Bombshell Interview: Obama’s Brother Says Barack Is ‘Cold And Ruthless…Dishonest And A Schemer’

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

500wde_YOU-LIE-Obama

 

Hat/Tip to Joel Gilbert and to Lt. Colonel Allen West.

You might remember Joel Gilbert from another story we did on him here at CH2.0.

Starstruck Obama Voter has Fundamental Transformation: Must See Video

Well now Joel has a new film out and it is pretty damning towards Barack Obama and the shabby way he’s treated his family since he became President and accumulated his wealth, becoming a multi-millionaire.


 

In an interview conducted earlier this month, film maker Joel Gilbert, who produced the film “Dreams from My Real Father,” (which suggested that Obama’s Communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, may be his real father) talks to President Obama’s brother Malik, who has some very strong views about his half-brother – including his own doubts as to Obama’s parentage.

Malik says, he feels “Disappointed, disappointed, used, used and also betrayed. In the beginning, I didn’t think that he was a schemer. His real character, his real personality, the real him, is coming out now.”

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Trust me Malik, you are not alone.

‘…the way that he’s turned and become a different person with the family is the same way that I see him behaving politically. He says one thing and then he does another. He’s not been an honest man, as far as I’m concerned, in who he is and what he says and how he treats people.”

While Malik and Barack are not particularly close now, Malik was close enough to have been the best man at Barack and Michelle’s wedding, has visited the White House, and is president of the Barack H. Obama Foundation.

Gilbert asks Malik if he really thinks he and Obama share the same father. Granted, Gilbert has a vested interest in the answer, considering he’s hawking a book about the subject, but Malik’s response is still troubling. He has his doubts.

However, most troubling is how Americans were duped into electing this dishonest “schemer” as president – twice.


.

.

.

Share

Pizza Shop Worker Loves Seattle’s New $15 Minimum Wage, Until He Finds Out That It Cost Him His Job

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

z-pizza-min-wage
Former pizza shop worker Devin Jeran, thanks to new $15 min wage law in Seattle

Hat/Tip to Ashley Dobson at RedAlertPolitics.

Fifteen bucks an hour? Score!!!!

Then reality sets in…

Pizza shop worker Devin Jeran was excited about the raise that was coming his way thanks to Seattle’s new $15 an hour minimum wage law. Or at least he was until he found out that it would cost him his job.

Jeran will only see a bigger paycheck until August when his boss has to shut down her Z Pizza location, putting him and his 11 co-workers out of work, Q13 Fox reported.

He said that while the law was being discussed all he heard about was how the mandatory minimum wage increase would make life better for him, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

“If that’s the truth, I don’t think that’s very apparent. People like me are finding themselves in a tougher situation than ever,” he told the TV station.

Owner Ritu Shah Burnham said she just can’t afford the city’s mandated wage hikes.

“I’ve let one person go since April 1, I’ve cut hours since April 1, I’ve taken them myself because I don’t pay myself,” she told Q13. “I’ve also raised my prices a little bit, there’s no other way to do it.”

Small businesses in Seattle have up to six more years to phase in the new $15 an hour minimum wage, but even though she only has 12 employees, Z pizza counts as part of a “large business franchise.” As a result, she is on a sped up timeline to implement the full raise.

“I know that I would have stayed here if I had 7 years, just like everyone else, if I had an even playing field,” she said. “The discrimination I’m feeling right now against my small business makes me not want to stay and do anything in Seattle.”

Shah Burnham said that she is “terrified” for her employees after she closes up shop.

“I have no idea where they’re going to find jobs, because if I’m cutting hours, I imagine everyone is across the board,” she said.

The organization that pushed for the higher minimum wage, 15 Now Seattle, wouldn’t comment directly on the closing to Q13 and didn’t offer any sign of sympathy.

“Restaurants open and close all the time, for various reasons,” Director Jess Spear said.

Watch Q13’s story below:


.

.

.

 

Share

White House Press Secretary ‘Earnestly’ Avoids Answering Questions About Hillary’s Foreign Donations

Share
White House press secretary Josh Earnest (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
White House press secretary Josh Earnest (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Hat/Tip to WeaselZippers.

The most transparent administration on the planet evidently doesn’t bother with daily briefings, because they’ re never aware of anything, ever.

Not only did the Clinton charity continue to take money from foreign donors, but they failed to disclose the donors as required under Hillary’s agreement with the administration to maintain transparency.

Moreover, not only did Hillary not stop taking money, but money to the charity doubled during the time she was Secretary of State.

White House? Oh, we don’t know much about the story…


.

.

.

Share

100 Years Of The Income Tax At A Glance

Share

Hat/Tip to Doug Ross @ Journal.

Courtesy of Americans for Tax Reform comes this visceral evidence of government’s endless growth; in good times and bad it grows. It never shrinks. Like a bad rash. Or a tumor.

150422-100-years-of-the-income-tax

 

Which reminds me of the question that Democrats have refused to answer for well over 100 years: how do we know when the government has done growing?

What is their endgame? When will we know their massive government has reached its Utopian completion?

Cue the crickets.

.

.

.

