Tag Archives: Congress

Is Congress Allowing Itself To Become Irelavent?

In answer to that we present this. 

Does a wild bear..

Does a wild bear..

———————————————————————————————

‘The Imperial Presidency’

House holds hearing on executive overreach

BY:              February 26, 2014 5:42 pm

Members of Congress and constitutional law experts testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, warning that the legislative branch is in danger of ceding its power in the face of an “imperial presidency.”

The hearing, “Enforcing the President’s Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws,” focused on the multiple areas President Barack Obama has bypassed Congress, ranging from healthcare and immigration to marriage and welfare rules.

Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, testified that the expansion of executive power is happening so fast that America is at a “constitutional tipping point.”

“My view [is] that the president, has in fact, exceeded his authority in a way that is creating a destabilizing influence in a three branch system,” he said. “I want to emphasize, of course, this problem didn’t begin with President Obama, I was critical of his predecessor President Bush as well, but the rate at which executive power has been concentrated in our system is accelerating. And frankly, I am very alarmed by the implications of that aggregation of power.”

“What also alarms me, however, is that the two other branches appear not just simply passive, but inert in the face of this concentration of authority,” Turley said.

While Turley agrees with many of Obama’s policy positions, he steadfastly opposes the method he goes about enforcing them.

“The fact that I happen to think the president is right on many of these policies does not alter the fact that I believe the means he is doing [it] is wrong, and that this can be a dangerous change in our system,” he said. “And our system is changing in a very fundamental way. And it’s changing without a whimper of regret or opposition.”

Elizabeth Price Foley, a law professor at Florida International University College of Law, agreed, warning that Congress is in danger of becoming “superfluous.”

“Situations like this, these benevolent suspensions as they get more and more frequent and more and more aggressive, they’re eroding our citizens’ respect for the rule of law,” she said. “We are a country of law and not men. It’s going to render Congress superfluous.”

Foley said Congress is not able to tackle meaningful legislation out of fear that Obama would “simply benevolently suspend portions of the law he doesn’t like.”

“If you want to stay relevant as an institution, I would suggest that you not stand idly by and let the president take your power away,” she said.

( Translation, get off your ass and do something you boobs. )

Panelists and members of Congress dismissed the idea of impeachment, and instead focused on lawsuits to challenge the constitutionality of the president’s unilateral moves.

Four House members testified on the first panel during the hearing to highlight legislation they have sponsored to thwart the administration’s executive overreach.

Impeachment would “surely be extremely divisive within the Congress and the nation generally, and would divert the attention of Congress from other important issues of the day,” said Rep. Jim Gerlach (R., Pa.).

Gerlach, who testified before the committee, introduced H.R. 3857, the “Enforce the Take Care Clause Act,” which would expedite the review and injunction process for federal courts to challenge executive actions. Such a challenge would have to pass a supermajority in both chambers in order to be fast-tracked.

“Given the growing number of examples where this President has clearly failed to faithfully execute all laws, I believe it is time for Congress to put in place a procedure for a fast-track, independent review of those executive actions,” he said.

Gerlach said he proposed the bill due to Obama’s repeated alterations to his signature law, the Affordable Care Act.

“The ACA has been revised, altered and effectively rewritten by the president and his administration 23 times since July,” he said.

“When we have these constant changes at the president’s whim think about what that does to businesses’ planning capabilities and hiring capabilities and their expansion capabilities,” Rep. Tom Rice (R., S.C.) said. “We shouldn’t wonder why our economy is struggling.”

Rice has proposed the “Stop This Overreaching Presidency (STOP) Resolution” as a remedy. The resolution, which has 114 cosponsors, would direct the House to file lawsuits against four of the president’s unilateral actions, including the employer mandate delay in Obamacare and deferred action program for illegal immigrants.

Turley said Congress must take action to regain their power as the “thumping heart of our system.”

