Obamacare Architecht: Law Passed Because of Lack of Transparency, "Stupidity" of American Voters

A series of videos have surfaced showing MIT Economist Jonathan Gruber, the man widely credited with crafting President Obama's sweeping healthcare law, admitting that the law was written in a vague and deceptive manner by design to hide costs and that the Affordable Care Act was ultimately passed thanks to the 'stupidity of the American voter'.

As of Friday, the total number of videos circulating of Gruber boasting to audiences about the circumstances under which Obamacare had passed was six. A number of the recently surfaced videos date from 2010 and 2011, while the most recent videos date back to fall of 2013 and there may be even more damning video to come.

In a 2011 conversation about the Affordable Care Act, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the architects of the law more commonly known as Obamacare, talked about how the bill would get rid of all tax credits for employer-based health insurance through "mislabeling" what the tax is and who it would hit.

The issue at hand in this sixth video is known as the "Cadillac tax," which was represented as a tax on employers' expensive health insurance plans. While employers do not currently have to pay taxes on health insurance plans they provide employees, starting in 2018, companies that provide health insurance that costs more than $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family will have to pay a 40 percent tax.

"Economists have called for 40 years to get rid of the regressive, inefficient and expensive tax subsidy provided for employer provider health insurance," Gruber said at the Pioneer Institute for public policy research in Boston. The subsidy is "terrible policy," Gruber said.

"It turns out politically it's really hard to get rid of," Gruber said. "And the only way we could get rid of it was first by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people when we all know it's a tax on people who hold those insurance plans."

(The White House press secretary said at a press briefing in 2010: "I would disagree with your notion that it is a tax on an individual since the proposal is written as a tax on an insurance company that offers a plan.")

The second way was have the tax kick in "late, starting in 2018. But by starting it late, we were able to tie the cap for Cadillac Tax to CPI, not medical inflation," Gruber said. CPI is the consumer price index, which is lower than medical inflation.

Gruber explains that by drafting the bill this way, they were able to pass something that would initially only impact some employer plans though it would eventually hit almost every employer plan. And by that time, those who object to the tax will be obligated to figure out how to come up with the money that repealing the tax will take from the treasury, or risk significantly adding to the national debt.

"What that means is the tax that starts out hitting only 8% of the insurance plans essentially amounts over the next 20 years essentially getting rid of the exclusion for employer sponsored plans," Gruber said. "This was the only political way we were ever going to take on one of the worst public policies in America."

Unions and employers who object in 2018, he noted, "at that point if they want to get rid of it they're going to have to fill a trillion dollar hole in the deficit...It's on the books now."

Speeches with much more blunt language on Gruber's part had surfaced on conservative blogs and talk radio earlier this week, although the story didn't begin gaining coverage until later on in the week when more videos began surfacing.

The comments were made during the panel sessions at the Annual Health Economics Conference last year.

"This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes," he said during a panel discussion at the University of Pennsylvania in October, 2013. "Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the 'stupidity of the American voter' or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

Democrats who were pivotal in passing Obamacare were quick to distance themselves from Gruber. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who cited Gruber's work during the push to pass Obamacare, denied knowing who he was and attempted to downplay his role in crafting the law during a press conference on Friday.

Gruber himself boasted of a 2009 meeting with the President Obama about the healthcare law in a 2012 interview- the White House visitor's log confirms Gruber's visit.

While some pundits have been wondering why these videos didn't surface before the election, their release may have been timed to coincide with something else altogether. The revelations come before the issue of Obamacare is once again before the Supreme Court. This time, the law is being challenged based on subsidies for the 14 states that didn't set up state-run Obamacare exchanges and the Administration's case could very well be undercut by Gruber's statements.

White House Announces Missing Soldier Returning Home After Negotiating Questionalble Prisoner Swap With Taliban

Flanked by the parents of missing US Army Sgt Bowe Bergdahl, President Obama announced that he had reached a deal with the Taliban securing their son's return from the Taliban in exchange for the release of five senior Taliban leaders who were being held in Guantanamo Bay. The announcement took place during a press conference in the White House rose garden on Saturday and already has both civilian and military officials alike calling the legality of the deal into question.

In addition to the legality of negotiating for Bergdahl's release from the Taliban, a number of soldiers who served with Bergdahl at the time of his 2009 disappearance have come forward and claimed that the missing sergeant is- at best- a deserter and may have been actively collaborating with the Taliban after going AWOL. Reportedly, at least six soldiers were killed in Taliban ambushes as the unit was searching for Bergdahl leading to criticism of the release from some of the soldier's family members.

The circumstances behind Bergdahl's disappearance are murky, but what is known that Bergdahl was absent when his unit-
1st Battalion, 501st Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division- conducted a headcount in the early morning hours of June 30th, 2009 at a forward operating base in southern Paktika province. Bergdahl, who was originally from Idaho, expressed growing disillusionment with the US Army in Afghanistan in his correspondence with his father and reportedly made offhanded comments to his platoon-mates about just walking off into the mountains. Some soldiers said that Bergdahl likely told the Taliban on how best to place IEDs for maximum effect on US Convoys.

Bergdahl's father did nothing to allay those suspicions after sending out messages via social networking sites like twitter encouraging the release of all Taliban prisoners in US custody while following foreign fighters in Syria. Bob Berdahl was also reportedly learning to speak Arabic and Pashto- the language primarily used by the Taliban- although that may have been done in an attempt to independently secure the release of his son. The elder Bergdahl also raised eyebrows when he uttered "In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate-" in Arabic during his appearance in the Rose Garden with President Obama over the weekend [anybody else find it slightly curious that Obama had time to fly in the elder Bergdahl for the rose garden presser, but not notify Congress?- NANESB!]

The five Taliban detainees who were released were identified as Khair Ulla Said Wali Khairkhwa, Mullah Mohammad Fazl, Mullah Norullah Nori, Abdul Haq Wasiq and Mohammad Nabi Omari. The five were flown to the gulf state of Qatar while Bergdahl was flown to a US Army hospital in Germany.

Meanwhile, in Washington D.C., lawmakers on the Senate Intelligence committee say that the White House has broken the law by entering into negotiations with the Taliban without notifying Congress. According to NBC's senior Washington correspondent, the White House was caught off guard by the military's reaction to Bergdahl's release.

6/4 UPDATE- A couple of even stranger developments began circulating regarding the aftermath of Bowe Bergdahl's disappearance in 2009 that have only recently come to light. The first was that some of Bergdahl's platoon-mates were reportedly ordered by superiors to sign a non-disclosure agreement over Bergdahl's alleged desertion and the search for the missing GI. According to Bergdahl's team leader, an Afghan interpreter translated messages in real-time from radio chatter about a lone American in a nearby village looking for an English speaker so he could talk to the Taliban.

House Speaker John Boehner Announces Select Committee on September 11, 2012 Benghazi Terrorist Attack

Speaker of the House John Boehner [R- OH 8] announced the formation of a special committee to probe the 2012 terrorist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in eastern Libya that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens as well as Ty Woods, Sean Smith and Glen Doherty.

Boehner said that he had held off on calling a special committee on Benghazi since he believed the House Oversight committee hearings were sufficient, even though many of the CIA and State Department documents they were given were heavily redacted. However, watchdog group Judicial Watch was able to obtain emails from White House and national security officials from the night of the attack that weren't redacted- emails that show a cabinet more concerned with protecting the President's image less than two months before the election than taking any action in response to the attack on the diplomatic compound on Benghazi.

Speaker Boehner said that in light of the emails released to Judicial Watch and the possibility of perjury by administration officials before previous hearings, he decided to form a select committee.

The Obama Administration wasn't helped any when former National Security Council aide Tommy Vietor appeared on FOX News' Special Report With Bret Baier on Thursday and flippantly dismissed questions about the attack and Obama Administration's response with a flippant "Dude, that was two years ago".



Besides coming off as a snide hipster douchebag, Vietor apparently let slip that President Obama never made it to the Situation Room that night- he left for a Las Vegas fundraiser the following day in Las Vegas.

The day before Vietor's less-than-inspiring Special Report appearance, White House press secretary Jay Carney was grilled by ABC News' Jon Karl after Carney alleged the White House emails that Judicial Watch had obtained weren't about Benghazi- Karl pointed out that they had 'Benghazi' in the subject line.