Share

Must See Courtroom Video: Kentucky Judge Lets Armed Robbers Off, Calls Three-Year-Old White Victim ‘Racist’

Share

 photo Judge20Olu20Stevens_zpsdfxwgjxc.jpg
Judge Olu Stevens

Hat/Tip to Warner Todd Huston.

A black judge in Kentucky gave a home invader and armed robber a light sentence because he said he feels that the three-year-old white victim was a “racist” because in her victim statement the little girl said she is now afraid of black people after two black men broke into her home and threatened her with a gun.

In an outrageous statement from the bench, Louisville Judge Olu Stevens attacked the tiny white toddler and her parents for their “racism” calling the little girl’s statement “disturbing” while at the same time excusing the actions of the criminals who traumatized her. That’s right, this judge was more upset at a little girl for being scared by armed robbers than he was at the armed robbers.

At the sentencing trial of one of the robbers, a victim’s impact statement written by the little girl’s mother was entered into evidence. The statement read in part, “Whenever we are running errands, if we come across a black male, she holds me tight and begs me to leave. It has affected her friendships at school and our relationships with African-American friends.”

Then the judge outrageously attacked the little girl saying her statement disgusted him…

 

Judge Olu Stevens’ unleashed his wrath on the little girl and her parents who were the victims of the robbery.

“I am offended. … I am deeply offended that they would be victimized by an individual and express some kind of fear of all black men,” Stevens said.

“This little girl certainly has been victimized, and she can’t help the way she feels,” he said. “My exception is more with her parents and their accepting that kind of mentality and fostering those type of stereotypes.”

Judge Stevens then gave the criminal probation because he “deserved” the opportunity to redeem himself.

So, the armed robber who traumatized a tiny girl gets probation because this judge claimed that the little girl was a racist….? And you can get he assumes that the little girl deserved to be robbed at gunpoint because she is white.

Now, think of this. If this “judge” was so willing to excoriate a 3-year-old girl for being a “racist” one has to wonder how many other black criminals he’s let go because he thinks that all whites–even tiny tots–are racists?

This jerk needs to be removed from the bench.

.

.

.

Share

UPDATE: FBI Has Put ALL Registered Motorcycle Owners On Classified Gang List

Share
outlaw bikers 001
Outlaw Bikers, according to the FBI

Editor’s Note:

Okay, looks like the left is at it again. This time they hijacked a URL to spoof a news story about the FBI and motorcycle owners.

The Washington Post did not publish the story below, but rather it emanated from an “entertainment” website. That is being generous. There’s no problem with having a fake news site, when you let everyone know that the stories are solely for giggles and such. But when people go to the trouble to take a URL and make it look like a credible news outlet, then that is just wrong.

On the brighter side, at least – as far as we know – the FBI isn’t lumping all motorcycle owners in with gang bangers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hat/Tip to the Washington Post.

Yeah, let that sink in…

ALL motorcycle owners are now in gangs.

Did everyone get the memo on this? Because I sure didn’t.

MSNBC correspondent Jeremy Lancaster sat down with government official Darrin Cornia to discuss recent rumors that have been in circulation in regard to registered motorcycle owners being placed on a classified FBI gang list.

outlaw bikers 004
Are these two wanton criminals Bloods or Crips?

Darrin Cornia who currently holds a position within the National Security Branch of the government agreed to complete transparency prior to the interview with MSNBC’s Jeremy Lancaster and did remain direct and seemingly forthright throughout his conversation with Lancaster.

After a few moments of introduction, Lancaster bluntly asked the following question,” Mr. Cornia, if I were to make the statement, all registered motorcycle owners are currently showing on a classified FBI gang list, would the statement be true or false?

outlaw bikers 006
Photo obviously taken just before they knocked over the liquor store…

Cornia responded by saying, “That would be a true statement, the FBI has been collecting and compiling Department of Motor Vehicles and Drivers License Division records for the purpose of adding those that own motorcycles to a classified gang list since 1994.

Lancaster asked Cornia to explain the reasoning behind the list which seems inappropriately broad, to Cornia answered the question with the following statement, “It’s nothing more than collecting and utilizing data. We may not like to admit it, but the truth of the matter is that those that own and operate motorcycles are 67% more likely to be involved in illegal or criminal activity than those that do not own or operate a motorcycle.”

The National Security Official went on to explain, “It’s the same as firearms, if local P.D or Highway Patrol were to pull someone over that is a registered firearm owner, that officer has the right to know this information going into the interaction, the same could be said about a local P.D or Highway Patrol Officer that pulled over a registered motorcycle owner, the situations are honestly interchangeable in the eyes of National and Homeland Security.

Big government getting bigger all the time. And we know what happens with lists, they get sold, disseminated and used against the common working man in America.

outlaw bikers 007
The family that Rides Outlaw together, stays together.

Lancaster asked how individuals can find out if they are on this classified gang list.

Cornia responded, “Did you register a motorcycle or obtain a Class M license anytime between the year 1994 and 2015? If so, than you are on the list.”

So what about those unintended consequences of this list?

The MSNBC correspondent concluded the interview by asking Cornia, “aside from potential profiling from law enforcement, are there potentially any additional consequences of being on this gang list?”

outlaw bikers 003
You can just see the steely glint of the hardened criminal in their eyes

Cornia responded by saying, “the purpose of the list is to collect and utilize data, not to create consequences. Aside from notifying law enforcement that you are a registered motorcycle owner or operator, it can show up to potential employers on select background checks.”

Well there ya have it. Don’t buy a motorcycle and expect to not be profiled as a gang-banger.

outlaw bikers 002
One can only imagine the criminal activity these two have planned.

 

.

.

.

Share

Obama Lawyers Afraid To Go To Court On Email Scandal

Share

clinton obama missing emails

 

Hat/Tip to Judicial Watch.

Lie, lie, obfuscate, delay, postpone, and if that doesn’t work, lie again. THAT is our government.

The Obama administration’s fraud, misconduct and misrepresentation on the Hillary Clinton email scandal continues in federal court. Crafty, corrupt politicians realize that transparency and accountability go hand-in-hand.  So that is why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (with the federal bureaucracies at their beck and call) have a personal and political interest in keeping their records away from the American people – even if it means violating the federal transparency law:  the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

So it will not surprise you to learn that Hillary Clinton’s former colleagues at the Obama State Department (with the help of taxpayer-funded lawyers in the Justice Department) continue to mislead the court and oppose Judicial Watch’s work to obtain emails and other documents sent by Hillary Clinton and her aides using secret email accounts.

Judicial Watch recently filed a strong brief in federal court, a Reply in Support of a Motion for a Status Conference, that argues that the State Department should be required to inform both Judicial Watch and the court itself “about the details surrounding the retention of agency emails within the Office of the Secretary and the extent of the Department’s ability to search, request and retrieve those records…” in order to avoid “further undue delays, prejudice and potential spoliation” of those documents.  The request is before U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, who is the judge assigned to what should have been a simple FOIA lawsuit to find out more about Hillary Clinton’s role in the Benghazi cover-up.

But of course, the Obama administration is in no hurry to expose their dear leader…

In a brief filed last week opposing a court hearing on this issue, the Obama administration argued that there was no need for urgency in resolving the issue, and continued their attempt to stonewall.  They want no hearing until at least late April!

With this contemptuous response to our push for transparency, the Obama administration shows that it wants to protect Mrs. Clinton, not enforce the law.

What’s more, this administration is willing to mislead more than one federal court in order to do so.  The cover-up continues.  Why else would the Obama team fear telling the court immediately about this important issue?  What possible harm could one court hearing do!

Continuing the cover-up, State argued that only recently had they been made aware of the secret email accounts, an argument in direct contradiction with the department’s previous statements and as we note, Mrs. Clinton’s statement about the issue:

The State Department cannot claim it was unaware of the…failure to records-manage agency emails from the Office of the Secretary. In fact, the “Statement from the Office of Former Secretary Clinton” states that “[h]er usage [of non-“state.gov” email for State Department business] was widely known to the over 100 Department and U.S. government colleagues she emailed.”

And the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton are well aware that time is on their side.

So as Congress gets out of Dodge for a few weeks without having done much of anything to address the massive obstruction of its investigations, your Judicial Watch is in federal court highlighting that quick action is necessary as the Clinton/Obama gang can’t be trusted to keep these emails secure:

Time is of the essence in this case. The statement by former Secretary Clinton during a press conference that she did not preserve approximately 30,000 emails she sent or received through her non-“state.gov” email address she used exclusively to conduct government business is a matter of public record – not [as the State Department alleged] “conjecture.” Only last week, the State Department publically disclosed that it was unable toautomatically archive the emails of most of its senior officials until last month. This is also a matter of public record – not conjecture. The State Department has still not informed the Court or Judicial Watch whether it has undertaken any efforts to retrieve agency emails from non-“state.gov” email addresses used by other officials or employees within the Office of the Secretary during the relevant time period or from other employees within the agency. The State Department needs to request these agency records immediately in light of the Department’s history of poor records-management and preservation of agency records.

It is a big, absurd lie – now being peddled by the Justice Department (following Hillary Clinton’s lead) – that Hillary Clinton’s alleged removal of the records would prevent them from being subject to FOIA. There is no precedent for the head of an agency “purposefully rout[ing] a document out of agency possession in order to circumvent a FOIA request.”

Read the full story here.

.

.

.

Share

Obama Planning To Evade FOIA Requests On…EVERYTHING He Does

Share
king obama the fundamental transformer
All Hail King Obama!

White House Office Planning To Delete Federal Transparency Regulation That Subjects It To FOIA Requests…

Hat/Tip to WeaselZippers.

Remember this?

Yeah, well Obama evidently doesn’t remember it…

The White House is removing a federal regulation that subjects its Office of Administration to the Freedom of Information Act, making official a policy under Presidents Bush and Obama to reject all requests for records to that office.

The White House said the clean-up of FOIA regulations is consistent with court rulings that hold that the office is not subject to the transparency law. The office handles, among other things, White House record-keeping duties like the archiving of e-mails.

