Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Harry Reid Celebrates CBO Report of Job Loss Caused by Obamacare as ‘Free Agency’

Harry Reid Celebrates
Harry Reid praised the CBO’s findings that Obamacare will cause over 2.3 million people to lose their jobs by 2021. Speaking with reporters outside of a luncheon, Reid shared his ridiculous and convoluted attempt at a football analogy to celebrate the rise of unemployment in America.

“We have the CBO report, which rightfully says, that people shouldn’t have job lock. If they — we live in a country where there should be free agency. People can do what they want.  And what they’re saying here is — and the fact checkers have already done this — the Republicans talk about losing millions of jobs simply isn’t true. It allows people to get out of a job they’re locked into, because of — they have healthcare in their job.”
“So my caucus is right on track to understand this. The CBO report is far better for us than it’s not. Republicans should get away from repeal and start talking about some constructive ways to handle the issues that they’re concerned about.”
Reid undoubtedly attempted that analogy because this report was released just a few days after the completion of the Super Bowl. However, in the world of sports, the definition of free agency is a person who is able to act freely without being controlled by someone else.
However, people have always been able to do what they want. Sure, at times, some professions, such as the financial services industry or lawyers, sign contracts with their firms. But, even then, there is a way out of the contract should you choose an early exit.
But, this distorted narrative pushed by Reid to lead people to believe that everyone is ‘locked into jobs due to healthcare’ is simply a continuation of the twisted spin by the progressive Democrats to demonize the health insurance industry and corporations. It also continues their tendency to focus on ‘choice’ when it is convenient for them. But, what about the choice of those who don’t want to lose their jobs or don’t want to see their hours cut. Are they to see this negative impact on their lives due to an over-controlling government as a good thing simply because Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barack Obama say so?
In his statement to reporters, Reid says that people losing millions of jobs isn’t true. He attempts to lessen the severity of the CBO statement by saying that people won’t be ‘locked into their job’.
The exact CBO statement is as follows. (emphasis mine)
“CBO estimates that the ACA will reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 to 2 percent during the period from 2017 to 2024, almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor—given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive,” said the report. 
“The reduction in CBO’s projections of hours worked represents a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024.”
Reid would like Americans to believe that those workers who choose to supply less labor are doing so happily and simply because they are relieved to no longer have ‘job lock’.
However, there are key words in this report that Reid conveniently, and not surprisingly, chooses to ignore. Those words are ‘given the new taxes’.
Harry Reid and his fellow Democrats, in continuing to spin the negative effects on the livelihood of Americans due to Obamacare are clearly demonstrating the ultimate in big government, elitist attitude – ‘Damn the facts. Ignore the reality. We know what is best for you.’
So desperate is the left to salvage and prop up Barack Obama’s signature legislation that millions of Americans losing their jobs, seeing hours cut, and pay reduced is spun as a good thing. But, this should come as no surprise. After all, the left spent months diminishing the negative impact of ObamaCare on those who were losing the policies that Barack Obama guaranteed they could keep by stating that it ‘only impacted 5% of Americans’. It’s bad enough that the experience of those losing their insurance, not by choice, was flippantly disregarded. It turns out, this number repeated ad nauseum was a lie.
Those millions of Americans who want to work, but are seeing their work hours cut or eliminated, will likely not be joining in the celebration of their loss with Harry Reid. Who would have thought we would see a day in America when the American dream was sold to the people by the government as working less and living more off the government dole. But, with a president hell-bent on fundamentally transforming America and a yes-man Congress readily allowing him to do so, even if his actions are unconstitutional, Americans shouldn’t be surprised that the Democrat Majority Leader in the Senate is reveling in their job loss. At this rate, America is headed further down the road of emulating the economic hardship and high unemployment of Greece. Is that the change that Americans were supposed to believe in?

Obama admin unilaterally changes law to allow immigrants with ‘limited’ terror contact into US

The Obama administration has issued new exemptions to a law that bars certain asylum-seekers and refugees who provided “limited material support” to terrorists who are believed to pose no threat from the U.S.
The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department published the new exemptions Wednesday in the Federal Register to narrow a ban in the Immigration and Nationality Act excluding refugees and asylum seekers who had provided limited material support, no matter how minor, to terrorists.
“These exemptions cover five kinds of limited material support that have adversely and unfairly affected refugees and asylum seekers with no tangible connection to terrorism: material support that was insignificant in amount or provided incidentally in the course of everyday social, commercial, family or humanitarian interactions, or under significant pressure,” a DHS official explained to The Daily Caller.
Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry signed the exemptions.
DHS contends that the law change is “commonsense” and that immigration procedures will remain the same in other respects.
“In addition to rigorous background vetting, including checks coordinated across several government agencies, these exemptions will only be applied on a case-by-case basis after careful review and all security checks have cleared,” the official added. “This exemption process is vital to advancing the U.S. government’s twin goal of protecting the world’s most vulnerable persons while ensuring U.S. national security and public safety.”
While the administration says the rule change is reasonable, former State Department official and current director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration StudiesJessica Vaughan questioned the administration’s right to unilaterally change the law.
“[T]here is a very legitimate question as to whether the administration actually has the authority to change the law in this way,” Vaughan wrote in an email to TheDC. “It seems to me that they are announcing that they will be disregarding yet another law written by Congress that they don’t like and are replacing it with their own guidelines, which in this case appear to be extremely broad and vague, and which are sure to be exploited by those seeking to game our generous refugee admissions program.”
According to DHS, Section 212(d)(3)(B) of the INA allows either the secretary of state or DHS secretary in consultation with each other and with the U.S. Attorney General “to determine that certain terrorism bars of the INA do not apply.”*
While Vaughan conceded that there are a number of immigrants seeking protection who have been denied due to unintentional contact with terrorists, she sees the exemptions as likely another opportunity for people to get around the system. (RELATED: Is spotty immigration enforcement to blame for MS-13 gang havoc?)
“If the recent past is any guide, those evaluating these cases will be ordered to ignore red flags in the applications, especially if the applicant is supported by one of the many advocacy groups that have the ear of senior DHS staff,” she explained. “The administration already approves of the admission of gang members as asylees and criminals in the DACA program and grants of prosecutorial discretion, so I don’t expect them to be troubled by the admission of terrorists and garden variety fraudsters in our refugee program.  This is how we end up with families like the Tsarnaev brothers [the Boston marathon bombers], who were originally admitted for political asylum.”
On the other side of the spectrum, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy cheered the changes to that law passed by Congress following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
According to Leahy’s office, the senator has been pushing for such exemptions for years.
“The existing interpretation was so broad as to be unworkable. It resulted in deserving refugees and asylees being barred from the United States for actions so tangential and minimal that no rational person would consider them supporters of terrorist activities,” the Vermont Democrat said in a statement. “These changes help return our nation to its historic role as a welcoming sanctuary to the world’s most vulnerable populations. It is long past time to return common-sense to our refugee and asylum laws and these new exemptions are an important step in that process.”
There are the types of asylum or refugee status seekers who would have been previously barred from entering the U.S., according to DHS include:
1) Individuals who provided small or inconsequential amounts of support without an intent to further any terrorist or violent activities, such as a refugee who gave a bowl of rice to a member of an opposition group.
2) Individuals who, in the ordinary course of business transactions or social or family interactions, have incidentally provided support with no intent of abetting violent or terrorist activity.  For instance, an owner of a restaurant who serves food to any paying customer, even though he knows some of them are members of an opposition group; or a mother or father who-as any parent would-fed and clothed their young adult child, even when they knew their child is part of a resistance movement.
3) Individuals who have provided certain humanitarian assistance – for example, an aid worker who handed out bottled water and blankets to victims of a natural disaster or those displaced by civil conflict, some of whom happen to be members of an opposition group.
4) Individuals who have provided support under significant pressure that does not quite rise to the level of duress (for which there are already exemptions in place), but that is significant enough that anyone in the same situation would see no reasonable alternative and would do the same.  We have seen, for example, a farmer who regularly pays a toll to a resistance group in order to cross a bridge to take his food to market, or a Syrian refugee who pays an opposition group to gain safe passage out of Syria.
Vaughan pointed out that in some cases, only the word of the individual would be used to make a determination.
“In my experience as a former State Dept. consular official, I know that there are some qualified applicants that get excluded because we cannot be sure if they are truly associated with terrorist or criminal groups, but it is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to national security and public safety,” she explained. “After all, there are usually other resettlement options for these people – they don’t have to come to the U.S., even if that’s what they want.”
And while the changes will affect those seeking protection in the short term, the manner in which the Obama administration changed the law will not be lost on Republican skeptics of immigration reform in the long term.
“This glaring end-run around Congress underscores that immigration reform is doomed to failure,” a Senate GOP aide told TheDC.
* This article has been updated with additional information about the secretaries’ authority to change the law. 
Follow Caroline on Twitter

Administration Did Not Adequately Review Health Law Before Expanding ObamaCare Subsidies, Report Finds

Administration Did Not Adequately Review Health Law Before Expanding ObamaCare Subsidies, Report Finds

February 5, 2014
WASHINGTON – Today, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and the House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., released a joint report that finds the Obama Administration did not conduct an adequate review of key issues prior to expanding health insurance subsidies created by the Affordable Care Act.
In May 2012, IRS and Treasury issued a final rule, which according to many legal experts has added hundreds of billions of dollars in new, unauthorized spending. The rule made premium subsidies available for individuals purchasing insurance on federal exchanges, despite clear language in the Affordable Care Act that explicitly limits these subsidies to individuals in an “Exchange established by a State.”  It also expands the employer mandate tax to states with a federal exchange.
“The evidence gathered by the Committees indicates that neither IRS nor the Treasury Department conducted a serious or thorough analysis of the PPACA statute or the law’s legislative history with respect to the government’s authority to provide premium subsidies in exchanges established by the federal government,” the report states. “IRS and Treasury merely asserted that they possessed such authority without providing the Committees with evidence to indicate that they came to their conclusion through reasoned decision-making.”
Key Findings:
-          IRS and Treasury officials expressed concern that there was no authority to interpret federal exchanges as an “Exchange established by the State,” as was necessary to expand the subsidies.
-          The only written explanation by the IRS and Treasury before publishing the rule was a single paragraph with a single reason. The single reason was the entire basis for the IRS’ decision to expand subsides prior to the proposed rule.
-          IRS and Treasury have not provided evidence that they seriously considered the letters and comments made by at least 35 members of Congress who commented on the rule. Officials also did not consider the possibility that the tax credits were intentionally targeted to encourage states to establish their own exchanges.
You can read the full report here.

Related Documents

Goal: 68 Million New Voters, Healthcare be Damned

Goal: 68 Million New Voters, Healthcare be Damned

Please review Mathew Boyle’s explosive article published at Brietbart.com on Oct. 30, 2013: “Election Integrity Activists: ObamaCare is “Biggest Voter Registration Fraud Scheme in History.” In brief, ObamaCare has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare for all.
Matthew clearly documents 6 facts that allows any objective reader to accept his very reasonable conclusion.
1: Beginning in 2010, the Obama administration began savagely attacking Houston resident Catherine Engelbrecht, President of “True the Vote”, with personal and business IRS audits, DHS threats, FBI visits, Secret Service investigations, harassing OSHA and BATF investigations. Watch a brief overview of the government attacks she and her family endured. Ask yourself, why so much massive fury directed at a single citizen unless she posed a dire threat to exposing the truth?
2: 100% of ObamaCare exchange applicants will automatically receive a voter registration card in the mail, in a manner more egregious than Bill Clinton’s 1993 “Motor-Voter” law, without one single government official actually laying eyes on another human being. The ObamaCare exchange system is programmed to blindly accept all user input data at face value. Period.
3: Left wing political activists are proudly gloating over their aggressive plans to mine the ObamaCare exchange databases and leverage “Navigators” (hired from the ranks of ACORN, Labor Unions and activist community organizations) to go door-to-door, registering the poor, elderly and illegals to vote. 68 Million NEW Democrat voters is their stated mission.
4: Why should Barack Obama actually care about the Healthcare.gov website costs, end-to-end customer data security, destruction of the individual healthcare markets, exploding healthcare premiums, etc., if his TRUE goal is 68 million new voters and NOT a better healthcare system for all?
5: By merely accepting this premise: Obama is hell-bent on the fundamental transformation he promised in 2008, and knowing he is a lifelong advocate of Saul Alynski (author of Rules for Radical, a book dedicated to Lucifer), then the engineered ObamaCare chaos via an “ends justify the means” ideology is easily understood. Acceptance of Obama’s deep hatred of America is the hardest part of this equation.
6: Who has publicly and consistently demonstrated higher character, honesty, decency and personal credibility: Citizen Catherine Englebrect or President Barack Obama?
imageBarack ObamaIf the basic essence of this blockbuster expose is correct, Obama, the Democrat Party, failed GOP “leaders” and the left-wing, ideological cheerleaders in the mainstream media will have accomplished what the Soviet Union could not: the total destruction of America via economic ruin. If the so-called conservative Republican Party can’t accept the harsh reality of Barack Obama’s deep hatred of capitalism and his constant war against the very ideal of American Exceptionalism, we can not possibly expect to survive as a nation.
I pray so-called conservative sages like Dr. Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Bill O’Reilly, Fred Barnes, Jeb Bush, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will accept the unlimited depths to which radical progressives like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will go to destroy the very fabric of free market capitalism.
May we continue to accept God’s blessings on our great nation.

Email: IRS’s Lerner, Treasury Department secretly drafted new rules to restrict nonprofits

Email: IRS’s Lerner, Treasury Department secretly drafted new rules to restrict nonprofits

The Obama administration’s Treasury Department and former IRS official Lois Lerner conspired to draft new 501(c)(4) regulations to restrict the activity of conservative groups in a way that would not be disclosed publicly, according to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The Treasury Department and Lerner started devising the new rules “off-plan,” meaning that their plans would not be published on the public schedule. They planned the new rules in 2012, while the IRS targeting of conservative groups was in full swing, and not after the scandal broke in order to clarify regulations as the administration has suggested.
The rules place would place much more stringent controls on what would be considered political activity by the IRS, effectively limiting the standard practices of a wide array of non-profit groups.
“Don’t know who in your organizations is keeping tabs on c4s, but since we mentioned potentially addressing them (off -plan) in 2013, I’ve got my radar up and this seemed interesting…,” Treasury official Ruth Madrigal wrote in a June 14, 2012 email to Lerner and others obtained by Ways and Means and provided to The Daily Caller.
Ways and Means chairman Rep. Dave Camp blasted the off-the-record plan during a hearing Wednesday with IRS commissioner John Koskinen, and called for the administration’s newly proposed 501(c)(4) rules to be halted until criminal investigations into the IRS targeting scandal are complete.
“If Treasury and the IRS fabricated the rationale for a rule change it would tend to raise questions about the integrity of the rule-making process,” Camp said.
“I want to be perfectly clear – this committee will fight any and all efforts to restrict the rights of groups to organize, speak out and educate the public, just as unions are allowed to do so.  We will get to the bottom of this, and I expect the IRS to produce – quickly – the outstanding documents the committee has requested,” Camp said.
“I believe the IRS has a long way to go in restoring its credibility.  But, you can take a first step by complying with this committee’s request and stopping all action against 501(c)(4) groups until the appropriate investigations are completed.”
The new rules define more previously acceptable activities by nonprofit groups as prohibited “candidate-related political activity.” Communications and activities including voter registration drives and publishing voter guides, among others, are now classified as political activity. Grants and donations that 501(c)(4)’s give to other nonprofits are now subject to new record-keeping and increased scrutiny to prevent the money’s use for broadly-defined political activity.
The rules were “drafted in a manner, in my view, to shut down tea party groups” Rep. Camp said earlier this week.
New IRS commissioner Koskinen said that the rules should “put to rest all of the issues surrounding applications for tax-exempt status.”
But Madrigal’s email to Lerner proves that the regulations were being developed long before the IRS needed to publicly put anything “to rest.”
At least 292 conservative groups were subjected to unfair targeting between 2010 and 2012, against six liberal groups that were allegedly given similar treatment.
“They are both over-broad and under-inclusive,” said Foley & Lardner LLP partner Cleta Mitchell on the new rules.
“They’ve taken everything that 501(c)(4) organizations do in the normal course of business and proposed to convert that all to candidate-related activity, even if a candidate is never mentioned.”
Mitchell said that the rules are being “rushed through” for political purposes.
“The objective is to get the rules in place before the 2014 election,” Mitchell said.
Follow Patrick on Twitter

911 Whistleblower Richard Andrew Grove - May28-06

1
911WhistleblowerRichardAndrewGrove..
QUOTE:

Subject: The Meria Heller Show Newsletter Message
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 22:25:56 -0500

Okay. It's Memorial Day and I've been working all day. I want you to go
to the free show link (eventually it will be in the archives, and in
about an hour at the Ipod download). I have a two hour show that will
blow your mind on 9/11. This man Richard Andrew Grove, a whistleblower who worked for the big boys and money people behind 9/11 has come out with information to set the 9/11 movement on fire.

Although many have rejected his work (too busy, big egos, whatever)
including the IRS, Treasury Dept and SEC, what he exposes on Marsh &
McLellan, AIG, Dyncorp, Spitzer, Stewart Air Force Base, Fitzgerald, Bremer, missing gold and bucks of 9/11, software that predicts the future and more will ASTOUND YOU as it did me. I will be having him live on the
show in June, but wanted you to hear this urgent information immediately.
That is why I worked on it all day.

If you are a journalist, blogger, etc., DO NOT think this is a ruse. I expect you to LISTEN intently to what this man is presenting and act on it.

If you are a friend, subscriber, past guest, listen and then relisten.
Pass it on to every outlet and every email list, group you have. This
information is EXPLOSIVE. The more of us that know this information, the
greater the chances I won't be killed for presenting it, and the greater the chances for a real revolution in America's thinking processes. Go beyond the explosions, destruction of evidence, etc., and learn who BENEFITTED and HOW on 9/11 to find out who the Corporate Fundamentalists are that were behind it all.

Thank you for trusting me with this one, it's well worth it.
Love,
Meria

"We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore".
"THE MERIA HELLER SHOW"

END QUOTE


This audio is part of the collection: Ourmedia
It also belongs to collection:

Notes

Please download and share or post this file, send to friends, colleages etc. Do your own research on 9/11. The official story is a big lie and proven fraud. It's not about Right vs Left, it is about Right and Wrong ... and justice.

Individual Files

Information FormatSize
911_Whistleblower_Richard_Andrew_Grove__May2806_files.xml Metadata [file]
911_Whistleblower_Richard_Andrew_Grove__May2806_meta.xml Metadata 3.0 KB
911_Whistleblower_Richard_Andrew_Grove__May2806_reviews.xml Metadata 211.0 B
Other Files mpeg
911WhistleblowerRichardAndrewGroveMay2806.mp3

Elizabeth Hurley had 'year long affair with President Clinton - flying to White House for secret sex'

Elizabeth Hurley had 'year long affair with President Clinton - flying to White House for secret sex'

Feb 05, 2014 13:13
By Lucy Buckland, Christopher Bucktin
23 Comments


Share
Share
Tweet
+1
Email

Hurley and Clinton had sex while his wife Hillary was in the next room
Close: Bill Clinton and Liz Hurley at a Russian charity ball in November 2005

Extraordinary claims Elizabeth Hurley had a year long affair with President Bill Clinton after he flew her to Washington for sex, have surfaced in the U.S.

During their first secret tryst his wife Hillary was asleep in the next room.

The astonishing claim comes after a tape of the actress's former boyfriend Tom Sizemore was found describing how he set Hurley, 48, up with the Clinton following a private screening of Saving Private Ryan at the White House in 1998 - scroll down for the audio.

Although the actress took to Twitter to furiously deny the rumours, telling her 450,000 followers: "Ludicrously silly stories about me & Bill Clinton. Totally untrue. In the hands of my lawyers. Yawn."

The then President called the actress saying "Elizabeth, this is your Commander-in-Chief. I'm sending a plane to pick you up in three hours. Is that enough time?"

Hours later she is said to have arrived at the White House where charismatic Clinton gave her a personal tour before showing her Lincoln's bedroom.

According to Radar Online the meeting was arranged after Clinton asked Sizemore, 52, if he was still in touch with his former girlfriend.

When the actor said he was, Clinton said: "You got her number don't you?”

VantageNews Elizabeth Hurley is seen out in London
Liz Hurley in London earlier today


Actor Sizemore, who appeared in the Steven Spielberg film, said yes. "He then takes his phone out and goes 'Give it to me?'" explained Sizemore.

In audio recording obtained by the US website, the actor said he perhaps should ask Hurley first if he can give out her number to which Clinton replies "You dumb mother******. I'm the Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America. The buck stops here. Give me the damn number."

When he called her, she at first appeared coy but Clinton charmed her saying: "Listen Elizabeth, this is the President. I don't have any time for the ****. I'm keeping the world from nuclear war all the time. I'm sending a plane to pick you up”.

Sizemore claimed it was the first night they politician and actress slept together.

The actor described Clinton as "6ft 4with more charisma than 1,000 Brad Pitts".

Getty Images Bill Clinton wipes his eyes as his wife Hillary looks on
Bill Clinton and wife Hillary were apparently in separate bedrooms at the time

It was the start of a year long affair only called off by the President after he said he was falling in love with her. Clinton, 67, and Hilary, 66, had separate bedrooms in the White House. Hurley has made no secret of her attraction to Clinton.

She once admitted that she has a secret fetish for powerful politicians. However this afternoon Liz branded the claims "ludicrous". She tweeted: "Silly stories about me and Bill Clinton. Totally untrue."

The 'Austin Powers' star has confessed that she lusts after world leaders including former U.S. President Bill Clinton and ex-Prime Minister John.



"Powerful folk can be sexy. I adore Clinton; you know, naughty but nice with a very sexy voice,” Hurley once said.

In 2001 the pair reportedly spent an evening at a luxurious beach house in Santa Monica, where they reportedly wiled away a few pleasant hours shooting pool and playing cards. Clinton's aides are quick to point out that there were other famous guests at the house, including singer Sheryl Crow.

However, Clinton's spokesperson Julia Payne confirmed Clinton and Liz have met before and said that everybody had a 'good time' at the gathering.
Elizabeth Hurley         @ElizabethHurley
Ludicrously silly stories about me & Bill Clinton. Totally untrue. In the hands of my lawyers. Yawn.


View gallery

"
"
"

Liz Hurley and Bill Clinton
View gallery



http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/elizabeth-hurley-affair-president-clinton-3113958#ixzz2sU3vcLgQ
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Hurley and Clinton had sex while his wife Hillary, in the running for 2016 presidential campaign, was in the next room
By Christopher Bucktin|The Mirror