Tag: Greta Van Susteren

Knockout Game does not fit the race pimp’s narrative, so……….

Allen West nails it, and yes I have said this months ago. These knockout games, and other Black on White violent attacks do not fit the narrative of the Left, but the first time someone with a concealed weapon fights back, the race pimps will leap with both feet! Video at the link, 

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: ON THE RECORD has been reporting on these violent attacks all week but few community leaders and few in the media are willing to talk about it. As we talk about this spreading crime, take a look of a few of the attacks caught on camera so you know what to look out for.

Congressman West, this horrible game, you know, first of all, it’s a group of people — a gang might not be the right word. And after it’s done, everybody laughs at doing it as the victim is lying there suffering. In some instances, even murder. But the question of race. Frankly, so far, it’s been African-Americans, as far as I can see, on whites. I don’t know if it’s completely that way but that’s what we have seen.

WEST: That’s true. That’s exactly what you are seeing. This talks of the state of depravity that is in the black community right now. Again, where are these black leaders that should be talking about this breakdown? Where are the parents? Where are the guardians of the black community to say this is unacceptable behavior?

Now, this is what is going to end up happening. At some point in time, one of the people that’s going to be attacked is going to have a concealed weapons license. They are going to draw down and, unfortunately, someone is going to get shot. Then what is going to happen? You will hear all of the rhetoric coming out from the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons that this unarmed black teenager was shot and killed and assaulted, when right now they should be out there stopping this so we don’t get to this point.

VAN SUSTEREN: They have been silent. And the president, attorney general also role models in the African-American community, but one —

(CROSSTALK)

WEST: This doesn’t fit their political narrative.

VAN SUSTEREN: Obviously, the ones who do it, they’re criminals, arrest them, process them or whatever. Those who laugh may be aiders and abettors, has encouraging them, deal with them, too.

The thing that concerns me, a lot of these communities have 12 and 13- year-olds who look up to older people in the community. There is always the peer pressure. If we don’t stop this now — sort of immaturity of a 13-year-old — is a 13-year-old going to follow suit and do something really stupid, have the person die or end up in prison, and no one is speaking out to try to stop this now.

WEST: Well, you have already seen this happen. Think about down in Brunswick, Georgia, where the two black teenagers shot the white baby in the face. And so now that’s, again, a life that has been lost because no one intervened and no one tried to get in those communities. You have got a breakdown. It’s not just the family. It’s the education opportunities, job opportunities. We should not have these roving gangs out there saying, we are going to knock someone out just for fun. They should be studying.

VAN SUSTEREN: One attacker, I should tell you, in Michigan, was shot. So we are seeing a little bit of that already.

What should President Obama do, if anything? I mean, is there anything? Would making a statement or putting this out as public dialogue, would that help?

WEST: It would help. You can’t just cherry-pick when you go in to intervene. You can’t look at the Skip Gates issue and say the police officers up there —

VAN SUSTEREN: Harvard.

WEST: Absolutely. Acted stupidly. You can’t jump in and say Trayvon Martin, or it could have been me or it could have been my son. Then you have these instances where you just complete (INAUDIBLE). I think this is an opportunity for him to show some leadership. But once again, it doesn’t fit that political narrative.

VAN SUSTEREN: How about Jesse Jackson and Reverend Sharpton? They can certainly draw attention. They can draw attention toward important issues. Why are they silent?

WEST: There’s no profit in it for them. There’s no political gain or political advantage for them. So why —

VAN SUSTEREN: How about helping these neighborhoods? This is terrorizing some of the inner-city neighborhoods.

WEST: They don’t care. They live off victimization. Therefore, as long as you have black communities that see themselves as victims, that helps to perpetuate their existence. Now, all of a sudden, if you jump in — why aren’t they saying anything in Chicago about the black-on-black crime? They don’t have a point in that. It doesn’t elevate them whatsoever. That’s why these guys should be totally irrelevant and should not be listened to whatsoever

West also makes a great point about the victim mentality that is helping destroy the Black community. It is truly despicable what the Left has done, and is still doing to Blacks in America. Jackson, Sharpton and much of the NAACP leadership give not the first damn about Black Americans. They care about getting richer, and that is it. In short these “leaders” are about the lowest form of life I can imagine. Talk about racists!

So now “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan” is an incorrect promise is it?

How morally retarded is the Left? The Other McCain lets us know

Orwellian euphemism from the New York Times:

The split between lawmakers and the White House reflects the dilemma the president finds himself in as he seeks to follow through on last week’s acknowledgment about his incorrect promise on health care coverage.

Good freaking grief! How far removed from our senses are we? Why is anyone making excuses for Obama’s BALD-FACED LIE? He LIED, and many Democrats lied with him. This was not a broken promise, it was a lie, PERIOD! And it was a lie told, and repeated to pass a bill these miscreants KNEW would force most American’s off the insurance they chose, and onto plans the government mandates! How tough is it to connect the dots here? If the government can tell you you MUST buy a product, in this case health insurance, then they can tell you what type of health coverage you MUST have. Honestly who did not see this coming?

Maybe more to the point, why would anyone defend, excuse, or spin this? Because those defending this un-American abomination actually think the government should do whatever it takes to reach the desired end, in this case, socialized medicine. Those defending this do not love liberty, they detest it! They care about the “common good”, they are Marxists! They are fine with deceit because they like the end game, so the means do not matter. It is all about the Collective as Donald Douglas notes

This is literally painful, from Jonathan Cohn, at the New Republic, “Bill Clinton Is Wrong. This Is How Obamacare Works” (via Memeorandum):

The Affordable Care Act includes a so-called grandfather clause. That allows insurers to keep renewing plans, without changes or benefits and prices, as long as they were available before March 2010, when the Affordable Care Act became law. But the non-group market is volatile: Very few people stay on plans for more than two years anyway. And the grandfather clause is narrow, by design: If insurers made even modest changes, the protection goes away. Those plans are subject to the new regulations that take effect in January. As a result, the majority of people who buy insurance on their own are learning they can’t have what they had before, even though Obama promised everybody they could. Either their premiums are going up, as insurers accommodate the new regulations, or the plans are disappearing altogether. In those cases, people have to find new plans. And the sticker price of what they’ll find is higher than what they pay now.

This is not a glitch or an accident. This is the way health care reform is supposed to work. And it’s important to put these changes into context. For one thing, it’s a small number of people relative to the population as a whole. The vast majority of Americans get coverage through employers or a large government program like Medicare. These changes don’t really affect them. The law also anticipates these changes by, among other things, offering tax credits that discount the premiums—in many cases, by thousands of dollars. (Other provisions of the law, like a limit on insurance company profits and overhead, should restrain prices more.) As a result, many people buying coverage on their own will be paying less money for benefits that are as good, if not better, than what they have now.

But there are real people who must pay more and, in some cases, put up with less. Some of them are people walking around with junk insurance, the kind are practically worthless because they pay out so little. Some of them are young people, particularly young men, whom insurers have coveted and wooed with absurdly low premiums—and make too much money to qualify for substantial subsidies. And some of them are reasonably affluent, healthy people with generous, open-ended policies that are hard to find even through employers. Insurers kept selling them because they could restrict enrollment to healthy people. Absent that ability, insurers are canceling them or raising premiums so high only the truly rich can pay for them.

Those people are the ones everybody is hearing about now, partly because they are a compelling, sometimes well-connected group—and partly because, absent a well-functioning website, stories of people benefitting from the law’s changes aren’t competing for attention. It’s impossible to know how big this group is. The data on existing coverage just isn’t that good. The anecdotes are frequently, although not always, more complicated than they seem at first blush. It’s probably one to two percent of the population, which doesn’t sound like much—except that, in a country of 300 million, that’s 3 to 6 million people. Most experts I trust think they represent a minority of people buying coverage on their own, but nobody can say with certainty.

Is that a worthwhile tradeoff for reform? Obviously that’s a matter of opinion. The fact that some people—even a small, relatively affluent group—are giving up something they had makes their plight (genuinely) more sympathetic. They are right to feel burned, since Obama did not make clear his promise might not apply to them. And there’s a principled argument about whether people should be responsible for services they’re unlikely to use presently, whether it’s fifty-something year olds paying for maternity care or twenty-something year olds paying for cardiac stress tests.

Read the whole thing. Utterly astounding.

This is what the president meant by “fundamental” change folks. He is willing to destroy private health insurance to get what he, and his fellow Marxists have long dreamed of, universal health care, which, according to a man I met today at the airport, is a great thing, until you make the mistake of getting sick. And speaking of getting sick, it seems that more Democrats are getting sick of their electoral chances next year

House Democrats delivered a fix-it-or-else ultimatum Wednesday to President Obama, giving his administration until Friday to find an affordable solution for the millions of Americans losing their health plans under ObamaCare — or risk some Democrats backing a Republican solution. 

The ultimatum from President Obama’s own party is another sign of the unrest within the Democratic caucus about the cancellation notices. The end-of-the-week deadline is significant, because House Republicans are planning to call a vote Friday on a bill that would extend current policies for another year. 

It’s unclear whether Democrats would go so far as to support that bill if the administration does not offer a Plan B. But one senior Democratic source told Fox News that, at a closed meeting Wednesday, Democrats made clear to the administration that they need a proposed fix before Friday’s vote. 

The White House has vowed to come up with a solution, but so far has not provided much detail on what such a solution would entail. Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that the president will make an announcement on possible options “sooner rather than later.” 

One senior House Democrat characterized the meeting Wednesday as “heated.” The source said the session consisted of “members telling the administration that they screwed it up and now we have to explain it to the public.” 

Another source said that it helps for the administration to hear frank talk “from their friends that they need to get back in front of the problem.” 

“No more excuses, just get it done,” the source said. 

Of course, if these same Democrats had listened to their constituents three years ago, we would not be in this mess would we? Frankly, every Democrat who voted for Obamacare deserves to get thrown out of office over this.

Why Fox News prime time lineup sucks

Just three words tell you why I put that headline up. NO RED EYE! COME ON Fox! Apparently their ratings among 25-54 year-olds has fallen. Featuring Megyn Kelly seems to be their strategy to fix that. I would argue Red Eye would be a better choice. Gutfeld is hilarious, and his guests usually include an attractive woman. See eye candy, humor, political debate, AND entertainment. The only problem with red Eye is that moron Bill Schulz, good Lord what a beating he is, so I would add another guest in his place.

Greta Van Susteren: What Congress Just Did “Will Make You Want To Throw Up”

Greta: What Congress Just Did ‘Will Make You Want To Throw Up’ – Bizpac Review

When the actions of the federal government succeed in riling up the normally stoic Fox News host Greta Van Susteren, you can be sure that something sinister is afoot.

.

And she is so ticked by the current reign of lawlessness she could just vomit!

As elected officials slipped out of town for a 5-week recess, we learned a deal was struck to exempt Congress from new higher premiums associated with ObamaCare. A move designed to avert the provision in the law which said members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans “created” by the law or “offered through an exchange.”

The Office of Personnel Management, under heavy pressure from Capitol Hill, determined that the health care premiums of members of Congress and their aides can be subsidized by taxpayers, according to Politico.

As noted by Mediaite, Van Susteran responded in a blog post titled with all capital letters “THIS WILL MAKE YOU WANT TO THROW UP,” in which she railed against the “appalling” exemption, repeatedly expressing her “disgust” with elected officials.

“It is indecent… just WRONG,” she wrote. “So let me get this straight… they push OBAMACARE on EVERY OTHER AMERICAN except themselves. Really? Unbelievable, isn’t it?”

Van Susteran zeroed in on how the exemption was rushed before the August recess, but Congress failed to address the expiring resolution that prevents government shutdown in 60 days, as reported by Mediaite’s Andrew Kirell.

“So…let me get this straight… what matters to YOU and is their job to handle can wait until their 5 week vacation is over, Van Susteran stated. “What matters to them, gets done NOW, before their 5 week vacation.”

“I really don’t know how Members of Congress can sleep at night when they pull these stunts on the rest of America,” she concluded. “I don’t know who voted how, but I want to know who voted FOR this. At the very minimum, this selfish vote should have been put at the back of the line.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Senator Pat Roberts: Military worried that Obama does not have their back

Gee why would they think that? Video via Gateway Pundit

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Bing West lays out his fears

As I watched this video, I thought of how this administration has completely failed in Obama’s promise to be transparent. Frankly, Obama acts like he does not care a bit about any of this.

