives Matter would play in the training and curriculum development, school officials said the budget is funding both staff and curriculum that is being developed by staff in conjunction with an advisory council that includes community, parents, educators, staff and students. 

"The focus is on racial disparities and inequities in education that must be addressed," the Milwaukee School District official said to FoxNews.com in a written statement. 

Kyle Olson, founder of Wisconsin-based schools watchdog Education Action Group, said the Milwaukee School District has a reputation for wasteful spending and poor performance. If Black Lives Matter is involved in training and curriculum, taxpayers and parents alike should be worried, he said.

Milwaukee, WI Profile | FindTheHome

“All I’ve seen from ‘Black Lives Matter’ is a fomentation of hatred against the police, increased racial division and making excuses for the combination of poor parenting and failed policies from big city liberal politicians,” said Olson.

The story was initially reported by local radio station WISN 1130 AM, which cited the line item in the proposed 2017 school budget listing $471,073 for “Black Lives Matter.”

Perry Chiaramonte is a reporter for FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter at@perrych

How Donald Trump Beat Roger Ailes at His Own Game

Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty, Frederick M. Brown/Getty

by TONY LEE27 Jan 20163233

Did Fox News expect anything less from Donald Trump?

After the network taunted the GOP frontrunner for two days leading up to Thursday’s Fox News GOP presidential debate, Trump finally decided to skip the debate on Tuesday evening, setting off another chaotic media firestorm that will make him the centerpiece of every story from here to the Iowa Caucuses on Monday.

By pushing Trump over the edge in what the network may now clearly view as a miscalculation, Fox News may have inadvertently done Trump a favor while doing itself a huge disservice.

When Trump and Fox News began sparring over Megyn Kelly’s objectiveness at the beginning of the week, Fox News boss Roger Ailes may have figured that the combativeness would create more controversy, which would lead to even bigger ratings for Thursday’s debate.

Since the Republican National Committee cut ties with National Review as a debate partner after National Review published its anti-Trump issue, Trump felt that Fox News should have replaced Kelly with a more objective moderator, especially after Kelly helped National Review Editor Rich Lowry gin up the magazine’s “Against Trump” manifesto last week.

“Sooner or later Donald Trump, even if he’s president, is going to have to learn that he doesn’t get to pick the journalists—we’re very surprised he’s willing to show that much fear about being questioned by Megyn Kelly,” Fox News said in a Monday statement.

After Trump polled his Instagram followers on Tuesday about whether he should participate in the Fox News debate (Trump asked: “Megyn Kelly is really biased against me. She knows that, I know that, everybody knows that. Do you really think she could be fair at a debate?”), Fox News inexplicably upped the ante by mocking and taunting Trump in an unprecedented statement to left-leaning Mediaite:

We learned from a secret back channel that the Ayatollah and Putin both intend to treat Donald Trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president — a nefarious source tells us that Trump has his own secret plan to replace the Cabinet with his Twitter followers to see if he should even go to those meetings.

Perhaps Ailes wanted to get an over-the-top response from Trump so the network could hype the Kelly v. Trump clash like Vince McMahon promotes Wrestlemania. Controversy does indeed create cash—and ratings. But even veteran CNN journalist John King said he had never seen a media organization—let alone one that claims to be “fair and balanced”—issue such a statement, which inexplicably turned the process for choosing the country’s next president into a joke.

Fox News’s taunt was the last straw for Trump, who decided soon after that he was done playing Ailes’s games after the “wise-guy press release.” After reading it, Trump said, “I said, ‘bye, bye.’”

After blasting “lightweight” Kelly as a “third-rate” journalist at an Iowa event, Trump said that his decision to skip the Fox News debate was “pretty close to irrevocable.”

“Fox is playing games,” Trump said. “They can’t toy with me like they toy with everybody else. Let them have the debate. Let’s see how they do with the ratings.”

Soon after Trump’s Tuesday evening Iowa event, Trump Campaign Manager Corey Lewandowski told the Washington Post that Trump is “definitely not participating in the Fox News debate. His word is his bond.”

Game over.

Instead, Trump will hold a town hall event to raise money for Wounded Warriors while his rivals debate for three tedious hours. Fox News’s advertisers may even want some of their money back.

Ailes may really want to “save the country”from Trump, but his taunting press release, which was reportedly 100% his, may have unintentionally done Trump many favors while backfiring big time on Fox News if Trump keeps his word and skips the debate.

