"ObamaCare Is Incompatible With Fiscal Responsibility"--- And Will Undermine Our Freedom

Liberty Is Never Safer Than When The Politicians Are Terrified...Sen. Ted Cruz

Note: Several weeks after this was posted, it was reported the Obamacare website was a cluster f*ck. In addition, the government already spent over $500B on this piece of garbage---further reinforcing the claim the law is incompatible with fiscal responsibility.

• In 2008, Pres. Obama said we were days away from "transforming" America. Several days ago, he said we are days away from finishing the job. Although he was referring to ObamaCare last week, he was also referring to his transforming vision of America---by having more government intrusion into our lives. In the case of ObamaCare, it will be a significant loss of our freedoms (After what we learned about the NSA and the IRS  in the last year, can we trust the government having even more access to intimate details of our personal lives?).
• Unfortunately the consequences will be even more severe. As my headline from Michael Needham of the Heritage Action For America group makes clear, the cost of this entitlement will be unsustainable. When ObamaCare was presented to the American people, many promises were made and many have already been broken (the infamous "you can keep your doctor" claim by Pres. Obama is just one example of many. Even CNN's fact-checker said the claim was FALSE). In fact, as many studies have now shown, ObamaCare will also cost more than first promised (we predicted that here 2 years ago). Three years ago, the estimated cost over a ten-year period was $940 billion. That's now ballooned to $1.7 trillion. You can make a safe bet that number will increase again. For example, in 1965, Congress estimated Medicare Part A would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost: $67 billion. Medicare spending in 2010 was?---$560 billion. Get the picture? Understand this lesson: everything the government ever predicts about projected costs are never accurate and never have been. So what do you think will occur with ObamaCare?

Sen. Ted Cruz's Filibuster More About Freedom Than ObamaCare

Pundits are saying Pres. Obama is losing support from his own party. To give you an idea how bad it's gotten, today Jimmy Carter compared him to Jimmy Carter...Leno

• "The only thing that can stop ObamaCare now is reality." That was a Tweet by David Burge earlier today. I believe he's absolutely correct in his observation.
• Ted Cruz was also right yesterday. Too many pundits and critics (many from his own party) missed Cruz's main points. Namely, Cruz was not only making a case against ObamaCare. After all,  he was preaching to the choir. Almost all major polls continue to show most Americans do not support the law and know little of the law even after hundreds of speeches by Pres. Obama and his surrogates touting it since its passage in 2010. No, Cruz was making a case against the law as a costly intrusion into our lives.
• Interestingly, those Republicans who continue to criticize Cruz made some of the exact same arguments against ObamaCare three years ago. Yet now they fling long knives into his back? It's yet another example of the political class---whether Republican or Democrat---standing against the people rather than standing for the people and the Constitution. Cruz made that clear when he himself said, "The American people are frustrated because their elected officials don't listen {to them}."
• And why should these political class Republicans so arrogant anyway? After all, they just lost two elections to an incumbent who possessed one of the most pitiful records of any president in American history.

Progressives Enjoy Waltzing With The Devil

Nation Sick Of Looming Stuff...The Onion

Note: Since this was posted, the devil won.

• Yesterday I wrote a piece about Bill de Blasio, the Democrat candidate for mayor of NYC. I targeted his love affair with the progressive agenda as well as his very conspicuous Socialist background (some referring to it as Marxist). In short, he supported the Marxist Sandinistas in Nicaragua. He honeymooned in Cuba in violation of American policy. As even the NY Times pointed out--De Blasio's history of aiding despots. Or as Michael Goodwin of the NY Post wrote today: "...he's a member of the 'blame-America-first' club, the kind that doesn't understand the fuss over Jane Fonda or why it's not okay to sport Che Cuevera T-shirts." These are the same people who have a long history of referring to the likes of Castro, Che and the late Venezuelan dictator Chavez as their heroes.
• And today, the NY Post reported De Blasio was part of a group of NY nitwit politicians who honored Zimbabwe dictator and murderer Robert Mugabe in 2002 at City Hall. For those who don't know about Mugabe. This guy murdered is political opponents, confiscated land from anyone who wasn't black and rigged elections.
• So what does this all mean? It means many progressive politicians are not only naïve and stupid, they're also dangerous. Progressives have a long history of a love affair with revolutionaries, both domestic and international. If you recall, Columbia University hired Kathy Boudin as an adjunct professor. She was a member of a domestic terror group that attacked an armored car in 1981 that left two police officers and a guard dead. They were gunned down in cold blood.  She served 22 years for that crime and was paroled in 2003. Ironically, in 1970, Boudin and her cohorts planned on bombing Columbia's library. Her group also had plans on bombing the officer's club at Ft. Dix. One of her comrades reported Boudin wanted to use anti-personnel bombs for that attack because she wanted to kill people as well as damaging property.
• Keep in mind, there is evidence that Pres. Obama had some acquaintance with Bill Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground, a Marxist domestic terrorist group responsible for conducting a campaign of bombings through the mid-1970's. (Obama's own admission to George Stephanopoulis of ABC News). Obama also denounced Ayers' actions with the Weather Underground.

Why Americans Should Follow The NY Mayoral Election---Will NY Make The Same Mistake The Nation Did In 2008?

Man With Widely Circulated Penis Pictures Not The Most Humiliated Person At Podium.. The Onion on Weiner and wife giving a speech at a rally.

• Many people might believe that the New York mayoral race is not important to their lives. After all, it did turn into one long dick joke with Weiner. But Weiner lost the primary (some say he pulled out prematurely--sorry, I can't help it---low hanging fruit). But Americans should follow this race.
• Recall just over six years ago, a man by the name of Barack Obama entered the national political domain. Back then, the most miserable prick in Congress today, Harry Reid, referred to Obama as  "light skinned...with no negro dialect."  Joe Biden, who also entered the fray and was prying his foot out of his mouth throughout the campaign, said of Obama at the time: "I mean. You got the first main-stream African-American who is articulate and bright, and clean and a nice-looking guy." How could Obama lose even when he was facing the Clinton machine (Hillary at the controls)?
• He couldn't. If you recall, Obama had the mainstream media in his hip pocket as he does now(at one time during the campaign while at Barnes + Noble, I counted over 40 books and magazines with the images of Obama or Michelle or both on their covers). Very few in the mainstream media (or presstitutes as I like to refer to them) carried any stories about Obama's past associations with former domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers and company.

• Jump to the present, we now have an avowed socialist---some might say Marxist---who may well become the next mayor of the largest city in the United States---New York.
• Bill de Blasio, "democrat" candidate for mayor of NY, is a long-time admirer and sympathizer of Nicaragua's Marxists Sandinistas. He even traveled to Nicaragua in his mid-20's. In the 1980's, he helped raise funds for the Sandinistas and even subscribed to the party's Marxist newspaper. He also happened to honeymoon in Cuba in violation of U.S. policy.
• As late as the 1990's, he described himself as an advocate of "democratic socialism." (code for Marxist). To this day, he admires European socialist movements. In fact, to this day, he has support from the likes of Al Sharpton and former senior officers of ACORN. Pres. Obama recently endorsed his candidacy.
• But let's not stop with de Blasio. Let's, for a moment, take a look at his hero---Daniel Ortega, current president of Nicaragua and member of the Sandinistas National Liberation Front.

Benghazi: What We Knew Then + What We Know Now

Are they going to call Hillary again? She needs to know for concussion planning...Tweet by David Burge

Note: Since this was posted, this week's revelations show this attack was preventable.

I've written a number of pieces on Benghazi. Also, Rep. Darrell Isaa's House Oversight Committee has been holding hearings this past year. This is what we knew then and what we now know from more recent reports.

• Last December, a Senate bi-partisan report found there were "systemic failures and management deficiencies" prior to, during and after the attack on our consulate.
• We know that in-country consulate staff had requested additional security PRIOR to the attack. In fact, we now have in evidence a cable bearing Hillary Clinton's signature on a request from the U.S. ambassador requesting more security.
• The same report contradicted earlier reports by the administration and State that the attack was "spontaneous" or a response to an anti-Muslim video.
• In fact, in a new book entitled, "Under Fire, The Untold Story Of The Attack In Benghazi," the authors report within minutes of the attack, the consulate got word to the State Department, the FBI and Pentagon that terrorist were attacking. In fact, they report that a security official at the Benghazi consulate sent a message to our embassy in Tripoli reporting: "Benghazi under fire. Terrorist attack." Keep in mind, throughout this period and days later, the American people were being told by the administration that the attack was a response to the anti-Muslim video. Susan Rice, then US ambassador to the UN and now National Security Advisor, appeared on several Sunday morning news shows pimping that lie. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even the staff at the compound that day never reported there was a spontaneous attack. As shown above, they reported otherwise.
• The book also details that drones flew over the consulate and viewed armed terrorist attackers not movie protesters.
• We also know---from Leon Panetta, former Defense Secretary---he was up all night monitoring the attack on Benghazi but never heard from Pres. Obama. In fact, the very next day, the president flew to Vegas for yet another fundraiser. NY Post

• In a more recent report by the House Oversight Committee, we now know that Hillary Clinton appointed a majority of the members of the Administrative Review Board that unfairly placed the blame on midlevel officials while giving senior officials a pass. Last month, John F. Kerry, Secretary of State, allowed the four midlevel officials to return to work but not to their former positions. Again, senior State Department officials were never disciplined.
• The House Committee continues to look into what role Hillary played throughout this entire episode. In fact, it was also reported---by the Daily Beast---that the ARB never interviewed Hillary Clinton. But we do know from testimony by Gregory Hicks, second in command to the late ambassador Stevens, he personally debriefed Hillary the very night of the attack.
• As we also now know, we didn't send anyone to help our people being attacked at the compound other than some CIA operatives. In fact, the book also reports our allies in Libya remained on the sidelines. Italy's top diplomat allegedly watched the attack unfold while at the Venezia Café. Many in the neighborhood surrounding the embassy filmed the attack on their cell phones.

• In summary, we know these facts: The attack was not spontaneous, even the FBI, Pentagon and State Department knew that within 30 minutes of the attack. Hillary was briefed during the night of the attack. Yet, the administration refused to admit it was a terrorist attack for over a week. Even then CIA Director, David Petraeus, said he knew it was a terrorist attack "almost immediately." We also know our in-country staff requested more security on several occasions prior to the attack.  We also know no help was sent to our people who were being attacked and besieged by the terrorists.

• Over a year after the attack, we still don't know where our senior officials were physically during the attack. That includes Pres. Obama. We still do not know who denied requests for additional security. In fact, that leads to another question. If your in-country staff are requesting more security, why wasn't the compound made more secure? We still don't know who issued any "stand-down" orders to our military. We still don't know who gave Susan Rice her bogus talking points. And finally, why haven't any of the attackers been apprehended when even reporters found one, and we have video of many of the attackers?
• In other words, over a year after the attack, many questions still remain.

Postscript:

Fox News reported CIA operatives on the ground during the attack on Benghazi were denied requests for assistance on at least 3 occasions. In other words, they were told to "stand down" by their supervisors. Eventually they defied those orders and responded to the attack.
Also breaking last week, former Assistant Secretary of State, Raymond Maxwell, accused Clinton's staff of sanitizing the Benghazi files.