But the timing of the move raised eyebrows among transparency advocates, coming on National Freedom of Information Day and during a national debate over the preservation of Obama administration records. It’s also Sunshine Week, an effort by news organizations and watchdog groups to highlight issues of government transparency.

“The irony of this being Sunshine Week is not lost on me,” said Anne Weismann of the liberal Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW.

Read the full story here.

.

.

.

Share

Supreme Court Will Never Decide Obamacare’s Fate

Share

supreme court

Hat/Tip to Scott Rasmussen at Right Wing News.

An excellent Op-Ed by pollster Scott Rasmussen, presented here, in its entirety.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There has been a lot of discussion lately about whether the Supreme Court will save or destroy the president’s health care law, known to many as ObamaCare. At least one writer went so far as to suggest the court might be preparing to undo the nation’s safety net.

To suggest that such talk is absurd is a gross understatement.

Remember, we have no idea what the Court will decide. Some people following the oral arguments closely concluded that supporters of the law have reason to be optimistic. Just a few years back, however, the analysts watching the oral arguments concluded that the Court would rule against ObamaCare — and they were wrong. Chief Justice John Roberts surprised everyone and found a creative way to keep the law alive.

The Court might be similarly creative again this year. They have great latitude on what to decide and how the decision will be implemented. It’s even possible to imagine them ruling against the law but staying the order for a year or two giving Congress a chance to deal with it.

But the larger issue is that the Supreme Court does not have the final say on it. Public opinion and the reality of how the law works will ultimately decide its fate.

That scares some supporters of the law. They fear a scenario where the Court undoes a major piece of the ObamaCare puzzle and makes the whole law unworkable. Since the law has never been popular with voters, they assume that the current Congress would not replace it.

There’s some truth to that. The law was passed over voter opposition only because the Democrats had a unique and temporary hold on both the White House and Congress. There’s no way today’s Republican-controlled Congress would support anything like President Obama’s pet plan.

But, even if the Court sides with the Administration on the current case, the health care law will remain vulnerable as long as it is unpopular. If consumers continue to see it as more of a burden than a benefit, the unpopular parts of the law will eventually disappear.

And there are many unpopular parts of the law. The biggest, of course, is the individual mandate. It’s not just that people are being forced to buy insurance that’s troubling to many; it’s the fact that the mandate forces people to buy more insurance than they need. That makes it more expensive than most people want (or are able) to pay.

There are a couple of other things that may heighten opposition to the law in the coming months.

Millions of people will find out in the next two months that they owe the government a lot of money because they didn’t have insurance last year. Millions more will find out that the subsidies they received for health insurance last year were too high and that they also owe the government a lot of money. That’s not likely to produce a lot of warm feelings toward the law.

The bottom line is that the fate of ObamaCare is in the hands of the American people. Given the continued unpopularity of the law, that should worry the president’s team far more than what the Supreme Court will decide.

.

.

.

Share

Outspoken Critic Of Obama’s Iran Policy To Face Federal Corruption Charges

Share
bob menendez
Senator Bob Menendez will be indicted by the Department of Justice on federal corruption charges.

Bob Menendez, an outspoken critic of Obama’s Iran policy, will face federal corruption charges

I’m sure the timing of this announcement is purely coincidental.

According to an exclusive report published first by CNN, Democrat Senator Bob Menendez will be indicted by the Department of Justice on federal corruption charges.

The Justice Department is preparing to bring criminal corruption charges against New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez, alleging he used his Senate office to push the business interests of a Democratic donor and friend in exchange for gifts.

People briefed on the case say Attorney General Eric Holder has signed off on prosecutors’ request to proceed with charges, CNN has learned exclusively. An announcement could come within weeks. Prosecutors are under pressure in part because of the statute of limitation on some of the allegations.

The government’s case centers on Menendez’s relationship with Salomon Melgen, a Florida ophthalmologist who the senator has called a friend and political supporter. Melgen and his family have been generous donors to the senator and various committees the senator is associated with.

I am no fan of Bob Menendez. But this thing stinks. He’s been vocal and persuasive in his opposition to Dear Leader’s policies on Cuba and Iran. And this “investigation” has been percolating for six years.

So why now?

“Will no one rid me of this turbulent senator?”, cried President Valerie Jarrett. And lo, Eric Holder unleashed the hounds.

I got a buck that says if Bob pipes down and acts like a good boy the whole thing will go away. That’s how the Obama White House operates. They punish their enemies, and they reward their friends.

Bob Menendez didn’t get with their program. So now he’s gonna get an orange jumpsuit.

.

.

 

Share

Netflix: Hey, We Didn’t Want Net Neutrality To Apply To Us, Just All Those Other Guys

Share

Netflix_Web_Logo

 

Sorry Net Neutrality knuckleheads, don’t say we didn’t warn you. But now it’s too late to be complaining about how when the jackbooted thugs of the FCC take aim at the internet they’re gonna squash your hopes and dreams too.

Exhibit A: Netflix! They got what they wanted, except they’ve decided they didn’t really want what they got.

Netflix CFO David Wells, in comments at an industry conference, said the company’s preference was that broadband Internet service should not be regulated by the U.S. government as a telecommunications utility — appearing to backtrack on Netflix’s previous stance on the issue, although the company later said that its position remained unchanged.