First, Fox News’s childish press release from left field proved to Trump that the network had no intention of being impartial, and it gave him the perfect excuse to skip a debate from which he did not have much to gain. Frontrunners with huge leads routinely avoid giving their upstart challengers debates because there is not much to gain and everything to lose. Now, Trump won’t have to go through Fox News’s anti-Trump gauntlet while fending off seven challengers bent on dethroning him. It also allows Trump to separate himself from his crowded field of challengers.

Second, unlike other GOP candidates, Trump has never needed Fox News. Because of his unmatched celebrity and near-universal name recognition, Trump has been able to go over the heads of the mainstream media cable and network news networks in an unprecedented way this election cycle, getting his message—and criticisms of other candidates—directly to voters. And as the frontrunner heading into Iowa, he doesn’t need a Fox News debate to close the deal with his supporters.

But Fox News needs Trump for ratings. Already, Ailes has reportedly been desperately trying to reach out to Trump, who has reportedly told Fox News that he will only field calls from Rupert Murdoch. Fox News will probably now have to make major concessions to get Trump to participate in the debate.

The one downside of skipping the debate for Trump is that he may leave himself open to three hours of attacks without being able to defend himself in real time. But Trump could easily display his mastery of social media and Tweet his counterattacks. Or better yet, Trump could go on rival networks the next morning and have comebacks ready for everything that was said about him the night before. By saturating the media the morning after the debate, when final impressions about what happened the night before are congealed, Trump could have the last word on every issue/criticism/candidate in the crucial few days before Iowans vote since Trump will be the story regardless of what happens at the debate. Nobody, after all, knows the“orchestra pit theory of politics” better than Ailes. And Trump’s media appearances on Friday morning will bigfoot anything that happened the night before.

Thursday’s debate will not be as compelling without Trump and may resemble a glorified undercard debate. It will lack drama and, hence, ratings.  John Kasich will continue to appeal to liberals. Jeb Bush’s new haircut, posture, and gestures will not convince viewers he has more energy. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie will try his best to be relevant by attacking the gobbledygook spoken by the Senators. The moderators will probably ignore Dr. Ben Carson again. And Sens. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) will drone on like Senators and viewers will think at times that they are watching C-SPAN.

By skipping the debate, Trump will only reinforce his strengths among his supporters. Trump has drawn new voters into the political process and rocketed to the top of nearly every poll because blue-collar Americans think he will be their “jackass” who will stick up for the country and their interests against Washington’s permanent political class and the global elite that have colluded to screw them over. By giving Fox News the proverbial middle finger, Trump reinforces his anti-establishment/outsider bonafides.

Trump’s potential absence from the debate, though, presents some dangers for Fox News’s brand.

Conservative voters felt that Fox News had a finger on the scale for establishment GOP candidate Mitt Romney during the 2012 election cycle. And after the network hired CNN retreads and endlessly promoted centrist Kelly after the 2012 election, many of the network’s core viewers unenthusiastically watched Fox News because it was the least offensive news outlet on television. Kelly’s giggling “love-fest” with Michael Moore on Tuesday evening did the network no favors with heartland viewers that Rush Limbaugh saiddo not think Fox News is the “conservative network that it used to be.”

The network’s treatment of Trump has indeed only reinforced the suspicions many Fox News viewers have had about the network’s move toward the center. When Fox News and Kelly tried to take out Trump’s knees in the first debate by painting him as a sexist with a misleading and loaded question that accused Trump of referring to women as “pigs,” “dogs,” “disgusting animals” and saying that it was a “pretty picture” to see a “Celebrity Apprentice” contestant “on her knees,” the backlash was immediate. A Fox News sourcetold New York magazine that “ in the beginning, virtually 100 percent of the emails were against Megyn Kelly” and Ailes “was not happy” because “Most of the Fox viewers were taking Trump’s side.”

One can only wonder how Fox News viewers will react after the network taunted and mocked the GOP presidential frontrunner and compelled him to walk away from the last debate before the Iowa caucuses.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Big Journalism, 2016 Presidential Race

Trump More Than Doubles National Lead in NBC/WSJ Poll

www.nbcnews.com

CHARLESTON, S.C. — Donald Trump has more than doubled his national lead in the Republican presidential race ahead of Thursday night's GOP debate here, according to the results from a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Trump is the first choice of 33 percent of national Republican primary voters - his highest percentage in the poll. He's followed by Ted Cruz at 20 percent, Marco Rubio at 13 percent and Ben Carson at 12 percent. Chris Christie and Jeb Bush are tied at five percent. No other Republican presidential candidate gets more than 3 percent.

