The shooter at the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic was white, which is a bonanza for the mainstream media, but it didn't take long for the race baiters to start accusing the CS police department of racism; simply because the man surrendered and was taken alive.
Some tweets went along the lines of, "white cop to white man: hey let me do you the service of taking you in alive." I'm sure that the conversation went exactly like that... (man we need a sarcasm font)
No, the man was taken alive because that's the goal in every hostage situation or stand off; to get everyone out of there alive including the shooter. Robert Lewis Dear surrendered quietly after a long standoff, during which he was talked down by hostage negotiators. I'm not even sure they knew what color he was when the standoff began, but it doesn't matter. Had Dear come out of the clinic without dropping his weapons, he would have been shot. We know that because of history and police procedures, which are followed the vast majority of the time.
Of course the race baiters want to ignore all of the officer involved shootings that did involve people of color (and not just blacks) wherein the result was the shooter or suspect being taken into custody alive. You would think that if police truly were out to kill minorities, that we'd see many more stories every day about officer involved shootings, but we don't. And not because the MSM is hiding it; they want that story to be true as much as anyone.
The simple fact is, if you are stopped by police and follow instructions given to you, you are much less likely to be shot. If you don't follow instructions, bad things are going to happen to you. What a novel concept.
I always get a kick out of someone telling me that an organization is a non-profit, implying that the group is somehow better than a private entity. Sometimes, I'll feel energetic and try to explain that the entity is not truly a non-profit but most of the time it just goes over the person's head. They can't grasp the fact that a non-profit must make a profit in order to stay in business. The other implication of a non-profit is that the people running the business are somehow more altruistic than management of a private company. No. The same enticements that are present in 'real life' are present in the non-profit as well.
I saw a post on FB this weekend along with some comments that proved how ignorant people are about non-profit organizations. But the gist of the post was about how much money some organization really give to the needy and how others seem to be set up for the enhancement of the CEO's life style. To be sure, I have no problem with someone being paid large amounts of money, as long as it's earned and they do not defraud people out of their money. But sometimes you have to wonder.
For example, on the better end of the scale, the Salvation Army pays their CEO about $13,000 a year and gives 93% of their collections to the poor and needy. Ronald McDonald Houses pays their CEO zero and 90% of the money goes to help the families of sick kids. Others that do pay more to the CEO but have good returns are Lions Club International, The VFW, St. Jude Hospital and World Vision. All give at least 80% of them money collected to those that are in need of their services.
On the other hand, UNICEF pays it's CEO $1.2 million, gives them a Rolls Royce to use and gives about 14% of the money it collects to the needy. The March of Dimes pays its CEO $495K but gives only 10% to the kids. The United Way, American Red Cross, and Goodwill Industries give less than 10% of the money collected to the needy while paying their CEOs over a million a year.
But to understand reality, any non-profit has to make a profit; the only thing that delineates them is how that profit is treated for tax purposes and what can be done with that profit. But the business, whether it's the Salvation Army or a local group selling used books to fund charitable efforts to help the homeless, must make a profit in order to stay in business.
The cost of doing business dictates that they charge more for their goods or services than what it costs them to produce or provide the products or services. Quite simply, you have to pay for rent, utilities, salaries and so on. But also the cost of doing business increases over time, the cost of goods goes up, the cost of utilities increases and so on. If you do not make a profit on what you are now selling, you will not stay in business for very long. Period.
And as we can see from the above information, just because the business uses the non-profit status to entice people to give to them and to avoid paying taxes, it doesn't mean the people running the business are completely and always altruistic. It's like everything else, it's incumbent upon the donor or consumer to do a little research and find out what's really being done with the money.
The FCC admitted this past week that their investigators have found rampant fraud and abuse in the Obama phone program. The companies involved in giving out free phones to poor people have done everything from forging signatures to falsifying income information to signing one person up for 2 or 3 phones. The FCC has fined companies a total of $100 million and have collected almost nothing. Tracfone, the largest beneficiary of the program, has also been fined a number of times but hasn't paid a dime. You see the company gets about $9 a month for every phone they 'sell' plus a bonus payment at the time the phone is sold. Now the administration wants to expand the program to include providing internet access for poor people. Look at your phone bill, there is a charge on there every month, usually called a universal usage fee or something similar. That is your money being used to pay for the Obama phone program, which they are trying to expand as well. Now you'll get to see another fee on your internet to pay for poor people surfing the net for cat photos and porn.
