Mark Levin Gives “Unvarnished Truth” On Romney Loss

Comments Off

I can’t post the video portion of this post, but you can hear it at Real Clear Politics here:

Mark Levin passionately defends conservatism and analyzes last night’s election in the opening monologue of the Wednesday broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program. Here’s a partial transcript of Levin’s opening remarks:

MARK LEVIN: We conservatives, we do not accept bipartisanship in the pursuit of tyranny. Period. We will not negotiate the terms of our economic and political servitude. Period. We will not abandon our child to a dark and bleak future. We will not accept a fate that is alien to the legacy we inherited from every single future generation in this country. We will not accept social engineering by politicians and bureaucrats who treat us like lab rats, rather than self-sufficient human beings. There are those in this country who choose tyranny over liberty. They do not speak for us, 57 million of us who voted against this yesterday, and they do not get to dictate to us under our Constitution.

We are the alternative. We will resist. We’re not going to surrender to this. We will not be passive, we will not be compliant in our demise. We’re not good losers, you better believe we’re sore losers! A good loser is a loser forever. Now I hear we’re called ‘purists.’ Conservatives are called purists. The very people who keep nominating moderates, now call us purists the way the left calls us purists. Yeah, things like liberty, and property rights, individual sovereignty, and the Constitution, and capitalism. We’re purists now. And we have to hear this crap from conservatives, or pseudo-conservatives, Republicans.

Obama re-election protest escalates at Univ. of Mississippi

Comments Off

You know, no matter how much you disliked the outcome of the election, this type thing is ridiculous and uncalled for.

A protest at the University of Mississippi against the re-election of President Barack Obama grew into crowd of about 400 people with shouted racial slurs as rumors of a riot spread on social media. Two people were arrested on minor charges.

The university said in a statement Wednesday that the gathering at the student union began late Tuesday night with about 30 to 40 students, but grew within 20 minutes as word spread. Some students chanted political slogans while others used derogatory racial statements and profanity, the statement said.

The incident comes just after the 50th anniversary of violent rioting that greeted the forced integration of Ole Miss with the enrollment of its first black student, James Meredith.

Ole Miss Chancellor Dan Jones promised an investigation and said “all of us are ashamed of the few students who have negatively affected the reputations of each of us and of our university.”

On Wednesday night, about 700 people held up candles and called for racial harmony outside the administrative building at the university in Oxford, countering Tuesday’s protest over Obama’s re-election.

Continue reading

Stocks: Dow ends down 313 points after Obama win

Comments Off

Well I guess we know what Wall Street thinks about the election results:

Stocks ended sharply lower Wednesday, one day after the re-election of President Obama. The Dow Jones industrial average closed down about 313 points, or 2.4%.

Investor reaction is decidedly negative over the defeat of the more business-friendly Mitt Romney and the continued gridlock in Congress that makes it tough for lawmakers to avert a fiscal policy crisis by year-end.

The benchmark Dow remains below the psychologically significant 13,000, not seen since Aug. 3. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index and Nasdaq composite index ended down 2.3% and 2.5%, respectively, with stocks in nearly every industry lower.

The Dow, which settled at 12,933, had its lowest close since Aug. 2; the S&P 500 and Nasdaq had their lowest closes since Aug. 6.

Wall Street pros said negative sentiment was amplified Wednesday after European Central Bank President Mario Draghi expressed concerns ahead of the U.S. market open about the outlook for Europe’s economies, especially Germany.

Others said much of the sell-off is coming from computerized trading programs, which trigger huge sell-offs of stocks at pre-set prices hit versus investors making decisions on the spot about what they think of a stock’s outlook. One exception: Apple (AAPL) shares closed at $558.13, off 3.8% Wednesday. That puts the computer and gadget maker in correction territory, which is still about off 20% from its September intraday high $705.07 a share.

Investors are focusing on what Obama and Congress will do to avert the looming so-called “fiscal cliff.” The biggest fear is Washington’s inability to compromise in a lame-duck session over a host of mandated budget cuts and tax cut expirations set to kick in Jan. 1. Fears are that lack of a deal will roil markets and derail the economic recovery.

Continue reading

Harry Reid Vows To Change Senate Rules To Make It Easier For Obama To Ram His Agenda Down Our Throats

Comments Off

The Senate has rules? Of course Harry Reid would be going ballistic if this was reversed. He’s referring to Filibuster Reform.

WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pledged on Wednesday to change the rules of the Senate so that the minority party has fewer tools to obstruct legislative business.

In his first post-election press conference, the Nevada Democrat said he wouldn’t go so far as to eliminate the filibuster, which requires 60 votes for the chamber to enter and exit the amendment and debate process. But in remarks meant to preview a more combative approach during the next session, he warned Republicans that obstructionism as a tactic won’t be tolerated — or as technically feasible.

“I want to work together, but I also want everyone to also understand, you cannot push us around. We want to work together,” Reid said.

“I do” have plans to change the Senate rules, he added. “I have said so publicly and I continue to feel that way … I think the rules have been abused, and we are going to work to change them. We will not do away with the filibuster, but we will make the senate a more meaningful place. We are going to make it so we can get things done.”

Obama Is Conducting Secret Negotiations with Iran

Comments Off

Jeff Dunetz at  http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com , the article here.

Secret or out in the open, any negotiations with Iran regarding their nuclear program are as delicate as they are important.   Obviously they must be handled by a very experienced diplomatic negotiator ..well not according to this President.

Israeli Newspaper Yediot Ahranot published in their Print edition today, that it is friend of Obama , former slumlord, supporter of crony capitalism, and friend of the radical Islamist community Valerie Jarrett who is the president’s secret envoy to Iran.

You may remember the reports about Jarret’s last foray into foreign policy, she tried to convince Obama NOT to approve the raid on Bin Laden.  She was also Obama’s representative to the convention of the Hamas-affiliated ISNA convention.

Ask yourself this, do you really want “re-hire” as commander-in-chief a person that sends a former slumlord with no diplomatic experience to negotiate with Iran about its Nuclear Program?

An English Translation of the full Yediot Ahranot story follows:

Yediot Ahranot, November 5, 2012, page 10
Obama’s Woman in Tehran Meet Valerie Jarrett – Obama’s secret envoy to talks with Iran

By Alex Fishman

Valerie Jarrett, senior advisor to President Barack Obama, is the key figure in the secret contacts conducted by the White House with the Iranian government. According to senior sources in Israel, the attorney from Chicago serves as the American president’s personal envoy for contacts with representatives of the spiritual leader Khamenei.

Jarrett, a close friend of Michelle Obama, is a central figure among the advisors to the president. She was born in the city of Shiraz in Iran to parents who were sent on an agricultural mission.

On October 21 the New York Times claimed that the American administration had secret contacts with Iran with the goal of opening direct talks immediately after the presidential elections in the US. A spokesman for the US National Security Council denied that there was any agreement between the Americans and the Iranians for direct talks or of any meeting after the elections, however, the next day senior officials in the administration confirmed that talks existed through a secret channel. They claimed, however, that no meeting was set between the sides.

The American administration made great efforts to minimize the contacts because central countries to the negotiations, like Russia, were not partners to the secret talks.

Israel was apparently surprised by the revelations. Today, however, senior officials in Jerusalem know of secret negotiations taking place between the sides for several months. The contacts, the sources say, were initiated by Jarrett and she serves as the head of the negotiations. Jarrett served, according to them, as the direct and personal envoy of the president to the secret meeting with the Iranians which apparently were held in one of the Persian Gulf emirates, most likely in Bahrain.

At the Iranians request, the talks will open – if they open – after the US elections and only if Obama is reelected.

According to the estimates done in the US State Department, the economic pressure on Iran will reach a climax at the beginning of next year – in February and March, immediately after the presidential inauguration. The direct contacts with Iran on a nuclear understanding are therefore expected to take place precisely in the same time frame that Iran will find itself under particularly heavy pressure. This confluence is likely to bring about positive results in the secret direct talks and in the P5+1 talks.

National Guard Whistleblower: “Doomsday Preppers Will Be Treated As Terrorists”

Comments Off

I have to ask, why would they call anyone who prepares for an emergency a “terrorist”?  The government themselves tells us to prepare for emergencies by storing up a two week to one month supply of food along with a little emergency medical supply as well.  The government has years of food stored in underground bunkers in Washington DC and other areas themselves. So this makes no sense to me. And why would you confiscate people’s guns at a time of civil unrest when they will probably need those weapons to defend their property and home, most likely for the first time in their life. Confiscating weapons would be a dangerous occupation. I just don’t believe many in the National Guard or military would do that to US citizens at a time like that. As a matter of fact, the State of Tennessee passed a law after the gun confiscation in New Orleans during Katrina, that says you can’t do that in Tennessee during an emergency/martial law.I might also add, the US Constitution doesn’t give the federal government the authority to declare martial law in a State, only the States have that right in their individual States only.

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”

So begins the Oath of Enlistment for the U.S. military, but in an explosive interview with a National Guard whistleblower shown below, soldiers are now being advised they will be ordered to break that oath should civil unrest erupt across the country.

Referred to only as “Soldier X” under promise of anonymity, an Army National Guardsman spoke via phone with Infowars Nightly News Producer Rob Dew regarding a recent briefing his unit underwent on actions the military would take in the event that an Obama election loss sparked rioting in America’s streets.

Citing not only recent widespread threats to riot if Mitt Romney were to become the next U.S. president, but threats to actually assassinate him should he win, Soldier X’s superiors dispensed plans of how the National Guard would be responsible for “taking over” and quelling such unrest.

The soldiers were reportedly told“Doomsday preppers will be treated as terrorists.”

In addition, guns will be confiscated.

“They have a list compiled of all these doomsday preppers that have gone public and they plan to go after them first,” Soldier X said. He claimed those in charge are acting under the belief that preppers will be “the worst part” of any potential civil unrest.

Soldier X was also told that any soldiers in the ranks who are known as preppers will be deemed “defects.” He explained the label meant these soldiers would be treated as traitors. “If you don’t conform, they will get rid of you,” he added.

Unit members also warned not to associate with any fellow soldiers who are preppers.

Not only does the military reportedly plan to target preppers should mass chaos break out, but Soldier X also voiced his concerns regarding civilian gun confiscation.

Soldier X admitted, “Our worry is that Obama’s gonna do what he said he’s gonna do and he’s gonna outlaw all weapons altogether and anybody’s name who is on a weapon, they’re gonna come to your house and try to take them.”

It would not be the first time the National Guard has been used to unconstitutionally disarm law-abiding citizens, robbing them of their Second Amendment right to bear arms. In the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, police and military took to the streets disarming lawful gun owners, including  those who were on dry land and had plenty of stored food and water.

Continue reading

Emails Show: White House told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack

Comments Off

What was that Biden said about the White House not knowing this was a terrorist attack in Benghaz, India? Plus Obama said it was two weeks before he knew as well. Along with these emails, we also know: U.S. Drone CAM was watching Benghazi attacks

Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of “extremists,” they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

MISSIVES FROM LIBYA

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department’s Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time – or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began – carried the subject line “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack” and the notation “SBU”, meaning “Sensitive But Unclassified.”

The text said the State Department’s regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was “under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well.”

The message continued: “Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four … personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.”

A second email, headed “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi” and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that “the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared.” It said a “response team” was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

The message reported: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president’s secure command post.

Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command center, the source said.

It was not known what other messages were received by agencies in Washington from Libya that day about who might have been behind the attacks.

Continue reading

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 396 other followers