Barack Obama’s Unfortunate New Movie
http://t.co/x7kI3cqxWR pic.twitter.com/8HOtKV3VSx
— MAD Magazine (@MADmagazine) June 3, 2014Hat tip: Twitchy
Barack Obama’s Unfortunate New Movie
http://t.co/x7kI3cqxWR pic.twitter.com/8HOtKV3VSx
— MAD Magazine (@MADmagazine) June 3, 2014America is an exceptional country.
When our country was founded, we crafted a constitution that Thomas Jefferson explained would serve as chains to bind the mischief of government. There has never been more mischief of government than there is right now.
And the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the constitution, are precious to every American. The Bill of Rights begins with the first amendment. For over two centuries Congress has not dared to mess with the Bill of Rights.
This amendment here today, if adopted, would repeal the free speech protections of the first amendment.
Mr. Chairman, when citizens hear that they gasp. As immune as we are to abuse of power of government, citizens are still astonished that members of Congress would dare support repealing the first amendment.
And let’s be clear, this amendment doesn’t just do it to for corporation or just do it to billionaires. Nothing in this amendment is limited to corporations or billionaires. This amendment would give Congress absolute authority to regulate the political speech of every single American with no limitations whatsoever.
This amendments is about power, and its about politicians, silencing the citizens.
Mr. Chairman, when did elected democrats abandon the Bill of Rights?
QOTD: "...all the pain that the EPA will cause won’t actually save a single cute polar bear, keep an Arctic ice flow from melting or those pesky oceans from rising, assuming you believe all of the alarmist claims at the heart of the new warming orthodoxy. What, then, is this all about? The answer lies in the gargantuan conceit of the man in the Oval Office.
The official explanation for the gap between the president’s rhetoric and the actual impact of the EPA’s dictates is that what the president wants is to start moving the country in “the right direction.” That’s a sobering thought if you consider that what is happening here is a massive government intervention in the private sector to achieve an ideological rather than an economic goal. Anyone inclined to accept the EPA’s new role riding roughshod over both Congress and the economic interests of the country should think long and hard about the prospect that this is merely the first of a new series of rulings from Washington that could hamstring any hopes of a real recovery in the coming years.
More than that, though, is the fact that what Obama really wants here is to show the international community that he means business about restricting the ability of America to do business. The real audience for this spectacle isn’t so much in blue states where any bow in the direction of environmentalism is applauded as it is abroad where other nations are watching to see if the U.S. is really going to walk the walk on climate change rules that could do damage to the American economy. The president wants the Chinese to see that the U.S. will handicap its own industries in order to set a good example for the Communist nation that almost certainly will do little if anything to cap their own growing carbon emissions." --Jonathan S. Tobin
Startling charts from the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee about male participation in the labor force, particularly men between the ages of 25-54...
"There are currently 61.1 million American men in their prime working years, age 25–54. A staggering 1 in 8 such men are not in the labor force at all, meaning they are neither working nor looking for work. This is an all-time high dating back to when records were first kept in 1955. An additional 2.9 million men are in the labor force but not employed (i.e., they would work if they could find a job). A total of 10.2 million individuals in this cohort, therefore, are not holding jobs in the U.S. economy today. There are also nearly 3 million more men in this age group not working today than there were before the recession began," the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee claim...
"Although defenders of the current economy attribute shrinking labor force participation to the increasing pace of retirement of the Baby Boomer generation, these new statistics above confirm a trend that Barron’s recently diagnosed: 'The ratio of those over 55 in the workforce actually ticked up'—in other words, older Americans are being forced to return to work in a poor economy to make ends meet while many younger Americans simply aren’t working at all. In short, there is an unprecedented supply of working-age Americans who do not hold jobs."
The Senate resolution would allow Congress to limit fundraising and spending on election campaigns and independent political speech. Reid and others insist restricting the amount of money that may be raised and spent on political speech is not the same as limiting speech. That’s like saying that limiting the amount of newsprint a newspaper can buy does not limit its speech.
Having lost the battle at the Supreme Court, Reid and his cohorts are now pushing this constitutional amendment to reverse decisions—including Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC—that protect the rights of Americans to speak their minds about elected officials and candidates and to engage in the political process.
Shutting down conservative speech certainly appears to be a motivating factor behind this push to amend the First Amendment. Reid has given many interviews and speeches on the Senate floor demonizing the Charles and David Koch for “dumping unseemly amounts of money” into politics, “rigg[ing] the system” and “trying to buy the country.” Of course, he never mentions efforts by big Democratic contributors, such as George Soros and the SEIU. Imagine the audacity of those “un-American” and “shrewd businessmen” (Reid’s words) who would back candidates and causes they believe will make America better.
Osmo is a unique gaming accessory for the iPad that comes with games that will change the way your child plays.
Setup is a snap. Simply mount Osmo Reflector over your iPad's front‑facing camera. Reflective Artificial Intelligence and a built‑in mirror recognize and respond to your every real‑world move.
Osmo is crafted for kid‑durability and always ready to go: no batteries, electronics, or Wi‑Fi required. Works with the latest iPads including the iPad 2 and iPad Mini.
...Top educators from over 150 elementary schools nationwide, including the Bay Area’s best preparatory institutions, are raving about Osmo’s natural ability to foster creative, social, and emotional learning ‑ and how much their students love it...
...Osmo was invented by young parents out of Stanford and Google. Engineers at heart, the founders are personally committed to innovating new technologies that nurture positive play experiences for kids.