Last year, Netflix urged the FCC to reclassify broadband as a telecom service, under Title II of the Communications Act. In a July 2014 filing, Netflix said that “Title II provides [the FCC with] a solid basis to adopt prohibitions on blocking and unreasonable discrimination by ISPs. Opposition to Title II is largely political, not legal.”

But Wells said that the FCC’s adoption of Title II regulations covering broadband was not, in fact, Netflix’s preferred outcome. On Wednesday, Wells — speaking at the 2015 Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference in San Francisco — said that, while the streaming-video company wanted to see “strong” net neutrality measures to ensure content providers would be protected against ISPs charging arbitrary interconnection fees, Netflix ultimately wanted the situation resolved without government intervention.

“Were we pleased it pushed to Title II? Probably not,” Wells said at the conference. “We were hoping there might be a non-regulated solution.”

Translation? We didn’t expect the FCC to regulate us, just all those other guys.

Yeah, tough noogies numbnuts. The Title II ship has sailed, thanks in no small part to you and your company’s mendacity. You asked for it, you got it. Now live with the consequences.

Speaking of “consequences,” here’s Exhibit B: 5G wireless services were specifically designed to prioritize different classes of data. Now, of course, such a rollout runs smack-dab into the Net Neutrality mavens’ silly “no fast lanes” mantra.

Net neutrality and 5G may be on a collision course as the mobile industry tries to prepare for a wide range of mobile applications with differing needs.

The net neutrality rules passed by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission last week have raised some eyebrows at Mobile World Congress this week. The full text of the rules isn’t public yet, but mobile movers and shakers are having their say. The latest questions involve 5G, the next-generation standard that everyone here is trying to plan for.

The most common thing they think 5G will have to do is to serve a lot of different purposes. Regulators’ attempts to ban “fast lanes” and other special treatment might make that impossible, people who’ve been thinking about 5G said Wednesday.

Industrial sensors, self-driving cars and other emerging uses of the Internet have needs that can’t be met by a general-purpose network, Ericsson Group CTO Ulf Ewaldsson said during a panel discussion. That’s driving a global discussion on a so-called “industrial Internet” alongside the regular Internet that’s grown up around the Web and other consumer activities, he said.

Regulatory efforts like the FCC’s rules don’t see a distinction, Ewaldsson said. He didn’t slam the agency for this but said the mobile industry needs to do a better job of explaining what it’s trying to do. Most importantly, it’s not trying to block or throttle people’s access to the Internet, he said.

Gee, a law written in 1934 isn’t compatible with the technology of 2015. Who’da thunk it! And when it turns out that government is incapable of accommodating nuance, yeah that’s not exactly a News Flash either. Except, maybe, to the starry-eyed utopians who put their faith in bureaucracy instead of the free market.

Now there is a federal agency involved, and it has a bunch of power that it didn’t before. Good luck to Mr. Ewaldsson. Good luck to Netflix. Good luck to Google. Good luck to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Good luck to the Progressive Policy Institute. Good luck to the Internet Society. You made your bed. Now lie in it.

Smiling-Reagan-Cowboy-HatHere’s where I remind you turkeys of Ronald Reagan’s wisdom:

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.'”

Welcome to the party boys.

.

.

Share

BREAKING: NRA Just Gave Barack Obama Some Bad News About His Ammo Ban

Share

ammo

 

Hat/Tip to the Conservative Tribune.

 

Oops, looks like your alligator mouth just overloaded your hummingbird ass, Barack. In other words, maybe you ought to stick to the facts when trying to “fundamentally transform” our country.

Remember that ammo ban Obama is going to do through Executive Order? Well it seems that the reasons he gave to justify trying to take away our 2nd Amendment rights via back door actions, were nothing more than lies. But that’s just par for the course for this President (pardon the pun).

President Barack Obama’s lies and exaggerations on the issue of gun control are starting to unravel. The administration has pushed to ban a common type of rifle bullet based on the allegation that it is a threat to law enforcement officers — but the largest police organization in the U.S. just dismantled that bogus claim.

A short time ago, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives made a surprise announcement about 5.56 M855 “green tip” ammunition. In a move widely seen as backdoor gun control, the BATFE changed the classification of that common rifle round from “sporting purpose” to “armor piercing.”

Obama administration spokesman Josh Earnest tried to use police lives to justify the ban. He stated that “we are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone.”

Oops…according to the cops, that’s just not true.

There’s one problem: Contrary to the claims of the Obama administration, police have not been threatened by M855 ammunition.

“Any ammunition is of concern to police in the wrong hands, but this specific round has historically not posed a law enforcement problem,” said James Pasco, an executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, the world’s largest law enforcement organization.

That top cop explained that 5.56 M855 is usually used for target shooting, and “is not typically used against law enforcement.”

In short order, the NRA stepped in to combat this illegal action.

The National Rifle Association quickly initiated an effort to stop the ATF’s bizarre ban. According to the Washington Examiner, an impressive 235 members of the House of Representatives have signed a letter challenging the regulation.

It is true that a 5.56 M855 can penetrate most soft body armor. However, the type of body armor most commonly used by police officers isn’t rated to withstand rifle rounds, but handgun rounds.

In other words, almost any big game hunting or sporting rifle can defeat soft body armor — and that’s nothing new.

Moreover, so-called “assault rifles” such as 5.56 AR15s are not commonly used by criminals. Law enforcement statistics show that most criminals greatly prefer small, concealable handguns for their dirty work.

You should call your Congressman and let them know that your vote for them, hinges on how hard they fight this ammo ban by our King.

.

.

.

Share

Stop The Insanity: BBQ Pitmasters Told To Take Down American Flags

Share

american flag 005

 

Hat/Tip to Todd Starnes at TownHall.com.

When will the PC madness stop? And why would ANYONE agree to NOT fly Old Glory?

Nothing says America quite like smoking a pork butt and flying Old Glory.

“The sport of professional barbecue is extremely American and family oriented,”said pitmaster Jeff Petkevicius.

So you can imagine Jeff’s extreme displeasure when organizers of an Alabama barbecue competition ordered him – along with other competitors to take down the American flags hanging from their barbecue trailers.

It happened Feb. 27th at the Sam’s Club National BBQ Competition in Daphne, Ala., sponsored by the Kansas City Barbecue Society.

Jeff is the founder of “Give it to God” competition barbecue — a professional barbecue team that smokes meat and shares the love of Jesus. Both are noble missions.

Last Friday Jeff rolled into town with his barbecue trailer and promptly hoisted Old Glory. Not too long after, one of the organizers of the event told Jeff to take down the flag.

“There were six or eight of us that had flags flying,” he told me. “He went to each camp and told them to take the flag down and everybody did.”

The first rule of barbecue is low and slow – but the temperature started rising after Jeff complied with the directive.

“The whole time I’m thinking –the reason I fly the flag is because I love America,” he said. “I love what it stands for. It’s a way to say to our current and former troops – thank you.”

So Jeff had a change of heart and decided to raise Old Glory – as an act of defiance.

“It was a matter of saying there are things more important (than a barbecue competition),” he said. “If they want to kick me out – I’ll leave.”

Jeff was not kicked out and he was not asked to take down the flag. As a matter of fact – after he re-raised the flag another competitor followed suit.

So why were the patriotic pitmasters told to take down the flags?

Jeff said they were told by event organizers that the flags violated a city ordinance in Daphne. But that allegation turned out to be false.

“No one from the city advised or asked anyone to take down flags of any type,” Mayor Dane Haygood told me. “”We proudly and boldly display American flags and we encourage everyone in the community to do the same.”

So who, then tried to stifle patriotism at this truly Americana event?

It turns out the order to remove the flags came from the tour director of the Kansas City Barbecue Society.

“As a measure of precaution, we asked everyone to take down any kind of signs or any kind of flags that were being displayed,” spokesman Mike McCloud told me. “It turned out that some of those happened to be American flags.”

So there you have it, PC madness run amuck.

Read the full story here.

.

.

.

Share

Obama Admin: ISIS Are Not Terrorists But 72 Types Of Americans Are, Did You Make The List?

Share

 photo AmericanTerrrorists001_zps4c8b0f7f.jpg

Hat/Tip to Blaze at Americas Freedom Fighters.

Evidently the Bill of Rights is now optional.

Optional in the sense that, as long as you are saying nice things about our current President and his administration, then you get to enjoy your various rights under the Bill of Rights.

However, if you are saying things that King President Obama and his thugs administration don’t like, well then you just made the list!

What list, you ask yourself? Why the list of 72 types of Americans who are considered a threat and are labeled as ‘Domestic Terrorists,’ that’s what list.

Does our constitution not give us the individual freedom to speak out against the things we do not agree with? Does it not give us the right to speak out against our government and demand better from our elected officials or to stand in defiance of terrorism and illegal immigration among many other things that a true American Patriot would?

Below is a list of 72 types of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and/or “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents. And remember, technically if you are considered a ‘terrorist’, you have NO RIGHTS! You can click on the clink for each point to see the source.

Are you on this list? I’ll bet you are!

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Gay”

11. “Anti-Immigrant”

12. “Anti-Muslim”

13. “The Patriot Movement”

14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”

15. Members of the Family Research Council

16. Members of the American Family Association

17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”

18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

21. Members of the Christian Action Network

22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

27. The militia movement

28. The sovereign citizen movement

29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

41. “General right-wing extremist”

42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

45. Those that are “anti-global”

46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

58. “Rightwing extremists”

59. “Returning veterans”

60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

64. “Anti-abortion activists”

65. Those that are against illegal immigration

66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

72. Evangelical Christians

The groups of people in the list above are considered “problems” that need to be dealt with. The returning veterans in my eyes are the most disturbing considering they fought and in many cases have died for the rest of America to be free.

Looking over the list I also see most of these “types” of people are the people who built America- the working class of today and in my opinion America’s only hope of returning to the great nation that it once was is to fight for our rights! The will of the American people is strong but we are a nation divided. Wake up my fellow Americans for we are playing into their hands. It is time to put aside race, religion and politics and unite against the tyrannical government that is destroying the very fabric of our great nation that our forefathers fought and died for. 

Source –  at The Truth 

.

.

.

Share

Net “Neutrality”: Turning The Internet Into MSNBC

Share

dems-for-net-neutrality

 

 

“Obama gave his direction to the FCC in back in early November and lo and behold, the FCC majority has put together President Obama’s plan for Internet regulation …Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet is an unlawful power grab.” – FCC commissioner Ajit Pai

“The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission’s view, honest, equitable and balanced.” — Wikipedia

“Think of the press as a great keyboard
on which the government can play.”
? Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda

Make no mistake: Barack Obama, not the FCC, is the one pulling the strings here.  So-called “net neutrality,” as envisioned by Barry and the Socialists … uh, Democrats, is no more than a thinly disguised attempt to abrogate free speech rights as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“…the movement behind net neutrality—from President Barack Obama to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, and reportedly to New York Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand—is coming from the left for political reasons. As liberal dominance of the media has waned under the shadow of FOX News, conservative talk radio and websites such as the Drudge Report, some in the Democratic Party have been looking for creative ways to maintain, or regain, the “mainstream media’s” liberal clout. Net neutrality is one way to attain their goal of dominating the media.”Forbes

Obama supporters, useful idiots who would gleefully support the stoning of infants and puppy dogs if they thought it would help Dear Leader in his campaign against capitalism,  are all in favor of so-called “net neutrality,” which they see as a large thumb in the eye of the telecom giants instead of what it really is: a sucker kick to the cojones of American freedom.

Related stories:

.

.

Share

Obama to Outlaw .223 Ammunition Through Executive Action

Share

ammo

 

Hat/Tip to Brandon Gatton and Dave Dolbee at The Shooter’s Log at cheaperthandirt.com.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, probably a million more times – 2017 CANNOT GET HERE FAST ENOUGH!!

Editor’s Note: The following article is posted in its entirety:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is doubtful that anyone reading this article will truly be surprised that Obama and his cronies in key government posts are trying to once again de facto suppress our Second Amendment rights. They were not able to make it happen through the legislature, but Obama has his phone and his pen. Currently, it seems the President is using both to target gun owners, specifically owners of AR-15s. If you can’t outlaw the guns, get rid of the ammunition.

The AR-15 platform, also commonly referred to as the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR), has dominated the civilian market. I am not sure of the numbers, but it certainly runs in the millions. The logic flows like this. After any major war or conflict, the service rifle of the day becomes popular among the civilian market. With well over a decade of conflict in the Middle East, it logically flows that a civilian version of the rifle service members were trained with and relied on would become popular. It happened with the M1, M14, Winchester Model 70, Remington 700, 1911 and the list goes on both in eras spanning before and after this list.

The popularity of the AR-15/MSR is the reason it is a target of the Obama administration. The latest assault on the Second Amendment came after the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) unexpectedly announced on Friday the 13th that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” Instead of going through the legislative process as intended, President Obama is using his executive authority to once again impose gun control measures

Three Major 2A Assault in 2015 Already

Obama is a lame duck with nothing to lose. He will never run for office again and does not care about public opinion—at least not the public opinion of gun owners. We are not even two months into the year, and we have already seen three major assaults on the Second Amendment through executive action. The first came when the activities that constitute “manufacturing” firearms were changed. Next, was the flip-flopping decision of the BATFE regarding firing a shouldered pistol.

The most serious, or at least far reaching, is of course the BATFE’s “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c).” The new proposed regulation would eliminate the M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.

The Backstory

Federal law imposed in 1986 prohibits the manufacture, importation, and sale by licensed manufacturers or importers, but not possession, of “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely… from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium.”

We now have AR pistols, which of course are capable of shooting M855—i.e. handguns. On the face, this would seem to run afoul of the law… unless you actually dissect the bullet. The core is not made of any of the materials listed. The M855 uses a lead core with a steel tip, therefore, it is not, nor was it ever “armor piercing.” Not to be bothered by pesky facts or the letter of the law, the BATFE declared the M855 as armor piercing anyway, but granted it an exemption as a projectile “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

How Will this Affect You?

Perhaps Obama’s phone has made the BATFE “reconsider” its position. Going forward, the BATFE will only grant the sporting exemption in two categories of projectile:

Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles

A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.

Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles

Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.

In essence, you can have AP rounds for a rimfire .22 or a wildcat cartridge in which the only handgun commonly available or used is a single shot handgun—what a joke!

Two Chances to do Something About it

The NRA-ILA and others are of course on the case and looking for ways to stop this latest assault. The BATFE is accepting comments until March 16, 2015 on this absurd attempt to restrict ammunition for the most popular rifle in America in an attempt to trample our Second Amendment rights once again. Early next week, we should have a follow up article with more in depth details as well as information regarding how you can submit comments and make your voice heard. For now, share this information with your friends and let’s start marshaling our pro 2A forces.

There is a lesson to be learned and this is your wakeup call. In the mid ‘90s when the Assault Weapons Ban was enacted, the prices of ARs skyrocketed. The same was true when the Obama administration banned Russian imports last year. The prices shot through the roof overnight. Who knows whether or not the BATFE will be successful or whether we are able to muster enough public support to thwart it efforts. Until then, I think I will stock up on some M855 while supplies are plentiful and the prices are good.

