published Thursday, June 13th, 2013

The Castle

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

234
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
alprova said...

Well...this one should generate a great deal of interest, although I'm sure we've hashed out the subject quite well already.

In the meantime, Edward Snowden is still on the run for his treasonous choices.

June 13, 2013 at 12:11 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Snowden can't run far enough, or fast enough.

June 13, 2013 at 12:19 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

IT'S PUBLIC vs PRIVATE

Everyone seems to be shocked, SHOCKED, to 'discover' the government engaged in surveillance and data mining, but the boys and girls at the NSA are lightyears behind Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Amazon.

I'm not thrilled with the way the 4th Amendment has been shredded over the past seven years, but the NSA was able to stop a plot to place 12 separate bombs on NYC subway cars. We've known all along that the Patriot act allows the government access to our phone calls, emails, and internet. Snowden just detailed some sensitive information for the benefit of nut jobs who rejoice in killing Americans.

I get a kick out of the nitwit brigade complaining that 1) NSA failed to stop the Boston bombing and 2) government has gone too far in violating our privacy.

June 13, 2013 at 1:14 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Ha.

Osama's home was his castle? The WTC was a castle? The court that supervises these supervisors received 33,000 requests for surveillance and denied 11 of them?

b'48, the Russians warned us about the Boston bombers, and after claiming asylum here from Chechnya one of them went back and spent six months there. That should've enabled the NSA to stop them without keeping records of all our phone calling. As often, big government did no good. The wounded one wasn't found by the martial lawyers, either, but by a boat owner.

Our President's idea of politics is to win a knife fight by using a gun: an IRS gun. So however nice the NSA surveillance might be in theory--and theory does warn us that sooner or later some bad guy will be running the show--a guy who abuses his power like that cannot be trusted with what the NSA is doing. IF the NSA is squeaky clean and its work necessary, however, President Obama could offer to let the GOP run the NSA--he'll ask the Democrats to vote for whatever the GOP majority wants, and promise to sign it, and appoint whatever NSA administrator(s) the GOP asks for--and, hey, he'll be showing he's clean, he'll be getting done what the country needs done...baby crying. Good night.

June 13, 2013 at 2:29 a.m.
EaTn said...

Remember the common party line home phones? The Bush Patriot Act has turned-out to be worse than the old nosey neighbor who used to listen-in on all our party-line phone conversations. Often I had a hot phone conversations with my high-school girlfriends and there were sometime three heavy breathers over the line. Yes, it was Bush/Cheney who installed this nosey neighbor program.

June 13, 2013 at 7:07 a.m.
degage said...

EaTn, and Obama administration took it to the next level.

June 13, 2013 at 7:21 a.m.
Pokerface said...

Seems like this subject has been beaten into the ground on this forum, but it is a little refreshing to see a debate that isn't so partisan. No person on here is gonna change anyone's mind on 99% of the debates on here. But I think this one falls in the 1% category. I find myself straddling the fence on this issue.

June 13, 2013 at 7:32 a.m.
EaTn said...

degage said... " and Obama administration took it to the next level."

I think it's been at the next level for the past ten years, as technology allowed. Obama did limit some of the more extreme programs that Bush/Cheney initiated.

June 13, 2013 at 7:43 a.m.
conservative said...

What next, a peeping government tom, a man on a slide under a microscope or even better a fake repairman planting a bug?

June 13, 2013 at 7:57 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

At his 18th fundraiser of the yr, Obama declared that governing the nation is his sole priority. criminy

June 13, 2013 at 8:48 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Who said this?

"Truth is Treason in the Empire of Lies!"

June 13, 2013 at 8:48 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Alprova says: “I'm sure we've hashed out the subject quite well already. In the meantime, Edward Snowden is still on the run for his treasonous choices.”

Your early morning post reminds of a commentary that I read yesterday. Its author makes some interesting observations about leaks, leakers and trash brigades: “The willingness of the government to punish leakers is inversely proportional to the leakers’ rank and status.”

“Leakers like Snowden, Manning and Ellsberg don’t merely risk being called narcissists, traitors or mental cases for having liberated state secrets for public scrutiny. They absolutely guarantee it. In the last two days, the New York Times’s David Brooks, Politico’s Roger Simon, the Washington Post‘s Richard Cohen and others have vilified Snowden for revealing the government’s aggressive spying on its own citizens, calling him self-indulgent, a loser and a narcissist.

Yet even as the insults pile up and the amateur psychoanalysis intensifies, keep in mind that Snowden’s leak has more in common with the standard Washington leak than should make the likes of Brooks, Simon and Cohen comfortable. Without defending Snowden for breaking his vow to safeguard secrets, he’s only done in the macro what the national security establishment does in the micro every day of the week to manage, manipulate and influence ongoing policy debates. Keeping the policy leak separate from the heretic leak is crucial to understanding how these stories play out in the press.

Secrets are sacrosanct in Washington until officials find political expediency in either declassifying them or leaking them selectively. It doesn’t really matter which modern presidential administration you decide to scrutinize for this behavior, as all of them are guilty. For instance, President George W. Bush’s administration declassified or leaked whole barrels of intelligence, raw and otherwise, to convince the public and Congress making war on Iraq was a good idea. Bush himself ordered the release of classified prewar intelligence about Iraq through Vice President Dick Cheney and Chief of Staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby to New York Times reporter Judith Miller in July 2003.

Sometimes the index finger of government has no idea of what the thumb is up to. In 2007, Vice President Cheney went directly to Bush with his complaint about what he considered to be a damaging national security leak in a column by the Washington Post’s David Ignatius. “Whoever is leaking information like this to the press is doing a real disservice, Mr. President,” Cheney said. Later, Bush’s national security adviser paid a visit to Cheney to explain that Bush, um, had authorized him to make the leak to Ignatius.”

http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/06/11/edward-snowden-and-the-selective-targeting-of-leaks/

June 13, 2013 at 8:48 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Orwell

June 13, 2013 at 8:49 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

alprova said... "Well...this one should generate a great deal of interest, although I'm sure we've hashed out the subject quite well already."

Yeah, nothing to see here, move along...

June 13, 2013 at 8:50 a.m.
fairmon said...

Pokerface said...

I find myself straddling the fence on this issue.

VP Biden is right there with you. He was very outspoken against the Patriot Act but is now a supporter. A lot more than 1% are not sure but most always go with their party line and their puppet master.

June 13, 2013 at 8:56 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Fairmon: Remember, Plugs Biden was recruited as the foreign policy specialist for BHO. Now that's funny right there

June 13, 2013 at 9:06 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Obama Restricts Spying In Mosques While Spying Everywhere Else

news.investors.com

Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover sting operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.

The panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel's formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

June 13, 2013 at 9:33 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

blackwater48 said... "Everyone seems to be shocked, SHOCKED, to 'discover' the government engaged in surveillance and data mining, but the boys and girls at the NSA are lightyears behind Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Amazon."

That's funny. Us tinfoil hat people were talking about this years ago and the sheeple were calling us conspiracy nuts.

No shock here. Vindication.

June 13, 2013 at 9:39 a.m.
limric said...

BRP,

An answer to your question:

A certain libertarian(ish) senator & one time presidential candidate summarily dismissed by the Republican intelligencia?? ........

Or Dick Cheney?? LOL.

June 13, 2013 at 9:43 a.m.
Leaf said...

I don't think Snowden is a traitor. He did what he did not for monetary gain, or to benefit another country. He is a patriot who thinks the government is going down the wrong path. And unlike most of us, he was in the position and had the guts to do something about it. And, he leaked in such a way that no assets were put in harms way.

By the way, the assertion that Prism thwarted a bombing has been widely disputed. I'm not sure we'll really know the truth about that.

June 13, 2013 at 9:48 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Glenn Greenwald: Media Filled with 'Slavishly Partisan…Democrats'

by John Nolte:

Greenwald told Business Insider late Tuesday night that he thinks some left-leaning members of the media — such as Time magazine's Joe Klein and The New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin — have shifted stances on surveillance and civil liberties for "principle-free, hackish, and opportunistic" reasons.

"I'm not surprised," Greenwald said in an email. "I've been amazed and disappointed for a long time at how the most slavishly partisan media Democrats who pretended to care so much about these issues when doing so helped undermine George Bush are now the loudest apologists and cheerleaders for these very same policies. …

"To call them principle-free, hackish, and opportunistic is to be overly generous."

June 13, 2013 at 9:50 a.m.
chatt_man said...

Now that it's been reported that Snowden has told that the US has been conducting cyber attacks against China, and methods used to do it, I'm not so sure i could call him a patriot.

June 13, 2013 at 9:54 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Where was BHO the night of Benghazi attack? Asking for a friend.

June 13, 2013 at 9:57 a.m.
Leaf said...

By the way, remember the Valerie Plame affair? That was way more evil than what Snowden did.

WHAT!?!?!?! The US and China engage in cyberattacks? I'm shocked. That's not even close to being a secret.

June 13, 2013 at 10:07 a.m.
chatt_man said...

While it's true everyone knows the US and China have been engaging in a cyber battle, China has never had anyone on their soil admitting it and that could maybe tell them as much about it. The fact that he appears willing to share that with them removes the patriot label from him for me.

June 13, 2013 at 10:24 a.m.
Maximus said...

I was contacted by the NSA and asked to stop calling President Obama a pimp. I politely told them to GO F THEMSELVES AND THAT NOT ONLY IS OBAMA A LYING MARXIST PHONY ELITIST WELFARE PIMP BUT THAT AG ERIC HOLDER IS BARRY'S WHORE!

So there you go Valarie Jarret you can suck my big ole fat Republican Tea Party dick! Boo ya lying faggot Democrats! Free speech is AWESOME!

June 13, 2013 at 10:31 a.m.
Leaf said...

Maximus, classy as always.

