Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Obama’s Illegals SWAMP Blue-Collar City In Massachusetts

 By Neil Munro

President Barack Obama is dumping hundreds of Guatemalan migrants into the blue-collar town of Lynn, Mass.;
boosting its education costs, forcing cuts in government services, and helping raise rental prices for Americans, according to the city’s mayor.
Many “are illiterate in both English and Spanish [and] the odds of us getting them to pass a 10th grade math test are negligible,” Judith Flanagan Kennedy, the mayor of Lynn, told reporters Aug. 27.
Most of the city’s residents “are very afraid to speak publicly about it, because they don’t want to be branded as a racist,” Kennedy said.

But the voters tell her, via letters, emails and conversations, that “they are very concerned about the number of people coming in,” she said.
“They want to see it stopped. They’re glad I’m speaking up about it,” she said.
More than 1,200 supposed minors have enrolled in the town’s schools, including 538 new students in the 2013-14 school year, she said.

The new 538 students are part of the growing wave of Central American illegal migrants that have crossed the border to ask for asylum since 2010.

More than 125,000 low-skill migrants have been allowed into the country since last October. That number includes at least 60,000 “unaccompanied alien minors.” The minors include kids, youths and people masquerading as teenagers, most of whom are guided to the U.S. border by coyotes.
MORE dailycaller


By Chris Stirewalt

Unwilling or unable to work out a deal with either party in the Senate to address his legacy project of an international treaty on global warming, President Obama today will unveil a mock version of the pact that would bring new restrictions on U.S. emissions but be enforced globally through peer pressure. NYT: “…Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a ‘politically binding’ deal that would ‘name and shame’ countries into cutting their emissions. …
[The plan is] a proposal to blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges.
The mix would create a deal that would update the treaty, and thus, negotiators say, 
not require a new vote of ratification.” Shorter version: The reimagining of an old treaty would allow the administration to further clamp down on U.S. industry but would rely on the promises of other nations for compliance. Because Russia and China are totesanxious about “naming and shaming.” Totes.
[Dems use Gore to frack for cash - Washington Examiner: “The former vice president was the nominal ‘sender’ of a blast email Tuesday touting President Obama's push to address climate change…”]

The United States has rejected every successor treaty to the 1992 UN global warming “framework,” something the second-term Obama administration vowed to reverse, with Secretary of State John Kerry calling global warming “perhaps the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.” But Senate Democrats haven’t been interested in joining the fight, staging a symbolic “all-nighter” to seemingly show gratitude to key donors but otherwise have ditched the politically poisonous topic.
Unwilling to tangle with his own party on the issue, but desirous of showing some result for disaffected liberal Democrats, the president has decided to go it alone. And that’s got to be music to the ears of Republican Senate candidates like Michigan’s Terri Lynn Land, whose latest ad campaign is focused on slashing federal gas taxes. Carbon controls may sound good to the folks on Martha’s Vineyard, but won’t play well in blue states like Michigan, Iowa and Minnesota, let alone the battleground states of Kentucky, West Virginia, Arkansas, Alaska, North Carolina, Colorado and Louisiana.

[“Unfortunately, this would be just another of many examples of the Obama administration’s tendency to abide by laws that it likes and to disregard laws it doesn’t like — and to ignore the elected representatives of the people when they don’t agree” –Senate Minority Leader 
Mitch McConnell in a statement Tuesday.]

Why? - It seems unlikely that the legally questionable effort to further regulate U.S. industries would ever be put into effect. Obama would likely be out of office before the legal challenges could be worked out, and none of his potential successors would want to campaign as a proponent of something that, at best, could be called a workaround.

There is the aforementioned base appeal and it may help to further stoke Republican outrage over executive actions, which has a multiplier effect on Democratic donations. But this move, especially when there are obviously more pressing issues on the world stage, looks unlikely to succeed or gain much momentum. The most likely answer is that Obama believes what he says about global warming, which he called a threat to “everything we hold dear -- the laughter of children, a quiet sunset, all the hopes and dreams of posterity.” This is a legacy project, but one that might further ensure that he faces a Republican Senate next year.

VIDEO--Watch Israel’s Iron Dome Intercept 15 Rockets at Once

A video posted on YouTube shows 15 Qassam rockets being intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome antimissile defense system.

The individual capturing the video is filming at an entrance of a bomb shelter. The Red Alert siren can be heard throughout the video freebeacon

Kevin McCarthy Can Give Republicans Another Tool To Retake The Senate (And It Would Help Him In DC, Too)

By Christopher Bedford

When Congress comes back from recess in September, Rep. Kevin McCarthy will begin his first days as the majority leader of the House. The moderate but amiable California Republican will face a number of major challenges in his new role, among them a conservative-leaning caucus that will expect conservative votes; an autocratic Senate majority leader who won’t allow conservative measures to even come to a vote; a Democratic president bent on vilifying the GOP as obstructionist at best; and a tough election, where the GOP needs to win the Senate to have any hope of legislative success before January 2017.

Fortunately for Republican leadership, Mr. McCarthy has a vote he can bring to the floor — one that Americans overwhelmingly support; one that would unify conservatives; and one that would put red state Democrats in an awkward position while giving farm state Republicans a boost. That vote is to repeal the death tax.

The death tax, or the estate tax, is a pariah to the American public — a tax whose unpopularity consistently eludes progressives. Polls consistently show a large majority of the American public supports death-tax repeal, including a poll by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, which found that it is considered the most “unfair” federal-level tax. That 2009 poll (unfortunately, the most recent) showed just over one-third of those polled favoring complete repeal. This week, by contrast, favored

Republican target Obamacare hovered at just above half of Americans supporting repeal.
And while the House hasn’t voted on repealing the death tax since sending it to the Senate in 2005, Congress has, by contrast, voted over 50 times to change Obamacare — and six times to repeal it. 

The reason for unwavering popular opposition to the death tax (under whatever name pundits call it), is that it is a tax on responsible savings, and it is a tax that favors corporations while punishing family businesses that can’t exempt themselves from it. This is precisely the sort of vote conservative and libertarian Republicans can unite on. It is the sort of vote that will unite them behind Mr. McCarthy, who is currently — and correctly — viewed as a moderate. Winning conservative support right out of the gate would be a good play for the incoming majority leader, and allow him more trust on later votes
MORE dailycaller

Romney On Not Running Again: ‘Circumstances Can Change

By Patrick Howley

Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said that “circumstances can change” when asked Tuesday about his decision not to run for president again in 2016, and said that his former running mate Paul Ryan would make a great president.
“I know you’re going to press, but you know, this is something we gave a lot of thought to when early on I decided we’re not going to be running this time,” Romney told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. “And again, we said look, I had the chance of running. I didn’t win. Someone else has a better chance than I do. And that’s what we believe, and that’s why I’m not running. And you know, circumstances can change, but I’m just not going to let my head go there.”
“I remember that great line from Dumb and Dumber,” Romney said, paraphrasing a Jim Carrey line about one in a million odds. “You’re telling me I have a chance?”

“Well, you know, let’s say all the guys that were running all came together and said hey, we’ve decided we can’t do it, you must do it,” Romney said. “That’s the one of the million we’re thinking about.”

Romney was quick to praise Rep. Paul Ryan, who told Hewitt Monday that he would like to see Romney run again in 2016. Ryan is currently angling for the chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee and said that he does not intend to run for Speaker of the House after the 2014 midterms.
“I think Paul has the kinds of qualities you’d like to see either in a president or in the highest levels of leadership in other parts of Washington, namely the House,” Romney said.
Romney enjoyed a public relations bump after the sympathetic behind-the-scenes 2012 campaign documentary “Mitt” was released this year.

The campaign on which that documentary was based, however, was notably weak and reflected a poor understanding of modern media. Romney was upfront in the interview about some of his mistakes.
“First, I think we have to work very early on, on Hispanic media, to make sure that our message is heard loud and clear by Hispanic voters,” Romney said. “I think we underinvested in Spanish media, and I don’t think we monitored what the Obama people were saying and countered it.”
MORE dailycaller

Déjà vu for Barack Obama in Syria

 By Herb and Ewing

Barack Obama has a bad case of Syria déjà vu.

Nearly one year after he stood at the brink of ordering military action against Syria — but said he’d only step across if Congress agreed — the president finds himself in an eerily similar situation.

Then, as now, the world has been horrified by violence in the region. Then, as now, the drumbeat of increased military operations has grown louder. And then, as now, a president whose political rise was partly defined by his opposition to interventions abroad must decide whether to escalate American involvement, either on his own or with permission from Congress.

So Obama is once again stuck on a national security crisis: worried about political support on Capitol Hill for a vote on intervention and held back by his own visceral resistance to unilateral military action.The White House, for the record, says this is not the same dilemma Obama faced last Labor Day.
“The goal of the mission from last year was aimed squarely at the [Bashar] Assad regime,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest. “The situation a year later is markedly different.”
Last year, the White House argues, the question was whether the U.S. should put its combat boot onto the scales of the Syrian civil war, tipping them in favor of moderate fighters in their struggle against Assad, Syria’s president.
Now, the question is whether the U.S. should expand to Syria its current operations in Iraq against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which Pentagon and other leaders warn is an ever-growing threat to the U.S.
 MORE politico

Tepid clapping greets unpopular Obama's VA speech at American Legion convention Video

President Barack Obama faced a tough crowd on Tuesday – American military veterans – and fell flat on his applause lines as he failed to win over the American Legion's convention-goers.
His 35-minute speech seemed to have reminded the audience of the stark divide between the White House's policy choices and the feelings of the men and women often called on to carry them out.
A Virginia legionnaire who served in the U.S. Marine Corps told MailOnline that 'a small group of Obama's admirers – and there are some here – sat near the front and tried to generate applause for him about 10 times.'
'They didn't get much pickup,' the retired lieutenant colonel said of the 'instigators' gathered at the Charlotte, North Carolina event, but 'they were persistent. You could tell when the applause was genuine and when it wasn't. It was obvious to everyone here.'
Most of the veterans sat on their hands, leaving awkward silences where White House speechwriters expected ovations. 
'Some of these guys – well, most of them – remember that Obama sent Biden to speak to us last year in Houston, and blew us off entirely during his 2012 campaign.'
That year, the president sent a 3-minute video message instead of coming to Indianapolis. Mitt Romney, his Republican rival, flew 1,000 miles to speak in person.

The veteran asked MailOnline to conceal his identity. 'I don't need that kind of trouble,' he said. 'I work for a government contractor.' 

After the customary introductions and thank-yous to dignitaries, Obama spoke for nearly eight full minutes on Tuesday without a single clap.

He touted his foreign policy bona fides, boasting that 'even countries that criticize us – when the chips are down and they need help, they know who to call. They call us. That's what American leadership looks like.'

'Sustaining our leadership, keeping America strong and secure, means we have to use our power wisely,' Obama cautioned, in keeping with his slow approach to battling ISIS and other terror groups overseas.
'History teaches us of the dangers of overreaching and spreading ourselves too thin, and trying to go it alone without international support, or rushing into military adventures without thinking through the consequences.'


Will IRS’s Strategy of Destroying Evidence Pay Off?

By Seth Mandel

If the latest revelations about the IRS are correct, then its officials have approached the abuse-of-power scandal with a clear strategy, pretty much from the beginning. They have been betting that, since their illegal targeting campaign against those who disagree with President Obama has had the backing of Democrats in Congress, they needed only a media strategy, not a political one.

And that media strategy appears to have been: conceal or destroy potential (and actual) evidence, and assume that this activity will be less damaging than whatever is in the files they’ve worked to hide.

It’s a direct challenge to the media, in other words.

