Friday, January 17, 2014

Barker's Newsbites: Friday, January 17, 2014




The truth about the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, is finally coming out.

* IT'S BEEN OUT...

(*ROLLING MY EYES*)

* ...AT LEAST TO THOSE OF US WHO CARED AND WHO PAID ATTENTION AND WHO SEARCHED FOR THE TRUTH.

An explosive intelligence report made public this week revealed that officials knew it was a terrorist attack that killed four Americans on September 11, 2012 — and they knew right away.

It also revealed that the lapse in security was preventable, based on intelligence the U.S. already had about the area.

* "INTELLIGENCE...?" FORGET INTELLIGENCE... ANYONE WHO PAID ATTENTION TO OPEN-SOURCE WORLD MEDIA REPORTING ON THE REGION KNEW WHAT THE SITUATION WAS!

These new answers are unsettling.

* THEY'RE NOT "NEW." (WELL... THEY ARE IN THE SENSE OF ATTRIBUTION TO OFFICIALS WHO FORMERLY LIED...)

“Every step of the way, the White House’s response to Benghazi has been appalling,” said Heritage expert Helle Dale, who has followed the tragedy closely from the beginning. The most shocking revelation, as Dale described it: "The country’s top military commanders clearly understood the assault on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, was a terrorist attack from the moment the first reports came in, just 15 minutes after the assault began on September 11, 2012."

* UNFORTUNATELY OUR NATION'S TOP MILITARY COMMANDERS HAVE BEEN CO-OPTED BY OBAMA AND HIS POLITICAL MACHINE. (REMEMBER PATRAEUS...???)

This news is shocking because the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the story that the violence was a protest against an anti-Muslim video that had simply gotten out of hand.

* WITH THE FULL COOPERATION OF THE MOST OF THE U.S. MEDIA...

(*SIGH*)

“As a result, there was no attempted military rescue or response, and false information was peddled to the American people to shift the blame,” Dale explained.

* THOSE OF US PAYING ATTENTION HAVE KNOWN THIS FROM THE START!

“This testimony indicates beyond any doubt that the narrative of the Benghazi tragedy was changed within the White House. The question remains why and by whom.”

* WHY...?!?! TO GET PAST THE ELECTION! (AND IT WORKED!) BY WHOM...??? (THE FISH ROTS FROM THE HEAD DOWN...)

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton added insult to grave injury when she was questioned a year ago about the distinction between a protest and a terrorist attack. Her infamous response, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” showed an Administration entangled in the mess of its own making.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

The difference Clinton downplayed at that time is crucial because “the same White House that declared victory in the war against terrorism and pulled U.S. military assets out of Libya also failed miserably to take responsibility for its own miscalculation,” Dale said.

Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN) told The Foundry this week that Members of Congress were “misled” — just like the American public. “It’s just outrageous that the Administration thought they could get away with blaming the cause of Benghazi on a false story.”

* WHAT IS THIS BIMBO BLATHERING ABOUT? THE ADMINISTRATION DID GET AWAY WITH PEDDLING THE FALSE STORY AND MUDDYING THE WATERS ENOUGH THAT BENGAZI NEVER BECAME A KEY CAMPAIGN ISSUE. (IN CASE BACHMANN ISN'T AWARE... OBAMA WON RE-ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 6, 2012!)

The American people — beginning with the families of those who were killed — deserve to know why the Administration denied what was apparently known.

* THE SAD TRUTH IS THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.

(*SHRUG*)

Our military and intelligence personnel around the world also deserve a full accounting, because they continue to enter dangerous situations every day.

* OUR MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE LEADERSHIP IS WELL AWARE OF WHAT OCCURRED. BY AND LARGE THEY STUCK TO THE OBAMA PARTY LINE. CAREERISM TRUMPS INTEGRITY. WELCOME TO OBAMA'S AMERIKA.

10 comments:

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://blog.heritage.org/2014/01/15/explosive-top-secret-benghazi-testimony-contradicts-obamaclintonrice/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

There was never any doubt at the Pentagon, we learned this week.

The country’s top military commanders clearly understood the assault on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, was a terrorist attack from the moment the first reports came in - just 15 minutes after the assault began on September 11, 2012.

Over 450 pages of testimony given at nine closed-door hearings in the House Armed Services Committee were unclassified this month.

* BUT THEY WERE "CLASSIFIED" - HIDDEN FROM PUBLIC VIEW - LONG ENOUGH TO GET OBAMA RE-ELECTED. (AND THAT'S WHAT MOST MATTERED TO HIM AND HIS PEOPLE!)

This testimony indicates beyond any doubt that the narrative of the Benghazi tragedy was changed within the White House.

* AND YET...

(*SPITTING ON THE GROUND*)

Recall that the day after the attack the White House pointed to an offensive anti-Muslim video as the root cause of the assault that took the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. This narrative was unveiled on September 12 at a Rose Garden press conference by President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — moments before the President boarded Air Force One for a star-studded fundraising event in Las Vegas.

The same narrative was later repeated by Obama at the United Nations, on ABC’s The View, and at Andrews Air Force Base in front of stricken family members of the fallen Americans.

It was repeated six times on national Sunday television by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and countless times by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

* THESE GUYS ARE SO GOOD... AND THE GOP LEADERSHIP IS SO WEAK, COWARDLY, AND INEFFECTIVE... THAT THOUGH OBAMA AND CLINTON CLEARLY SET RICE UP AS THE SACRIFICIAL LAMB... THE FALL GIRL... IN THE END THEY DIDN'T SACRIFICE HER - SHE ACTUALLY ENDED UP GETTING A PROMOTION!

* FOLKS... THINK ABOUT THAT... JUST PONDER THAT...

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

Yet, testimony given by General Carter Ham, who at the time of the attack was head of the AFRICOM Command, paints a very different picture.

* TESTIMONY ONLY NOW RELEASED...

(*SMIRK*)

* WHY DIDN'T HAM LEVEL WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE EVEN AT THE COST OF HAVING TO RESIGN?

When attackers overran the Benghazi consulate on September 11, Ham immediately informed Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey. Panetta and Dempsey subsequently headed to the White House for a 5:00 p.m. national security briefing with Obama, where they would brief him on the situation.

Under pointed questioning by Representative Brad Wenstrup (R–OH), Ham admitted that he discussed the likelihood of terrorism with Panetta and Dempsey, moments before they saw the President:

* STOP! HOLD ON! RE-READ THE ABOVE.

* "UNDER POINTED QUESTIONING."

* ONLY THEN, GENERAL...??? MEANING YOU WERE ACTUALLY PART OF THE "MUDDY THE WATERS/MISLEAD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE" CABAL ALL ALONG? (SURE SOUNDS LIKE IT - DOESN'T IT?)

Rep. Wenstrup: “As a military person, I am concerned that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration. I would hope that our military leadership would be advising that this was a terrorist attack.”

Gen. Ham: “Again, sir, I think, you know, there was some preliminary discussion about, you know, maybe there was a demonstration. But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack.”

Rep. Wenstrup: “And you would have advised as such if asked. Would that be correct?”

Gen. Ham: “Well, and with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir.”

* HAM... DEMPSEY... PANETTA...

(*SIGH*)

Demonstration or terrorism? “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Clinton famously hissed during a Senate hearing in January 2013. Well, the difference is important because the same White House that declared victory in the war against terrorism and pulled U.S. military assets out of Libya also failed miserably to take responsibility for its own miscalculation.

* SCREW THAT! THIS ISN'T ABOUT "GOTCHYA." THE REASON THESE BASTARDS SHOULD PROBABLY BE STOOD AGAINST A WALL AND SHOT IS BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO EVEN ATTEMPT TO SAVE OUR PEOPLE FIGHTING FOR THEIR LIVES IN BENGHAZI AS THE BATTLE RAGED! NO RESCUE WAS ATTEMPTED! THEY LEFT OUR PEOPLE "ON THE OWN" TO DIE!

As a result, there was no attempted military rescue or response, and false information was peddled to the American people to shift the blame. Every step of the way, the White House’s response to Benghazi has been appalling.