June 13, 2013 at 10:48 a.m.
Leaf said...

chatt_man, you're supposing that he might talk to them about it and that he might be able to tell them something they don't know already. He wasn't a hacker for the NSA. It's a pretty specialized field. You're judging him for something you think he might do.

Now, if he does give classified info to the Chinese voluntarily, that would change things. But so far there is no indication of that.

June 13, 2013 at 10:53 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

The finest interpretative representation of ‘PlainTruth’s’ persona in the known universe.

June 13, 2013 at 11:24 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Very nice, rat. Too much time on your (left) hand?

June 13, 2013 at 11:29 a.m.
mtngrl said...

It seems Fox "News" and Hannity had no problem with the NSA data mining program when Bush was doing it, then the rhetoric TOTALLY changed now that it is Obama:

June 13, 2013 at 11:34 a.m.
cheezy123 said...

Lame toon.

June 13, 2013 at 11:51 a.m.
Maximus said...

Everyone knows that it is actually Barrack Obama that lives in Valarie Jarrets Chicago basement. Valarie writes Obama's teleprompter speeches and runs the greatest political show in American politics. That is ALL it is folks..........a show. Obama's immigration vision for America is to create a permanent underclass, larger than the working tax paying middle class, that will continually sign up for entitlements including free healthcare and vote Democrat. Giving amnesty to 30 million illegals will also help Obama move Obamacare to his dream of a single payer government run system seizing 1/6 th of the private sector economy. Bye bye, BCBS of TN. Those like me with a LOT of cash will not be affected. We will be on Obama's elitist A list guest list. :)$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

June 13, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.
cheezy123 said...

Who cares about what the nut job Hannity has to say? listen to the vice president talk his garbage when Bush was in office about the NSA above.

June 13, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

MountainGrl....You mean sorta like Biden?

June 13, 2013 at 12:04 p.m.
mtngrl said...

Hannity has a much larger audience which actually hangs on every word he utters and repeats those words many times on this forum with blind faith...

unlike Biden

June 13, 2013 at 12:08 p.m.
mtngrl said...

Most Democrats overall were against the program under Bush, and are still against it under Obama. Similar to the Libertarians.

The Repubs are the ones blowing in the wind on this issue, depending on who is in office.

June 13, 2013 at 12:11 p.m.
cheezy123 said...

Mtngrl are you just another mindless leftwing drone?? Silly me of course you are. Posting Hannity rhetoric is sad, he is nothing more than a commentator what he thinks or talks about does not affect our lives. So why post you tube videos of him when there far more important people that are such hypocrits on this subject including the president.

June 13, 2013 at 12:13 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Mttngrl....weak, weak, weak. Did Biden do a 180, or didn't hr?

June 13, 2013 at 12:14 p.m.
Maximus said...

Clay Bennett, I know right, it's Bush's fault. You are a complete stoner idiot! No wonder the only place you can get a job is low expectations Chatt A Boo Boo! Obama's NSA and IRS programs make the Nazi's look like a Disney Theme Park!

June 13, 2013 at 12:26 p.m.
tifosi said...

It is quite entertaining to see the desperation of the Teabaggers. They are grasping for anything, including profanity laced diatribes that only exposes their sense of losing.

June 13, 2013 at 12:45 p.m.
tifosi said...

The rats are leaving the ship Maximus. Can you swim?

June 13, 2013 at 12:47 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

No desperation here, tifosi. No profanty either.

June 13, 2013 at 12:47 p.m.
tifosi said...

The GOP is dying. Even Bob Dole can't recognize it. Time for the GOP to kick the teabaggers to the curb if they want to survive.

June 13, 2013 at 12:50 p.m.
cheezy123 said...

Just like it is time for the Dems to kick the radical liberals out of their party. Last time I checked the GOP still runs the house of rep's, and nobody will see that change next year, so enjoy the gridlock nothing significant will be accomplished for the next few years.

June 13, 2013 at 1:02 p.m.
EaTn said...

cheezy123----gridlock is good, party rule is bad.

June 13, 2013 at 1:06 p.m.
Leaf said...

There are a certain percentage of people who identify with party first and issues second, if at all. Some on the left that reviled Bush for wiretapping are OK with Obama doing it. Some on the right that were OK with Bush doing it are having a cow now that Obama's doing it.

There are many from both (all) sides however, that don't like secret courts and spying on citizens no matter which party is doing it.

Hannity and Biden are, of course, partisans.

June 13, 2013 at 1:06 p.m.

Yes, let's have a country with just one party, the Democrat Party. Boobs! Obamacare is imploding with each passing day and 3 scandals going on. The truth of the matter is both parties aren't worth much, they lie, they're hypocritical and do nothing about the problems we have. The border is the perfect example. Just f'ing secure it. They dance around it, and come up with ridiculous solutions that are based on securing the "hispanic vote". Cowards and liars.

Regarding the cartoon, Obutthead, that tyrant, has run with the patriot act and can't stop himself. He's a bully and bullies dream about control.

June 13, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.
cheezy123 said...

EaTn- I totally agree the last time there was as a party majority we ended up with nearly a 3,000 page horrendous health care law that will be enforced by the most hated and corrupt agency in government.

June 13, 2013 at 1:14 p.m.
Maximus said...

Boy it sure seems like a LOT of Obama supporters are getting shot every night in Chattanooga. Is our new, very nerdy mayor a Democrat? Democrat mayors always have a high nightly murder rate in their cities. Just sayin. Glad I have a carry permit!

June 13, 2013 at 1:23 p.m.
cheezy123 said...

53 shootings already in Chattanooga this year. How many of those were committed by someone with a carry permit? And how many were committed by someone who should have never had a gun to start with?

June 13, 2013 at 1:36 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Leaf 1:06. Accidentally swerved into the truth.

June 13, 2013 at 1:44 p.m.
tifosi said...

Young GOP know the problem:

"They come across as hostile hateful scolds. The rhetoric employed by many Republicans has turned off many younger voters, who want solutions to problems, not the blame game and excuses. Hateful rhetoric and a dismissive is what younger voters associate the GOP with."

The young GOP activists said swing voters who responded to two surveys lambasted the party as "closed-minded, racist, rigid, [and] old-fashioned."

http://theweek.com/article/index/245055/college-republicans-have-figured-out-whats-wrong-with-the-gop

June 13, 2013 at 1:57 p.m.
tifosi said...

One Republican operative had a great line yesterday that summed up the GOP problem: "We're a Mad Men party in a Modern Family world."

That sums it up quite well. The country is changing and the Republicans need to adapt or they'll be left behind in the dustbin of history.

June 13, 2013 at 2:03 p.m.
Leaf said...

Simplistic Truthiness said, "Leaf 1:06. Accidentally swerved into the truth."

If I ever need you to tell me what the truth is, I'll know I'm ready for the Alzheimer's ward. You're one of the most partisan characters on this forum.

June 13, 2013 at 2:05 p.m.
tifosi said...

In order to survive, a party has to adjust to the realities of where and who voters are, it can't expect voters to conform to the ideology and mythology of the party itself.

The Republican Party has convinced itself that there is a silent majority of American voters who are anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, anti-union, anti-gay, anti-tax and pretty much anti-everything. It's not true, and the party either has to modify it's hard-right stands on issues, or go the way of the Whigs. And demographically, the Grand Old Party has become the Grumpy Old Men Party.

The fast-changing demography of America, and particularly of key states, is killing a party whose appeal is directed mainly at white people who think America is going down the tubes because of "all those other people." The Republican Party will either change, or it will become uncompetitive in national elections. I wouldn't bet a lot of money on the former.

June 13, 2013 at 2:05 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Posting the Integrity of Hannity video is a truly patriotic service to the nation Mtngrl. A round of applause.

[ That Fred Flintstone lookalike is THE BIGGEST hypocrite/chickenhawk in the country - and a DICK!
He stands out (but not much) from the other hollow skulled right-wing blowhards reciting GOP talking points by the fact that he ‘pretends’ to listen to opposing views. In instances where a guest isn’t a right wing/Tea Party chowder head like him, and actually throws down with a counter argument - and bitch slaps him like the little girl he is; he immediately puts an end to it via his patented methods of: A) Disrespectful interruption; B) yelling over his opponent like a maniac; C) changing the subject; D) lying; or E) ending the interview and cutting off his opponent before they can make their point. ]

Nothing shows the contemptible stupidity of his adherents more than those that blindly line up behind his ideals. Right Max? Hmm? Yes of course.

[Loosely based on Dickipedia’s ‘daffynition’]

June 13, 2013 at 2:17 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

untrue Leaf. Right down the middle. Belong to no party. You seem to be the party hack.

June 13, 2013 at 2:23 p.m.
Leaf said...

Simplistic Truthiness, my impression of you is that you troll and paste. I don't recall seeing any insightful analysis from you.

June 13, 2013 at 2:51 p.m.
Leaf said...

Yes, I'm a Democrat, no doubt. But I still have a mind of my own. I don't simply regurgitate things I find on a blog.

June 13, 2013 at 2:53 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Rarely read blogs. Rarely paste. Hardly ever as angry as you.

June 13, 2013 at 3:05 p.m.
fairmon said...

Which of the government scandals concerns you most?

Benghazi, IRS, AP, NSA, immigration, Guns to Mexican Cartels, Holder and others lying to congress, AHCA taxes and cost, other?

A lot of distraction from unemployment, the deficit and tax reform.

June 13, 2013 at 3:15 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

ALL. Should concern all of us. (except ALPO...he thinks they're all made-up)

June 13, 2013 at 3:26 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Tifosi, your 2:05 post was an excellent summation of the GOP.

As for this from PlainTruth: "untrue Leaf. Right down the middle. Belong to no party. You seem to be the party hack."

I'm still reeling from laughter from that one. PlainTruth, you are full of plain crap. You might not label yourself a Democrat or a Republican but I have NEVER seen anything out of you remotely favorable to the left side of the spectrum. You ALWAYS defend the right, the far right, and the far-far right side. If you were truly "right down the middle," you would at least once in a while acknowledge that lefties are on the side of truth at least part of the time and that righties are spewing BS at least part of the time. Right down the middle? You?? Now, that's funny.

June 13, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.
tifosi said...

fairmon said "Which of the government scandals concerns you most?"

The NRA perverting the 2nd Amendment and the slaughter of innocent children by reckless gun owners that do not secure their firearms.

June 13, 2013 at 4:10 p.m.
tifosi said...

Prescott Valley Police say that an adult male was shot by his son Friday afternoon in an accidental shooting.

The victim has been identified as 35-year-old Justin Stanfield Thomas.

Officers responded to a Prescott Valley residence about 12:30 p.m. for a shots fired call. According to PVPD, Thomas' 4-year-old son accidentally shot him.

The boy somehow got ahold of a handgun in the living room and it discharged, hitting his father in the torso.

June 13, 2013 at 4:13 p.m.
tifosi said...

A 10-year-old boy accidentally shot himself in the chest Tuesday afternoon at a Miramar Ranch condominium complex while playing in a garage that a resident described as a “clubhouse” for kids in the close-knit neighborhood.

The shooting was reported about 4:15 p.m., and the boy died shortly afterward at Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego police homicide Lt. Jorge Duran said.

The boy had been playing in the garage with a 9-year-old girl who lives in the condo, Duran said. Her 14-year-old brother was in charge of them and there were no adults home at the time, police said.

June 13, 2013 at 4:14 p.m.
tifosi said...

If you don't leave guns unsecured, criminals can't use them. Simple enough.

"The majority of guns used by inner-city gang members in Chattanooga come from burglaries and car break-ins in surrounding counties, the lead local ATF agent said."

June 13, 2013 at 4:16 p.m.
tifosi said...

How is that for a scandal fairmon? How soon we forget that pile of dead children caused by someone that left firearms unsecured.

June 13, 2013 at 4:18 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

DHS Claims it has the authority to inspect safety deposit boxes (and confiscate contents) WITHOUT A WARRANT.

http://www.examiner.com/article/dhs-claims-authority-to-inspect-safety-deposit-boxes-without-warrants

Are we ready to put an end to this yet?

June 13, 2013 at 4:39 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

tifosi said...

Young GOP know the problem:


From your link:

The report is based largely on two national surveys of 800 registered voters each, ages 18-29, and six focus groups of young people, including Hispanics, Asian-Americans, single women, economically struggling men and aspiring entrepreneurs in Ohio, Florida and California who had voted for President Barack Obama.

Alex Schriver, who served as the chairman of the CRNC during the election and is a co-author of the report.

The authors wrote. “In the short term, the party ought to promote the diversity of thought within its ranks and make clear that we welcome healthy debate on the policy topic at hand.”

Republicans need to avoid allowing the abortion debate to be “conflated” with debates over contraception, rape and Planned Parenthood, the report recommended, though the party needn’t alter its stance on the issue of abortion itself.

The report found that while Republicans during the 2012 cycle invoked jobs and the economy at every turn, the younger age group was put off by the way the GOP presented those issues.

But the study said the party must explain how its policies translate into chances for economic advancement and should seek to do so in a more “caring” tone.

“We found that there were misconceptions and common ways of thinking among people who didn’t view the Republican Party favorably that were simply not in accord with where the party actually stands,” Smith told POLITICO.

To combat that, the report stressed that the GOP should better explain how its policies translate into economic growth for the country and for individuals.

Some members within the party haven’t been helpful on the explanation front, muddling or distracting from the party’s positions by going too far in various statements, the report noted, and causing problems for the GOP brand.

“Something the report stresses is the rhetoric and the language of acceptance has to be a part of our strategy going forward,” Smith said.

The report does not contain many specific policy recommendations on issues like immigration or gay marriage.

Schriver said. “The purpose of the report is, we need to do a better job communicating our principles. …We wanted to put out a product that candidates, whether they agree or disagree on [various issues], can find useful.”

“I would say what the report conveys is frustration,” Schriver said. “As we sat in those six focus groups they would continually say they agree with policies we know we hold, but they didn’t equate those policies with the Republican Party. That’s really one of the biggest takeaways of this document. … We need to do a better job communicating.

(cont)

June 13, 2013 at 4:42 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

(cont)

Do you see a recurring theme here?

Are they saying the Republicans should alter their policy positions or just that they need better public relations efforts to define them?

So the Republican’s problem with young voters is that they need better spin masters to counteract the negative spin from the Democrats and the MSM.

June 13, 2013 at 4:43 p.m.
chatt_man said...

tifosi, I see why you call it an NRA scandal, but here's a question.

How many people die of accidental gun death every year. The answer might surprise you.

Answer: amazingly unintentional deaths due to firearms in the U.S. ranges anywhere from 500-1000 per year. considering there are 93 guns for every 100 people in the U.S. (not including the military and law enforcement - which would essentially make the ratio 1/1), this is AMAZING. think about that for a moment...350,000,000 guns, and less than 1000 accidental deaths...simply incredible.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_accidental_gun_deaths_are_in_the_US_every_year

OMG, I posted a wiki link. I hope Easy doesn't see this...

June 13, 2013 at 4:45 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Leaf: You should pay closer attention. I've sided with left of center positions often. Name one far, far, right thing I've said. You're angry, man.

June 13, 2013 at 4:55 p.m.
chatt_man said...

Maybe this will help people put accidental gun deaths in perspective...

How many Americans die from cold and flu each year?

Answer: "Each flu season is unique, but it is estimated that, on average, approximately 5% to 20% of U.S. residents get the flu, and more than 200,000 persons are hospitalized for flu-related complications each year. About 36,000 Americans die on average per year from the complications of flu."

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_die_from_a_cold_a_year

June 13, 2013 at 4:55 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

tifosi said...

In order to survive, a party has to adjust to the realities of where and who voters are, it can't expect voters to conform to the ideology and mythology of the party itself.


Sadly it is true, with certain groups that are unsophisticated or unaware, they can be readily swayed back and forth by pandering to their inherent misconceptions and biases. However instead of selling out on you principles and policies you could permanently bring them to you point of view by educating them as to how your positions are in their best interests.

Of course in this country, with its high level of politically dysfunctional citizens, the latter is very difficult. As a result most just stick their finger in the air and blow with the winds produced by the flavor of the day, week, month, etc. That is exactly how we find ourselves experiencing many of the problems our country stumbles into.

June 13, 2013 at 5:13 p.m.
Leaf said...

PlainTruth said...

"untrue Leaf. Right down the middle. Belong to no party. You seem to be the party hack.

"Leaf: You should pay closer attention. I've sided with left of center positions often. Name one far, far, right thing I've said. You're angry, man."

That's funny. The truth-o-meter is spinning wildly and making an alarm sound.

June 13, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.
una61 said...

When I have a phone conversation with a business, I often hear the message, "This conversation may be recorded for training purposes.". I didn't realize that the trainee was an NSA agent.

June 13, 2013 at 5:20 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

leaf: waiting

June 13, 2013 at 5:32 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Leaf said...

By the way, remember the Valerie Plame affair? That was way more evil than what Snowden did.


If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?

June 13, 2013 at 5:33 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^^ all it did was ruin the career of a perfectly good American.

June 13, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

From CNS News:

CIA deputy director Michael Morell, who played a key role in editing the administration’s controversial talking points on last September’s terror attack in Benghazi, announced his retirement on Wednesday after 33 years of service.


Looks like this guy has been taking bullets for the Obama administration for almost a year and has now taken the final one.

He said he wanted to spend more time with the old ball and chain and their brood.

Yeah right!

June 13, 2013 at 5:47 p.m.
miraweb said...

Our resident homeschooler writes:

If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?

I realize six years ago you were probably more concerned about the tooth fairy than politics, m'dear, but "Scooter" was convicted. Karl Rove and Dick Cheney managed to escape prosecution.

I'm guessing the prosecutor felt his time was better spent putting people in jail whose presidential buddies wouldn't pardon in 10 minutes.

It is a travesty of justice that Karl Rove doesn't have half-a-room at the Hard Luck Hilton. But life ain't really fair.

June 13, 2013 at 5:57 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Jt6gR3hM asked re. Valerie Plame:

"If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?"

U.S. v. Libby Indictment

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Holding a Criminal Term

Grand Jury Sworn in on October 31, 2003

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. I. LEWIS LIBBY, also known as "SCOOTER LIBBY"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801086.html

June 13, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Obamacare? We were just leaving … Obama finds secret to reducing government

From Politico:

Dozens of lawmakers and aides are so afraid that their health insurance premiums will skyrocket next year thanks to Obamacare that they are thinking about retiring early or just quitting.

(But there is this)

The Affordable Care Act — signed into law in 2010 — contained a provision known as the Grassley Amendment, which said the government can only offer members of Congress and their staff plans that are “created” in the bill or “offered through an exchange” — unless the bill is amended.


Odd that the liberals have used this amendment, to the bill, to show that Congress was not exempt from Obamacare. However it was pointed out many times to them that Congress had an out and now they are preparing to utilize it to keep the best and brightest to help run our lives.

June 13, 2013 at 6:03 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat you may want to actually read the documents that you refer to first so as to not embarrass yourself.

June 13, 2013 at 6:07 p.m.
tifosi said...

Jt6gR3hM said...

"So the Republican’s problem with young voters is that they need better spin masters to counteract the negative spin from the Democrats and the MSM."

I didn't see that part. Must have pulled that one out of your ass.

June 13, 2013 at 6:09 p.m.
miraweb said...

I do wonder how long the Texas 3rd Court of Appeals is going to sit on Tom Delay's money laundering conviction. They heard his oral argument last October but somehow just haven't found the time to rule on it.

June 13, 2013 at 6:15 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

tifosi said...

Jt6gR3hM said..."So the Republican’s problem with young voters is that they need better spin masters to counteract the negative spin from the Democrats and the MSM."

I didn't see that part.


Then you obviously didn’t read the article or the quotes that I provided. That is exactly what the study was all about.

Messaging.

June 13, 2013 at 6:20 p.m.
miraweb said...

I believe we can announce the winners of the 2016 elections.

Sarah Palin just went crawling back to Fox.

Guess that book money doesn't go far when you have to pay out of pocket for your own wardrobe. I hear there is champagne down at The Daily Show.

June 13, 2013 at 6:25 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Scooter Libby resigned following indictment on five federal felony charges.

He was indicted with obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and two counts of making false statements to the investigations into the Plame leak.

I don't see much ambiguity.

June 13, 2013 at 6:29 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat said...

Scooter Libby resigned following indictment on five federal felony charges.

He was indicted with obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and two counts of making false statements to the investigations into the Plame leak.

I don't see much ambiguity.


For MickeyRat And Miraweb:

Odd that I didn’t see a charge for outing a CIA agent which is what my question asked and I wonder why?

June 13, 2013 at 6:36 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Obama Threatens Veto of Religious Protection for Military

Ken Klukowski

Last week that Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) passed an amendment in the House Armed Services Committee protecting religious speech of service members in the military. President Barack Obama has now threatened to veto the bill if it passes the full House and Senate.

Obama says he will veto any bill that forbids his appointees or officers from telling a soldier that he cannot mention Jesus during prayer or have a Bible on his desk, or that keeps those appointees from telling a chaplain (who is an ordained clergyman) what religious teachings he is allowed to give in worship services, or what spiritual counseling he can give to another soldier.

Ambassador Ken Blackwell, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission:

"President Obama is waging a war on religion. He and Chuck Hagel are denying the most basic rights to those who put their lives on the line to protect all of our rights. It is shameful and appalling. I am confident that congressional leadership will show courage to stand up for our troops against this radical assault on religious liberty in the military."

This is the most compelling expression yet of the aggressive approach of the Obama-Hagel Defense Department to soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines who are observant Christians or devout members of other peaceful faiths.

June 13, 2013 at 6:51 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

LIBBY's Grand Jury Testimony

On or about March 5 and March 24, 2004, LIBBY testified before Grand Jury.

On each occasion of LIBBY's testimony, the foreperson of the Grand Jury administered the oath to LIBBY and LIBBY swore to tell the truth in the testimony he was about to give.

I. LEWIS LIBBY, also known as "SCOOTER LIBBY,"

defendant herein, did knowingly and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice, namely proceedings before Grand Jury 03-3, by misleading and deceiving the grand jury as to when, and the manner and means by which, LIBBY acquired and subsequently disclosed to the media information concerning the employment of Valerie Wilson by the CIA.

THE GRAND JURY FURTHER CHARGES:

  1. The Grand Jury realleges Paragraphs 1-26 of Count One as though fully set forth herein.

  2. During the course of the criminal investigation conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice, the following matters, among others, were material to that investigation:

a. When, and the manner and means by which, defendant LIBBY learned that Wilson's wife was employed by the CIA; b. Whether and when LIBBY disclosed to members of the media that Wilson's wife was employed by the CIA

Jt6gR3hM, you may want to actually read the documents that you refer to first so as to not embarrass yourself.

June 13, 2013 at 7 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

The Left's Phony Defense of Freedom

by David Harsanyi:

There are many idealistic progressives who've remained opposed to the National Security Agency's data mining programs regardless of who is in the White House. (We can't surrender our freedom for safety, you know!)

It's only a shame that these same people have such little reverence for constitutional liberties in other areas of public life.

Really, it's worse than that. Consider the central case of the left these days: "Unfettered" freedom is a tragedy -- decadent, unfair and un-American. So if, as liberals like to argue, it's a moral imperative for Americans to scale back personal liberty to build a cleaner, fairer and healthier world, shouldn't we be willing to do the same to protect the nation from terrorists? Why one and not the other?

If Washington can shield you from the vagaries of economic life, why can't it do the same with terrorists?

In January 2006, when George W. Bush was president, Pew Research Center asked Democrats how they felt about the NSA's surveillance programs. Thirty-seven percent labeled the spying "acceptable," and 61 percent said they were unacceptable.

The reverse is true today, as 64 percent of Democrats believe that Barack Obama's surveillance programs are acceptable and 34 percent say they're not.

Even those Democrats who claim to have a special reverence for privacy regularly support policy that undermines it. If this affection for privacy were unwavering, would they be demanding that we expand government-run background checks on firearms?

Would they advocate legislation that forces Americans to ask the Internal Revenue Service for permission to assemble and partake in the political process? Government should be transparent, but shouldn't citizens be free to support politicians without registering with government?

And really, how could someone who claims to value privacy support a law such as the individual mandate, which coerces every American citizen to report the status of his health insurance to the IRS?

And why is privacy a more critical liberty than economic freedom -- or any other freedoms regularly pooh-poohed by progressives? Overregulating trade and markets can be more consequential to the freedom of an average person than any data mining program. Just ask a small-business owner.

Let's face it. Most of the concern about these NSA programs is likely driven by an antipathy toward the war on terror rather than a concern about the corroding of constitutional protections. And though I agree with progressives that we've lost too many liberties in this effort, it's a shame they don't believe we're deserving of similar liberty elsewhere in our lives.

June 13, 2013 at 7:15 p.m.
dude_abides said...

maximus brought up the subject of oral sex with a man? Telling, very telling.

Whip up that choir, Jt6! Get them out there self flagellating! Drive that center to the left. LMaO Your title was all I read, but it was telling, very telling.

June 13, 2013 at 7:21 p.m.
tifosi said...

President Obama isn't waging a war on religion. He is insuring that the Constitution is being followed. If someone were using the Quran, then the Teabaggers would accuse the President of promoting Sharia Law. It's okay as long as it is Christians. Others are forbidden... that is the Teabagger way.

June 13, 2013 at 7:22 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat-

Old buddy you seem to be working very hard on this but not very smart.

You still haven’t provided the answer to the question of why he was not charge for outing the CIA agent.

But I’ll give you a hint from the document:

“On or about June 11 or 12, 2003, the Under Secretary of State orally advised LIBBY in the White House”

Here is the original question that I posed:

"If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?"

Maybe you can figure it out from there.

June 13, 2013 at 7:28 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

tifosi said...

President Obama isn't waging a war on religion. He is insuring that the Constitution is being followed.


By denying service members the exercise of their first amendment rights?

Really?

June 13, 2013 at 7:33 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "Odd that I didn’t see a charge for outing a CIA agent which is what my question asked and I wonder why?"

The answer to that question is rather simple. The classified National Intelligence Estimate contains no references to Valerie Plame or her CIA status. However, the Special Counsel conducted and reported that White House actions in "outing" Valerie Plame were part of "a plan to discredit, punish or seek revenge against her husband, Mr. Wilson."

Karl Rove is the person who should have been convicted in that one, but everyone ran for cover and got away clean.

June 13, 2013 at 7:39 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova

So you want some of this action as well?

Here's the original question:

"If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?"

When you answer it, you have the answer to the second question.

June 13, 2013 at 7:43 p.m.
jjmez said...

Jt6gR3hM said... Obama Threatens Veto of Religious Protection for Military Ken Klukowski Last week that Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) passed an amendment in the House Armed Services Committee protecting religious speech of service members in the military


Would the 'Bill' have protected all religions, faiths and non-faiths? Hinduism? Buddhism? Jainism? Judaism? Shinto? etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Could I take my old collection of Dr. Seuss books, call them bible and proceed to use them to teach character, integrity, compassion, respect? Dr. Seuss books are filled with all things needed to teach right and wrong. Isn't that what religion is suppose to be about? Right? Wrong? Character? Integrity? Compassion? etc. etc. etc. etc.

June 13, 2013 at 7:45 p.m.
jjmez said...

"If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?"


Who says the guilty party can't have a prosecutor who's also a friend? Nice to have friends in such a powerful position, ain't it?

June 13, 2013 at 7:48 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Atheists are outraged that a Bible sits right next to the mayor’s desk, inside a Pinellas Park City Council chamber, and they’re demanding its removal. Holy Moly

June 13, 2013 at 9:02 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

OHHH, it’s the Jt6gR3hM making up my own rules of semantics as I go along game.

You posed a rhetorical question regarding ‘Leaf’s’ assertion that quote: ”The Valerie Plame affair? That was way more evil than what Snowden did.”

To wit: “”If that is so, then why did the special prosecutor not indict the person that originally outed her?”

Scooter Libby was indicted (whether you like it or not) and the reason for the indictment in the Valerie Plame case is clearly spelled out. Your claim has been rebuked & reasoning debunked.

June 13, 2013 at 9:04 p.m.
fairmon said...

tifosi said... How is that for a scandal fairmon? How soon we forget that pile of dead children caused by someone that left firearms unsecured.

It is an unfortunate situation but not in the same vein as the others. If to you it is a scandal than it is. Perhaps legislatures are looking at it through the wrong lens. Perhaps those allowing guns to be stolen or to cause injury or death due to careless handling or storage should be subject to the same penalty as someone that intentionally did the harm. The other approach that stifles progress or business are taxes. You want less of something tax it, if you want more of the same then recognize and reward it.

A lot of people would have to sell or get rid of their guns to pay for their health care insurance or taxes. I'm not suggesting it but I bet you would support a $500 minimum per year per gun ad valorem tax? And, Increase the amount based on weapon value.

June 13, 2013 at 9:15 p.m.
rick1 said...

Mickey Rat, you need to read this article by Robert Novak. It was Richard Armitage who leaked Valerie Plame's name to Novak.

You are wrong on Libby being convicted for outing Plame.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/13/AR2006091301572.html

June 13, 2013 at 9:27 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

rick1

I sure had Mr. Rat going, as well as miraweb and alprova. However I forgive you for letting them off the hook as I was tiring of their very weak efforts.

It is very strange how much lefties know for sure that is completely wrong.

If you want to have even more fun just bring up that Algore said he created the internet or that Bush won the 2000 election.

Their buttons are so easy to push on subjects like that.

June 13, 2013 at 9:57 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

The contention isn't conviction, it's indictment.

June 13, 2013 at 10 p.m.
joneses said...

And more about obamacare. It just keeps getting worse. And what is really pathetic is the liberal loons will still give hussein obama a pass. What will they do? I suspect they will eventually blame this hussein obama failure on the insurance companies because in their sick twisted mentally ill liberal minds hussein obama cannot do anything wrong.

WASHINGTON (AP) — It's called the Affordable Care Act, but President Barack Obama's health care law may turn out to be unaffordable for many low-wage workers, including employees at big chain restaurants, retail stores and hotels. That might seem strange since the law requires medium-sized and large employers to offer "affordable" coverage or face fines. But what's reasonable? Because of a wrinkle in the law, companies can meet their legal obligations by offering policies that would be too expensive for many low-wage workers. For the employee, it's like a mirage — attractive but out of reach. The company can get off the hook, say corporate consultants and policy experts, but the employee could still face a federal requirement to get health insurance. Many are expected to remain uninsured, possibly risking fines. That's due to another provision: the law says workers with an offer of "affordable" workplace coverage aren't entitled to new tax credits for private insurance, which could be a better deal for those on the lower rungs of the middle class. Some supporters of the law are disappointed. It smacks of today's Catch-22 insurance rules. "Some people may not gain the benefit of affordable employer coverage," acknowledged Ron Pollack, president of Families USA, a liberal advocacy group leading efforts to get uninsured people signed up for coverage next year.

June 13, 2013 at 10:08 p.m.
rick1 said...

Jt

I'm sorry for interrupting your fun and you did have them going.

I notice the left wing media never mentions that Colin Powell also knew his under secretary Richard Armitage was the leak and Powell never said a word as Libby was crucified. Powell is sure a class act. No wonder he supports Obama, they have a lot in common.

June 13, 2013 at 10:10 p.m.
GameOn said...

County Mayor Jim Coppinger on Thursday morning presented a $197.4 million no-tax-increase budget to the County Commission that includes no employee pay increases and a step down from the current "Cadillac" insurance plan.

He said recent new county employees have been placed on a co-insurance plan, while longer term employees were on a more lucrative co-pay plan. He said all will be shifted to co-insurance.

County Mayor Coppinger said employees would not notice much difference in doctor visits, but would be on an 80/20 plan for more serious health treatment.

He said under the Affordable Health Care Plan if the county stayed with its "Cadillac" plan it would be penalized starting in 2018.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2013/6/13/253184/Coppinger-Presents-No-Tax-Increase.aspx

June 13, 2013 at 10:14 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat said...

The contention isn't conviction, it's indictment.


So where is the indictment for Libby outing the CIA agent. Here are the only ones listed:

Count 1: Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. Section 1503)

Counts 2-3: False Statements (18 U.S.C. Section 1001(a)(2))

Counts 4-5: Perjury (18 U.S.C. Section 1623)

No “Outing a CIA Agent” to be found.

Its been real and its been fun but it hasn't been real fun.

June 13, 2013 at 10:28 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

rick1 said... Jt

I'm sorry for interrupting your fun and you did have them going.

I notice the left wing media never mentions that Colin Powell also knew his under secretary Richard Armitage was the leak and Powell never said a word as Libby was crucified. Powell is sure a class act. No wonder he supports Obama, they have a lot in common.


Exactly.

Powell has been damaged goods ever since and has kept his head down but Armitage is still trying to cause trouble. He thinks he is a real bad boy and is out for revenge. However few people will give him the time of day.

June 13, 2013 at 10:42 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

jjmez said...

Could I take my old collection of Dr. Seuss books, call them bible and proceed to use them to teach character, integrity, compassion, respect? Dr. Seuss books are filled with all things needed to teach right and wrong. Isn't that what religion is suppose to be about? Right? Wrong? Character? Integrity? Compassion? etc. etc. etc. etc.


Sure you can but that attitude may get you a blanket party or a code red.

June 13, 2013 at 11:08 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

As I indicated earlier, the indictment is pretty clear cut. The only person charged is Libby. Naming others as co-conspirators is(in the eyes of the law)conjecture. Thus my claim stands.

Your claim has again been rebuked.

Now I have no doubt Cheney/Rove ordered it, but Libby knew he was going to be pardoned and played the patsy.

June 13, 2013 at 11:10 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

libby was not pardoned

June 13, 2013 at 11:39 p.m.
miraweb said...

True. Libby's sentence was commuted. His conviction stands. Lost a law license he wasn't really using and a job in an administration that was already over - but he is not in jail.

Cheney got a new heart and Rove a cushy job at Fox. Libby was just low enough down to take the fall.

Funny how I can't recall a single comment from ol' Karl about the Snowden leak. You'd think he'd have an opinion.

June 13, 2013 at 11:55 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Noogs, is it true you and Dudely are over at Easy's basement having a beatoff?

June 14, 2013 at 12:02 a.m.

Rachel Maddow is a man.

June 14, 2013 at 12:22 a.m.
fairmon said...

joneses said... And more about obamacare. It just keeps getting worse

Joneses..."The rest of the story", using Paul Harvey's phrase, will be very ugly. There will be no fewer, possibly more with no insurance. I have already personally had two cost increases. Obama never knew the details, he was told what to say about the AHCA such as if you like what you have and like your dr. you will not be affected. Nancy Pelosi's we will just have to pass it to see what is in it...she didn't really know but supported it for party reasons.

Insurance companies, lawyers and politicians crafted the piece of crap with a thesis if everyone has to have it there would be enough young healthy people paying to off set some added cost. Their enticements before the stuff hits the fan was the no pre-existing conditions provision and kids (?) remain covered to age 26. Why and how were so many exempt including Harry Reid's state, Nevada, some in Pelosi's state plus multiple unions and government employees. Why if it is so great and 100% participating is critical were any exemptions granted?

To make cost predictable larger employers providing health care coverage will designate an amount an employee can use to obtain their own health care, losing the advantage of group rates. At some point money provided for health care becomes taxable income. There is a clue when insurers and pharmaceutical companies contribute millions to publicize and gain support for the AHCA. Remember no new taxes for those making less than $250,000 dollars? the penalty for not having health care coverage is not a tax we were emphatically told. Who pays the higher cost of implants and artificial limbs due to the tax on the manufacturer? Who will pay the taxes added to insurers and prescription drugs? Who is affected more, high earners or those under $250,000 down to the poverty level?

The only salvation is improved treatment methods and medicines resulting from R&D. The business ignorant supreme court weakened patent opportunities so investments in R&D will be reduced with no opportunity to recover their R&D investment.

Universal health care yes, Obama care no. A government that allows over $62 billion per year in fraudulent Medicare claims may not be the best choice for managing a health care system. Most insurance companies will detect fraud quickly and not allow it to happen. Those that fail to stop it will not to be around long. Some in congress claim people are in good hands when they trust congress and administration.

June 14, 2013 at 1:30 a.m.
Maximus said...

Dude, Valarie Jarret is a woman and tifosi younger voters are getting very tired of being unemployed. Obama is toast and his healthcare fiasco will fail.

June 14, 2013 at 1:46 a.m.
Easy123 said...

PlainJack_Dennis,

"Noogs, is it true you and Dudely are over at Easy's basement having a beatoff?"

Is it true that you've just revealed your favorite wet dream to everyone here?

You're an easy mark, Geriatic_Dennis.

June 14, 2013 at 1:56 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

The Obama administration is considering resettling thousands of refugees who left Syria during the country's ongoing civil war to multiple towns and cities across the United States, the L.A. Times reports. no big surprise here

June 14, 2013 at 2:11 a.m.
Easy123 said...

PlainJack,

You must be unaware of how common it is for the U.S. to resettle refugees. Your ignorance is palpable. But NO BIG SURPRISE HERE.

https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/orr/fy_2009_annual_report_to_congress.pdf

June 14, 2013 at 2:55 a.m.
fairmon said...

from newspaper article....

The Obama administration supports rebels trying to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad, but is wary of deeper involvement in Syria.

The issue is politically sensitive on several levels.

Congress strongly resisted accepting Iraqi refugees, including interpreters who had worked with U.S. forces, after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Most lawmakers share White House caution about getting more engaged in Syria and may have little appetite for a major influx.


Where will the money come from to support them? Crank up the printing presses and borrow more from China? The article says most of them would be women and children with physical injuries or psychological issues.

Officials worry about members of Al Qaeda entering as part of the influx like two refugees from Iraq that tried to send arms to Al Qaeda from their home in Bowling Green Kentucky. How would it benefit America to add to the number in this country that cannot support themselves and become dependent on the government? Will all those in those areas that want to kill us start liking us?

June 14, 2013 at 5:25 a.m.
dude_abides said...

PlainTruth said... Noogs, is it true you and Dudely are over at Easy's basement having a beatoff?

What a gross man you are. What a base, grimy souled reprobate you are. This is what makes you laughable when you try to come off as thoughtful and conservative.

June 14, 2013 at 7:52 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

The Republican Leadership urged Congressmen to vote AGAINST the Smith-Gibson Amendment to the NDAA, which would have protected our rights to due process.

Chuck Fleischmann voted AGAINST our Constitutional right to due process.

The Republican Leadership and Chuck Fleischmann VIOLATED THEIR OATH to uphold the Constitution.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll228.xml

Are we going to fire Chuck Fleischmann?

June 14, 2013 at 8:08 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Dude: Bwahahahaha. You should know base, loser. How are things at the public trough today?

June 14, 2013 at 9:09 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "The Republican Leadership urged Congressmen to vote AGAINST the Smith-Gibson Amendment to the NDAA, which would have protected our rights to due process."

Sir, OUR rights to the U.S. System of justice are not threatened in any manner by the failure of that amendment to pass.

Surely you are aware that the amendment was offered to force the military to immediately try by a court established under Article III of the Constitution, anyone who is detained under the Authorization for Use of Military Force authority in the United States, its territories or possessions.

Unless you were to take up arms against the U.S. Military, your freedom and access to the justice system is quite assured.

"Chuck Fleischmann voted AGAINST our Constitutional right to due process."

Chuck Fleischmann voted against the granting of Constitutional rights and due process to terrorists, who were likely emboldened to take up arms against the United States because we were determined to be an aggressor in a part of the world where we were not welcome.

"The Republican Leadership and Chuck Fleischmann VIOLATED THEIR OATH to uphold the Constitution."

I'm not defending their position, because I feel they deserve justice as well, but I assume that they feel that anyone who would take up arms against us in an act of terrorism or war, is not entitled to any provisions of the United States Constitution.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor and authorized GWB this power, which for some unexplained reason, Barack Obama has refused to overturn that authority, even though I do believe that he has spoken out against it.

"Are we going to fire Chuck Fleischmann?"

One could only hope.

June 14, 2013 at 9:20 a.m.
tifosi said...

fairmon said: "I'm not suggesting it but I bet you would support a $500 minimum per year per gun ad valorem tax? And, Increase the amount based on weapon value"

No, I would not support that. I support gun owners being responsible by securing their weapons just like any soldier is taught. There is absolutely no reason to leave guns lying around to be stolen or used recklessly. Even though it is mentioned in NRA guidebooks, they do nothing to promote proper security of guns and have fought legislation requiring gun locks. The argument of having your gun readily available in case of home invasion is BS. If the gun is in the bedside drawer and you are in the recliner channel surfing when bad guys invade... that gun is of no use. In fact it becomes a threat to your own safety when the invaders find it. If it is not on your body... SECURE IT!

I am not anti-guns. I am anti-reckless gun owners.

June 14, 2013 at 9:24 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Easy: No need to go all google on us. We know all about resettled refugees. Here we have 5000 votes (down the road) for Sharia. Wake up, fool.

June 14, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.
fairmon said...

fairmon said: "I'm not suggesting it but I bet you would support a $500 minimum per year per gun ad valorem tax? And, Increase the amount based on weapon value"

tifosi said...

No, I would not support that. I support gun owners being responsible by securing their weapons just like any soldier is taught.


Assuming there was a law that guns had to be under lock and key or in some manner secured, how would that be enforced other than after an accident or mishap? What would be an appropriate failure to obey the law consequence?

June 14, 2013 at 9:44 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

It appears that Slick Willy genuinely hates BHO's guts. Funny.

June 14, 2013 at 9:54 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

I know that much of the NSA’s budget is a secret, but I can’t help but wonder how much it’s actually costing taxpayers on an annual basis to compile and store all of our personal telephone, email records, Internet records? . . . Anyone know?

In 2012, the U.S. population was around 313.9 million so I know that Congress has approved paying 313.9 million X some $ amount. From what I’ve read Snowden’s employer Booz Allen is successful, and it’s majority-owned by the Carlyle Group:

"They’re huge. Booz has 24,500 employees, $5.8 billion in revenue for its 2013 fiscal year, $219 million in profits and a stock market value of $2.5 billion.”

"It makes its money servicing the federal government. Says the company’s 10-K filing: “We have strong and longstanding relationships with a diverse group of clients at all levels of the U.S. government. During fiscal 2013, we derived 99% of our revenue from services under more than 5,700 contracts and task orders.”

"It’s trying to figure out how to identify terrorists through social media. On April 1 of this year, Booz Allen created a “Strategic Innovation Group,” with 1,500 employees, aimed at creating new products that clients (read: government agencies) don’t know they need yet.”

”It pays well.There have been reports that Snowden made $200,000 annually despite not having a college degree [Update: Booz Allen says Snowden was actually paid $122,000 per year]. But that’s nothing compared to the company’s top brass. Chairman Ralph W. Shrader was paid $1.2 million in base salary and a total of $3.1 million in fiscal 2012. Four other named executive vice presidents had total pay packages in the $2 million to $3 million range.”

"The biggest risk for the company?. . . Every public company must list “risk factors” for investors in their SEC filings, the things that could cause the company’s earnings to fall. Booz Allen Hamilton lists this as its first risk factor: “We depend on contracts with U.S. government agencies for substantially all of our revenue. If our relationships with such agencies are harmed, our future revenue and operating profits would decline.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/10/seven-facts-about-booz-allen-hamilton/

June 14, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.
miraweb said...

To be fair - people working for companies like Booz get a huge amount of their compensation in bonuses and stock options. It is likely that Snowden's $200,000 figure would be correct, especially as he would have had a signing bonus this year, as well.

June 14, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.
Easy123 said...

PlainJack,

"Easy: No need to go all google on us."

It would probably help your image if you stopped "googling" yourself and actually looked stuff up before you act like you know what you're talking about. Breitbart and Drudge aren't doing you any favors, fool.

"We know all about resettled refugees."

May I be the first to call bullsh!t. If you actually knew, you would already understand that the negative connotation that was placed on that copy and pasted excerpt was bunk considering there are millions of such refugees already in United States and such things have been going on since 1980.

"Here we have 5000 votes (down the road) for Sharia. Wake up, fool."

And the 18,709 Iraqi refugees from Oct. 1, 2008 to Sept. 30, 2009? Or the 4,170 Somali refugees during the same time period? More votes for dictators with mustaches and pirates down the road, right?

I'm awake, Rip Van Moron. You're the one in the perpetual state of intellectual dormancy.

June 14, 2013 at 12:32 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Miraweb said: "To be fair - people working for companies like Booz get a huge amount of their compensation in bonuses and stock options. It is likely that Snowden's $200,000 figure would be correct, especially as he would have had a signing bonus this year, as well.

A signing bonus!!! . . Wow, good deal!!! . . I’ve been reading about all these wonderful things Booz Allen can afford to do for its employees like ice cream socials, wine tasting events, stock options, good salaries and so forth, but I had not heard about the signing bonuses.

You know, Miraweb, I bet all of these defense contractors like Booz Allen - along with all of their employees - are dreading the days when all the terrorists are gone and there is no longer a need to keep the American public in the fish bowl, as Clay Bennett might say.

June 14, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Easy: I think you would fit in perfectly under Sharia. One caution, however. Keep the atheism on the down-low.

June 14, 2013 at 1:14 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

According to The Washington Post's Erik Wemple, shortly after news broke in May of the breach of CBS News investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson's computer, the justice Department released the following statement: To our knowledge, the Justice Department has never compromised Ms. Attkisson’s computers, or otherwise sought any information from or concerning any telephone, computer, or other media device she may own or use. hahaha...sort of like, not willfully

June 14, 2013 at 1:30 p.m.
Easy123 said...

PlainJack,

I'll take that idiotic post as you conceding the point.

I'd like to see a little more effort out of you next time.

June 14, 2013 at 1:57 p.m.
miraweb said...

It's a very fine way to make a living. Generous salaries and benefits. No worries about pesky public accountability.

Once you've bought a congresscritter or two you can keep the sweet government cash flowing for as long as you like.

win-win-win!

June 14, 2013 at 2:19 p.m.
miraweb said...

The IMF has issued its review of the US economy. They are projecting that the U.S. will lose 33% of its potential gains in GDP this year due entirely to the nonsense coming from the U.S. Congress.

1) Get more revenue through taxes. Yes, taxes.

2) Cutting science, education, and infrastructure budgets will inevitably cut growth. Don't do that.

3) DO NOT muck about with the debt ceiling limits. The world is not up to it.

4) The Sequester is idiotic. Fix it.

5) Hooray for the Fed!

6) Old people are expensive.

7) Housing is better but still needs help.

8) There is a structural nature to unemployment that will require retraining many workers.

9) There are still real idiots mucking about in the real estate markets. Find them. Stop them.

10) Bring the deficit down - GRADUALLY.

http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2013/061413.htm

June 14, 2013 at 2:46 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said...

I’ve been reading about all these wonderful things Booz Allen can afford to do for its employees like ice cream socials, wine tasting events, stock options, good salaries and so forth, but I had not heard about the signing bonuses.

No doubt they patterned their process after the IRS, GSA and other departments multimillion dollar seminars and celebrations at the tax payers expense. A contractor is limited only to the extent the government does so. Congressional over sight is a joke unless over sight means over look. Someone in government had to agree with the exorbitant cost which includes the comp rates and perks.

June 14, 2013 at 3:56 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Careers in government are the way to go. Just ask Easy and Dudely.

June 14, 2013 at 4:03 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel and miraweb-

Let me ask you some questions?

The U.S. government uses large quantities of toilet paper. Should the government manufacture its own supply or purchase from the market?

If the government chooses the latter is the internal affairs of the company, as long as they do not violate the laws, of any real concern of yours unless you own stock in that company?

Why is it always the private company is the evil partner in the the transaction and not the government that may be inappropriately spending our tax money? I know that you mentioned Congress but they are not the whole government. In most cases the “fourth” branch of government has the discretionary power of specific purchases.

June 14, 2013 at 4:19 p.m.
fairmon said...

miraweb said...

The IMF has issued its review of the US economy. They are projecting that the U.S. will lose 33% of its potential gains in GDP this year due entirely to the nonsense coming from the U.S. Congress.

miraweb, did you post the IMF recommendations due to your high level of confidence in their past accuracy and credibility or because you agree with their comments? Missing from their list was reducing the U.S. funding of the IMF. They don't have a demonstrated capability of managing money or economies well. Is that the same outfit whose top person allegedly molested the maid in New York?

Why not crack down on waste and fraud and things like continuing to pay the Fort Hood shooter full pay and benefits. I know he has not yet been convicted for the work place violence (what a joke instead of charging him as a terrorist) and can appeal but he is not working and he can be suspended without pay. This is one of many, many examples of waste that occurs daily while congress talks about "chained" CPI to reduce the amount of social security increases. Where is the outrage over $62 billion in Medicare fraud? The only valid comments they make are 8,9,10 and they fail to point out housing is going down the same route as before. Fannie and Freddie are again making no or low down payment loans with foreclosure risk. Is this Play it again Sam.

June 14, 2013 at 4:20 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Then there's this

NBC: NSA Leaks Show Private Contractors 'Don't Have A Sense of Patriotism'

by Kyle Drennen:

While a series of Obama administration scandals have left many Americans questioning the trustworthiness of government officials and bureaucrats, NBC News decided to use the recent National Security Agency leaks by Booz Allen contractor Edward Snowden to bash the role of the private sector in assisting with intelligence gathering.

Chief medical editor Nancy Snyderman summed up the network's smear campaign during a panel discussion on Wednesday's NBC Today about the NSA snooping controversy:

"...the number of contractors who aren't government workers, who are hired because they're young and geeky and they have computer skills....But they also are rather unmoored, they don't have a sense of patriotism, they don't really belong anywhere, so their sense of right and wrong is very different than how we see it."

(I bet you didn't know that government employment raised people to a higher level of ethics and morality.)

June 14, 2013 at 4:31 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Jt: NBC. That says it all.

June 14, 2013 at 4:41 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Miraweb said ...

The Sequester is idiotic.


Doesn’t that reflect badly on who came up with that idea?

Based on the amount of squalling from the left before the sequester took effect shouldn’t we be a burning heap of waste land by now?

June 14, 2013 at 4:48 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Miraweb said ...

Old people are expensive.


This one is the best and easiest to address.

Soylent Green!

June 14, 2013 at 4:53 p.m.
fairmon said...

Miraweb said ...

Old people are expensive.

The fact is the percent of old people (over 60) that are wealthy with assets that are self supporting is higher than the percent of young people(under 40) that are self supporting. Old people are only expensive when they have health issues but they have paid premiums for years with few claims and now they are being gouged with higher premiums and cost of care reducing their wealth and assets.

Miraweb said ...

The Sequester is idiotic.

The sequester as proposed by Obama and as being implemented is not the smartest way to do it. However, the net effect still leaves an overall increase in spending. So, how is it idiotic? Notice how the air traffic controllers were back in place when other savings were found after all the hell raising and bad publicity. Pilots had been told to tell people the delays were due to the sequester. To get an increase in funding a department has to spend last years and need more. Guess how many have not spent every penny?

The government with millions of employees plus millions of contractors is huge. No human or group of humans can effectively manage anything that big. The states and local governments have prostituted themselves to a large central government for grants and subsidies in addition to mismanaging their sphere of responsibility. Politicians have one and only one primary objective...please people enough to get re-elected regardless of what it takes. The second objective is get their cronies and friends in positions that can help them get re-elected. The third is to raise enough money to withstand any challenge.

June 14, 2013 at 5:27 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director:

“President Obama's action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law. The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield. The ACLU will fight worldwide detention authority wherever we can, be it in court, in Congress, or internationally.”

June 14, 2013 at 5:39 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/defense-bill-passed-so-what-does-it-do-ndaa

Following the Obama administration's withdrawal of its veto threat Wednesday, the National Defense Authorization Act passedboth houses of Congress easily and is now headed to the president's desk.

So what exactly does the bill do? It says that the president has to hold a foreign Al Qaeda suspect captured on US soil in military detention—except it leaves enough procedural loopholes that someone like convicted underwear bomber and Nigerian citizen Umar Abdulmutallab could actually go from capture to trial without ever being held by the military.

It does not, contrary to what many media outlets have reported, authorize the president to indefinitely detain without trial an American citizen suspected of terrorism who is captured in the US. A last minute compromise amendment adopted in the Senate, whose language was retained in the final bill, leaves it up to the courts to decide if the president has that power, should a future president try to exercise it. But if a future president does try to assert the authority to detain an American citizen without charge or trial, it won't be based on the authority in this bill.


Do you think maybe these two congressmen were more interested in media coverage than actually making meaningless changes to the NDAA?

June 14, 2013 at 5:52 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/06/14/obama-africa-trip-costs-the-washington-post/2422951/

Presidential trips are expensive, and President Obama's journey to Africa this month will in no way be an exception.

The Washington Post estimates that Obama's Africa trip could cost $60 million to $100 million, citing a person familiar with the details who cited previous presidential missions to Africa.

"Hundreds of U.S. Secret Service agents will be dispatched to secure facilities in Senegal, South Africa and Tanzania. A Navy aircraft carrier or amphibious ship, with a fully staffed medical trauma center, will be stationed offshore in case of an emergency.

"Military cargo planes will airlift in 56 support vehicles, including 14 limousines and three trucks loaded with sheets of bullet­proof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the first family will stay. Fighter jets will fly in shifts, giving 24-hour coverage over the president's airspace, so they can intervene quickly if an errant plane gets too close.

"The elaborate security provisions -- which will cost the government tens of millions of dollars -- are outlined in a confidential internal planning document obtained by The Washington Post.

I know... already!

All previous presidents traveled like this but at this level of expense at a time of high government debt and borrowing?

At least they dropped the safari and military snipers to shoot any wildlife that might want to eat Obama.

June 14, 2013 at 7:14 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Jt6gR3hM asks:”If the government chooses the latter is the internal affairs of the company, as long as they do not violate the laws, of any real concern of yours unless you own stock in that company?”

Since the taxpayers are picking up the tab and indirectly contributing to all of the huge profits these defense contractors appear to be making at our expense, I’d say the taxpayers have a right to be concerned and a right to know everything there is to know about the internal affairs of these government contractors. Is there something wrong with this?

Jt6gR3hM asks:“The U.S. government uses large quantities of toilet paper. Should the government manufacture its own supply or purchase from the market?”

I can certainly understand why the image of toilet tissue might come to mind when one is thinking about defense contractors, but for the record I should point out there is a difference between the two purchases. Toilet tissue is one of those basic supply items and it would be impractical for the government to manufacture its own toilet tissue. Contractors on the other hand provide a specific service. It makes sense for the government to contract out for certain types of services, but not every service, particularly in the area of national defense.

I say this for several reasons. For example, Edward Snowden’s employer Booz Allen is a huge for-profit corporation. The corporation and its stockholders can only make profits as long as there are terrorist activities. In others words, Booz Allen and their stockholders have a vested interest in terrorism. While the American citizenry might be praying for peace and seeking peaceful solutions to the problems in the Middle East, its corporate executives and stockholders are most likely praying for more unrest and more trouble in the Middle East.

June 14, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.
miraweb said...

It is interesting when you compare the last three IRS heads' histories.

Bush appointee Schulman came directly from the management consulting world.

It probably didn't even occur to him that millions spent on training events - utterly routine in consulting - would be inappropriate on the taxpayer dime.

Schulman was succeeded by two career civil service employees. The career folks have a more sensitive view of flagrant displays of wealth at government agencies.

Of course, if that taxpayer dime goes to a consulting firm you can fly the whole department to Aruba with no worries.

June 14, 2013 at 7:55 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Laura not cool with for profit bidnesses.

June 14, 2013 at 7:57 p.m.
miraweb said...

I have a problem with any organization with global reach whose "bidness" model depends on terror and conflict.

Don't you?

June 14, 2013 at 8:08 p.m.
miraweb said...

Here are extracts from Booz Allen's conferences in the past 12 months. Ring any bells?


Black Hat USA Jul. 21 - 26.


Biometric Technology Expo. Sept 18 - 20.


Strata Conference and Hadoop World. Oct 23 - 25.

"Visit our Big Data experts in our executive suite or join our Big Data Hackers Contest at Kiosk #59."


Abu Dhabi Continuity Standards. November 4.


Bloomberg Big Data Conference: From Hype to Value. March 14.


Big Data in Life Sciences. March 19.


Health Datapalooza IV. June 3-4.


. .

There are companies out there who almost couldn't survive without being paid to collect your data on behalf of the government. They get paid whether your are a terrorist or a tinker.

Cha-ching!

June 14, 2013 at 8:19 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

So you're blaming defense contractors for the global conflicts?

June 14, 2013 at 8:20 p.m.
miraweb said...

The oil industry has a fair share too.

It is just a pity that Iraq was not all that grateful for all the "shock and awe" and signed its energy contracts with China.

And China gets interest on the money we borrowed to set that up.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948787,00.html

June 14, 2013 at 8:24 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel said...

Since the taxpayers are picking up the tab and indirectly contributing to all of the huge profits these defense contractors appear to be making at our expense, I’d say the taxpayers have a right to be concerned and a right to know everything there is to know about the internal affairs of these government contractors. Is there something wrong with this?


Yes there is.

Just as when you buy a bottle of ketchup you don’t have the right to butt into Heinz’s internal business beyond reporting any unlawful conduct.

June 14, 2013 at 8:31 p.m.
miraweb said...

One of the more cogent pieces of reporting I heard this week noted that the one fact we know about Booz Allen is that its data resources are fundamentally insecure.

One guy with a flash drive was able to walk away with anything he really wanted.

The last time we had this problem was a data aggregator called ChoicePoint. They were very busy selling data to the government until they were found to be selling accounts to identity theft organizations, too.

Shortly after that, Lexis-Nexis bought them up.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/cases/choicepoint/index.shtm

June 14, 2013 at 8:34 p.m.
miraweb said...

However, if you buy ketchup for school lunch programs, you can call it a vegetable!

June 14, 2013 at 8:39 p.m.
miraweb said...

I'm always surprised about the folks who think millions in government money going to a private company is a sacred profit black box - but if we offer an old lady $75 in food stamps she'd better be prepared to be investigated, copy all her receipts, and pee in a cup.

June 14, 2013 at 8:50 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

miraweb said...

Th oil industry has a fair share too.

It is just a pity that Iraq was not all that grateful for all the "shock and awe" and signed its energy contracts with China.

And China gets interest on the money we borrowed to set that up.


It was a fair and open auction but the U.S. companies just weren’t able to close the deal.

Even if they had gotten the contracts there would have been very little oil imported into this country.

War in oil producing countries hurts the oil industry more than any gain they may realize.

As far as China charging us interest, we asked for the loans.

June 14, 2013 at 8:58 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

miraweb said...

One of the more cogent pieces of reporting I heard this week noted that the one fact we know about Booz Allen is that its data resources are fundamentally insecure.

(I wonder who allowed that to continue?)

One guy with a flash drive was able to walk away with anything he really wanted.

(You mean like Pvt. Manning?)

The last time we had this problem was a data aggregator called ChoicePoint. They were very busy selling data to the government until they were found to be selling accounts to identity theft organizations, too.

(Again as above)

June 14, 2013 at 9:27 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

miraweb said...

I'm always surprised about the folks who think millions in government money going to a private company is a sacred profit black box - but if we offer an old lady $75 in food stamps she'd better be prepared to be investigated, copy all her receipts, and pee in a cup.


Apples and oranges.

Selling someone a service or product is not hardly the same as being a ward of the state that requires a proof of need.

June 14, 2013 at 9:32 p.m.
miraweb said...

So if you receive public benefits should you have to register your guns?

June 14, 2013 at 10:11 p.m.
alprova said...

It's been fun to watch the NSA "scandal" fizzle over the last 24 hours and to witness so many people who first thought Edward Snowden to be a "hero" kinda sideline that claim.

The more this progresses and the more I read, the more Edward Snowden appears to be working for the Chinese. Fox News has even changed their tune.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/14/edward-snowden-whistleblower-or-double-agent/

Gee...it appears that all these salacious scandals that was supposed to end with the President being marched out of the White House or impeached, are not going anywhere at all.

And you know what? I've noticed an up tick in discussions about Congressman actually getting back to work and passing some legislation for a change.

And what I am reading about is going to put some very prominent Republicans in the hot seat. They are actually going to have to go on the record and will be forced to vote their conscience, and if they do, they know they will be toast.

June 14, 2013 at 10:12 p.m.
miraweb said...

There is an interesting mathematical quirk to Facebook's reporting on its data given to the government - there are fewer requests than accounts.

That means a single request frequently covers multiple accounts - likely any person of interest and all of their links, likes, and contacts.


Facebook received 9,000-10,000 requests for user data from US government entities in the second half of 2012, the company has revealed.

The firm said the requests related to 18,000-19,000 user accounts and covered criminal and national security issues.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22916329

June 14, 2013 at 10:16 p.m.
miraweb said...

We know that there is no psyops campaign to discredit Snowden, of course, because that would actually be illegal if it targeted American citizens.

The funny thing is everyone seems to be focused on Snowden.

The documents themselves remain credible (and creepy).

June 14, 2013 at 10:18 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Jt6gR3hM said; "Just as when you buy a bottle of ketchup you don’t have the right to butt into Heinz’s internal business beyond reporting any unlawful conduct."

You poor guy. . . You just don’t get it. . . Do you?

You have the option of either purchasing a bottle of ketchup or not purchasing a bottle ketchup. . . You can’t say the same for the alleged services that a company like Booz Allen is allegedly providing for Congress. . . I’ve emphasized “allegedly” because Congress has opted to keep the actual contract amount and services that Booz Allen is providing a "secret" from the taxpayers.

Again, since the taxpayers are picking up the tab, the taxpayers have a right to know everything there is to know about the affairs of these contractors, particularly a company like Booz Allen. . . This company is getting a huge chunk of our tax dollars to collect, compile, and store years and years worth of the taxpayer's private telephone, email, and internet records.

The taxpayers didn’t grant Booz Allen a “security clearance” to get into their lives. Did you?

June 14, 2013 at 10:47 p.m.
alprova said...

miraweb wrote: "We know that there is no psyops campaign to discredit Snowden, of course, because that would actually be illegal if it targeted American citizens."

And I again remind you and everyone else that nothing illegal was exposed in those documents. Does it make some people uncomfortable? Yes. But when you take just a little time to understand the exact content of the data that was mined, the vast majority of Americans never drew so much as a first glance by the NSA, because most Americans are not making International phone calls.

It doesn't bother you that out of all the places he could have landed when he boarded a plane, he decided on Hong Kong CHINA?

He clearly is being protected where he is at the moment. Who did he know there and how did he get to know them?

He could have went to Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, the Central African Republic, Chad, Mainland China, Comoros, Congo (Kinshasa), Congo (Brazzaville), Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Macedonia, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Micronesia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Samoa, São Tomé & Príncipe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vatican, Vietnam and Yemen, all of which do not have extradition treaties with the United States.

"The funny thing is everyone seems to be focused on Snowden. The documents themselves remain credible (and creepy)."

They are no more creepy or potentially damaging to any American than computer cookies that install themselves on your computer to track your website visits which are then used to target you with ads that should be of interest to you.

Data mining has been going on for decades, in one form or another. This little revelation, and the way it unfolded has sparked some rather irrational fears in many people who normally would resist buying into conspiracies.

Much of what Snowden has alleged has been discredited and there are companies wanting to prove to the American people that they have nothing to fear from the data mining that has been done.

June 14, 2013 at 11:23 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

miraweb said...

So if you receive public benefits should you have to register your guns?


We have a Constitutional right to own and bear guns however it is not an absolute right and the SCOTUS has ruled that reasonable regulations are allowed. Felons can be denied that right but I hardly think the court would allow such a law for those receiving aid and not the general public. There is not a compelling government need that such a law would address.

June 14, 2013 at 11:41 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel said ...

You have the option of either purchasing a bottle of ketchup or not purchasing a bottle ketchup. . . You can’t say the same for the alleged services that a company like Booz Allen is allegedly providing for Congress.


The government also has the option to make a contract with Booz Allen or not. They can forgo the service they requested, contract with another company, or do the service in-house.

June 14, 2013 at 11:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountailaurel said ...

The taxpayers didn’t grant Booz Allen a “security clearance” to get into their lives.


Of course they did as the government acts as their agent in making these contracts. You get the government you vote for and deserve.

June 14, 2013 at 11:49 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel said ...

This company is getting a huge chunk of our tax dollars to collect, compile, and store years and years worth of the taxpayer's private telephone, email, and internet records.


It is the governments responsibility to set the standards for the service or materials contracted for and to provide oversight of the company meeting those standards.

As long as the company full fills, in a proper manner, their part of the contract you or the government have very little or no say in the benefit package, or etc. provided to its employees.

June 14, 2013 at 11:57 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel..

Who let the contract with Booz Allen? Who has over sight responsibility? Who agreed to their charges? Were there competitive bids? I suspect the answers would be found within the homeland security boondoggle. Another Bush addition along with prescription coverage in Medicare without additional means of funding for either, shades of Jimmy Carter. Who is addressing the over $1 trillion annual dollars in wasteful spending and fraud within the government? What happened to another campaign promise of "no pork" in their administration?

June 15, 2013 at 12:02 a.m.
miraweb said...

China makes little sense. If China had what it wanted - a back door into the NSA, documents, passwords and their agent was on home turf then why would they go to a British newspaper and te Washington post to tip the NSA off to a major security breach?

If he was China's agent they would keep him there far longer than 3 months and not reveal his cover after he was out don't you think?

June 15, 2013 at 12:27 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Fairmon asks: “Who let the contract with Booz Allen? Who has over sight responsibility?”

The discussion isn’t about the bidding process, Fairmon. It’s about the “big Brother” project, which started with Congress and needs to be ended by Congress.

“Jt6gR3hM said: "Of course they did as the government acts as their agent in making these contracts. You get the government you vote for and deserve.”

What world are you living in, Jt6? In America, privacy is valued and considered a right, which the U.S. Congress has an obligation to protect. And for the record, I didn’t vote or support any of the individuals responsible for setting up the “big brother” project. Did you? In case you’ve forgotten the details as to how the “big brother” project began:

“On Sept. 11, 2007, the National Security Agency signed up Microsoft as its first partner for PRISM, a massive domestic surveillance program . . .

That’s barely a month after Congress passed, and President George W. Bush signed, the Protect America Act.

The Bush Administration portrayed the PAA as a technical fix designed to close a gap in America’s surveillance capabilities that had been opened by a then-recent ruling of the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).

It proved to be much more than that. . .

In reality, the PAA represented a sweeping change to American surveillance law. Before conducting surveillance, the PAA only required executive branch officials to “certify” that there were “reasonable procedures” in place for ensuring that surveillance “concerns” persons located outside the United States and that the foreign intelligence is a “significant purpose” of the program. . .

Civil liberties groups warned that the PAA’s vague requirements and lack of oversight would give the government a green light to seek indiscriminate access to the private communications of Americans. . .

It now appears that this is exactly what the government did. . . the moment the PAA was the law of the land, the NSA started using it to obtain unfettered access to the servers of the nation’s leading online services. . ."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/06/how-congress-unknowingly-legalized-prism-in-2007/?tid=rssfeed

June 15, 2013 at 12:26 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.