Posts Tagged ‘Bye’


Hillary’s Campaign Died Today -State Department audit faults Clinton’s handling of emails

WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton disregarded various State Department guidelines for avoiding cybersecurity risks, an internal audit found Wednesday, faulting her and past secretaries of state for weak information management.

The inspector general’s 78-page analysis, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, cites “longstanding, systemic weaknesses” related to the agency’s communications. These started before Clinton’s appointment as secretary of state, but her failures were singled out as more serious.

Despite guidelines to the contrary and never seeking approval, Clinton used mobile devices to conduct official business on her personal email account and private server. She never sought approval from senior information officers, who would have refused the request because of security risks, the audit said.

“By Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the department’s guidance was considerably more detailed and more sophisticated,” it concluded. “Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives.”

The review was prompted by the revelations of Clinton’s email use, which has affected her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. Nevertheless, the review also encompassed the email and information practices of the last five secretaries.

The report said the department and its secretaries were “slow to recognize and to manage effectively the legal requirements and cybersecurity risks associated with electronic data communications, particularly as those risks pertain to its most senior leadership.”

Clinton has been dogged by questions about her email practices for more than a year, since AP revealed that the server was in the basement of Clinton’s New York home while she served as the nation’s top diplomat from 2009 to 2013.

Separately from the State Department audit, FBI agents have been probing whether Clinton’s use of a private email server imperiled government secrets.

Clinton has acknowledged in the campaign that her homebrew email setup was a mistake, but said she never sent or received anything marked classified at the time

We Are Busy

We are Busy

A Traitor is a Traitor is a Traitor

by Marcia Wood

In 2008, Obama said he would fundamentally change America – why weren’t we in shock when we heard those words. What did we really think he meant?

A man who wouldn’t honor our Country by placing his hand over his heart during our National Anthem and in return we’re supposed to honor this man some call Mr. President… Most politicians wore the flag pin since September 12 after the terrorist attack on the towers to honor fallen victims, our Troops and the family members who lost love ones on 911. Obama was ridiculed for refusing to wear the flag pin and finally relented.

Obama nonchalantly gives US support to the Arab Spring movement in his televised speech on the Middle East. In fact he bragged about planting the seeds of the Arab Spring that started in Tunis spreading throughout the Middle East. He even promised to use all US resources to assist them.

He is the one we should be holding responsible for the Fast and Furious gunrunner operation, the 787 billion stimulus money that he stole from taxpayers, the deliberate support of the Muslim Brotherhood, opening up our borders to drug cartel and terrorists, weakening our Military, refusing to support Netanyahu and the ugly corrupt Obama list just rambles on…

When is enough, enough? Why would anyone including African Americans, Hispanics, women and our youth support a person who is destroying our Nation. Are they really that naïve? Don’t they realize our Military is in harm’s way due to Obama’s foreign policies? Don’t they realize Obama used a sledge hammer to stop drilling on the coast, nixed the Keystone Pipeline and hamstrung all businesses?

When Mitt Romney was chewed up and kicked under the bus over his remarks about the 47% not voting for him and placed them in the category of victims – for the first time in many years finally one man had the guts to state the truth. These people are the victims of the Government and Obama continued using them and destroying all their hope for a better day starting in 2008 during his Presidential campaign.
He has followed the Rules for Radicals to a “T” which is based on one theory only destroying your adversaries. Obama has never allowed a serious crisis go to waste and his goal to overthrow Capitalism is being accomplished by creating a vacuum that places more and more people under Government control via entitlements.

These people Mitt Romney refers to are the victims of a corrupt vicious dictator who lives by theCloward/Piven strategy to create an ongoing crisis and manage it by abusing those who in fact need a hand up, not a hand out. It’s time for those who are undecided about the Presidential Election this year to step forward and stop the traitors in our Government including all of Obama’s Administration, the Liberal News Media and extreme Liberals.
May God Bless America
As Always,
Little Tboca


Fact Check: Obama Had More to Do With 2008 Economic Meltdown Than Bush Ever Did

by Jim Holt

Here’s something you’ll never read about in the liberal media.
Barack Obama played a leading role in the mortgage crisis of 2008 that sunk the US economy.

In his early activist days, Barack Obama the community organizer sued banks to ease lending practices.

State Sen. Barack Obama and crackpot priest Michael Pfleger led a protest in Chicago in January 2000. (NBC 5 Week of January 3, 2000)

In 1994, Barack Obama was one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. The lawsuit forced the bank to ease its lending practices.
The Daily Caller reported:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.

Then there’s Bush…
On the flip side, President George W. Bush warned the Democratic Congress 17 times in 2008 alone about the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.

To this day Barack Obama blames Bush for the 2008 economic meltdown.
The truth is, it was Obama not Bush who destroyed the economy.

Supreme Court rules against SEIU, overturns Ninth Circuit in Knox v. SEIU


On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled against the SEIU and said unions must let nonmembers object to unexpected fee increases that all workers are required to pay in a closed-shop, Fox News reported.

In a lopsided 7-2 decision, the Justices overturned the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Knox v. SEIU, a case dealing with coercive union dues collected from non-members that are used for political purposes.
Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg joined the majority in the case, but wrote a separate concurrence.

Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan dissented.

Fox News reported that the seven justices “ruled for Dianne Knox and other nonmembers of the Service Employees International Union’s Local 1000, who wanted to object and opt out of a $12 million special assessment the union required from its California public sector members.”

Stephen Hayward at Powerline called it “an important blow against labor unions,” but Townhall’s Guy Benson said the ruling “may not be the sweeping loss for the government sector unions that some conservative would like to think it is,” since it is limited to nonmembers and “focuses on a squabble over proper notification of special political dues.”

Amy Ridenour wrote at her National Center Blog that the ruling is a victory for free speech against a “tyrannical union.”

“A close connection exists between this Nation’s commitment to self-government and the rights protected by the First Amendment,” wrote Justice Alito, citing Brown v. Hartlage.

“The government may not prohibit the dissemination of ideas it disfavors, nor compel the endorsement of ideas that it approves… And the ability of like-minded individuals to associate for the purpose of expressing commonly held views may not be curtailed,” he added.

“When a State establishes an ‘agency shop’ that exacts compulsory union fees as a condition of public employment, ‘[t]he dissenting employee is forced to support financially an organization with whose principles and demands he may disagree.’ …This form of compelled speech and association imposes a ‘significant impingement on First Amendment rights.'”

Obama's Overplayed Hand and Blatant Disregard for the Constitution is Appalling

In order to become President, Barack Obama had to swear to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. But three years later, I am disgusted with the disregard that the President continues to show to our Constitution. Has he forgotten about the separation of executive, judicial and legislative branches found in our founding document? Our founders gave us a system of checks and balances so that one person could never seize more power than was provided in the Constitution.

President Obama’s actions demonstrate that he thinks he’s above the law. When he doesn’t get his way, he creates new policies to his liking.

Under Obamacare, an even playing field doesn’t exist for businesses. And President Obama must have recognized that, because he ordered his Health and Human Services Secretary to provide waivers from the healthcare overhaul. Unions, universities and restaurants in Nancy Pelosi’s district received waivers so that they didn’t have to comply with the law.

Then we have the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Passed in 1996, DOMA is a federal law that defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. But earlier this spring, the administration said it will no longer defend the constitutionally of DOMA. So even though this law is on the books – passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton – President Obama just thinks we should ignore it.

Last week Obama threw the Constitution out the window again. Even through Congress disagreed, the President was happy to circumvent the Constitution in order to protect younger illegal immigrants from deportation and hand them work permits. He stands resolute in this position despite the fact that, a year prior, the President said this about immigration: “Some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own.” He continued, “That’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”

Today, President Obama invoked executive privilege so Attorney General Eric Holder wouldn’t have to turn over documents on Fast and Furious. That is not what executive privilege was intended for!

Where will the madness end? When will the President stop blatantly disregarding the Constitution?

Sadly, I don’t think this President cares that he is ignoring the laws of our land. Nor, does he plan to curb his agenda. In fact, I expect things to only grow worse under this President. Thanks to an open mic in March, President Obama was caught telling Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he will have “more flexibility” in his second term.

The future of our country depends on making sure that the executive head of our nation knows he is subject to our laws and that he is under the Constitution.

Mr. President, I urge you, stop your autocratic reign; drop everything you are doing and read the Constitution. You will be well-served to remember the document that you swore to preserve, protect and defend.



Amazing that the Wash Post would actually print this about Obama.

January 8, 2012 Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson (columnist – Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”) ; and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:

To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.

Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass — held to a lower standard — because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues:

And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon –affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.

Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin — that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.

True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?

In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people — conservatives included — ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth — it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor