Iranians Cheer As $Billions Fill State Coffers : Objma - 'Mission Accomplished'

And now the entire world knows for sure America is a fool to believe Iran will actually do things to help there country prosper. John Kerry says, 'yeah maybe the will use some of the money for terrorism but most of it will used for infrastructure'.

Is there some common sense in that statement? Do you believe John Kerry is mentally sound in this statement or totally suffering from a psychological  break down in his ability to determine reality. Or maybe even worse, he is simply a progressive socialist and this is standard operating procedure?

The entire world hoped Mr Objma and the progressive socialists would come their senses and stop the transfer of $billions of dollars to the Iranian terrorist nation, but the reality is Mr Objma is all in on engaging with the Iranians to support his legacy of Muslim jihad throughout the middle east and Africa.

And if the truth be known, Mr Objma is now trying to fulfill his legacy at home, opening our boarders to hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants, playing a leadership role in supporting new Islamic frontiers for jihad in America.

Even before the deal was struck on nuclear weapons that Objma brokered, which the Iranians have not signed and now with the flow of $billions of dollars to Iran, the chant from the Iranians was and still is "death to America".

Of course the question that remains, why are so many among us willingly accepting the ideology of a Islamic Muslim jihad in our country?

Overstaying Visa Problem : Solution A Lack of Will & Politics

I believe there are several reasons why the government doesn't have the will to track people that over stay their visits to this country. The major one now is the problem is so huge and the government is cumbersome as so many departments and agencies are involved in everything that happens in this country, it becomes nearly impossible to define a solution and therefore it's easier to put off making a decision on how to proceed.

No one wants to take on the task of trying to bring together all the different factions to get some kind of consensus on what it will take to solve the problem of over staying visas, let alone immigration over all.

And then there is the problem of the politics involved where some politicians believe the more unknowns living here are a good source of voters. But this isn't anything new, this is a strategy for winning elections that has been used for decades.

Nearly 500,000 Foreigners Overstayed Their Visas Last Year. What That Means.
Josh Siegel / @SiegelScribe          

Almost 500,000 foreigners who traveled legally to the U.S. last year for business or leisure remained here after their visas expired, according to a long-awaited government study on one of the more undertold aspects of the country’s immigration story. The Department of Homeland Security report, first requested by Congress in 1997, shows that 1.07 percent of the nearly 45 million foreigners who entered the country legally in 2015 overstayed their visas.

The report is limited in that it contains information only from travelers using certain visas and does not include data on others, like those coming here as students or temporary workers. It also includes information only on people who arrived by air or sea, and not foreigners who came by land. Indeed, while experts warn of drawing conclusions from the report, since it includes only one year of data and can’t be compared to anything, the numbers relating to visa overstays —a population that represents an estimated 40 percent of the roughly 11 million immigrants living in the country illegally—will likely add to the nation’s tense debate over immigration.

“This is an area where Congress for 20 years has been asking for this information, and now we have a roadmap to determine what’s the best way to improve these numbers,” said Stewart Verdery, a senior Homeland Security official during George W. Bush’s administration, in an interview with The Daily Signal.

After receiving the report they sought, members of Congress expressed frustration at a weakness in the system described by the report: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, an agency of Homeland Security, does not have the ability to obtain biometric data—such as fingerprints, facial recognition, and iris scans—on people leaving the country. “If we do not track and enforce departures, then we have open borders. It’s as simple as that,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., who questioned Homeland Security officials at a hearing Wednesday put on by the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest. “There is no border at all if don’t enforce our visa rules.”

The study sheds light on Homeland Security’s ongoing challenge to build an “entry-exit” system that can accurately track all people coming into and leaving the country. Foreigners who apply to enter the U.S. on a visa are interviewed and photographed and have their fingerprints taken at a consulate overseas before arriving there. But collecting biometric data on those exiting the country is not as easy. That’s because U.S. airports do not have exclusive areas for domestic and international flights, which makes it hard for Customs officers to screen out overseas travelers and get their information.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been undergoing tests to obtain biometric exit data, including one that began last year where officers use mobile devices to collect fingerprints from passengers at the departure gate. In addition, John F. Kennedy Airport in New York City debuted facial-recognition technology this week.

Verdery, who worked on the entry and exit system at Homeland Security, said the challenge is finding a cost-effective method that does not inconvenience travelers. “The question is, where do you collect the information? At the jetway? Via a kiosk after security? During the security check? At the airline counter?” Verdery said. “Where do you put them that doesn’t inconvenience travelers and is actually effective in making sure someone has left? None of the options are particularly great. And though the biometric equipment is very mature, there is also a manpower issue.”

At the Senate hearing, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he expected Homeland Security to come up with solutions after lawmakers, he said, provided $2 billion in a government spending bill this year for the exit-entry system. “Knowing who is going in and coming out is a matter of national security, plain and simple,” Schumer said. Similarly, Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies wonders how the government has not solidified its entry-exit system so many years after the 9/11 Commission recommended it as a tool against terrorism. “The implementation on a better exit tracking system is more a lack of will than a lack of viable solutions,” Vaughan said. “It’s not something that can happen over night, but we can definitely do it. The problem is this is an unguarded gate, and it shows how our legal immigration system is being abused.”

Even if the government was better able to get better exit data, experts say, there would still be challenges to enforcing the law against those who have overstayed their visas. “Even if you had a more precise entry-exit system and even if you are able to capture the exit information on everybody, that does not lead automatically to being able to conquer the problem of overstays,” said Doris Meissner, who leads the U.S. Immigration Policy Program at the Migration Policy Institute. “Because though the data tells you who’s left and who’s remained, you don’t know where those people are.”
Foreigners who enter the U.S. on visas do have to say where they are going, but there’s no stopping them from traveling elsewhere when they enter the country.

So the question for immigration enforcement officials becomes whether it makes sense to expend resources on finding people who have overstayed tourist or business visas, when those foreigners have already been screened before coming here. “The question becomes how much of a problem from a standpoint of enforcement are these people as compared to people you know have committed a criminal act and are able to trace because they are being released from jails where they served their sentences,” Meissner said. “By definition, people here on visas are here as tourists, or they are visiting family or coming to a concert or cultural event. They are part of international mobility. So there has to be a real commonsense element to how you use data like these for enforcement purposes and what makes sense from a cost-effective standpoint.”

Verdery believes that the government can do more to deter visa overstays, by better notifying foreigners when they have been in the country too long and reminding them of the consequences of not leaving on time. According to federal statute, foreigners who overstay their visas by 180 to 365 days before leaving cannot enter the U.S. again for three years. Those who stayed more than a year too long can’t come here again for a decade. The hope among experts is that having baseline overstay numbers provides the government incentive to improve.

“The Coast Guard is not expected to stop 99 percent of drugs, and the FBI is not expected to stop 99 percent of crime,” Verdery said. “I think Customs and Border Protection’s view is that 99 percent [of people not overstaying their visas] is a great start, but where can we find improvement knowing at some point you will reach a law of diminishing returns?”

Big Cities Hardest Hit With $15 Wage Hike : It Just Feels Good & Right

 This is just more 'feel good politics' by the progressive socialists. And when the new minimum wage is finally fully implemented and the results are catastrophic job loss and the low wage earners are out of work, who will they blame? Easy, George Bush and the Republicans!

Data Show These 6 Big Cities Aren’t Faring Well After Minimum Wage Hikes
Leah Jessen / @_LeahKay_          

Data shows a downhill economic trend for six big U.S. cities that hiked the minimum wage to $10 or more an hour in 2015.  “Chicago, Oakland, San Francisco, Seattle, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.—all on the leading edge of the push for big minimum wage hikes—all show worrisome job trends,” wrote Jed Graham of Investor’s Business Daily.

An analysis by Investor’s Business Daily shows that these big cities are going through a period of adverse job effects in fields such as restaurant and hotel employment.  Graham highlights in his article that preliminary data possibly links the increased minimum wage to job decline but added, “The data aren’t, for the most part, stark and reliable enough to amount to smoking-gun proof.”

