tagged w/ Liberals
Notorious gun-grabber demands Obama skirt Constitution in effort to outlaw firearms.
New York mayor and noted gun-grabber Michael Bloomberg went on Meet the Press today and told Obama he should skirt Congress and the Constitution and take executive action against firearms owners in the United States
“It’s time for the president, I think, to stand up and lead and tell this country what we should do — not go to Congress and say, ‘What do you guys want to do?’ This should be his number one agenda. He’s president of the United States,” Bloomberg said.
“What the president can do is number one, through executive action, he can order his agencies to enforce the laws more aggressively.”
Issuing an executive action, unlike an executive order, does not modify a law. Executive actions, a Obama administration office told NBC News in October, concern “regulation, enforcement, statements of policy… and numerous other things.”
Obama, unlike his predecessors, “is not expanding executive power to meet the demands of an external crisis. Instead, he is counteracting a new pattern of partisan behavior – nonstop congressional obstruction – with a new, partisan pattern of his own,” Andrew Romano and Daniel Klaidman wrote for Newsweek prior to the election.
White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer told Newsweek Obama will “work with Congress where we can – and then be willing to act where they won’t.”
Obama imposed a number of unilateral executive actions in his first term, including a move to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, implementing greenhouse-gas regulations held up in the Senate by allowing the EPA to interpret existing law, bypassing the usual confirmation process to make four recess appointments while the Senate held pro forma sessions to block them, and ignoring Congress and violating the Constitution by sending troops to Libya (see the entire list posted at Breitbart.com).
Obama has already used executive action to instruct the ATF to conficate guns. In September, Obama’s Justice Department gave the ARF authority to “seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled-substance abuses.” In other words, the agency now has the power to size firearms from people not convicted of a crime or even charged with a crime.
In July, as the Fast and Furious scandal unfolded, Obama’s Justice Department devised new rules requiring border-state gun dealers to report large purchases of firearms made by individual buyers over short periods of time.
“Limiting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens is not going to solve the problem of guns being trafficked into Mexico,” said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, following the order. “This rule unfairly punishes citizens in border states who have the right to purchase firearms to protect themselves and their families from dangerous drug traffickers and human smugglers.”
“Without the approval of Congress, Obama is making gun shops in border states report gun purchasers to the federal government. Obama bypassed Congress and, instead, used the Justice Department to make this the law of the land,” said Alan Gottlieb, Chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
“The anti-gun rules require gun dealers to report anyone who makes multiple semi-automatic weapon purchases within five days to the ATF. The gun buyer’s personal information is then put into a massive government list where their gun activity will likely be tracked and monitored for the rest of their lives. 18,000 law-abiding Americans will be put on this list every year.”
48 hours after the Gabby Giffords shooting, Attorney General Eric Holder sent out a memo almost completely ignored by the establishment media. The memo called for more restrictive sentencing of so-called “straw purchasers” who buy weapons and transfer them to someone else (this activity was encouraged by the government during Operation Fast and Furious).
Obama and his gun-grabbing allies in Congress may try to gum up the current background check system implemented under the Brady law under the guise of eliminating supposed loopholes. If they can turn the system into a bureaucratic nightmare, background checks may grind to a halt and fewer firearm permits will be issued.
Currently, 92% of Brady background checks through NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) are completed while the FBI is still on the phone with the gun dealer. If this system can be further tied up with red tape and new regulations imposed by executive action or decree, fewer firearms will be sold by federally licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers.
If the above can be implemented and Obama and the Democrats move to outlaw unlicensed private sellers who are not subject to the Brady Act, then the sale of legal firearms can be reduced to a trickle.
http://www.infowars.com/bloomberg-demands-obama-take-executive-action-against-second-amendment/Notorious gun-grabber demands Obama skirt Constitution in effort to outlaw firearms.... more
searching souls searching
http://latestbloomer.uskoa.com/snapshot-series-post-2012-election-the-gops-moment-for-self-resuscitation/searching souls searching... more
Apparently according to the Obama campaign it is impossible for women to wrap their brains around the mishandling of the economy and failed foreign affairs of the past four years. According to the Obama campaign the last four failed years are not important because the only topics women care about for the future are those issues that revolve around their vaginas and uteri. Talk about a war on women. Talk about a mountain of disregard and disrespect. This inane supercilious advent of the democrats that women are too self-focused and too self-centered to care about the nation at large is beyond the pale. Insulting doesn’t even begin to describe their latest campaign denouement.
Women need a good economy. Women want to feed their children, clothe their children, house their children as independent and self-sufficient adults. Women are not JULIA who relies on government to ensure her very existence. Women are strong self-realizing human beings that know without a strong economy their children have no future and no American dream. Women do not want the government telling them how to raise their children. Whether it’s the government telling women what their children should eat and drink, to how women choose to feed their newborns or what words people are allowed to use. Women do not need nor want a nanny state overseeing their lives. No, government does not know better than any individual about what the future should hold.
Ironically the original feminist movement railed against the societal predisposition to view women through the lens of their sex organs. The original feminist movement’s purpose was for society to see women first as capable independent human beings. Women were to viewed as persons able and willing to stand on their own two feet if given the proper respect and proper chance.Women demanded the right to decide for themselves about their bodily integrity, not that someone else should pay for it. Women demanded good schools and good employment opportunities. Women demanded independence of thought, action and existence. Women do not need a pat on the head from government as if they are misbegotten ill-prepared children. Women are not lapdogs waiting for a human master to recognize their existence. Women are tired of being infantilized by government and the democratic left. http://usa2mom.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/american-women-are-more-than-their-vaginas/
Today the Obama campaign has come full circle. They see women as dependent upon government largesse for their success, their healthcare and especially their bodily integrity. The democrats have once again turned women into chattel. But this time instead of the husband being your lord and master, it is the government that rules over a women’s world. The left thinks that women are weak of mind and ability, incapable of success without the intervention of “Big Daddy” government. It’s ironic really, that in the end, all the left sees in a woman is her reproductive organs.
American women understand that with economic independence comes bodily integrity, self-realization, independence, freedom of thought and action, along with the American dream. For with economic realization comes the political power to make your dreams come true. American women know what needs to be done to advance themselves and their children. It’s called hard work not government largesse. American women know that what they need is not a nanny-government but freedom to create their own future. American women really do understand that the most important organs in their bodies are their brains and their hearts. American women know that they are more than their vaginas.Apparently according to the Obama campaign it is impossible for women to wrap their... more
The women’s group “Liberal Ladies Who Lunch” is putting together an unusual event, which it is calling “Access Denied: Sex Strike.” The event, which is scheduled to take place between April 28 and May 5, features a poster saying “If our reproductive choices are denied, so are yours.” Younger men and women may not remember the "good old days" when the only reproductive choice we had was to deny men access to sex. In truth, if we lose our hard won rights to medical care, birth control and pregnancy choice, it won't only affect women. Men will have to...go back to the days when they waited for or paid for sex. This is issue impacts all of us. This strike is designed to make that point. Ask your man to speak up for your rights, because when we lose our reproductive choices, so do they.
And to think, it's an unimpeachable article of faith on the Left that conservatives are reactionary. A few points:
(1) One could argue that there is a Constitutional right to access birth control, established under Griswold. But as I've said many times, nobody is seeking to ban or cut off access to contraception. This "strike" was prompted by the dust-up over the administration's very recent unconstitutional mandate, under which the federal government forces all employers -- including most religious employers -- to pay for health plans that must include "free" birth control. Push back against this federal power grab and affront to religious liberty in no way represents a deprivation of women's "rights." This manifesto also makes passing reference to abortion "rights" (extrapolated from "penumbras" or some such nonsense by the Supreme Court in 1973), which is also a red herring. Although pro-lifers are happy to have a debate about the legality and availability of abortion, the current debate has nothing to do with the issue, aside from the fact that the new mandate coerces religious institutions to fund certain abortion-causing drugs.
(2) Do these ladies realize that by suggesting this sex moratorium will require men to "go back to the days when they waited for or paid for sex," they're tacitly endorsing prostitution? Weren't a lot of people ticked off at Rush's inappropriate "joke" about Sandra Fluke being...a prostitute? I'm also unclear on whether certain pockets of women actually want to be called sluts. Liberal columnist Kirsten Powers has written about the "slut walk" movement, in which women "reclaim" the term (however that works), and Hot Air's Tina Korbe just wrote about a (related) "sluts unite" project. What are the rhetorical rules governing the use of this term? Help me out here.
(3) Is the idea that men -- conservative or otherwise -- will abandon their views on anything, let alone a core Constitutional principle, after one week of no sex? Glad to know these ladies hold us in such high esteem.
(4) After a full week of endless, mindless, and baseless "war on women" rhetoric from Democrats, The Weekly Standard's John McCormack highlights the inconvenient truth that President Obama (warmonger in chief on this front) has lost standing among female voters, according to the Washington Post poll we discussed earlier:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/03/12/bad_news_liberal_women_plan_sex_strike_to_protest_nonexistent_contraception_banThe women’s group “Liberal Ladies Who Lunch” is putting together an... more
A well kept secret? Many young Jews are questioning the wisdom of voting Obama. You won't see it in the msm, but you can see it in the movie that is the subject of this article.