Benghazi just looks worse and worse for Team Obama

Now President Obama says he gave a clear directive to protect secure personnel, but where is the paper trail?

Earlier today Barack Obama told Denver’s WUSA TV this in regard to the Benghazi 9-11 terror attack,

“I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.”

Tonight however, Bing West, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, told Greta Van Susteren,

“If that actually happened the way President Obama said it happened, there’s a paper trail and I think people reasonably enough can say, “Can we see the order?” because hundreds of others supposedly saw this order.

So, basically, he is trying to throw everyone under the bus here. One problem for me is this, if such an order was given, why did President not follow-up? Certainly we should expect that our Commander-in-Chief would be monitoring the events, getting constant updates. Obama’s latest story makes it sound like he just threw out a directive, to use his word, and threw up his hands. One more glaring problem here is that why wasn’t the president saying this weeks ago? Why does his version of events keep evolving? Sadly, I think we know why.

Mark Levin: Is Newt Really Satan? – Plus Related Gingrich Videos

Mark Levin: Is Newt Really Satan? – The Right Scoop

While Mark Levin is on vacation, he’s taken a little time to pen his thoughts on the ongoing disgusting attacks aimed at Newt Gingrich by those on the right, including Ann Coulter, George Will, and the NRO:

If you read the comments on some conservative sites you might think so.

Newt Gingrich is not my first choice for the GOP nomination. I have said if I were voting today, I would vote for either Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum. But I don’t feel the need to smear Newt, either.

My friend Ann Coulter says she would vote for Ron Paul over Newt Gingrich. Really? Despite his racism, anti-Semiticism, hate-America first pronouncements, 9/11 truther nuttiness, etc., etc.? What about this?

http://www.jbs.org/birchtube/viewvideo/1007/constitution/ron-paul-at-the-50th-anniversary-of-jbs

What about this?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-21/ron-paul-racist-newsletters/52147878/1

What about this?

https://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/2011/12/09/nutbag-ron-paul-bush-administration-reacted-with-glee-after-911

What about this?

http://www.textfiles.com/politics/ron_paul.txt

The list goes on and on. Coulter is undoubtedly aware of all of this. How can she or any sensible person, let alone conservative, advocate for or defend this? She backed Chris Christie, telling me that if Mitt Romney is nominated he will lose as John McCain did, and it will be my fault (along with Rush’s and Sean’s). Now, she insists that only Romney can win and the conservatives in the field cannot. Perplexing.

George Will is slamming away at Newt again today, having previously suggested he was a Marxist. A Marxist? Is this the same Will who supported George H. W. Bush and Howard Baker over Ronald Reagan in 1979? Somehow he not only missed the Reagan Revolution, but he initially doubted it and opposed it. Your judgment, George, does not match your conceit, with all due respect.

Over at NR, the hits keep coming. My friend Ramesh Ponnuru is waxing on priest-like about Newt and his Catholic faith. It’s a very odd piece. But Ramesh backs Romney, not Rick Santorum, who is not only Catholic but is clearly a more reliable conservative than Romney. Perplexing.

Most of Newt’s attackers have announced for Romney or are at least fronting for him, overlooking or excusing most of Romney’s deceits — which continue to this day and most recently involve his flip-flopping on the Iraq War. Moreover, Will has not said who he supports, having previously backed Mitch Daniels. No doubt Michelle Bachmann is just too wacky and inexperienced for his tastes, much as Reagan was too old and unsteady back in 1979.

Having consulted a number of friends and colleagues from the Reagan era, they agree with me that we’ve not seen this kind of daily attack on a legitimate Republican primary candidate in modern times, despite Newt’s weaknesses and faults. And most are disgusted by it.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

——————————————————————————————————————–

Related video:

Former Congressman J.C. Watts Endorses Newt Gingrich For President

.

.
——————————————————————————————————————–

Related video:

Newt Discusses Mitt Romney’s Dishonest Attack Ads On The Laura Ingraham Radio Show

.

.
——————————————————————————————————————–

Related video:

Newt Challenges Mitt Romney To A One-On-One Debate On Greta Van Susteren’s Show ‘On The Record’

.

.