“It’s getting harder and harder to argue that high minimum wages don’t destroy many jobs, as advocates claim,” Salim Furth, a research fellow in macroeconomics at The Heritage Foundation, said.  “These are early data—we’ll get better numbers over the next year —but they show frighteningly consistent job loss across different cities from different parts of the U.S.” Both the Chicago ($10-an-hour minimum wage) and San Francisco and Oakland ($12.25- and $12.55-an-hour minimum wage, respectively) areas have sunk to five-year employment lows in the leisure and hospitality fields.

Investor’s Business Daily reports that after a $15.37-an-hour mandate for hotels with 300 or more rooms in the Los Angeles area, hotel jobs declined, while the rest of California saw a growth in hotel and motel jobs.  “This early evidence is particularly bad because most researchers believe that minimum wages take effect slowly,” Furth said. “They destroy some jobs, but they prevent the creation of even more jobs later on. Prospects may get much worse for the unemployed in these progressive cities.”

The nation’s capital provides some of the most compelling data. Instead of adding about 2,000 leisure and hospitality jobs per year, as the city has in recent years, D.C. lost about 700 jobs in this sector, according to Investor’s Business Daily.  A $1 per hour minimum wage hike took place in July, raising the minimum wage to $10.50 an hour. The minimum wage had already risen from $8.25 an hour to $9.50 in July 2014 and is scheduled to increase another $1 per hour this year.

“The D.C. data are key because they reveal outright job losses confined to the city limits,” Graham wrote. “Researchers studying the latest round of citywide minimum wage hikes generally have had to rely on data for a big chunk of the broader metropolitan area, making the analysis more speculative.”
Investor’s Business Daily says leisure and hospitality sector employment decline in D.C. provides “plenty of reason to be wary of the big minimum wage hikes in the pipeline.”  Mark Perry, an American Enterprise Institute scholar and professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus, wrote a post on AEI’s blog Carpe Diem as a follow-up to Graham’s piece.

Perry notes that suburbs of D.C. include towns in Virginia that have a $7.25-an-hour minimum wage and towns in Maryland that mostly have an $8.25-an-hour minimum wage.  Since separate data for the city of D.C. and the D.C. metro area are available, this “provides a natural experiment to test for the employment effects of D.C.’s minimum wage law,” Perry wrote.  “While it might take more time to fully assess the impact, the preliminary evidence so far suggests that D.C.’s minimum wage law is having a negative effect on employment levels at the city’s restaurants,” Perry added.

“At the same time that suburban restaurants last year increased staffing levels by nearly 5,000 new positions, employment at the District’s restaurants contracted by more than 200 jobs.”
In October, Perry reported on Seattle’s shaky start for restaurants jobs after a $15-per-hour minimum wage hike was voted on and had started to be phased in at $11 per hour in April 2015. While Seattle’s data combines a metropolitan statistical area, not just the city limits of Seattle, Perry wrote that a “likely cause” of a drop of 700 restaurant jobs from January to September 2015 in the Seattle Metropolitan Statistical Area (while restaurant jobs increased by 5,800 positions for the rest of Washington) is the minimum wage increase.
“Cities like Portland, Maine, and Buffalo, N.Y., that are just beginning to implement similar minimum wage increases should slam on the brakes before too much damage is done,” Heritage’s Furth said. “Once you kill a downtown, it’s hard to bring it back.”

 

Objma Adminstration Attacking Homeless : HUD's New Rules for Transgenders

This is a classical example of the minority ruling the majority. The question that remains is why are the rights that are demanded for the few are denied to the many. This is crazy! This is just more insanity from the progressive socialist left liberals that believe if it feels like the right thing to do then it's legitimate and legal under the law. It has to be legal because we say it is.

But if you find this outrageous, look in the mirror and ask the question, did you vote to make this happen? Did you vote twice to make this happen? In reality, of course if you actually voted twice to elect and reelect Mr Objma and his progressive socialist democrats to being us this catastrophic ideology were the majority, the middle class are of no concern to the larger picture of sex, class and religious warfare to gain an advantage in the arena of control.

There are no limits to which the progressive out go to get and keep power over others. It's who the are and Mr Objma is the perfect example over the last 7 years of the progressive ideology. Total domestic failure and a foreign policy of fostering world war.

