Dumba** Maxine Waters Inflates Sequester to ‘170 Million’ Jobs Lost

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) had a dire prediction for America about sequestration, claiming that 170 million jobs would be lost as a result of the across-the-board cuts. But according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are only about 140 million jobs in the whole country.

During a press conference on February 28, Waters told reporters of a visit by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke who told members of congress that sequestration is not the optimal way to cut the federal budget.

Talking of Bernanke’s comments, Waters claimed that “if sequestration takes place, that’s going to be a great setback. We don’t need to be having something like sequestration that’s going to cause these jobs losses, over 170 million jobs that could be lost.”

However, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table A-9, Selected Employment Indicators, in January of 2013 there were 141,614 million jobs in the current American economy.

Using Waters’ math, the US would lose about 30 million more jobs than it had to start with.

Yesterday we did have Mr. Bernanke in our committee and he came to tell us what he’s doing with quantitative easing and that is trying to stimulate the economy with the bond purchases that he’s been doing because he’s trying to keep the interest rates low and create jobs–and he said that if sequestration takes place, that’s going to be a great setback. We don’t need to be having something like sequestration that’s going to cause these jobs losses, over 170 million jobs that could be lost–and so he made it very clear he’s not opposed to cuts but cuts must be done over a long period of time and in a very planned way rather than this blunt cutting that will be done by sequestration.

Read more liberal garbage and stupidity here.

Mark Levin Calls Out “Little Weasel” Eric Cantor

Why Are Some Liberals Freaking Out Over What Happened at the Supreme Court on Wednesday?

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a question not touched for nearly 50 years – namely, the question of whether parts of the landmark Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 still stand the test of constitutionality, and specifically a section that has long plagued states’ rights advocates.

Unfortunately for liberals, who view the VRA as one of their landmark legislative achievements, the answer to that question may well be “no,” as many court analysts seem to have viewed the oral arguments in the case as either an unadulterated disaster for the government, or at least as a strong sign that a majority of the court is willing to consider striking down at least part of the act.

And to add to the Left’s consternation, Justice Antonin Scalia, known for his strongly worded opinions, attacked the motives behind reauthorizing the supposed touchstone of racial equality for being motivated by Congressional cynicism about race in an impromptu speech. Here’s Scalia’s statement from the transcript of the oral argument:

Well, maybe it was making that judgment, Mr. Verrilli. But that’s — that’s a problem that I have. This Court doesn’t like to get involved in — in racial questions such as this one. It’s something that can be left — left to Congress. The problem here, however, is suggested by the comment I made earlier, that the initial enactment of this legislation in a — in a time when the need for it was so much more abundantly clear was — in the Senate, there — it was double-digits against it. And that was only a 5-year term.

Read more here.

Gov. Brewer BLASTS White House: “They’re Releasing Illegal Criminals… Who’s Running This Country?”

Why Totalitarians Release Prisoners

From the Rush Limbaugh website:

RUSH: I tell you, I’m finding myself in a difficult situation here, because I know that certain words and phrases happen to turn people off in this country. For example — it’s been this way a long time — in this country and in the media today, if you say to somebody, “That person over there’s a communist,” you lose ‘em. That doesn’t work. So you say, “Okay, socialist.” Well, okay, that may make more impact. Call ‘em a totalitarian or a statist, they still don’t want to hear it.

But it’s challenging because that’s exactly what’s happening. Barack Obama is employing tactics that have been used by people like Nicolae Ceausescu, Saddam Hussein, and Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro released hundreds of thousands of just the most horrible characters from his prisons and they infested south Florida in the Mariel Boatlift — and the same thing with Ceausescu and releasing his prisoners. Not all of them are political. Some of them were hardened criminals.

I mean, Ceausescu was trying to pollute Western Europe. He wasn’t sending a bunch of freedom fighters to Western Europe. He was polluting it. Castro was trying to pollute south Florida. He was trying to corrupt it, and the United States in general. Saddam Hussein was trying to corrupt Iraq and Baghdad by letting his most hardened criminals go. It was a punishment, a punishment to the citizens of Iraq for not supporting him, for being complicit in the forthcoming US invasion.

So what happens is, Ceausescu… Well, use the Mariel Boatlift. What happened in this country was the Mariel Boatlift — and, of course, the nice, compassionate people of America welcomed them in at first. “They’re escaping the dungeons of Fidel Castro! These are people seeking freedom, and we are people of freedom.” The same with Ceausescu’s release, and the same thing with Castro’s and Saddam’s. They end up corrupting the places that they go, and that’s the purpose of it.

‘No question’ Obama should be impeached

Rock legend and gun-rights defender Ted Nugent says there’s “no question” President Obama should be impeached, and he’s blasting CNN anchor Piers Morgan as an “effective idiot” in the battle over the Second Amendment.

Referring to Obama, Nugent says, “There’s no question that this guy’s violations qualify for impeachment. There’s no question.”

He blasted “the criminality of this government, the unprecedented abuse of power, corruption, fraud and deceit by the Chicago gangster-scammer-ACORN-in-chief. It’s so diabolical … .”

Read more here.

Our Child of a President Has Committed an Impeachable Offense

RUSH: You know, this really is unprecedented. It’s not getting any attention. It’s not getting any commentary whatsoever. It’s barely even being reported. But, I mean, this is serious stuff. The president of the United States has opened up the jails. The president of the United States, because of budget cuts which have not happened yet, has released 500 or so illegal immigrants, and, by definition, of law, they are criminals.

We mentioned this late in the program yesterday. Hundreds of illegal alien criminals have been released from illegal alien jail. Janet “Big Sis” Napolitano says that because the sequester is gonna cut 1% of their $2 billion detention budget, they will no longer be able to afford to detain as many as 30,000 criminals. Now, not all of those have been released yet. This is the president of the United States. Look, folks, I understand that we’ve gotta be very careful here in how we approach criticism of Obama, but, man, this is unprecedented. This is actually action that will do harm.

Now, I know Obama thinks that he’s harming Republicans. This is exacting harm on the country, and it’s entirely unnecessary. None of these so-called budget cuts are necessary. None of this panic is necessary. It is not even going to be felt in reality if the sequester actually does happen. We read the three-paragraph report from the AP on this near the end of the program yesterday, but there hasn’t been much mention of it in the rest of the Drive-By Media. I’ve only seen one article buried in the New York Times on a report from Fox News. Fox is reporting 500 illegal alien criminals were released in Pima County, Arizona, alone. Apparently Obama never gets tired of sticking it to Arizona.

The New York Times reported that there were reports of releases in more than a dozen other locations all over the country. Can you imagine any other president doing this in a fit of pique? “Okay, I’ll show you.” You know, folks, I’m gonna tell you something. In what used to be considered, if we can remember this far back, normal, sane times, this is an impeachable offense. This is in direct violation of the oath of office. Defend and protect the Constitution of the United States and the people. We’re opening the doors of prisons before the sequester has even happened, before there have even been any budget cuts. This is so childish, except the consequences are real for people that live nearby these detention centers. This is on-the-ground, hard, cold reality.

Read more here.

Columbine Victim Asks Obama “Whose Side Are You On?” : Freedom Outpost

Columbine Victim Asks Obama “Whose Side Are You On?” : Freedom Outpost.

734

Evan Todd, a man who was shot and wounded at Columbine High School in 1999 as Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold conducted one of the most stunning and devastating mass school shootings in the history of America, penned a letter to Barack Obama which called upon him to stand with freedom and with the people and not with thugs and criminals. Todd made logical arguments against gun bans, universal background check and high capacity magazine bans. Ultimately, he asked Obama “Whose side are you on?”

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/columbine-victim-asks-obama-whose-side-are-you-on/#ixzz2M7dAnCD0

Obama’s DOJ targets religious freedom, again

The Obama administration has launched another challenge to the rights of individuals to act on their religious beliefs, this time focusing on a family of homeschoolers.

The administration already has argued in legal cases against the Obamacare contraceptive mandate that religious business owners can be forced to pay for abortifacients for their workers in violation of their religious beliefs.

Repeatedly, the government has referenced its dedication to the freedom of “worship,” altering the First Amendment’s assurances of freedom of religion.

Now comes a case in which the administration is seeking to return a family of homeschoolers to Germany, where they likely would be persecuted for their religious objections to the mandatory public school system.

Attorneys for the Justice Department are arguing before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a government has every right to demand that parents send their children to public schools, even if the schools’ teaching conflicts with the family’s religious beliefs.

Michael Farris, founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association, found the position adopted by the Obama administration startling.

The administration contends subjecting children to those teachings for several dozen hours a week doesn’t violate any religious or human rights.

“Does anyone think that our government would say to Orthodox Jewish parents, we can force your children to eat pork products for 22-26 hours per week because the rest of the time you can feed them kosher food?” he wrote in a website commentary.

Read more here.

See police confiscate guns from Americans

Is it possible – or even imaginable – that in the United States of America, police could go door to door and confiscate citizens’ legally owned firearms?

To many, such a concern is conspiratorial and evidence of paranoia. They might be surprised to learn that not only has outright gun confiscation of legally purchased weapons already occurred in a major way in the U.S., but public officials in some areas are right now attempting to pass legislation to allow more of the same.

Alas, with the national furor over multiple new gun restrictions being proposed by President Obama via “executive action,” in Congress, in state legislatures and in municipalities, the plan being forwarded by officials in Guntersville, Ala., this week drew scarcely a mention in the media.

Mayor Leigh Dollar says that in case of an emergency or crisis, she wants police officers to have the authority to “disarm individuals, if necessary.”

“We are not trying to infringe upon anyone constitutional rights whatsoever,” she says. “It’s just to protect the workers working out there in a disaster.”

The ordinance is up for debate at the city council meeting next week.

Such blatant grabs for guns are not new in the U.S. Less than a year ago, the Second Amendment Foundation fought a court battle over a North Carolina regulation that banned firearms and ammunition outside the home during any declared emergency, and won.

Read more here.