* AGAIN... I WOULDN'T SHED A TEAR IF SOME SKILLED VETERAN WERE TO...

(*SILENCE*)

From the Pentagon to the CIA to the State Department, it was clear that an outpost of the United States had been attacked by terrorists. But the White House chose — for its own reasons — to turn a blind eye.

* AND TO LIE ABOUT IT... FOR WEEKS...

William R. Barker said...

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/obama-claims-ignorance-extent-nsa-surveillance

* LISTEN... YOU GUYS KNOW ME... IT'S RARE THAT I'LL SOURCE SOMETHING LIKE "TRUTH REVOLT" AS A NEWSBITE. THAT SAID... THE RELEVENT LINKS CAN BE FOUND WITHIN THE ARTICLE AND THERE'S NOTHING IN THE ARTICLE ITSELF I DIDN'T ALREADY KNOW. I'M POSTING THIS BECAUSE IT'S CONCISE AND WELL-WRITTEN:

President Obama doesn’t merely claim ignorance of the IRS’ targeting of politically conservative groups or the Department of Justice’s targeting of journalists: according to The New York Times, Obama was also ignorant of the extent of NSA surveillance.

According to the Times, “aides said Mr. Obama was surprised to learn after leaks by Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, just how far the surveillance had gone.”

David Plouffe, Obama’s advisor, said, “Things seem to have grown at the NSA. I think it was disturbing to most people, and I think he found it disturbing.”

President Obama has repeatedly claimed ignorance on scandals plaguing his administration. In October, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius said Obama didn’t know about failures of Healthcare.gov.

In May, Obama said he knew nothing about the IRS scandal: “I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press.”

That same month, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Obama had no clue that the DOJ was targeting the Associated Press: “Other than press reports, we have no knowledge of any attempt by the Justice Department to seek phone records of the AP.”

In November 2012, Obama said he knew nothing about the scandal surrounding then-CIA Director David Petraeus.

Carney denied in June 2012 that Obama knew anything about the Fast and Furious scandal: “[E]veryone knows the President did not know about this tactic until he heard about it through the media.”

(*ROLLING MY EYES*)

* EITHER CARNEY - AND OBAMA - ARE FULL OF SHIT, OR... WE EFFECTIVELY HAVE NO CHIEF EXECUTIVE.

(*SHRUG*)

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/former-top-nsa-official-now-police-state.html

* THE HEADLINE...

32-year NSA Veteran Who Created Mass Surveillance System Says Government Use of Data Gathered Through Spying “Is a Totalitarian Process”

Bill Binney is the high-level NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information. A 32-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency, Binney was the senior technical director within the agency and managed thousands of NSA employees.

Binney has been interviewed by virtually all of the mainstream media, including CBS, ABC, CNN, New York Times, USA Today, Fox News, PBS and many others.

* LINKS ARE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE WASHINGTON'S BLOG PIECE.

Last year... Binney held his thumb and forefinger close together, and said: "We are, like, that far from a turnkey totalitarian state."

But today... Binney told Washington’s Blog that the U.S. has already become a police state.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

By way of background, the government is spying on virtually everything we do.

All of the information gained by the NSA through spying is then shared with federal, state and local agencies...

* THIS IS NEW - TO ME ANYWAY. WE NEED TO KNOW IF THIS IS TRUE. THIS NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED.

...and they are using that information to prosecute petty crimes such as drugs and taxes.

* AGAIN... I'VE HEARD OF THIS OCCURRING ON A LIMITED BASIS... BUT IF THIS IS INDEED WIDESPREAD... WE'VE GOT A MAJOR PROBLEM ON OUR HANDS.

The agencies are instructed to intentionally “launder” the information gained through spying, i.e. to pretend that they got the information in a more legitimate way … and to hide that from defense attorneys and judges.

* AGAIN... IF THIS IS WIDESPREAD...

(*SIGH*)

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

This is a bigger deal than you may realize, as legal experts say that there are so many federal and state laws in the United States, that no one can keep track of them all … and everyone violates laws every day without even knowing it.