There are two aspects to the latest news. The first is that, according to Judicial Watch, the Justice Department believes Lerner’s records are backed up, but don’t want to put in the effort to find them:
Department of Justice attorneys for the Internal Revenue Service told Judicial Watch on Friday that Lois Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe.  The Obama administration attorneys said that this back-up system would be too onerous to search.  The DOJ attorneys also acknowledged that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) is investigating this back-up system.
We obviously disagree that disclosing the emails as required would be onerous, and plan to raise this new development with Judge Sullivan.
This is a jaw-dropping revelation.  The Obama administration had been lying to the American people about Lois Lerner’s missing emails.
There are no “missing” Lois Lerner emails – nor missing emails of any of the other top IRS or other government officials whose emails seem to be disappearing at increasingly alarming rate. All the focus on missing hard drives has been a diversion. The Obama administration has known all along where the email records could be – but dishonestly withheld this information. You can bet we are going to ask the court for immediate assistance in cutting through this massive obstruction of justice.
The second piece of news is pointed out by the New York Observer:

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Mississippi Test Scores Suffer Under Common Core

Test scores for Mississippi schools have dropped since the state adopted the Common Core standards.

The students were evaluated by tests aligned with their previous standards, but they will soon replace those tests with Common Core-aligned tests.
According to the Associated Press:
In grades 3-8, the average share of students scoring proficient or higher on language arts tests fell by 2.5 percentage points from 2012-2013. The average share of students scoring proficient or higher on math tests fell by 4.6 percentage points. State officials have said in the past that Common Core math classes will show bigger differences from Mississippi’s old standards than reading and language arts classes. […]
Among last year’s 37,000 third-graders, 13 percent or 6,500 scored minimal, the lowest of four levels, on the state reading test. This year’s third-graders must pass a new computerized reading test to move on to fourth grade. Passing levels have yet to be set. The roughly 30-minute test will be given in April.
The state superintendent of education told AP that the drop is “because the 2014 tests were not aligned to Mississippi’s higher academic standards,” and that new standards will “provide a more meaningful measure” of student learning.

The new tests will be available in the spring. But former Mississippi state testing director James Mason has cautioned that the Common Core-aligned tests, which are being produced by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, will be “probably twice as hard.”

10 Acts of Jihad in America That Americans Haven’t Heard About,Videos

While the world’s attention is focused on the Islamic State, and its jihadis tell Americans that they will drown all of you in blood, jihad activity continues in the United States – although hardly anyone notices through the fog of mainstream media obfuscation.

The report noted laconically in its fifth paragraph, without elaboration, that “multiple sources with knowledge of the investigation say Brown told police he carried out the murders because he was on a jihad to kill Americans.” added, also deep in its story on Brown’s murders: “Prosecutors say Brown is a devout Muslim who had become angered by U.S. military intervention in the Islamic world, which he referred to as ‘evil.’”

 If these news outlets were committed to informing Americans about the true nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, this seemingly insignificant detail would be in the headline and central to all the reporting on this case. But this myopia they share with the main stream media in general.

Here are some recent acts of jihad on American soil that you may have missed – all from this spring and summer:

1. Seattle Muslim “on a jihad to kill Americans” prime suspect in four murder cases

The report noted laconically in its fifth paragraph, without elaboration, that “multiple sources with knowledge of the investigation say Brown told police he carried out the murders because he was on a jihad to kill Americans.” added, also deep in its story on Brown’s murders: “Prosecutors say Brown is a devout Muslim who had become angered by U.S. military intervention in the Islamic world, which he referred to as ‘evil.’”
If these news outlets were committed to informing Americans about the true nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, this seemingly insignificant detail would be in the headline and central to all the reporting on this case. But this myopia they share with the mainstream media in general.



House Republicans hire legal representation to sue Obama

By Christina Marcos

House Republicans have hired D.C. law firm BakerHostetler to provide legal representation to sue President Obama.

House Administration Committee Chairwoman Candice Miller (R-Mich.) signed a contract on Monday for Baker Hostetler to represent the House in the civil action lawsuit in a U.S. district court against the president.
"The president must be held accountable, and the House will continue to act in an open and transparent manner to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution," Miller said in a statement.
The contract authorizes the House general counsel to pay BakerHostetler $500 per hour for "all reasonable attorney time expended in connection with the litigation."

However, the contract states that the legal costs will not exceed a "firm cap" of $350,000 that "will not be raised."

Meals, travel expenses and travel time that do not involve work on the lawsuit would not be reimbursed by the House. Under the contract, BakerHostetler must submit a monthly report detailing the expenses to the House general counsel.

In addition, the contract prevents BakerHostetler partners and employees from making any statements or giving interviews to reporters without express permission of the House general counsel.

Before leaving for the five-week August recess, the House passed a resolution along party lines to authorize a lawsuit against the president for his use of executive power. The lawsuit focuses on Obama's delay of the healthcare law's requirement that employers with 50 or more workers provide insurance coverage.

Democrats argued the lawsuit would be an improper use of taxpayer resources.
“This outrageous waste of taxpayer dollars is yet another reminder of House Republicans’ misguided priorities. Only in John Boehner’s world does it make sense to pay lawyers $500 per hour to work on a partisan lawsuit while refusing to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 for hardworking Americans trying to feed their families," said Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The cost of the lawsuit was unclear at the time of the resolution's passage. Miller said during floor debate in July that Republicans wouldn't know until contracts were finalized.
Democrats have demanded the House GOP to provide details on the cost of the lawsuit to taxpayers.

Funeral Pastors Compare Michael Brown’s Death To Jesus Christ’s Crucifixion [VIDEO]

By Heather Smith

A crowd of family, friends, music stars, civil rights leaders and preachers gathered at the Friendly Temple Missionary Baptist Church on Monday for the memorial of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old robbery suspect who was fatally shot by local police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Mo.
Brown’s uncle, Pastor Charles Ewing, gave a passionate eulogy and made parallels of his nephew’s life and that of the life of Jesus Christ.
“Michael Brown was 18 years old.  He was shot around noon.  Our Lord and Savior hung on the cross — now compare our time frame 12 o’clock to the Jewish time frame which is at the sixth hour.  Michael Brown died on August the 9th.  Jesus hung on the cross between the sixth and the 9th hour.”
Pastor Ewing continued his Jesus comparison by tying the St. Louis area’s geography to biblical numbers.
“If you look at the demographics of St. Louis, Missouri, we are known for the Gateway to the West. Now Holy Spirit said ‘well, look at 12 gates of Israel.’ The East gate that Jesus is going to walk to is shaped like an arch. Look at Interstate 70 rides 2, 153 miles from Maryland to all the way to Utah. Jesus spent 70 hours. Israel went into captivity for 70 years.”
The pastor went on to compare Brown to the story of Cain and Abel:
“Abel are mentioned in this passage seven times. Abel is mentioned in this passage 14 times. Brother is mentioned in this passage seven times. The question that Cain asked God — because his sacrifice was not acceptable because God is required before we come to him that our sacrifice is accepted before him.
Cain asked God: ‘Am I my brother’s keeper?’  This is a question we should ask one another. God’s purpose for this to happen — even though we can’t fully understand. But at such a time as this, God is shaking
Ewing says that, like Jesus had prophesied his own crucifixion, Michael Brown predicted his own death too. The pastor also compared police officer Darren Wilson to “Judas.”
“Michael Brown prophetically spoke of his demise. Not giving justification or legalizing this officer — it does not give him the right to take his life. Judas when he betrayed Jesus Christ — he yet have to suffer the consequences.”

Glenn Beck Ripped Conservatives While Trying to Get CNN Deal

By Tony Lee

Glenn Beck was bashing Americans opposed to illegal immigration, decrying partisan politics, and positioning himself toward the center just as he was reportedly trying to strike a deal to get his programming on CNN.

CNN's Brian Stelter reported that "the idea fizzled fast and talks aren't expected to resume."
 CNN and HLN are expected to lay off at least 550 more people in what is being called another "bloodbath," and Beck was reportedly trying to get on the HLN network, where he got his first break in cable television.