A Jewish themed video about the U.S. presidential race that has “gone viral” has been nearly completely ignored by the mainstream media, which may not be all that surprising.
What is a cause for concern is that the Jewish media has failed to report on it as well.
“Absolutely Uncertain: Obama, Israel & the Nuclear Threat” was published on YouTube on September 26 by RightChange and is just under 19 minutes long. The video can be seen by clicking here. (Note: some of the dress is not in line with halakha).
According to the news website The Blaze, the video generated 650,000 hits in its first three days online. The article can be found by clicking here..
"Absolutely Uncertain”was at nearly two million views by October 7, 2012. Given the press attention Sarah Silverman’s pro-Obama video received in 2008 this is especially alarming. According to YouTube Silverman’s video has only 2,166,148 views as of October 7. Measured another way, Silverman’s video has just over 7,000 Likes and“Absolutely Uncertain” has earned just under 5,000 Likes.
Why isn’t the media, mainstream or Jewish, covering this obviously popular and influential video on Obama's views on Israel?
As The Blaze details “Irina, the 23-year-old “Jewish New Yorker” who narrates much of the documentary, explains that she has always seen American-Israeli relations as a cornerstone of American politics, reaching into both parties.”
Is the reason that the video has been ignored the overwhelming allegiance to the Democratic party that so much of the American Jewish establishment leadership has so aptly exhibited since the days of FDR?
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency / JTA newswire has not reported on “Absolutely Uncertain.” JTA is funded in large part by the Jewish Federation system. Many Jewish community newspapers depend on JTA for their national news and are also funded by Federations. It is worth noting that The Jerusalem Post has an editorial calling the privately-sponsored video a Republican campaign film and explaining that the link to the film was sent to JPost readers as a paid advertisement.
It should be clear from the popularity of “Absolutely Uncertain” that many Jews, especially young, committed Jews, are questioning the wisdom of supporting the Democratic party.
The question remains what future does the Jewish Federation system have in the U.S. if it continues to be so unabashedly one-sided? Can U.S. Jewish leaders afford to alienate even more Jews - and young Jews at that?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/12280A well kept secret? Many young Jews are questioning the wisdom of voting Obama. You... more
More B.S. from the M.B.A.
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/10/fridays-unemployment-data-three-levels.html#axzz28XHXcm7jMore B.S. from the M.B.A.... more
Breaking News: Big Bird On Ledge Atop 123 Sesame Street, Seeks Meeting WIth Mitt Romney ~ They Will Say ANYTHING!Oh, the Birdmanity!
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/10/breaking-news-big-bird-on-ledge-atop.html#axzz28XHXcm7jOh, the Birdmanity!... more
Ryan . . . ? Ryan . . .? Ryan . . .?
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/09/dems-convention-bill-clinton-teaches.html#axzz25c1h9fJ4Ryan . . . ? Ryan . . .? Ryan . . .?... more
Latest Blog Post
Yes Labor was once respected and rewarded with laws in our country but now thanks to the GOP, Republicans, Reaganites and now the Tea Party, those benefits, hard won by the working class, are fading fast. If the GOP keeps on lying and people keep on believing their lies all of these labor advancements will be a thing of the past. Ignorance is not bliss unless you’re a wealthy corporate shareholder who profits from all the Horatio Alger horseshit the Republicans have propelled upon their flock. Most jobs today offer a low hourly wage WITH NO, zero, zip, zilch, nada BENEFITS AT ALL. With no work no pay and no safety net, the Poor/Work Houses will return. thinkingblue
A poorhouse or workhouse was a government-run facility in the past for the support and housing of dependent or needy persons, typically run by a local government entity such as a county or municipality.
The term is commonly applied to such a facility that housed the destitute elderly; institutions of this nature were widespread in the United States prior to the adoption of the Social Security program in the 1930s. Facilities housing indigents who are not elderly are typically referred to as homeless shelters, or simply "shelters," in current usage.
Often the poorhouse was situated on the grounds of a poor farm on which able-bodied residents were required to work; such farms were common in the United States in the 19th and early 20th centuries; it could even be part of the same economic complex as a prison farm and other penal or charitable public institutions.
PS: Now we know what the Republicans mean when they shout TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK… to the days of the Poor House. Happy Labor Day!