* ABSOLUTELY! ABSOLUTELY TRUE!

The NSA also ships Americans’ most confidential, sensitive information to foreign countries like Israel (including a private company in Israel), the UK and other countries … so they can “unmask” the information and give it back to the NSA … or use it for their own purposes. Binney told us today: "The main use of the collection from these [NSA spying] programs [is] for law enforcement."

* THIS IS NOT GOOD, FOLKS... THIS TOTALLY SHREDS THE CHECKS AND BALANCES WITHIN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM AND TRAMPLES OUR CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.

[S]lides [provided by binney] give the policy of the DOJ/FBI/DEA etc. on how to use the NSA data. [T]hey instruct that none of the NSA data is referred to in courts – because it has been acquired without a warrant.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

So, they have to do a “Parallel Construction” and not tell the courts or prosecution or defense the original data used to arrest people. This I call: a “planned programmed perjury policy” directed by U.S. law enforcement.

* YEP...

And, as the last line on one slide says, this also applies to “Foreign Counterparts.” This is a total corruption of the justice system not only in our country but around the world. The source of the info is at the bottom of each slide. This is a totalitarian process – means we are now in a police state.

* FOLKS... THROW IN THE DESCRIPTIVE "POTENTIAL" IF IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER... "POTENTIAL" IN TERMS OF TARGETING YOU PERSONALLY... BUT THE FACT IS THAT AMERICA IS NO LONGER A NATION RULED BY THE CONSTITUTION. THE RULE OF LAW IS NOW WHAT HOLDER AND OBAMA SAY IT IS.

We asked Binney a follow-up question: "You say 'this also applies to ‘Foreign Counterparts.’ Does that mean that foreign agencies can also 'launder' the info gained from NSA spying? Or that data gained through foreign agencies’ spying can be 'laundered' and used by U.S. agencies?'"

Binney responded: "For countries like the five eyes (U.S. Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand) and probably some others it probably works both ways. But for others that have relationships with FBI or DEA etc., they probably are given the data to used to arrest people but are not told the source or given copies of the data."

* LISTEN... WHAT WE DO ABROAD... THAT'S A DIFFERENT MATTER. I'M CONCERNED WITH AMERICANS RIGHTS IN AMERICA.

William R. Barker said...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/195809-paul-on-nsa-are-we-going-to-get-snowdens-contractor-to-hold-all#ixzz2qgDQHJLb

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)...

* ONE OF THE GOOD GUYS...

...said Friday he might be more concerned if a private entity controlled the vast database of phone records currently maintained by the National Security Agency.

* I WONDER IF HE KNOWS THAT FOREIGN (ISRAELI) CONTRACTORS APPARENTLY HAVE ACCESS...?

(*SIGH*)

Immediately following President Obama's address to the Justice Department, in which he announced a series of [supposed] NSA "reforms," Paul questioned who would be tasked with holding the records. He jokingly asked if the government would get Edward Snowden’s former contractor for the job.

* NO JOKE. RECALL... SNOWDEN WORKED FOR A GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, NOT THE GOVERNMENT. AS A CONTRACTOR HE WAS GIVEN HIS SECURITY CLEARANCE AND ABILITY TO DO WHAT HE DID!

Sen. Paul reiterated it is not about who holds the data. He takes issue with its collection in the first place.

(*RISING TO APPLAUD*)

“I’m not sure if I am more or less concerned with having a private entity,” he said on CNN after Obama’s speech. “Who are we going to hire, [Edward] Snowden’s contractor to hold all the information? I don’t want them collecting the information. It is not about who holds it.”

Snowden’s leak of information while working for NSA contractor Booz Allen Hamilton led to revelations about the program and the ensuing debate.

(*SHRUG*)

The Kentucky senator is one of the most vocal critics of the NSA program and has launched a lawsuit against the bulk collection program.

* AS I WROTE ABOVE - "ONE OF THE GOOD GUYS."

In one of his largest recommendations, Obama argued for the NSA to give up control of its database that holds millions of Americans' phone metadata — which includes call times, lengths and durations. However, he did not outline a specific proposal on where to store the information, either with telephone companies or a third party.