.

.

.

Share

Sen. Mike Lee: Obama’s Internet ‘Takeover’ Means ‘Massive’ Taxes

Share

obama taxes internet

 

Hat/Tip to @Mr. Pinko at IOTWReport.com.

Ronald Reagan once famously tried to explain government’s world view, and I agree with him. However, I do believe that the modern Democratic Party has perfected the practice.

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” – Ronald Reagan

Government Internet takeover is coming

We do not have much time left to stop this gigantic government takeover of the Internet. The FCC is voting on February 26th and the Left is mobilizing to support their effort to do so.

And of course, it is one of the favorites of the Tea Party that is taking this issue head on, NOT one of the “GOP-Good ‘Ole Boys” establishment types.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, is stepping up his criticism of President Obama’s plan to regulate the internet, warning that new rules will lead to the types of taxes and fees slapped on telephones and cable service.

“Under this new regulatory regime, Internet service providers will be subject to these fees as well, and then pass them on to you, the consumer,” said Lee. “This is essentially a massive tax increase on the middle class, being passed in the dead of night without the American public really being made aware of what is going on,” he added.

Lee’s warning comes in a new letter asking supporters to sign a petition demanding that the president withdraw his plans to reclassify the internet as a public utility. It follows other warnings from Lee on the issue.

Here is a link to the online petition.

Protect Internet Freedom

Read the full story here.

.

.

.

Share

Because Tom Wheeler Wasn’t Smarter Than Steve Case, Obama Will Tax And Destroy The Internet

Share

obama turns interenet off

 

 

Today Barack Obama’s hand-picked FCC chairman laid out his rational for taxing and regulating the internet. It’s because AOL’s Steve Case ate his lunch back in the 80’s.

I personally learned the importance of open networks the hard way. In the mid-1980s I was president of a startup, NABU: The Home Computer Network. My company was using new technology to deliver high-speed data to home computers over cable television lines. Across town Steve Case was starting what became AOL. NABU was delivering service at the then-blazing speed of 1.5 megabits per second—hundreds of times faster than Case’s company. “We used to worry about you a lot,” Case told me years later.

But NABU went broke while AOL became very successful.

Steve Case built a better mousetrap. Tom Wheeler went into government.

Vengence is mine, sayeth the Obamabots.

Tom Wheeler failed at business. So he’s going to punish everyone who has managed to succeed.

That’s the whole story. Sour grapes. Because the thing is, the problem Tom Wheeler’s 1980s company encountered won’t be alleviated by his definition of Net Neutrality.

My proposal will modernize Title II, tailoring it for the 21st century, in order to provide returns necessary to construct competitive networks. For example, there will be no rate regulation, no tariffs, no last-mile unbundling.

Can you guess what NABU needed to make its cable internet venture successful?

Last mile unbundling.

Tom Wheeler needed the government to seize the private property of cable operators to make his dreams a reality. He needed free access to the wires coming into your house so he could put his magic gizmos on them. The very thing he’s saying he won’t demand.

But the fact remains, he didn’t want to pay for those wires. He didn’t want to rent those wires. He wanted them to be handed to him, on a silver platter, for free.

So why isn’t he now requiring last mile unblundling as part of his Net Neutrality initiative?

Because regulating the internet is only the first step. Nationalizing the internet is his, and his president’s goal. Total government control of what you download, what you see, and where your surf. For your own good, of course.

We used to call that censorship. Now it’s called Obamunism.

Imagine if the internet was an actual highway. (Remember Al Gore and his “information superhighway?”) Along the highway are billboards. Some of those billboards are bigger than others. Some are brighter. Some are closer to the road. Tom Wheeler’s billboard is in the next county. Nobody sees it. So his “solution?” Force you to drive on a 2 lane dirt road just so you do see it.

That’s Net Neutrality. Every billboard is equal.

Except, that’s not how America works.

Net Neutrality means everybody’s internet is equally slow.

You want to pay for faster internet? Sorry, you can’t. Because some schlub in Cleveland might be sad if he finds out his internet is slower than yours.

Adding insult to injury — the 16.1% tax Tom Wheeler is going to impose on your monthly internet bill.

Think of of it as Obamacare for the internet. He’ll tax you to subsidize broadband for “the underserved.” I’ll leave you to imagine how the population of the underserved intersects with the population of slacker Obama voters.

They want free internet. And Tom Wheeler and Barack Obama want you to pay for it.

There’s the dirty secret behind Net Neutrality. You pay. Obamabots get free downloads.

And Tom Wheeler gets to use his government position to stick it to Steve Case’s progenitors, so he can exact his pound of flesh and pretend he “won.”

The thing is, Steve Case did more to build and perfect the internet than Tom Wheeler ever could. And in 1,000 years, when history looks back at this era, Steve Case will be lauded as a visionary, while Tom Wheeler and Barack Obama will be forgotten, if not vilified and ridiculed for their pettiness.

Small comfort, for sure, when you and I are writing the checks.

.

.

Share