This will be Mr Objma legacy. America without an anchor and floundering in financial and domestic chaos. This is Mr Objma's vision of the new world order that he promised to bring as his "fundamental change" to our society.

Proposed Obama Rule on Transgender Persons Could Affect Homeless Shelters
Melody Wood / @melodywwood          

Emergency shelters are the next target for regulations elevating gender identity over health, safety, privacy, and religious liberty concerns.

Emergency shelters are the next target for regulations elevating gender identity over health, safety, privacy, and religious liberty concerns.

On Nov. 20, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provided notice of a proposed new rule, “Equal Access in Accordance With an Individual’s Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs.” This proposed rule, if implemented, would endanger religious liberty and create concerns for the privacy and safety of our most vulnerable citizens: the homeless and other people seeking emergency shelter for the night.

In 2012, the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued a rule elevating sexual orientation and gender identity as specially protected classes under HUD-assisted and insured housing programs. This rule, however, allowed temporary emergency shelters to take sex into account when providing shared sleeping areas or bathrooms.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s proposed rule would rescind this commonsense exemption that protects the faith, privacy, and safety concerns of those in shelters.
The rule would require emergency shelters to “provide transgender persons and other persons who do not identify with the sex they were assigned at birth with access to programs, benefits, services, and accommodations in accordance with their gender identity.” This means that a man who comes to a homeless shelter and identifies as a woman must be provided access to shared women’s bedrooms and bathrooms, regardless of the privacy concerns of the women in the shelter. The same would hold true for a woman who self-identifies as a man.

No Grounds to Deny
The rule would not allow shelters to consider the person’s sex as indicated on identity documents when determining where to place the person. Even a single-sex emergency shelter can have no basis for denying someone access to shared bedroom and bathroom facilities “solely because the provider possesses identity documents indicating a sex different than the client’s or potential client’s gender identity.”
This would give a woman’s shelter no grounds to deny a man dressed as a woman, and whose identification documents confirm that he is male, if the man identifies as a woman. This is because the rule defines “gender identity” as “the gender with which a person identifies, regardless of the sex assigned at birth” and also regardless of “perceived gender identity.”

Under the new rule, if a person identifies as male, female, neither, both, or some combination of male and female, he or she gets special privileges that would be enforceable regardless of biology or other people’s moral, privacy, or safety concerns.

Safety Concerns
The safety of transgender persons seeking accommodations in shelters is a genuine concern. But so is the safety of all other persons in the shelter. The proposed regulation allows exceptions only in cases where the transgender person him- or herself requests one. The rule puts the choice entirely in the hands of the transgender person, even in instances where the other shelter residents express concerns over privacy or safety.

According to the rule, the only acceptable decision to find an alternative placement for a transgender person would be due to “the individual’s own request to be otherwise accommodated.” Complaints from others, including shelter employees or other clients forced to share a room with someone of a different sex, would not provide adequate reason to find alternative placement for transgender individuals. The homeless, who often have nowhere else to turn, could be forced to share rooms with persons of the other sex regardless of their own concerns, or themselves be forced out.

Faith-Based Shelter Issues
Beyond the privacy and safety concerns it causes, the proposed rule also poses a danger to religious liberty. Many emergency shelters are run by churches or religious organizations whose religious beliefs inspire them to help the poor. Yet many of these same churches and religious organizations also hold as a matter of faith or moral conviction that maleness and femaleness are objective biological realities to be respected and affirmed. This proposed rule would require religiously run shelters to violate their sincerely held religious and moral convictions on sexuality.

A comment submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development by the Christian Medical Association, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Association of Evangelicals, and similar organizations highlights the problems that the proposed regulation poses for religious liberty.

It argues that some of the shelters that would be affected by this rule “may consider it impermissible on religious grounds, for example, to share sleeping and bathing areas with adults to whom they are neither married nor related and who are biologically of the opposite sex. Similarly, a rule that forbade faith-based providers of housing to treat biological men as men, or biological women as women, could substantially burden their religiously-motivated mission to provide housing to those who need it.”

Should this rule go into effect, shelters run by religious organizations might be forced to choose between violating their beliefs and shutting down due to loss of government funding. The religious or moral convictions that affirm biological realities as meaningful are from the same set of beliefs that prompts these organizations to help the poor in the first place—it doesn’t make sense for the government to make them choose just one of these beliefs to stand by.