A recent poll found that 40% of millenials wanted to censor speech if they found it to be offensive to someone. OK, so who decides if what was said is offensive? You? What happens when whomever is in charge is ousted and another group or political party takes control? Does the definition of offensive speech change? Yes it will. And what do you do to the people engaging in what you call, 'offensive speech'? Do you put them in jail? Like Castro in Cuba or do you kill them like radical Islamists? This generation of overly sensitive, self centered, under educated, panty wastes needs to learn that they aren't really being discriminated against if someone says something they don't like. Remember when you get offended at the slightest little thing, you are giving that person control over you. Learn to shake it off, understand that's someone you don't want to be around and move on with your life. Go succeed, be self sufficient and live your life; that's the best way to get them to shut up.
It appears that someone did know that the Paris attacks were about to happen and they did nothing to warn anyone in France. Can you guess why? I'll bet you can. Belgian authorities had compiled a list of 18 known terrorists living in Belgium. These Islamists had known ties to terror groups. The list was given to the mayor of Brussels. 2 of them men on that list lived just 100 yards from the mayor's office. He could have seen their apartment across the square. Included in the report was credible information that some of the 18 were going to be participating in a planned attack, likely to happen in France. Yet the mayor did nothing. He said the information was not specific enough to act upon and passing it on to French authorities would have profiling or discriminatory. I'm sure the families of the deceased are really happy that you aren't a bigot.
The President has embarrassed himself and our nation once again. By claiming that the best rebuke to the terrorists is going to Paris to attend the Global Climate Summit, he has become a laughing stock. His claims that 'solving' the so called climate crisis will solve the terrorism problem has infuriated many of our allies, including those in the Middle East. His stories about kissing Michelle in Paris are pablum and don't solve any problems. His refusal to provide meaningful military assistance to Jordan, France, Egypt is mind boggling. What has this world come to when the cheese eating surrender monkeys are more aggressive in fighting terrorism than we are?
A year long undercover investigation has identified a cell of Islamist women brainwashing young girls in the U.K., encouraging the to join ISIS and fight infidels in England. The group holds clandestine meetings that are invitation only to talk about how Britain is fighting a war against all of Islam and that it is their duty to destroy those fighting against Islam.
Reporters for a local T.V. station captured video of some of the meetings after following 2 women who lived with known radical Islamists in England. Among the things caught on film were discussions about "filthy Jews" and a two hour lecture about how the "good days have already begun" because a caliphate has been established by ISIS.
Another of the women who was befriended by the reporter and invited to the meetings talked about how it was necessary to live under the caliphate. There are several discussions about the attacking of the caliphate and how it is not the first time but that ISIS will reign over the spreading of the caliphate and overcome the infidels just as they have done in the past.
Young girls are encouraged to go to Syria and other places to aid in the fight against the non-believers. They are told it may be necessary for them to die to further the cause of Allah; that they can be called upon at any time.
According to the liberals, we aren't supposed to be afraid of women and children; despite the increasing frequency of attacks carried out by women, by children, by widows and orphans.
On Wednesday last week, ISIS released a video threatening an attack on New York City. At about the same time, Border Patrol agents stopped 8 Syrian men from entering the U.S. using false passports and 6 others were stopped trying to enter Mexico with intent to go to the U.S. So you would think that a plane arriving at JFK from Mexico with 150 passengers would be scrutinized carefully. You would think. But I guess having a rock solid vetting process from those entering the U.S. doesn't include such an expectation.
Shortly before 9 p.m. on Friday, AA flight 1671 landed at JFK. Rather than being led to the customs area, a gate agent led all 150 passengers to the baggage claim area and then out of the airport without any of them going through customs.
American Airlines called the passengers back to go through customs and 144 had returned but 6 had not, although they "are American citizens". Yeah, that makes me feel better because no American citizens have carried out any terrorist attacks. And any contraband could have been handed off.
Of course the buck is being passed around. TSA says they are only responsible for screening outgoing passengers. American Airlines says they direct passengers to the customs area and that's where their responsibility ends. NYC police say screening incoming passengers is a federal responsibility and port authority doesn't get involved in that process. Customs and Immigration officials say the airline is supposed to direct passengers to their area. I'm sure they'll investigate how this happened and we'll never see the report.
Sometimes even stupid people come up with a good idea, even if it is designed to circumvent the law; but don't worry, they'll screw it up in the end. Hayley Oates had been drinking. When she left the bar, she knew she was over the legal limit and to her dismay, there was a cop sitting in the parking lot. What to do, what to do? Hayley called 911, not from her phone, to report that a woman was being assaulted in the parking lot of another bar, about 2 miles away. Sure enough, the cop that was hindering Hayley's desire to drive home sped away. She took off and made it home safely. All was well and good until Hayley decided to brag on her Facebook page. "lmao, 2 mins later the cop peals out. silly piggies trick r for u." Apparently she went into a bit more detail and someone reported the post to the police. That gave them enough info to show up, arrest her, and charge her with filing a false report and creating a false public alarm. You just couldn't leave well enough alone could you?
