And So I Go: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Archive for the ‘Black Panthers keep voters from polling places’ Category

I sincerely hope my readers have been watching FOXNEWS and the revelations coming out about our current government.  Not that some of what is happening hasn’t been done before but this President  has made making the United States a police state a major goal of his administration and I am sooo happy the stuff has finally hit the fan.  I especially enjoy the outrage of my sister-in-law who voted for him because “Romney hates poor people!”.  Obama so loves poor people that he wants to gather them all under his benevolent arms and tell them exactly what to wear, eat, speak and especially vote.  And to ensure that they do all these things as he directs he puts his dogs on them when they refuse to listen to papa.   Do read the following article to bring yourself up to date on the agency that will implement and control Obamacare and is now under the gun for doing their part to make sure that Obama was elected in 2012.  BB


The IRS and Obamacare, by the Numbers


Chilling new details emerged yesterday about the IRS targeting scandal, as representatives from six conservative groups testified before Congress about the scrutiny and demands they faced from Obama administration bureaucrats.

Yesterday’s testimony reminded us once again why Washington bureaucrats cannot be trusted, and why Americans should be so concerned about the new powers granted to the IRS as a result of Obamacare.

These powers are so vast, in fact, they’re difficult to put into words. So instead, we decided to give you the numbers:

18New taxes in Obamacare, including 12 that directly violate then-Senator Barack Obama’s “firm pledge” to those making under $250,000 per year that he would not “raise any of your taxes.”

47—New provisions Obamacare charges the IRS with implementing, according to the Government Accountability Office.

$695Tax for not buying “government-approved” health insurance the IRS will be charged with enforcing on all Americans.

1,954—Full-time bureaucrats the IRS wants to devote to Obamacare implementation and enforcement in the upcoming fiscal year.

60,000,000—Medical records the IRS has been charged with improperly seizing, raising concerns about whether the agency can handle the personal health insurance information all Americans will be required to submit to the IRS.

$439,584,000—The IRS’s request for new spending on Obamacare implementation in the upcoming fiscal year; the request did not specify how much of those funds the IRS will spend on the “Cupid shuffle.”

6,100,000,000—Man-hours Americans already devote to tax compliance, according to the National Taxpayer Advocate, a burden that will rise significantly thanks to Obamacare.

$1,000,000,000,000—New revenue raised by Obamacare in its first 10 years alone, according to the Congressional Budget Office, sums that will only rise in future decades.

If ever there were an argument as to why Obamacare should be repealed and defunded, these numbers—coupled with the IRS revelations of recent weeks—tell the tale.

>>> SHARE THIS PICTURE: Facebook | Pinterest | Tumblr

IRS on

Quick Hits:










Eric Holder is by far the worse attorney general this country has ever had.  And yes, I do indeed remember Mitchell under Nixon!  But Holder is not only a liar but a damned liar!  You might find this article giving brief facts concerning Washington IRS scandals and Holder’s role in  them.   Will Holder be the weapon We the People need to rid ourselves of Obama?  I am beginning to think so because at this point Holder’s resignation will not suffice to stop the rupturing scandals that are now engulfing the White House  since too many IRS agents have come forward or turned in documents to congress that implicate the White House and the Department of Justice.  The only way Obama can possibly get thru the next three years in office is to shuck Holder and appoint someone with a modicum of credibility—an incredibly difficult task if Obama chooses from among his cohorts as he will need to do.    Then when the whole IRS mess is turned over to a  Special Prosecutor,  which is of course chosen by and overseen by the Department of Justice, the new  Special Prosecutor  will take two or three years to get thru the twisted and entwined details coming from all departments in our current corrupted government.    The Republicans of course are going to try to keep the pot boiling at their level with their own investigation but simply lack the power to prosecute that a Special Prosecutor would have.  So, it is going to be an interesting summer.

You might find the following article interesting if you haven’t been paying close attention as the tales have unfolded.  BB


Q&A on Scandals and Eric Holder05/31/2013

Attorney General Eric Holder is head of the Department of Justice—in charge of enforcing the nation’s laws. So what happens when the head law enforcer gets caught up in questionable conduct?

The Obama Administration is under scrutiny for the scandals of the IRS targeting conservative groups and the Justice Department investigating journalists, and Holder’s role is the focus of a lot of speculation. We sat down with Heritage senior legal fellow Hans von Spakovsky to get some context.

A number of news organizations including the Associated Press, CNN, and The New York Times just refused to meet with Eric Holder “off the record” about guidelines for investigating journalists. Have we even begun to get to the bottom of this? 

A soured relationship with the press over the subpoenas of AP and Fox News phone records is just one of the problems that Holder faces. When he was asked about the AP investigation during an oversight hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on May 15, he told the committee that he could not provide them with information because he had recused himself from being involved in the case.

“Recusal” is the legal term lawyers use when they remove themselves from having any involvement in a case because of an actual or perceived conflict of interest. In the AP case, Holder said he had removed himself because he had been interviewed by the FBI about the leaks, although he testified that he told the FBI that he had not leaked any classified information.

So was he involved in obtaining the Fox News reporter’s phone records? 

At the time of the oversight hearing I just mentioned, information about the investigation of the phone records of James Rosen of Fox News was not yet public. But in answer to a question from Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) about investigations of the press, Holder said, “with regard to potential prosecutions of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something that I have ever been involved, heard of, or would think would be a wise policy.”

Yet we now know that the Attorney General “personally approved a decision to subpoena Fox News telephone records.” In fact, the affidavit that supported the subpoena request referred to Rosen as a possible “aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator” in the national security leak.

What’s being done about Holder’s inconsistent answers?

The discrepancy between Holder’s testimony and what actually happened at the Justice Department prompted the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), to send a letter to Justice on Wednesday expressing “great concern” over the fact that Holder’s testimony “appeared to be at odds” with the approval of the Fox News investigation and search warrant “at the highest levels” of the Justice Department.

This is a very polite way of raising the possibility that Holder may have misled the committee. Goodlatte asks for an explanation of the discrepancy and whether the “investigation of Mr. Rosen as a potential co-conspirator or aider/abettor was a ‘wise policy’?”

Our government should investigate the leak of classified information, especially any leak that endangers national security. But it appears, at least at this point, that the Attorney General’s actions and sworn testimony are not the last word on this saga.

Let’s not forget the IRS targeting of conservative groups trying to obtain tax-exempt status. Should Holder appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS? 

There have been some calls for Holder to appoint a special prosecutor, something that he has refused to do. The independent counsel statute, which was used to investigate prior scandals like Whitewater, has expired, so the only alternative to a normal investigation authorized by the Attorney General is for the AG to give a Justice Department attorney full authority to investigate and prosecute a case without going through the usual process of having the AG review and approve his decisions.

It is questionable whether such an appointment of a special prosecutor, like a U.S. attorney—all of whom are all political appointees just like Holder—would make any real difference in the investigation conducted by the Justice Department.

In any event, however, DOJ’s opening of a criminal investigation should not inhibit Congress from exercising its oversight function and conducting an extensive inquiry into why and how the IRS was targeting conservative organizations.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Quick Hits:

  • The IRS’s targeting of conservatives may be even broader than originally thought.
  • Should your money be used to teach Moroccans to make pottery? What about for free bus rides to the Super Bowl? Check out this list of not exactly “essential” government spending.

This article from The American Thinker is a good overview of the IRS scandal in case you need to get the facts straight or understand just what it all means to you.  The Internal Revenue Service is the most powerful department in the government.  No one, but NO ONE dares to go up against the IRS.  This being the case it is a powerful weapon for any congressman or President to use to get back at anyone they don’t like.   This is what has happened with the conservatives in our country who dared to oppose the Democrats and Obama:  The IRS was  notified to “look into the activities” of any groups who applied for tax exempt status with certain words in their names.  Words like “Tea Party,  “Conservative”,  “Constitution”.   The Treasury Department Inspector General  (Treasury oversees the IRS) sat right beside the IRS Director in the Congressional hearing Friday and refuted every lie the IRS Director told!    The Inspector General stated without a doubt that certain groups were “targeted” by the IRS deliberately.    The Inspector General also stated that he told members of the Obama White House of his findings last summer well before the elections and yet Obama is playing deaf and dumb!

Inspectors General are people who have no political affiliation and whose job it is to police the departments in the government.  These people are the public’s watch dogs and are chosen for their high standards and integrity.  Many of them have been denigrated by this administration in the past four years when they have dared to speak up so I expect this one (Mr. George) to be vilified also in the next week or so.

Anyhow,  the following article may be useful to you when trying to argue the points while some bone head or other damned fool.   🙂  BB

May 18, 2013

The IRS Scandal — a Basic Primer

By Jonathon Moseley

Confusion about the IRS scandal is distracting from its importance, so that thinking conservatives should be prepared to debate the issue. Some basics matter. Conservatives may need to share a summary such as this article to help convince moderate friends.

Callers to C-SPAN badly misunderstood these details when Jenny Beth Martin, Coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, appeared on C-SPAN television last week. I interviewed Keli Carender of Tea Party Patriots on the radio on May15, who helped clarify some of the pushback and distractions from liberals.

First, don’t let people forget: the IRS scandal is not about conservative accusations. The Inspector General of the U.S. Treasury issued a report finding that the Internal Revenue Service sharply discriminated against conservative organizations. This is confirmed by Treasury’s Inspector General.

Second, a group’s political beliefs and positions ought to be totally irrelevant. Tax exemption must be based on what an organization does, not what it believes or what positions it supports. Whether a group teaches the Constitution or teaches union tactics doesn’t matter, it is educating either way. Therefore, the IRS should not have been looking at the name of the organization, whether liberal or conservative, but on the substance of the organization.

Third, many people don’t realize that nearly all liberal political organizations are tax exempt. There has been a lot of distraction and diversion focused on whether or not the IRS should have scrutinized tea party groups. However,, NARAL Pro-Choice America, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood (which has been active in partisan election campaigns), Media Matters, etc., are all tax exempt. Organizations on the Left similar to tea party groups have had tax exempt status forever.

Fourth, don’t allow people to wander away from the central point that the scandal is about a double standard — not whether people believe political organizations should be tax exempt. Conservatives seeking tax exempt status were treated very differently from similarly-situated liberal organizations. Sure, some liberal groups were scrutinized. But conservatives were treated differently.

IRS official Lois Lerner fast-walked the tax-exempt application of Barack Obama’s half-brother, the best man at President Obama’s wedding. Abon’go “Roy’ Malik Obama got tax-exempt status in a bureaucratic breakneck speed, in only 30 days, in May 2011, even though it is unclear what if anything the Barack H. Obama Foundation actually does or has done since being approved.

When a conservative organization Media Trackers couldn’t get approved after 8 months, it changed its project to the liberal-sounding name “Greenhouse Solutions.” With the new name, the exact same project was approved within 3 weeks.

Liberal groups — even with very political activities — were systematically approved, and quickly, with relatively little burden or scrutiny, as reported by USA Today.

Groups supporting Israel were discriminated against. In August 2010, a pro-Israel group “Z Street” filed a Federal lawsuit when an IRS staff member admitted that all Israel-related groups were singled out by the IRS for extra scrutiny. There will be a hearing this July 2013, after the case was transferred to the Federal district in Washington, D.C.

The IRS demanded that a Pro-Life group promote abortion in order to get tax-exempt status. No liberal group has such a requirement. NARAL and Planned Parenthood are not required to promote abstinence, adoption, or Pro-Life Crisis Pregnancy Centers.

It is the law that the IRS must answer within 270 days for 501(c)(3) organizations, yet the IRS delayed conservative organizations for more than 540 days.

Fifth, there are many different types of tea party organizations. Some tea party organizations are Political Action Committees (PAC’s) which are directly involved in election campaigns. Others focus purely on training tea party organizers and members on how to be effective in organizing events and lobbying on legislation. Some purely educate about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Federalist Papers, etc. Others lobby on pending legislation.

So when the public hears about tea party organizations applying for tax exempt status, they often imagine only campaigning for or against a candidate. That is not tax exempt. Some tea party groups qualify. Some don’t.

Sixth, many have questioned whether the IRS wasn’t doing the job it should have done by asking questions of tea party groups seeking tax exempt status. No one objects to the IRS obtaining basic information and asking reasonable questions. The problem is that the IRS bombarded tea party and conservative groups with multiple waves of a huge number of very intrusive questions. And the wave after wave of questions seemed aimed at never getting around to finishing the process or persuading groups to simply give up and abandon their application.

Seventh, many don’t recognize what ‘tax exempt’ means. It means that if someone donates to a tea party group, the donations are not taxed as income. Otherwise, any political organization would have to pay income taxes on donations.

A tax-exempt organization may still have to pay taxes on other income, such as sales of products or services. Some C-SPAN callers imagined that people in such groups don’t pay income taxes. Of course, people running or working in tax-exempt groups pay income taxes on their salary the same as everyone else.

There are four important categories:

1. A 501(c)(4) organization is tax-exempt (they don’t pay income taxes on donations). A 501(c)(4) organization is allowed to lobby for or against legislation, but is not allowed to advocate for or against a candidate. A 501(c)(4) also can do anything a 501(c)(3) can do.

2. A 501(c)(3) organization is both tax-exempt and tax-deductible. That is, contributors can deduct their donations from their income taxes. It is much more difficult to qualify for 501(c)(3) status. A 501(c)(3) cannot lobby for or against legislation (except to an insignificant extent) and may not engage in any partisan’ (campaign) activity. A 501(c)(3) can educate the public on policy, issues, the advantages and disadvantages of various political policies and topics like the Constitution, concepts of our Founding Fathers, etc. or train citizens.

3. A Political Action Committee (PAC or Super-PAC) intervenes directly in partisan campaigns and does not qualify as tax exempt.

4. A 527 organization is a recent development, which also intervenes directly in partisan campaigns and does not qualify as tax exempt.

Eighth, many are not aware of the difference between ‘political’ and ‘partisan.’ Tax exempt organizations are allowed to engage in public discussion and lobbying of ‘political’ issues affecting society. That is very different from ‘partisan’ activity. ‘Partisan’ means influencing a campaign — that is, advocating for or against a candidate in an election (not necessarily just discussing policy or issues).

An example is the liberal Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). CREW is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt, tax deductible foundation. Its head Melanie Sloan earns $230,000 per year. CREW does nothing but slander conservative Republicans and a few Democrats who get out of line with mostly false accusations.

Christine O’Donnell won the Republican primary for United States Senate from Delaware. This was learned at 8:00 PM on September 14, 2010. By about 11:00 AM on September 15, 2010, CREW started attacking Christine O’Donnell and publicly declaring that Christine belongs in jail not in the Senate.

Advocating for or against a candidate is the test of ‘partisan’ (campaign) activity that is prohibited for a tax-exempt organization. CREW ignored Christine until she won the GOP Primary. But within hours CREW started attacking her. CREW explicitly referenced her status as a candidate, and specifically that she does not belong in the Senate. Melanie Sloan explicitly said that the voters should know all this when they go to vote in November 2010.

I noticed this pattern and conceived, developed, planned, and drafted the complaint against CREW to the IRS, which ChristinePAC later filed with the IRS in July 2011. Yet two years later, the IRS has done nothing. Melanie Sloan’s parents are big donors to former Delaware Senator Joe Biden and CREW attacks conservatives. Don’t expect the IRS to hold liberals responsible for anything.

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

From the beginning it was clear to me that controlling our health care was the federal government final grab for complete control of Americans.  Yes!  Control!   Everything about Obamacare is about taking our rights away and learning everything about us and our lives so that the government can control our lives in all areas not just health care.   Jim DeMint lays it out very well in the following article.  Sincerely, BB


Obamacare Is About Power


By Jim DeMint

Members of the House of Representatives are scheduled to vote Thursday to repeal all of Obamacare. Given that the House voted to repeal the law last year, some commentators and observers have questioned the need for another repeal vote. (actually there have been 37 votes in the Republican control House of Representatives repealing all or parts of Obmacare.  BB)

However, the scandals coming to light over the last week perfectly make the case for why Congress must eradicate the law from the statute books.

On Friday, the Internal Revenue Service finally disclosed that it had spent years targeting tea party and other conservative groups, delaying their applications for non-profit status and giving those applications additional scrutiny — solely because of those groups’ political beliefs.

Also on Friday, The Washington Post revealed that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius personally asked health industry groups to contribute to Enroll America, a pro-Obamacare front group working to “educate” the public about the law’s supposed benefits.  

While we don’t yet know all the details about these scandals, we do know that the IRS grossly abused its power at a time when Obamacare grants it massive new authority. The Treasury Department’s Inspector General has said Obamacare represents “the largest set of tax law changes in 20 years,” with at least 42 provisions adding to or amending the tax code.  (AND, at least 18 new taxes on the American tax payer.  that is 18 that we have discovered so far.  BB)

Obamacare taxes most people with health insurance, and most people without health insurance. Likewise, the law taxes many employers who provide health insurance, and most employers who don’t provide health insurance.

Obamacare’s heavy reliance on the IRS seems somehow fitting, as the entire law relies on a scheme of government controls and regulations to work its will on the health care system. The law imposes price controls on insurance companies and extends a system of price controls for pharmaceutical companies. Obamacare also places a board of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats at the center of its plans to control health care costs.

A 2010 Congressional Research Service report found that the number of new bureaucracies “that will ultimately be created” by Obamacare “is currently unknowable.” Little wonder that Vice President Biden boasted shortly before the law was passed, “We’re going to control the insurance companies.”

That’s what Obamacare is about. It’s not about health care. It’s about government control and power. And the record of this Administration shows its willingness to use this power in arbitrary and harmful ways.  (We the People MUST accept and fully understand and accept this fact!  BB)

Secretary Sebelius’s recently disclosed fundraising campaign tried to make an end-run around Congress, forcing private companies to give money for a pro-Obamacare marketing campaign that Congress itself has refused to fund.

It isn’t the first time the secretary has skirted the law, either. HHS’s infamous waivers, the majority of which went to individuals in union health plans, weren’t mentioned in Obamacare. And in recent weeks, Democrats who support the law have criticized the secretary for taking funds from other programs to fund Obamacare implementation.

Just like the IRS, HHS has also targeted the First Amendment rights of private organizations. In 2009, the department applied an infamous “gag order” on Medicare Advantage plans, ordering them not to communicate with seniors about how Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare Advantage would affect their coverage.

If past experience is any guide, IRS and HHS could use their newfound Obamacare powers to target their political opponents. Will individuals who choose not to buy insurance under Obamacare’s mandate find themselves subjected to government audits?

Will corporations who choose not to “donate” to Sebelius’s fundraising campaign find themselves targeted by Obamacare regulators — or even the IRS itself? Given the events of the past week, few can answer these questions with an unequivocal “no.”

There’s one easy way to stop the rot, and that’s to repeal Obamacare once and for all. At a time when this week’s revelations show how the government has abused its existing powers, it’s exactly the wrong time to give the government yet more authority. Congress should instead focus on repealing Obamacare and restoring freedom.

This piece originally appeared in The Washington Examiner.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Quick Hits:  (You may want to read some of these other Heritage reports.  BB)



  • The acting commissioner of the IRS has been ousted, but congressional committees and the FBI are still investigating potential civil rights violations in the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups.  (Big deal this is when the man was due to leave the department next month anyhow.  What a farce!  And he was only appointed last November and this  breaking of the laws has been going on since at least 2010.  BB)


  • Attorney General Eric Holder went before a congressional committee yesterday on the AP phone record scandal, though the hearing yielded few answers.   (The last count I heard was that he said “I don’t know” 87 times.  He claims he knew nothing about this because it was his staff that handled the whole thing.  Yeh!  BB)


  • Google has launched a new music streaming service to compete with Pandora and Spotify.  (I like Pandora and don’t really trust Google with all the shenanegans I have read and heard about Google being involved in.  BB)


Dear Readers I won’t be blogging a great deal on the three scandals now  ripping the curtain aside and showing  the Obama Administration as  it is and has been from even before Obama’s election in 2008.  Chicago thugs, communists and Muslims—–ALL destroyers and haters of the United States and the American way of life.  I was blogging my heart out in 2007 onward trying to show Obama for what he is. This man and his cadre of thugs has gotten away with every possible bending and breaking of the laws and even the Constitution  with nothing more than a few crying in the wilderness while the main stream media (CNN< MSNBC< ABC< NBC and a whole slew of newspapers covering for him while they were getting a “thrill up their legs” while blinkers and blinders were firmly placed upon their eyes.   Ironically it may be the IRS (Internal Revenue System)    the department that taxes us that finally puts a spike in Obama’s heart.  Funny because it has taken the taxing system to finally take  down the worst criminals in our country  (usually for the evasion of taxes as in the case of Al Capone a fellow Chicagoian!)