Finally, consider the many homeless people of faith who will refuse to disrobe, sleep in the same rooms, or shower with strangers of the opposite sex as a matter of deep religious conviction. It is they who will be forced out of shelters by this rule and who will have nowhere else to turn.

The proposed rule should be rejected. The best way to truly protect the needs of the homeless and the freedom of religion is to leave shelters free to operate in accordance with their faith and moral convictions.

Water Contamination In Flint : EPA Fails Again Like Colorado - Who Cares?

This is interesting in that the governor of Michigan has stepped up and took the responsibility for the problem of water contamination in Flint, but who has stepped up to take the responsibility for the contamination of the river in Colorado by direction action on the part of the EPA, The Environmental Protection Agency?

As one can assume, being a Objma government agency, they will not now or at any time in the future take responsibility for the rivers contamination and destruction of it's aquatic life. There is always be some private enterprise to demonize as the bad people that hate the environment, and there will always be millions of the ignorant that will believe the same to be true.

Another Government-Caused Water Crisis and Cover-Up
John-Michael Seibler / @JSeibler          

Flint, Mich., may be another case (similar to the Environmental Protection Agency Gold King Mine spill) of negligent government behavior that would raise criminal prosecution had it come from a private party.

Michigan officials are under scrutiny for potentially causing, and covering up, a series of decisions that resulted in Flint’s drinking water being contaminated with unsafe amounts of lead. Unsafe amounts of lead can cause behavioral problems and learning disabilities in children and kidney ailments in adults.

Flint officials’ 2014 decision to draw water from an inadequately treated Flint River source reportedly started the now widespread contamination of some of Flint’s 99,000 residents’ drinking water. The untreated water caused lead to leak from old pipes throughout the city.
Flint, which previously used Detroit’s water system, switched back after a few individuals discovered elevated lead levels in children. But officials “remain concerned that damaged pipes could continue to leach lead.”

So far the government has failed to remedy the situation. Four families with children suffering from elevated lead levels filed a federal lawsuit claiming that their children’s injuries were caused by officials’ negligence “in switching from Detroit’s water system to the Flint River.”

Michael Pitt, an attorney in the lawsuit, said “failure to stop the use of the Flint River, despite knowledge it was toxic, made the danger far worse.” Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder formed the Flint Water Advisory Task Force to study the water crisis. The group wrote a report that concludes that “the state Department of Environmental Quality ‘must be held accountable for that failure.’”
The task force report uncovers three general areas in which state officials may have misbehaved.

First, state officials practiced a passive “technical compliance” with the law that led to failures to identify the contamination. Second, state officials responded to victim’s complaints of lead contamination with a “persistent tone of scorn and derision.” Third, state officials may have failed to properly adhere to relevant federal regulations pertaining to lead and safe water supply.

Former prosecutor Keith Corbett said of any investigation into these behaviors that in “dealing with incompetence or malfeasance in office that’s just the result of people not doing their job, it becomes difficult to turn that into crime.” Still, some individuals “in positions of authority made bad decisions,” Corbett continued, “and those bad decisions have had horrible consequences for the city of Flint.” Now federal investigators have their hands full looking for signs of criminal conduct from negligent discharge to mail fraud.

But since the EPA has yet to be held responsible in Colorado after the Animas River spill, it is unclear if Michigan officials will be held responsible.

Whether criminal charges will be brought against government officials for contaminating Flint’s drinking water is unclear—just as it was when the EPA discharged toxic water into the Animas River.
There has to be a full discovery of what caused the contamination. With clear signs of serious contamination that include locals reporting health effects, however, it is likely that the government would bring a criminal prosecution had a private party caused the spill.

As Heritage scholars have said before:

“There is no reason to let government officials slide when the government prosecutes private parties for the same conduct. It’s time for the government to choose: Either stop prosecuting private parties for negligence or make the [responsible Michigan] officials stand in the dock. Sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.”

This piece has been updated by the author. 

Detroit School Teachers/Governemnt Demand More - Deliver Failure

As with nearly every aspect of the Detroit government that has been tasked to serve the people,  it has been increasing clear the dysfunction and absolute disconnect from reality on the part of the politicians that run this city rules the day. But this is nothing new in that for decades Detroit has been known for it's corruptive politics and politicians can be seen as out right criminals, also known as members of he progressive socialist liberal democrat party, or the "collective".

School failures to deliver as promised to taxpayers, parents, and the demands of unions for more money to deliver even less product is business as usual. Failure piled upon failure.

It's only now that Detroit has become the poster child for dysfunction and corruption in city politics, which has brought it to it's collective knees, forcing it into receivership from financial collapse, and with the light of reality that has begun to shine on Detroit for it's systemic failures, we begin to see and understand the true depth of failure that is the progressive democrat agenda and mentality.

But it's not just Detroit, there are many other major cities around the country that have fallen to the same dysfunction, corruption and failure are all ruled, , not governed coincidently, by democrats. Who knew?

Detroit Public School Teacher ‘Sick Out‘ Underway While Just 8% of Students Can Read Proficiently
Lindsey Burke / @lindseymburke          

Nearly all schools in Detroit were closed Wednesday due to a massive teacher “sick out,” preventing students from attending class.

Teachers have complained about over-crowded classrooms, poor school conditions, and dissatisfaction with the idea of charter school growth in Michigan. The teachers’ sick-out includes a planned march, which will conclude near a venue being visited by President Barack Obama Wednesday. Meanwhile, 46,000 kids are unable to attend school in Detroit. Among those 46,000, it’s likely that less than 4,000 of them can read proficiently.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, just 8 percent of Detroit eighth-graders can read proficiently. Eight percent. And just seven in 10 students graduate. But lack of progress is due not to a lack of resources in Detroit public schools, which spend roughly $16,000 per pupil per year. According to the Mackinac Center and a separate analysis by Randan Steinhauser:

– About 75 percent of the annual District budget goes toward paying employees covered by its current collective bargaining agreement for teachers.

– Out of a new $7,450-per-pupil grant the Detroit school district will receive this year, $4,400 will be spent on debt servicing and benefits for teachers who have retired.

– The average Detroit Public Schools (DPS) superintendent makes between $121,091 and $178,871 a year.

– The superintendent can select up to two “professional associations” (unions) to be a member of each year, and the district (taxpayers) will reimburse his membership dues.

– DPS has a debt of over $3.5 billion, which includes unfunded pension liabilities.
Funneling money into a mismanaged school system has not created an environment conducive to improving academic achievement in Detroit.

Serious reforms to the district are necessary. Policymakers in Michigan would do well to enable every Detroit child—and every child in the state—to exercise school choice through the use of education savings accounts (ESAs), accounts that enable families to harness the funds that would have been spent on their children in their assigned pubic school to craft a customized education plan. They can begin by considering how to tackle the barriers to school choice that currently exist in the state.

A Short History Lesson : Hillary As First Lady

I don't know how accurate this summation is on what a thrill it was to have worked with Hillary or was thrown under the bus by her for stuff she did and didn't do to serve the nation. One thing that was left out of list was how much did the taxpayer pay her for doing all of this great work serving the people of the great nation.

As we know now, Hillary isn't about to do anything for nothing, not ever. I can just imagine how much she raped the taxpayer, that is stole for her servers, and  just like Bill served his female staff for eight years. Bill raped, fondled, groped and screwed the women on his staff and of course the taxpayers.

WOW - just think how much fun it will be to have the Clintons back in the White House.

A History Lesson : How Soon We Forget
(Author Unknown)

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary
 to assume authority over a health care reform.  Even
 after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get
 a vote in a democratic controlled congress.  This
 fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million
 in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.
  
Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over
 selecting a female attorney general.  Her first two
 selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were
 forced to withdraw their names from consideration.
  
Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described
 her selection as “my worst mistake.”  Some may not
 remember that Reno made the decision to gas David
 Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in
 Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women
 and children.
  
Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations
 for the head of the Civil Rights Commission.  Lani
 Guanier was her selection.  When a little probing led
 to the discovery of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her
 name had to be withdrawn from consideration.
  
Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed
 Hillary to make some more recommendations.  She chose
 former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice
 Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff,
 and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department.  Her
 selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster
 (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was
 forced to resign.
  
Many younger votes will have no knowledge of
 “Travelgate.”  Hillary wanted to award unfettered
 travel contracts to Clinton  friend Harry Thompson –
 and the White House Travel Office refused to comply.
 She managed to have them reported to the FBI and
 fired.  This ruined their reputations, cost them
 their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month
 investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was
 charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime
 of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury
 acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.
  
Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was
 allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig
 Livingstone, for the position of Director of White
 House security. When Livingstone was investigated for
 the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton
 enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by
 White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president
 denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course,
 denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.
 Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White
 House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of
 service to seven presidents.
  
Next, when women started coming forward with
 allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill
 Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the “bimbo
 eruption” and scandal defense.  Some of her more
 notable decisions in the debacle was:  She urged her
 husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit.  After
 the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.
  
She refused to release the Whitewater documents,
 which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special
 Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer
 money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica
 Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later
 admitting his affairs.
  
Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing
 his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to
 a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by
 the House of Representatives.
 
Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and
 obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation
 by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no
 recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times
 while under oath.
  
After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to
 return an estimated $200,000 in White House
 furniture, china, and artwork she had stolen.

What a swell party – ready for another four or eight
 year of this type low-life mess?
  
Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly
 incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of
 State and the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton
 Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall
 next.  But to her loyal fans - “what difference does
 it make?”
  
Electing Hillary Clinton president would be like
 granting Satan absolution and giving him the keys to
 heaven!
  

Cologne Rape Victims Found Guilty : Islam's Muslim Terror Welcomed

It appears that the criminal attacks on women in Germany is only a matter of identity. The problem only arises when that identity is the attacked. And apparently as well, given that Islam cannot be held responsible for it's actions, then all that's left to blame are those that have been abused, raped, the women.

Welcome to the new world order where victims are less important then the ideology and religious tenants of Islam and feminism only identified as occasional.

Attacks on Women in Cologne Highlight Double Standard of Multiculturalism
Kim Holmes / @kimsmithholmes

The horrendous attacks on women in Cologne, Germany, on New Year’s Eve have exposed a deep crack in the façade of radical multiculturalism. On one side are radical feminists who argue that sexism, no matter how innocently expressed, must be vigorously repressed. On the other are the mavens of racial and ethnic identity politics who preach that Muslim refugees must be exempt from too much censure for sexual assault, lest we be guilty of “Islamophobia.”

Forced to choose between the two, some feminists come down on the side of anti-Islamophobia. Harvard University International Nieman Fellow Laurie Penny, for example, was far more outraged by the supposed “theft of feminist rhetoric by imperialism and racism” than by the attacks themselves. She doesn’t excuse the attackers outright, but it’s clear she’s far more worried about confirming the “narrative” of Islamophobia than defending the rights of women.

Many people think that multiculturalism is all about defending common humanity. It isn’t.

Why is that? One reason is that Muslim refugees now enjoy the pre-eminent position in the canon of multiculturalism. They are thought to be the most victimized, so they get most of the attention, even to the point of sacrificing the feminist cause.

But there are deeper philosophical reasons. Many people think multiculturalism is all about defending common humanity. It isn’t. It’s about creating a new power structure that divides humanity into competing and unequal groupings.

As I explain in my upcoming book, “The Closing of the Liberal Mind: How Groupthink and Intolerance Define the Left”:

In order to justify the plethora of self-generated identities, the very notion of the human being must be eradicated. It must be sliced and diced only according to what each identity establishes as its own local truth. … If we believe, as identity theorists do, that the individual human being as we commonly understand him or her is a social fiction, then it is not that big of a tragedy if some people are sacrificed for the sake of others. Without a respect for all human beings, regardless of their place in the identity pecking order, it is fairly easy, even necessary, to separate people into winners and losers in the power game.

In the Cologne case, the losers of this new power game are women. In the current sweepstakes of multicultural victimhood, they are lower in the pecking order than Muslim refugees.

It’s a blatant double standard—one for Western women and another for Muslim refugees. But we really shouldn’t be surprised. After all, radical multiculturalism is philosophically grounded in the logic of the double standard. According to the canon of “white privilege,” all white people, regardless of their individual views, are assumed to be racist by definition. Racial minorities, on the other hand, cannot by definition be racist. Only white people can be. There’s one standard for one and another standard for another.

In the case of Cologne, the same is true for not only for Western women and Muslim refugees in Germany. It also is true for German and Muslim refugee men as well. Does anyone doubt for a second that Penny would have bent over backwards to explain away the import of Cologne attackers if they had been German men?

Here’s the root of the problem: Multiculturalism and its offshoot identity politics are supposed to be about equality, but they are not. They are actually about pretending that different things are the same. According to the canon of identity theory, a white woman who claims she’s black is “really” a black woman. A male who insists he’s a woman is “really” a woman. A Muslim refugee’s victimhood status entitles an assailant to be treated “as if” he were innocent because he’s a victim of Western cultural oppression. In all these cases, people claim to be something they are not. And yet they grab the mantle of equality as if they were.

This contradiction is why the defenders of multiculturalism must always change the subject. As Ralf Jaeger, minister of the Interior for North Rhine-Westphalia, explained after the Cologne attacks, “[w]hat happens on the right-wing platforms and in chatrooms is at least as awful as the acts of those assaulting the women.” Never mind all the actual acts of rape and groping—what matters more are the words of people who committed no crimes.

Yes, we all know Germany’s horrible past, but Jaeger’s hyperbole is not merely overcompensation. Jaeger is descending into the very same moral abyss he claims (and I assume sincerely) to abhor. By invoking such a false moral equivalence, not only are the actual crimes of men minimized, but the equal rights of women are sacrificed. It represents an astonishing Faustian bargain with a new and different kind of intolerance.

As I explain in “The Closing of the Liberal Mind”:

In practice, identity and equality work against each other. The more the former is pushed, the more the doctrine of equality is Balkanized. It becomes a contest between competing demands for recognition and privilege.

In that contest, there are winners, and there are losers. And in Cologne, it looks as though the losers are women and the cause of feminism.

John Kerry Believes "Death to America" Just A Personal Greeting From Iran

If you know the truth, the truth will set you free? What if you have no idea what the truth is or where to look for it? What then?

What happens then is someone like John Kerry arrives on the scene and for all the world to see he is someone that is psychologically unstable and mentally challenged.

A perfect diplomat for Mr Objma's ideology. The last thing Mr Objma wants is a diplomat that says something that make sense.

But John Kerry is the face of the progressive socialists that want to be seen as warriors for peace at any cost to the American homeland. If it is seen that Mr Objma's ideology and agenda for America is just an extension of the Islamic jihad that is running wild in the middle east and northern Africa, no problem. If thousands have to die in America to prove we are truly subservient to the Islamic revolution, so be it.

Does it make sense then Mr Objma is the religious leader in America for the Islamic jihad in this country? No body knows for sure.

 

American Heritage On the Brink : Barack - It's Not Who We Are - Believe Me!

It called fundamental change. As many in our society now readily accept as the new norm, it's where subsistence and obedience is so much easier then having to decide one's own fate.

Whether it's Mr Objma or Hillary or Bernie, it all boils down to what matters to us as a nation. Do we live with pride in who we are or maybe it's okay to be controlled by people that see us as just tools to be used and abuse, and then discarded when there isn't left to gain by that association?

ObjmaCare? Wide open Immigration? Hatred for the middle class and a discussed with ethnic  minorities that are poor and disadvantaged but the socialist politicians still using them for personal gain by our progressive socialist leaders in Washington and the White House?

The agenda and ideology of the progressive socialists is on track to bring down our country. If you haven't listened to Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, or even Bill Clinton, and still don't understand they are not saying anything that is designed to further our countries prosperity, then be ready to accept the consequences.

Given the last 7 years of  government dysfunction and abject failure on all fronts makes headlines everyday, one has to know the worst is still to come if we fail in our duty to recognized what and who brought this nightmare of progressive socialism to our country. It will be the voters, in their collective ignorance that will suffer the most, not the politicians that lied, but were too lazy or ignorant to see them for who and what they are.