YEP! Eric Holder:  As rotten as they come!

"Somewhere, Scooter Libby must be scratching his head. He was indicted and convicted simply because his recall of when a meeting occurred differed from others. He didn't lie about a gun-running operation that led to the deaths of two American agents and at least 200 Mexicans. But Attorney General Eric Holder did, according to memos obtained by CBS News and Fox News. They show Holder lied to Congress on May 2, 2011, when he was asked about when he knew about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' Fast and Furious gun-running operation. He told House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa he was 'not sure of the exact date, but I probably learned about Fast and Furious over the last few weeks.' Holder learned of the operation as early as July 2010 in a memo from the director of the National Drug Intelligence Center informing him of an operation run by the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force out of the Phoenix ATF office, under which 'straw purchasers are responsible for the purchase of 1,500 firearms that were then supplied to Mexican drug cartels.' ... Holder, quite simply, has lied to Congress, although the defense now being offered is he didn't understand Issa's question, doesn't read all the memos sent to him or was otherwise out of the loop. It is perhaps the first time incompetence has been offered as a defense to possible charges of criminality. ... As Issa told radio talk show host Laura Ingraham last month: 'We have a paper trail of so many people knowing that the only way the attorney general didn't know is he made sure he didn't want to know. ... But if you don't want to know something of this sort, then you shouldn't have the job he has.' We'd go a step further. Baseball star Roger Clemens was equally vehement when he told a House committee in 2008: 'Let me be clear. I have never taken steroids or HGH.' Clemens was indicted for lying to Congress. The same should go for Eric Holder." -- Investor's Business Daily

I agree,and email congress,another of Obamas dem bit the dust,and we need more..

The Senate health care bill just signed contains some exemptions to the "pay-or-play" mandate requiring purchase of Obamacare-approved health insurance or payment of a penalty fine. As Fox News has pointed out, for instance, the Amish are excused from the mandate:

So while most Americans would be required to sign up with insurance companies or government insurance plans, the church would serve as something of an informal insurance plan for the Amish.

Law experts say that kind of exemption withstands scrutiny.

"Here the statute is going to say that people who are conscientiously opposed to paying for health insurance don't have to do it where the conscientious objection arises from religion," said Mark Tushnet a Harvard law professor. "And that's perfectly constitutional."

Apparently, this exemption will apply similarly to believers in Islam, which considers health insurance - and, for that matter, any form of risk insurance - to be haraam (forbidden).

Steve Gilbert of Sweetness & Light calls our attention to the probability that Muslims will also be expempt. According to a March 23 publication on an authoritative Islamic Web site managed by Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid, various fatwas (religious decrees) absolutely forbid Muslim participation in any sort of health care or other risk insurance:

Health insurance is haraam like other types of commercial insurance, because it is based on ambiguity, gambling and riba (usury). This is what is stated in fatwas by the senior scholars.

In Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa'imah (15/277) there is a quotation of a statement of the Council of Senior Scholars concerning the prohibition on insurance and why it is haraam:

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa'imah (15/251):

Firstly: Commercial insurance of all types is haraam because it involves ambiguity, riba, uncertainty, gambling and consuming people's wealth unlawfully, and other shar'i

Secondly: It is not permissible for the Muslim to get involved with insurance companies by working in administration or otherwise, because working in them comes under the heading of cooperating in sin and transgression, and Allaah forbids that as He says: "but do not help one another in sin and transgression. And fear Allaah. Verily, Allaah is Severe in punishment"

[al-Maa'idah 5:2]. End quote.

reservations.
And Allaah knows best.

So, it turns out that observant Muslims are not only strictly forbidden from buying any health insurance under the ObamaCare mandate, but may also not even work for any company that provides such insurance or any other form of commercial insurance.

It is not made clear whether or not it is religiously okay to accept "free" non-insured medical care such as that offered in hospital ERs and to some who are covered by Medicaid.

Whether it's all right to serve as a doctor, nurse, or orderly caring for patients whose medical services are being paid for by insurance is not covered in the present response - but one could probably obtain a religious ruling from the Sheikh, whose site welcomes the submission of questions about Islamic law and practices.

 

wonderful story weasle

for framer:

You are taxed from the minute you get up. Here's how it goes >

This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of Energy.

I then took a shower in the clean water tested and provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the television to one of the FCC regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Checking out those hurricanes? I watched this while eating my breakfast of US Department of Agriculture inspected food and taking my medicines, which have been determined as safe by the Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time, as regulated by the US Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the US Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on roads built and maintained by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a lead-free quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank. On the way, I might deposit any mail I have to be sent via the US Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

Then, I go to work, complaining about the taxes I am forced to pay, and how the government needs to get off my back and out of my business. And that's just my morning.

Your friend,

p_s

Cash for Clunkers! Why should I be able to go buy a new car and have the government tax my neighbor to subsidize the purchase. Why should my tax dollars be going to buy you a new car? Oh, I forgot, it's not MY tax dollars, it's tax dollars that hasn't even been collected yet! So, why should my little six year old daughter have a promise hung around her neck, to subsidize the purchase of someone's car, today?

This program has not been running very long and it is already out of money. (borrowed money) I have not talked to a dealer yet that has actually received any money that they have applied for through the "clunker" program. I've asked four. Oh, and the dealers have to render the cars that they are taking in on trade, un-saleable. I guess they have to destroy some major component or something... maybe the engine? I don't know the details of that part of it, but it would stand to reason seeing that part of the purpose of the program is to better the enviornment by taking these old gas guzzlers off the road. What about the people that drive used cars? Oh yeah, the government isn't in the business of making used cars.

Here's a scary detail that has just surfaced: When the automobile dealers log on to the government website to make application for reimbursement under the Cash for Clunkers program they have to accept the terms and conditions of the program... you know, a disclaimer page. We've all seen them. This one has a "Privacy Act and Security Statement" that includes the wording: (This application provides access to the DOT "CARS" system, your computer is now considered a part of the Federal computer system and is the property of the U.S. Government.) Why in the hell would anyone press the "I Accept" button on this one. One word: MONEY. The government has taken control of the auto industry and these are the tenticales reaching out and grabbing hold of the distribution points ( the dealers). This means they can look into a dealer's computer and sniff around for anything they want to look at. I guess if the dealer was using an internet based phone service, the government could even listen to their phone conversations.

How's that " Change we can Beleive In " stuff working for you so far?!?

Does anyone want the Federal Government to "FIX" our healthcare system?!?

When we give the government power to give us something, we give them control over us. The assistance always comes with requirements, regulations, stipulations, and so forth. This, for the left, is a “backdoor” way to advance their agenda. Directly ordering states to change their laws and regulations is a direct violation of the Tenth Amendment. Also, going through the legislative process can be messy; legislation may not pass, and, more importantly, the debate is public. When the left can’t pass something in the open, they either do it  incrementally, bypass the democratic process via a lawsuit, or pass it as a “string” attached to funding.

Thinking about today's massive deficits, where in the U.S. Constitution is Congress given the authority to do anything about the economy?

The Constitution is an obstacle to Obama's plans.

Interesting reading weasel..you know weasel,Obama is a true socialist,he is.He wants to rid us of capitalism...Obama wants the Govt to run everything,own everything.If the people of this country sit back and do nothing and let their reps vote for all this,we are in bad trouble.Watch Fox News,Glenn Beck,Hannity..they arent afraid to say whats happening.The govt has no bussiness making choices on anything we do.Thanks again weasel for the artical,very interesting..

Team ObamaCare: Sanger, Ginsburg and Holdren

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government." --Thomas Jefferson


Now that Barack Hussein Obama has undermined free enterprise by nationalizing major financial and manufacturing sectors of our economy, he has set his sights on the health care sector, which comprises almost 18 percent of the U.S. economy.

This shouldn't surprise us. After all, he did promise a "fundamental transformation of the United States of America," and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, did cite the current economic crisis as the means for doing so. "Rule 1: Never allow a crisis to go to waste," Emanuel said. "They are opportunities to do big things."

Of course, there is NO constitutional authority or precedent for this massive government intrusion into the private sector. But then, when do Leftists look to any authority higher than themselves?

Considering the prospect of Socialists in charge of dispensing health care from cradle to grave, I was reminded, by none other than Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that when one is in need of health care, one should not depend on folks who advocate a "culture of death."

In an interview last week, Ginsburg said that she thought "at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."

This comment was not some senile blunder from an aging jurist noted for nodding off during High Court deliberations.

In fact, Ginsburg's candid assessment of the Left's advocacy for abortion as a means for controlling propagation of undesirable ethnic groups is based upon the writings of atheist social activist and leftist icon Margaret Sanger.