This is how it starts: King Carl Gustaf XVI of Sweden is getting ready to attend the UN Conference on the Human Environment in Paris later this month told a local magazine that he had an epiphany. He was apparently staying in a hotel the day before the interview and had to run a bath because the room did not have a shower. Then it hit him; "we need to ban all bathtubs". It really struck him that it took a lot of fresh water and energy to fill the tub to a level that allowed him to bathe. He said, "I really felt ashamed then, I really did." He then admitted that his call for a ban on bathtubs was bit "lighthearted" but quickly said there is truth in there and such small details have an enormous effect upon the environment. Yep, he may say he feels a bit silly but you can bet he will begin pushing for a ban on bathtubs and then when everyone has showers, there will be a call for usage limiting devices that keep you from staying in the shower for long periods of time. Get ready to start smelling like the French.
Craig Arnolds and his wife Laura seemed to have a happy life, albeit they'd run into hard financial times when the economy slowed. But it was all an illusion. When Craig went on yet another business trip to New York, he left his iPhone at home in Warwickshire England. Laura heard the telltale beep of a text message and what she saw was devastating. It was a message from a half naked woman describing in minute detail all of the naughty things she was going to do to Craig when he arrived in NYC. Rather than confront Craig, Laura found other similar messages and decided to get even. She put their house up for sale on a website designed to help homeowners sell their houses quickly. Craig returned home after the 2 week trip. He knew something was amiss when he arrived at their home about 11 p.m. to see all the lights on and the T.V. was blaring. Craig said Laura was rarely up at that time and there was also a Nissan parked in the driveway. His key did not work and after ringing the bell, a '21 year old hippie' answered the door. He told Craig they'd bought the house a few days earlier. Included in the price was some vintage furniture and fixtures, including Craig's 1930's era radio that he'd inherited from his grandfather, his golf clubs, and a set of tables and chairs that had been custom built by Craig's father. Craig doesn't have much recourse because they had put the house in the names of Laura's parents after his business had fallen off a few years earlier, so nothing illegal was done. Craig was not amused when asked if the affair was worth the loss.
OK Al and all of you so called scientists, activists, and Earth loving tree huggers. You believe that all of the programs, regulations, speeches, and calls for action are really about saving the Earth from man caused climate change. Then why don't you use scientific principles and quit manipulating the data. If it really was about saving the Earth, don't you think you'd want to correctly identify the problem and implement feasible, effective solutions? Don't you think you'd want all countries to adhere to the same requirements? You would think so.
But the climate change racket is not about really saving the Earth, it's about creating fear and making money. The Climate Policy Initiative recently released a study that shows just how much money is involved in the whole climate change 'industry'. Last year alone, $391 billion was spent by governments and private sector entities on "low carbon and climate resilient growth" programs. Governments alone, mostly in Western Europe and the U.S. spent over $148 billion backing green energy research.
It's not going to get any less expensive either; the group says it will take at least $13.5 trillion for some countries, like China, to cut their carbon dioxide emissions to 'required' levels in order to save our planet. The CPI says there is more money in climate change than there ever has been and it's only going to grow. Another $16.5 trillion is needed to meet the United Nation's goal of limiting future warming to 2 degrees celsius by 2100.
So you see, it's simple to understand why the global warming alarmists don't want to have any sort of accuracy in the data; don't want to acknowledge that they might be wrong. Remember they told us in the 80's that we'd all be under water if we didn't change our habits and get rid of fossil fuel by 1990; then in the 90s, they told us the corn belt would be a desert if we didn't get rid of coal and cars and air conditioners. I don't see too many sweaty folks driving horses and buggies, or a sand dune in Iowa.
It's an undeniable truth of life, if you want to know what's really going on, follow the money. It's hard to give up your slice of the pie when it's counted in the trillions.
Illegal immigration isn't a problem, there aren't any potential terrorists flooding through our border. 8 Syrians were caught trying to cross the border on Monday Nov. 16th at Laredo TX. The 8 were captured in what agents called '2 family units' that weren't really family units. 5 other Syrians using stolen Greek passports were apprehended in the Honduras after they landed in Toncontin on a connecting flight from Costa Rica. It was learned they had started in Syria, the flown to Lebanon, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina, and Costa Rica. Officials said members of the group were to meet a guide in San Pedro Sula who was to make arrangements to take them through Mexico into the United States. Now certainly there is the possibility that some or all of these Syrians are true refugees. There is a very strong possibility, as well, that they are not. That they are really terrorists. Syrian refugees don't typically fly through several countries as they attempt to flee the war. Simple fact of the matter; if they come across illegally, we don't even have a chance to vet them. The other simple fact is, agents know that Middle Easterners are coming across our border and they haven't caught them all.
After a lengthy fight, Congressional Republicans were able to obtain background information on naturalized citizens who had been arrested and charged with offenses related to terrorism. 70 U.S. citizens have been arrested for their involvement in terrorist plots or action in the last few years, 15 of them were found to be naturalized citizens who had originally come here legally. The background check information was obtained and it was found that all had serious red flags in their history, including several who had known ties with terrorist groups, but were given U.S. citizenship in spite of their terrorist ties. President Obama would have us believe that we have a very strict vetting process, despite testimony from Homeland Security, the FBI, and other agencies that there isn't a very good process in place for being able to check the backgrounds of all the refugees entering the U.S. In fact, more than a dozen have gone missing before they could be processed. Rest comfortably knowing that Obama's on the job.
Russian authorities, along with most Western intelligence agencies have concluded that the Russian jet brought down over the Sinai Peninsula last month was brought down by a bomb detonated inside the plane. ISIS has claimed responsibility and after Russian authorities made their announcement on Tuesday, ISIS released a photo of the bomb that was used. They claim it was a Schweppes can of soda, the photo also showing the detonator and a switch mechanism next to the can. The official magazine of the terror group said they exploited a loophole in airport security to smuggle the can onto the plane. But at least ISIS is the JV team, now being contained by Glorious Leader's excellent strategy. Can you imagine what they would do if they weren't being contained?
The American media is fawning over a video from a French T.V. station/news program. It might be the dumbest thing I've ever seen and at the same time it explains how France allowed itself to be attacked and how we, the U.S., are setting ourselves up for an attack. We are making victims.
A crowd was gathered outside one of the venues that was attacked by terrorists. As usually happened people had come to lay flowers outside in remembrance of those that died. The reporter was doing the obligatory story including interviewing cute little snowballs of fluff aka children.
One child was with his dad; the dad said his child was 5 years old. When asked what he thought, the boy said he was afraid because the bad men had guns and wanted to hurt us. Dad said that everything would be OK since we have flowers. But the boy said do flowers protect us? Yes said dad, flowers protect us. From bad men with guns? Yes said dad. The boy, who should trust his father, said he felt better since the flowers were going to protect us from men with guns.
Some in the American media thought it was the perfect response; it symbolized how we are going to overcome the hate in the world by being loving instead of hateful; how the little boy will sleep better knowing that love protects him. You people are a special kind of stupid.
Here's the deal, the 5 year knew instinctively that we needed guns to protect ourselves; he was at first unsure that flowers would protect us from men with guns. But because he trusts his dad, he went against his instincts and bought into the argument. So next time an attack like this happens or a thug pulls a gun to rob him, this kid is going to pull out a flower and assume that it will somehow protect him from bullets. I hope he lives through the experience to realize that his dad is an idiot.
All this bull crap about loving the terrorists and how we created the hatred because of our torture, our imperialistic actions, our overthrowing of democratically elected governments; this is why there are still terrorist groups gaining strength and expanding their operations. The root cause of their actions is not what we have done to them over the last 50 years, it's what they have believed for the last thousand years; that their sole purpose in life is to expand Islam, creating a world wide caliphate, and vanquishing all non believers. Period, end of story. Until you liberal flower children understand that, we will continue be in danger.
Obama has not only surpassed Jimmy Carter as the worst president in history, he's has lapped him. One thing about politicians, they usually know how to get out in front of the crowd and appear to be leading. Not Obama, he is so self-centered and egotistical, that he thinks he's the only one who gets it and is right. He can't even pay attention to the critics and realize that they are making fun of him; and it's now beginning to include many of his biggest supporters.
Obama was speaking at the summit in Turkey and said that responding to ISIS would not be about "winning" or "American leadership". Then what the hell is it about?! For someone who is so anti-leadership, you certainly do expect everyone else to follow you, agree with you, go along with your wishes and desires without question. I guess that's not leadership, that's tyranny.
Even foreign leaders are criticizing Obama for his failure to act. France's President is even laying some of the blame for the Paris attacks at Obama's feet, since the U.S. is refusing to share intelligence data about terrorists. I guess because it's not fair that we'd help our allies and not the terrorists.
This is absolutely about winning and it is about American leadership. We must win the war against the terrorists, there is no alternative. America must be the leader. We have a larger intelligence organization, we have a larger more capable military (at least we did but Obama's been working on that too). Someone has to take control and we are the logical country to do just that; not because we are somehow morally superior or better human beings but because we have the tools to do so.
Liberals are so worried about the perceptions of other and now that they are in charge, more people are dying.