So ISIS just beheaded a journalist and demanded Obama give in to their demands or they will behead another one.
What troubles me is that James Foley gives a little speech before being beheaded. In his speech, he calls for Americans to rise up against the “real killers” (America) and denounces his parents and brother (a US Air Force airmen).
It’s kind of hard to feel sympathy for a man who is willing to betray his country and family in the face of evil. Something about this video just doesn’t sit right. Either James Foley is a traitor, or it’s fake. I haven’t decided what I think of it yet.
You can see the video here. As always, it is GRAPHIC so view it at your own risk.
EDIT: They say they have Steven Sotloff and will kill him next.
Out of everything Obamas speech has covered he has yet to speak on the border crisis. I guess he thinks since he won’t answer on it America will forget about it.
"Never let a crisis go to waste"
I’m sure things are being done behind the scenes that will outrage us once they come to light. It happens every time.
Another Broken Promise: Obama Works Behind “Closed Doors” With Lobbyists On Immigration Policy
Obama Is Currently Working To Draft An Executive Action “Almost Entirely Behind Closed Doors, Where Lobbyists And Interest Groups Invited To The White House Are Making Their Case Out Of Public View.” “Since then, the process of drafting what will likely be the only significant immigration changes of his presidency — and his most consequential use of executive power — has been conducted almost entirely behind closed doors, where lobbyists and interest groups invited to the White House are making their case out of public view.” (Julie Hirschfeld Davis, “Behind Closed Doors, Obama Crafts Executive Actions,” The New York Times, 8/18/14)
- Working With Lobbyists Has Opened Obama “To Criticism That He Is Presiding Over Opaque Policy-Making, With The Potential To Reward Political Backers At The Expense Of Other Interests, Including Some On The Losing Side Who Are Threatening To Sue.” “It also has opened the president, already facing charges of executive overreach, to criticism that he is presiding over opaque policy-making, with the potential to reward political backers at the expense of other interests, including some on the losing side who are threatening to sue.” (Julie Hirschfeld Davis, “Behind Closed Doors, Obama Crafts Executive Actions,” The New York Times, 8/18/14)
Administration Officials Have Said Obama Has Met With “An Array Of Lawmakers, Experts And Business Leaders For A Wide Range Of Perspectives To Inform His Plans For Executive Actions.” ““White House officials say Mr. Obama has been inclusive as he looks to wield his authority, reaching out to an array of lawmakers, experts and business leaders for a wide range of perspectives to inform his plans for executive actions.” (Julie Hirschfeld Davis, “Behind Closed Doors, Obama Crafts Executive Actions,” The New York Times, 8/18/14)
- “The Go-It-Alone Approach Has Left The Administration — Which Claims To Be The Most Transparent In United States History — Essentially Making Policy From The White House, Replacing Congressional Hearings And Floor Debates With Closed Meetings For Invited Constituencies.” (Julie Hirschfeld Davis, “Behind Closed Doors, Obama Crafts Executive Actions,” The New York Times, 8/18/14)
FLASHBACK: During His 2008 Campaign, Obama Spoke Out Against The Influence Of Lobbyists Engaging In “Secret Meetings”
In 2008, Obama Said Washington Needed To Reform It’s Politics “By Taking Power Away From The Lobbyists That Kill Good Ideas And Good Plans With Secret Meetings And Campaign Checks.” OBAMA: “And change in Washington is what we need right now. Now, Green Bay—Green Bay, I want to be honest with you. I want to be honest with you. This change is not going to be easy. It’s going to require reforming our politics by taking power away from the lobbyists that kill good ideas and good plans with secret meetings and campaign checks.” (Barack Obama, Remarks, Green Bay, Wisconsin, 9/22/08)
"Never let a crisis go to waste"
Ferguson isn’t being wasted.
Hey, remember that whole ‘Cash for Clunkers’ thing? Yeah, it didn’t work out so well.
Texas A&M has a new report on the Cash for Clunkers program, and it’s not good.
From Fox News:
Researchers at Texas A&M, in a recently released report, measured the impact of Cash for Clunkers on sales and found the program actually decreased industry revenue by $3 billion over a nine-to-11-month period. Meanwhile, the “stimulus” also cost taxpayers $3 billion.
The Car Allowance Rebate System, commonly called Cash for Clunkers, was part of a 2009 economic stimulus program that was sold as a lifeline from the federal government to a sinking U.S. auto industry.
The program let people turn in their old cars for up to $4,500 in cash to be used toward the purchase of a more fuel-efficient alternative. Nearly 700,000 vehicles were traded in through the program.
But the Texas A&M University study, for the National Bureau of Economic Research, shows the program may have actually created a drag on the economy.
This is nothing but a little microcosm of Keynesian economics. The “thinking” is that an economy can be stimulated by the government simply paying people. The problem is, it doesn’t work.
- First of all, people were paid, but no actual wealth was created. People are simply the beneficiaries of something without working or creating anything.
- Second, wealth (in the form of cars) was actually destroyed.
- Third, it hurt those who were looking to purchase an inexpensive car because it raised the price of older, used cars. This happened because cars that were only worth a few hundred bucks could be traded in for $4,500. Anyone with a cheap car to sell, would be stupid not to take that deal. This lowered the number of cars in the marketplace and, as supply and demand might dictate, those who needed a cheap car (most likely the poor), could no longer afford one.
- Fourth, it’s redistributive. Those who had no need for a car and didn’t have one to sell, had to fund the program anyway.
- Fifth, the government went into debt to do it. This not only means that we’re now paying interest on it, but we’re saddling people with debt who weren’t even eligible to vote for the candidates who initiated the program.
It should come as no surprise that the program was a huge failure.