“The fact is, we’re stuck with each other,” Turley said. “Whether we like it or not in a system of shared powers. For better or worse we may deadlock, we maybe despise each other. The framers foresaw such periods, they lived in such a period.”

~Steve~

H/T           http://freebeacon.com/the-imperial-presidency/

Obama Accumulates More Debt Than All Presidents Combined.

Now this will make your head go Boom!

sangry_blowsupheart_100-100—————————————————————————————————-

+106%: Obama Has More Than Doubled Marketable U.S. Debt

By Terence P. Jeffrey       February 18, 2014 – 1:37 PM

(CNSNews.com) – The marketable debt of the U.S. government has more than doubled–climbing by 106 percent–while President Barack Obama has been in office, increasing from $5,749,916,000,000 at the end of January 2009 to $11,825,322,000,000 at the end of January 2014, according to the U.S. Treasury’s latest Monthly Statement of the Public Debt.

During the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush, the marketable debt of the U.S. government almost doubled–climbing 93 percent–from $2,977,328,000,000 at the end of January 2001 to $5,749,916,000,000 at the end of January 2009.

( Bush was a Boob Too)

During the time that Bush and Obama have been in office, the marketable debt of the U.S. government has nearly quadrupled, increasing by $8,847,994,000,000.

MARKETABLE DEBT-CHART

However, despite the massive increase in the government’s marketable debt during Bush’s eight years, Obama managed to accumulate more additional marketable debt in his first five years in office than all the presidents who preceded combined.

Let’s read that again..

However, despite the massive increase in the government’s marketable debt during Bush’s eight years, Obama managed to accumulate more additional marketable debt in his first five years in office than all the presidents who preceded combined.

The marketable debt of the U.S. government includes all debt securities sold by the U.S. Treasury that can be held by individuals, corporations or other entities outside the U.S. government and that can be sold in the secondary market.

It does not include money the Treasury has borrowed out of government trust funds—such as the Social Security Trust Fund—to spend on other government expenses when those trust funds were running surpluses.

The marketable debt of the U.S. government now includes Treasury bills, which mature in 52 weeks or less; Treasury notes, which have maturities between 2 and 10 years; Treasury bonds, which mature in 30 years; Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS), which have maturities of 5, 10 and 30 years; and Floating Rate Notes (FRNs), which are sold on 2-year terms.

At the end of January 2009, the month Obama took office, the marketable debt of the U.S. government was $5,749,916,000,000, according the Treasury’s Monthly Statement of the Public Debt. This included $1,792,889,000,000 in Treasury bills held by the public; $2,825,174,000,000 in Treasury notes held by the public; $591,174,000,000 in Treasury bonds; and $516,209,000,000 in TIPS.

It also included $23,754,000,000 in marketable Treasury bills, notes, bonds, TIPS and Federal Financing Bank notes that, according to the Treasury, were held by federal agencies.

In addition to the $5,749,916,000,000 in marketable debt as of the end of January 2009, the Treasury also reported $4,882,164,000,000 in nonmarketable debt owed by the government at that time, including $4,291,027,000,000 in nonmarketable intragovernmental debt.

By the end of January 2014, the marketable debt of the U.S. government had increased to $11,825,322,000,000. This included $1,484,438,000,000 in Treasury bills held  by the public; $7,922,464,000,000 in Treasury notes held by the public; $1,421,110,000,000 in Treasury bonds held by the public; $959,058,000,000 in TIPS held by the public, and $15,000,000,000 in FRNs held by the public. There was also $23,252,000,000 in marketable debt held by government agencies.

In addition to the $11,825,322,000,000 in marketable debt as of the end of January 2014, the Treasury also reported $5,467,698,000,000 in nonmarketable debt, including $4,961,625,000,000 in nonmarketable intragovernmental debt.

From January 2009 to January 2014, the marketable debt of the U.S. government increased $6,075,406,000,000—or about 106%

The Federal Reserve is now the largest owner of the U.S. government’s marketable debt. As of Feb. 12, 2014, according to the Fed’s latest balance sheet, the Fed owned $2,261,099,000,000 in U.S. Treasury securities.

Entities in the People’s Republic of China are the second largest owners of the U.S. government’s marketable debt. As of the end of December, according to data released by the U.S. Treasury today, the Chinese owned $1,268,900,000,000 in U.S. Treasury securities—down from $1,316,700,000,000 at the end of November.

In January 2014, according to the Treasury, the U.S. paid an average interest rate of only 1.998 percent on its marketable debt. In January 2009, when Obama took office, the Treasury was paying an average interest rate of 3.116 percent on its marketable debt; and, in January 2001, when President George W. Bush took office, the Treasury was paying an average interest rate of 6.620 percent on its marketable debt.

That means that the average interest rate on the U.S. government’s marketable debt is currently less than a third of what it was in 2001—when the U.S. had only $2,977,328,000,000 in marketable debt, or about 25 percent of the marketable debt it has now.

Also in January 2001, the Federal Reserve owned only $518,441,000,000 in U.S. Treasury securities, or about 23 percent of what it owns now.

~Steve~

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/106-obama-has-more-doubled-marketable-us-debt

 

ObamaCare Imploding! Obama Making It Up As He Goes.

Ladies and Gentlemen This POS is breaking the law as it is written everytime he waves his magic pen and changes the goal post. When will they freaken impeach him????

images

——————————————————————————————–

Obama’s New Delay of Employer Mandate Violates Plain Language of Law.

By Terence P. Jeffrey           February 10, 2014 – 6:14 PM

(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama’s Treasury Department issued a new  regulation today that for the second time directly violates the plain and unambiguous text of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by allowing some businesses to avoid the law’s Dec. 31, 2013 deadline to provide health insurance coverage to their employees.

Initially, on July 2, 2013, the administration unilaterally delayed the deadline for the employer mandate until 2015. Now, the administration is unilaterally delaying it for some businesses until 2016.

n its official summary of PPACA, the Congressional Research Service said: “(Sec. 1513, as modified by section 10106) Imposes fines on large employers (employers with more than 50 full-time employees) who fail to offer their full-time employees the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage or who have a waiting period for enrollment of more than 60 days.”

The text of the law itself describes an “applicable large employer” as follows: “The term ‘applicable large employer’ means, with respect to a calendar year, an employer who employed an average of at least 50 full-time employees on business days during the preceding calendar year.”

The final words in the section of PPACA mandating that employers with more than 50 full-time employees provide their employees with “minimum essential coverage” imposes a specific statutory deadline for doing so. It says: “EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013.”

Last summer, the administration unilaterally moved this hard statutory deadline back one year to 2015 for all employers with more than 50 full-time employees. Now, without any action by Congress, the administration is moving it back again for some employers—despite the plain language of the law.

The Treasury Department has issued a fact sheet explaining how the Obama administration’s new declaration changes the meaning of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The fact sheet says:

“To ensure a gradual phase-in and assist the employers to whom the policy does apply, the final rules provide, for 2015, that: The employer responsibility provision will generally apply to larger firms with 100 or more full-time employees starting in 2015 and employers with 50 or more full-time employees starting in 2016.”

The fact sheet goes on to say:

“To avoid a payment for failing to offer health coverage, employers need to offer coverage to 70 percent of their full-time employees in 2015 and 95 percent in 2016 and beyond, helping employers that, for example, may offer coverage to employees with 35 or more hours, but not yet to that fraction of their employees who work 30 to 34 hours.”

It further says:

“While the employer responsibility provisions will generally apply starting in 2015, they will not apply until 2016 to employers with at least 50 but fewer than 100 full-time employees if the employer provides an appropriate certification described in the rules.”

And also:

“Employers that are subject to the employer responsibility provisions in 2015 must offer coverage to at least 70 percent of full-time employees as one of the conditions for avoiding an assessable payment, rather than 95 percent which will begin in 2016.”

In sum, the law says that employers with “at least 50 full-time employees” must provide “minimum essential coverage” in the “months beginning after December 31, 2013” or pay a fine. The new declaration from the Obama administration’s Treasury Department says this part of the law no longer applies. It says employers with between 50 and 99 employees need not provide coverage until 2016 and larger employers need only provide coverage to 70 percent of their employees next year.

Great Links from Drudge

~Steve~

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/obama-s-new-delay-employer-mandate-violates-plain-language-law

Is Social Security a Massive Ponzi Scheme?

I received an interesting email. Here it is:

THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THE GOVERNMENT’S CALCULATION OF AVAILABLE SOCIAL SECURITY IS THEY FORGOT TO FIGURE IN THE PEOPLE WHO DIED BEFORE THEY EVER COLLECTED A SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK!!!

WHERE DID THAT MONEY GO?

Remember, not only did you and I contribute to Social Security but your employer did, too.

It totaled 15% of your income before taxes.

If you averaged only $30K over your working life, that’s close to $220,500.

Read that again.

Did you see where the Government paid in one single penny?

We are talking about the money you and your employer put in a Government bank to ensure you and me that we would have a retirement check from the money we put in, not the Government.

Now they are calling the money we put in an entitlement when we reach the age to take it back.

If you calculate the future invested value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer’s contribution) at a simple 5% interest (less than what the Government pays on the money that it borrows) –

After 49 years of working you’d have $892,919.98 . If you took out only 3% per year, you’d receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years (until you’re 95 if you retire at age 65) and that’s with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit!

If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you’d have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month.

THE FOLKS IN WASHINGTON HAVE PULLED OFF A BIGGER PONZI SCHEME THAN BERNIE MADOFF EVER DID.

Entitlement my foot; I paid cash for my social security insurance!

Just because they borrowed the money for other government spending, doesn’t make my benefits some kind of charity or handout!!

Remember Congressional benefits? — free healthcare, outrageous retirement packages, 67 paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days.

Now that’s welfare, and they have the nerve to call my social security retirement payments entitlements?

They call Social Security and Medicare an entitlement even though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives, and now,when it’s time for us to collect, the government is running out of money.

Obamacare. Oh This Is A Doozy!!

OK, so what I get out of this article is either part of the code for Obamacare was written by a firm with ties to Belarus, which is an authoritarian regime that  is closely allied with Russia and is adversarial toward the United States,. Or it was hijacked to Belarus and written there and malware installed. Not Good.

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

Vladimir Putin, Alexander Lukashenko

 

The Belarusian Connection

Obamacare network vulnerable to cyber attack
February 3, 2014 8:11 pm

U.S. intelligence agencies last week urged the Obama administration to check its new healthcare network for malicious software after learning that developers linked to the Belarus government helped produce the website, raising fresh concerns that private data posted by millions of Americans will be compromised.

The intelligence agencies notified the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency in charge of the Healthcare.gov network, about their concerns last week. Specifically, officials warned that programmers in Belarus, a former Soviet republic closely allied with Russia, were suspected of inserting malicious code that could be used for cyber attacks, according to U.S. officials familiar with the concerns.

The software links the millions of Americans who signed up for Obamacare to the federal government and more than 300 medical institutions and healthcare providers.

“The U.S. Affordable Care Act software was written in part in Belarus by software developers under state control, and that makes the software a potential target for cyber attacks,” one official said.

Cyber security officials said the potential threat to the U.S. healthcare data is compounded by what they said was an Internet data “hijacking” last year involving Belarusian state-controlled networks. The month-long diversion covertly rerouted massive amounts of U.S. Internet traffic to Belarus—a repressive dictatorship located between Russia, Poland, and Ukraine.

“Belarusian President [Alexander] Lukashenko’s authoritarian regime is closely allied with Russia and is adversarial toward the United States,” the official added.

The combination of the Belarus-origin software, the Internet re-routing, and the anti-U.S. posture of the Belarusian government “makes the software written in Belarus a potential target of cyber attacks for identity theft and privacy violations” of Americans, the official said.

Security officials urged HHS to immediately conduct inspections of the network software for malicious code. The software currently is used in all medical facilities and insurance companies in the United States.

The officials also recommended that HHS use security specialists not related to software vendors for the inspections to reduce further risks.

Officials disclosed the software compromise last week after the discovery in early January of statements by Belarusian official Valery Tsepkalo, director of the government-backed High-Technology Park (HTP) in Minsk.

Tsepkalo told a Russian radio station in an interview broadcast last summer that HHS is “one of our clients,” and that “we are helping Obama complete his insurance reform.”

“Our programmers wrote the program that appears on the monitors in all hospitals and all insurance companies—they will see the full profile of the given patient,” Tsepkalo said June 25 on Voice of Russia Radio.

White House National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said an intelligence report on the Belarusian software was “recalled by the intelligence community shortly after it was issued.”

The report has prompted HHS to conduct a review to determine if software related to the Affordable Care Act “was written by Belarusian software developers,” she said.

“So far HHS has found no indications that any software was developed in Belarus,” Hayden said. “However, as a matter of due diligence, they will continue to review the supply chain. Supply chain risk is real and it is one of our top concerns in the area of cyber-security.”

A senior administration official questioned whether suspect software mentioned in the report would be valuable to a nation state.

“Nation states are generally not interested in [personal identification information] for its own sake,” the official said. “Given that, we would be surprised to see a nation-state capability applied in this matter. But we are doing a thorough review anyway.”

HSS spokeswoman Dori Salcido referred questions about the matter to Richard A. Olague, spokesman for the HHS’ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Olague declined to discuss the software vulnerability.

He also would not say if CMS is conducting a search for malicious software emanating from Belarus.

CMS said in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon that assessments by independent security contractors are conducted regularly by companies such as MITRE and Blue Canopy.

The website also is continuously monitored by CMS technicians and electronic sensors, and weekly penetration tests to check the security of the system are carried out.

A CMS security team in place also seeks to “identify anomalous activity, and to deter and prevent any unauthorized access,” the statement said.

“In addition, as new website functions continue to go live, CMS follows a rigorous and regular change management process with ongoing testing and mitigation strategies implemented in real time,” the statement said. “This occurs on a regular basis, in between the testing periods.”

A spokeswoman for CGI Federal, the main federal contractor for the healthcare network, also had no immediate comment.

Intel chair calls for probe

REST HERE

~Steve~

Henry Waxman To Resign. That’s 11 And Counting Folks.

The Rats are jumping ship. 

He does look like a rat doesn't  he?

He does look like a rat doesn’t he?

DEM CASUALTY LIST GROWS

by MIKE FLYNN 30 Jan 2014

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/30/Dem-Casualty-List-Grows

Each week, it seems another Democrat lawmaker announces their retirement from Congress. On Thursday, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) joined the growing list. It is only January, but 11 Democrat lawmakers have said they are quitting at the end of this current term.

Sen. Max Baucus (MT)

Sen. Tom Harkin (IA)

Sen. Carl Levin (MI)

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (WV)

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (NY)

Rep. George Miller (CA)

Rep. Jim Moran (VA)

Rep. Jim Matheson (UT)

Rep. Mike McIntyre (NC)

Rep. Bill Owens (NY)

Rep. Henry Waxman (CA)

All the lawmakers, with the exception of Owens had a lot of seniority and would have been in line for Chairman gavels on important committees if Democrats took control of Congress. The retirements could be an indication of how unlikely they think that is.

Two of the House seats, in UT and NC, are almost guaranteed to flip to the Republicans. Romney won those districts by 40 and 19 points respectively. That means Democrats need to flip 19 seats now, rather than 17.

Who will be next for the door?

( Mama Pelosi is my hope ) 

Bye Bye,

Bye Bye,

~Steve~

UPDATE~~~ 

Sandra Fluke ‘Strongly Considering’ Run for Henry Waxman’s Seat

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/sandra-fluke-strongly-considering-run-for-henry-waxman-s-seat-20140130

The lawyer Rush Limbaugh once called a ‘slut’ is reportedly mulling a congressional campaign.

H/T        Will

Did You Know We Were Royally Screwed Yesterday?

President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of Global Warming.

In Typical Obama/Media collusion there was a Friday afternoon dump of this gem. What has just happened is obama has yet again circumvented the will of the people and Congress who have repeatedly defeated Global Warming legislation.

He has now opened the door to total destruction of our economy. Make no mistake about it. This is their plan.

The obamacare fiasco is part of it. They wanted it to fail. They want the markets in termoil. People getting cancelled with no where to turn but the Gov.

Now electricity will become so cost prohibitive no one will be able to afford big home, hell any home besides what the Gov assigns you like in Russia. NOT GOOD.

Can someone tell me, no really someone tell me just where do his powers end. What do we need Congress and the Senate for if he can just issue executive orders and get what he wants.

Sort of reminds me of the “Enabling act” and Adolph Hitler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

——————————————————————————————

Obama orders government to prepare for impact of global warming

By Dave Boyer

The Washington Times

Friday, November 1, 2013

President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

There’s no estimate of how much the additional planning will cost. Natural disasters including Superstorm Sandy cost the U.S. economy more than $100 billion in 2012, according to the administration.

The White House is also setting up a task force of state and local leaders to offer advice to the federal government, with several Democratic governors having agreed to serve and at least one Republican governor, from the U.S. territory of Guam.

Mr. Obama has a goal of reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent by 2020, and the Environmental Protection Agency is working on rules that would impose tougher regulations on coal-burning power plants. But much of the president’s climate-change agenda has stalled in Congress, and the administration says the new order recognizes that global greenhouse gas emissions are still rising, making further damage from global warming inevitable.

At a speech at Georgetown University in June, Mr. Obama outlined executive actions he would take to require government and private industry to prepare for the effects of climate change.

( I just love that he gets to tell “Private Industry” how to act)

sangry_group_100-100

“The question is not whether we need to act,” Mr. Obama said at the time. “The question is whether we will have the courage to act before it’s too late.”

~Steve~

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/#ixzz2jUb1429E

National Park Service Goon Shoots Unarmed Man on Houseboat

Park_Service_Flag_Blue

AKA: Federal Goons with Guns

Author’s Note: For future reference, I will be referring to any and all federal agencies that I feel have no business being armed with anything beyond a radio as being federal goons with guns. If that offends you, tough grits.

-And before you start telling me about the dangers of bears and snakes, you should know I spent half of my 30 years in the land surveying bizz all over the eastern half of the country – most of it in the woods, and the only two times I felt threatened was when I was shot at by a couple of irate (human) property owners.

That’s when it is time to call for-real local law-enforcement officers, not glorified feds who are probably ex-Peace Corps types, or worse -  PETA rejects, who are poorly trained and have no business being armed in the first place.

Via spokesman.com:

Lake Roosevelt park ranger shot man near son, family says

Kip Hill The Spokesman-Review

The Kettle Falls man shot by park rangers at a campground over the weekend had been standing alongside his 9-year-old son when the bullet tore into his torso, family members say.

Few details of the shooting have been disclosed by the National Park Service or investigators with the Washington State Patrol.

The shooting injured Casey Hartinger, 43. It happened after a Saturday night confrontation between rangers and another man who owns a houseboat that was moored at the Kettle River Campground within the Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area.

At least one park ranger boarded the houseboat in response to a noise complaint.

It’s unclear what prompted a ranger to open fire on Hartinger, 43, who was released Monday from Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center, apparently without being arrested.

However, the owner of the houseboat, 41-year-old Michael J. Sublie, faces possible federal charges of interfering with law enforcement.

Court documents describe a scuffle that included Sublie shoving a park ranger off the gangplank that stretched from the houseboat to the shore.

Hartinger and Sublie both live in Kettle Falls and are friends. Family members of both men said Monday that neither of the men was armed at the time.

Court documents include allegations that Sublie was uncooperative when rangers approached him. He refused to turn down the music blaring from his boat at about 10:30 p.m. – some 30 minutes after quiet hours had begun. And he refused to identify himself or remove his hands from his pockets as a ranger requested. Sublie was described by rangers as having “a heavy odor of alcoholic beverage” on his breath and at one point yelled obscenities at the rangers as he demanded they leave his boat.

A ranger tried several times to detain Sublie, but each time Sublie is accused of violently raising his arms to resist.

After several failed attempts to detain Sublie, the ranger was pushed backward off the gangplank, according to records.

Court filings do not mention when shots were fired or by whom. The two rangers who responded to the call were identified only by their initials.

Bob Hartinger, the father of the man who was shot, said he’d received word in a phone call from his 13-year-old granddaughter who was on the boat with her 9-year-old brother that Casey Hartinger had been wounded. The 9-year-old stood near his dad when the shots were fired, Bob Hartinger said.

“If the bullet hadn’t hit my son, it would have hit (my grandson) in the head,” he said.

You will find the rest at this link.

the-tyranny-liberty-cycle-of-government-L-v7LiL2

This time around, I think it will be stopping at Tyranny

I guess we should be thankful that no one’s dog was shot, nor that their 98 year-old wheelchair-bound grandmother was tasered – at least not this time.

Scuffle or not, there was no reason to shoot an unarmed man, no matter how drunk and belligerent he was at the time.

There are ways to subdue such people that do not involve attempted deadly force that can be employed by law enforcement officers that are properly trained and thus qualified.

And I have the same question Doc E had (even though she did not quite put it this way): WTF is up with this?

We are currently very late 1930s Germany – and very close to becoming something just as bad – if not ultimately worse.

Americans better pull their heads out of their rectums and start paying attention – and that right soon, because we are staring nose-to-nose eyeball-to-eyeball at our demise.

-Dave

(h/t: My buddy Earl)

Obama Making his Own Laws – Again

I don’t knoW IF YOU RECALL, BUT AS PART OF OBAMMYCARE CONGRESS AND STAFF WERE SUPPOSED TO PARTICIPATE JUST LIKE US PEONS  WELL AS GOMER WOULD SAY “WELL GOOOOOLY’ SEE WHAT HAPPENED NOW.

 

Obama - He's dead

————————————————————————————————

by KEITH KOFFLER on AUGUST 5, 2013, 9:24 AM

By what authority did President Obama decide to exempt members of Congress and their staffs from a provision of Obamacare that would deny them their federal subsidy and and make them buy insurance on the exchanges like everyone else?

Obama, as has been widely reported, promised Congress the other day that he would personally see to it that the federal benefit, which pays 75 percent of premiums, would be preserved even after Congress is forced onto the exchanges.

Lawmakers were complaining of a potential “brain drain” as high quality staffers left Capitol Hill instead of ponying up thousands more for health insurance.

Let’s be clear. Other brains would certainly have replaced the parting brains on Capitol Hill. It’s a cool job – makin’ laws for the rest of us – that others would have done before cashing in their padded resumes and scoring tons of dough in the private sector. The problem wasn’t a brain drain. The problem was a money drain.

And so, lo and behold, the administration’s Office of Personnel Management has dutifully determined that Congress will keep its taxpayer-funded health care gift.

According to the Wall Street Journal, OPM has no authority to pay for plans on the exchanges, which are not part of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

This latest White House night at the improv is also illegal. OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in congressional pay in return for less overall compensation. Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President.

The White House, the WSJ notes, was eager to issue a decree instead of pursuing a legislative fix that would have uncomfortably opened up the Obamacare can of worms and invited Republican mischief.

So, as it has so often done when the law is inconvenient, the Obama administration has decided the laws are for stupid people.

(That’s Us If You Were Wondering.)

Your government has unlawfully decided to take action to financially benefit the ruling class, those who WHO ACTUALLY WRITE THE LAWS. Democrats took the lead on this, but Republicans are complicit too.

Be afraid.

~ Steve~                    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/08/05/lawlessness-white-house/

Will Dems Pay for Passing Obamacare in 2014?

Obama_witch_doctor

Disaster for Dems

ObamaCare & the 2014 vote

  • By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
  • Last Updated: 12:09 AM, March 25, 2013
  • Posted: 10:42 PM, March 24, 2013
headshot

Betsy McCaughey

Democrats hope to retake the House of Representatives in next year’s elections. They won’t — and they’ll have themselves to blame, because 2014 is when ObamaCare kicks in.

With a vengeance.

The authors of the Obama health law postponed the pain until after the 2012 election. Some popular provisions went into effect immediately, such as allowing children to stay on their parent’s plan until age 26. And the White House granted 1,472 waivers to various companies and unions, exempting them from insurance reforms so they wouldn’t drop coverage for employees and members before the presidential contest.

Kiss of death: ObamaCare’s disastrous impact means Nancy Pelosi, here being greeted by the president last year, won’t be speaker again soon.

AFP/Getty Images
Kiss of death: ObamaCare’s disastrous impact means Nancy Pelosi, here being greeted by the president last year, won’t be speaker again soon.

Yet a majority of voters on Election Day still opposed the health law (though, obviously, it wasn’t the deciding issue in the presidential race). And opinion will only sour more as the law takes full force starting in January.

People in their 20s and 30s will be clobbered — their health-insurance premiums will double (or more), insurers report. Nineteen percent of the president’s 2012 voters came from this age group. The biggest problem: The Obama law forces insurers to charge young, healthy people more to cover the cost of insuring the middle-aged and those with pre-existing conditions.

Middle-aged folks will benefit somewhat from overcharging the young, but the law’s mandatory benefits package and its billions in new taxes on insurers will drive up costs enough that overall premiums for a family of five will start at $20,000 (before subsidies, if any). Oh — and that doesn’t count the penalty for each smoker, roughly $3,000 a head.

(Subsidies may help some people cover sky-high premiums, though not the smoking penalty — but the letter of the law makes those subsidies unavailable in many states. The federal courts will eventually decide the issue.)

Many workers in industries such as retail, hospitality and home care will lose on-the-job health coverage, forecasts the ADP Research Institute — and many will also be demoted to part-time status because of ObamaCare.

Why? The president’s health law mandates that all employers with 50 or more full-time workers provide its “essential benefit package” if they offer insurance — and that package costs about twice what these industries now offer. Many employers will drop coverage, and pay the (smaller) fine; others will try to avoid that 50-employee limit by using more people part-time.

Even the government’s actuaries admit fewer people will get coverage at work after the employer mandate goes into effect than if the law had not passed.

You will find the rest of the article at this link.

Obamacare

I am praying Betsy McCaughey is right, as it appears the current congress cannot bring itself to even throw a speed bump in front of Obama’s health care plan from Hell. Okay, it really is not Obama’s plan, as it was written many moons ago and has been sitting in a rusty file cabinet ever since, but he will be forever associated with it.

There is just one teeny, tiny problem, though, as filling out an Obamacare application will include an opportunity to register to vote.

That could end up being a double edged sword given the low-information electorate we now have in this country.

And do not even get me started on the potential for voter fraud.

-Dave