Clare Lopez is a former CIA operations officer, a strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on Middle East, national defense, WMD, and counterterrorism issues, and a friend of mine.
She emailed me this morning a very poignant analysis that only someone knowing language and Islam could ascertain. She wrote:
“What none of these media is reporting is that the father’s (SGT Bowe Bergdahl’s father Bob) first words at the WH were in Arabic – those words were “bism allah alrahman alraheem” – which means “in the name of Allah the most gracious and most merciful” – these are the opening words of every chapter of the Qur’an except one (the chapter of the sword – the 9th) – by uttering these words on the grounds of the WH, Bergdahl (the father) sanctified the WH and claimed it for Islam. There is no question but POTUS knows this.”
Folks, there is a lot to this whole episode — like Benghazi — that we may never know. And this is not conspiracy theory, it is truth based upon Arabic and Islamic dogma and tradition.
QOTD: "Forty-one Democrats have signed on to co-sponsor New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall's proposed amendment to give Congress plenary power to regulate political speech. The text of the amendment says that Congress could regulate "the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to federal elections." The amendment places no limitations whatsoever on Congress's new power.
Two canards are put forth to justify this broad authority. First, "money is not speech." And second, "corporations have no free speech rights."
Neither contention bears even minimal scrutiny. Speech is more than just standing on a soap box yelling on a street corner. For centuries the Supreme Court has rightly concluded that free speech includes writing and distributing pamphlets, putting up billboards, displaying yard signs, launching a website, and running radio and television ads. Every one of those activities requires money. Distributing the Federalist Papers or Thomas Paine's "Common Sense" required money. If you can prohibit spending money, you can prohibit virtually any form of effective speech." --Sen. Ted Cruz
QOTD: "In 2012, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs paid at least $11.4 million to 174 nurses, mental-health specialists, therapists, and other health-care professionals who, instead of caring for veterans, worked full-time doing union business...
...In total, the VA spent at least $13.77 million on 251 salaried employees performing full-time union work. Others, who were not included on the list provided by the VA, work part-time for unions at the taxpayer expense. In fiscal year 2011, the latest on record, the VA used 998,483 hours of this “official time,” costing taxpayers more than $42 million...
...In Columbia, S.C., the VA pays one health technician a $40,706 salary to work for the American Federation of Government Employees... At that same location, CNN reported in January, a 44-year-old veteran named Barry Coates was forced to wait a year for a colonoscopy, despite intense pain, constipation, and rectal bleeding. When Coates finally got his appointment, doctors found a tumor the size of a baseball — Stage 4 colorectal cancer that had metastasized elsewhere." --Jillian Kay Melchior
Developed and built by Nuytco Research, this exosuit is made from hard metal and allows divers to operate safely down to a depth of 1000 feet. The suit has four 1.6 horsepower propulsion thrusters, fiber optic gigabit ethernet, and a host of telemetry devices.
The "Exosuit atmospheric diving system" (ADS) will allow wearers to work in deep water without facing problems with decompression. While still in testing right now, diver Michael Lombardi will be taking it out for its first full exploration mission later this summer, at a location called Canyons, approximately 100 miles off the coast of Rhode Island.
NEW ORLEANS, May 31, 2014 — Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex., excited the crowd at the Republican Leadership Conference when he addressed them this afternoon. He followed up his appearance with a victory in the event’s 2016 presidential straw poll, which was sponsored by Conservative Intel.
In the straw poll, 633 ballots were cast, which was attended by more than 1,500 people. The results were as follows:
1. Ted Cruz — 30.33 percent
2. Ben Carson — 29.38 percent
3. Rand Paul — 10.43 percent
4. Mike Huckabee — 5.06 percent
5. Rick Perry — 4.90 percent
6. Curt Clawson (write-in) 4.58 percent
7. Jeb Bush — 4.42 percent
8. Marco Rubio — 3.32 percent
9. Rick Santorum — 2.37 percent
10. Paul Ryan — 2.05 percent
11. Allen West (write-in) — 2.05 percent
12. Chris Christie — 1.11%
People are more likely to believe that humans cause global warming if they are told that 97 percent of publishing climate scientists agree that it does, a new study has found.
Well, yes. If I was told that, say, 97 percent of dentists agree that chewing Trident is better for your teeth than chewing bubble gum, that would make perfect sense. Trouble is, the idea that “97 percent of publishing climate scientists agree” human activity has created an out-of-control global warming crisis is a myth.
To cop the immortal words of Rowdy Roddy Piper in the B-movie classic “They Live”: I have come here to chew bubble gum and debunk this myth … and I’m all out of bubble gum.
One of the most commonly cited studies of the “97 percent” was conducted by a University of Illinois professor and a graduate student who asked the following questions to 10,257 Earth scientists working for universities and government research agencies:
QOTD: "With his lame duck status and this being his “year of action,” we should be terribly wary of what institutionalized edicts he’s putting in place — and especially, those we haven’t really heard much about. Because fundamental transformation has been given its legal go ahead through ObamaCare, and the offshoots of that re-imagining of the relationship between the people and the government, with the citizens as subjects and the government the sovereign, will be used in any number of ways to constrain liberty and choice, all in the name of the greater good." --Jeff Goldstein
100 years of income tax..... pic.twitter.com/FS07Ufsdty
— BOSSY MONICA (@LeMarquand) May 31, 2014