Anyone who has ever lived in Chicago for any length of time and followed Chicago politics recognizes exactly what is going on in DC today. We are seeing, Chicago on the Potomac playing out. Even veteran Chicago political reporters are seeing the parallels.
The Internal Revenue Service scandal now devouring the Obama administration — the outrageous use of the federal taxing authority to target tea party and other conservatives — certainly makes for meaty partisan politics.
But this scandal is about more than partisanship. It's bigger than whether the Republicans win or the Democrats lose.
It's even bigger than President Barack Obama. Yes, bigger than Obama....
The recent admission from IRS Director of Tax Exempt Organizations Division Lois Lerner (the department in charge of non-profit organization 501 (c) approvals) that Tea Party, 9/12, pro-life and other conservative leaning groups were give extra scrutiny in the approval process has led many to wonder just what other groups got special scrutiny/treatment. While a charity supportive of President Obama got swift approval, others have not been so lucky.
Three years ago, at the request of a constituent, US Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-3) launched an investigation in the HSUS's 501 (c) status. Recent IRS developments have caused him to renew his call to have the HSUS's status investigated.
Three years after launching an investigation with a constituent-driven inquiry questioning the tax exempt status of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and subsequent stonewalling by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), U.S. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-3) is renewing his inquiry. Luetkemeyer is also raising serious questions about IRS Exempt Organizations Division Director Lois Lerner’s political ties to HSUS in light of her recent apology for targeting conservative non-profit groups seeking tax-exempt status.
In a letter dated May 17, 2013 to U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Luetkemeyer called for an investigation into the handling of his request made to then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman in March, 2010 about constituent concerns regarding HSUS’s significant lobbying activities as a tax-exempt group. Luetkemeyer also sent a letter to Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George requesting that he perform his own investigation into the HSUS.
In May, 2010, Luetkemeyer had shared those concerns in both a personal conversation and letter to Lerner who has been tied directly to the political arm of HSUS. Since launching his inquiry, Luetkemeyer has received repeated non-responsive letters from the IRS about his inquiries and given recent events and his responsibility to constituents mandated that a follow-up letter renewing his concerns be sent because it was both timely and necessary.
I am not Catholic, but a Catholic friend forwarded this to me and I really enjoyed it. This is from the personal blog of the Arch Bishop of New York, His Eminence Timothy Cardinal Dolan.
It was a lesson I began to learn when I was seven or eight . . .
My buddy Freddie from across the street and I were playing outside. Mom called me for supper.
“Can Freddie stay and eat supper with us?” I asked.
“He’d sure be welcome, if it’s okay with his mom and dad,” she replied.
“Thanks, Mrs. Dolan,” Freddie replied. “I’m sure it’s okay, because mom and dad are out, and the babysitter was just going to make me a sandwich whenever I came in.”
I was so proud and happy. Freddie was welcome in our house, at our table. We both rushed in and sat down.
“Freddie, glad you’re here,” dad remarked, “but . . . looks like you and Tim better go wash your hands before you eat.”
Simple enough . . . common sense . . . you are a most welcome and respected member now of our table, our household, dad was saying, but, there are a few very natural expectations this family has. Like, wash your hands!…
So it is with the supernatural family we call the Church: all are welcome!
All are welcome to the Church. But we do have a set of beliefs the define the church. Those beliefs are found in the Bible. A cutesy acronym that I heard years ago for the Bible was Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth - in other words, the Christians "rules of the road". With that in mind His Eminence continues with a lesson right out of Parenting 101.
The USA Today has the latest on the Obama Administrations use of the IRS to target enemies. It took away the "bureaucratic incompetence" argument.
In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked.
That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months.
In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.
As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with liberal-sounding names had their applications approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," the liberal groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.
So contrary to Ms. Lerner's claims that the extra scrutiny was not "partisan", evidence suggests otherwise.
Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.
This conduct has included one or more of the following:
1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
Thus begins Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment for Richard M. Nixon from May, 1974. It seems that some people have not learned from the lessons of the Nixon Administration.
Now before my liberal friends go all "you have no proof that this goes to the White House.", I would like to refer you to one Trey Hardin.
“I will tell you this on the IRS front. I’ve worked in this town for over 20 years in the White House and on Capitol Hill and I can say with a very strong sense of certainty that there are people very close to this president that not only knew what the IRS were doing but authorized it. It simply just does not happen at an agency level like that without political advisers likely in the West Wing certainly connected to the president’s ongoing campaign organization.”
Emphasis mine. Mr. Hardin is not the only one with that sense of certainty.
The jury in the Kermit Gosnell trial came back with a verdict.
After a two-month trial and 10 days of deliberation, a jury on Monday decided that Baby A, Baby C and Baby D lived a few fleeting moments outside their mothers’ wombs before their spinal cords were severed at Kermit Gosnell’s abortion clinic in West Philadelphia.....