Trump's 13-point lead over Cruz is an increase from last month, when he held a five-point advantage over the Texas senator, 27 percent to 22 percent.

Yet in a hypothetical one-on-one race between the two Republicans, Cruz tops Trump, 51 percent to 43 percent, while Trump beats Rubio in their one-on-one matchup, 52 percent to 45 percent.

In a three-way contest featuring the Top 3 Republicans in the poll, Trump gets 40 percent, Cruz 31 percent and Rubio 26 percent, underscoring the overall strengthen out of the outsider/insurgent wing of the Republican Party.

Maybe the most striking finding in this NBC/WSJ poll is the growing GOP acceptance of Trump. Back in March, only 23 percent of Republican primary voters said they could see themselves supporting the real-estate mogul. Now that number stands at 65 percent.

The Republican candidates with the highest percentages on this question are Cruz (at 71 percent, up from 40 percent in March) and Rubio (at 67 percent, up from 56 percent 10 months ago).

By contrast, only 42 percent of Republicans say that they can see themselves supporting Jeb Bush, which is down from 75 percent in June.

Sixty percent of GOP primary voters say they can see themselves backing Carson - down from 77 percent in the late Oct. 2015 NBC/WSJ poll, when he was leading the Republican field.

The NBC/WSJ poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies (a Republican polling firm) and Hart Research Associates (a Democratic firm) from Jan. 9-13. The margin of error for the responses among the 400 Republican primary voters is plus-minus 4.9 percentage points. For this full poll, click here.

COMMENTS

Judge Napolitano: Why Obama's executive action on guns is unconstitutional

SECOND AMENDMENT

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

Published January 05, 2016

FoxNews.com

Is Obama's executive action on guns unconstitutional?

President Obama announced Tuesday that he is issuing an executive order on guns and background checks. Here’s a look at what the president is doing and if it is even legal under the Constitution of the United States.

Just what is an executive order?  A presidential executive order is a written instruction to persons in the executive branch of the federal government informing them of the manner in which the president wants federal laws or regulations enforced. Executive orders do not direct private persons, or persons in the legislative or judicial branches of government. Executive orders remain in effect until abandoned or rescinded by the president who issued them or by a successor president.

President Obama has very little room to issue executive orders on guns because the congressional legislation is so extensive, detailed, and clear. The principal thrust of the president’s orders addresses the requirement for background checks in occasional sales and the requirement that occasional sellers become federal licensees and the imposition of reporting upon physicians.

Congress has expressly removed occasional sales (sales not made by full-time dealers) from the obligation of obtaining federal licenses and from conducting background checks.

The president is without authority to negate the congressional will on this, and any attempt to do so will be invalidated by the courts. Mr. Obama will now require that anyone who sells a gun, that is even an “occasional” seller will be required to perform a background check. By defining what an “occasional seller” is, the president is essentially interpreting the law, a job reserved for the courts.

The courts will ignore his interpretation, and impose their own.

As well, by requiring physicians to report conversations with their patients about guns to the Department of Homeland Security, (yes, even an innocent conversation in the examination room, “we gave Bobby a bee bee gun for Christmas, we plan to get him some instruction on how to use it”) the president will be encouraging our government to invade the patient/physician privilege.

But wait, there’s more. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental liberty. Under the Constitution, fundamental liberities (like speech, press, worship, self-defense, travel, privacy) are accorded the highest protection from governmental intrusion.

One can only lose a fundamental right by intentionally giving it up, or via due process (a jury trial resulting in the conviction of criminal behavior). President Obama --  whose support for the right to keep and bear arms is constitutionally limited to the military, police, and his own heavily-armed body guards --  is happy to begin taking America to a slippery slope down the dark hole of totalitarianism whereby a president can negate liberty.

Finally, we still have a Constitution in America. Under the Constitution, Congress writes the laws, the president enforces them, and the courts interpret them.

President Obama can no more write his own laws or impose his own interpretations upon them than the Congress or the courts can command the military.

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel

The owner of CNN and TNT wants to transform commercial breaks into 3-minute-long native ads

www.businessinsider.com.au

Turner Broadcasting — which owns TV networks including CNN, TNT, and Cartoon Network — has a plan to transform its commercial breaks to make them more like its programming.

At the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this week, Turner is showcasing its “Native Plus” product, which will see it replace some commercial breaks that tend to showcase anywhere between five and 10 different 30-second ads a with 2-to-3-minute-long “native” ad for a single advertiser.

Turner will work with the advertiser to create the longer-form content, which it says will be more “powerful and impactful to the viewer.” The thinking, presumably, is that a longer ad will give the advertiser more space to convey their key messages and that the elongated slot will provide standout compared to traditional commercial breaks.

The advertiser can also choose to use their existing digital marketing content, extending it to a TV audience — a role-reversal from recent years when marketers used to be criticised for simply uploading their TV ads to YouTube and Facebook and hoping they would appeal to a digital audience.

In a press release, Turner says: “Turner Native Plus will extend storytelling into the commercial pod by developing the right environment for the client, increasing exposure to the brand, and as a result, driving higher ROI [return on investment.]”

AdAge reports that Intel will be one of the first brands to trial Native Plus.

US primetime TV ratings declined 10% year on year, according to Nielsen’s monthly live viewership data for December. However, as analysts at Nomura Securities pointed out in a recent research note, Turner was one of the bright spots of the industry in December.

CNN reported a 119% year-on-year ratings increase in primetime, while Cartoon Network recorded primetime viewership growth in nine of the last 10 months. The increases helped offset ongoing ratings declines at TBS and TNT, meaning aggregate primetime ratings were up 2% year-on-year.

Follow Business Insider Australia onFacebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn

COMMENTS

Trump Jumps To 39 Percent in Post Debate Fox Poll

Getty Images

by NEIL MUNRO18 Dec 2015152

Donald Trump has spiked his primary support to 39 percent among the 402 GOP primary voters reached in the latest Fox News poll, released Friday evening.

In mid-November, Trump was at 28 percent in a Fox poll. His December score of 39 percent is almost a 40-percent spike  in one month.

In the new December poll, 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

97%

 climbs 4 points to 18 percent, while 

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

79%

 is down 3 points to 11 percent. Brain-surgeon Ben Carson crashed from 18 percent down to 9 percent. The poll was conducted after Tuesday’s GOP debate in Las Vegas.

Gov. Jeb Bush, once the hero of the establishment GOP, scored only 3 percent, equal to Gov. Chris Christie, CEO Carly Fiorina and 

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)

93%

. Bush was at 5 percent in Fox’s November poll.

However, Trump may be hitting his support ceiling, partly because his support among women and college-educated voters is much below his support among non-college voters. He’s got the support of 45 percent of non-college voters, reflecting his strong campaign opposition to the inflow of cheap illegal labor.

But that narrow base of support means that Trump only gained two points when the poll’s respondents were asked to pick from a four-man field of Trump, Cruz, Rubio and Carson.

That narrow set of choices left Trump with 41 percent, while Cruz jumped to 25 percent, Rubio climbed to 17 percent, and Carson only reached 12 percent.

Also, Trump has the most distance to reach Hillary Clinton’s support, according to Fox’s poll.

He now lags behind her, 38 percent to 49 percent.

In contrast, Cruz matches Clinton, 45 percent to 45 percent, while Rubio is a little ahead, at 45 percent to 43 percent.

One advantage that Rubio has over Trump is stronger support among younger voters, perhaps because of the demographic differences between young and old. “Clinton tops Trump by 29 points among those under 30, while Rubio bests her by 4 points,” notes Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News Poll along with Anderson.

“For whatever reason, millennials are more resistant to Trump’s appeal,” said Fox.

The Fox News poll reached 1,013 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research, and Shaw & Company Research, on Dec. 16-17.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race,Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, poll

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/12/19/fox-news-poll-trump-jumps-cruz-climbs-carson-sinks-in-gop-race.html

Progressive Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee Pushes for Obama Dictatorship

February 5, 2014 By Jennifer Burke Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee Reminiscent of FDR’s Second Bill of Rights, members of the Congressional Black Caucus, along with a few more progressive Democrats, have formed the Congressional Full Employment Caucus. Their goals, as stated on their website is to serve as a platform and working group for Members dedicated to identifying solutions to our current unemployment crisis and advocating for legislative action. Ultimately, the goal of the Caucus is to realize the dream of a society in which every American who wants to work has the right to some form of employment.

American Black Racist.

d

Members of the caucus include Democrats Rep. John Conyers Jr., Rep. Maxine Waters, Rep. Charles Rangel, Rep. Frederica Wilson, Rep. Barbara Lee, Rep. Jose Serrano, Rep. Mike Quigley, and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee.
Jackson Lee, known for her staunch and constant defense of Barack Obama, plans on using this newly formed caucus to help Obama with pledge to make 2014 be ‘a year of action’ with or without Congress. In support of his pledge to rule America as a dictator, Jackson Lee has stated that the Congressional Full Employment Caucus will help Obama by sending him numerous executive orders. This will be their top priority.
As reported at CNSNews.com, Jackson-Lee made the following statement to reporters during the launch of the caucus on January 29^th.

 “We will be answering the call of all of America because people need work and we’re not doing right by them by creating work,” Jackson Lee said.
“I believe this caucus will put us on the right path and we’ll give President Obama a number of executive orders that he can sign with pride and strength.”

- See more at: http://www.tpnn.com/2014/02/05/progressive-democrat-sheila-jackson-lee-pushes-for-obama-dictatorship/#sthash.MKe3ORx4.dpuf

Obama Speechwriter: Obama Plagiarized Bush's 2007 SOTU FNC (1.28.2014)

OBAMA ONE SICK B@ST@RD. Hates Bush but stole his speech... WTF ???? If you are a liberal and support this jackass of a fool then you are one of the same. 

Speechwriter: Obama Plagiarized Bush's 2007 SOTU FNC (1.28.2014) 

 

 

Are you the "Correct Race" ? Crystal Night 1938 Coming to America

“There is an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that came out over the weekend that every American should see,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “I think Tom is right… He is a hero. He is a hero. Somebody needs to say it. It is the same seed.”
The letter, titled “Progressive Kristallnacht Coming?” reads:

This is a very dangerous drift in our American thinking. Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendent “progressive” radicalism unthinkable now?

Tom Perkins
San Francisco

DInesh D'Souza, Highly Successful Anti-Obama Documentary Indicted for Allegedly Violating U.S. Election Law

NEW YORK (TheBlaze/AP) — A conservative scholar and author known recently for his critical works on President Barack Obama has been indicted in New York on charges he violated campaign finance laws.

Federal prosecutors announced the charges Thursday against Dinesh D’Souza, who made the anti-Obama documentary “2016: Obama’s America.” They say he’ll be arraigned Friday on charges he directed $20,000 in illegal contributions to be made in the New York Senate race in 2012. The funds allegedly headed to the Wendy Long campaign, who unsuccessfully ran for Hillary Clinton’s U.S. Senate seat.

D’Souza found out he was being investigated by the feds in the mid-2013, months after his anti-Obama documentary earned roughly $33 million at the box office, according to the Hollywood Reporter. The film went on to become the second most popular political documentary in U.S. history.

Prosecutors say the San Diego resident was charged with causing the illegal campaign contributions to be made and causing false statements to be made in connection with them. They say the criminal case resulted from a routine review by the FBI of campaign filings by various candidates after the Senate race.

A defense attorney says D’Souza didn’t act with any corrupt or criminal intent.

But Gerald Molen, a co-producer of “2016,” told THR that the charges are politically motivated.

Just days before the indictment, Molen penned an op-ed on TheBlaze titled, “In Michael Moore’s America, Speaking Out Against the President Gets You a Visit From the Secret Service.”

In it, he argued that in the world of people like Michael Moore, “dissent is only allowed for those who share his ideology.” He bashed Moore for calling on the Secret Service to visit D’Souza for calling President Barack Obama as the “Trayvon Martin in the White House.”

The producer is now arguing that it’s obvious that D’Souza is being singled-out over an “an alleged minor violation.” He also connected what he believes to be political targeting in this case to the targeting done by the IRS.

“In America, we have a long tradition of not doing what is commonly done in too many other countries — criminalizing dissent through the selective enforcement of the law,” Molen told the Hollywood Reporter.

“In light of the recent events and the way the IRS has been used to stifle dissent, this arrest should send shivers down the spines of all freedom-loving Americans,” he later added.