* SOME "RECOMMENDATION."

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

Paul applauded Obama’s rhetoric but said the reforms were just window dressing, and the issue would eventually have to be decided by the Supreme Court.

* UNFORTUNATELY WE CAN'T TRUST THE SUPREME COURT TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION. ULTIMATELY... THE FOUNDERS GAVE US THE 2ND AMENDMENT FOR A REASON.

“Well, I think what I heard was, if you like your privacy you can keep it, but in the meantime, we are going to keep collecting your phone records, texts messages and likely your credit card information,” Paul said.

* YEP... PRETTY MUCH.

About Obama’s proposal to appoint a public advocate to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court, Paul said “it’s better” and noted he has sponsored legislation to make the change as well.

* ER... EXCUSE ME, BUT... ISN'T OBAMA THE GUY WHO APPOINTED ALL THE OFFICIALS WHO HAVE BEEN VIOLATING THE LAWS AND LYING TO CONGRESS AND THE PUBLIC...? (RHETORICAL QUESTION.)

But Paul questioned whether there could be a real adversarial process if the government appoints the advocate. “I don’t think it works necessarily if they are appointed by the government,” he said. “To truly have an adversarial process, they have to be hired by someone who thinks they are being injured by the government.”

* DUH!

* AT THE VERY LEAST (AS I SUGGESTED YESTERDAY) PUT ALL RETIRED SUPREME COURT JUSTICES ON SUCH A PANAL.

Paul touted his own proposal to reform that court, which would allow people to challenge FISA court orders at appellate courts.

* HOW DOES ONE CHALLENGE SOMETHING THAT'S DONE IN SECRET...???

William R. Barker said...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/16/Study-Christie-s-New-Jersey-Least-Economically-Solvent-State-In-The-U-S

George Mason University's Mercatus Center released a working paper Thursday ranking the solvency of the 50 states by a number of factors - from "liquidity and budgetary balance" to "reliance on debt to finance current and long-term expenditures and ability to pay for essential services." They further subdivided the category of solvency generally into cash solvency, budget solvency, long-run solvency, and service-level solvency.

The study finds that New Jersey is in the worst financial state of any state in the union generally, while also being the worst in budget and long-run solvency.

New Jersey's highest ranking on any list, #39, is for service-level solvency, though the statistics used for this study predate the spike in service needs after Hurricane Sandy. It also has the worst per-capita budget deficit in the nation.

The researchers explain that the state faces a number of management problems with the way multiple administrations have handled its economy. Researchers cite "nearly 15 years of underfunding its state and local pensions," as well as tax revenues that do not match or keep up with state expenses, "use of budget practices that only appeared to balance their annual budgets," and "decades of using bonds without being able to pay for them."

The people of New Jersey have been extraordinarily supportive of Christie despite this record.

* THAT'S BECAUSE THE RECORD ISN'T SOLELY CHRISTIE'S. WHAT IS REQUIRED IS A FOLLOW-UP REPORT THAT COMPARES AND CONTRASTS THE CHRISTIE YEARS (HIS RECORD) TO HIS PREDECESSORS'.

Christie told the audience of legislatures at his State of the State address this week that the state "is good and getting better."

Christie has repeatedly highlighted the fact that New Jersey is the largest donor state of taxes in the country - paying far more than it receives in federal tax funding - but [he] has done little to change this pattern.

On the contrary, the tax burden on the average New Jersey family has increased 18.6% under Christie.

[N]othing seems to have improved since Christie's time in office, despite Christie running a campaign based in large part on economic recovery. Under his tenure, 25% of New Jersey's youth are moving back in with their parents and rampant crime is overtaking urban centers like Newark and Camden.

William R. Barker said...

http://neighborhoodeffects.mercatus.org/2014/01/16/crony-capitalism-and-the-revolving-door/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NeighborhoodEffects+%28Neighborhood+Effects%29

A colleague just handed me the latest issue of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy [featuring] a short essay by Jonathan Macey of Yale Law School called “Crony Capitalism: Right Here, Right Now.”

