Read the article HERE
Long Island Woman Receives $1.12 Million For False Prosecution
A Long Island federal jury rewarded Nancy Genovese, 58, a mother of three, $1.12 million in compensatory damages after being arrested in 2009 for attempting to photograph a helicopter at a Air National Guard base in the Hamptons. Genovese intended to use the photo on a “Support the Troops” website; she was arrested for trespass and insulted as a “Teabagger.”
From The New York Post:
Southhampton cops searched her and found a legally owned rifle that she was transporting from a nearby rifle range. She contends a deputy sheriff arrived on the scene later and said to her, “I bet you are one of those Tea Party people.” When Genovese said she’s gone to Tea Party rallies, he allegedly said, “You’re a real right-winger, aren’t you?” and “You are a ‘Teabagger’” and then added that she’d be arrested for terrorism to make an example of other “right wingers.”
Read more at breitbart.com.
Note: There are issues on the forefront right now that may be much more significant to most people than this story: the CROmnibus, ISIS and President Obama’s lawless Executive Amnesty to name a few, but not to worry, I’ll be back at them soon – Just taking a few days away from them trying to calm down a little – ADB.
Today is Pearl Harbor Day
On Tuesday night, one of Megan Kelly’s guests on the Kelly File was Milwaukee County sheriff David Clarke. They discussed Attorney General Eric Holder’s new initiative to end racial profiling once and for all. The YouTube clip below begins with Mr. Holder’s lecturing us on Monday in Atlanta, and then moves on to a discussion with Kelly and her guest who just happens to be an African-American.
You won’t need Common Core to solve this simple math problem:
(The number of people in this photo) minus (The number of people in this photo who are no longer in office) equals (The number of people who still need to go).
November 25th, 2014 • Officer Darren Wilson broke his silence on the shooting death of Michael Brown. Mayor Rudy Giuliani weighs in with Fox News host Megyn Kelly.
From friend and GTP member Jim Sharp:
Tonight, I had the pleasure of interviewing Straw Man. Mr. Man has been the object of much criticism from President Obama and the Democratic Party. He’s been in hiding until recently, for his own safety. Now, vindicated by this latest election, he’s agreed to speak with me tonight.
ME: Good evening, Straw Man, and welcome.
You’ve endured numerous vitriolic assaults, over the years. From the classic “You want to throw granny over the cliff,” to “You want old people on social security to choose between heating and eating dog food.”
They say you don’t care about the environment; that you’re for “dirty air and dirty water.” And, of course, that you’re a “climate-change denier.”
Many say you want little children on welfare to starve. Then there’s your supposed “war on women,” your hatred for gays and minorities. And, of course, you hate puppies … the list goes on.
My question to you, sir, is how you do it? – How have you weathered these withering politics of personal destruction?
STRAW: Well, thank you, Serv. At first, I really let this stuff get to me. I got defensive – quiet and introverted. I went around mumbling to myself, asking myself, “How did it come to this?” How did someone like me – who wants everyone to live a good, productive life, to be a good citizen, to experience the blessings of liberty – come to be so misunderstood, even despised?
Nothing in my life prepared me for that. Finally, I started to realize – it’s not me, it’s THEM! THEY hate me for the very things I stand for. It’s their job to deconstruct my life. They were trying to make me feel bad. They wanted to get people to hate me. It’s a power grab. I learned not to take it personally.
Now, finally, other people are starting to see that too – my critics were SO over-the-top that people began to sympathize with me. They look in the mirror, and see me. My critics SO over-reached, and SO exposed themselves, that now I’m starting to feel safe to be seen again in public, even to speak out.
ME: You’ve been disavowed even by your supposed friends, the Republicans. Aren’t you afraid of being back-stabbed?
STRAW: I know, I know – the Republicans wouldn’t come out and defend me. Some did, here and there, but they certainly didn’t make a concerted effort. It’s not that they hate me; I think they were just afraid to say anything, for fear of being laughed at or criticized.
Some people tried to protect me – the Tea Party and such; conservatives, and some corporations. I appreciate that. But they were silenced, as much as possible, by the Obama Democrats. For some reason, his corporations were considered okay, but my corporations are “dark,” – not to be trusted.
Thing is, the Obama Democrats, they NEVER talk to me. They never even consider my real point of view! They couldn’t tell you what my real point of view is! They exaggerate and stereotype all my positions!
It’s what they have to do to make themselves feel special. Read more at the405media.com.
Opinion: The person who most disrespects the office of the president is the one who occupies that office.
As quoted in the NY Post, a CNBC rep said, “That’s laughable, but we take notice, because as the fastest-growing network in prime time, we’re always on the lookout for high quality comedy writers and actresses.” (Hat tip: bizpacreview.com)
Francis appeared on The Kelly File on Fox News on Monday night and discussed this debacle further:
“At the end of the day, liberals not only believe that they’re smarter than the public, but that they have a better sense of what’s good for the people than Americans themselves.”
MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, a leading architect of President Obama’s healthcare law, is under fire for recently surfaced comments in which he conceded that to pass Obamacare, supporters relied on “the stupidity of the American voter” to hide its actual effects.
My colleague Tim Carney has already written about how the comments are just the latest reminder of how the law was built on a foundation of lies. But there is a broader message in all of this — that Gruber’s comments get to the heart of what’s wrong with liberalism.
Read more at washingtonexaminer.com.
by Ben Shapiro 10 Nov 2014
On Monday, President Obama announced that he would be pushing the Federal Communications Commission to begin enforcing “net neutrality” – a policy by which internet service providers would be forced to load all web sites at the same speed. While the internet works just fine as is, President Obama believes we’re mere moments away from the system breaking down barring massive government intervention:
We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas. I believe the FCC should create a new set of rules protecting net neutrality and ensuring that neither the cable company nor the phone company will be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do or see online.
If this sounds suspiciously like the language President Obama used with regard to health insurance in his pitch for Obamacare – unlimited access and zero scarcity, as dictated by the government – that’s because it is. Free market economics generally create higher supply, lower price, and better service. But President Obama believes that markets inevitably fail.
Here are the top seven reasons government-enforced net neutrality is an awful idea:
We Already Have Net Neutrality. As a result of competition between internet service providers in the marketplace, ISPs generally do not discriminate against highly-trafficked websites. If they did – holding a figurative gun to the head of those websites by throttling back speed to those websites – consumers would dump those ISPs in favor of others. Competition ensures that companies do not have the leverage to discriminate against particular websites.
Read the other six reasons on breitbart.com.
At long last, the conventional wisdom about the 2014 midterms is here: It’s an election about nothing.
Nov 3, 2014, Vol. 20, No. 08 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES
The Washington Post may have been first in declaring the coming midterms “kind of—and apologies to Seinfeld here—an election about nothing.” But the Daily Beast chimed in: “America seems resigned to a Seinfeld election in 2014—a campaign about nothing.” And New York magazine noted (and embraced) the cliché: The midterm election “has managed to earn a nickname from the political press: the ‘Seinfeld Election,’ an election about nothing.”
Soon enough this description was popping up everywhere—the New Republic, the Los Angeles Times, the Christian Science Monitor, Bloomberg, Politico, and many others. The 2014 Midterms, the Seinfeld Election.
Others posited something even worse. “The 2014 campaign has been the most boring and uncreative campaign I can remember,” wrote New York Times columnist David Brooks. That wasn’t harsh enough for Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post, who went further. The election isn’t just “boring,” he wrote, “it’s vapid and inconsequential.”
The big television networks seem to agree. The signature newscasts of ABC, NBC, and CBS have barely found the upcoming elections worthy of notice. According to the Media Research Center, ABC’s World News Tonight didn’t run a single story about the midterms between September 1 and October 20. Over that same seven-week period, NBC and CBS evening newscasts ran just 11 and 14 stories, respectively. (It probably goes without saying that the networks found the prospective Democratic triumph in the 2006 midterms much more compelling. Over the same time period that year, NBC ran 65 stories about the midterms, CBS ran 58, and ABC ran 36.)
We have a different view.
Not only is this election not about nothing, it is being fought over exactly the kinds of things that ought to determine our elections.
It’s about the size and scope of government. It’s about the rule of law. It’s about the security of the citizenry. It’s about competence. It’s about integrity. It’s about honor [Bold type, mine].
Read more at WeeklyStandard.com.
So much for free speech – You remember, the First Amendment
by Warner Todd Huston – 25 Oct 2014
As the media prepared to vacate newsrooms for the weekend, Democrats snuck in a last minute proposal that the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) be allowed to heavily regulate political content on internet sites such as Youtube, blogs, and the Drudge Report.
Obama FEC Vice Chairperson Ann M. Ravel announced late on Friday that the FEC was preparing new regulations to give itself control over videos, Internet-based political campaigns, and other content on the web. She insisted that, “A reexamination of the commission’s approach to the internet and other emerging technologies is long overdue.”
This snap decision came after the FEC deadlocked 3-3 over whether or not an anti-Obama Internet campaign in Ohio had violated FEC campaign disclosure rules. The videos were placed for free on Youtube and were not paid advertising, but they also did not disclose who made them.
Until now, videos and other political content that is not posted for a fee are unregulated by the FEC. Only paid advertising is regulated under election rules. It is this that the Democrats want to change.
“FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said if regulation extends that far, then anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site, or even a chat room could be regulated,” [bold type: mine] the Washington Examiner reported on October 24. Continue reading at breitbart.com.
The below time is incorrect. It should read 7:00 Central Daylight Time (6:00 EDT)
This is a National call so register now!
The above time is incorrect. It should read 7:00 Central Daylight Time (6:00 EDT)
In this video, the Daily Surge’s Jason Mattera confronts former IRS official and current pension collector Lois Lerner, who has demonstrated that she handles targeting just fine when she holds the bow and arrows, shows that when the apple on her head – well, not so much. Watch the video which builds to a climax and read the story below.
Lois Lerner attempted to bust into a neighbor’s home uninvited, in a desperate attempt to avoid answering questions about her involvement in the targeting of conservative groups.
Jason Mattera, author of the explosive new book CRAPITALISM: Liberals Who Make Millions Swiping Your Tax Dollars, recently caught up with the disgraced former IRS official in her ritzy neighborhood outside Washington, D.C.
Mattera, who publishes the Daily Surge, asked Lerner if she had any regrets for her role in the ongoing IRS corruption case, and if she wanted to take the opportunity to give a genuine apology to conservatives for using the force of government to harass and single them out.
But, similar to her testimony before Congress where she pleaded the fifth, Lerner didn’t show any remorse, and, on a more latent level, showed her disregard for people’s privacy rights in general. In the video above, you can see Lerner fleeing from Mattera as she rushes through what appears to be a random person’s front yard. Read more at dailysurge.com.
(Reuters) – Conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza avoided prison on Tuesday when a U.S. judge sentenced him to serve eight months in a community confinement center after he pled guilty to violating campaign finance law.
D’Souza, 53, was ordered by U.S. District Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan to live in the center at the start of a five year probationary period in which he must do one day of community service a week. He must also pay a $30,000 fine and undergo weekly therapy, Berman said.
D’Souza, a frequent critic of U.S. President Barack Obama, admitted in May to illegally reimbursing two “straw donors” who donated $10,000 each to the unsuccessful 2012 U.S. Senate campaign in New York of Wendy Long, a Republican he had known since attending Dartmouth College in the early 1980s. Read more at reuters.com.