Stelter, who is one of the best-sourced reporters in the television industry and made a name for himself out-scooping more established mainstream media reporters, claimed he had no knowledge of the negotiations whatsoever when he unusually gave Beck two Sundays worth of relatively good PR, showcasing Beck's Texas offices and future plans.

During that interview, Stelter said industry sources have said that major cable networks are reluctant to pick up Beck's network because "there's no other must-see TV on the channel."

However, Stelter's line of questioning revealed that industry executives may be hesitant to make deals with someone who once referred to President Barack Obama as a racist and accused Obama of having problems with white people.

Stelter suggested that Beck was responsible for inflaming much of the polarization he now decries during his mainstream media appearances and told him that many Americans remember Beck for "saying on [Fox News] that President Obama is a racist." Beck said he regretted making the comment and replied, "we all live and learn."

Stelter also praised Beck for how "you evolve your views" and "change your mind" on issues, and Beck mentioned that he does so after various "pivot points." Beck also said he would rather be Walt Disney than Edward R. Murrow or Rush Limbaugh.
More Breitbart

FWD.US President Suggests Foreign Workers 'Truly Great,' Americans 'OK'

By Tony Lee

Joe Green, the president who was also Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg's college roommate, was asked in a recent Bloomberg TV interview how he felt about big-tech companies like Microsoft, Cisco, and Hewlett-Packard that are slashing American high-tech jobs while pushing for massive increases in guest-worker permits.

 He suggested that foreign workers are "truly great," while Americans are "just sort of okay."
Green stated that jobs in technology, engineering, and design are "extremely high-value, high-productivity jobs, where the difference between someone who is truly great and just sort of okay is really huge."
After saying that it is important not to think of the economy in a zero-sum way,"
Green said that "if those jobs are not able to be hired here," then they will go to places like Vancouver and England. has poured millions of dollars into getting drastic increases in guest-worker visas that the Congressional Budget Office determined would lower the wages of American workers. The group, along with other high-tech interests, is pushing for more guest-workers at a time when, as Breitbart News has extensively reported, "scholars and studies from organizations on the left, right, and center have debunked the notion that there is a shortage of American high-tech workers."

Green, though, insisted that America had the capacity to absorb more foreign workers and even claimed that a "vast, vast majority of tech engineers that I talked to who are from the United States are very supportive of bringing in people from other countries because they want to work with the very best."

Try telling that to the Oracle manager who recently sued the company, alleging that "he was fired for complaining when he was told to offer an Indian worker he sought to transfer to California substantially lower pay than white workers in the same position."

Green said he did not believe that those being laid off were untalented, emphasized the "meritocratic culture" of high-tech companies, and claimed, "We treat people the same, whether they are from the United States or not from the United States."

Obama's Staggering Blindness To Growing Terror Threat

By David Limbaugh
Image Shaw

One does not need to be Sun Tzu or George Patton to know that a nation must recognize an enemy before it can develop a strategy to defeat it. But one apparently does have to be someone other than President Barack Obama.

Since he took office, Obama has spent considerable energy trying to convince us how peaceful and magnificent the religion of Islam is and how exceptional acts of terrorism springing from it are.

He has also been telling us in words and deeds that such terrorism can best be prevented by overtures of peace and good will toward Islam, understanding that the root cause of this violence is poverty, and developing an action plan to address it.

That means the United States must downsize its military, because our sheer strength and power constitutes a threat — a provocation to the rest of the world.

It means that we must pursue “economic justice,” a wretched euphemism for undermining our capitalist system and redistributing our wealth at home and abroad.

But even Obama’s stalwart supporters in the liberal media now understand that this man doesn’t have a clue about how to deal with threats to the United States. He is highly proficient at campaigning, community organizing, partisan agitating and ordering underlings to carry out his agenda, but he is psychologically incapable of attending to the details himself and appears to have no interest in actual governance beyond setting his statist goals and issuing his implementation orders.

Obama either can’t focus on high-level problems he didn’t anticipate in connection with his various utopian schemes or is so narcissistic that he rides around blindly in his golf cart like Mr. Magoo, wholly unaware of the damage he’s done to his own reputation as a serious, engaged and thoughtful person.