.....Jurors acquitted Gosnell of third-degree murder but found him guilty on a lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter in the 2009 death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar of Virginia, who died from a drug overdose while undergoing an abortion at his clinic.
What the jury had to say about Babies A, C and D is going to be basis of future abortion "rights" arguments.
The way those brief lives ended didn’t amount to abortion but to three acts of first-degree murder, jurors concluded.
This has given legal standing for late term abortion bans. But that is not all. There were an additional 200 + charges against Gosnell.
Last week, in an appearance in Mexico City, President Obama uttered these amazing words.....
"Most of the guns used to commit violence here in Mexico come from the United States," President Obama said during a speech at Mexico's Anthropology Museum. "I think many of you know that in America, our Constitution guarantees our individual right to bear arms. And as president, I swore an oath to uphold that right, and I always will."
"But at the same time, as I’ve said in the United States, I will continue to do everything in my power to pass common-sense reforms that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people. That can save lives here in Mexico and back home in the United States. It’s the right thing to do," Obama added.
Emphasis through out the post is mine. What he didn't add was WHO in the United States let the guns through.
Water is a huge issue out here in the semi arid west. Going back to the settlement days, range wars were fought over water and water access. Today, there is a large battle going on in Utah over access to streams and rivers.
Water is life, and access to clean water is one of those issues that can unit people from Zimbabwe to the Antarctic. Which is why you see stories like this in papers out here in the west.
Today, the hottest and thirstiest parts of the United States are best described as over-forested. Vigorous federal protection has stocked semiarid regions of public land with several billion trees too many. And day after day these excess trees deplete a natural resource that has become far more precious than toilet paper or 2-by-4's: water.
Scientists and water managers report that 39 states face water scarcity. Much of the nation's freshwater shortfall comes from our population growth, waste, hunger and contaminants. But we must also now implicate the escalating thirst of unnatural forests.
Water depletion from afforestation — the establishment of trees or tree stands where none previously were — is the unintended consequence of a wildly popular federal policy.
Yes Virginia, there is such a thing as OVER-planting and we are seeing the consequences of that "wildly popular" policy. It should also be noted that the policy was most popular in states where the policy was not being implemented. I remember Arbor Day drives when I was a school aged child back in Illinois, where we were encouraged to raise money to buy trees to plant - OUT WEST. No, don't worry about planting trees at home, no - send them somewhere else so that THEY can deal with the consequences.
For millenniums, fires set by lightning or Native Americans limited forest stocks to roughly a few dozen trees per acre. All that changed after the nationally terrifying Big Blowup wildfires of 1910, which led the United States to in effect declare war on wildfire. The government's wartime-like tactics included security watchtowers, propaganda, aerial bombing and color-coded threat alerts. Uncle Sam trained elite Hotshot and Smokejumper crews to snuff out enemy flames. Congress annually funded the war effort with an emergency blank check, now $2.5 billion.
We have raised a psychotic generation of people who worship nature and "Mother Earth" and yet when it comes to natures manner of maintaining balance, they are the first to rush to stop nature from running it's course.
As closing arguments were made in the Kermit Gosnell trial yesterday, pro-life group Live Action Network release a pair of undercover videos showing that, when it comes to performing risky, illegal late term abortions, he's not the ONLY bad apple. The first of the two videos shows the abortion counselor nervously laughing as she describes how the baby is "fully grown" at 6 months and how they pull it out "in pieces" and that if the baby does come out alive and moving the solution that they put it in will make it stop moving. The counselor finally said (in response to a question about whether she would have to take a baby that survived the abortion) "No. That is so illegal! Once was start this, we have to finish it.” That is not a true statement (see the next paragraph).
The second video shows a "doctor" advising a patient that (at 24 weeks) it is too early for the baby to survive (not true by the way) and that if it did it would "expire shortly after birth" thereby acknowledging that the baby IS INDEED born. He also says "it's all in how vigorously you do things to help the fetus survive", he then goes on to admit that his clinic would not do anything to help. That is a violation of the Federal Infants Born Alive Protection act (bet you didn't know we had one of those did you?) Here is what this "doctor" had to say when pressed on the possibility of the infant surviving the abortion process.
When asked by the undercover investigator what would happen if the baby were to survive the abortion, Doctor Santangelo responds:
“Technically – you know, legally we would be obligated to help it, you know, to survive. But, you know, it probably wouldn’t. It’s all in how vigorously you do things to help a fetus survive at this point. Let’s say you went into labor, the membranes ruptured, and you delivered before we got to the termination part of the procedure here, you know? Then we would do things – we would – we would not help it. We wouldn’t intubate. It would be, you know, uh, a person, a terminal person in the hospital, let’s say, that had cancer, you know? You wouldn’t do any extra procedures to help that person survive. Like ‘do not resuscitate’ orders. We would do the same things here.”
