Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Re: I am curious if you see an internet ad

Best way to keep from opening an ad with a virus or trojan. SAFETY
FIRST.
---
should'a bought a mac

On Jun 12, 11:43 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Best way to keep from opening an ad with a virus or trojan. SAFETY FIRST.
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 8:52 AM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > why?
>
> > On Jun 12, 8:29 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > My personal policy is to never, under any circumstances, open any ad on
> > the
> > > internet even those from companies of which I regularly do business. If
> > I
> > > see something of interest I copy the information on a scratch pad and go
> > to
> > > it later.
>
> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > Google kept begging me to use a $100 voucher to advertise a blog,
> > mainly I
> > > > think because they are hoping I will spend way more than that.
>
> > > > So I am advertising a local libertarian blog
>
> > > >http://dclibertarian.blogspot.com/
>
> > > > with google ad sense, with the account set to spend only $30 a month
>
> > > > I am hoping that means my voucher makes it free for three months
>
> > > > I will be curious if ANYONE sees an ad for it on any other website
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > <http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: I am curious if you see an internet ad

very good!

On Jun 12, 11:45 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i thought the Trojan protected against the virus?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Best way to keep from opening an ad with a virus or trojan. SAFETY FIRST.
>
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 8:52 AM, plainolamerican <
> > plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> why?
>
> >> On Jun 12, 8:29 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > My personal policy is to never, under any circumstances, open any ad on
> >> the
> >> > internet even those from companies of which I regularly do business.
> >> If I
> >> > see something of interest I copy the information on a scratch pad and
> >> go to
> >> > it later.
>
> >> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com
> >> >wrote:
>
> >> > > Google kept begging me to use a $100 voucher to advertise a blog,
> >> mainly I
> >> > > think because they are hoping I will spend way more than that.
>
> >> > > So I am advertising a local libertarian blog
>
> >> > >http://dclibertarian.blogspot.com/
>
> >> > > with google ad sense, with the account set to spend only $30 a month
>
> >> > > I am hoping that means my voucher makes it free for three months
>
> >> > > I will be curious if ANYONE sees an ad for it on any other website
>
> >> > > --
> >> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> >> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> >> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> >> <http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> >> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> >> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> >> --
> >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> >> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> >> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Jesse and Al

he's half white
--
speculation noted

On Jun 12, 11:37 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> .
>
> __,_._,___
>
> 1339117076-535.jpg_m.jpg
> 87KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Jesse and Al

Long delayed ethics charges against Rep Maxine Waters to finally go forward

BY COACH COLLINS, ON JUNE 12TH, 2012

by Doug Book, staff writer

It was in August of 2010 the House Ethics Committee decided to proceed with charges against California Congresswoman Maxine Waters for contriving to procure "special favors" for the Massachusetts-based, OneUnited Bank. And although "Waters has done her damnedest during [these] three years to exploit as many legal technicalities as possible to try to get the investigation halted…" it now looks as though the jig might finally be up. (1)

In 2008, Representative Waters set up a meeting between officials of the Treasury Department and members of a "trade association" of minority owned banks. The meeting, however, consisted almost exclusively of OneUnited Bank executives who, to the surprise of the Treasury people, asked them for a $50 million dollar loan!

It seems the minority-owned OneUnited was in trouble. It also seems Maxine Waters' husband, Sidney Williams, was on the board of OneUnited and owned $350,000 worth of the bank's stock–stock which would have been worthless if the bank failed. The Congresswoman forgot to mention this minor point to Treasury when arranging the get together.

Now who came to Waters' assistance but Rush Limbaugh's "Banking Queen," Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank. Advising the congresswoman that her involvement in the affair might not look so hot to the House Ethics Committee, Frank offered to do the dirty work for her as OneUnited Bank was, after all, in his district. Frank later told the Committee:

"I said, look, it's a Boston institution. You should stay out of it. It's a legitimate constituency thing for me. You should stay away from this. It's a legitimate thing for me to do, and you shouldn't be involved," Frank told the Globe, recounting his conversations with Waters. (2)

Although it is against House rules to "use one's power as a member for personal financial gain," it's apparently just FINE if one of your House colleagues does it FOR you. (2)

At this point, Waters' Chief of Staff—and grandson—Mikael Moore decided to lend a hand. He addressed numerous emails to the House Financial Services Committee, "…discussing with committee members details of a bank bailout bill apparently after Ms. Waters agreed to refrain from advocating on the bank's behalf. The bailout bill had provisions that ultimately benefited OneUnited…" (2)

In the end, OneUnited was the only institution to receive a bailout–$12 million—through section 103-6 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. And that, only after Barney Frank had personally telephoned Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on behalf of the bank– a call which Frank later claimed to have "forgotten." Perhaps it was the heat which Frank believed might be heading his way after the Republican blowout win in the election of 2010 which prompted his sudden decision to retire. (3)

And now, after lengthy delays prompted by Waters' unfounded claims of racism and violation of her due process rights, the Ethics Committee might finally get down to the business of charging this corrupt congresswoman with criminal abuse of the power of her office. (2)

It should be noted that Waters has claimed she only lobbied on behalf of OneUnited in order to "[look] out for the interests of small and minority-owned banks." And here some thought Obama had a corner on the contempt-for-the-intelligence-of-others market. (1)

Use this site to contact your Congressional Representative:https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

To read more use these links:

(1) http://www.theblaze.com/stories/house-ethics-committee-resumes-case-against-maxine-waters/

(2)http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/2228/368/Breaking:_Maxine_Waters_Ethics_Case_WILL_Proceed.html

(3) http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/13-barney-franks-ethics-mess/

Have you answered this week's CiR.com poll?

This day in history June 12^th

1987: While standing in front of the Berlin Wall, Ronald Reagan makes his famous challenge to Mikhail Gorbachev to "tear down this wall."

To read about the Democrats' 200 year war on Americanism get your copy of Coach's new book Crooks thugs and bigots the lost hidden and changed history of the Democratic Party athttp://crooksthugsandbigots.com

Do you have something to say? If you do and you want to be heard, coachisright.com may be your answer. CiR is a conservative Judeo/Christian site that demands links for everything you say except obvious opinion pieces. If you can you reduce your thoughts to a cohesive 300 to 500 word essay send a writing sample to kcoachc@gmail.com .

In this world you may have knowledge or you may have repose, but you may not have both. What have you done today to deserve to live in America?

Comments on this or any other coachisright.com essay can be sent by following the posting instructions below.

Share and Enjoy:

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Travis <baconlard@gmail.com> wrote:

.

__,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Republicans Outmaneuvered by Obama and Holder

Attorney General Eric Holder assigned two prosecutors to look into
classified document leaks that fed two New York Times articles this
past week, further heightening the profile of a debate between
Democrats and Republicans about secrecy and the press.

In a press release published on Friday, the U.S. Attorney General said
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald C. Machen Jr. and
U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein would
lead separate FBI investigations into who may have given reporters top
secret information about national security operations.

"I have every confidence in their abilities to doggedly follow the
facts and the evidence in the pursuit of justice wherever it leads,"
Holder wrote.

Some critics have accused the Obama administration for leaking the
information to help Obama's re-election prospects, an allegation the
president called "offensive" on Friday.

The controversy unfolded when the New York Times ran two articles
about the United States' national security operations. In one story,
Jo Becker and Scott Shane take a close look at President Obama's hands-
on approach to counter-terrorism and details aabout a so-called "Kill
List" that's at the heart of the United State's drone strikes.

Another article is an excerpt from David Sanger's new book, "Confront
and Conceal: Obama's Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American
Power," and it describes Obama's plan to accelerate cyber-attack on
Iran's nuclear program.

The United States' use of drones to execute al-Qaeda officials, as
well as its use of the Stuxnet computer work to weaken or destroy
Iran's nuclear program, have long been open secrets. Just earlier this
week, the Pentagon confirmed that a predator drone in Pakistan killed
the terror group's second-in command, Yahya al-Libi.

But the White House and Congress are furious over the possibility of
unauthorized disclosures of top secret information. A group of
Congressmen, including Republican Sen. John McCain, condemned the
national security leaks and launched an investigation into their
source on Wednesday, the Huffington Post reported.

Thanks to the upcoming election, the controversy has also launched a
partisan debate about whether or not a Washington insider is leaking
information to help Obama beat Republican candidate Mitt Romney in the
fall. As the New York Times summarizes in an article about the
controversy and backlash, the issue has "Congressional Republicans
accusing the Obama administration of leaking classified information
for political advantage and Democrats lodging their own protests about
high-level disclosures."

"It is difficult to escape the conclusion that these recent leaks of
highly classified information, all of which have the effect of making
the president look strong and decisive on national security in the
middle of his re-election campaign, have a deeper political
motivation," Sen. McCain, who sits on the Senate Armed Services
Committee, said, according to the New York Times.

When asked what he thought about the document leaks, Obama said it was
"offensive" for people to assume or believe one of his aides was
responsible.

"The notion that my White House would purposefully release classified
national security information is offensive, it's wrong," Obama said in
a press briefing on Friday, shortly before Holder launched the federal
investigation.

On Jun 12, 11:51 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good thought provoking article. If Holder and the Justice Department don't
> go after whoever leaked the latest sensitive information that was
> undoubtedly leaked by White House officials, then they need to let that
> private accused of leaking to WikiLeaks go.
>
> McCain is clearly a RINO!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Wimps and rinos. Is there any other kind of Republican in Congress these
> > days?
>
> > **
> > New post on *therightplanet.com*
> > <http://www.therightplanet.com/?author=2> Republicans Outmaneuvered by
> > Obama and Holder<http://www.therightplanet.com/2012/06/republicans-outmaneuvered-by-ob...> by
> > Sard <http://www.therightplanet.com/?author=2>
>
> > *By: Cliff Kincaid*
> > Accuracy in Media<http://www.aim.org/aim-column/republicans-outmaneuvered-by-obama-and-...>
>
> > Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in 2008 in part because he did not
> > want to challenge Obama's personal character or loyalty to the U.S., is now
> > upset over what he calls<http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice....>"…a disturbing stream of articles" that cite "leaked classified or
> > highly-sensitive information…" in an "effort to paint a portrait of
> > President Obama as a strong leader on national security issues…"
>
> > McCain's statements, like his 2008 presidential campaign, are careful not
> > to personally accuse Obama himself of any wrongdoing. McCain's statements
> > refer repeatedly to the "Obama Administration" or just the
> > "administration," rather than the President himself. At best, he says that
> > Obama is ultimately "responsible" for the leaks. Obama denies the White
> > House leaked anything and finds the charge that anyone did so "offensive."
>
> > The senator went on to say, "The fact that this Administration would
> > aggressively pursue leaks perpetrated by a 22-year old Army private in the
> > 'WikiLeaks' matter and former CIA employees in other leaks cases but
> > apparently sanction leaks made by senior Administration officials for
> > political purposes is simply unacceptable. It also calls for the need for a
> > special counsel to investigate what happened here."
>
> > Here, the senator makes two questionable assumptions: that the
> > administration is determined to aggressively pursue the WikiLeaks matter,
> > and that "senior Administration officials" are behind the recent leaks, not
> > Obama himself.
>
> > In the first place, government prosecutors have ruled out the death
> > penalty in the case of Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, the
> > source of the classified WikiLeaks material. This is strange because the
> > leaks constitute the largest release of classified information in history.
> > The trial of Manning, regarded as a hero by the radical left, has been
> > repeatedly delayed and now won't occur until November. Then, after the
> > election, it wouldn't be surprising to see the government dropping some of
> > the charges against him.
>
> > Second, Attorney General Eric Holder has not brought charges against
> > Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who allegedly received the stolen
> > documents from Manning and was therefore part of a conspiracy to commit
> > espionage. Like Manning, Assange is a hero to much of Obama's political
> > "progressive" base.
>
> > McCain's decision to accuse administration officials, rather than Obama
> > himself, of the leaks to The New York Times, is an assumption that enables
> > the senator to avoid questioning Obama's personal patriotism. McCain fought
> > for his country in wartime but politically he wants to "play nice."
>
> > Nobody doubts that McCain, who was tortured by the communists when he was
> > a POW during the Vietnam War, believes in his country. But his decision to
> > give Obama the benefit of the doubt makes no sense, especially because the
> > Obama campaign has been caught lying about such relatively minor matters as Obama's
> > membership in the New Party<http://www.trevorloudon.com/2012/06/barack-obamas-ties-to-the-marxist...>,
> > a vehicle designed for a Trojan Horse takeover of the Democratic Party in
> > Chicago. Obama's ally in this effort was Rep. Danny Davis, who recently accepted
> > an award<http://rebelpundit.com/2012/03/obama-ally-rep-danny-davis-receives-aw...>from the Communist Party USA. This followed the campaign's claim that
> > Obama's childhood mentor, Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis,
> > was just a civil rights activist. Obama called him just "Frank" in *Dreams
> > from My Father*, leaving it to anti-communist investigators—not the
> > FBI—to discover his true identity.
>
> > McCain requested a special counsel independent of the Justice Department
> > to investigate the leaks. Holder outflanked McCain, appointing<http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/June/12-ag-736.html>U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald C. Machen Jr. and U.S.
> > Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein to conduct the
> > inquiry and "follow all appropriate investigative leads within the
> > Executive and Legislative branches of government." Since not even McCain
> > has suggested the President personally did the leaking, it cannot possibly
> > be appropriate to investigate Obama himself. As a result, Obama is, once
> > again, off the hook. Congress will hold hearings but they will go nowhere
> > because the administration will claim an investigation is already underway.
>
> > McCain never learns—or doesn't want to learn. When HBO's "Game Change"
> > came out, conservatives attacked the film for its distorted portrayal of
> > McCain running mate and GOP 2008 vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
> > That was legitimate criticism, and McCain defended his former running mate
> > and attacked the film. But the film was accurate, as far as we can
> > determine, in depicting McCain as a candidate who did not want to take the
> > gloves off when attacking Obama. "This is not the campaign I wanted to
> > run," McCain says, when some of his supporters in a crowd scene label Obama
> > a socialist or a Muslim and cry out that "He hangs out with people who hate
> > our country!" It was Palin, not McCain, who took the fight to Obama over
> > his "palling around with terrorists" such as Bill Ayers and Bernardine
> > Dohrn.
>
> > Before the 2008 election, we wrote a column titled "Who Vetted Obama?"
> > that asked <http://www.aim.org/aim-column/who-vetted-obama/> two simple
> > questions: When did the FBI investigate Obama? And who vetted him? The FBI
> > did not investigate Obama, and the media did not "vet" him, something that
> > angered the late Andrew Breitbart and made him want to pick up where the
> > news media failed to tread.
>
> > We noted, "Obama has a 30-year history of associating with unsavory
> > characters, beginning with communist Frank Marshall Davis and continuing
> > with Jeremiah Wright and communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine
> > Dohrn, which should disqualify him from getting a security clearance in the
> > government that he wants to run."
>
> > Four years later, we find McCain and many Republicans making the same
> > mistake they made then—assuming that Obama is above the fray and should be
> > shielded from any personal charges. Mitt Romney seems to be following in
> > McCain's footsteps, refusing to label Obama a socialist. On the other hand,
> > the Obama campaign does not shy away from calling Romney a "capitalist," as
> > if that is a dirty word.
>
> > The media, who receive the leaks that make Obama look good, have a vested
> > interest in not investigating their source. In the strange-but-true
> > department, American national security suffers but Obama comes across
> > looking like someone committed to the security of America and its allies.
> > According to the latest Fox News poll<http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/08/once-helpful-national-secu...>,
> > Obama beats Romney by 11 points on handling of foreign policy and 13 points
> > on dealing with terrorism. The leaks have served their purpose.
>
> > The fact is that the FBI does not vet presidential candidates for national
> > security purposes. There was no FBI investigation into Obama's own
> > background, associations, loyalty, and overall fitness for office. The FBI
> > only probes those being considered for some federal positions under the
> > president. It is not clear, however, if Van Jones was ever investigated. If
> > so, he got the job anyway, and then-Fox News personality Glenn Beck and
> > blogger Trevor Loudon discovered the truth, not the FBI.
>
> > Former FBI agent Max Noel told me that the Bureau used to investigate
> > candidates for federal employment by analyzing Character, Associates,
> > Reputation, and Loyalty to the United States. The first letters in those
> > words make up the acronym CARL. By the standard of "A"
> > alone—Associates—Obama flunks.
>
> > Obama was never investigated by the FBI, however. He captured the
> > presidency and, with the help of the media, continues to outflank his
> > Republican opponents, McCain then and Romney now.
>
> > *Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative
> > Journalism and can be contacted at cliff.kinc...@aim.org<Cliff%20Kincaid%20is%20the%20Director%20of%20the%20AIM%20Center%20for%20Investigative%20Journalism%20and%20can%20be%20contacted%20at%20cliff.kinc...@aim.org.>
> > .*
>
> > *h/t: Noisy Room<http://noisyroom.net/blog/2012/06/11/republicans-outmaneuvered-by-oba...>
> > *
>
> > *Sard <http://www.therightplanet.com/?author=2>* | June 12, 2012 at
> > 10:41 am | Categories: American Sovereignty<http://www.therightplanet.com/?cat=905245>,
> > Communications
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

No swearing in town, I swear!

Can't say 'firetruck'?

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

No swearing in town, I swear!

by DCG

Massachusetts town to vote on $20 fines for cursing in public

Fox News: Mimi Duphily was hanging baskets of pink geraniums on antique street lamps downtown for the Middleborough Beautification and Activities Group when she noticed something else that needed cleaning up -- citizens' mouths.

"The cursing has gotten very, very bad. I find it appalling and I won't tolerate it," said Duphily, a civic leader in the otherwise quiet New England community, which calls itself the Cranberry Capital of the World. "No person should be allowed to talk in that manner."

Soon, Middleborough residents who do could risk a $20 fine.

Duphily, 63, tried scolding the cursers -- whom she describes as young people shouting the "F-word" back and forth -- with a stern, "Hey kids, that's enough!" Then she conferred with the Beautification and Activities Group, which informed the Middleborough Business Coalition, which then called a summit with Middleborough Police Chief Bruce Gates, who now, in his sworn role, is trying to stomp out swears.

He is asking citizens to vote at the annual Town Meeting on Monday to flush potty mouths by granting police the power to issue $20 civil tickets to anyone who publicly "accosts" another person verbally with profanity.

He isn't targeting ordinary swears, like an understandable expletive uttered after a Red Sox loss. He said he is aiming at offenses like "profane language at some attractive female walking through town." His officers patrol on bikes and can already give tickets for public drinking, rubbish thrown in streets and more. Cursing is another "quality of life" issue, he said.

After all, who wants to go downtown and "listen to that baloney?" he said.

I certainly agree with them in that I don't want to hear baloney like that yet apparently this woman hasn't heard of the First Amendment.

One would think that the police in this city would have higher priorities. Yet with a budget deficit of over $500,000, I guess they need to find additional revenues elsewhere.

DCG

DCG | June 12, 2012 at 3:19 am | Tags: Middleborough | Categories: Culture War, First Amendment | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-f19

Comment

See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/no-swearing-in-town-i-swear/

Thanks for flying with

WordPress.com

Re: Republicans Outmaneuvered by Obama and Holder

Good thought provoking article. If Holder and the Justice Department don't go after whoever leaked the latest sensitive information that was undoubtedly leaked by White House officials, then they need to let that private accused of leaking to WikiLeaks go.

McCain is clearly a RINO!

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Travis <baconlard@gmail.com> wrote:

Wimps and rinos. Is there any other kind of Republican in Congress these days?

New post on therightplanet.com

Republicans Outmaneuvered by Obama and Holder
by Sard

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in 2008 in part because he did not want to challenge Obama's personal character or loyalty to the U.S., is now upset over what he calls "…a disturbing stream of articles" that cite "leaked classified or highly-sensitive information…" in an "effort to paint a portrait of President Obama as a strong leader on national security issues…"

McCain's statements, like his 2008 presidential campaign, are careful not to personally accuse Obama himself of any wrongdoing. McCain's statements refer repeatedly to the "Obama Administration" or just the "administration," rather than the President himself. At best, he says that Obama is ultimately "responsible" for the leaks. Obama denies the White House leaked anything and finds the charge that anyone did so "offensive."

The senator went on to say, "The fact that this Administration would aggressively pursue leaks perpetrated by a 22-year old Army private in the 'WikiLeaks' matter and former CIA employees in other leaks cases but apparently sanction leaks made by senior Administration officials for political purposes is simply unacceptable. It also calls for the need for a special counsel to investigate what happened here."

Here, the senator makes two questionable assumptions: that the administration is determined to aggressively pursue the WikiLeaks matter, and that "senior Administration officials" are behind the recent leaks, not Obama himself.

In the first place, government prosecutors have ruled out the death penalty in the case of Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, the source of the classified WikiLeaks material. This is strange because the leaks constitute the largest release of classified information in history. The trial of Manning, regarded as a hero by the radical left, has been repeatedly delayed and now won't occur until November. Then, after the election, it wouldn't be surprising to see the government dropping some of the charges against him.

Second, Attorney General Eric Holder has not brought charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who allegedly received the stolen documents from Manning and was therefore part of a conspiracy to commit espionage. Like Manning, Assange is a hero to much of Obama's political "progressive" base.

McCain's decision to accuse administration officials, rather than Obama himself, of the leaks to The New York Times, is an assumption that enables the senator to avoid questioning Obama's personal patriotism. McCain fought for his country in wartime but politically he wants to "play nice."

Nobody doubts that McCain, who was tortured by the communists when he was a POW during the Vietnam War, believes in his country. But his decision to give Obama the benefit of the doubt makes no sense, especially because the Obama campaign has been caught lying about such relatively minor matters as Obama's membership in the New Party, a vehicle designed for a Trojan Horse takeover of the Democratic Party in Chicago. Obama's ally in this effort was Rep. Danny Davis, who recently accepted an award from the Communist Party USA. This followed the campaign's claim that Obama's childhood mentor, Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis, was just a civil rights activist. Obama called him just "Frank" in Dreams from My Father, leaving it to anti-communist investigators—not the FBI—to discover his true identity.

McCain requested a special counsel independent of the Justice Department to investigate the leaks. Holder outflanked McCain, appointing U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald C. Machen Jr. and U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein to conduct the inquiry and "follow all appropriate investigative leads within the Executive and Legislative branches of government." Since not even McCain has suggested the President personally did the leaking, it cannot possibly be appropriate to investigate Obama himself. As a result, Obama is, once again, off the hook. Congress will hold hearings but they will go nowhere because the administration will claim an investigation is already underway.

McCain never learns—or doesn't want to learn. When HBO's "Game Change" came out, conservatives attacked the film for its distorted portrayal of McCain running mate and GOP 2008 vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. That was legitimate criticism, and McCain defended his former running mate and attacked the film. But the film was accurate, as far as we can determine, in depicting McCain as a candidate who did not want to take the gloves off when attacking Obama. "This is not the campaign I wanted to run," McCain says, when some of his supporters in a crowd scene label Obama a socialist or a Muslim and cry out that "He hangs out with people who hate our country!" It was Palin, not McCain, who took the fight to Obama over his "palling around with terrorists" such as Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Before the 2008 election, we wrote a column titled "Who Vetted Obama?" that asked two simple questions: When did the FBI investigate Obama? And who vetted him? The FBI did not investigate Obama, and the media did not "vet" him, something that angered the late Andrew Breitbart and made him want to pick up where the news media failed to tread.

We noted, "Obama has a 30-year history of associating with unsavory characters, beginning with communist Frank Marshall Davis and continuing with Jeremiah Wright and communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, which should disqualify him from getting a security clearance in the government that he wants to run."

Four years later, we find McCain and many Republicans making the same mistake they made then—assuming that Obama is above the fray and should be shielded from any personal charges. Mitt Romney seems to be following in McCain's footsteps, refusing to label Obama a socialist. On the other hand, the Obama campaign does not shy away from calling Romney a "capitalist," as if that is a dirty word.

The media, who receive the leaks that make Obama look good, have a vested interest in not investigating their source. In the strange-but-true department, American national security suffers but Obama comes across looking like someone committed to the security of America and its allies. According to the latest Fox News poll, Obama beats Romney by 11 points on handling of foreign policy and 13 points on dealing with terrorism. The leaks have served their purpose.

The fact is that the FBI does not vet presidential candidates for national security purposes. There was no FBI investigation into Obama's own background, associations, loyalty, and overall fitness for office. The FBI only probes those being considered for some federal positions under the president. It is not clear, however, if Van Jones was ever investigated. If so, he got the job anyway, and then-Fox News personality Glenn Beck and blogger Trevor Loudon discovered the truth, not the FBI.

Former FBI agent Max Noel told me that the Bureau used to investigate candidates for federal employment by analyzing Character, Associates, Reputation, and Loyalty to the United States. The first letters in those words make up the acronym CARL. By the standard of "A" alone—Associates—Obama flunks.

Obama was never investigated by the FBI, however. He captured the presidency and, with the help of the media, continues to outflank his Republican opponents, McCain then and Romney now.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.

h/t: Noisy Room

Sard | June 12, 2012 at 10:41 am | Categories: American Sovereignty, Communications, Conservatism, Foreign Policy, House of Representatives, Legal/Judicial, Main-Stream Media, National Defense, National Security, Presidential Campaign, Progressive Movement, Terrorism, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Military | URL: http://wp.me/p1SHGG-5TD

Comment See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.therightplanet.com/2012/06/republicans-outmaneuvered-by-obama-and-holder/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Republicans Outmaneuvered by Obama and Holder

Wimps and rinos. Is there any other kind of Republican in Congress these days?

New post on therightplanet.com

Republicans Outmaneuvered by Obama and Holder

by Sard

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in 2008 in part because he did not want to challenge Obama's personal character or loyalty to the U.S., is now upset over what he calls "…a disturbing stream of articles" that cite "leaked classified or highly-sensitive information…" in an "effort to paint a portrait of President Obama as a strong leader on national security issues…"

McCain's statements, like his 2008 presidential campaign, are careful not to personally accuse Obama himself of any wrongdoing. McCain's statements refer repeatedly to the "Obama Administration" or just the "administration," rather than the President himself. At best, he says that Obama is ultimately "responsible" for the leaks. Obama denies the White House leaked anything and finds the charge that anyone did so "offensive."

The senator went on to say, "The fact that this Administration would aggressively pursue leaks perpetrated by a 22-year old Army private in the 'WikiLeaks' matter and former CIA employees in other leaks cases but apparently sanction leaks made by senior Administration officials for political purposes is simply unacceptable. It also calls for the need for a special counsel to investigate what happened here."

Here, the senator makes two questionable assumptions: that the administration is determined to aggressively pursue the WikiLeaks matter, and that "senior Administration officials" are behind the recent leaks, not Obama himself.

In the first place, government prosecutors have ruled out the death penalty in the case of Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, the source of the classified WikiLeaks material. This is strange because the leaks constitute the largest release of classified information in history. The trial of Manning, regarded as a hero by the radical left, has been repeatedly delayed and now won't occur until November. Then, after the election, it wouldn't be surprising to see the government dropping some of the charges against him.

Second, Attorney General Eric Holder has not brought charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who allegedly received the stolen documents from Manning and was therefore part of a conspiracy to commit espionage. Like Manning, Assange is a hero to much of Obama's political "progressive" base.

McCain's decision to accuse administration officials, rather than Obama himself, of the leaks to The New York Times, is an assumption that enables the senator to avoid questioning Obama's personal patriotism. McCain fought for his country in wartime but politically he wants to "play nice."

Nobody doubts that McCain, who was tortured by the communists when he was a POW during the Vietnam War, believes in his country. But his decision to give Obama the benefit of the doubt makes no sense, especially because the Obama campaign has been caught lying about such relatively minor matters as Obama's membership in the New Party, a vehicle designed for a Trojan Horse takeover of the Democratic Party in Chicago. Obama's ally in this effort was Rep. Danny Davis, who recently accepted an award from the Communist Party USA. This followed the campaign's claim that Obama's childhood mentor, Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis, was just a civil rights activist. Obama called him just "Frank" in Dreams from My Father, leaving it to anti-communist investigators—not the FBI—to discover his true identity.

McCain requested a special counsel independent of the Justice Department to investigate the leaks. Holder outflanked McCain, appointing U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald C. Machen Jr. and U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein to conduct the inquiry and "follow all appropriate investigative leads within the Executive and Legislative branches of government." Since not even McCain has suggested the President personally did the leaking, it cannot possibly be appropriate to investigate Obama himself. As a result, Obama is, once again, off the hook. Congress will hold hearings but they will go nowhere because the administration will claim an investigation is already underway.

McCain never learns—or doesn't want to learn. When HBO's "Game Change" came out, conservatives attacked the film for its distorted portrayal of McCain running mate and GOP 2008 vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. That was legitimate criticism, and McCain defended his former running mate and attacked the film. But the film was accurate, as far as we can determine, in depicting McCain as a candidate who did not want to take the gloves off when attacking Obama. "This is not the campaign I wanted to run," McCain says, when some of his supporters in a crowd scene label Obama a socialist or a Muslim and cry out that "He hangs out with people who hate our country!" It was Palin, not McCain, who took the fight to Obama over his "palling around with terrorists" such as Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Before the 2008 election, we wrote a column titled "Who Vetted Obama?" that asked two simple questions: When did the FBI investigate Obama? And who vetted him? The FBI did not investigate Obama, and the media did not "vet" him, something that angered the late Andrew Breitbart and made him want to pick up where the news media failed to tread.

We noted, "Obama has a 30-year history of associating with unsavory characters, beginning with communist Frank Marshall Davis and continuing with Jeremiah Wright and communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, which should disqualify him from getting a security clearance in the government that he wants to run."

Four years later, we find McCain and many Republicans making the same mistake they made then—assuming that Obama is above the fray and should be shielded from any personal charges. Mitt Romney seems to be following in McCain's footsteps, refusing to label Obama a socialist. On the other hand, the Obama campaign does not shy away from calling Romney a "capitalist," as if that is a dirty word.

The media, who receive the leaks that make Obama look good, have a vested interest in not investigating their source. In the strange-but-true department, American national security suffers but Obama comes across looking like someone committed to the security of America and its allies. According to the latest Fox News poll, Obama beats Romney by 11 points on handling of foreign policy and 13 points on dealing with terrorism. The leaks have served their purpose.

The fact is that the FBI does not vet presidential candidates for national security purposes. There was no FBI investigation into Obama's own background, associations, loyalty, and overall fitness for office. The FBI only probes those being considered for some federal positions under the president. It is not clear, however, if Van Jones was ever investigated. If so, he got the job anyway, and then-Fox News personality Glenn Beck and blogger Trevor Loudon discovered the truth, not the FBI.

Former FBI agent Max Noel told me that the Bureau used to investigate candidates for federal employment by analyzing Character, Associates, Reputation, and Loyalty to the United States. The first letters in those words make up the acronym CARL. By the standard of "A" alone—Associates—Obama flunks.

Obama was never investigated by the FBI, however. He captured the presidency and, with the help of the media, continues to outflank his Republican opponents, McCain then and Romney now.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.

h/t: Noisy Room