Limbaugh: Obama ‘Sociopathic,’ Guilty of ‘Blatant Lying’

On his Monday broadcast, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh excoriated President Barack Obama for his response to the controversy surrounding ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber’s remarks regarding voters and their lack of knowledge pertaining to the ObamaCare legislation, which he argued helped its passage into law.

Limbaugh keyed in on Obama’s claim he had no knowledge of Gruber’s remarks and downplayed his role in the crafting of the legislation when asked over the weekend.

Partial transcript as follows:

LIMBAUGH: This is unbelievable.  This little sound bite of 23 seconds may be more jam-packed with lies than any 23-second presidential sound bite I’ve ever played for you.  “I did not.  I just heard about this just now. I get well briefed. I just heard about this.  The fact that some advisor who never worked on our staff…”  He was in meetings with Obama! Gruber has been bragging about them!

Obama has talked about Gruber being in meetings.  Someone who “never worked on our staff, expressed an opinion I completely disagree with.”  He was not just a member of the staff, he was paid 400 grand alone just for this!  We have done the numbers, by the way.  Gruber has made almost $6 million in government contracts advising them on various things.  Gruber even has his hands in…

What is the other thing he has his hands in?  Climate change?  No, not climate change. He’s got his hands on something like that.  He’s got his hands on Obamacare, and he’s got his hands in advising them on — oh, amnesty!  Gruber has his hands in advising the Regime on amnesty — when to do it, how to do it, and all that.  The guy’s deep.  He’s a rock star with these people.

But there’s no difference. Gruber and Obama are the same person, the same guy, the same outlook.  That’s why Gruber is hired. That’s why Gruber is there. And this is the Limbaugh Theorem, folks! This is it right front and center. Obama gets confronted with it and says, “No, I didn’t know about this. I’m as mad as you are! I’m livid about this. I’m gonna get to the bottom of this, some advisor running at the mouth.”

It just confirms how stupid he thinks you are.  That sound bite is an exclamation point to how stupid and gullible Obama believes you to be.  He then talks about how the bill was debated and debated and everybody knew what was in it.  He continued. After saying he only he read about this recently and he’s mad about it — it’s some advisor who never worked on the bill, what have you, blah, blah, blah — he then added this.

OBAMA:  We had a yearlong debate, Ed.  I mean, go back and look at your stories. (nervous chuckle) The one thing we can’t say is that we did not have a lengthy debate about health care in the United States of America or that it was not adequately covered.  I mean, I would just advise all of… (stammers) every press outlet here, go back and pull up every clip, every story, and I think it’ll — it’s fair to say that there was not a — a provision in the health care law that was not extensively debated, uhhh, and was fully transparent.

LIMBAUGH:  Now, seriously, what are we to do about this?  This is sociopathic. There is something terribly wrong here.  I mean, this is blatant lying.  There’s no transparency. He lied 31 times, I think.  (interruption)  Yeah, at least 23 and maybe 31 times he said, “You keep your doctor if you like your doctor. You keep your plan if you like it.” At least 23 times he told that lie.

Pelosi’s out there saying, “No, nobody knows what’s in this bill. You’ve got pass the bill to find out what’s in it.”  Nothing about this bill was transparent. Everything about the bill was hidden. The people that wrote the bill didn’t know what it said. It was 2,000 or 2,200 pages. People like me and others in the New Media were trying to sound the clarion call to people all over the country.

“What’s in this bill is horrible. It’s rotten. It’s gonna upset everything. It’s not good. You’re gonna lose health care coverage. It’s gonna get more expensive.” We warned everybody about it, and he says this? This is just… I don’t know what you do with this.  There’s over 22,000 pages of regulations after the bill was passed that have never been debated.  The bill itself was never debated!  There were never hearings with experts, people called up.

When you have a piece of legislation like this, normally what happens is there are committees in the Senate and the House that debate with experts on the various proposals so that members of Congress can so-called inform themselves before the vote.  There was none of that.  This thing was ramrodded through.  There was no transparency whatsoever.  This is (once again) a blatant, in-our-face lie that is again indicative of how stupid he believes everybody is.