Emphasis mine. The mind blowing part is when he says that it's like a "Do Not Resuscitate" order that a terminally ill patient CHOOSES to sign. The now born infant does not have the ability to CHOOSE to sign a DNR. They have no choice in this matter at all. To try to imply that it is like a DNR is preposterous!
So what lessons can we take from Philadelphia and the trial of abortionist Kermit Gosnell. There are several. First (as Jonah Goldberg summarizes) is that media bias is a reality.
My fellow Fox News contributor Kirsten Powers wrote a USA Today column last week shaming the media for not covering the Gosnell case enough or, in many cases, at all. She got results. Suddenly everyone was talking about it. Though a dismaying amount of the coverage is about why there was a lack of coverage.
It’s an important issue, of course. But it’s not a complicated one. It seems obvious that most mainstream outlets are run and staffed by pro-choice liberals. But whatever the motivation, The Washington Post’s Melinda Henneberger is surely correct when she says the mainstream media are generally locked into a single narrative about abortion: “reproductive rights under siege.”
Ironically, the same factors that might have discouraged the mainstream media from covering the story in the first place now give them an incentive to turn it into a story about the media. CBS News, for instance, broke its broadcast boycott of the trial by running a piece on the political firestorm over the lack of coverage.
Secondly, he points out that a lack of oversight needs to be corrected.
If anything good can be said to have come out of the whole Kermit Gosnell horror story, it is this....this story skewered a whole lot of abortion myths. What myths? I'm glad you asked....
Myth #1 - babies don't survive the abortion procedure.
A 2002 article in The Journal of Clinical Nursing seems to indicate that nurses encounter babies born alive after abortions with some frequency. According to the article:
In the case of late termination, the death of the fetus before delivery, though usual, is not inevitable except in rare cases of extreme physical abnormality[.] … At times the fetus will actually attempt to breathe or move its limbs, which makes the experience extremely distressing for nurses. Also, whereas the woman will probably go through this process once in her lifetime, nurses may go through it several times a year or even in the same week. (1)
The article quotes author and lecturer Annette D. Huntington, BN, Ph.D. saying that abortion live births are a “regular occurrence.”
Testimony in the Gosnell case showed that time and time again, infants survived the abortion process.
A new study of the medical records for nearly half a million women in Denmark reveals significantly higher maternal death rates following abortion compared to delivery. This finding has confirmed similar large-scale population studies conducted in Finland and the United States, but contradicts the widely held belief that abortion is safer than childbirth...
As I indicated in my initial post on the subject yesterday, unless you were actively looking for it online, finding national coverage on the Kermit Gosnell trial has been difficult to find. You had to go to local Philadelphia outlets, or foreign outlets (the Daily Mail has covered the trial in all it's gruesome detail) or to conservative leaning websites like Life News or Hot Air for anything about the trial. This black out was intentional.
In a HuffPost Live segment today on the issue, host Marc Lamont Hill admitted what many pro-life advocates have been thinking:
“For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.”
Inspired by Kirsten Powers’ USA Today column yesterday, I decided to start asking journalists about their personal involvement in the Gosnell cover-up.
I wonder how are friends in the gun control lobby will try to bury THIS in their post-Newtown rush to grab the guns of law abiding citizens.
The Boston Marathon bombings appear to have been driven by the older of the two suspects, according to CBS News...
...Tsarnaev is communicating with authorities in writing. According to CBS News senior correspondent John Miller, he can say about one word at a time. Investigators went through public safety questions with him and tried to find out if he is part of a group.
“His account so far is that this was driven by his brother. It was mostly done online in terms of radicalization, finding instructions, and so on and so forth and there’s no international terrorism organization or Mr. Big behind it,” Miller said Tuesday....
...“The original question is they walked up to that car and appeared they shot the officer in the head unprovoked, that it was an assassination. But why? How did that fit into their plan? The operating theory now in the investigation is they were short one gun. The older brother had a gun. They wanted to get a gun for the younger brother and the fastest and most efficient way they could think of doing it was a surprise attack on a cop, to take his weapon and go.
Emphasis mine. No gun show "loophole"...no private sale....just murdering a cop in order to get his gun. How are you going to prevent that? Murder is already illegal.....as is robbery....no new law would prevent someone hell bent on committing a crime from breaking the law, so the question remains for our gun grabbing friends on the left....
How are you going to stop someone from murdering a cop for his/her weapon?
The raison d'etre of abortion and abortion rights was safety. We have to make abortion legal so that it will be safe...If we do away with the back alley abortions, it will save lives...the abortion acolytes would tut. The problem that the Kermit Gosnell trial brings for them is the FACT that abortions are no safer today than they were 60 years ago when my now deceased mother did her nurses training at a Catholic charity hospital in Springfield Missouri.
The Grand Jury report is littered with examples - from unlicensed people (including the 15 year old daughter of one of his employees) performing medical procedures to unsanitary equipment being used in surgical procedures. But the most damning thing to come out in the trial is that, in spite of repeated reports of unsafe practices at the Gosnell "Clinic", Philadelphia regulators who are charged with looking out for the safety of their residents, did NOTHING to close him down.
Kareema Cross worked for Kermit Gosnell for a harrowing four years helping with abortion procedures amid conditions so bad that she snapped photos to document them in 2008 — a year before the death of Karnamaya Mongar — then reported her boss to the authorities under a fictitious name.
But no one listened.
Emphasis mine. Conor Friedersdorf quotes the Grand Jury report in his Atlantic column...
On February 18, 2010, the FBI raided the "Women's Medical Society," entering its offices about 8:30 p.m. Agents expected to find evidence that it was illegally selling prescription drugs. On entering, they quickly realized something else was amiss. In the grand jury report's telling, "There was blood on the floor. A stench of urine filled the air. A flea-infested cat was wandering through the facility, and there were cat feces on the stairs. Semi-conscious women scheduled for abortions were moaning in the waiting room or the recovery room, where they sat on dirty recliners covered with blood-stained blankets. All the women had been sedated by unlicensed staff." Authorities had also learned about the patient that died at the facility several months prior.
This is the first of MANY posts on the Kermit Gosnell trial. For those of you who rely on the liberal media for your news, let me bring you up to speed. Kermit Gosnell is an abortionist on trial for murder in Philadelphia. He is facing 5 (it was 8 but 3 charges were recently dropped) charges of murder. If you don't know about the story - you're not the only one.
Until Thursday, I wasn't aware of this story. It has generated sparse coverage in the national media, and while it's been mentioned in RSS feeds to which I subscribe, I skip past most news items. I still consume a tremendous amount of journalism. Yet had I been asked at a trivia night about the identity of Kermit Gosnell, I would've been stumped and helplessly guessed a green Muppet. Then I saw Kirsten Power's USA Today column. She makes a powerful, persuasive case that the Gosnell trial ought to be getting a lot more attention in the national press than it is getting.
The afore-mentioned Kirsten Powers column lays out some of the more gruesome aspects of the story.
Infant beheadings. Severed baby feet in jars. A child screaming after it was delivered alive during an abortion procedure. Haven't heard about these sickening accusations?
It's not your fault. Since the murder trial of Pennsylvania abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell began March 18, there has been precious little coverage of the case that should be on every news show and front page. The revolting revelations of Gosnell's former staff, who have been testifying to what they witnessed and did during late-term abortions, should shock anyone with a heart.
The testimony of Gosnell's employees has been damning at best. Whether it is testimony that one of the infant victims "screamed" when Gosnell cut it's spine....
Only the media and our friends on the left (redundant I know) to find this out.....
Cambridge, Mass., police told Reuters they had not issued a gun license to 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who died after the firefight. The police departments in both Cambridge and Dartmouth said they didn’t issue 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev a firearms identification card, which would’ve allowed him to own rifles holding less than 10 rounds and shotguns. Dzhokhar, who is under 21, wasn’t eligible for a regular handgun license.
In Massachusetts, local police departments issue handgun licenses to residents and have wide sway over when to issue licenses and whom to issue them to.
But...but....but.....you mean tough gun laws don't stop criminals from committing gun crime??????? But that can't beeeeeeeee..........
Even more shocking to our friends on the left?
The 19-year-old charged with the Boston Marathon bombing, his throat injured by a gunshot wound, wrote down answers to the questions of investigators about his motives and connections to any terror networks.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's answers led them to believe he and his brother were motivated by a radical brand of Islam
I suppose now the AP is racist for bringing that up? Because heaven knows when it was brought up last week, anyone bringing it up was accused of being a racist....never mind the FACT that Islam is a RELIGION, not a RACE.
As I was reading these reports, I could only think of one thing.....PAGING CAPTAIN LOUIS RENAULT.....
UPDATE: Logical Lady Carol Platt Liebau is spot on with this.
I thought a rigorous system for regulating gun permits was supposed to prevent gun violence (that's what Massachusetts state officials insisted upon passing the nation's toughest gun laws back in 1998).
It's almost as if the Tsarnaev brothers -- terrorists, murderers, carjackers -- had no respect for the (gun) laws . . .
A bit of logic our friends on the left just do not seem to comprehend.
- Green Jobs Killer
- GOP Nannies
- Teaching Fear
- Couldn't See This Coming
- Yet Another....
- If You Like What You Have Now...
- Another ACA Failure
- More Surprising ACA Consequences
- Political Grandstanding 101
- Those Who Don't Learn From History
- Just The Facts
- Another "Unexpected" ACA Set Back
- The Big Con
- And Yet Again...
- It's For The Children....