Obama threw Hillary under the bus ( so to speak) with the release by the White House of 100 pages of emails yesterday.  Not much was contained in the emails but they do point a finger directly at the State Department for changing the famous “talking points” that put a silly video as the cause of the Benghazi slaughter.  Now we all saw how Bill took over giving Obama a big lift and getting him elected in 2012 because  he and Hillary didn’t want her having to face a sitting President in 2016. (Bill actually preferred that Romney be elected because he knew that Romney would get the country working and at heart Bill Clinton is  and was a patriot.) But a “sitting president”  with all the perks and privileges and bully pulpit available to him/her is much harder to defeat.  Having two newbies running in 2016 gives Hillary a level playing field.  Now that Obama has turned on Hillary and tried to put the blame for Benghazi  squarely  on her I am waiting to see how the Clinton’s retaliate.  Should be a good show!

WATCH FOXNEWS and even FOX BUSINESS!  They are covering all three scandals  very well and in their “fair and balanced way”  by giving the leftist journalist a fair chance to give their take.  Some are still trying to forgive and alibi and explain but some have come to the  place where they can no longer stomach what the Obama Administration and the Clinton’s are doing.  Bob Beckel on THE FIVE yesterday finally seemed top see the light.

Below is the Heritage report on this subject for some extra information.  BB

The IRS Wants to Know If You’re a “Patriot”


By Matthew Spalding

Across this great land, patriotic Americans are behaving subversively.

We’re quoting from our pocket Constitutions, starting reading groups to discuss our founding documents, evengathering together to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Uncle Sam is not amused.

As leaders of tea party groups have been painfully aware for years, the Internal Revenue Service has given “special” attention to conservative groups.

Heritage sounded the alarm on the Obama Administration’s hit list nearly a year ago. Idaho businessman Frank VanderSloot was singled out by the IRS and the Labor Department after making a sizable donation to Mitt Romney. Who ordered his investigation?

>>> Watch our video to hear his story 

The IRS admits that in recent years it has zeroed in on organizations with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names. Further, The Wall Street Journal reports the IRS has also targeted groups that say they are “worried about government spending, debt or taxes, and even ones that lobbied to ‘make America a better place to live.’” Fox News adds that organizations interested in doing “education on the Constitution and Bill of Rights” made the list.

The goal was clearly to reduce the amount of anti-government speech by making it more difficult for these groups to achieve tax-exempt status. And it worked. Just look at these examples from four different states:


  • ABC News reports that Jennifer Stefano of Pennsylvania wanted to start a tea party group, but dealing with the IRS “was frightening and that’s why I shut it down. I shut my group down.”


  • The IRS ordered an Ohio group to answer 35 detailed questions, including to “provide a listing of all your past activities. Indicate the percentage of your time spent conducting the activity (total of all activities should equal 100%) and the percentage of your funds spent conducting the activity (total of all activities should equal 100%).”


  • In Tennessee, Kevin Kookogey was trying to start an educational group called Linchpins of Liberty to teach the economic principles of Milton Friedman and Adam Smith. When he inquired with the IRS in 2011 about the delay in his tax-exempt status, he was told: “We have been waiting on guidance from our superiors as to your and similar organizations.” He is still waiting.


  • In Virginia, it took Richmond Tea Party President Larry Nordvig two and a half years to get tax-exempt status.He tells The Washington Post the wait had “a very chilling effect” on how much money his group could raise, and thus on how much speech it could generate.

How many groups are under scrutiny? That remains to be seen. President Obama said yesterday that the IRS’s actions were “intolerable and inexcusable” and that “regardless of how this conduct was allowed to take place, the bottom line is, it was wrong.”

Our federal government was designed to be a neutral arbiter between competing private interests that would protect our liberties. Instead, it has morphed into a permanent interest group of its own.

In some ways, it’s almost as if we’ve disappointed our government by questioning it. As Bertolt Brecht quipped about the late, unlamented East Germany:

The people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts.

So here’s a charge to all tea partiers, and indeed all “patriotic” Americans of any political bent: Let’s redouble our efforts—to limit government and promote freedom.

Doing so may anger Big Brother, but it will protect the liberty of all Americans.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Quick Hits:


  • The IRS isn’t the only agency treating conservative groups differently from liberal groups. The Competitive Enterprise Institute reports that the EPA shows a bias in its answers to Freedom of Information Act requests.   (CHECK THIS REPORT OUT.  BB)


  • At a fundraiser earlier this week, President Obama blamed gridlock in Washington on “hyper-partisanship,” saying, “My thinking was after we beat them in 2012, well, that might break the fever, and it’s not quite broken yet.”


  • Conservatives should be concerned about modernizing U.S. defenses so that they are there when we need them, says Heritage President Jim DeMint.


  • Join us today at noon ET for a debate about defense. Watch online as conservative and liberal debaters face off on national security.

Please read and study this post from American Thinker.  I have heard and read much of what this writer is relating about Obama’s power grab in other sources including FOXNEWS.  The writer lays it all out for those who are willing to open their eyes to what is going on.   Ask yourself why Homeland Security needs more ammunition and guns than were used in Afghanistan!    Who are they planning to use all this fire power on?  And at the same time the Obamanites are trying to take Americans guns away from them.  BB


(article from The American Thinker)  March 7, 2013

A Government to be Feared

By Lauri B. Regan

With each passing day of President Obama’s second term he continues to consolidate power and undermine any notion of conventional democratic governing norms.

Not only did Obama make history as the first black president, he made history by winning a second term despite less than optimal polling numbers, divisive tactics, failed policies, an abysmal economy with high unemployment and gas prices, and breaches of promises to the American people. Today he continues taking his campaign to the next level, further demonizing the GOP in the hopes of winning back the House in 2014. Americans from both sides of the aisle must begin to pay attention to the incremental power shifts occurring in the federal government.

While many Americans feared an Obama unleashed, most were not anticipating the federal government arming itself with massive amounts of ammunition (reportedly 1.6 billion bullets) while at the same time threatening the Second Amendment rights of ordinary citizens. Americans were not contemplating that, in the face of the sequestration’s implementation forcing the scaling down of our military despite imminent dangers and the simultaneous push for Global Zero, the Obama administration would purchase almost 3000 Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles (MRAPs) for domestic use.

In Obama’s first term, his administration proudly touted its terrorist kill list as a means of keeping the country safe. And while many were angered about the use of drones to kill enemies abroad, no one considered the possibility that such tactics would be used here at home. The Washington Examiner recently reported, however the drone program might now be on steroids. In response to a question from Sen. Rand Paul as to whether Obama “has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial,” Eric Holder responded:

It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.

Let us think about that statement. Yes, 9/11 would certainly constitute an extraordinary circumstance that would have justified Dick Cheney’s order for the military to shoot down a hijacked plane headed for the White House, the Capitol, or other site that would have resulted in massive loss of American life. But that is not what is happening at the moment. At the moment, Department of Homeland Security is ordering that drones be adapted to detect a gun-carrying citizen at the same time that it is purchasing souped-up armored vehicles typically found on the battlefield. One report estimates that by 2020, there will be 30,000 drones flying in American airspace.

When approximately 8% of discretionary military spending must be cut due to sequestration, I fail to see why the purchase of armored vehicles for domestic use is a priority. When the Navy must cancel the scheduled deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Harry S Truman to the Gulf due to insufficient funds, how does the government have the funds to arm itself here at home? J.E. Dyer recently noted, “The level of carrier presence is insufficient today to execute a limited-strike campaign against Iran while containing the potential backlash.” But we can afford to arm ourselves here at home in order to strike out against whom, exactly?

I feel frightened that my government is arming itself in a seemingly warlike fashion for the first time since the Civil War. After all, Obama is a man whose disdain for America and the Constitution has been worn as a badge of honor and whose policies of reaching out to terrorists, propping up Islamists, andinviting the Muslim Brotherhood into the White House is of grave concern. And I recall that in July of 2008 Obama stated:

We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.

Putting aside the fact that Obama has never articulated national security objectives for his administration, he has yet to explain why a civilian national security force is required to be funded with money the government does not have to face an enemy or threat that is nonexistent. Is it the millionaires and billionaires, corporate jet owners, and other successful Americans who will be forced to share their wealth at the point of a gun? Why in the world does the DHS need 1.6 billion bullets, over 2700 vehicles impervious to mines, and up to 33,000 drones?

As a Jew, I fear the beginning of history repeating itself. The similarities in cultural transformations and domestic issues between America in 2013 and Germany circa 1933 are quite frightening. America’s economy is a mess and anti-Semitism is on the rise. Throughout history, there is one group of people who provide the perfect scapegoat when difficulties in a community appear. The 21st century is no different. From Occupy Wall Street to the Department of Defense, the old stereotypes are back in full force. As Ben Shapiro reported on the OWS movement:

In New York, ralliers hold signs reading, “Google: (1) Wall Street Jews; (2) Jewish Billionaires; (3) Jews & Fed Rsrv Bank,” “Gaza Supports The Occupation of Wall Street,” and shouting ugly canards like “Jews control Wall Street.” The American Nazi Party is supporting OWS, with leader Rocky Suhayda stating, “Who holds the wealth and power in this country — the Judeo-Capitalists. Who is therefore the #1 enemy who makes all this filth happen — the Judeo-Capitalists.”

But the old canards have now infiltrated the highest offices in the land. While Chuck Hagel had his Jewish defenders, there is no question that some of his more abhorrent statements fall squarely in line with the dangerous stereotypes that Jews control the world. Bill Maher joined the fray in announcing, to resounding applause from his audience, “the Israelis are controlling our government.”

On college campuses (many academic programs are funded by the Saudis), on the streets of our cities, on television and in movies, and in our newspapers, seemingly intelligent and well-respected Americans are comfortable spewing anti-Semitic views that were taboo just a few years ago. The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement is being pursued by some of Obama’s biggest donors and supporters. And the President of the United States, disciple of unapologetic anti-Semites Jeremiah Wright and Rashid Khalidi and domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, has helped mainstream offensive bias in his selection of high-powered czars and cabinet members.

So yes, I am nervous when the federal government under the leadership of Barack Obama begins to arm itself for no apparent reason. One cannot convince me that we need these measures in order to protect us from terrorist attack. Waterboarding terrorists protected us from terrorist attacks but the Obama administration did away with that. Killing terrorists by drone strike without extracting information, while justifiable, is not optimal from a national security perspective. Claiming that al Qaeda is decimated and refusing to use the terms “War on Terror” and “Islamic Fundamentalist” is harming our national security. Withdrawing American power from the region where terrorists thrive and tanking our economy risks our national security. Stealthily ramping up a “civilian national security force” under the guise of Homeland Security provides no domestic purpose other than that which history has proven tragically destructive and lethal to society.

Alas, in the face of governmental attacks on the right of American citizens to bear arms, it is important to recall why that right is so precious. Guilio Meotti recently wrote an article entitled, “Jews, Hold onto Your Guns! Obama is Coming,” in which he recognized:

The first thing Adolf Hitler did, once in power, was to pass a restrictive gun control law which forced most of the people to give up their guns. We know how the story ended… Imagine if Germany or Poland’s Jews had been armed. Would rounding Jews up have been possible?

It is very clear that neither the police nor the army can provide adequate protection from sudden attacks perpetrated either by trained terrorists or individuals. Any attempt on the lives of Jews which results in killing or maiming will encourage repetition and will weaken deterrent power. That’s why when terror strikes, Israeli Jews run for pistols.

Americans need to take notice of what is occurring under a man of questionable character, disdain for Constitutional limits on his power, a quest for transformational measures that have yet to be articulated and clearly defined, and a vitriolic reaction to those who do not abide by his rules. Now is not the time for apathy, it is time for heeding the lessons of history and speaking out to prevent future atrocities. America does not need a civilian national security force and it should be prevented from being assembled.

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

This is a newsletter from Americans for Prosperity.  The Obama administration is at this time attempting to put this organization out of business by demanding a list of their contributors.  this is an unconstitutional act on the part of the Justice Department but then unconstitutional is  par for the course for these thugs.  BB

With the national average price for a gallon of gas approaching $3.90, you’d think that Washington would be doing everything it could to ease the price and the impact on your wallet.  Well, you’d be wrong.

Believe it or not, Harry Reid’s tax-and-spend gaggle in the Senate are responding to soaring gas prices by, you guessed it, trying to raise taxes on oil and gas companies.  Of course, higher taxes mean higher prices; it’s just common sense.  But that’s something in short supply in the Senate these days.

The bill is S. 2204, offered by Senator Menendez from New Jersey.  Not only does it seek to jack up taxes on oil and gas when we can least afford it, but it also handpicks a range of so-called green technologies for special tax breaks.  This bill tries to prop them all up: electric cars, cellulosic biofuels, wind, ethanol blender pumps, and on and on.

The Senate will be voting on the bill this week.  So, take action today and send your senators a simple message: stop trying to use the tax code to prop up your friends and attack your political enemies!

See topic cloud at bottom of page for specific topics.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 97 other followers

BB’s file cabinet