Read the entire indictment via Politicker:

Other Must-Read Stories

• Guess Which Hollywood Actor and Major Obama Supporter Mitt Romney Was Seated Next to for an Entire Flight
• Top GOP Senator Says Obama Could Be Impeached Over 'Most Egregious Cover-Up in American History'
• 5 'Devastating Secrets' the Obama Admin Has Allegedly Fought to Keep From the American Public
• In Michael Moore's 'America,' Speaking Out Against The President Gets You a Visit from the Secret Service (op-ed)
• Nancy Pelosi: Today's Worst Person On Earth (moneymorning.com)

D’Souza, Dinesh Indictment

Winthrop coach Pat Kelsey addresses Sandy Hook shooting

Winthrop coach Pat Kelsey addresses Sandy Hook shooting 

Awake up America, its about the way we are raising our children and the lack of Jesus Christ in our society that is at the root of this evil.  obama needs to be man up and somehow become a leader over night and "Lead".  Im not asking him to do something, Im telling him to be Presidential and man the hell up and lead.

Newtown Shooter Sane? Comment of the Day

A new article on Yahoo! by Jason Sickles attempts to shed new light on the Newtown Massacre. Apparently the gunman didn't just snap, but rather showed control by planned his operation. Among the things he did in his planning - destroyed his hard drives and loaded numerous rounds into gun clips. The main point of the article was that the author didn't want the public to think this guy was insane, psycho, or more generally, suffering from mental disorders. Why? Because he wants you to believe that a sane person could do something like this. How? Well he would never actually say this out loud but liberals want you to subconsciously believe that guns have their own minds, and that these evil guns can convince good people to fill innocent people up with lead. It's just another nuanced angle they can use to pry our rights away in the future. They want you to believe that ANYONE and possibly EVERYONE that has access to guns not only can do it, but most likely will if you don't take all the guns away.

But luckily, this is still a very unpopular view. Nearly ALL of the most popular comments in the comments section reject this thesis and instead seem to collectively agree that just because the guy was clearly 100% psycho doesn't mean he is stupid or incompetent.

But my favorite comment came from a guy that wanted to throw everyone's opinions out and start fresh and clean:


"Look I'm black, and I am very aware of all the statistics regarding crime from those that look like me. Everyone has a reason, my dad wasn't around, my mom was on crack, or I live in a bad neighborhood, and you looked at me wrong. Guess what, I don't care. America has become such pansies until we want to accept all reasons. How about a reason to live right, a reason to respect others. I don't tolerate excuses from myself, my kids, or the lame excuses I hear from others. I'm certainly not going to listen to this hogwash about some allegedly brilliant kid living in a 4k SQ ft. house in a fantastic neighborhood talk about how miserable his life has been. He was evil, and it would've helped if they had given the kid a fricken hair-cut. No way we would've given this kid this kind of empathy had he been black, and neither should we. We all have mental challenges, stress, and other concerns. But to blow away little kids, unforgivable, another point, had this been some Arab......please. No this was one of our home grown young American gone bad, just like the gang bangers ruining this country." - Truthbetold

 Way to put things back into perspective, Truthbetold. I like it.

BREAKING: Shooter DID "snap." Watch this video that has Rick Levanthal with real information:

CNN's Piers Morgan uses stupidity, dead 1st graders to sell gun control

I don't know about you but listening to a guy from another country question a very basic RIGHT guaranteed to me by my country's constitution doesn't sit well with me. It's even worse when that guy is British. My ancestors fought and in some cases died to ensure that I have the rights written in that document, and it was written in direct response to the British oppression of the time. So you can imagine the rage I felt listening to this:

But let's get to what Piers is doing here. First he is using complete nonsensical stupidity and ignorance to sell the idea of ridding the U.S. Bill or Rights of its 2nd Amendment. In the video, Steve Dulan makes a perfectly logical case by saying that licensed and properly trained people who carry should be allowed "to carry in places that [they] couldn't carry before." He goes on to say that the only way to stop a deranged killer is to shoot him. At this point Piers loses his mind and calls it "a load of total hogwash"because "if everyone was armed in [the Aurora, Colorado] theater, TWICE as many people would have been killed in the mayhem that would have erupted." 

Here are the list of things you have to either ignore, or be completely stupid about in order for that to be correct:

1. That trained, law abiding citizens would somehow become careless about innocent human life when it came time to use a weapon. Where this comes from is that people like Piers are so terrified of guns that they think the guns are possessed to the point that it has its own personality, that it is an evil living thing and that it wants to kill and will when given the opportunity. They also believe that ALL people that possess guns are also under the gun's spell - that they must find an excuse to use it, and to kill as much life as possible. Because of this irrational fear of guns, all logic gets thrown out the window. You can tell when Piers says that when other, innocent citizens in a massacre are armed, that "twice as many people would be killed," what he really means is that those armed citizens will just simply join in on the massacre! Or maybe what he means is that the armed innocents will draw their weapon and start shooting as fast as they can pull the trigger while they spin in 360 degree circles, completely disregarding human life? Let's reintroduce LOGIC into this debate. A mass murderer points ONE gun at many people, and of course, many people die. When MANY, properly trained people take aim at ONE person, the only way more than ONE person dies is by freak accident. Considering the body count in Colorado, Connecticut and elsewhere, I think anyone not willing to take the chance of an accidental death to save so many DOZENS of lives is kidding themselves.
2. That video games replicate the complexities of aiming and shooting a weapon. Everyone that has had the luxury of comparing video games to real life know that your view through a monitor is extremely limited and that aiming is extremely cumbersome. In real life you are much more aware of whats around you and aiming is about as difficult as changing the channels on a TV with a remote.
3. So let's show the real-world proof:

Grandpa here knows his stuff! Lots of people around, and he shoots right past them. "Twice as many people" were NOT killed. Piers' argument is based on nothing more than his cowardly, European inspired FEAR of guns.

But besides Piers' use of fear, ignorance and pure absence of logic to make his point, at 6:44 of the video he plays Tarzan on the heartstrings of devastated and mourning America while simultaneously BLAMING those patriots that defend the Constitution by screaming out "HOW MANY MORE KIDS HAVE TO DIE BEFORE YOU GUYS SAY WE WANT LESS GUNS NOT MORE?"

For that, Piers earns the Low-Life of the Year award for 2012.

Here's a suggestion Piers - you need to assimilate to OUR country by embracing everything we stand for, or get the hell out of here. You DO NOT belong here and you have officially worn out your welcome.

This is Victoria. She died a hero Friday, 14 Dec 12

This is Victoria. She died a hero today. She hid her first graders in the cabinets and closets after hearing the gunfire. When the shooter came to her classroom

, she told him that her students were in the gym. He then gunned her down and moved on. She saved the lives of all of her students. Please pass this on if you see it. She deserves to be remembered for her bravery. She was 27 years old and did what she loved.  May God comfort her family and hold them as they morn. 

All teachers should be licensed and trained to carry a concealed weapon just as police officers. 

Watch More News Videos at ABC | 2012 Presidential Election | Entertainment & Celebrity News

 

ESPNNewYork.com columnist Rob Parker RACIST slam on Redskins starting quarterback Robert Griffin III’s

I am going to start this by quoting ESPNNewYork.com columnist Rob Parker the real CORNBALLER. A RACIST Parker blasted out at RG3 by saying, "if Griffin was “a brother, or is he a cornball brother?” and questioning both his reported Republicanism and his decision to become engaged to a white woman.
“I am an African-American in America,” Griffin told USA Today. “That will never change. But I don’t have to be defined by that. … We always try to find similarities in life, no matter what it is so they’re going to try to put you in a box with other African-American quarterbacks — Vick, Newton, Randall Cunningham, Warren Moon … That’s the goal. Just to go out and not try to prove anybody wrong but just let your talents speak for themselves.”

This is as bad as it gets.  Racist ignorant fools on parade at ESPN.  For this guy to still have a job come Monday morning will show how the Media is Sick Bias and its ok to slam a black man for having a white girlfriend and being a republican.  

Hostess: Union Rules were Harder to Digest than Twinkies

Hostess: Union Rules were Harder to Digest than Twinkies

reprint from : Courtesy of Dr. Paul Price

Did union workers simply get their 'Just Desserts' for backing Hostess into a corner with too many unreasonable demands? Consider the evidence.

Union workers have now completed their mission. 18,500 jobs are gone forever.

The national labor bosses stood firm. Labor leaders are proud they stood up to those nasty ‘suits’ [see Entourage for definition] who refused to run a money-losing business simply to continue paying salaries and benefits.

Hostess posted a $341 million loss in 2011 on revenues of about $2.5 billion. Contributing to those 2011 losses:

• $52 million in Workers’ Comp Claims
• Dealing with 372 Distinct Collective-Bargaining Contracts
• Administration of 80 Separate Health and Benefits Plans
• Funding and Tending to 40 Discrete Pension Plans
• $31 million in year-over-year increases in wages and health care benefits for 2012 v. 2011

Uncounted in the above numbers were the outrageous union-imposed rules that made for a too-high-to-bear cost of sales:

• No truck could carry both bread and snacks even when going to the same location
• Drivers were not permitted to load their own trucks
• Workers who loaded bread were not allowed to also load snacks
• Bringing products from back rooms to shelves required another set of union employees
• Multi-Employer pension obligations made Hostess liable for other, previously bankrupted, retirement plan contributions from employees that never worked for Hostess at all

America has come to this. The only defense against insane union demands is the willingness to walk away and close shop.

With General Motors and Chrysler we found that even that remedy wouldn’t work.

 

 

Does America Need Her Bullies Back?

I read an inspirational but otherwise seemingly benign article today, accompanied by some comments that called into question the very society we live in. 

ABCNews Blogs did a puff piece about a 9 year old girl named Breanna Bond who lost 66 pounds to go from a very obese little girl to one that looks very normal and healthy. The article HERE, also included a video showing a very overweight younger toddler, presumably Breanna, playing on a jungle-gym while the audio in the background was Breanna talking of herself getting "bullied." 

Hidden between the lines of this article are some of the root causes of obesity in millions of American kids. 

The anchor starts off with the usual liberal plays of branding her a victim:

"Struggling with obesity," is what he called it. The article also points out that she was overweight since the day she was born, and so it constantly hints at her "struggle" also known to liberals as a "condition." They want you to think its a disease that she was so unlucky to catch, or be born with. 

The problem arises when the article goes on to contradict this stealthy premise by pointing out that the girl had no medical problems and was able to shed the weight by eating less and exercising more.

The victimization is just starting. Next the article talks about the bullying:

"The California girl soon became a target for bullies. "Everybody at school would call me names," she said. "They would call me fatty, they would call me fat head."
Ok, ok. We get it. We get that this kind of bullying is wrong. It's mean. It doesn't subscribe to the old saying, "Treat other as you would want them to treat you (assuming you don't want to be treated that way)." Nor does it subscribe to, "If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all."

But there is a major problem with this Political Correctness. This falls under the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Their family pediatrician told them their 100 pound kindergartener will "grow into her body." The parents eventually "fired" this doctor by getting a second opinion, but the REAL true irony of this is that the commenters representing the public at large piled on! 

A commenter named Michelle wrote, "The pediatrician said a 100 pound kindergartner would "grow into" her body? What kind of crazy doctor is that?"

Her comment got 1354 thumbs up to only 23 thumbs down at the time of this writing. Out of 84 replies to her comment, a majority of them echoed her sentiments. They called him a quack, and irresponsible jerk, and said he should have been the first one to go. Some of them envisioned that the doctor must also be overweight to have said something like that.

I believe that our society of political correctness is to blame, and this doctor was too weak minded to overcome it. Why are we blaming the doctor for what ended up being a diagnosis of "parents need to step up?" Our PC society demands that everyone embrace many bad things including obesity. Isn't it a very fine line between a doctor saying that an otherwise healthy girl needs to lose weight and a "bully" making fun of her for being fat? 

Even Breanna's dad said, "Don't be afraid to do the tough love." I'm willing to bet the Doctor, fearing for his job and possible public scrutiny just said she'll just grow into her body, knowing full well that the truth is that her parents needed to make her lose weight, but was too afraid to say it. The doctor didn't want to be branded a "Bully."

A big problem with liberalism is that you can't ever hurt anyone's feelings or else you are a bully. The truth hurts sometimes. In a liberal America, you need to either lie, keep your mouth shut, or just embrace your title as "Bully." The problem is that nobody wants to fall victim of the PC police and get branded the Bully. The big question is whether or not an America without her Bullies is a better America or not. I guess it depends on whether or not you believe America needs a healthy dose of HONEST "tough love" or not  ...

Angry Democrat Ed Anser Sick Bias Capitalism

 

Capitalism Will Save America
...