Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Archive for the ‘Gangster Government’ Category

Obama to the Rescue – of Hamas

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post. Hamas

Operation Protective Edge is now two weeks old. Since the ground offensive began Thursday night, we have begun to get a better picture of just how dangerous Hamas has become in the nine years since Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip. And what we have learned is that the time has come to take care of this problem. It cannot be allowed to fester or grow anymore.

We have known for years that tunnels were a central component of Hamas’s logistical infrastructure.

What began as the primary means of smuggling weapons, trainers and other war material from Hamas’s sponsors abroad developed rapidly into a strategic tool of offensive warfare against Israel.

As we have seen from the heavily armed Hamas commando squads that have infiltrated into Israel from tunnels since the start of the current round of warfare, the first goal of these offensive tunnels is to deploy terrorists into Israel to massacre Israelis.

But the tunnels facilitate other terror missions as well.

Israel has found tunnels with shafts rigged with bombs located directly under Israeli kindergartens.

If the bombs had gone off, the buildings above would have been destroyed, taking the children down with them.

Other exposed shafts showed Hamas’s continued intense interest in hostage taking. In 2006 the terrorists who kidnapped Cpl. Gilad Schalit entered Israel and returned to Gaza through such a tunnel.

Today the presence of sedatives and multiple sets of handcuffs for neutralizing hostages found in tunnel after tunnel indicate that Hamas intends to abduct several Israelis at once and spirit them back to Gaza.

In an interview with Channel 2 Monday evening, Minister Naftali Bennett spoke of a mother at Kibbutz Netiv Ha’asara who told him that her children wake her in the middle of the night and tell her that they hear digging beneath their beds.

As Bennett said, this state of affairs simply cannot continue. People cannot live in fear that there are terrorists burrowing beneath their homes, digging tunnels to murder or kidnap them.

These tunnels must be found and destroyed not merely because they constitute a physical danger to thousands of Israelis. They must be located and destroyed, and Hamas’s capacity to rebuild them must be eliminated because the very idea that they exist makes a normal life impossible for those immediately threatened.

Hamas’s tunnels are also the key component of their command and control infrastructure inside Gaza.

Hamas’s political and military commanders are hiding in them. The reinforced bunkers and tunnel complexes enable Hamas’s senior leadership to move with relative freedom and continue planning and ordering attacks.

The sophistication of the tunnels and the malign intentions of Hamas are not in the least surprising.

But Hamas’s rapid advances in both tunnel and missile technology are deeply worrisome. At a minimum, they indicate that if it is allowed to end the current round of fighting as a coherent, relatively well-armed terrorist army, Hamas will be able to rapidly rebuild and expand its capabilities.

As a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas is not a stand-alone terror group. It is part of a much larger web of Islamic jihadist terror groups including al-Qaida and its affiliates as well as the Shi’ite Hezbollah. Like Hamas, all of these threaten several major Sunni Arab states.

Due to their recognition of the threat Hamas and its allies pose to the survivability of their regimes, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have taken the unprecedented step of supporting Israel’s efforts to defeat Hamas.

They understand that a decisive Israeli blow against Hamas in Gaza will directly benefit them. Not only will Hamas be weakened, but its state sponsors and terrorist comrades will be weakened as well.

Presently, Hamas’s most outspoken state sponsors are Qatar and Turkey.

As Israel’s Calcalist newspaper reported earlier this week, Qatar is Hamas’s biggest and most important financier, a role it plays as well for ISIS, al Nusra, the Muslim Brotherhood and various jihadist groups in Libya.

Turkey for its part is aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Like Qatar, Turkey has also been a major supporter of ISIS and al Nusra, as well as Hamas. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s slander against Israel has grown so hysterical in recent weeks that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has been trying to downplay Turkey’s animosity, called him out on his open anti-Semitism.

By Tuesday morning, IDF forces in Gaza had destroyed 23 tunnels. The number of additional tunnels is still unknown.

While Israel had killed 183 terrorists, it appeared that most of the terrorists killed were in the low to middle ranks of Hamas’s leadership hierarchy.

Hamas’s senior commanders, as well as its political leadership have hunkered down in hidden tunnel complexes.

In other words, Israel is making good progress.

But it hasn’t completed its missions. It needs several more days of hard fighting.

Recognizing this, Israel’s newfound Muslim allies have not been pushing for a cease-fire.

In contrast, the Obama administration is insisting on concluding a cease-fire immediately.

As Israel has uncovered the scope of Hamas’s infrastructure of murder and terror, the US has acted with the UN, Turkey and Qatar to pressure Israel (and Egypt) to agree to a cease-fire and so end IDF operations against Hamas before the mission is completed.

To advance this goal, US Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Cairo on Monday night with an aggressive plan to force on Israel a cease-fire Hamas and its state sponsors will accept.

As former ambassador to the US Michael Oren told the media, it is clear that neither Israel nor Egypt invited Kerry to come over. Their avoidance of Kerry signals clearly that the US’s two most important allies in the Middle East do not trust US President Barack Obama’s intentions.