WHAT WERE POORHOUSES?
the Poorhouse Story
(often also called Poor Farms -- and several similar terms --
or referred to with the older term -- Almshouses)
Poorhouses were tax-supported residential institutions to which people were required to go if they could not support themselves. They were started as a method of providing a less expensive (to the taxpayers) alternative to what we would now days call "welfare" - what was called "outdoor relief" in those days. People requested help from the community Overseer of the Poor ( sometimes also called a Poor Master) - an elected town official. If the need was great or likely to be long-term, they were sent to the poorhouse instead of being given relief while they continued to live independently. Sometimes they were sent there even if they had not requested help from the Overseer of the Poor. That was usually done when they were found guilty of begging in public, etc.
[One misconception should be cleared up here; they were not technically "debtors' prisons." Someone could owe a great deal of money, but if they could still provide themselves with the necessities for remaining independent they might avoid the poorhouse.]
the Poorhouse Story
Prior to the establishment of poorhouses the problem of what to do with paupers in a community was dealt with in one of three ways:
Outdoor Relief provided through an Overseer of the Poor: When people fell upon hard times and members of their family, friends or members of their church congregations could not provide enough assistance to tide them over, they made application to an elected local official called the Overseer of the Poor. Within a budget of tax money, he might provide them with food, fuel, clothing, or even permission to get medical treatment to be paid out of tax funds. http://www.poorhousestory.com/history.htm
In England, Wales and Ireland (but not in Scotland) a poorhouse was more commonly known as a workhouse. In early Victorian times (see Poor Law), poverty was seen as a dishonorable state caused by a lack of the moral virtue of industriousness (or industry as it was called). As was depicted by Charles Dickens, a workhouse could resemble a reformatory and house children, either with families or alone, or a penal labor regime to give the poor work at manual labor and subject them to physical punishment. As the 19th century progressed, conditions improved.Yes Labor was once respected and rewarded with laws in our country but now thanks to... more
Lotsa precip up in here
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/08/tuesday-august-28-day-2-of-2012.htmlLotsa precip up in here... more
That'll offend the bald vote, though.
http://www.mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/08/romneyryan-campaign-to-emphasize-their.html#axzz23kDUuE9zThat'll offend the bald vote, though.... more
Ron Paul's particularly pissed!
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/08/romney-steps-aside-endorses-paul-ryan.htmlRon Paul's particularly pissed!... more
Perhaps we can learn from it.
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/08/just-in-mars-rover-curiosity-sends.htmlPerhaps we can learn from it.... more
Congratulations to "Face The Nation" host Bob Schieffer, who finally, permanently, made his case for keeping the CBS News panel show a full hour! Schieffer talked to me last December for Poynter.org when the network announced plans for a short-term, hour-long experiment. You can literally hear the excitement in his voice in this interview. http://www.mrmedia.com/2012/07/cbss-bob-schieffer-finally-gets-his-60-minutes-of-face-2011-audio-interview/#.UBaHjkQmlGxCongratulations to "Face The Nation" host Bob Schieffer, who finally,... more
Sarasota Florida GOP Taps Donald Trump As "2012 Statesman Of The Year" After Syria's Bashar Al-Assad DeclinesLet us now praise . . .
http://mytinyspot.blogspot.com/2012/07/sarasota-florida-gop-taps-donald-trump.htmlLet us now praise . . .... more
Is more Donald better Donald?
The Rise of the GOP can be traced to Ronald Reagan's bid for the White House. At that time the American right wing drew inspiration not from conservatives but from liberal organizers like Saul Alinsky.
For public consumption, the GOP attempted to demonize Alkinsky with labels which often included the stock right wing attacks: liberal, commie, leftie! For 'in-house' consumption, however, the GOP was advocating and touting Alinsky's strategies and tactics.
The best strategy available to progressives now is not to create another party but to take back an existing party apparatus --the Democratic party. It will take years to mount an effective third party whose best hope would consist of 'brokering' a deal with more conservative wings of the only organized opposition to the GOP i.e. the Democratic party.
Progressives' best chance for changing the fascist direction taken by American politics may be found in a book that was, in fact, appropriated if not usurped by the GOP. I have in mind one Saul Alinsky whose 'Rules for Radical', written for a liberal, left leaning movement owing much to FDR and war opponents like Eugene Debs.
Interestingly, it is the GOP which has made more effective use of the strategies and tactics than have liberals or Democrats for whom 'Rules for Radicals' was written. It is cited in GOP campaign manuals, practiced in almost every campaign. I have personal knowledge of that, having acquired a few GOP 'campaign manuals' at a time when Tom DeLay was building a conservative machine while gerrymandering the state of Texas.The Rise of the GOP can be traced to Ronald Reagan's bid for the White House. At... more