Rep. Steve King: Ferguson Protesters of “Continental Origin” So Racial Profiling Not Factor

rep. steve king 350x181 Rep. Steve King: Ferguson Protesters of Continental Origin So Racial Profiling Not Factor

Rep. Steve King: Racial Profiling Not a Factor Since Ferguson Protesters of “Continental Origin”

WTF? Rep. Steve King proved once again why he is a raving lunatic. He was asked by Newsmax TV if the Congressional Black Caucus should investigate what’s occurring in Ferguson over the murder of unarmed black teen Michael Brown and he said it’s not necessary because they are all black. Huh?

“This idea of no racial profiling,” King said, “I’ve seen the video. It looks to me like you don’t need to bother with that particular factor because they all appear to be of a single origin, I should say, a continental origin might be the way to phrase that.” “I just reject race-based politics, identity politics” King concluded. “I think we’re all God’s children. We all should be held to the same standards and the same level of behavior.” Source: Huffington Post

Um, I guess I have to ask, where’s Steve King’s white hood?

Here’s the video from Right Wing Watch:

President Obama’s Iraqi Military Campaign is to Contain, Not Destroy ISIS

president obama1 350x235 President Obamas Iraqi Military Campaign is to Contain, Not Destroy ISIS

President Obama’s Iraqi Military Mission is to Contain, Not Destroy ISIS

(OPINION) — President Obama emphatically stated that there won’t be any troops on the ground in the latest crisis in Iraq, but something else piqued my interest….the implication that containing not destroying the Islamic States militants seems to be the military goal. He said the airstrikes he ordered in northern Iraq have destroyed the Islamic State militants’ arms and equipment.

During a press conference on the South Lawn, just before boarding Marine One for a Martha’s Vineyard family vacation, President Obama said, “Ultimately, there’s not going to be an American military solution to this problem.” “There’s going to have to be an Iraqi solution.” He implied that there won’t be any deeper US action unless there’s a clear change in how the Maliki-led government runs the country and the need for a unity government. In other words, the ball is in their court. He also said the Iraq campaign will be a “long-term project” and “I think this is going to take some time.”

President Obama said U.S. troops were pulled out of Iraq because they didn’t want them there. He repeated there will be no more combat troops in Iraq again. “We are going to maintain that because we should have learned a lesson from our long and immensely costly incursion into Iraq,” Obama said. He said there is “no doubt” that ISIS advance on Erbil “has been more rapid than the intelligence estimates.”

He said, “There is no American military solution to this problem, but an Iraqi solution that America and other countries will support.” In other words, the goals of this military campaign are much more narrower than you think. The objectives for Obama’s airstrikes in Iraq are protect the Kurdistan region from ISIS and to break ISIS seige that has stranded about 40,000 Yazidis on the Sinjar mountain. That’s it. Rather than blunting the effect of ISIS offensive anywhere else, he is focused on a limited swath of Iraq.

ISIS or ISIL poses a serious threat to the Iraqi government and could destabilize the entire region. The way the Obama administration seems to view the current situation is that ISIS marching to Kurdistan and displacing the Yazidis is a military problem, hence the airstrikes, but the political problems are up to the Iraqi government to solve. In other words, containing ISIS and not eliminating ISIS is the mission at this juncture.

Well, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is sounding the alarm about ISIS, though President Obama’s goal at this juncture isn’t to destroy the militant group, but to contain them. She issued a sharp rebuke of President Obama’s strategy:

“It has become clear that ISIL is recruiting fighters in Western countries, training them to fight its battles in the Middle East and possibly returning them to European and American cities to attack us in our backyard,” the California Democrat said in a statement backing military action authorized by President Barack Obama. “We simply cannot allow this to happen.”

Feinstein called for a broader military campaign against ISIL, not just the targeted missions authorized by the president.

It takes an army to defeat an army, and I believe that we either confront ISIL now or we will be forced to deal with an even stronger enemy in the future. Inaction is no longer an option. I support actions by the administration to coordinate efforts with Iraq and other allies to use our military strength and targeting expertise to the fullest extent possible,” Feinstein said. Source: Roll Call

I would venture to say, the mess playing out before our eyes are the result of the failed policies of four American presidents — George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, especially George W. Bush and to some extent, Barack Obama. Like former secretary of state Colin Powell said, if you break it, you own it. We own the mess in Iraq. I will concede another point — you can’t ignore the fact that a deep-seated resentments of the Sunnis is what’s driving ISIS and Prime Minister Maliki doesn’t show any signs that he wants to share power with the Sunnis and the Kurds. Not even a teeny bit. So, we have a big problem on our hands.

The Washington Post slammed President Obama in a scathing editorial, saying his Iraq policy “isn’t connected to a coherent strategy” and that it’s “unrealistic”:

While U.S. airstrikes and drops of supplies may prevent the terrorist forces from massacring the Yazidi sect or toppling the pro-Western regime in Kurdistan, Mr. Obama lacks a plausible plan for addressing the larger threat posed by the Islamic State. In recent weeks, senior U.S. officials have described the danger in hair-curling terms: The Islamic State forces, which have captured large numbers of U.S.-supplied heavy weapons, threaten not only the Iraqi and Kurdish governments, but also Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. With hundreds of Western recruits, they have the ambition and capability to launch attacks against targets in Europe and the United States.

Yet by the White House’s own account, the measures ordered by Mr. Obama are not intended to defeat the Islamic State or even to stop its bloody advances in most of the region. Instead they are limited to protecting two cities where U.S. personnel are stationed and one mass of refugees. The hundreds of thousands of people in Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere threatened by the al-Qaeda forces will receive no U.S. protection. Nor will the terrorists’ hold over the areas they already control, including the large city of Mosul and nearby oil fields, be tested by U.S. airpower.

U.S. officials say that Mr. Obama has refrained from a broader campaign because he believes the Islamic State is “an Iraqi responsibility,” as Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel put it. The administration is pushing Iraq’s political factions, sharply divided along sectarian lines, to join in forming a new government; once such a government is formed, Mr. Obama said, “the United States will work with it and other countries in the region to provide increased support.”

President Obama is right, that this is an Iraqi problem, but the wait will be a long one, for us to see any kind of resolution. Meanwhile, ISIS will continue its push forward and deeper into Iraq, creating chaos along the way.

James Brady’s Death Ruled a Homicide From John Hinckley Gunshot in 1981

james brady 350x225 James Bradys Death Ruled a Homicide From John Hinckley Gunshot in 1981

James Brady’s Death Ruled a Homicide From John Hinckley Jr. Gunshot in 1981 (Photo Credit: Twitter)

James Brady’s death ruled a homicide:  The recent death of former president Ronald Reagan’s press secretary James Brady has been ruled a homicide from John Hinckley Jr.’s gunshot on March 30, 1981 during an assassination attempt.

The District of Columbia medical examiner ruled on Friday that James Brady’s death was the result of grevious injuries he suffered 33 years ago. This means shooter John Hinckley Jr. could be charged with his murder in federal court.

Hinckley is a mental patient at St. Elizabeth hospital in suburban Washington. He was found guilty by reason of insanity for the assassination attempt against Ronald Reagan.

Hinckley, who is now a mental patient at St. Elizabeth’s hospital in suburban Washington.

US Launches Air Strikes on Islamic State Artillery Used Against Kurds in Erbil

lloyd austin 350x233 US Launches Air Strikes on Islamic State Artillery Used Against Kurds in Erbil

US Launches Air Strikes on ISIL Artillery Used Against Kurds in Erbil (Pictured Lloyd Austin) [DoD photo by Cherie Cullen. (Released)]

Pentagon: US military aircraft conduct strike on Islamic State artillery ‘used against Kurdish forces defending Erbil.” The airstrikes are meant to go after ISIL military artillery and formations. This morning the airstrikes targeted a clear military formation outside Erbil. General Lloyd Austin, the first African American to lead the U.S. Central Command, was the general who gave the order to fire after President Obama’s authorization. It’s ironic that Austin should give the order, since he played a big role in the drawdown of military forces from Iraq.

Washington Post: “The airstrikes targeted artillery being used by militants of the Islamic State extremist group against Kurdish forces defending the Irbil, the Kurdish regional capital, the Pentagon said. It said the artillery was used “near U.S. personnel.”

“The U.S. action came after President Obama authorized airstrikes against Sunni Muslim extremists who punctured Kurdish defenses in a powerful offensive in northern Iraq on Thursday. Obama also sent U.S. military aircraft to drop food and water to besieged Iraqi civilians in the region.”

The Islamic State militants will be hard to contain because they are well financed. It is not clear how they are getting their money and weapons, but they aren’t only wreaking havoc in Iraq but also in Syria. It is troublesome that ISIL is getting support from the Sunnis. What that means is the if the U.S. bombs on behalf of the Kurds, we are playing right into ISIL’s propaganda and further pushing the Sunnis squarely in their corner. There are no easy solutions.

BOMBS AWAY: President Obama Authorizes Targeted Air Strikes, Humanitarian Relief in Iraq

president obama 350x235 BOMBS AWAY: President Obama Authorizes Targeted Air Strikes, Humanitarian Relief in Iraq

BOMBS AWAY: President Obama Authorizes Targeted Air Strikes, Humanitarian Relief in Iraq

BOMBS AWAY!!!! AIRSTRIKES AUTHORIZED!!

President Obama has “authorized two operations in Iraq: targeted air strikes and humanitarian relief.”

This comes as Islamic State militants (ISIL) have taken the Mosul Dam, which is the largest dam in Iraq. The Sunni militants have also seized Iraq biggest Christian town, Qaraqosh, which caused many residents to flee. They would face similar demands made by the Sunni militants in other captured areas, that they should convert to Islam or die.

The Islamic State views Iraq’s majority Shi’its and religious minorities such as Christians and Yazidis, as infidels. The Islamic State tweeted that its fighters had captured 15 towns, along with the Mosul Dam, and a military base.

Thousands have become trapped on Sinjar mountain, with children dying of thirst. It is a very dire situation. The U.S. did air drops of food and water on the mountain.

The NY Times reports that “military forces bombed at least two targets in norther Iraq on Thursday night to rout Islamist insurgents who have trapped tens of thousands of religious minorities in Kurdish areas.”

Here’s the text of President Obama’s speech:

Good evening. Today I authorized two operations in Iraq — targeted airstrikes to protect our American personnel, and a humanitarian effort to help save thousands of Iraqi civilians who are trapped on a mountain without food and water and facing almost certain death. Let me explain the actions we’re taking and why.

First, I said in June — as the terrorist group ISIL began an advance across Iraq — that the United States would be prepared to take targeted military action in Iraq if and when we determined that the situation required it. In recent days, these terrorists have continued to move across Iraq, and have neared the city of Erbil, where American diplomats and civilians serve at our consulate and American military personnel advise Iraqi forces.

To stop the advance on Erbil, I’ve directed our military to take targeted strikes against ISIL terrorist convoys should they move toward the city. We intend to stay vigilant, and take action if these terrorist forces threaten our personnel or facilities anywhere in Iraq, including our consulate in Erbil and our embassy in Baghdad. We’re also providing urgent assistance to Iraqi government and Kurdish forces so they can more effectively wage the fight against ISIL.

Second, at the request of the Iraqi government — we’ve begun operations to help save Iraqi civilians stranded on the mountain. As ISIL has marched across Iraq, it has waged a ruthless campaign against innocent Iraqis. And these terrorists have been especially barbaric towards religious minorities, including Christian and Yezidis, a small and ancient religious sect. Countless Iraqis have been displaced. And chilling reports describe ISIL militants rounding up families, conducting mass executions, and enslaving Yezidi women.

In recent days, Yezidi women, men and children from the area of Sinjar have fled for their lives. And thousands — perhaps tens of thousands — are now hiding high up on the mountain, with little but the clothes on their backs. They’re without food, they’re without water. People are starving. And children are dying of thirst. Meanwhile, ISIL forces below have called for the systematic destruction of the entire Yezidi people, which would constitute genocide. So these innocent families are faced with a horrible choice: descend the mountain and be slaughtered, or stay and slowly die of thirst and hunger.

I’ve said before, the United States cannot and should not intervene every time there’s a crisis in the world. So let me be clear about why we must act, and act now. When we face a situation like we do on that mountain — with innocent people facing the prospect of violence on a horrific scale, when we have a mandate to help — in this case, a request from the Iraqi government — and when we have the unique capabilities to help avert a massacre, then I believe the United States of America cannot turn a blind eye. We can act, carefully and responsibly, to prevent a potential act of genocide. That’s what we’re doing on that mountain.

I’ve, therefore, authorized targeted airstrikes, if necessary, to help forces in Iraq as they fight to break the siege of Mount Sinjar and protect the civilians trapped there. Already, American aircraft have begun conducting humanitarian airdrops of food and water to help these desperate men, women and children survive. Earlier this week, one Iraqi in the area cried to the world, “There is no one coming to help.” Well today, America is coming to help. We’re also consulting with other countries — and the United Nations — who have called for action to address this humanitarian crisis.

I know that many of you are rightly concerned about any American military action in Iraq, even limited strikes like these. I understand that. I ran for this office in part to end our war in Iraq and welcome our troops home, and that’s what we’ve done. As Commander-in-Chief, I will not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq. And so even as we support Iraqis as they take the fight to these terrorists, American combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq, because there’s no American military solution to the larger crisis in Iraq. The only lasting solution is reconciliation among Iraqi communities and stronger Iraqi security forces.

However, we can and should support moderate forces who can bring stability to Iraq. So even as we carry out these two missions, we will continue to pursue a broader strategy that empowers Iraqis to confront this crisis. Iraqi leaders need to come together and forge a new government that represents the legitimate interests of all Iraqis, and that can fight back against the threats like ISIL. Iraqis have named a new President, a new Speaker of Parliament, and are seeking consensus on a new Prime Minister. This is the progress that needs to continue in order to reverse the momentum of the terrorists who prey on Iraq’s divisions.

Once Iraq has a new government, the United States will work with it and other countries in the region to provide increased support to deal with this humanitarian crisis and counterterrorism challenge. None of Iraq’s neighbors have an interest in this terrible suffering or instability.

And so we’ll continue to work with our friends and allies to help refugees get the shelter and food and water they so desperately need, and to help Iraqis push back against ISIL. The several hundred American advisors that I ordered to Iraq will continue to assess what more we can do to help train, advise and support Iraqi forces going forward. And just as I consulted Congress on the decisions I made today, we will continue to do so going forward.

My fellow Americans, the world is confronted by many challenges. And while America has never been able to right every wrong, America has made the world a more secure and prosperous place. And our leadership is necessary to underwrite the global security and prosperity that our children and our grandchildren will depend upon. We do so by adhering to a set of core principles. We do whatever is necessary to protect our people. We support our allies when they’re in danger. We lead coalitions of countries to uphold international norms. And we strive to stay true to the fundamental values — the desire to live with basic freedom and dignity — that is common to human beings wherever they are. That’s why people all over the world look to the United States of America to lead. And that’s why we do it.

So let me close by assuring you that there is no decision that I take more seriously than the use of military force. Over the last several years, we have brought the vast majority of our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. And I’ve been careful to resist calls to turn time and again to our military, because America has other tools in our arsenal than our military. We can also lead with the power of our diplomacy, our economy, and our ideals.

But when the lives of American citizens are at risk, we will take action. That’s my responsibility as Commander-in-Chief. And when many thousands of innocent civilians are faced with the danger of being wiped out, and we have the capacity to do something about it, we will take action. That is our responsibility as Americans. That’s a hallmark of American leadership. That’s who we are.

So tonight, we give thanks to our men and women in uniform -— especially our brave pilots and crews over Iraq who are protecting our fellow Americans and saving the lives of so many men, women and children that they will never meet. They represent American leadership at its best. As a nation, we should be proud of them, and of our country’s enduring commitment to uphold our own security and the dignity of our fellow human beings.

God bless our Armed Forces, and God bless the United States of America.

Alabama GOP Rep. Mo Brooks Accuses Democrats of Waging War on Whites

rep. mo brooks 350x175 Alabama GOP Rep. Mo Brooks Accuses Democrats of Waging War on Whites

Alabama GOP Rep. Mo Brooks Accuses Democrats of Waging War on Whites (Credit: MSNBC Video Screengrab)

Democrats have been searching for a replacement for Todd Akins and they found him….Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL). Yeah, he went there… This is not even worth a comment but read on….

During an interview with Laura Ingraham, Brooks accused Democrats of waging a war on “whites.” Yeah, he pulled the ole race card! Here’s the transcript from Real Clear Politics:

Brooks: “This is a part of the war on whites that’s being launched by the Democratic party. And the way in which they’re launching this war is by claiming that whites hate everybody else. It’s a part of the strategy that Barack Obama implemented in 2008, continued in 2012, where he divides us all on race, on sex, greed, envy, class warfare, all those kinds of things. Well that’s not true, okay?

And if you look at the polling data, every demographic group in America agrees with the rule of law, enforcing and securing our borders, and every one them understands that illegal immigration hurts every single demographic group. It doesn’t make any difference if you are a white American, a black American, a Hispanic American, an Asian American, or if you’re a woman or a man….

Ingraham: I don’t think [U.S. Rep.] Raul Labrador would probably say there’s a war on whites, though, Congressman – that characterization’s a little out there.

Brooks: But that is in effect what they’re doing, though. And that’s the political game they’re playing there, okay?

Ingraham: They’re playing the race card, just like they played the war-on-women card. This is what the left does. I just think that phraseology might not be the best choice.

Brooks also stated that everyone in America, regardless of their race, is affected by the influx of undocumented and legal immigrants. In other words, in his view, we need to halt ALL types of immigration because it lowers wages. Um, gee, I wonder how he explains his heritage? So, now we have moved on from Todd Akin’s honest rape, to other issues, such as treating immigration reform as a “thoughtful issue.” I could never in good conscience ever support the Republican Party, not when lunatics like Mo Brooks are holding elected office.

Now for the audio:

US State Department Condemns Israel’s Latest Shelling of UN School as “Disgraceful”

israel gaza map 350x262 US State Department Condemns Israels Latest Shelling of UN School as Disgraceful

US State Department Condemns Israel’s Latest Shelling of UN School as “Disgraceful” (Credit: Maps.com)

The U.S. criticized the “disgraceful shelling” at a U.N. school in Rafah on Sunday, which killed 10 people. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki called for an investigation into the recent Israeli shelling on U.N. schools. This comes as the Palestinian death toll rises to 1,800.

Psaki didn’t hold back in her criticism in a press release, “The United States is appalled by today’s disgraceful shelling outside an UNRWA school in Rafah sheltering some 3,000 displaced persons, in which at least ten more Palestinian civilians were tragically killed.” The statement went on to say, “We once again stress that Israel do more to meet its own standards and avoid civilian casualties.”

Psaki continued: “UN facilities, especially those sheltering civilians, must be protected, and must not be used as bases from which to launch attacks. The suspicion that militants are operating nearby does not justify strikes that put at risk the lives of so many innocent civilians.”

United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon also slammed Israel for this latest shelling, calling it “a moral outrage and a criminal act.” He called it “yet another gross violation of international humanitarian law, which clearly requires protection by both parties of Palestinian civilians, U.N. staff and U. N. premises, among other civilian facilities.”

Ban Ki-moon added, “This attack, along with other breaches of international law, must be swiftly investigated and those responsible held accountable. It’s a moral outrage and a criminal act.”

Samantha Power, U.S. Permanent Representative to the UN, issued a press release criticizing Israel for the shelling near the UN school:

“Today’s strike outside an UNRWA school in Rafah, where an estimated 3,000 people were taking shelter, is horrifying. This incident, which took the lives of at least ten Palestinians, including one UNRWA staff member, and injured many more, is only the latest in a conflict that has left dead approximately 1,750 people, including 11 UN staff, and injured many thousands more. Additionally, the UN estimates as many as 475,000 people have been displaced by the violence, of whom more than 259,000 are sheltering in 90 UNRWA schools, which are not equipped as shelters. It is imperative that all sides work towards a ceasefire that ends the rocket attacks and tunnel threat from Hamas, and the perilous situation faced by civilians in Gaza.”

Power continued:  “We call on all parties to take all feasible precautions to prevent civilian casualties, comply with international humanitarian law and respect UN facilities in Gaza. We further call on Israel to conduct a full and prompt investigation of this incident as well as the recent strikes that hit other UNRWA schools. Civilians, many of whom have been told to evacuate their homes by the Israel Defense Forces, must be able to find refuge in safe, UN-designated shelters.”

This latest rebuke comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is coming under increased pressure as the Palestinian casualties mount. My personal feeling is that while Hamas can be considered a terrorist organization, people must consider why Palestinians voted to give them so much power — desperation. The Palestinians are living under modern-day apartheid and we cannot sit by allow this to go on. Too many innocent children and civilians are being senselessly murdered.

By the way, expect a Republican freakout over Jen Psaki’s press release, but GOP idol Ronald Reagan had to get really ugly with the Israelis over their Palestinian incursions. Read more at Hullabaloo.

It also seems that the Israeli government is violating its own law against firing on human shields:

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz on Tuesday demanded that the [Israeli] High Court review a ruling it issued last Thursday in which it declared that the ‘human shield’ procedure employed by the IDF when detaining Palestinian terror suspects is illegal and violates international law.

According to defense officials, the Israel Defense Forces made use of the ‘human shield’ procedure on 1,200 occasions over the last five years, and only on one occasion did a Palestinian civilian get hurt.

Why do we continue to give money to the Israeli government only for the president to be disrespected? Here’s a link to an Intercept article on the US view of Israel as “dangerous” to our interests. It’s time to turn off the spigot. Sorry, but no-one should condone the modern-day apartheid state that the Israelis have the Palestinians living under in Gaza. The international outrage is growing.

Thanks to ‘Speaker’ Ted Cruz, House GOP Border Crisis Plan Blows Up!

gop 350x273 Thanks to Speaker Ted Cruz, House GOP Border Crisis Plan Blows Up!

Thanks to ‘Speaker’ Ted Cruz, House GOP Border Crisis Plan Blows Up! (Photo credit: Donkey Hotey)

More lunacy from the do-nothing House GOP as their bill goes up in flames. House Republicans were forced to withdraw an emergency spending bill to address the unaccompanied minors streaming across the US-Mexico border as a rebellion erupted among the ranks.

This is a major embarrassment for the party, but no-one should be surprised. We saw this mess when ‘Speaker’ Ted Cruz held the country hostage during the government shutdown. The real House Speaker John Boehner has no control over House Republicans. Having a new leadership team means nothing. If you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

More from the New York Times:

House Republicans, who have long called for strengthening security at the nation’s southern border, may now be forced to head home for the recess with nothing to show for their efforts — something many Republicans fear will be an enormous political liability.

The blow to Speaker John A. Boehner and his new team — including Representatives Kevin McCarthy of California, the new majority leader, and Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the whip — makes it unlikely that any legislation to address what both Democrats and Republicans call an urgent humanitarian crisis will reach President Obama’s desk before the August break. The Senate was also unlikely to pass its own border bill on Thursday.

[..]

The Republican leaders had hoped to push through a modest $659 million emergency spending measure, well short of the $2.7 billion that Senate Democrats had proposed and the $3.7 billion that President Obama had requested.

Speaker Ted Cruz, ahem, Sen. Ted Cruz strikes again….He’s front and center in the House GOP disarray….

House Republicans were not helped by their Senate counterparts, particularly Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who on Wednesday night held a meeting over pizza and beer with more than a dozen of the House’s most conservative lawmakers to urge them to vote against the immigration bill.

Representative Joe Barton, a senior Republican in the Texas House delegation, expressed frustration with Mr. Cruz. “I like Senator Cruz personally,” he said. “I think his instincts are right, but having not served in the House, I’m not sure he’s cognizant of the protocol in the House. The Senate’s an equal body legislatively, and I certainly am encouraging him to get his positions passed in the Senate.”

There are no winners. The Democrats don’t have enough votes for their plan either. President Obama won’t win either. It’s a sad state of affairs, that the people we sent to Washington D. C. are no more than a laughingstock. I hope voters remember this trainwreck in November and in 2016. The Republican Party deserves to get another shellacking in the next presidential election.

5 Republicans, Including Paul Broun, Vote Against Suing President Obama

president obama1 350x225 5 Republicans, Including Paul Broun, Vote Against Suing President Obama

5 Republicans, Including Paul Broun (GA), Vote Against Suing President Obama

Five House Republicans voted against a resolution authorizing a lawsuit against President Barack Obama. Reps. Paul Broun (GA), Scott Garrett (N.J.), Thomas Massie (KY), Walter Jones (NC) and Steve Stockman (TX). No Democrats voted for the resolution, which stems from the president’s use of executive power. Don’t rejoice five Republicans broke rank. In fact, most of the five want to see President Obama impeached.

Broun, Stockman and Jones have all indicated support for impeaching President Obama. Jones told The Hillhe didn’t think the lawsuit went far enough.

A Broun spokeswoman said he voted against the bill because he didn’t think it would truly help limit President Obama’s executive power.

“Dr. Broun believes that this legislation – while well-intentioned – is doomed for death in the Senate. As a result, he would rather see House leadership work towards practical solutions which would shrink the size and scope of government and cut wasteful federal spending when it comes to stopping the president’s gross overreach of executive power,” Broun spokeswoman Christine Hardman said. Source: The Hill

Here’s more from Think Progress:

The resolution gives Boehner the authority to file or intervene federal court cases “to seek any appropriate relief regarding the failure of the President, the head of any department or agency, or any other officer or employee of the executive branch, to act in a manner consistent with that official’s duties under the Constitution and laws of the United States” relating to failure to implement provisions of Obamacare. ” The aim of this, Boehner has stated, is to sue the Obama for “his decision to extend — twice — the deadline to institute the employer mandate in his health care law.”

The administration has delayed the provisions — which requires employers with more than 50 employees to pay a fine if they don’t offer affordable quality coverage — citing complaints from firms that claimed they wouldn’t be ready to meet its requirement by 2014.

The administration claimed justified the delays under the Treasury Department’s “transition relief” authority, which allows the government to grant relief by section7805(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, and noted President George W. Bush’s administration also cited the authority to delay implementation of laws. “The authority has been used to postpone the application of new legislation on a number of prior occasions across Administrations,” Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Mark J. Mazur noted in a July 2013 letter to the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Funny, the GOP is so busy trying to sue Obama, they haven’t done the work people elected them to do. Oh, well, that’s the usual jive from politicians. I guess this means another Democrat will occupy the White House come 2017. The “do nothing” party is really living up to its name of doing nothing. At least for 99 percent of Americans.

President Obama Announces New Round of Sanctions Against Russia

vladimir putin1 350x243 President Obama Announces New Round of Sanctions Against Russia

President Obama Announces New Round of Sanctions Against Russia

President Obama announced new sanctions against Russia, in coordination with the European Union announcing its own sanctions, in response to the aggression against Ukraine. President Obama said, “United States is imposing new sanctions in key sectors of the Russian economy: energy, arms and finance.”

President Obama said the Russian-backed separatists still won’t cooperate with international investigators in the down Malaysia Airlines plane. He also said U.S. satellite images show that Russia recently fired missiles across the border into Ukraine.

Obama warned if Russia, led by President Vladimir Putin, doesn’t change its policy towards Ukraine, the “costs will continue to grow.”

NY Times:  The growth of the oil industry in the last two decades has powered Russia’s economic and geopolitical resurgence since the collapse of the Soviet Union and enriched allies of President Vladimir V. Putin. Russia pumps about 10.5 million barrels of oil a day, making it among the largest producers.

“The biggest edge that Western energy companies still have is their technological edge — that’s why these sanctions have the potential to have significant impact,” said Michael A. Levi, an energy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Chinese companies can’t step in and provide shale technology where U.S. companies are blocked. They can provide capital; they can provide people. They can’t fill in on the technology front.”