The attack came during the 2012 Presidential election, and for weeks President Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton blamed a spontaneous demonstration over an internet video even when it became apparent the attacks on the US Diplomatic compound in Benghazi were carried out by terrorists from Ansar-Al-Shari'a using mortars and heavy machine guns mounted on trucks while blocking off the roads around the compound nearly two hours before the attack. The date of the attacks also coincided with the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, Pentagon and United Flight 93 that killed nearly 3000 Americans.

While there were similar protests attributed to a YouTube video called The Innocence of Muslims elsewhere in the Middle East that night, there were no US fatalities as a result of those protests. After the attack photos began circulating of men, some of them presumably from Ansar-Al-Shari'a, dragging a dead or dying Ambassador Stevens through the street- some accounts said he was rushed to a hospital under Ansar-Al-Shari'a's control.

Officially Ambassador Stevens died of asphyxiation from smoke inhalation during the attack, however, the US State Department has not released any postmortem information detailing the nature of Ambassador Stevens' death.

Within hours of the attack, it was apparent that Ambassador Stevens and the others were killed in a well-planned assault on a US Diplomatic compound by a heavily armed Islamist group. However, then-ambassador to the UN Susan Rice made the Sunday morning talk show circuit and continued to blame the 'Innocence of Muslims' video while Hillary Clinton was standing next to the caskets of the four murdered Americans at a memorial service at Andrews AFB as she also blamed the video.

In fact, the only person who has been imprisoned over the Benghazi terrorist attacks to this date was Nakoula Basseley, an Egyptian-born Coptic Christian residing in California who made The Innocence of Muslims. Basseley had prior convictions for bank fraud and intent to manufacture methamphetamine, and was arrested less than two weeks after the Benghazi attacks by Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputies since posting videos online was apparently in violation of his probation.

More 0bamacare Good News! Democrats Spin CBO Report Estimating 2 Million People Will Lose Jobs as Freeing Americans From 'Job Lock'

According to a Congressional Budget Office report released this week, 0bamacare is set to push roughly 2 million Americans out of the workforce over the next three years as their hours are reduced or they leave the workplace altogether to qualify for subsidies offered by 0bamacare.

Although part of those numbers are attributed to job cuts, the vast majority represent workers who decide it makes more sense to stay home or work fewer hours, weighing the higher taxes they pay in the workforce versus their qualifications for benefits if they drop out.

“CBO estimates that the ACA will reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 to 2 percent during the period from 2017 to 2024, almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor — given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive,” the nonpartisan tax agency said in its economic outlook.

Although the White House and Congressional Democrats initially disputed the CBO's findings, many of them had revised their strategy shortly thereafter and claimed its actually a good thing that 0bamacare was providing Americans disincentive to work less or employers from hiring, citing the dreaded phenomenon of 'Job lock'.

Yes- that's the actual phrase House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi used.

“What we see is that people are leaving their jobs because they are no longer job-locked,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters after House votes Tuesday afternoon. “They are following their aspirations to be a writer; to be self-employed; to start a business. This is the entrepreneurial piece. So it’s not going to cost jobs. It’s going to shift how people make a living and reach their aspirations.”

Pelosi said she hadn’t “fully” seen the report, but, “this was one of the goals. To give people life, a healthy life, liberty to pursue their happiness. And that liberty is to not be job-locked, but to follow their passion.”

Using their line of reasoning, I guess I should actually be thanking the Democrats for freeing me from 'Job Lock' [not to mention 'paycheck lock'- NANESB!] for several months back in 2009. Come to think of it, maybe the Democrats can market the War on Coal as freeing most of West Virginia, eastern Kentucky and Western Pennsylvania from 'Job Lock'- assuming those jobs had something to do with mining or transporting coal.

I'm pretty sure I've seen this somewhere before: After Obama's promise to Americans of "If you like your health insurance, you can keep it" turned out to not only be untrue, but the 'Affordable Care Act' resulted in roughly 4.7 million cancellations of already-existing healthcare plans, the spin from Democrats and editorial boards at the New York Times and Washington Post was that those policies were 'junk' and the people who were previously happy with their 'junk' policies could shop around for another plan [often offering even less than the cancelled 'junk' policies for much more money- NANESB!] on the not-really-working healthcare.gov website.

Yet the Democrats and liberal pundits who somehow failed to go into detail on what made the millions of policies cancelled thanks to 0bamacare 'junk' are now opining what sort of jobs Americans find themselves 'locked' into- apparently involuntarily- when they could be spending that time with their family or pursuing a fulfilling career in interpretive dance [how exactly they still have a roof over their heads after being liberated from 'job lock' isn't really made clear- NANESB!].

Perhaps the most patronizing and insulting thing from the beltway pundits and liberal politicians who have most likely never worked a day of their life in the private sector is the assumption that Americans taking time off from work to be with family, switching jobs or quitting everything to pursue your dream job or start up your own business had never happened prior to the 2010 passage of 0bamacare. Even more dangerously, not only does the CBO report find this disincentivizes working full time but also tacitly promises success for those who strike out on their own thinking they have the Affordable Care Act to thank.

UPDATE 2/6- The Lonely Conservative points out that entrepreneurs 'liberated' from the drudgery of Job Lock could face an increase of as much as $20,000 for insurance if they cross the income level set out by 0bamacare guidelines (Calculated as roughly 400% of the Federal Poverty Level)

Report: White House Knew As Far Back As 2010 That Millions Of Americans Would Lose Insurance Coverage Under 0bamacare

According to an NBC report on Monday, The Obama Administration knew that as many as 67% of Americans already insured would lose their coverage once 0bamacare was passed into law as far back as 2010. This runs contrary to President Obama's numerous promises of "If you like your insurance, you can keep it" while stumping for the passage of the law known as the Affordable Care Act in 2009.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC News that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date -- the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example -- the policy would not be grandfathered.

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Yet President Obama, who had promised in 2009, “if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan,” was still saying in 2012, “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”

“This says that when they made the promise, they knew half the people in this market outright couldn’t keep what they had and then they wrote the rules so that others couldn’t make it either,” said Robert Laszewski, of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, a consultant who works for health industry firms. Laszewski estimates that 80 percent of those in the individual market will not be able to keep their current policies and will have to buy insurance that meets requirements of the new law, which generally requires a richer package of benefits than most policies today.

The NBC article drew an immediate and fierce reaction from senior White House staffers on social media.

FACT: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans.
— Valerie Jarrett (@vj44) October 29, 2013

Curiously, the NBC story disappeared for awhile on Monday night before re-appearing at a different URL- at first with a key paragraph missing and then with the original content posted.

White House press secretary Jay Carney at first blamed the cancellation notices on 'routine turnover within the insurance industry' and Medicare chief Marilyn Tavenner said it was the insurance industry that was to blame, not the Obama Administration. However, the insurance industry claims that the cancellation notices are being sent out because the current policies aren't in compliance with 0bamacare.

Elsewhere, Senator Mary Landrieu [D- LA] claimed that Democrats had only promised Americans could keep their insurance policies if it was "good insurance".

According to Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Democrats had only promised that Americans could keep their insurance if it was "good insurance."

"We said when we passed that, 'If you had insurance that was good insurance that you wanted to keep it, you could keep it,'" Landrieu said.

She declined to say if she would support a measure to let Americans keep the plans they had in 2013. "I haven't looked at it specifically," Landrieu said.

So first the White House and the Democrats denied that there was any widespread cancellations of insurance policies taking place, but when the reports of previously insured people receiving cancellations notices or being placed into newer, cost-prohibitive policies for the same level of coverage thanks to Barack Obama's landmark healthcare law became too numerous to ignore, the spin was that those policies millions of Americans were losing were crappy to begin with and that the insurance industry was to blame- all while making sure the individual mandate wasn't delayed during this month's government shutdown.
Other Democrat senators, including those up for re-election in red or swing states, declined to comment on the cancellations

Meanwhile, Obamacare Rollout Going As Well As Expected

Or at least as well as I expected.

Where to start? As President Obama and the Democrats are fond of reminding us, 0bamacare is now the law of the land despite efforts to repeal or defund it [including this month's government shutdown- NANESB!].

The botched and error-plagued rollout of the President's landmark achievement has drawn criticism from both parties and is best embodied by the lethargic and seemingly impossible-to-navigate healthcare.gov website- which the most charitable of critics have likened to an experience with all the warmth, efficiency and joy of a 1970s-era DMV visit. Those criticisms may end up being the least of the Democrats' worries, however.

A few weeks into the 0bamacare launch, enrollment numbers are dismal. Contractors for CGI Federal claimed that the $400 million website only underwent minimal testing a few weeks prior to the October 1st launch of Obama's Affordable Care Act- meaning that by law, Americans are required to buy a product or service through a website that doesn't exist.

Interestingly, not even a week after Democrats constantly referred to their Republican colleagues as terrorists, anarchists, hostage-takers and suicide bombers for even the most watered down demands in the budget negotiations where they sought a delay in the individual mandate, some Democrats are petitioning President Obama and the department of Health and Human Services for....a delay in the individual mandate of 0bamacare. Tellingly, many of these Democrats will be facing an uphill campaign in Republican-leaning states or districts where 0bamacare is unpopular to begin with in 2014.

Meanwhile, instead of demanding any sort of accountability from HHS head Kathleen Sebelius, other Democrats- including the President- apparently thought that the GOP was magically capable of crashing the 0bamacare website through their mere dislike of the law.

But to treat the healthcare.gov website as the sole problem of the 0bamacare rollout would be misleading. It's believed that more Americans in three states have had their insurance cancelled than Americans in all 50 states have filed applications for coverage through the government's website. Many more Americans who already have insurance have received notices that prices will increase dramatically for coverage under the same policy.

A spokeswoman for California's state-run insurance exchange- Covered California- admitted that there would be 'winners and losers' under 0bamacare- with the 'losers' typically being individuals who were purchasing health insurance for themselves or their families before 0bamacare kicked in. Now the costs have gone up dramatically or they will be dropped altogether by Jan 2014. An article from the San Francisco Chronicle earlier this month points out that a lower 2014 income would qualify an individual to be eligible for insurance subsidies as well- basically encouraging people to earn less in order to qualify for a subsidy for a good or service they were compelled to purchase under threat of fine or imprisonment by the federal government.

While pushing for the law in 2009, President Obama infamously told audiences "If you like your insurance, you can keep it"- a claim that was met with justifiable skepticism at the time.

Fears of a Clown- Rodeo Clown Recieves Lifetime Ban From Missouri State Fair For Mocking Obama

Several days after the fact, I have a hard time believing this is even a story.

The antics of a rodeo clown who donned an Obama mask at the Missouri State Fair this past weekend has left state officials scrambling to issue apologies and the progressive blogosphere fuming and comparing the scene to a latter-day minstrel show.

A clown wearing a President Barack Obama mask appeared at a Missouri State Fair rodeo this weekend and the announcer asked the enthusiastic spectators if they wanted to see "Obama run down by a bull."

The antics led the state's second highest-ranking official, Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, to denounce the performance in a tweet Sunday. He said it was "disrespectful" to the president.

"We are better than this," the Republican tweeted.

State Fair officials said the show in Sedalia was "inappropriate" and "does not reflect the opinions or standards" of the fair. "We strive to be a family friendly event and regret that Saturday's rodeo badly missed that mark," they said in a statement Sunday.

The furor started when fairgoer Perry Beam posted video of the clown in the Obama mask on Facebook and claimed that the crowd was little different from a Ku Klux Klan rally [which naturally begs the question of how many KKK rallies Beam has attended for his informed comparison- NANESB!].

Fairgoer Perry Beam of Higginsville, Missouri attended and snapped photos of the incident, which have spread rapidly via political blogs statewide.

Beam claims the announcer "whipped the audience into a lather" by repeatedly asking attendees if they wanted to see "Obama run down by a bull." Beam says another clown ran up and "started bobbling the lips on the mask and the people went crazy."

In an interview with NewsChannel 5, Beam called it a "racist" display.

Naturally, the 'political blogs' alluded to include far left forums such as Show Me Progress and the Daily Kos. The story gained further attention when AP writer and Salon.com contributor Maria Sudekum picked up on it and both Beam's account and the reactions of officials like Missouri governor Jay Nixon and Sen Claire McCaskill (both Democrats) were front page news for The Kansas City Star. Comments and op-eds in the Star's online edition drew thousands of remarks from across the region and country before the publication decided to suspend comments for the articles- this included a few pithy observations from yours truly that were reiterated in the Twitter format.

At least the #Obama rodeo clown at #MoStateFair isn't forcing me to buy health insurance or shutting down coal-fired power plants
— Fenway Nation (@Fenway_Nation) August 12, 2013

No long after, an op-ed where columnist Yael T Abouhalkah implied that the rodeo clown's antics warranted a Secret Service investigation [coz remember when John Hinkley tried trampling President Reagan with a rodeo bull to impress Jodie Foster? NANESB!].

It’s also borderline illegal; the U.S. Secret Service takes threats against the president seriously. While the president himself was in no danger here, it’s the kind of stupid activity that could give nuts ideas about harming the president.

Using Abouhalkah's logic, I suppose opposing Obamacare, gun control, amnesty, various 'green energy' boondoggles or Card Check could 'give nuts ideas about harming the President', so perhaps its best we stay quiet- otherwise President Obama might find himself on the wrong end of an irate bull someday. The Missouri chapter of the NAACP doubled down on the hand-wringing and have reportedly called for a federal investigation into rodeo clowns inciting violence against the President. Also continuing to use the 'logic' of Abouhalkah, the NAACP and those who comment on Show Me Progress or Daily Kos, the Occupy movement must be overtly racist for their practice of wearing Obama masks at various rallies as well.

In reaction to all of the hyperventilating, Missouri Rodeo Cowboy Association Mark Ficken stepped down. The clown- identified as Tuffy Gessling- has been hit with a lifetime ban from the Missouri State Fair on Monday. In the future, rodeo clowns who perform at the fair will be [I shit you not- NANESB!] required to undergo sensitivity training as well.

Meanwhile, in what's considered a mostly symbolic gesture, congressman Steve Stockman [R- TX 36] invited the clown to perform in Texas, adding that he'd be welcome any time.

Interestingly, the overwhelming majority of the articles describing events at the state fair rodeo rely heavily on quotes exclusively from Beam's perspective- although the Washington Post thoughtfully was able to track down other State Fair attendees who could vouch for the alleged racism of the mostly white crowd present at the time.

I must admit that I shrugged this off as a non-story when I heard it at first. However, the rebukes directed at the rural, blue-collar crowd from the media, coastal elitists and state party officials comes off as nothing less than tone-deaf, patronizing, thin-skinned hypersensitivity in their defense of a man who has been President for five years- yet anything bad that's happened on his watch is magically somebody else's fault. Seriously- look at the issues President Obama has made a priority and his accomplishments- how well do you think gun control, the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and the Obamacare individual mandate would go over in swing states like Virginia or Colorado- let alone the crowd in a darker red state like Missouri?

The same people who are wagging their fingers at the uneducated rubes and hillbillies in flyover land for guffawing at the antics of a rodeo clown in a President Obama mask raised were eerily quiet when novels and mockumentaries detailing a fictitious assassination of then-President George W Bush were published. They feel that Americans have an unspoken obligation to mock those in power- until they're the ones in power. Then talking about insensitive rodeo clowns becomes much more important than discussing the continuing turmoil in the middle east, the stagnant economy or those in charge using supposedly nonpartisan government agencies to harass political opponents.

I'm sure this could lead to renewed calls for a national 'dialogue' about race in this country, but to a liberal "dialogue" means you're supposed to quietly sit there and nod politely as they are informing you of how ignorant and racist you are. The 'dialogue' is also based on the somewhat laughable premise that folks in flyover country would be OK with higher taxes, gun control, gay marriage, abortion and shutting down the coal industry if it was a white liberal speaking in favor of all these things.

UPDATE- 6/16: Parson the pun, but when it comes to protecting Barack Obama from criticism, this isn't the Missouri Democrats' first rodeo. St Louis radio hostess Dana Loesch details Missouri's recent history of using the mechanisms of state to stifle dissent- starting with 'truth squads' comprised of sheriff's and prosecutors who were acting on behalf of then-candidate Obama in 2008.

Obama Warns Disabled Veterans That Sequester Cuts Could Endanger Their Benefits Before Having His Dog Flown to Martha's Vineyard

Before flying off to Martha's Vineyard for vacation, President Obama addressed the Disabled American Veteran's convention in Orlando, FL this weekend and warned attendees that veteran's benefits would be jeopardized by a prolonged fight between the White House and GOP led House of Representatives over budget sequestration.

President Obama took his case for ending the sequester to hundreds of disabled veterans Saturday, saying he protected their benefits from the “reckless” cuts to the federal budget but suggesting next year might be different.

“It’s hurting our military. I made it clear that your veteran’s benefits are exempt from this year’s sequester,” the president said to the applause of hundreds at the Disabled American Veterans' convention in Orlando, Fla. “But I want to tell you going forward the best way to protect the VA care you have earned is to get rid of this sequester altogether.”

The president but the blame squarely on Congress, which returns in about four weeks to work on a new federal budget and increasing the federal debt limit.

“We’ve got these reckless, across-the-board budget cuts called the sequester that are hitting a lot of folks hard,” Obama said. “Congress needs to come together and agree on a responsible plan that reduces our deficit and keeps our promises to our veterans and keeps our promises to future generations.”

The cuts went into effect in March after Congress and the White House failed to agree on a more balanced plan to cut government spending.

Some Republicans have meanwhile said the president shares in the responsibility, considering he signed the 2011 Budget Control Act that raised the debt ceiling and led to sequester.

The remarks to the DAV were made the same day President Obama flew to Martha's Vineyard. The First Family will be staying at a $7.6 million property owned by Chicago corporate financier and Democrat donor David Schulte until Aug 18th.

However, not everybody in the First Family was able to make it up on the same Air Force One flight. Bo, the President's dog, was apparently flown up from Washington DC separately on a V-22 Osprey along with equipment and additional White House staff. According to the UK's Telegraph this is the first time that the Osprey's have been used for a Presidential vacation of any kind.

Apparently the progressive blogosphere has been patting themselves on the back over how they 'debunked' the Telegraph's story about Bo being flown up when in fact Bo WAS flown up to Martha's Vineyard along with equipment and personnel. Still, the defenders of this Administration seem all to willing to overlook the fact that the President basically told a convention hall full of disabled US veterans that they'll lose their benefits if he doesn't get his way with the upcoming budget before jetting off to Martha's Vineyard where his wealthy donors will roll out the red carpet for him.

Labor Unions Start Turning Against Obamacare

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (R-CA), leaders of three major unions say that the health benefits of their members are now in peril thanks to the implementation of 0bamacare.

The leaders of three major U.S. unions, including the highly influential Teamsters, have sent a scathing letter to Democratic leaders in Congress, warning that unless changes are made, President Obama’s health care reform plan will “destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.”

If that’s not bad enough, the Affordable Care Act, if not modified, will “destroy the very health and wellbeing of our members along with millions of other hardworking Americans,” the letter says.

The union leaders point out that the employer mandate incentivizes companies shifting full time employees to part time status by cutting an employees hours to less than 30 a week. A number of employers have already announced they would be cutting back on employees' hours to avoid increased costs under President Obama's healthcare act. The reduced hours also mean reduced pay for the affected employees, who still have to purchase their healthcare under 0bamacare's individual mandate.

Further implementation of the plan will adversely affect group healthcare coverage between union labor and multiple companies within an industry, Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa claims.

Multi-employer plans, also called Taft-Hartley plans, are health insurance benefits typically arranged between a labor union in a particular industry, such as restaurants, and small employers in that industry. About 20 million workers are covered by these plans; 800,000 of Joseph Hansen’s 1.3 million UFCW members are covered this way.

Taft-Hartley plans, they write, “have been built over decades by working men and women,” but unlike plans offered on the ACA exchanges, unionized workers will not be eligible for subsidies, because workers with employer-sponsored coverage don’t qualify.

Obamacare’s regulatory changes to the small-group insurance market will drive up the cost of these plans. For example, the rules requiring plans to cover adult children up to the age of 26, the elimination of limits on annual or lifetime coverage, and the mandates that plans cover a wide range of benefits will drive premiums upward.

But the key problem is that the Taft-Hartley plans already provide generous and costly coverage; small employers now have a more financially attractive alternative, which is to drop coverage and put people on the exchanges, once the existing collective bargaining agreements are up.

Somehow, I suspect Hoffa and the other union presidents knew that 0bamacare would be the massive trainwreck they're saying it is, but were banking on some sort of carve-out or exemption for the unions written into the law. After lobbying tirelessly since 2009 for its passage and implementation and pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the campaign coffers of President Obama and liberal politicians who helped get the law passed, they're just now finding out there is no immunity for them for the law that they so vociferously backed. This leads me to wonder how well squandering hundreds of millions of dollars and years of political capital are going over with the union's rank-and-file workers.

Earlier this month, the White House announced a delay in enforcing the employer mandate provision of the healthcare law. Critics point out that the one year delay is technically illegal and the timing was suspect, pushing the mandate back until after the 2014 mid-term elections. The delay also applies only to businesses, the individual mandate is still intact.

Last month, Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius announced that the White House was in talks with the NFL and NBA to promote the upcoming 0bamacare rollout. By the end of  June, however, the National Football League announced that they would not be promoting 0bamacare. Spokesmen from the NHL and Major League Baseball also confirmed they were contacted by the administration regarding promoting enrollment in the healthcare law, but had yet to meet with any HHS officials.

White House Makes War on Coal Official

Front end loader at work at the Jellico Branch National Coal loadout in Turley, TN in June 2009. BA Harrison photo

Well- at least Obama is following through on one of his campaign promises from 2008-



In a speech at Georgetown University this week, President Obama outlined plans to bypass congress and implement strict new emissions regulations on new and existing power plants throughout the USA. The proposals include shutting down the remaining coal plants in the USA through regulatory fiat and freeing up an estimated $8 billion in guaranteed loans to startup green-energy firms [such as Solyndra, Spectra-Watt or Evergreen solar- all of whom filed for bankruptcy or shipped production offshore- NANESB!].

The speech was basically a big middle finger to coal country and energy-producing states like Texas, North Dakota or Oklahoma. Senator Joe Manchin (D- WV) said that the President's proposals were essentially a declaration of war on the American economy in an interview after Obama's Georgetown address.

Similar proposals- such as a cap and trade system- couldn't make it through a House and Senate controlled by the Democrats in Obama's first term, which was why the President announced his intention to bypass congress with these new regulations.

The speech comes less than a year after the media and supporters of President Obama laughably denied that President Obama was even waging a War on Coal or that GOP candidate Mitt Romney would be more harmful than Obama for the coal industry. However, now that Obama has secured a second term, White House officials can openly declare "a war on coal is exactly what's needed" without having to worry about any immediate electoral consequences.

In recent years, the coal industry has been besieged by competition from oil and natural gas while simultaneously being targeted from the left by well funded and politically connected environmental groups. Although coal is also used in the steelmaking and cement making processes, roughly 40% of the electricity generated in the USA comes from coal-fired power plants. Metallurgic coal is also exported to China, South Korea and Europe for steelmaking there, proposed coal export terminals have been facing increased political opposition in the Pacific Northwest. In the traditionally coal-centered economies of western Pennsylvania, West Virginia and eastern Ohio, natural gas drilling in the Marcellus and Utica shales [along with the EPA's previous regulatory burden- NANESB!] has brought more pressure on the coal industry there.

While the Administration's focus on crippling the coal industry may have seemed to benefit the oil and natural gas industries at first blush, Obama also weighed in on the Keystone XL pipeline during his Georgetown speech, saying that the project wouldn't be approved if he determined that it increased carbon emissions. Backers of the pipeline cite a State Department finding from earlier this year transporting the oil sands from Canada by pipeline would emit less greenhouse gases than shipping it by rail.

Unlike President Obama's vaunted 'green jobs', hiring has been brisk around the oilfields in North Dakota and western Texas in recent years and parts of western and central Pennsylvania have seen economic growth due to exploration and drilling activities around the Marcellus shale.

Democrat National Convention Organizers Claim $500,000 Worth of Electronics Lost or Stolen Months After Charlotte Convention

Months after the Democrat National Convention in Charlotte, NC wrapped up, Convention organizers have filed a police report for lost and stolen electronics worth $465,197. The pricetag for some of the missing has raised some eyebrows and led to speculation that the monetary value of the missing electronics has been vastly overstated in an attempt to collect more than the original price of the items from the insurance company.

'How inflated could it be?' you might be asking yourself. Try $75,537 for a MacBook Pro, $54,250 for a missing Blackberry or $30,503 for a lost iPhone, according to a report filed with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department in May.

Other items reported to have gone missing at the convention included two iPads worth around $15,000 each, laptops listed at $40,000, $34,000 and $25,000 each, and other miscellaneous items worth far more than their list price.

The report claimed that 40 items were reported lost and one item – the most highly valued one, the $75,000 MacBook Pro – was stolen.

The apparently inflated prices were reported in May with the Charlotte Police Department by Kenneth Hardy, deputy in-house counsel for the Democratic National Convention Committee, on behalf of the DNCC Host Committee.

While proprietary software and programs can increase the value of a laptop, Blackberry, smartphone or tablet, companies like Apple [NASDAQ- AAPL] list items like the missing 13 inch MacBook Pro starting at $1199, the police report file by the DNCC Host Committee values the same computer at $75,537- more than a year's wage for most Americans.

The police report filing comes after Duke Energy [NYSE- DUK] announced that they had completely written off a $10 million line of credit and loans for the Charlotte DNC host committee in February.

The Charlotte host committee had repaid just $1 million as of the end of the year and still owed $9 million in loans and another $1 million in outstanding bills, according to the latest filing with the Federal Election Commission.

The financial backing from Duke comes despite vows by Democratic Party officials to put on the convention without corporate cash.

Organizers broke that pledge after they were unable to hit their $36.7-million fundraising goal, drawing $5 million from a separate civic committee financed by companies such as Bank of America, Duke Energy and AT&T to rent the the Time Warner Arena for the event.

a Duke official said that at least $6 million of the money owed to the utility would be written off as a business expense.

Ricin Son- Mississippi Man In Custody After Allegedly Mailing Ricin to President Obama and US Senator

You know it's been a hell of a week when an Elvis-impersonating conspiracy theorist tries to poison the President of the United States and a US Senator was maybe the fourth or fifth most newsworthy item of the week.

An envelope addressed to Sen Ron Wicker (R- Mississippi) tested positive for the lethal poison ricin twice on Tuesday, according to the FBI. The fact that it came so soon after the Boston Marathon bombings heightened concerns over terrorism.

"This matter is part of an ongoing investigation by the United States Capitol Police and FBI," Wicker said. "I want to thank our law enforcement officials for their hard work and diligence in keeping those of us who work in the Capitol complex safe."

Terrance W. Gainer, the Senate sergeant-at-arms, said in an emailed message to Senate offices that the envelope to Wicker, a Republican, had no obviously suspicious outside markings and lacked a return address. It bore a postmark from Memphis, Tenn.

Mail from a broad swath of northern Mississippi, including the Memphis suburbs of DeSoto County, Miss., Tupelo, Oxford and the northern part of the Mississippi Delta region is processed and postmarked in Memphis, according to a Postal Service map. The Memphis center also processes mail for residents of western parts of Tennessee and eastern Arkansas.

Preliminary tests on a letter mailed to President Obama that was intercepted at an off-site facility later that day had also indicated traces of ricin. At a press conference in Tupelo, MS on Wednesday night, the Lee County Sherriff said that a local judge had also recieved a similar suspicious letter.

Authorities reportedly traced back the letters to a 45 year old Corinth, MS man named Paul Kevin Curtis who was arrested at his home by federal agents.

The letters to Obama and Wicker said: "To see a wrong and not expose it, is to become a silent partner to its continuance." Both were signed, "I am KC and I approve this message."

Ricky Curtis, who said he was Kevin Curtis' cousin, said the family was shocked by the news of the arrest. He described his cousin as a "super entertainer" who impersonated Elvis and numerous other singers.

"We're all in shock. I don't think anybody had a clue that this kind of stuff was weighing on his mind," Ricky Curtis said in a telephone interview.

Ricky Curtis said his cousin had written about problems he had with a cleaning business and that he felt the government had not treated him well, but he said nobody in the family would have expected this. He said the writings were titled, "Missing Pieces."

In 2000, Curtis was fired from the North Mississippi Medical Center and since then has claimed that he had uncovered a conspiracy by the hospital to harvest organs and body parts and sell them on the black market. Not surprisingly, NMMC denies the allegations made by the suspected ricin mailer.

According to The Hill Curtis once performed at a party attended by Wicker [who represented the district in the House at the time- NANESB!] and when Curtis' activites were less threatening.

Curtis- a registered Democrat- could face up to 15 years on charges of sending mail threatening the President and sending mail "containing threats to injure the person of others".

Mr Paul Goes To Washington- Sen Rand Paul (R-KY) Launches 12 Hour Filibuster to Hold Up Nomination of Brennan to CIA

Aided by colleagues in the US Senate, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul ended a nearly 13 hour filibuster in an attempt to hold up the nomination of John Brennan to the CIA Director's post in the early morning hours of Thursday. At issue was limits to the President's authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans. Earlier in the day, Attorney General Eric Holder did not rule out using aerial drone strikes to kill American citizens on US soil during questioning before the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday.

After Holder's testimony, Sen Paul vowed that he would do what we could to hold up Brennan's nomination until the Committee recieved clarity from the White House on their policy on using drone strikes against American nationals.

Business in the Senate ground to a halt Wednesday as Paul -- aided by colleagues from both parties -- launched into the filibuster as he tried to hold up the nomination over concerns about the president’s authority to kill Americans with drones.

Paul's filibuster was at least two hours longer than most in U.S. history, as most flame out around 10 hours. Paul finished speaking around 12:40 a.m. local time, and his filibuster lasted 12 hours and 52 minutes.

"My legs hurt. My feet hurt. Everything hurts right now," Paul told Fox News shortly after stepping off the Senate floor, saying he believes "we did the best that we could."

"I would be surprised if we didn’t hear back from the White House," Paul said.

In a show of support, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell came to the Senate floor and congratulated Paul for his "tenacity and for his conviction." McConnell also called Obama's choice of Brennan a "controversial nominee."

Paul is one of several lawmakers -- on both sides of the aisle -- who has raised concerns about the legal justification for launching drone strikes against Americans overseas. But Paul took to the floor after receiving a statement from Attorney General Eric Holder that creaked open the door to the possibility of using a drone to kill an American inside the United States.

“To allow one man to accuse you in secret -- you never get notified you've been accused,” Paul said on the floor. “Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?”

Paul said he’d be raising the same complaints under a Republican president.

“No one politician should be allowed to judge the guilt, to charge an individual, to judge the guilt of an individual and to execute an individual. It goes against everything that we fundamentally believe in our country,” he said.

Neither Holder or Brennan would explicitly rule out drone strikes against American nationals on US soil in earlier questioning on the matter. Paul was eventually aided by other Senate colleagues including Ted Cruz, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen Marco Rubio (R-FL), Sen Tim Scott (R-SC), Sen Ron Johnson (R-WI), Sen Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Sen Ron Wyden (D-OR). At one point, Cruz was reading aloud tweets in support of the Kentucky Senator. Paul offered to end the filibuster in exchange for a nonbinding resolution regarding drone strikes on US citizens on American soil, but Sen Dick Durbin (D-IL) objected to allowing a vote, so Paul continued. He eventually finished speaking at 12:40 ET on Thursday morning, with the filibuster lasting 12 hours and 52 minutes.

Rand Paul's filibuster was the first significant challenge to Obama by Senate Republicans since the president was being sworn in back in January 2009

The concerns over using drones against American civilians comes as the Department of Homeland Security announced the purchase of more than 21 million hollowpoint rounds on top of 2 billion rounds purchased in the last year. The government explained the purchase by saying that- like many other commodities- they got a better deal when they purchased ammunition in bulk [however, keep in mind that one doesn't merely target shoot with hollowpoints- NANESB!]. However, in addition to the bulk ammunition purchases the DHS also announced the acquisition of more than 2700 armored MRAP (Mine Resistant Ambush Protected) vehicles over the weekend.

Also on Wednesday, the Southern Poverty Law Center released a report cautioning that membership in 'extremist' anti-government groups is approaching an all time high. However, like the Department of Homeland Security, the SPLC has a fairly broad definition of 'extremists', lumping pro-life groups, veterans, Tea Party chapters or pro-gun organizations in the same category as neo-nazis and Ku Klux Klan while omitting militant organizations like the New Black Panther Party from their dire warnings about domestic terrorism.

White House Staff Clashes With Veteran Washington Post Reporter Bob Woodward

Interesting how liberals claim to be all about "speaking truth to power" right up until the liberals are the ones in power.

Bob Woodward, the Washington Post investigative journalist who (along with colleague Carl Bernstein) was credited with bringing down the Nixon Administration over the Watergate break-in and cover-up, claims that he's been harassed by senior White House officials over the upcoming sequester deadline. Mr. Woodward, a Washington Post editor who detailed the 2011 deal that led to the imminent spending cuts in his book "The Price of Politics," has said the Obama administration shifted its position by insisting that new tax revenue be part of any agreement to replace the cuts.

President Barack Obama's demand for new revenue is a central reason the two political parties haven't come to agreement on a strategy for replacing the cuts.

The dispute has drawn media attention in large part due to Mr. Woodward's status as one of the nation's best-known journalists, and because he said the White House pushed back aggressively when he questioned the administration's statement about the cuts.

Mr. Woodward has said Gene Sperling, the president's National Economic Council director, went too far by suggesting the journalist would "regret" reporting that the president had changed his position. "It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters you're going to 'regret' doing something that you believe in," Mr. Woodward said on CNN. "It's Mickey Mouse."

Hardly anybody's idea of a right-wing firebrand and bomb-thrower, Woodward has been a vocal critic of Obama's lack of leadership during the 2011 debt ceiling negotiations with the Republican-held House of Representatives, accusing the Administration of "moving the goalposts" on the terms of any budget or continuing resolution deal.

Woodward said he spoke out because he felt certain that this conduct from was limited to him and was likely used to control the conduct and writing of much younger and inexperienced journalists

Woodward is not alone- on Thursday, former Clinton aide and Washington Times columnist Lanny Davis said in a radio interview on WMAL that a senior White House official called his editor at the Times and threatened to revoke the White House press credentials of reporters from the newspaper if Davis continued writing columns critical of the President [pretty interesting considering that Davis' criticisms of this Administration has been much more mild and subdued compared to Woodward's- NANESB!].

To hardly anybody's surprise, Barack Obama's media cheerleaders have decided that despite his distinguished career, Woodward clearly didn't know what he was talking about and was in the wrong.

This would not be the first time the Obama Administration has attempted to deny access to reporters or media outlets that they deem hostile. In May 2011, the White House Press Office denied the Boston Herald access to a Massachusetts fundraiser after the newspaper published an op-ed on the economy and misery index authored by eventual Republican challenger Mitt Romney. A month prior, the White House had allegedly threatened to exclude the San Francisco Chronicle from covering any presidential events in the newspaper's coverage area after a Chronicle reporter videotaped a group of women who demanded the release of Wikileaks suspect Bradley Manning interrupting one of the President's speeches at a Bay Area fundraiser. During the 2008 campaign, Obama also had reporters from three newspapers that endorsed Sen John McCain kicked out of his campaign's press pool, claiming there was no longer any room for them on the campaign's aircraft. Yet shortly after the reporters from the Washington Post, Dallas Morning News and New York Post were kicked off, the campaign reportedly made room for reporters from Ebony and Essence magazines.

Taxpayers Take a Hit as Uncle Sam Prepares to Unload General Motors Shares.

Worth the paper it's printed on?

General Motors [NYSE: GM] announced earlier this week that it was purchasing back some 200 shares of their stock from the United States government. Although the deal is worth an estimated $5 billion, taxpayers are going to end up taking a loss on the auto bailout from nearly four yearsago that also saw Chrysler end up in an arranged marriage with Italian automaker Fiat.

The government got its shares as part of a $49.5 billion bailout of GM that began nearly four years ago. It saved GM from collapsing into financial ruin.

GM said it will pay $27.50 each for the 200 million shares, and it expects to close the deal by the end of the year. GM stock closed Tuesday at $25.49, and it shot up 7.1 percent in premarket trading Wednesday to $27.30.

However, the 'break even' price is said to be near $53 per share, meaning that the shares of General Motors would have to nearly double in order for the government to recoup their losses from General Motor's post-bailout IPO. As part of the initial terms of the bailout, Uncle Sam initially owned more than 60% of GM. General Motor officals said that part of the reason for the stock buyback from the Feds was to rid themselves of th 'Government Motors' stigma.

Canada and the province of Ontario also became stakeholders in GM during the 2009 bailout and officials announced they had no plans to divest their shares of GM in the short-term.

"We've always been clear about two things. One, that we will not have a fire sale - we will not sell the shares without getting the best value we can for Canadian taxpayers - and secondly, that we are a Conservative government. We are not interested in the long term in being shareholders in private corporations," [Finance Minister] Flaherty told reporters in Burlington, Ontario.

"Over time we do intend to divest. On the timing, I'll have to get back to
you."
Canada's federal government and the province of Ontario became shareholders of GM in 2009, when they contributed a combined C$10.8 billion ($10.89 billion) to a bailout to keep GM afloat. The U.S. government provided about US$50 billion.

Canada and Ontario's combined stake in General Motors is about 9%.

Barack Obama Wins Second Term; Opportunities To Say "I Told You So" Immediately Present Themselves

County by county results of 2012 Presidential Election with red indicating counties that went with Romney and blue indicating counties that went for Obama.

Despite earlier indications to the contrary, the American electorate had apparently decided to double down on the previous four years of failure and re-elect Barack Hussein Obama to a second term. And I do have to use some sort of qualifier here not only because of widespread military disenfranchisement as well as election-day dirty tricks in some cities, but also some swing state counties having voter turnout as high as 111%.

It should probably go without saying that I was extremely shocked and disappointed in the outcome of the 2012 Presidential election. However, science fiction author and Mormon Democrat Orson Scott Card probably summed it up better than I ever could.

Of course, it didn't take long for harsh reality to rear its ugly head. On Wall Street in the days leading up to the election, there was talk of the markets rebounding regardless of who won because it removed 'uncertainty' from the longer-term picture, that turned out to be only partially true as the Dow-Jones plunged 369 points in a single day. Shares in finance and defense companies took a beating, but not nearly as bad as coal stocks. Since election day, shares of Arch Coal [NYSE: ACI] have dropped 14.78%, Oxford Natural Resources [NYSE: OXF] declined in value by more than 22% and shares of James River Coal [NASDAQ: JRCC] have lost 42.77% of their value.

Curously, the media decided to rediscover the 'fiscal cliff' and debt ceiling issues about one day after the election- issues the Romney/Ryan campaign had demonstrated they were at least capable of taking seriously while President Obama went on Letterman and denied there was even a debt problem. Some media types simply attributed the stock market freefall to uncertainty over the looming fiscal cliff.

Hardly 24 hours after Obama declared victory, a number of companies including Boeing, Energizer, Research in Motion, Lightyear Networks, Hawker Beechcraft, the Providence Journal, UtahAmerican Energy and Corning had announced a fresh round of layoffs while Olive Garden and Red Lobster parent company Darden and grocery chain Kroeger stated they were cutting workers' hours in anticipation of a number of 0bamacare provisions going into effect. A number of smaller businesses had reportedly trimmed their full time staff to under 50 employees so they could remain exempt from 0bamacare.

Financial consultants and industry observers also note that most of the smaller local and regional banks in the USA are set to disappear now that Dodd-Frank is here to stay for the forseeable future, leaving behind a number of the larger 'too big to fail' financial institutions that were bailed out with taxpayer money in 2008.

Of course, why should the bad news be limited to the economy and markets? On Friday afternoon, CIA Director David Petraeus announced his resignation, citing an ongoing extramarital affair. Interestingly, I heard this news being broken over CNBC, who claimed their parent network's Andrea Mitchell broke the story [given the close working relationship between the Obama campaign and NBC network's, I wouldn't doubt if she was handed the scoop in exchange for running interference on the Administration's behalf while on the campaign trail- NANESB!]. The affair reportedly came to light when Pretraeus' mistress sent threatening e-mails to another woman close to the CIA director who in turned reported the threatining messages to the FBI. Coincidentally, Petraeus was scheduled to testify before a Senate hearing on the September 11th terrorist attacks on the US consulate in Benghazi.

To hardly anybody's surprise, Petraeus' indiscrecions were made known to the White House by the FBI well before the election, but the White House reportedly held off on forcing him out until after November 6th- much to the chagrin of the FBI.

Keep in mind, all that wonderful news came within 48 hours of the election. If the Obama Administration can cram this much scandal and bad news into a timeframe of just under two days, imagine what could happen with four years.

Pre-Emptive Shennanigans? Military Voters Purged From Rolls in Florida; Aircraft Carrying Absentee Ballots Crashes in Afghanistan

With the 2012 Presidential campaign winding down, a number of incidents concerning active-duty members of the United States Military attempting to vote via absentee ballot have come to light.

According to an October 26th Associated report, a cargo plane crashed while on approach to Shindad Air Force Base in Afghanistan on October 19th. The plane was carrying an estimated 4700 pounds of mail at the time, and military investigators believe that this likely included a number of absentee ballots on board. The plane was reportedly carrying inbound mail and the ballots on board had yet to be filled out. All the mail on board was destined for a single APO Zip code and the plane was a civilian aircraft from a company that had been contracted to fly in supplies and mail to the base.

Over in Florida, active-duty military voters from the Tampa area were startled to learn that they had been purged from the roll of registered voters while they were deployed overseas. Valrico resident and Navy Captain Peter Kehrig, who has been abroad for five years tells 10 News he feels cheated by a system that removed him from the rolls.

Florida State Law requires county supervisor of elections offices to perform regular "maintenance" on its voter rolls to eliminate voters who have been convicted of felonies, moved out of the county, or may have died.

Voters who miss two consecutive general elections (2010 and 2008, for instance) are mailed a letter to their residence warning them they will be removed from the rolls. But since the post office only forwards mail for six months, Kehrig never got it.

Meanwhile, a couple from Palm Beach County, FL but stationed at Camp Lejune in North Carolina said they had yet to recieve their absentee ballot from the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections. When reached for comment, an official with the Supervisor of elections told a local TV station they were 'working on it' but declined to elaborate.

According to a recent Military Times poll, Republican nominee Mitt Romney enjoyed support from active duty and reservist members of the United States Military by a 66% margin compared to 26% for President Obama.

During the 2000 Presidential Campaign, lawyers for the Gore campaign fought to get absentee ballots from overseas disqualified from the recount as many of them were from soldiers, Marines, sailors and Airmen stationed overseas who had voted in support of Bush.

More recently, elections officials in Illinois and New York state had failed to mail off absentee ballots in time for the 2010 mid-term elections in violation of the 2009 MOVE act.

[Hat tip: Wyatt Earp]

Belated Post-Debate Musings

Well, here it is a few days after the second (and second to last) of the 2012 Presidential Debates and lord knows most of the other places on my blogroll have already commented, but I figured I should weigh in before the third and final debate on Monday night.

I missed the first debate at Denver University earlier this month- partly because I typically work evenings and partly because I was becoming burned out on politics altogether [not because I think Mitt Romney is such a shoddy candidate, but because I find it hard to believe there are people out there willing to defend President Obama's record over these last 3 years- NANESB!].

Apparently I missed a doozy, though. Romney repeatedly hammered President Obama over his economic record while Obama looked disinterested and even asked the moderator Jim Lehrer to change the subject at one point. Since then, Romney has been surging in the polls and gaining ground or pulling away in a number of battleground states while Obama's high-profile supporters have been blaming everything from the high altitude in Denver to the notion that Obama was being 'nice' and pulling his punches.

There was also a debate last week between VP Joe Biden and Romeny's VP nominee Paul Ryan that seemed to de derailed by the Vice President's facial tics and wierd grinning at the most inappropriate times.

The second Presidential debate took place on Tuesday night at Hofstra University in Long Island. The town hall format for this debate was different from the first, with Obama and Romney taking questions from an audience in a Q and A session that was moderated by CNN's Candy Crowley. I missed the first part of the debate- and I was told after the fact I didn't miss much at the time- but I caught most of the second half on radio.

I caught the moment everybody [who was paying attention- NANESB!] was talking about after the fact. Fielding a question about last month's terrorist attacks in Libya. Almost as soon Romney pointed out that it took nearly 2 weeks for the White House to acknowledge the attacks were the result of a planned terrorist action, not a spontaneous demonstration over a YouTube video, Crowley jumped in and said that Romney was wrong and at the Presiden't urging, produced a transcript of a September 12th statement to the press in the Rose Garden of the White House before flying off to a fundraiser in Las Vegas. After the debate, Crowley later walked back her words and said the Romney's statement was in fact correct.

Ignoring the fact that either the President and his proxies were lying to the press about the first terrorist attack to have killed an American diplomat in more than 30 years or he was callous enough to jet off to a high-end Sin City fundraiser while our diplomatic mission in Benghazi was still burning, there was something else I noticed that seemed to be overlooked by others in light of Crowley's blatant attempt to run interference for Obama.

Referencing the theater shooting in Aurora, CO, a member of the audience asked both candidates about revisiting the assault-weapons ban, which had lapsed under George W Bush. Gov Romney gave a fairly lengthy answer that mentioned enforcing laws already already on the books, before bringing up the Department of Justice's Operation Fast and Furious gunwalking program. Romney basically took a minute or so to explain what exactly was Fast and Furious to the audience of undecided voters, but as soon as he started mentioning the Obama Administrations' role in the ATF's gunwalking program, Crowley interrupted the governor in an attempt to steer the discussion back towards domestic gun control policy [most likely the original intent of Fast & Furious, according to some- NANESB!].

Apparently taking a cue from Joe Biden, President Obama apparently decided to start smiling at REALLY inappropriate times before Crowley allowed him to speak. Obama's long and rambling answer sidestepped Fast and Furious altogether and instead talk about the need for more teachers and funding for community colleges.

This likely won't be the last we hear from Fast and Furious at the debates- the third and final debate is scheduled for Monday, October 22nd and is slated to revolve around foreign policy. While some feel that this may be a strong suit for the President, there is not only the matter of Fast and Furious, the Libya terrorist attacks as well as the proposed KeystoneXL pipeline from Canada, there's also President Obama's persistent refusal to meet with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, the continuing threat from Iran's nuclear program, an increasingly aggressive Russia and China and deteriorating situations in Pakistan, Yemen, Syria and Turkey

Benghazi Update- Secretary of State Clinton Accepts Responsibility For Lack of Security; Congressional Panel Interviews Witnesses; FBI Spends Only 12 Hours in Benghazi; British Weapons Unaccounted For

During an official visit to Peru on Monday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that she accepted responsibility for the security lapses leading up to the deadly terrorist attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans last month.

"I'm responsible for the State Department, for the more than 60,000 people around the world," she said. "The decisions about security are made by security professionals. But we're going to review everything to be sure we're doing what needs to be done in an increasingly risky environment."

She also addressed the question of a June explosion at the consulate in Benghazi that some have argued should have raised a red flag about security.

"I can't speak to who knew what," she said. "We knew there were security breaches and problems throughout Libya. That's something that came about as the aftermath of the revolution to topple Qaddafi, with so many militias formed, so many weapons loose. ... It was taken into account by security professionals as they made their assessments."

Clinton also seemed to dismiss accusations that the State Department and White House intentionally pushed a false narrative about a spontaneously-forming protest over a YouTube video serving as a catalyst for the deadly September 11, 2012 attacks for nearly two weeks- in spite of the fact there were no protests in Benghazi that night and the assailants used heavy weaponry such as mortars and RPGs.

While some have viewed this as President Obama 'throwing Hillary under the bus', Da Tech Guy makes the case that this was a shrewdly calculated move by Secretary of State Clinton that undermines Obama while heading off a number of stories about security breaches leading up to last month's attacks from a normally compliant media that was starting to get curious on the issue. The decision can also be viewed through the prism of a possible 2016 Presidential run by Clinton.

Meanwhile, US security and military officials testified before the House Oversight Committee last week, claiming that requests for additional security in Libya were rebuffed by higher-ups at the State Department. Lt Col Andrew Wood of the Utah National Guard commanded a 16-member Special Forces security detail responsible for protecting American officials in Libya after the collapse of the Ghdaffi regime- the team departed the country about a month before the attacks in Benghazi.

Wood told CBS News that he met daily with Stevens to discuss security.

"He was constantly concerned about the threats to not just himself but the entire staff there," Wood said.

Over the six months leading up to the attack on Stevens, Wood says the security situation in Libya deteriorated.

There were 13 threats or attacks in Tripoli and Benghazi, including two attempted assassinations of the British ambassador to Libya.

Wood said Stevens and his staff made the case for tightened security in emails and diplomatic cables. One by one, they lost three State Department security teams, their only airplane and, eventually, his squad too.

Wood said some of the security teams would have been in Benghazi on Sept. 11 to if they had been allowed to remain in Libya, and the four deaths might have been avoided.

Earlier this month, an FBI forensic team arrived at the site of the attacks in Benghazi- nearly three weeks after the attacks took place- and examined the area for a grand total of 12 hours. The site of the attacks had been left unsecured for nearly three weeks and the trek out to Benghazi was expected to yield little in the way of actionable information.

Britain's Foreign Office also reported that British weapons and vehicles left at the grounds of the US Consulate in Benghazi were unaccounted for after the September 11 attacks. The UK's envoy to Libya, Sir Dominic Dominic Asquith, survived an RPG attack that wounded two of his bodyguards in June and the Foreign Office decided to withdraw all British diplomats from the area shortly thereafter. According to testimony from Lt. Col Wood, the UK Foreign Office made arrangements with the US Consulate in Benghazi for safekeeping of the weapons and vehicles and retrieve them incrementally through multiple low-profile trips back to the area.

UPDATE- 10/15- AP is reporting that the White House is inexplicably announcing preperations to send a strike team into Libya.....yes- basically announcing a 'covert' mission to the public via mass media, apparently.

Benghazi Update: As Obama Addresses UN, White House And State Department Change Stories on Benghazi Attacks; Brazilian Court Orders Anti-Islam Video Removed From You Tube

One day after President Obama delivered a harsh rebuke of those who would insult Islam while offering a tepid- if nonexistent- defense of free speech, The Daily Beast published an in-depth article detailing how within a day of the September 11th, 2012 attacks on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed the Ambassador and three diplomatic and security staff, US intelligence officials knew that Al Qaeda affiliated operatives in Eastern Libya were behind the attacks.

The intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast did so anonymously because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. They said U.S. intelligence agencies developed leads on four of the participants of the attacks within 24 hours of the fire fight that took place mainly at an annex near the Benghazi consulate. For one of those individuals, the U.S. agencies were able to find his location after his use of social media. “We had two kinds of intelligence on one guy,” this official said. “We believe we had enough to target him.”

Another U.S. intelligence official said, “There was very good information on this in the first 24 hours. These guys have a return address. There are camps of people and a wide variety of things we could do.”

A spokesman for the National Security Council declined to comment for the story. But another U.S. intelligence official said, “I can’t get into specific numbers but soon after the attack we had a pretty good bead on some individuals involved in the attack.”

It’s unclear whether any of these suspected attackers have been targeted or arrested, and intelligence experts caution that these are still early days in a complex investigation.

The Daily Beast article was published days after an unnamed Libyan source claimed that there was no protest in front of the US Consulate just prior to the bloody assault.

An intelligence source on the ground in Libya told Fox News that there was no demonstration outside the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi prior to last week's attack -- challenging the Obama administration's claims that the assault grew out of a "spontaneous" protest against an anti-Islam film.

"There was no protest and the attacks were not spontaneous," the source said, adding the attack "was planned and had nothing to do with the movie."

The source said the assault came with no warning at about 9:35 p.m. local time, and included fire from more than two locations. The assault included RPG's and mortar fire, the source said, and consisted of two waves.

The account that the attack started suddenly backs up claims by a purported Libyan security guard who told McClatchy Newspapers late last week that the area was quiet before the attack.

"There wasn't a single ant outside," the unnamed guard, who was being treated in a hospital, said in the interview.

A spokesman for Libya's nascent post-Ghdaffi government said local eyewitnesses claimed that the attack came in two waves- RPG and machine gun fire directed at the consulate followed by mortar fire directed at one of the safehouses. The eyewitness accounts directly contradict statements from the Obama Administration and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the consulate was torched as a result of a spontaneous protest or heavily-armed Al Qaeda operatives blending in among a massive demonstration in front of the US consulate.

US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice had made the Sunday morning talk-show circuit repeating the White House claim that there was a spontaneous demonstration- directly contradicting a number of reports to the contrary.

Despite sending FBI agents and forensic teams to Libya to examine the crime scene and interview local witnesses, the FBI agents still hadn't reached the city of Benghazi more than 2 weeks after the consulate attacks took place- meaning that the scene of the assault has been compromised and even if forensic teams were arrived today, there would be little evidence of value remaining. In fact, a stringer for CNN reportedly discovered Ambassador Stevens' diary in a charred hallway in the Benghazi consulate- CNN subsequently came under harsh criticism for not mentioning their find earlier and using the journal as a source without notifying the ambassador's family or the State Department, although they eventually returned the diary to the Stevens family after transcribing information they thought was pertinent.



Since June of this year, there had been at least four previous attacks targeting foreign diplomats or NGOs in Benghzai, including an IED targetting the US Consulate and an RPG fired at a British diplomatic convoy. Ambassador Stevens reportedly expressed a growing concern in his journal about the deteriorating security situation in the eastern part of Libya.

Another indicator that the attack in Libya required a considerable amount of advanced planning was the fact that CIA documents regarding post-Ghdaffi contacts in Libya and detailed dossiers on Islamist militias were missing from the consulate after the attack. As one analyst put it "We got our eyes poked out".

The missing intelligence along with the timing of the attack and use of heavy weapons- as well as reports from local eyewitnesses that there were no massive protests leading up to the attack- would give even the most casual observer every indication that the murder of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans were the result of a calculated, well planned raid- not a random gaggle of Muslims irate over a YouTube clip who just happened to have heavy weapons on them when they decided to lash out at the USA.

ELSEWHERE- The Obama Administration's insistence that a YouTube trailer somehow provoked the violence that led to Ambassador Steven's has spread to Brazil, apparently. Not only that, it reportedly has the weight of a Brazilian court ruling behind it.

Sao Paulo-based judge Gilson Delgado Miranda gave the site 10 days to remove video clips from "Innocence of Muslims," which has angered many Muslims around the world by its depiction of the Prophet Mohammed and his followers as thugs. After the 10-day window, Google will face fines of $5,000 a day for every day the clips remain accessible in Brazil, according to the statement on the court's website.

The company did not respond to requests Wednesday for comment about the case.

The "Innocence of Muslims" ruling resulted from a lawsuit by a group representing Brazil's Muslim community, the National Union of Islamic Entities, which claimed the film violates the country's constitutional guarantee of religious freedom for all faiths.

In a statement on the group's website, Mohamad al Bukai, the head of religious matters for the Sao Paulo-based organization, hailed the ruling.

"Freedom of expression must not be confused with giving disproportionate and irresponsible offence, which can provoke serious consequences for society," al Bukai said.

Attempts by courts and officials in several countries to remove the clips have revived the debate over freedom of expression.

The judge in the Brazilian case acknowledged that banning content from sites like YouTube is a thorny issue, according to excerpts of the ruling cited in the National Union of Islamic Entities' statement.

"This type of jurisprudence cannot be confused with censorship," Miranda is quoted as writing. In the excerpts, the judge defines censorship as "the undue restriction of the civic consciousness."

YouTube routinely blocks video in specific countries if it violates laws there. It also removes video deemed to infringe copyrights, show pornography, contain hate speech or violate other guidelines. However, none of those restrictions had been applied in Brazil to the "Innocence of Muslims."

Google is now selectively blocking the video clips in countries that include Libya and Egypt. Google has said it made the decision to block the video in such places due to "the sensitive situations" there.

Galperin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation questioned whether a ban was really necessary in Brazil, which has seen no protests or rioting that have swept the Muslim world in recent weeks.

"The notion that there's a need to take it down to prevent violence is ludicrous," she said.

Miranda's ruling came on the same day that Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff addressed the United Nations and urged an end to prejudice against Muslims.

In a separate ruling, a top official for Google Brazil was ordered detained and fined due to a breach of Brazilian electoral law. The arrest of Fabio Jose Silva Coehlo by federal police in Brazil was initially reported as stemming from the Innocence of Muslims short film.

Earlier this month, the White House had requested Google remove the movie.