And their distrust is entirely reasonable.

The State Department has openly applauded Turkey and Qatar for their involvement in attempts to achieve a cease-fire. Last week Israeli officials alleged that the US was responsible for Hamas’s rejection of the Egyptian cease-fire proposal. By attempting to coerce Egypt to accept Qatar and Turkey as its partners in mediation, Obama signaled to Hamas’s leaders that they should hold out for a better deal.

Due to Turkey’s membership in NATO and the glamour of the Qatari royal family, many Westerners find it hard to believe that they are major sponsors of terrorism. But it is true. Turkey and Qatar are playing a double game.

While sending his ambassador to Brussels for NATO meetings, Erdogan has been transforming Turkey from an open, pro-Western society allied with Israel into a closed, anti-Semitic and anti-American society that sponsors Hamas, ISIL, al Nusra and other terrorists groups.

As for Qatar, the tiny natural gas superpower presents itself to Americans as their greatest ally in the Muslim world. The emirate gives hundreds of millions of dollars to US universities to open campuses in Doha and pretends it is a progressive, open society, replete with debating societies.

Qatar hosts three major US military bases on its territory. And it is becoming one of the most important clients for US military contractors. Earlier this year Qatar signed an $11.4 billion dollar arms agreement with the US.

At the same time, according to the Calacalist report, Qatar is the major bankroller of ISIS and al Nusra in Syria and Iraq. It gives $50 million a month to jihadists in Libya. It gives Hamas $100m. in annual aid. And in the past two years Doha has provided Hamas with an additional $620m. dollars, including $250m. it transferred to Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal’s personal bank account, and $350m. in military aid to Hamas, transferred after the Egyptian military forced the Muslim Brotherhood government from power last July.

Add to that the $100m. per year that Qatar pours into Al Jazeera’s satellite network – which has dedicated itself to undermining pro-Western Arab regimes while popularizing the likes of al-Qaida and Hamas, and Qatar is the largest financier of international jihad in the world.

Rather than notice that Qatar and Turkey are playing a double game, and treat them with suspicion, the Obama administration has embraced them.

Chances that Kerry will secure a cease-fire in the near future are small. In all likelihood, the government will be able to buy the time necessary to complete the mission in whole or large part. But the fact that the US has chosen at this juncture in the operation – with Israel enjoying unprecedented support from the most important Sunni states in the region – to side with Hamas and its state sponsors in their demand for an immediate cease-fire speaks volumes about the transformation of US foreign policy under Obama’s leadership.

Bill O'Reilly Clashes with Valerie Jarrett over 'Gangsta' Culture

Food Stamp Recipients Outnumber Women Who Work Full-Time

People participating in the food stamp program outnumbered the women who worked full-time, year-round in the United States in 2012, according to data from the Department of Agriculture and the Census Bureau.

In the average month of 2012, according to the Department of Agriculture, there were 46,609,000 people participating in the food stamp program (formally known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). That contrasts with the 44,059,000 women who worked full-time, year-round in 2012, according to the Census Bureau’s report on Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States.

For each woman who worked full-time, year-round in 2012, there was slightly more than 1 other person collecting food stamps.FOOD STAMP BENEFICIARIES AND FULL-TIME FEMALE WORKERS-CHART 1

Food Stamp Recipients and Women Who Work Full-Time
In 2013, the average number of people on food stamps increased to 47,636,000. The Census Bureau will not publish its report on Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage for 2013, which includes the data on women working full-time, until September.

The Department of Agriculture’s website lists the annual average number of food stamps participants going back to 1969. That year, there were only 2,878,000 people on food stamps. Since then, food stamps participants have increased by 44,758,000—or about 1,552 percent.

In 1969, there were 15,678,000 women who worked full-time, year-round in the United States. Through 2012, their numbers had increased by 28,381,000—or about 181 percent.

Since 1969, there have been three years when the number of Americans taking food stamps outnumbered the women who worked full time, year-round. In 1976, there were 18,549,000 food stamps participants, and only 18,372,000 women working full-time. Then, in 2011, there were 44,709,000 food stamp participants and 43,702,000 women who worked full-time. (The Census Bureau has not published data for the number of women who worked full-time, year-round in 1974.)

So far, 2011 and 2012 are the only back-to-back years on record when the number of Americans taking food stamps outnumbered the women working full-time year-round.

The business and economic reporting of CNSNews.com is funded in part with a gift made in memory of Dr. Keith C. Wold.

DIRTY HARRY LIES AGAIN

BY KIMBERLY A. STRASSEL

The Really Big Money? Not the Kochs
Harry Reid surely must have meant the unions when he complained about buying elections.

Dirty HarryHarry Reid is under a lot of job-retention stress these days, so Americans might forgive him the occasional word fumble. When he recently took to the Senate floor to berate the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch for spending “unlimited money” to “rig the system” and “buy elections,” the majority leader clearly meant to be condemning unions.

It’s an extraordinary thing, in a political age obsessed with campaign money, that nobody scrutinizes the biggest, baddest, “darkest” spenders of all: organized labor. The IRS is muzzling nonprofits; Democrats are “outing” corporate donors; Jane Mayer is probably working on part 89 of her New Yorker series on the “covert” Kochs. Yet the unions glide blissfully, unmolestedly along. This lack of oversight has led to a union world that today acts with a level of campaign-finance impunity that no other political giver—conservative outfits, corporate donors, individuals, trade groups—could even fathom.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the Capitol Building, Jan. 25. Associated Press

Mr. Reid was quite agitated on the Senate floor about “unlimited money,” by which he must have been referring to the $4.4 billion that unions had spent on politics from 2005 to 2011 alone, according to this newspaper. The Center for Responsive Politics’ list of top all-time donors from 1989 to 2014 ranks Koch Industries No. 59. Above Koch were 18 unions, which collectively spent $620,873,623 more than Koch Industries ($18 million). Even factoring in undisclosed personal donations by the Koch brothers, they are a rounding error in union spending.

Mr. Reid was similarly heated over the tie-up between outside groups and politicians, by which he surely meant the unions who today openly operate as an arm of the Democratic Party. The press may despise the Kochs, but even it isn’t stupid enough to claim they are owned by the GOP. Most outside conservatives groups, including the Koch-supported Americans for Prosperity, back candidates and positions that challenge the Republican line. And in any event, every conservative 501(c)(4) is so terrified of the hay the media and regulators would make over even a hint of coordination with the GOP, they keep a scrupulous distance.

Unions, as 501(c)(5) organizations, are technically held to the same standards against coordination with political parties. Yet no Democrat or union official today even troubles to maintain that fiction. Hundreds upon hundreds of the delegates to the 2012 Democratic convention were union members. They were in the same room as party officials, plotting campaign strategies. The question therefore is how much of that $4.4 billion in union spending was at the disposal of the Democratic Party—potentially in violation of a bajillion campaign-finance rules?

As for Mr. Reid’s complaint that some “rig the system to benefit themselves,” that was undoubtedly a reference to the overt, transactional nature of union money. Nobody doubts the Kochs and many corporations support candidates who they hope will push for free-market principles. Though imagine the political outcry if David or Charles Koch openly conditioned dollars for a politician on policies to benefit Koch Industries?

In the past months alone, unions demanded an exemption to a tax under ObamaCare; the administration gave it. They demanded an end to plans to “fast track” trade deals; Mr. Reid killed it. They wanted more money for union job training; President Obama put it in his budget. Everybody understands—the press matter-of-fact reports it—that these policy giveaways are to ensure unions open their coffers to help Mr. Reid keep the Senate in November. The quid pro quo is even more explicit and self-serving at the state level, where public-sector unions elect politicians who promise to pay them more. If the CEO of Exxon tried this, the Justice Department would come knocking. The unions do it daily.

Democrats hope to make a campaign theme out of conservative “dark” money, something else Mr. Reid knows about. In addition to other spending, unions have been aggressively funneling money into their own “dark” groups. One of these is the heavyweight 501(c)(4) Patriot Majority USA. Patriot Majority doesn’t disclose its donors, though a Huffington Post investigation found it had been “fueled” in 2012 by $2.3 million in union donations. Amusingly, Patriot Majority used its undisclosed money on a campaign to expose the Koch brothers’ “front” groups. Oh, and Patriot Majority is run by Craig Varoga, a former aide and close ally of . . . Harry Reid.

The unions have had a special interest in funding attacks on conservative groups, since it has led to the IRS’s regulatory muzzling of 501(c)(4) speech. Under the new rule, conservative 501(c)(4)s are restricted in candidate support; unions can do what they want. Conservative groups are stymied in get-out-the-vote campaigns; unions can continue theirs. Conservative outfits must count up volunteer hours; not unions.

So now, in addition to a system in which organized labor spends “unlimited money” to “rig the system to benefit themselves” and “buy elections,” (to quote Mr. Reid), Mr. Obama’s IRS has made sure to shut up anyone who might compete with unions or complain about them.

Supporters of campaign-finance rules never want to acknowledge that their maze of regulations serve primarily as a tool for savvy politicians to manipulate and silence opponents. For proof, they need only listen to Mr. Reid—who is pretty savvy, and who didn’t misspeak after all.

Write to kim@wsj.com

Thanks to George Soros, John Podesta and Barak Obama

Millitary-Cuts-590-LI

Obama Appoints Hamas Adviser Robert Malley to Senior Director on National Security Council

by Pamela GellerPresident Obama has named Hamas adviser Robert O. Malley the senior director at the National Security Council (NSC). You may recall that Malley was foreign policy adviser to then-presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2007, and was fired from his campaign team in 2008 because of his notorious ties to Hamas, the PLO and other jihadist, anti-Israel groups.
Atlas readers are long familiar with this subversive jihad operative. As early as 2007 and 2008 (and repeatedly throughout the campaign and in my book), I warned Atlas readers of the troubling relationship between Robert O. Malley and Barack Hussein Obama.
Robert Malley told the NY Times that he had regularly been in contact with Hamas, which is designated a terrorist organization by the State Department.[Malley] was part of the American negotiating team that dealt with Yasser Arafat at Camp David. He has presented a revisionist history of those negotiations since then:
presenting a view that blames Israel for the failures of the negotiations. His version has been radically at odds with the views of Americans and Israelis (including the views of American Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross-also an adviser to Obama- and President Clinton). He has spent years representing the Palestinian point of view, co-writing a series of anti-Israel articles with Hussein Agha-a former Arafat adviser. Palestinian advocate. These have appeared in the New York Review of Books a publication that has served as a platform for a slew of anti-Israel advocates from Tony Judt to the aforementioned George Soros to the authors of the Israeli Lobby book Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer. Malley has also called settlements “colonies” — implicitly condemning Israel as a “colonial” state. His writings have been so critical of Israel that the media-monitoring group CAMERA has a “dossier” on him.
Discover the Networks:
In a July 2001 op-ed (titled “Fictions About the Failure at Camp David”) which was published in the New York Times, Robert Malley (whose family, as noted above, had close ties to Yasser Arafat) alleged that Israeli — not Palestinian — inflexibility had caused the previous year’s Camp David peace talks (brokered by Bill Clinton) to fail. This was one of several controversial articles Malley has written — some he co-wrote with Hussein Agha, a former adviser to Arafat – blaming Israel and exonerating Arafat for that failure.

hamas122
One security official at the time said, “We are noting with concern some of Obama’s picks as advisers, particularly Robert Malley who has expressed sympathy to Hamas and Hezbollah and offered accounts of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that don’t jibe with the facts” (here).
Because of the exposure of Malley by the blogs, he was removed from Obama’s campaign team. But the mask is off, and Obama has no need to pretend to be something he is not. Malley is back and in charge —

And where is American Jewish lay leadership on this? Too busy working with Islamic supremacist groups banning me from speaking at synagogues and Jewish groups, I am sure.
“Adviser Fired by Obama for Hamas Meeting Gets Top WH Security Job,” Judicial Watch, February 19, 2014
A radical foreign policy adviser fired by President Obama years ago for meeting with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas has been hired by the White House to be the senior director at the National Security Council (NSC).
How generous of the commander-in-chief to let bygones be bygones when it comes to this extremist, a Middle East “expert” named Robert Malley whose family had close ties to Yasser Arafat, founder of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Fatah movement. Malley was an adviser in Bill Clinton’s White House and he consistently exonerates Palestinians and condemns Israel.
Over the years he has published a number of newspaper opinion pieces urging the United States to reach out and negotiate with terrorist enemies like Hamas, Hezbollah and Muqtada al-Sadr. A website that documents the networks and agendas of the political left offers details about Malley’s scary past and provides links to the outrageous articles he’s published, including several co-written with Hussein Agha, a former adviser to Arafat.
Malley grew up in France and his Egyptian-born father was a key figure in Egypt’s communist party and a close friend of Arafat’s. His parents were fervently anti-Israel and huge supporters of several leftist revolutionary liberation movements, especially the Palestinian cause. Malley published a piece in a mainstream newspaper declaring that Israel was responsible for the failure of Bill Clinton’s peace talks with the Palestinians. Malley attended the 2000 event, which was held at Camp David because it was the site of the landmark 1978 Israeli-Egyptian peace accords.
When Obama launched his 2008 presidential campaign, he brought Malley on as a foreign policy adviser focusing on the Middle East. The then-Illinois senator reportedly dumped Malley around May for meeting with and having regular contact with Hamas, which has long been classified as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department. A London newspaper broke the story about Malley getting the boot for schmoozing it up with terrorists and U.S. media repeated the line, but Middle Eastern press published a vastly different version.
Shortly after Obama got elected president in early November, Israel’s largest news site revealed that the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat reported that Hamas engaged in talks with Obama for months through his “fired” adviser. The article quotes Ahmad Yousuf, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh’s political advisor, saying this: “We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama).”
Now Malley is officially a top dog in the crucial, tremendously influential agency that advises the president on national security and foreign policy matters. The Obama-loving mainstream newspaper that reported Malley’s new position this week says his return to the White House reflects a changing U.S. role in the Middle East. “This time he will manage the fraying ties between the United States and its allies in the Persian Gulf, a job that says a lot about how America’s role in the Middle East has changed.”

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/02/obama-appoints-hamas-adviser-robert-malley-senior-director-national-security-council/#dWBoeETIkbjVUzbh.99

Trey Gowdy Calls Nancy Pelosi’s Fast & Furious Conspiracy “Mind Numbingly Stupid”

by Tim Brown

South Carolina Representative Trey Gowdy (R) is not one for mincing words. He pretty much says what he thinks, which is why he got elected and which is why he has gained even greater respect in pursuing the scandals of the Obama administration. Appearing with Greta van Susteren on Fox News’ On the Record, Gowdy said in response to being asked about Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) comments about the vote for contempt during the Fast and Furious investigation of Attorney General Eric Holder were “mind numbingly stupid.”

“They’re going after Eric Holder because he is supporting measures to overturn these voter suppression initiatives in the states. This is no accident, it is no coincidence. It is a plan on the part of Republicans,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said at her weekly press conference.
“You know my friend Allen West said the race card was the last card in the deck,” Gowdy said. “I think former Speaker Pelosi has opened up a new deck and has found the 2 of clubs. I could not believe it when I heard her saying that. Is that all you have to come back with?”

“Is that the best you can come up with, is that we got together in this grand scheme to suppress votes and I’m sure she didn’t say southern states but that’s what she meant,” Gowdy continued.

“It’s really beneath the office of a member of Congress to say something that outrageous and the fact that she was once the Speaker is mind numbing. I honestly, and I have her a lot in my 16 years as a prosecutor, I couldn’t believe the words coming out of her mouth. But keep in mind, Greta, this is the same woman who said she could have arrested Karl Rove any day she wanted. So I don’t know what was wrong with her yesterday or today or whenever she said that, but I would schedule an appointment with my doctor if she thinks that we are doing this to suppress votes this fall. That is mind-numbingly stupid.”
Well go on with your bad self Representative Gowdy! Tell us what you really think. (This is why I like this guy.)

This isn’t the first time the race card has been played by Pelosi, or the Democrats for that matter. In fact, it’s often their play.
What Pelosi failed to speak about though was the fact that the entire Black caucus walked out on the vote! That seems just a bit racist doesn’t it?
Pelosi has stuck to her guns though. She’s been claiming since June 2012 that the vote to hold Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for not turning over documents, which may implicate him further in the Fast and Furious gun smuggling scandal, was all about voter suppression, or in Democrat language, “it was a vote by a bunch of white people against blacks.”
Pelosi’s comments are always “mind numbingly stupid” because they never are reality. They are always a misdirection from what the issue is, but never about the issue itself. No one has yet to be held accountable in the Fast and Furious scandal which has led to the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans and at least two federal agents.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/02/trey-gowdy-calls-nancy-pelosis-fast-furious-conspiracy-mind-numbingly-stupid/#WQrf7Vs8Fr2Ri61c.99

Reid is main culprit, not Republicans

Harry Devil
President Obama’s State of the Union announcement that he will “go it alone” and bypass Congress when his favored legislation doesn’t move forward is cause for grave concern and brings into question exactly where is the gridlock in the process of legislative action. The president should look at his own Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, as the main culprit for most of the stalemate in Congress. The process for passing bills requires collaboration between both houses. If passed by both the Senate and House, the bill goes to a conference committee comprised of members from each house to work out any differences. In the best of cases, the differences are worked out, voted upon by the entire Congress and forwarded to the president for signature or veto. Unfortunately, some bills never make it to the floor of the Senate or House because the Senate majority leader or speaker of the House control the calendar and decide which bills will make it to the floor for debate. To date, many of the bills President Obama attributes to being part of the stalemate have never been scheduled for debate in the Senate by Reid. More than 160 bills have been sent by the House to the Senate that Reid has refused to act upon. Many were potential solutions to stemming runaway spending, immigration reforms and modifications to our health-care crisis. So instead of bypassing Congress, Obama should prompt Reid to stop the gridlock and allow the bills’ process to proceed so healthy debate, compromise and cooperation can be conducted as intended.
Ted Waronich Valrico

State Of Obama's Union: Democrat Care

by Joseph BeverlyNoze
After Five State Of The Union Addresses, All Obama Has Delivered On Health Care Is A Series Of Broken Promises

Obama: “Our Government Shouldn’t Make Promises We Cannot Keep — But We Must Keep The Promises We’ve Already Made.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President In The State Of The Union Address , Washington, D.C., 2/12/13)
AT OBAMA’S 2010 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS, OBAMA MADE HEALTH CARE PROMISES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN BROKEN

Obama In His 2010 State Of The Union: “Our Approach Would Preserve The Right Of Americans Who Have Insurance To Keep Their Doctor And Their Plan. It Would Reduce Costs And Premiums For Millions Of Families And Businesses.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President In The State Of The Union Address , Washington, D.C., 1/27/10)
Obama’s Keep Your Plan Promise: Broken

5 Million People That Purchased Insurance On The Individual Health Insurance Market Have Received Cancellation Notices. “They said the widespread cancellations in the individual health insurance market – roughly 5 million and counting – are in line with what was projected under regulations drawn up by the administration in 2010, requirements that both insurers and businesses objected to at the time. Cancellations also are occurring in the small group market, which covers businesses with between two and 50 employees, they noted.” (Lisa Myers, “Insurers, State Officials Say Cancellation Of Health care Policies Just As They Predicted,” NBC News , 11/15/13)

PolitiFact Headline: “Lie Of The Year: ‘If You Like Your Health Care Plan, You Can Keep It.'” (Angie Drobnic Holan, “Lie Of The Year: ‘If You Like Your Health Care Plan, You Can Keep It,'” PolitiFact, 12/12/13)

Obama’s “Catchy Political Pitch” Was “Impossible To Keep.” “It was a catchy political pitch and a chance to calm nerves about his dramatic and complicated plan to bring historic change to America’s health insurance system. ‘If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,’ President Barack Obama said — many times — of his landmark new law. But the promise was impossible to keep.” (Angie Drobnic Holan, “Lie Of The Year: ‘If You Like Your Health Care Plan, You Can Keep It,'” PolitiFact, 12/12/13)

The Washington Post ‘s Fact Checker Gave Obama’s Promise That Americans Could Keep Their Health Care Plan Four Pinocchios. “The president’s promise apparently came with a very large caveat: ‘If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan – if we deem it to be adequate.’ Four Pinocchios.” (Glenn Kessler, “Obama’s Pledge That ‘No One Will Take Away’ Your Health Plan,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, 10/30/13)
Obama’s Keep Your Doctor Promise: Broken

Obama’s “High-Profile Pledge” That All Americans Could Keep Their Doctor Under Democrat Care Is Another Broken Promise. “Barack Obama’s broken promise that all Americans would be able to keep their health care plans after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act has infuriated people who took the President at his word and rattled even his staunchest supporters. But for the President, the real political pain may only be starting. Come 2014, the rest of the country may learn that another high-profile pledge was untrue. ‘No matter how we reform health care,’ Obama said in 2009, ‘we will keep this promise: if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.'” (Alex Altman, “‘You Can Keep Your Doctor’: Democrat Care’s Next Broken Promise?” Time , 11/19/13)

Despite Obama’s Promise, “New Plans Appear To Offer A Narrow Choice Of Hospitals And Doctors.” “Obama promised people could keep their doctors. But in many states the new plans appear to offer a narrow choice of hospitals and doctors. Overall, it’s shaping up as less choice than what people get through Medicare or employer-based coverage.” (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Holly Ramer, “Limited Patient Choice Next Overhaul Issue,” The Associated Press, 11/20/13)

Under Democrat Care, “Many Insurers Are Significantly Limiting The Choices Of Doctors And Hospitals Available To Consumers.” “Federal officials often say that health insurance will cost consumers less than expected under President Obama’s health care law. But they rarely mention one big reason: many insurers are significantly limiting the choices of doctors and hospitals available to consumers.” (Robert Pear, “Lower Health Insurance Premiums To Come At Cost Of Fewer Choices,” The New York Times , 9/23/13)

Faced With The Need To Cut Down Costs, Insurers Are “Shrinking” The Network Of Doctors Available To Patients. “It’s not that simple. In order to participate in health-insurance exchanges, insurers needed to find a way to tamp down the high costs of premiums. As a result, many will narrow their networks, shrinking the range of doctors that are available to patients under their plan, experts say.” (Alex Altman, “‘You Can Keep Your Doctor’: Democrat Care’s Next Broken Promise?” Time, 11/19/13)

ObamaCare’s Mandates Are Leading To “Limited Choices And Significant Out-Of-Pocket Costs.” “Exchange plans are required to take all applicants, cover broad benefits and provide robust financial protection against catastrophic illness. In return for that, something else has to give. The result: limited choices and significant out-of-pocket costs through deductibles and copayments.” (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Holly Ramer, “Limited Patient Choice Next Overhaul Issue,” The Associated Press, 11/20/13)

Democrat’s Health Care Premiums Promise: Broken

Under Obama, The Average Cost Of Family Health Care Premiums Has Increased By $3,671 From $12,680 To $16,351, A 29 Percent Increase. (“Employer Health Benefits; 2013 Annual Survey,” The Kaiser Family Foundation, 8/20/13)

“The Average Premium For Family Coverage Is $1,363 Per Month Or $16,351 Per Year.” (“Employer Health Benefits; 2013 Annual Survey,” The Kaiser Family Foundation, 8/20/13)

Under Obama, The Average Cost Of Single Coverage Premiums Has Increased By $1,180, From $4,704 To $5,884, A 25 Percent Increase. (“Employer Health Benefits; 2013 Annual Survey,” The Kaiser Family Foundation, 8/20/13)

“The Average Premium For Single Coverage In 2013 Is $490 Per Month Or $5,884 Per Year.” (“Employer Health Benefits; 2013 Annual Survey,” The Kaiser Family Foundation, 8/20/13)

“Workers Are Seeing A Larger Portion Of Their Paycheck Sliced Off” Due To Higher Health Care Premiums. “That means that in many cases workers are seeing a larger portion of their paycheck sliced off to cover health insurance.” (“Health Insurance Costs Outpace Wage Gains, Survey Says,” The Associated Press, 8/20/13)

For 2013, Employer-Sponsored Health Care Costs “Outpaced Worker Wage Increases.” “An annual survey shows that the average cost for employer-sponsored health insurance rose modestly this year, but it still outpaced worker wage increases.” (“Health Insurance Costs Outpace Wage Gains, Survey Says,” The Associated Press, 8/20/13)

Democrat Care Will “Accelerate” Health Insurance Premiums By Nearly 3 Percent. “Improved coverage for those who currently have individually purchased insurance is also expected to influence higher spending growth. On a per enrollee basis, growth in private health insurance premiums is expected to accelerate to 6.0 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 2013.” (Sean P. Keehan, et al, “National Health Expenditure Projections, 2012-22: Slow Growth Until Coverage Expands And Economy Improves,” Health Affairs, no. (2013))
DESPITE OBAMA’S 2010 PROMISE TO SMALL BUSINESS, OBAMACARE IS PROVING A BURDEN

Obama In His 2010 State Of The Union: “It Would Give Small Businesses And Uninsured Americans A Chance To Choose An Affordable Health Care Plan In A Competitive Market.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President In The State Of The Union Address , Washington, D.C., 1/27/10)
Obama’s Affordable Insurance For Small Businesses Promise: Broken

Democrat Care’s Small Business Rate Hikes Are “Another Political Time Bomb Lurking That Could Explode” Before The 2014 Midterm Election. “Think the canceled health policies hurt the Democrat Care cause? There’s another political time bomb lurking that could explode not too long before next year’s elections: rate hikes for small businesses. Like the canceled individual health plans, it’s another example of a tradeoff that health care experts have long known about, as the new rules for health insurance prices create winners and losers. But most Americans won’t become aware of it until some small business employees learn that their premiums are going up because of a law called – oops – the Affordable Care Act.” (David Nather, “Next Democrat Care Crisis: Small-Business Costs,” Politico, 12/17/13)

Small Businesses Will Be Forced To Comply With Democrat Care’s Rules, Which Are Likely To Cause Premiums To Go Up For Many. “Here’s why: Next year, small business health plans – generally those that cover less than 100 workers – will have to comply with a wide range of new rules, particularly the ones that say employees can’t be charged more if they have health problems. Their premiums will only vary based on their age, whether they have individual or family coverage, what part of the country they live in, and whether they use tobacco – and older workers won’t be able to be charged more than three times as much as younger ones. Those changes will be helpful to small businesses with older workers and employees with health problems, but they also mean that small firms with younger, healthier workers will have to pay more than they used to.” (David Nather, “Next Democrat care Crisis: Small-Business Costs?,” Politico, 12/17/13)

“Insurers Have Been Warning For Months That The UnAffordable Care Act Will Lead To Premium Increases For Some Small Businesses – It Was Part Of Their Pitch To Get Employers To Renew Their Old Coverage Early.” (David Nather, “Next Democrat care Crisis: Small-Business Costs?,” Politico, 12/17/13)

One Insurance Broker Expects 75 Percent Of His Clients To See “A Noticeable Increase” In Premiums Due To Democrat Care. “Chris Foley of Abbot Benefits, a Houston-based insurance broker firm, said he expected about 75 percent of his clients to see “a noticeable increase” in premiums when they renew under the new Democrat care rules, while the other 25 percent would see their rates stay the same or go down.” (David Nather, “Next Democrat care Crisis: Small-Business Costs?,” Politico, 12/17/13)

Democrat Care Will Unduly Burden Small Business Owners With Cancellation Letters And New Taxes

Many Small Businesses Will Be Receiving A Cancellation Letter In October 2014, Right Before The November Midterm Elections. “While some cancellation notices already have gone out, insurers say the bulk of the letters will be sent in October, shortly before the next open-enrollment period begins. The timing – right before the midterm elections – could be difficult for Democrats who are already fending off Republican attacks about the UnAffordable Care Act and its troubled rollout.” (Ariana Eunjung Cha, “Second Wave Of Health-Insurance Disruption Affects Small Businesses,” The Washington Post , 1/11/14)

The Cancellation Letters Will Leave “Some Small-Business Owners Confused And Disillusioned” About Democrat Care. “Still, the changes being made by the insurance industry are leaving some small-business owners confused and disillusioned about the law – whether it is directly to blame for the changes or not.” (Ariana Eunjung Cha, “Second Wave Of Health-Insurance Disruption Affects Small Businesses,” The Washington Post , 1/11/14)

The Department Of Health And Human Services Estimated 80 Percent Of Small Business Health Plans Will Be Cancelled, Affecting As Many As 46 Million Americans. “An estimated 18 million to 24 million people in the United States have insurance through employers with fewer than 50 workers, and about 40 million have coverage through firms with fewer than 100 workers. The Department of Health and Human Services estimated in 2010 that up to 80 percent of small-group plans, defined as having fewer than 100 workers, could be discontinued by the end of 2013. But many small employers bought themselves extra time by renewing policies early through the end of 2014.” (Ariana Eunjung Cha, “Second Wave Of Health-Insurance Disruption Affects Small Businesses,” The Washington Post , 1/11/14)

Small Business Owners Worry That Democrat Care’s HIT Tax “Will Mean Higher Premiums For Them.” “Many small-business owners worry that a new tax on insurance providers in the health-care law will mean higher premiums for them, undermining the law’s capacity to lower their health-care costs. Starting next year, the federal government will charge a new fee on health insurance firms based on the plans they sell to individuals and companies, known as the fully insured market. Meanwhile, the provision exempts health-insurance plans that are set up and operated by businesses themselves (the self-insured market).” (J.D. Harrison, “Health Insurance Tax ‘Scares The Daylights’ Out Of Some Small-Business Owners,” The Washington Post , 5/12/13)

The HIT Tax Will Hurt Small Businesses, As They “Are Less Likely To Self-Insure.” “The tax does apply to insurance companies that pick up the tab, including the private Medicare Advantage plans and those that will be sold to individuals on the new state-based Democrat Care exchanges. It applies to most small-business plans, which are less likely to self-insure.” (Brett Norman, “Health Insurance Tax Faces Challenge,” Politico, 9/9/13

WHAT A COINCIDENCE: Valerie Jarrett’s Daughter and Hubby Work for Company that Receives $653 Million for Obamacare - And You Thought It was Above Reproach

Now we know why a company in Canada got the contract for Obamacare::::::

“Michael D. Harbison via Dutch Valkema

Dutch Valkema

Valerie Jarrett’s daughter MARRIES the son of Canadian MP who chose the IT firm for Obamacare healthcare.gov website for $653M
laura_andtony.jpeg.size.xxlarge.letterbox
BAM … THE LINK!!!

$653 Million Dollar wedding present. We Americans paid for it!!!

Obama attends wedding of Toronto Liberal MPP’s son |

Toronto Star

By: Robert Benzie Queen’s Park Bureau Chief, Published on Wed Jun 20 2012
EXPLORE THIS STORY
How does a Toronto Liberal MPP get some face time with U.S. President Barack Obama?
Easy — invite him to your son’s wedding.
Obama was only one of many high-profile guests at the weekend wedding of Scarborough-Rouge River MPP Bas Balkissoon’s son Tony in Chicago.
Tony Balkissoon, 29, a lawyer in the Windy City, married Laura Jarrett, also a lawyer, whom he met while they were students at Harvard Law School.
She is the daughter of Valerie Jarrett, one of Obama’s most influential advisers and a long-time friend of president who heads the White House office of public engagement.
Photos View photos
U.S. President Barack Obama, right, and other members of his family attend the wedding on Saturday.zoom
“It was kind of cool,” Bas Balkissoon told the Star on Wednesday, declining to get into details, citing his son and daughter-in-law’s privacy.
Indeed, the 280 guests at the wedding were asked not to taken any photos with cameras or smart phones.
Also in attendance were Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder, who arrived in a four-SUV motorcade and Vernon Jordan, a key adviser to former president Bill Clinton, among other Democratic luminaries.
It was held at Valerie Jarrett’s mother’s home, which is so close to the president’s private residence that he, First Lady Michelle Obama, and their daughters Sasha and Malia walked.
More Video
Rob Ford in video rantRob Ford in video rant
Rob Ford admits using crack cocaineRob Ford admits using crack cocaine
Guests said the reception was held in the backyard under a large white marquee tent.
Several streets in the posh Hyde Park neighbourhood were cordoned off by hundreds of Chicago police officers and Secret Service agents. Even children attending the wedding were frisked for weapons.
The Chicago Sun-Times reported that on the morning of the wedding an F-15 fighter jet chased away a single-engine airplane that had wandered into the restricted airspace over the neighbourhood.
Such measures are often taken by the North American Aerospace Defense Command for events involving a U.S. president.
While Bas Balkissoon was understandably coy about the event, another Liberal confided that the MPP was seen in deep conversation with both Obama and Holder.
Balkissoon is no slouch at politics. Prior to coming to Queen’s Park in a 2005 by-election he was a prominent Toronto councillor and was credited for blowing the whistle and exposing the MFP computer-leasing scandal.

The Balkissoon-Jarrett marriage is one of several links between Premier Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals and Obama. From 2000 until 2002, David Axelrod, another key adviser to the president, was a paid McGuinty strategist.
As well, Toronto LiberalJean-Michel Picher, who helped the premier in the run-up to last year’s provincial election, was an early Obama insider who worked on the then-Illinois senator’s historic presidential primary campaign in 2007 and 2008.
Liberal MPP Bas Balkissoon’s son has married the daughter of the real President Valerie Jarrett

WHY DOES EVERYTHING END UP SO Criminal?

HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
SEO Powered By SEOPressor