And let me tell you: There’s a lesson here.

We’ve got polling data on Obamacare now.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor


Source: Breitbart Feed

Top Senate Democrat: Jonathan Gruber is a ‘Very Smart’ Person

As Democrats race to distance themselves from disgraced Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber and his disparaging remarks about “the stupidity of the American voter,” a 2013 Senate hearing transcript reveals top Democrat Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) lauded Gruber as a “very smart” expert.

During a May 13, 2013 Senate hearing considering the nomination of Brian Deese to serve as Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Sen. Carper said the following about MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber:

Thank you, Senator Levin. There has been no shortage of initiatives that have focused on Medicare led by people like Alice Rivlin, people that include like Tom Daschle, and folks that are practitioners, very smart people, Jonathan Gruber from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), that have actually looked at Medicare and said, These are some ways where we can save some money, save these programs in the long haul, and do so in a way that does not savage older people or poor people.

Sen. Carper is no stranger to making controversial Obamacare comments. In 2009, Carper told CNS News he had no intention of reading the Obamacare bill because it’s “confusing” and contains “incomprehensible” language and “hard stuff to understand.”

“I don’t expect to actually read the legislative language because reading the legislative language is among the more confusing things I’ve ever read in my life,” said Carper. 


Source: Breitbart Feed

Ralph Nader, 2008: Securing the Border Protects Americans from Wage Loss

Video of Ralph Nader, published in 2008, shows the liberal stalwart calling out many of his fellow liberal friends for abandoning a push for American sovereignty by securing the border. The objective was to protect American workers from wage loss, “infectious diseases,” smuggling, and more.

“The important thing is that we have to control our borders,” Nader said in the video, in which he was being interviewed by someone from the organization Glassbooth.org. 

“Anyone who thinks we should have open borders is an apostle of the Wall Street Journal low-wage policy in this country against minorities. That’s one, and we need to control our borders not just in terms of immigration that’s illegal; we need to control in terms pollution, which is a horrendous problem, smuggling, which is a horrendous problem, and infectious diseases,” Nader went on to say.

Nader continued by saying the way to raise the minimum wage is by controlling immigration policy so that large numbers of foreign workers can’t drive wages down for American workers. He also argued that “a lot of liberals” have abandoned pro-American sovereignty immigration policies, in favor of open borders ideas, to the detriment of Americans – especially minorities.

“The second is, we need to crack down on employers who are blocking a $10 minimum wage and therefore can say, ‘Oh, Americans don’t want to do this work,'” Nader said. “Who wants to do this work for under $5.15 under terrible workplace conditions? So it’s a low wage policy that’s the root of this approach. A lot of liberals have bought into it because they confuse the strategic policy by the Wall Street Journal types with civil rights.”

Nader also argued that there is not much need for more imported foreign high-tech workers via H-1B visas, since not only does that hurt Americans seeking such jobs, it also hurts other countries worldwide.

“The third is, we should prohibit brain-draining the rest of the world with these H-1B visas,” Nader said. “The idea that the richest country in the world has to pull in scientists, engineers, doctors, entrepreneurs, nurses from all these third world countries that are desperate for these skills is a poor sign to the extreme. Why are we brain-draining the rest of the world? And then we wonder why the rest of the world is not developing economically.”

Nader concluded by arguing that increasing illegal aliens in the workforce or increasing the number of foreign workers in the labor market drives wages down.

“And finally, and this last thing is really important, and this area is when you have illegal workers in this country—and then they get hired and their taxes are being withheld—you give them the same fair treatment as all other workers,” Nader said. “You can’t have it both ways. Now that’s not only humane. But it tends to reduce, attenuate and pull down a little bit this impact on wage conditions in our country.”

Nader hasn’t yet responded to a request for a followup interview to see if he still feels this way—a viewpoint that wasn’t always exclusive to one political party or another, but it’s now almost exclusively held by populist Republicans like incoming Senate Budget Committee chairman Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). Democrats used to fight for American workers over illegal aliens but have largely abandoned those efforts in the years President Barack Obama has been in the White House.

One of the most notable shifts in the Democratic Party away from helping Americans over illegal immigrants has been with Obama himself, who in his 2006 autobiography actually wrote that Americans are hurt by waves of illegal immigration.

“[T]here’s no denying that many blacks share the same anxieties as many whites about the wave of illegal immigration flooding our Southern border—a sense that what’s happening now is fundamentally different from what has gone on before,” then Sen. Barack Obama, an Illinois Democrat, wrote in The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.

“Not all these fears are irrational,” Obama wrote in the passages which were highlighted by The Daily Caller’s Neil Munro on Monday.

“The number of immigrants added to the labor force every year is of a magnitude not seen in this country for over a century,” Obama wrote. “If this huge influx of mostly low-skill workers provides some benefits to the economy as a whole—especially by keeping our workforce young, in contrast to an increasingly geriatric Europe and Japan—it also threatens to depress further the wages of blue-collar Americans and put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”

But it’s not just Obama who has abandoned working men and women across America on the immigration battlefield. Back in 2007, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) fought to protect American workers’ wages from a wave of new immigrants both legal and illegal—working against amnesty then. 

“If enacted, I believe the bill will lead to the exploitation of workers, including the 12 million undocumented immigrants we all hope to put on the path to legalization,” Boxer said in 2007, when she opposed the immigration bill from the now late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). “I also believe it will exert downward pressure on wages at a time when we are already losing our middle class.”

“Boxer was not alone,” Andrew Stiles, then writing for the National Review, wrote in July, 2013 when Boxer abandoned her support for American workers over immigrant labor. “Sixteen Democrats, including labor-union allies Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and Tom Harkin (Iowa), voted against the final bill that year, many after expressing similar concerns about its potential impact on American workers. Fast forward to 2013, and those concerns have all but disappeared.”

In 2013, however, Democrats had abandoned American workers completely. They all voted in lockstep for the Senate’s “Gang of Eight” immigration bill—joined by 14 Republicans.

Stiles, who now writes for the Washington Free Beacon, wrote a satirical post on Monday criticizing Obama for taking the exact wrong lessons away from the midterm bloodbath that delivered the U.S. Senate majority to Republicans, emboldened the GOP’s U.S. House majority, and saw statehouses and governors’ mansions go red nationwide. In it, he jokes that when George W. Bush’s Republicans lost his second term’s midterm elections almost as badly as Obama’s Democrats lost these midterms, Bush went right on and privatized Social Security–as he has always wanted to do, and still believes is the right thing to do–as if the voters never spoke. Of course, Bush didn’t privatize Social Security via an executive order, because he read the election results correctly–but Obama, whom the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan argues is the president most-isolated-from-reality-and-everyone-else since Richard Nixon, plans to move right ahead with his executive amnesty plans as if there wasn’t an election. At least for now.

This case is even more sinister than if Bush tried to privatize Social Security via executive order after his party was resoundingly defeated in those 2006 elections. That’s because Obama himself is on record many times actually admitting he does not have the authority to do what he is about to do anyway.

In July, 2010 Obama said that he didn’t have the authority to give legal status to illegal immigrants–and even if he did, he wouldn’t, because it would cause a “surge in more illegal immigration.”

“There are those in the immigrants’ rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws,” Obama said. “And often this argument is framed in moral terms: Why should we punish people who are just trying to earn a living? I recognize the sense of compassion that drives this argument, but I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally.”

In October, 2010 Obama doubled down on the idea he didn’t have the authority—referencing that July speech.

“My cabinet has been working very hard on trying to get it [immigration reform] done, but ultimately, I think somebody said the other day, I am president, I am not king,” Obama said. “I can’t do these things just by myself. We have a system of government that requires the Congress to work with the Executive Branch to make it happen. I’m committed to making it happen, but I’ve gotta have some partners to do it.”

Over the next several years, even throughout 2014, Obama has consistently and publicly stated the belief that he doesn’t have the authority. Yet now he’s about to do it anyway, with the entire institutional left–which again, used to stand up for working Americans–cheering him on. 




Source: Breitbart Feed

Obama Flashback: ‘Not the Case’ That I Can Suspend Deportations Unilaterally

In a 2011 town hall with Univision, President Barack Obama said “it was not the case” that he could suspend deportations unilaterally and argued that he could not extend temporary protected status to illegal immigrants looking for economic opportunity.

When asked whether he would grant temporary protective status to students, he responded “temporary protective status historically has been used for special circumstances where you have immigrants to this country who are fleeing persecution in their countries, or there is some emergency situation in their native land that required them to come to the United States. So it would not be appropriate to use that just for a particular group that came here primarily, for example, because they were looking for economic opportunity.”

He continued, “with respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.” And “there are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.”

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett




Source: Breitbart Feed

5 Takeaways from the College Football Weekend

Mississippi State loses, FSU comes back again, Muschamp resigns, and running backs go wild. Here are five takeaways from the college football weekend.

 

Mississippi State Suffers First Loss

#1 Mississippi State’s Cinderella season is no longer perfect after losing to #5 Alabama, leaving only Florida State and Marshall in the club of the unbeaten. Bulldog QB Dak Prescott never seemed to find his comfort zone with the Tide defense spying him all game and stealing three passes.

Mississippi State shouldn’t plummet in the playoff poll because its loss comes on the road in a close game to a quality, highly-ranked team. The committee set a precedent when they didn’t kick Ole Miss out of the top four after losing at LSU, whose resume is not nearly as good as Alabama’s.

 

Florida State Holds On…Again

Once more, FSU rallied back from a halftime deficit to barely edge out what was supposed to be inferior talent. Miami led until the three-minute mark in the fourth quarter, when FSU scored to seal the game.

FSU QB Jameis Winston’s QBR was 59.8 with one TD and one INT. The Seminoles’s remaining games are at home against unranked Boston College and Florida.

 

Muschamp Out at Florida

It’s official: Will Muschamp will not return next season. After four seasons at Florida, he will coach the Gators’ remaining games as a lame duck. Muschamp’s tenure started with two winning seasons and two bowl games, but has since declined. Before accepting the head position at Florida, he was the highest paid coordinator in the Big 12 and coach-in-waiting behind Mack Brown at Texas. Now, he’s on the move again. Let the coaching search and salacious speculation begin.

 

Week of the Running Back

Wisconsin RB Melvin Gordon ran into the record books against Nebraska, racking up 408 yards on 25 carries, surpassing former TCU RB LaDainian Tomlinson’s single-game record. He accounted for 65% of Wisconsin’s total yards. Three other CFB running backs rushed for more than 275 yards this weekend.

Georgia RB Todd Gurley returned from his NCAA-imposed four game suspension this week against Auburn. Gurley, also a kick-returner, took the opening kickoff 100 yards to the house. A microcosm of Gurley’s season: the exciting touchdown was revoked as Georgia was punished for holding; he rushed for 138 yards and tore his ACL in the fourth quarter.

 

Playoff Committee Predictions

The CFB Playoff Committee has a tough test this week with Mississippi State losing to a great team and FSU, Ohio State, and TCU scraping by. Here are this week’s committee predictions:

1. Oregon: previously #2—Bye week.

2. Alabama: previously #5—beat #1 MS State at home.

3. FSU: unchanged—narrowly defeated rival Miami on the road. Continues to show that it has the goods to win, but never convincingly.

4. Mississippi State: previously #1—lost at #5 Alabama. 

If you loved this column or hated it, let Daniel J. Freeman know on Twitter @djfree.




Source: Breitbart Feed