The entire piece is worth reading. But this anecdote, which I hadn’t heard before, jumped out:

"The Senate confirmed Jack Lew as Secretary of the Treasury in February 2013, and one of the striking things about that appointment is that his contract at Citibank, where he did administrative work with a hedge fund, stipulated that he would receive a bonus if, and only if, he were appointed to a senior position in government."

It is tempting, of course, to blame Citibank. And part of me does. But P.J. O’Rourke has a nice line about this phenomenon which I quoted in The Pathology of Privilege. “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation,” he says, “the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.”

(*PURSED LIPS*)

It may seem disgusting that, as Weil put it, “Citigroup might have agreed to pay Lew some sort of a bounty to seek out, and be appointed to, such a position.” But in today’s modern crony-capitalist economy, high-ranking government officials sometimes determine whether a firm lives or dies. When that is the case, it’s only prudent to have a man on the inside.

Stories like this reinforce the point that government-granted privileges to particular firms sully the reputation of both government and markets.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/who-read-1582-page-11t-spending-bill-congressman-nobody-did

When asked whether he read the 1,528-page, $1.1 trillion government spending bill before he voted for it yesterday, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) said, “Nobody did!”

On Capitol Hill on Thursday, CNSNews.com asked Blumenauer: “The omnibus bill yesterday, it was 1,582 pages, did you have a chance to read all the pages before voting on it?”

Blumenauer laughed and said: “Nobody did!”

“Nobody did?” said the CNSNews.com reporter.

“Nope,” said Blumenauer.

In an e-mail to CNSNews.com, Blumenauer's communications director, Patrick Malone, said: "A reminder that the Republicans complained and complained about not having time to read bills when the Dems were in charge and then keep dropping bombs like this on us."
currency

The $1.1 trillion bill will fund the federal government for the rest of fiscal year 2014, which ends on Sept. 30, 2014.

Sixty-four Republicans and three Democrats voted against the legislation. The final vote was 359-67. The legislation was opposed by conservative groups and conservative members of Congress.

The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress.

* REPEAT...

The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress... The bill increases federal spending by $44.8 billion this year over the spending level previously set by Congress...

William R. Barker said...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/16/Number-of-Able-Bodied-Adults-without-Dependents-Receiving-Food-Stamps-Doubles

The number of Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents (ABAWDs) receiving food stamps zoomed from 1.7 million to 3.9 million between Fiscal Year 2007 and Fiscal Year 2010. In that same period, food stamp recipients in total grew from 26 million to nearly 40 million.

One reason for the catastrophic growth in the number of ABAWDs is Barack Obama’s 2009 stimulus bill, which opened the door for states to waive the work provision required of ABAWDs. (That work provision mandated that to continue receiving food stamps, after three months of being unemployed ABAWDs must work or perform some type of work activity 20 hours per week.)

Spending on food stamps now totals somewhere around $80 billion, twice what the number was in Fiscal Year 2008.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

Congress is debating a new farm bill, but it is uncertain whether it will reinstate the work provision required of ABAWDs. Presently, the work waivers foisted on the states by Obama allow ABAWDs to receive food stamps indefinitely - without working or preparing for work.

* HERE... LET'S GO OVER THAT ONE MORE TIME...

Presently, the work waivers foisted on the states by Obama allow ABAWDs to receive food stamps indefinitely - without working or preparing for work.

* AH... WHAT THE HELL... ONE MORE TIME...

Presently, the work waivers foisted on the states by Obama allow ABAWDs to receive food stamps indefinitely - without working or preparing for work.

(*SPITTING ON THE GROUND*)

Sans work requirement, there is no guarantee that food stamps are being given to those who truly cannot work.

* AND THAT'S THE POINT... AND THE GOAL...

(*SMIRK*)

The proposal offered by the GOP-led House wants a 5% reduction in the cost of food stamps. The Democrat Senate is only willing to cut that cost by 1%.

* I WANNA CUT 50%. IMMEDIATELY! FOLLOWED BY AN ADDITION 10% A YEAR OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS!