“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Friday, May 10, 2013

The US Government spends $72 billion per year on the Department of Education. Polling firms can get Americans to agree to anything. Social and Political pacts manipulate at will. The US media dutifully supports the big lies. Welcome to America

Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.
Yet few Americans are aware of the dramatic drop, and more than half believe gun crime has risen, according to a newly released survey by the Pew Research Center.
In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.
The number of gun killings dropped 39% between 1993 and 2011, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in a separate report released Tuesday. Gun crimes that weren’t fatal fell by 69%. However, guns still remain the most common murder weapon in the United States, the report noted. Between 1993 and 2011, more than two out of three murders in the U.S. were carried out with guns, the Bureau of Justice Statistics found.
The bureau also looked into non-fatal violent crimes. Few victims of such crimes -- less than 1% -- reported using a firearm to defend themselves.
Despite the remarkable drop in gun crime, only 12% of Americans surveyed said gun crime had declined compared with two decades ago, according to Pew, which surveyed  more than 900 adults this spring. Twenty-six percent said it had stayed the same, and 56% thought it had increased.

Americans overwhelmingly say the nation’s immigration policy is in need of sweeping changes. Overall, 75% say immigration policy needs at least major changes, with 35% saying it needs to be “completely rebuilt”—among the highest of seven policy areas tested.
Yet the broad public agreement that immigration policy should be revamped is not matched by consensus on how to deal with illegal and legal immigration.
The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted May 1-5 among 1,504 adults, finds that 73% say there should be a way for illegal immigrants already in the United States who meet certain requirements to stay here. But fewer than half (44%) favor allowing those here illegally to apply for U.S. citizenship, while 25% think permanent legal status is more appropriate.
Few Americans want the U.S. military to get involved in the conflict in Syria, even those who think Syria has used chemical weapons against its people, according to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll.
Only 5 percent of respondents said they would support sending ground troops to Syria, while 68 percent said they were opposed. And support for the military providing weapons to rebel fighters was only barely higher: respondents opposed doing so 51 percent to 12 percent. Conducting air strikes saw 49 percent opposed to 16 percent in favor. Opposition to each type of intervention crossed party lines, with Democrats, Republicans and independents largely in agreement that the U.S. should not intervene.


  1. Is there truth behind any of these poll results? If not, how far off could they be from the truth?

    The polls often radically diverge from reality, yet lobbying groups hire the number twisters, get the statistics that their paymasters require, plant the results in the press, and then get the US Congress to dutifully change the law to conform to the false perceptions.

    Those that do it, know that they are doing it. Many are good soldiers following orders, most are not.

    The results are war, ignorance and tyranny. Most are too ignorant to even notice it is happening and in this information age, there is nothing that we can do about it.


  2. We must do something ...

    There was a refrain, my father used to say ...

    "Do something, even if it's wrong"

    He has not said that, in a long time.

    He changed his mind on Lincoln, too.
    Went from being a fan, to thinking Lincoln was a mass murdering war criminal.

    Circles and cycles.

    1. One of these days Lincoln’s image will be removed from that defaced mountain.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. More of the truth concerning quot comes out.

      quot is an admitted Israeli, despite the previous denials made on that point.

      An Israeli that two days after the Patriot Day bombing spoke highly of Hitler.

      Hitler, quot wrote, was right and quot's own father wrong.

      quot, an Israeli NAZI, a fella that would fit right in at the table with the Syrian Christians.

    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    5. Interesting, DOes this fellow "desert rat" just make it up as he goes along?

      what proof of truth does he have?


    6. "Do something, even if it's wrong"

      He has not said that, in a long time.

      Most likely because most things you ahve done have been wrong...

  3. LONDON—U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew Friday said he would "keep an eye" on whether the stimulus provided by the Japanese and other central banks is intended to address weak domestic growth, or deliberately weaken currencies.

    1. Terry Burnham: We are hostages to the destructive actions of central banks. Printing money destroys value. The puzzle is not economic, but rather psychological. Why do we allow Central Bankers to make us poorer and endanger us physically?

      Patty Hearst holds an M1 carbine during the April 1974 Hibernia bank robbery. Photo by Federal Bureau of Investigation.

      The answer lies in our non-rational brains. One aspect of our psychology, labeled the Stockholm Syndrome, is the human propensity to develop positive feelings towards captors in a form of traumatic bonding.

      Nils Bejerot coined the phrase after a 1973 Stockholm bank robbery where four hostages were held for close to a week. Even after being released, the hostages showed sympathy for the robber, and blamed the police. The most famous U.S. incident is that of Patty Hearst, who joined the organization that kidnapped her and took part in a bank robbery with her abductors.

      The phrase "economy supported by central banks" generates more than half a billion Google hits. Can it really be true that printing money is going to make us rich? No.

      Printing money can destroy an economy, or its effects can be close to neutral. Destruction occurs when the money printing severely distorts economic decision-making. My catastrophic view is that printing money by central banks in recent years has had three main impacts:

      Printing money destroys wealth.
      We cannot see the full impact yet of recent printing, but we can look at the last round of printing. After the NASDAQ crash in 2000, the Fed funds rate of very short-term (overnight) interest rates was cut from 6.5 percent to 1 percent. The unemployment rate at the time was a little over 5 percent. The subsequent problems created by the Fed were much larger than any short- term benefits during the low-rate periods.
      Printing money shifts wealth from the prudent to the profligate.
      The Federal Reserve is specifically trying to drive down interest rates. Borrowers are happy to pay fewer dollars in interest. For every dollar not paid in interest, there is a saver that is made poorer. To the extent that the Fed is able to reduce interest rates, it transfers money from savers to borrowers.
      Distorting prices leads to bad decisions.
      Interest rates are prices and incorrect prices lead to bad choices. The most obvious of these are investments in risky assets because lower risk assets have rates close to zero. We will only see the impact of the bad decisions in the future, but we can be sure they are being made now.

    2. Those are hardly self-exclusive outcomes. :)

    3. If they didn't print all that money then the 'borrowers' wouldn't have re-paid their loans and all the 'lenders' would have seen their 'assets' disappear.

    4. One wonders, who watches US to be ascertain whether the US Treasury and Federal Reserve are stimulating the economy or debasing the currency?

      Why does the Congress not audit the Fed?

      What are the politicians and the bankers trying to hide?

    5. One stimulates the economy by debasing the currency or you borrow to do it...

      ...or both.


    And why Benghazi is generally emerged as a rallying cry for the President's opponents. When during the Bush administration, there were 54 attacks on diplomatic targets that killed 13 Americans. Yet, garnered only three hearings on embassy security total. And zero outrage on Fox.

    So why is this attack so different for Republicans?

    1. .

      It's not the crime. It's the cover-up. Always has been.

      Another straw man drawn up by Steward, an appeal to his main audiance.

      But then, "What does it matter?"


    2. What is it, Q, that you think the Government is trying to cover up?

    3. That they are not omnipotent?

    4. Someone checked those numbers. They are pretty phony. Those attacks were in Iraq mostly, during the war, and most were like spray painting graffiti and stuff. Stone throwing. There were some deaths, but there was no cover up of anything.

      I am ashamed of you rat, you know better than to use Jon Stewart as a source on anything.


    5. What needs to be known is who ordered the stand down, the no help order.

      Now, who could that be?

      Let's see....hmmmm....

    6. boobie, the War continues.

      All the attacks during the Bush tenure were linked to International terrorism. Whether those attacks occurred in Iraq, or elsewhere, not pertinent.

      Until the 14SEP2001 AUMF is repealed or reformed the US is at war.
      With the fellas that offer support to those that may attack US anywhere overseas or here at home.

      The War has not ended. the standard not changed.

    7. .

      Evidently, you have not been watching the hearings or following the story or even following the posts on this blog, rat.

      As I said yesterday, there is no law against brain-farts and incompetance. We see it every day from this crew. Had the administration laid at the facts as they happened, made adjustments, and moved on, this story would now be as dead as Ambassador Stevens and the others.

      However, apparently for political reasons, they instead chose to manipulate the facts and lie to the American public in speaches and on TV in order to promote their own political meme heading into the 2012 election.

      It is this political manipulation that is now being attacked, no doubt for political reasons of their own, by the GOP.

      GOP, Dems, I could give a shit about any of them or their political games. But I am always happy when their bullshit gets exposed publically for what it is. If it takes a partisan GOP or a partisan Dem to acomplish that, I have no problem.

      Now, if I have to explain to you about the issues I am talking about when talking cover-up (Muhammad video, terrorists, Ansar al-Sharia, death of al-Queda, etc.) I would suggest you go back and do a little catching up.


    8. There was no cover up of the video.
      It aired on the Inet. There were riots in Egypt because of it.

      There was an attack on a US facility in Benghazi. Notice that no longer is it referred to as a "Consulate". Nor as Hannity told US, the Embassy.

      Spinning the story, especially a story involving what appears to be "Top Secret" negotiations with Turkey and the current Libyan leaders, expected. Rightly so. It does not always serve US interests, overseas, to have Q know all he'd like to know about what the US is doing.

      Loose lips sink ships.

      Or so the "Greatest" generation told US.

    9. That is why there is an expression, Q.

      "The fog of war"

      You, nor they, nor even US, get to ascertain the goings on, from "Official" sources.

      If you would like the fog to lift, well ...

      14SEP2001 AUMF, that is the key

    10. Misinformation and disinformation, both are essential tactical elements to winning the war.

    11. .

      Lord, rat, how fucking obtuse are you?

      Fog of war?

      Obama's speech on the last stream could have been intended directly for guys like you. You'll suck up any piece of shit they feed you.

      How things roll in D.C. The initial video rolls into others.



    12. .

      Misinformation and disinformation, both are essential tactical elements to winning the war.

      What, we wanted the terrorists to think we were too stupid to believe that terrorists had attacked us even after they said they attacked us? What, we want the world to believe that we bought the idea that the Muhammad video should have been censored because Muslims got their feelings hurt? Boohoo.

      In this case, misinformation and disinformation weren't essential tactical elements to winning a war. It was an essential tactical element in trying to win an election.


    13. .

      If you would like the fog to lift, well ...

      14SEP2001 AUMF, that is the key

      If you believe the political manipulation on Benghazi had anything to do with AUMF you are nuts. This is based on the arrogance and political manipulation endemic in this administration.


    14. .

      The Fog of War

      An excuse going back to Vietnam and before. Hell, McNamara used it as an excuse for his duplicity and failings there, even turned it into a book.


    15. The administration spun the events - what else is new? Not even close to being illegal and to be expected with an election in the works (when is an election NOT in the works in good ole USA?).

    16. .

      Another observation from the peanut gallery.

      Another baaaaaaa of "It happens all the time. Yawn."

      Of course, it is as usual, a non-sequiter since the orignal question from rat was "What is it, Q, that you think the Government is trying to cover up?"


    17. The whole issues is a "non-sequiter", eliciting a big yawn except for those out to tar Obama/Hillary and crew who are screaming in faux outrage trying to score some political points crying their crocodile tears and sucking in sheeple like you and Bob.

    18. What do we not know, that we need to know?

    19. faux outrage?

      That ain't fake outrage. People are pissed.
      If Obama is to be held to the same standard that Nixon was with Watergate, than O-bomb-a is outta here. (Not that he will be held to any standard but the very lowest)

    20. What do we not know, that we need to know?

      What did the pResident know and when did he know it?

    21. What do we not know, that we need to know?

      Who gave the stand down orders?

    22. .

      You have to go by the source, Dougman.

      Ash isn't concerned about the death of four Americans, he doesn't really care that the whole nation was lied to regarding how events developed and what occurred, that the lies appear to be for strictly polictical or CYA reasons, he could care less that, as rat has pointed out the same thing has happened before numerous times, and as yet, sucurity remains insufficient at hi-risk diplomatic missions, he doesn't care that all blame was fixed a certain grade level and only those below that level were singled out even though the entire administration at the highest levels was aware of what was going on in Benghazi, no, Ash like the other sheeple and Hillary says "What difference does it make".

      Don't try to shake the boy out of his comfort, Dougman. Thinking hurts.

      "God help Canada."


    23. .

      What do we not know, that we need to know?

      Why was the request for additional security in Tripoli and Benghazi not only denied but the security actually reduced despite the fact that both Tripoli and Benghazi were classified as hi-risk mission, there had been previous attacks there, there were a number of threats made? Was the decision administrative or political? According to sworn testimony in the hearing by Nordstrom, the security status given the classifications of the missions in Tripoli and Benghazi were contrary not only to State Dept. guidelines but also the State Department rules.


    24. .

      What do we not know, that we need to know?

      Why do we have an FEST team if we don't plan to deploy it?



    25. .

      What do we not know, that we need to know?

      How detached is the president from the actions of his national security team. The re-writing of intelligence summary involved input from various cabinet officials. Are we to believe that the president had no input on the focus of that final report?

      Likewise, why was the report put out when the final statement was at odds with what people at the highest levels of the administration knew within a day of the attacks?


    26. .

      What do we not know, that we need to know?

      Why were certain people excluded as witnesses to the Clinton appointed ARB investigation, specifically, the people on the ground and coordinating our response?

      Why is the State Department's OIG now investigating the entire ARP process on Benghazi?


    27. You want to know "why", but there is no need for you to know why.

      You know what happened, there is no cover up of the event.
      You want to know why ...

      You do not like the lack of responsiveness official provide to your questions, but there is no need for you to know motive, only what happened, and you do.

      You know security was decreased.
      We know the FEST was inadequate to the task of entering a ongoing fire fight in Benghazi.
      We know there is a policy of no US military on the ground in Libya. If we didn't before, we do now.

      No need for official confirmation.

      The Government had a "Cover Story" that they ran with as long as they could. It was a dumb story, to be sure. That they did it, everyone knows.

      You have no need to know the operational command structure of US combat forces.
      You have no need to know who gave what order, to whom.

      You may like to know, but you have no need to know.

    28. .

      Rat, you are the poster boy for the sheeple.

      You want to know "why", but there is no need for you to know why.

      What a craven response.

      Four people died and others injured because of inadequate security in Tripoli and Benghazi and you say we don't need to know why, that congress should abdicate its oversight responsibilites and like Hillary ask, "What does it matter?", that rather than try to find out 'why' and try to take the lessons learned forward to prevent it happening again, we should drop it, that we should believe the government when it says "Trust us".

      All the rest of the post follows in line.

      ...but there is no need for you to know motive...

      You don't need to know why sucurity was decreased...

      You don't need to know why FEST couldn't do the job it was designed for...

      All projection. What you are really saying is YOU don't need to know the answer to these things, that you don't give a shit about them, therefore, in your arrogance, you assume that if you don't care about them why should anyone else. Not only a sheeple but an elitist sheeple, the Ash of Arizona.

      From the previous thread,

      It should come as no surprise that President Obama told Ohio State students at graduation ceremonies last week that they should not question authority and they should reject the calls of those who do. He argued that "our brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule" has been so successful that trusting the government is the same as trusting ourselves; hence, challenging the government is the same as challenging ourselves.

      And the rat nods his head and baaas, "Gosh, that really makes sense. I guess I AM the government. Why do I need to know anything? Heck, if I question torture, rendition, signature strikes, abuses of the constitution, lying, double-taps, crony capitalism, foreign wars of choice, or a Benghazi cover-up, I am only questioning myself. It's all so logical."

      And the sheep baas, "Ya gots to go along to get along, amigo."


    29. What do we not know, that we need to know?

      I repeat myself,
      "What did the pResident know and when did he know it?"

      I think that is a fair question, as well as the question that was demanded of the Nixon administration.

    30. That question, Dman was made of the Nixon Administration with regards a breaking and entry into a private office building. A common crime.

      What crime do you think occurred which demands such an answer?

    31. What was the crime?

      Not what was the mistake?

      Not who made an error in judgement??

      What was the crime?

    32. Not who said something dumb, afterwards?

      But what is the crime the Obama administration is accused of, in regards Benghazi?

    33. That is what I'm getting at.
      Was Obama guilty of dereliction of duty?

    34. No, it was "Guilty" of limiting casualties, of not inserting an inadequate force into a combat zone.

      It was guilty of not repeating "Black Hawk Down!".

      Q wants to deny the US is at war and that there are legitimate security concerns with each information dump that the US has endured.

    35. Obama is guilty of not committing ground troops to Libya.

    36. Of not destabilizing, further, an already weak political structure, in Libya and Benghazi.

    37. Than was Mrs. Clinton, while a member of the Administration, negligent of her duty?

    38. Even quot will affirm that the Islamoids will set an ambush for the rapid response teams.

      Let's see, we lost a good slice of SEAL Team 6 in Afpakistan to such an aerial ambush. The helicopter brought down by massed RPG fire. As it made its approach to the LZ, in support of US troops which had been ambushed by the Taliban. 40 friendly KIA.

      In Benghazi, an urban environment like Mogadishu, it'd have worse.
      The approaches to the US facility, no secret

      The Marines in Italy or Embassy Security in Tripoli, not the caliber of SEAL Team 6 or Delta Force, which both got their hats handed to them, during helicopter insertions.

    39. How was Mrs Clinton negligent?

      In a way that has not already been brought to light?

      She knew that the President would not authorize a military intervention, the stakes, with regards destabilizing the Libyan governing coalition to great.

      The Ambassador and his security man, already dead.
      That being the day of the event.

      Prior to that, we know about the personnel cuts, already.
      She may have made mistakes, but not criminal ones, and she is no longer in a position of power.

    40. Law. the failure to exercise that degree of care that, in the circumstances, the law requires for the protection of other persons or those interests of other persons that may be injuriously affected by the want of such care.

    41. ..and she is no longer in a position of power.

      Her celebrity is too much power for that one, IMO.

    42. Celebrity is not illegal.

      It is not even applicable to checks and balances, but there it is, she's out of the government.

  5. At 2:00 Eastern we get the Treasury Statement for April that is expected to show about a $100 Billion Surplus for that month.

    If it comes in as expected, we might be looking at a cut in the deficit in 2013 of almost 50%, Year on Year.

    If so, it'll be "assholes and elbows" as the Xperts try to get back in line with reality.

  6. A little sequester, and look what happens, borrowing by the Feds is slashed.

    What a success!

    Which politico is standing and taking the credit that is most deservedly due?

    Not a Democrat or Republican seems to be stepping up.

    Why would that be, perhaps reality does not fit into either Party's rhetorical meme?

  7. Don't have to be convicted, may not even have to be charged, to have your assets siezed, by the Government.

    The Feds, State and Locals all get a piece of the pie.

    BAL HARBOUR, Fla. – Law enforcement agencies across the country are increasingly using forfeiture laws to seize cash and assets from suspected criminals and also some people with little connection to crime.

    The 30-man police force in Bal Harbour, Fla., recently came under fire from the Justice Department for how it used millions of dollars in forfeiture proceeds from drug investigations. The town has had to return some $1.2 million and may have to repay more.

    Critics say police focus increasingly on seizing assets because they get to keep the money. Some state legislatures are looking at new laws to give people more rights in such cases, particularly when they aren't charged with a crime.

    The Justice Department's forfeiture program has grown $297.5 million in payouts in 2006 to almost $454 million in 2012.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/10/tiny-fla-police-department-cash-task-force-shows-increased-used-forfeiture/#ixzz2SuDDqKk2

    1. That is a much better source than Jon Stewart. Now you are back in gear.

      This is the kind of thing that will get straightened out one day, either in the legislature, or in the courts.

    2. boobie, Stewart was being quoted, by FOX's own O'Reilly.

      who made the same argument you did, about Iraq.
      But the numbers were right.

      The Iraq argument, wrong.

    3. Bunk, I saw O'Reilly. He was lambasting Jon Stewart.

      The numbers were wrong, the Iraq argument, right.



    But, of course....

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. I had read that those targeted, they were "anti tax" activists.

      Who are not Conservatives, at all.

      What were the anti-tax activists trying to conserve?

      No, the anti-tax activists were not for conserving the system, they were for change, perhaps radical change.
      It should have been the FBI, not the IRS targeting those threat risks to the status que for investigation.

      The FBI has a lot of experience with investigating radical groups.
      Going back to the 1960's

    3. That might well be the case. Out this way we have always had a contingent of folks declaring themselves independent of the USofA and stuff. They have a phrase for it, some shit like sovereign citizen or something. Or they declare that the income tax wasn't passed properly. They come up with quite creative ways to declare themselves free of the tax laws.

      The Fed Court listens to their arguments, which they have heard time and time again, and then off to prison the tax protesters go.

    4. Hmmmm - on the other hand -

      IRS: Oh, by the way, we improperly targeted conservative and tea-party groups last year; Update: No disciplinary action

      posted at 11:21 am on May 10, 2013 by Allahpundit

      >Tea Party chapters around the nation are blasting the Internal Revenue Service after the federal agency sent them letters demanding information about their politics, contributors and even family members.

      In letters sent from IRS offices in Cincinnati earlier this month, chapters including the Waco (Texas) Tea Party and the Ohio Liberty Council were asked to provide a list of donors, identify volunteers, financial support for and relationships with political candidates and parties, and even printed copies of their Facebook pages…

      Tea Party leaders say they were particularly offended by demands that they name donors and volunteers, which is required by law, but were also asked to list any political ambitions of board members or their relatives.<


      This article suggests the IRS was indeed going beyond their normal reviews of income tax returns and applications for tax status.

    5. Another article -

      May 10, 2013
      IRS says it's sorry for targeting tea party groups
      Rick Moran

      >To be part of a government run by a Democratic president and then investigate opposition groups, harassing them, trying to discourage their political activities is the sort of thing we find in Russia.<


      Always suspect the worst from the government, I guess. Especially if it is run by Democrats. Usually you won't be disappointed.

    6. It was also the thing done by J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI and the Federal government for decades.

      In the "Good Old Days" the FBI would implant "agent provocateurs" within the radical groups, to further radicalize them. In some cases, the FBI plants would be the ones organizing the illegal activities.

      Just that now it's your goose gettin' gored, not the Black Panthers.

      Ain't democracy swell?

    7. Any Conservative would want the FBI investigating those domestic radical groups, not the IRS.

      But to investigate, plant agents in their midst, tap their phones, instigate illegal activities, all things that Conservatives could support, and did. Conserving the status que of Federal police over reaching their legal authority, dating back to the early 1960's, that's what it's all about.

      Conservative are about conserving the status que, right, not left?

  9. Quirk will no longer have to go to the Mafia Barbershop to hear about all those important stories in which he is so interested.

    ((((((THE BRITISH ARE COMING: Tabloid TV Editor Deborah Turness to be Named NBCNEWS President...
    'News is best drama on television'... Drudge)))))

    He can now save the trip to the BarberShop and watch the tabloid news sitting on his arse at home instead of sitting on his arse, watching people get hair cuts, and getting the gossip there.

    There is no further NBCNEWS can fall.

    1. NBCNEWS has reached 'Quirk Level Zero'.

    2. .

      My brother-in-law died six months ago. Since the shop is about 30 miles away, I no londer go there.


    3. Sorry to hear that. Didn't know it was owned by a relative.

  10. >Obama's Oval Office rug includes the following quote: "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." Perhaps Obama and Carney should rethink the "Benghazi was a long time ago" talking point because while it may take some time for Obama's dishonesty to catch up with him, Americans will witness justice ultimately being served. As Horatio states in Shakespeare's Hamlet, "Heaven will direct it."<

    May 10, 2013
    Is Benghazi Obama's Watergate?
    By Lauri B. Regan


    I can't help it. I'm always a sucker for references to Shakespearean Tragedy.

    1. And a sucker for Reagan' jokes -

      >For a long time, the Republican hunt for the truth surrounding the Benghazi terror attack has reminded me of one of President Reagan's favorite jokes. It concerns a little boy whose parents worried he was too optimistic. So they took him to a psychiatrist. Trying to dampen his spirits, the doctor led the boy into a room piled high with horse manure. The boy unexpectedly squealed with delight and began digging through it. "What on earth are you doing?" the psychiatrist asked.

      "With all this manure," the boy replied, "there must be a pony in here somewhere."<

      The dam bursts on Benghazi


      >There's a meatpacking-like quality to all this. You don't really want to know how your hamburger is processed, do you? The administration's defense — and it's looking thinner than ice on a late spring pond — is that government bureaucracy is messy and multi-layered and that's a big part of why Rice said what she did.

      Benghazi occurred seven weeks before election day. The administration's strategy was simple: Downplay the terror attack, change the narrative, and run out the clock. And that's what it did.

      But now the dam has burst. Carney's "here at the White House" comment has essentially thrown Clinton under the bus. Republicans, who leaked the edited emails to Karl and Hayes, have succeeded on two fronts: They've got the administration on the defensive over Benghazi, and they've weakened the Democrat's most formidable 2016 candidate.

      It seems that after all that digging, Republicans have found their pony at last.<


    2. So, for the Republicans success is all about the 2016 politics, not the security of the country, or its best interests abroad.

      Good thing to know.

    3. The security of the country depends on getting the Democrats out of there, and keeping Shillary away from the levers of power, yes, you are right.

      "or its best interests abroad"

      Bunk, you and your types have been saying we don't have any interests abroad. Ron wanted to withdraw to Fortress America. While Rand wants to concentrate on droning petty criminals here in the home land.

      So, the security of the country depends on keeping you and yours away from the levers of power too.

  11. The Federal Government showed a slightly higher than expected Surplus in April at $112.9 Billion.

    April Treas Statement

    Mostly from higher revenues starting in January.

  12. Remember the IRS is involved with enforcing ObamaCare. Wonderful, wonderful.

    Will the IRS be used by one political party to ease members of another political party out of the coils of this mortal life?

    An early exit? Treatment denied?

    1. Oh Mexico, if you've never been, you really ought to go!

      Fee for treatment, there.
      India, too.

      Don't like it here, vote with your feet.

      Your forebears did.

    2. Mr Romneys' grandfather went south, to Mexico, when the Federals became to oppressive, intruding upon his right to have multiple wives.

      If you think the Federals are intruding upon your rights, follow the Romney example.

      When the going gets tough, the tough leave country.

    3. the tough leave ... THE ... country.

    4. You could always follow quot to Israel, but their health care system is more socialized than ObamaCare.

    5. What's this rant got to do with the IRS, Bunk?

      You used to say you were going to some beach in Central America.

      Why haven't you gone? Everyone was so hoping you would go.

      I am quite happy here in the mountain west, myself.

    6. boobie, you moved the conversation from the IRS to ObamaCare and possible oppression unto death, by medical malfeasance, on the part of the Government.

      I kept it focused on the Federals, countering with the "Romney Solution" to Federal political power over reach.

      Obviously you don't think the Federals have gone to far, in usurping your political or personal rights.
      That the status que of the IRS and ObamaCare are good to go.

    7. You are happy in the Mountain West.


  13. "The Benghazi Cover Up Condom has broken, and Jay Carney got soaked."

    Greg Gutfeld


  14. “To the extent that we focus on the Women of the Wall, we’re missing the larger picture,” says Uri Regev, a Reform rabbi and president of Hiddush, an organization that advocates for religious freedom and equality in Israel. “Israel’s founding promise ... was freedom of religion and equality regardless of religion. That is a promise that still awaits its full realization.”“To the extent that we focus on the Women of the Wall, we’re missing the larger picture,” says Uri Regev, a Reform rabbi and president of Hiddush, an organization that advocates for religious freedom and equality in Israel.
    “Israel’s founding promise ... was freedom of religion and equality regardless of religion. That is a promise that still awaits its full realization.”

    Thanks to the growing size of Israel’s religious groups and their frequent role as kingmaker in the fragmented political scene, they have so far largely been able to ensure the predominance of their traditions and customs.

    Now, however, they are facing “signs of the crumbling of Orthodox control of Judaism and they don’t know what to do,” says Israeli parliamentarian Tamar Zandberg, a secular Jew from the social democratic party Meretz, standing a few yards away from a police barricade holding back crowds of shouting ultra-Orthodox men with top hats and sidecurls, and rows of women bowing their covered heads in prayer. “This is the backlash.”

    1. The Western Wall, or Kotel, is a powerful symbol of the tensions between religion and state – including its impact on women’s rights, says Noa Sattath, director of the Israel Religious Action Center, which has represented Women of the Wall for 10 years.

      “The attempt to exclude women from the public sphere begins here and it seeps into other areas of society,” she says. “I’m happy that the … ultra-Orthodox girls that are here can see how we worship, and I’m happy that they can pray, too.”

      Lesley Sachs, director of Women of the Wall, agrees. “I just love having them here,” she says, adding that it would be a victory if even one asked herself why it wasn’t OK for women to pray with prayer shawls and phylacteries, the leather bands that are wrapped around the forearms and are connected to a small box containing the divine commandments, worn on the forehead.

      Women of the Wall has gained significant support in the US and Canada by focusing on women’s rights, but their detractors in Israel say they’re treading on respect for religion in the process – and Israel isn’t doing enough to stop them.

      Natan Sharansky, chairman of the Jewish Agency, which works closely with the Israeli government, has proposed to introduce an egalitarian area of worship at a separate area of the Western Wall, which Women of the Wall initially seemed open to but have moved away from since the April court ruling.

      To some, the saddest part is seeing Jews battling each other at the place where they are supposed to be worshiping the divine.

      “It’s very disturbing when we see other Jews fighting over the desire to pray at the Kotel,” says Joseph Shamash, who moved here from Los Angeles and is wearing phylacteries.

      Jacob Weiss, a corporate attorney who came straight off a 5 a.m. flight from London to accompany his wife, who supports the Women of the Wall, says even he was heckled on the way in.

      “One guy told me, ‘Take off your kippa. You don’t belong here,’” he says. Another yelled, “You’re going to die for your sins.”

      Mr. Weiss, who has lived here for 33 years and whose five children have served in Israel’s military, says such insults don’t bother him personally. But on a societal level, he says the same baseless hatred between Jews that rabbis blamed for the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D. is playing out again.

      “To me," he says, "the only existential threat in the state of Israel isn’t Iran or Syria, it’s this.”


    2. “To me," he says, "the only existential threat in the state of Israel isn’t Iran or Syria, it’s this.”

    3. Women ought to have free access though.

      But, then I'm butting into another group's business.

    4. It is nothing like advocating for cutting four separate countries up, to create Kurdistan?

      In case after case you think that it is quite alright for the US to be "butting in", anywhere but butting in Israel.

      Why is that?

    5. Cause I know what is best for children.

      The Israelis are adults and can figure things out themselves, and be fine.


      Bunk, you have been telling the adults how they ought to live for years, and letting the children off to run wild as they will.

    6. When the children start throwing things at one another, and at their guests too, you call time out, and send them to separate rooms.

      The situation there is a little more complex in the mid east however. If the children were to quit fighting among themselves, and team up, they might attack the adults. They don't know why, but they hate the adults.

      Thus the question arises, what is really best from the adult's point of view, to break up the fight, or let them continue to fight?

      I have seen this argued many times on various other blogs.

    7. What is there about religion that demands respect?

    8. Whats is respectable about it?

    9. The reason I think Mr. Weiss is full of it is that the conditions in Israel today are vastly different than they were back then. The Romans first came in by invitation of one of the contending Princes for the kingship (contending brothers?) IIRC, and overstayed their welcome. Today Israel does not get its leaders by that means. They are a multiparty democracy, with a parliament, Knesset, and a ministerial system. They do their battles now through the vote. Woman can vote, own property, demand a divorce, wear what they want, drive, go out alone, and be Prime Minister. Some feel the first woman Prime Minister was one of the best. Israel is unlikely to tear itself apart internally over some old tradition about the Wailing Wall. These old traditions sometimes die hard, look at the Roman Catholic Church, only males can be priests, celibacy and the Pope is a man. And they are not tearing themselves apart over it.

      Another reason is that with all the enemies around them, they all know now they must 'hang together, or hang separately'. These enemies seem a force for unity, not division.

      Seems to me the situations are so different they can't be properly compared.

  15. They're not children, and they know damned well why they hate us and the jews.

    1. >"Do you hate the Arabs, Nissim?"

      "No. Of course no."

      "Why not?"

      "What is the good of hate?"

      What indeed? Arabs gorge on hate, they roll in it, they breathe it. Jews top the hate list, but any foreigners are hateful enough. Arabs also hate each other, separately and, en masse. Their politicians change the direction of their hate as they would change their shirts. Their press is vulgarly base with hate-filled cartoons; their reporting describes whatever hate is now uppermost and convenient. Their radio is a long scream of hate, a call to hate. They teach their children hate in school. They must love the taste of hate; it is their daily bread. And what good has it done them?<

      Martha Gellhorn: The Arabs of Palestine

      Yes Rufus, they are children, kids that hate. They hate us, the Jews, the Russians, the Chinese, the Canadians, the Australians, the Africans, the Europeans, the Hindus, everyone they come in contact with, and each other. And women. They are irrational haters. They hate you too, though they've never even met you. And they don't really know why, it simply is in their book.

      >"They teach their children hate in school."<

    2. They clearly hate people that fuck with them day in and day out. They hate Europeans that colonize and drive them off their land. They hate the American military for the killing and destruction, the military occupations and the coups. I dare say they hate in the same identical way that people in Pennsylvania or Idaho would hate any foreigner that would fuck with them the same way the US and Nato interferes, destroys and kills.

      Any red blooded freedom loving NRA member who does not trust the US government to inhibit their second amendment right to keep weapons should know that very same government has been constantly at war with Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Serbia, Cambodia, Viet Nam, Yemen. and is the supplier of weapons and cover for any israeli meddling with her neighbors.

    3. boobie, boobie, boobie ...

      You are qouting.

      The Martha Gellhorn Prize is given in honour of one of the 20th century’s greatest reporters and is awarded to a journalist ‘whose work has penetrated the established version of events and told an unpalatable truth that exposes establishment propaganda, or "official drivel", as Martha Gellhorn called it’.

      Previous winners include Robert Fisk of the Independent, Nick Davies of the Guardian, Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, and the late Marie Colvin of the Sunday Times (special award).

      Robert Fisk ?!?!
      Julian Assange ???

      You've popped gasket
      You're on board with Robert Fisk ???

    4. What is hate? Is it the inability to empathize with the human condition in someone that is foreign to them? Someone who believes his pretend god is superior to other’e pretend god?

  16. DAMASCUS, Syria – Syria will allow United Nations inspectors into the country to investigate the origin of the chemical weapon Sarin that may have been used in a recent attack on Aleppo, where some 15 Syrian military troops died along with a number of civilians.

    In an interview with WND, Syrian Prime Minister Wael Nader al-Halqi said that immediately following the incident, Syria requested a U.N. investigation and then followed up with a second request.

    However, he said, the U.N. hasn’t responded to either request.

    He said that Syria is ready to commit to whatever the U.N. wants, “mindful of the experience in Iraq” in which then-President Saddam Hussein refused further intrusive U.N. inspection teams to look for weapons of mass destruction. That then prompted U.S. military action in March 2003.

    He said, however, that the U.N. has now asked for the ability to go anywhere in Syria, which al-Halqi said was made at the request of the United States and may have been the reason why the U.N. had not responded to the Syrian government’s two previous requests.

    Late separate reports suggest that a U.N. team staged in Cyprus is prepared now to go into Syria to conduct the inspection, although a leading member of a U.N. commission of inquiry, Carla Del Ponte, said that evidence suggests that Syrian rebels may have “used Sarin,” which is a nerve agent that can be delivered in artillery shells, among other means of delivery.

    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/syria-to-allow-u-n-probe-of-alleged-sarin-gas-use/#DhSjRbxqIScjOYbD.99


    Why would anyone trust the US government when most US citizens with a brain would not trust them?

    1. This should let Obama off the hook. Now he can await a UN inspections report, which will take months and months, with the outcome uncertain.

  17. We have a few here that have selective trust in government.Implicit trust in anything to do with Israel, nothing with Benghazi, everything with Netanyahu, nothing with Obama or Clinton. They love the Pentagon, hate the EPA, the DOE and love anything to do with the police.

    I trust none of them. They are all cut from the same mold.

    1. :0 heh

      That's bizarre. I don't love the police. But they are necessary, and some are great people. I don't hate the EPA, they have done some great things, they sometimes, often maybe, go to far. But the rivers are cleaner. The air too. I don't love the Pentagon, I wish we didn't need one. You're right, I don't trust Obama or Clinton, not after Benghazi, do you? I trust the energy companies over the Department of Energy. They bring a product to the market. You have an implicit distrust of anything/everything to do with Israel and have called Netanyahu a murderer and worse. Your distrust/hatred of Israel far outbalances my somewhat trusting attitude to and support of Israel. I generally like countries where women can walk about without a minder, vote, be Prime Minister. I do not trust the moslems at all.

      >"I trust none of them. They are all cut from the same mold."<

      You failed to include the moslems.

      If you were referring to me...

    2. I have no more hate for Israel than I hate the people that build their luxury homes on the US barrier islands or the banks of the Mississippi and expect to be bailed out by the US government when the predictable occurs.

  18. You want to know what hate it, re-read Deuteronomy. It is all about a petty,ignorant, petulant psychopathic, ethnic cleansing made-up god. It is about everything that curses the human race. It is hardly unique and in fact common to all the religions that have srung up from the Middle East.

    1. The early part is a war poem, no doubt of it, very fierce. But I'd maintain Judaism has evolved far past that. The moslems can't, it is forbidden, the work is from Allah, and can't be changed, and demands the conversion or subjugation of the whole world by force if need be. The Jews don't even proselytize much, and the Christians do so peacefully.

      Hate is not in Christianity. In many Christians, yes, but not in the founder. And it sprang up out of Judaism. He didn't go out, we are told, with a chip on his shoulder, cursing his enemies, but forgiving his enemies with his last gasp on the cross.

      I can't imagine Christianity springing up out of Islam.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  19. Feel the love:

    …22If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shall you put away evil from Israel. 23If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed to an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 24Then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he has humbled his neighbor’s wife: so you shall put away evil from among you

    1. I have never known nor read about a Jewish person who would accept that today. Many moslems do. They would most likely just stone the woman though, and let the man go free, women being the source and fountain of all immorality.

    2. try reading the original and no fair just reading what you THINK is the "old testament", and don't go JUST reading the oral portion.

      MAke sure you read IN CONTEXT BOTH the Oral and the Written Torah in it's original language.

      Then quote it.


      Shut the fuck up.

    3. Right, everything that is embarrassing has some subtle nuance which ordinary human brains need to have filtered through some magic words on goat skin.

    4. .

      Shut the fuck up?

      I take from that you are the only one here that should be allowed to quote the Torah.

      What sect do you belong to, WiO? Orthodox, Ultra Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist...?


  20. I could put up absurdities from the Koran all day long, but what's the point, we all know all these old documents.

    I could find absurdities in the Gospels and the letters too, and from the Book of Mormon.

  21. I yield to WiO.

    I'd add though that the Hindu scriptures are partly a long war poem themselves.

    We could talk about northern European literature too. And the Romans.

  22. Bullshit, you go on and on about your so-called historical entitlements, all based on warfare and slaughter. One short paragraph from the British Museum sums up your real history in three paragraphs:

    The Canaanites were the indigenous people of the ancient Levant (modern Israel, Palestine, Transjordan, Lebanon and coastal Syria). They spoke a Semitic language related to Hebrew. During the Early Bronze Age, as trade with Egypt increased, strongly defended cities developed throughout the region which formed the centres of independent states. Egyptian campaigns were occasionally launched against some Canaanite cities but relations were normally maintained through trade.

    Starting around 2000 BC, Canaanites began to infiltrate the Egyptian Delta, and their donkey caravans can be seen on a number of Egyptian tomb paintings. By 1700 BC they had seized control of the Delta and established a local dynasty known as the Hyksos or “Shepherd Kings”. This period (1700-1480) saw the development of a rich and imaginative artistic style, and it was at this time too that the Canaanites developed an alphabetic writing system that was passed on to the Phoenicians.

    Around 1550 BC the Hyksos were driven from Egypt by the energetic kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and Tuthmosis III (1504-1450 BC) put the entire Canaanite region under direct imperial control. Throughout the period of the Egyptian Empire, disaffected and dispossessed Canaanites, known to the Egyptians as Habiru migrated to the hill country regions. This Habiru population formed the kernel of what was to become historical Israel, and it was referred to as such by the pharaoh Merneptah (reigned 1236-1223 BC) on a victory stele now in the Cairo Museum.

    The only thing that has changed is the weapons.

    1. I have some questions about that. This equation of Habiru = Canaanite = Hyksos - I am uncertain.

      There is speculation that the time of the Israelites in Egypt may have been during the time of the Hyksos, then a Kind arose 'who knew Joseph not'. There are arguments against that too. I've read, if I recall rightly, that the Hyksos may have been a sea people.

      If the equation of Canaanite = Hyksos = Habiru is accurate, it would seem they just going home?!

      Where then did the narrative arise that Father Abraham came from the south and east?

      Home again, home again, rub a dee dub, as dad used to say.

    2. The moslems are a new thing in the equation.

    3. All this happened 4000 years after the Lenapes farmed, hunted and fished the Delaware basin.

    4. Weapons are important.

    5. You are correct. Moral superiority comes out of the barrel of a gun.

    6. I did NOT mean that.

      Weapons are important in holding one's earthly position.

      And religions that tend to pacifism seem to slowly lose out.

      Where are the Christians in the middle east today?

  23. Who killed the Canaanites? What do the magic goat skins say about that?

  24. I know this: None of it is worth one young American life.

  25. There is more wisdom in Mark Twain and Kurt Vonnegut.

    1. A defendable position, to be sure.

      Twain admired the Jewish intellect. He said if the horses knew how strong they were we wouldn't be riding them. They would be riding us. He said if the Jews knew how smart they were, they would ruling the gentiles, rather than the other way around, as was the case in his day. Therefore, he said the gentiles should never tell them how smart they are.


  26. IRS political scandal a new political nightmare for Obama administration

    May 10, 2013

    Out of the blue, the Internal Revenue Service has apologized for targeting conservative groups with "tea party" or "patriot" in their titles for special treatment in applying for tax exempt nonprofit organization status. House investigation to come. More


    I like the idea of the Obama Administration having political nightmares.

    He has done some really stupid things. This is one of them. Is it really worth it? What is really to be gained about harassing one's opponents using the IRS?

    Not much, and look at the downside.

    Earlier in our history disliked individuals were often targeted, but this targeting groups seem like a new thing.

  27. I am putting up on the next post, the beginning of a fascinating series on the Americas before they were America. It is far more interesting than you will believe.

    1. .

      After that build-up, this better be good.

      (Although I'll have to wait til tomarrow. It's getting late)