Some 50 years before Roe v. Wade, Sanger founded the American Birth Control League, which later became Planned Parenthood, now the largest perpetrator of abortions in the U.S.

Sanger asserted that ministry to the poor, a fundamental tenet of Christianity, is responsible for excessive numbers of "unwanted" ethnic breeds. "Those vast, complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding, and is perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents, and dependents. My criticism, therefore, is not directed at the failure of philanthropy, but rather at its success. These dangers are inherent in the very idea of humanitarianism and altruism, dangers which have today produced their full harvest of human waste."

Ah, yes, "human waste."

Sanger characterized the poor as "human weeds, reckless breeders, spawning ... human beings who never should have been born."

In "Woman and the New Race," Sanger insisted that women create an enormous "debt to society [by] creating slums, filling asylums with the insane, and institutions with other defectives. ... Poverty and the large family generally go hand in hand. ... The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

Of blacks, Sanger wrote, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

She advocated policies that ensured "more children from the fit, less from the unfit" in order to "to create a race of thoroughbreds." (Remember this quote the next time a liberal tells you that Fascists and Socialists have nothing in common.)

Sanger was certainly the 20th century's most noted American proponent of racist eugenics. However when we remind our liberal friends of the origins of Planned Parenthood, they sputter on about Sanger's support for eugenics being an anomaly of another time and context.

But Sanger's advocacy for the extermination of the "unwanted" is the basis of today's culture of death. Indeed, one of the adherents of eugenics now directs BHO's White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and is the co-chair of Obama's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

John Holdren may not be openly advocating racial selection, but he clearly advocates mass sterilization and abortion in order to control human impact on the environment. This is nothing but a contemporary interpretation of Sanger's eliminating "human weeds" and "reckless breeders."

Holdren's modern day eugenics program is outlined in a book he co-authored, "Ecoscience," in which he calls for "a comprehensive Planetary Regime [in order to] control the development, administration, conservation and distribution of all natural resources."

One solution, writes Holdren, is "adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods" which would help weed out those "who contribute to social deterioration."

As for the constitutional authority, Holdren writes, "Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

"If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children," insists Holdren, "if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility -- just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns -- providing they are not denied equal protection."

I suppose Holdren is Obama's "Czar of Compelling Needs."

As for global solutions, Holdren writes, "The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries' shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits. If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization."

Holdren is of course careful about how his "Planetary Regime" might enforce these limits, but given the common bonds of Fascists and Socialists, a contemporary global solution with much more efficient ecological results than dismembering children in the womb would be to release a biological agent targeting mass populations in developing regions of Asia and Africa -- something like strains of Swine or Bird Influenza. After all, AlGorites consider climate change to be a crisis of global proportions, and such a crisis requires innovative solutions.

Holdren concludes, "This may be the last opportunity to choose our own and our descendants' destiny. Failing to choose or making the wrong choices may lead to catastrophe. But it must never be forgotten that the right choices could lead to a much better world."

In 1931, futurist H.G. Wells wrote of Sanger's proposed regime, "The movement she started will grow to be, a hundred years from now, the most influential of all time. When the history of our civilization is written, it will be a biological history, and Margaret Sanger will be its heroine."

Apparently, Obama's director of White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is prepared to do his part to sustain Sanger's legacy.

Given Holdren's musings about population control, should these folks be in charge of determining who receives what medical care?

Circling back to that same interview with Justice Ginsburg last week, here is how she defended a woman's right to end the life of her unborn child: "The basic thing is that the government has no business making that choice for a woman."

But in regard to ObamaCare, I doubt that Ginsburg would apply a similar standard: "The basic thing is that the government has no business making that choice."

The Hippocratic Oath, until recently the de facto position of medicine, established the fundamental principle that a physician should "First, do no harm." Perhaps BO himself should take that oath -- not that he has shown any penchant for honoring the one he took for his current job.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

 

ITS BACK !  vft , you came back in search of a new location for w.o. bashing  WELCOME BACK ! im wired for it , obviously your still sore , because someone else doesnt have an INFLATABLE like some here !!!! . how was it in lala land !!!!

Good seeing Venus,weasel.

Madman, I know exactly what you mean and I seldom visit the site for the same reasons. Good seeing you and don't give up hope on the site! I believe a lot of voters share our sentiment toward Wally and the good thing about this site is that a lot of people have seen others here for less than what they once saw them for. :0)

Hey weasel, I am not concerned with why the Taliban invaded Pakistan what has my interest in it is the fact that the Taliban cut off their noses to spite their faces and those who were supportive or even sympathetic to them have seen it. Their actions has brought the US and Pakistan into an alliance. Sometimes the cause and the means has to be divided in order to find progress and truth.
I don't see any sort or type of monarchy in our politics assuming your use of the word czar was heading in that direction. I do see the overall destruction of the Clinton administration taking place though.... Marxism vs capitalism is more of what I see and understand. Both are self destructive when the powers become self serving and abusing. Ironically marxism is said to be the removal of limitations for all resulting in freedom for all. In our present situation the self serving marxist movement and the greedy capitalists have destroyed themselves.... ALL suffer for it. It's going to take more than "A" democrat or more than "A" republican to fix this mess... It's going to take the people stepping upto the plate in unity and demanding a higher standard of leadership void of wealthy politicians who are advocates, wealthy advocates, leg humping politicians, role models, movie stars funding whichever movement they are for and extremists from all walks of life. How do you shut those types up? Don't expect a politician to do it and we the people are merely social and capitalist slaves... Condemning one side is the same as condemning the side you are for because they are ALL limited by their greed and self serving policies. Obama hasn't embraced activists and he has stepped on a few of their toes.... Not sure what it all means but it is a change and I am watching to see which direction this is going in... There is a saying that you should hold your friends close and your enemies closer.... I wait to see if Obama has positioned the Clinton's into power or restraints! Obama has my interest and my attention. I do hate the tax hikes that are coming especially when they are to be distributed selectively and it's to pay for the actions of marxists and capitalists and there won't be any tax hikes with the removal of limitations or with "equality"... It will be selective and the taxes marked to pay this debt will also be applied toward socialism programs disguised as helping the less fortunate but as we have all know for years and finally SAW that it's for those hidden agendas that are self serving.... UGH!!!!!
Right now I would settle for a czar or monarchy if it would get rid of the marxists and capitalists! hehehehe

Hey madman how have you been?

OK, I actually made contact with someone from Georgia Arms and they confirmed the information above.  But, here is the good news... they have recently started buying some brass from DOD again.  They said that the pressure and outcry from the people that were upset by this situation caused a reversal in policy.  It is possible to make a difference!  But, don't be fooled, the goal and plans of the  left are still moving forward.  Expect to see taxes and limitations on ammunition in the future.

I, like many Americans are proud that no US crewmembers aboard the Maersk Alabama were killed. But what should we do about these Pirates? Before a resolution had been found, I asked our newly elected Congressman Bobby Bright what he thought should be done about this situation. He said "they" had talked about that previously and had decided that if the ship was conducting trade for a "private" US enterprise, they should have to provide their own security. I tried to follow that answer with another question, but the Congressman's schedule man kept yelling at the Congressman, telling him they had to move on. I did not challenge this guy, as not to get my name on Ms. Napolitano's list. I would have liked to follow with a question asking him what he thought our armed forces were supposed to defend. It seems to me that American Companies' access to free trade and safety from PIRATES would fall under the catagory of "hey, we need one of those guided missles into that boat load of thugs over there." Besides, there are some extreme limitations put on private ships traveling International waters, armed. Our new Congressman is on the Armed Services Committee in the Obama / Pelosi controlled House. He knows what their plan is..... It seems appearant that they are trying take our Great Nation to a warm, fuzzy place where we are no longer a Super Power and can make nice with all the regular kids on the block. This does not work, will not work and only means a more dangerous future for all Americans.

The truth behind Maersk Alabama?

Copy and paste the address below in the address bar of your browser.  This will lead to a thread from some people who seem to have some first hand knowledge of how things happened.  But, hey, you can't believe everything you read on the internet...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f...1138/posts

awe come now weasel dont you remember that we just cling to our guns and religon. we are just a bunch of paraniod gun freaks. the stage has been set and all the crazies the past month are giving the anti-gun zeolots all the ammo they could wish to get to sway the middle of the roaders to their side. its going to get much worse before it can ever get better. i believe that we will be attacked and soon. where is the better question. its gonna be a long 4 years with the carsalesman at the helm. ttfn

dont know if anyone remembers back as the wars in iraq & afghanistan were beginning . it was either osama bin laden or one of his chief lieutenants made the statement that alquida knew it could not beat the u.s. militarily but it could defeat the u.s. in a indirect manner (financially ) as they said thru our wallets , not neccesarily implying compliance but didnt our newly elected icon hail from somalia , a known alquida hot bed how are we to know whether or not our newest edition is not helping alquida in their claim of disfame. but ive heard more than once that we the people are spending at least 1 million dollars a day on just one of these bail out schemes and we have only just begun . and claiming to reduce taxes , come on everyone knows that a dem. is a spendaholic in a suit ,i frankly didnt have a problem with the rep. they did ok a war is not a good thing but it kept terrorist from kicking us on the heals , lets wait to see what happens when we tuck tails and in a sense run , i cant believe the people of the u.s. have forgotten 9-11 and in a way they have, the political field is full of per say immigrants it didnt used to be that way , what happewned to the made in america slogan !do we even care anymore , i hope we wont have an eye oppening experience it could be historically nasty ,

CHANGE! Oh yeah, Change... It seems as though Mr. Obama has always surrounded himself with the shady powerful fringe players, and continues to do so. It would have been nice to see some fresh minds and new ideas come to his administration. But it ain't gonna happen! Appointed as Chief of Staff: Rohm Emanuel; this guy was a senior advisor in the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, and was the man that Bill used to put pressure on his political enemies. Appointed as CIA Director: Leon Panetta; he was Chief of Staff in the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. This lefty is the last person that should head our CIA. Appointed Attorney General; Eric Holder. This guy was the Deputy Attorney General under Janet Reno in the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, and was responsible for pushing through the pardons for the FLN Terrorists, among others. Robert Reich; Mr.Obama's Ecomony Guru was Labor Secretary in the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. This guy is a socialist through and through. Carol Browner, Mr. Obama's global warming expert was the head of EPA in the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. Susan Rice; appointed to the UN was Assistant Secretary of State in the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. And then there's Mr Obama's pick for Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton; she was not officially part of the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, but you get the picture. If the uneducated and apethetic population outnumber the people who seek the truth and honesty in government, this "A" team of liberal elitists will bring this country to its knees. I, for one, am fearful!

ahhhhhhh its good to back. im sure i was missed by everyone. the change people here are talking about, well lets see didnt they elect for the so called change you speak of? i mean the rockstar was elected because hes gonna change everything right? he was elected on his values and clearly outlined plans to fix things wasnt he? he couldnt be just another silver tounged politician could he ? personally i could care less if most of these people have to live in a tent. they bought a house they couldnt afford ( or multiple houses looking to turn a quick buck). guess what its a contract! read the fine print. nobody with a balloning interest rate should have been shocked when it went up, they signed the papers. now they want me to bail there butts out so they dont lose their house! well kiss my grits flo , it shouldnt happen. lose your house and fail, thats the american way. folks must take personal resposibilty for there own mistakes and shortcomings. if you cant pay your bills then you lose your stuff. my taxes are high enough as they are , why am i paying to bail out a loan company? they provide no large scale jobs like the auto industry( ill get to those guys in a sec). they are a money lender thats it. when one fails theres 20 smarter smaller ones to take its place. but no fear uncle sugar is gonna reach as far into my and your pocket as it takes to make sure that everyone wins. its like my kids tee ball leauge that didnt keep score. what the heck is that???? some one has to lose. thats what makes people stronger and want to do better. we are turning into a country of criebabies. as for the auto fat cats they had there wake up call but they are at least part of our g.n.p and can export that if they would get with the program and stop producing over priced beer cans that only run good until the warrenty expires. hmmmm 5 yrs or 50k miles, sounds like they knew they were selling crap. its only gonna get worse the people will realize they elected just another politician who is clueless and that is a socialist ( thats a first). i just hope that people wake up and quit coddling the weak and the stupid. ttfn

A TRILLION dollars...  It could be as much as a trillion more dollars of debt created by our new presidents "stimulus package", as he outlined in his recent speech. George Bush took the path of least resistance and threw a whole bunch of money at a problem.  It did not fix anything, only created a long line of people wanting the same handout.  What caused the econimic situation that is labeled a crisis?  Will printing more money, creating more debt, and growing government solve anything?  Are there any economists here?