Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for January 19th, 2013

Casey points out that the recovery after the 2008 financial crisis is just an illusion created by central bank money printing which will ultimately lead to very high inflation once bank lending starts to pick up again. Both men discuss what will happen when all the US dollars currently held overseas are repatriated as foreigners lose confidence in the greenback. They also speculate about what Keynesians might be thinking at the moment, and analyse how non-western central banks are beginning to behave with regards to gold.

An economic collapse is coming and the Obama regime knows it. Federal agencies are stocking up on huge amounts of  ammo and have labeled Americans as the enemy in case of economic collapse. Obama issued an executive order giving him control over all US resources in the time of war and/or national crisis. Add this info in with the blood-lust to ban/confiscate law-abiding citizens firearms and one should be worried about what’s to come in the next few years.

H/T to ZeroHedge

Read Full Post »

liberal-logic-101-309

Read Full Post »

So New York Democrats, along with Gov. Mario Cuomo (D), wanted to confiscate guns, magazines and clips but were to chickenshit to let it out to the public. Gun-grabbing liberals are ashamed to let the public know their real agenda.

From New York Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin:

Here it is. This is the video where I was asked to keep the Democrat proposals for the NY SAFE Act away from the public. This list was given to me by a colleague and it is not confidential.

This bill was an attack on the 2nd amendment and the Democrats clearly wanted to dismantle the work of the Founding Fathers. None of these amendments were included in the final bill thanks to us fighting back. I will not stand silent while these unpatriotic proposals are pathetically thrown at us a 11 o’clock at night:

1. Confiscation of “assault weapons”
2. Confiscation o ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder’s information to be replaced to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as “assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons

When will liberal idiots realize that criminals won’t obey any of their gun-grabbing laws? Liberals don’t care because they’re not attacking criminals. They’re attacking law-abiding citizens and punishing them instead of punishing the criminals.

 

H/T to The Mental Recession

Read Full Post »

290687547_0_xlarge

Scared Eric?

(Washington, DC) –Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a brief on January 15, 2013, in response to an Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) motion to indefinitely delay consideration of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking access to Operation Fast and Furious records withheld from Congress by President Obama under executive privilege on June 20, 2012 (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:12-cv-01510)).

Rather than respond substantively to Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit, the DOJ argued in court that the lawsuit should be subject to a stay of proceedings because it is “ancillary” to a separate lawsuit filed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee against the DOJ. The Court “should let the process of negotiation and accommodation [between the House Committee and the DOJ] run its course, and then decide with the input of the parties whether and how this action may appropriately proceed at that time,” the DOJ argued, effectively abrogating the FOIA.  The Obama DOJ even suggested that the Judicial Watch litigation might encourage the Congress to fight harder to get the same documents in separate litigation.

Judicial Watch counters that FOIA demands a response and that its lawsuit is more straightforward than the House lawsuit and ripe for consideration on its merits. A decision on the House Committee lawsuit, meanwhile, could be delayed for months, if not years:

This notion that [Judicial Watch’s] lawsuit is in some way inferior [to the House lawsuit] is simply incorrect. [Judicial Watch] has as much of a right under the law as the House Committee to seek access to records of Defendant. In fact, since Defendant does not challenge [Judicial Watch’s] claim on jurisdictional grounds, it could be reasonably argued that [Judicial Watch’s] right is greater – it is certainly clearer and simpler – than that of the House Committee…Whereas [Judicial Watch’s] FOIA lawsuit is ripe for adjudication on the merits, the House Committee suit could be months, if not years, away from reaching the same stage.

The DOJ also argued that Judicial Watch’s lawsuit might somehow interfere with negotiations between the president and Congress. Judicial Watch countered: “Regardless of any potential resolution in that case, Defendant in this action will still be required to satisfy its obligations under FOIA, including justifying its withholdings. [Judicial Watch’s] lawsuit simply does not vanish if and when the HouseCommittee suit is resolved.”

Judicial Watch concludes: “[Judicial Watch] has a statutory right to the requested records and to have Defendant’s denial of Plaintiff’s FOIA request reviewed by this Court. [Judicial Watch’s] claim is now ripe for adjudication, and [Judicial Watch] is prepared to brief the issues. Defendant simply seeks to delay the date that it must justify its claims of exemption. Defendant has not demonstrated why [Judicial Watch’s] rights should be immoderately and oppressively delayed; it has only disparaged public’s right to request records of its government. For the foregoing reasons, [Judicial Watch] respectfully requests that Defendant’s request for an indefinite stay of the proceedings be denied.”

Fast and Furious was a DOJ/Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) “gun-running” operation in which the Obama administration reportedly sold guns to Mexican drug cartels in hopes that they would end up at crime scenes. Fast and Furious weapons have been implicated in the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and countless others in Mexico.

Congressional investigators, led by Rep, Darryl Issa, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, have fought to secure records related to the Fast and Furious program, but the DOJ continues to withhold responsive records from disclosure. On June 20, 2012, President Obama made a highly controversial decision to assert Executive Privilege to shield the DOJ’s Fast and Furious records from disclosure. Executive privilege is reserved to “protect” White House records, not the records of federal agencies, which must be made available, subject to specific exceptions, under the FOIA.

Which shows Obama is lying about his knowledge of the gun trafficking scheme. If he wasn’t involved he can’t constitutionally use executive privilege. Don’t know why idiot Republicans didn’t push this to the attention of the public.

The president’s assertion of executive privilege came just hours before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for failing to respond to congressional subpoenas for Fast and Furious records. On June 28, 2012, Congress voted 255-67 to hold Holder in contempt. (A number of Democrats joined the vote, while other Democrats, endorsing lawlessness, walked out in protest.) A second vote, 258-95, authorized the pursuit of records through civil litigation in the courts. Moreover, documents uncovered by CBS News seem to indicate that Holder may have perjured himself during congressional testimony, detailing what he knew about Fast and Furious and when.

Continue reading>>>

Read Full Post »

Windber Medical Center

Voting for Obama has consequences:

Pregnant women in one southwestern Pennsylvania town will soon need to look elsewhere to deliver their babies, after a local hospital announced it will end the practice in March — blaming ObamaCare in part for the decision.

The Windber Medical Center will stop delivering babies after March 31 because its obstetricians are either leaving or refocusing their practices, and because hospital officials believe they can’t afford it based on projected reimbursements under looming federal health care reforms.

The hospital, about 60 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, is losing two obstetricians and two others are shifting their focus more to gynecology.

In a lengthy statement posted to its website Wednesday, the hospital cited several reasons for the decision — including a claim that the population of women of child-bearing age is dropping and that the number of births the hospital would be called upon to perform isn’t enough for it to provide the service in the face of lower reimbursements under the federal Affordable Care Act.

Continue reading>>>

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 491 other followers

%d bloggers like this: