Saturday, January 19, 2013

The accuracy and credibility of the cornerstone, left wing fact checker Politfacts unravels as their so called "Lie of the Year" proves to be 100% correct!

Jan. 19, 2013

Mainstream Lie of 2012 proves to be true: Jeep will be producing cars in China

(By Wayne Dupree @

Last month, PolitiFact selected its “Lie of the Year.” Given PolitiFact’s dubious record of singling out Republicans for lying far more often then Democrats, you probably could have guessed the winner of this particular sweepstakes was a Mitt Romney campaign ad:
It was a lie told in the critical state of Ohio in the final days of a close campaign — that Jeep was moving its U.S. production to China. It originated with a conservative blogger, who twisted an accurate news story into a falsehood. Then it picked up steam when the Drudge Report ran with it. Even though Jeep’s parent company gave a quick and clear denial, Mitt Romney repeated it and his campaign turned it into a TV ad.

And they stood by the claim, even as the media and the public expressed collective outrage against something so obviously false.

Ok. Now here’s what the Reuters reported earlier this week:

Fiat (FIA.MI) and its U.S. unit Chrysler expect to roll out at least 100,000 Jeeps in China when production starts in 2014 as they seek to catch up with rivals in the world’s biggest car market. …

“We expect production of around 100,000 Jeeps per year which is expandable to 200,000,” [Chrysler CEO Sergio] Marchionne, who is also CEO of Chrysler, said on the sidelines of a conference, adding production could start in 18 months.
So, yes, it’s confirmed that Jeep will be producing cars in China. According to the Toledo Blade last November:

Currently, Jeeps sell in more than 120 countries around the world, including China. They’re nearly all built in factories in the United States.

Another Day, Another Burglary at a House ID’d on N.Y. Paper’s Interactive Gun Map

Jan. 19, 2013

(Newsbusters) - Another home included in an interactive map of gun permit holders published by the Lower Hudson Valley’s Journal News shortly before Christmas has been burglarized. This time, according to the related report at Newsday, "The thieves ransacked the house Wednesday night, breaking into two safes on the home's third floor and stealing a third safe." The third safe, in what was either an amazing coincidence or yet another direct result of the interactive map’s publication, is the one which contained the homeowners' guns. Imagine that.

 More details from Timothy O'Connor's Newsday report, wherein officials compete to distance the crime from the map:

Journal News map-listed guns, permits stolen from New City home, cops say

Two handguns and two pistol permits were stolen from the New City home of a man whose name and address are listed on the website of a local newspaper as possessing gun permits, police said.

... Clarkstown police said they had no evidence the burglary was connected to the controversial map.

"The burglary is still under investigation, and there are no facts to support this correlation at this time," Clarkstown Sgt. Joanne Fratianni said in a statement. "If the investigation develops further information, it will be released accordingly."

Family members at the burglarized home refused to speak publicly Thursday, and police are keeping reporters off the property on the quiet suburban street.

"At this early point in the investigation, we believe it is a random crime and the home was not targeted," Clarkstown Det. Lt. Charles Delo told News12.

The burglary comes less than a week after a White Plains homeowner -- who also was listed on the Journal News website as having gun permits -- arrived home to find his home burglarized, with jewelry missing and an attempted break-in of his gun safe. The thieves were not successful, and no guns were stolen.

White Plains Police Commissioner David Chong said Monday that it was "premature" to connect that burglary to the website listing but said it was part of the police investigation.

Of course the police are going to continue to say they can't prove a connection to the Journal News's map and even continue to deny one. They likely need to keep whatever they do know quiet in the interest of catching perpetrators who are still at large, and convicting any they do catch (news reports about the earlier burglary which occurred on Saturday indicate that "one suspect was taken into custody" out of "at least two burglars").

But reasonable people don't need courtroom-level proof to cautiously infer that as the "coincidences" pile up, what the Journal News has done has made Westchester and Rockland Counties in News York less safe.

Cross Posted at BizzyBlog

Republican Plan: Kick the Can Once Again

Jan. 19, 2013

It's getting very difficult to criticize Obama golfing as much as Tiger Woods, while the Republican get so much practice "kicking the can", they may actually beat the L.A. Galaxy in soccer. Obama states that he will not compromise over the debt ceiling. So how do republicans retaliate? They let him have his way, of course!

Republicans proposed a three-month increase to the US debt ceiling Friday as they lean toward breaking a protracted fiscal impasse, but warned any long-term deal would require Congress to pass a budget that cuts spending.

The Republican-led House of Representatives will hold a vote next week on the temporary measure, Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced at the end of a two-day Republican work retreat outside Washington.

The move could help defuse a fiscal time bomb that Congress and the White House face in late February with the nation hitting its debt ceiling, looming automatic federal spending cuts, and debate over the budget.

The three-month extension of US borrowing authority would buy time for the Senate to pass a non-binding budget, Cantor said.

The House has passed budgets every year of Barack Obama's presidency, but the Senate has not passed one for four years.

Should they fail to approve a budget by April 15, the legislation would withhold lawmakers' paychecks, he added.

"Members of Congress will not be paid by the American people for failing to do their job. No budget, no pay. It's time to come together and get to work."

Obama has repeatedly said he will not negotiate on extending US borrowing authority and has called on Congress to raise the limit so the government can meet its obligations.

Some Republicans have signaled they would be willing to let the government shut down unless a debt ceiling increase was met with an equal reduction in federal spending.

The latest move is seen by some officials as a concession and a sign of a more pragmatic approach to debt negotiations by House Republicans amid pressure over the prospect of sending the government into default.

"We are encouraged that there are signs that congressional Republicans may back off their insistence on holding our economy hostage to extract drastic cuts in Medicare, education and programs middle class families depend on," White House spokesman Jay Carney said in response to Friday's proposal.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office suggested he would swiftly bring the Republican measure to a vote.

"If the House can pass a clean debt ceiling increase to avoid default and allow the United States to meet its existing obligations, we will be happy to consider it," Reid's spokesman Adam Jentleson said in a statement.

Congressman Paul Ryan, the powerful House Budget Committee chairman and Republican Mitt Romney's losing vice presidential nominee, backed the proposal but insisted the Senate pass a budget that gives priority to how taxpayer dollars are spent.

Any deal to temporarily raise the debt ceiling "rests on the recognition that our challenge is twofold: We have to pay our bills today, and we have to make sure we can pay our bills tomorrow," Ryan said.

"To achieve both ends, we must cut spending and budget responsibly."

House Speaker John Boehner, the top Republican in Congress, favored the proposal -- and made it clear that the debt ceiling would remain a bargaining chip, despite Obama's insistence to the contrary.

"Before there is any long-term debt limit increase, a budget should be passed that cuts spending," Boehner said.

Delaying the debt ceiling debate could allow lawmakers to focus more thoroughly on the $110 billion in broad mandated cuts set to hit the military and domestic programs from early March, as well as the temporary funding that is keeping the government running and which expires at the end of that month.

source: AFP

Preferential treatment for me but not for thee: A former teacher will have an opportunity to erase charges that she had a romantic relationship with a seventh-grader

Jan. 19, 2013

Living proof that in the end, it's who you blow that matters most..

Former Lancaster teacher gets deal in sex case. Can have charges dismissed if she completes ARD program

A former teacher will have an opportunity to erase charges that she had a romantic relationship with a seventh-grader at Reynolds Middle School.
Christina Layser was accepted Friday into the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) program, meaning she can have the sex charges dismissed if she obeys the program for the next seven months.

Lancaster city police allege that Layser had unlawful contact with a 13-year-old student, including kissing, touching and the exchange of love letters.

The incidents occurred in the math teacher's classroom and in a bathroom after school hours between October and Dec. 21 of 2011, according to police.

At a preliminary hearing last year, the student testified that he believed Layser, 37, to be his girlfriend. He and the teacher told each other, "I love you," the boy testified.

Layser, a married mother of two children, appeared again in court Friday morning.

She said little during the brief hearing that ended with Lancaster County Judge Dennis Reinaker accepting her into the ARD program (a program for first time convicted drunk drivers).

The program regiment will include probation, 75 hours of community service, and a $650 processing fee, prosecutor James Reeder explained. The program runs through Aug. 1.

ARD resolutions are common in DUI cases and other lower-level crimes, but relatively rare in felony cases such as Layser's.

However, as explained by prosecutor James Reeder, the case comes down to the victim's word alone. There were no eyewitnesses to the alleged crimes.

"This is basically a he-said she-said case," Reeder said on Friday afternoon. "It would be based solely on the jury's evaluation of the (victim's) credibility."

The victim and his family have since moved out of state, but were willing to return for a trial, Reeder noted.

Meanwhile, Layser has maintained her innocence.

"Ms. Layser has constantly and adamantly denied any wrongdoing in this case," defense attorney Terrence McGowan told the judge, "and will continue to do so."

Reinaker said he was hesitant to accept Layser into the program, considering the severe charges that include two felonies. However, the judge said, he knows the attorneys well and trusts their judgment.

"If there is any truth to these allegations," Reinaker told Layser, "you need to understand the serious consequences that would [typically] come along in a case like this."

The judge explained that if Layser doesn't follow the program, she faces criminal prosecution.

Layser was the second School District of Lancaster teacher to be recently charged with sex crimes.

The other, Christy Smith, was convicted last year of having sex with two high school students. She is serving a 20-to-40-year prison term.

Reeder noted that the two cases are very different.

No skin-to-skin contact, aside from kissing, is alleged between Layser and her accuser.

Also, there were numerous witnesses that testified at Smith's trial about her contact with the student-victims.


The Twisted Deceptionist:: The Indepth Look at Barack Obama's Distortions of Reagan Principles

Jan. 19, 2013

Obama absolutely loves Reagan! Not in the sense that matters most. The message, however, which he despises. Obama loves Reagan's mechanics. His style and the effectiveness created by the delivery of his message made President Ronald Reagan one of the, if not most, loved and successful leaders the free world has ever known. Combining what Obama loves about President Reagan with the hidden agendas, this anti-constitutionalist authoritarian has in store for America, and it's east to see how so many uniformed, lower tier voters fall for the deceptive words and promises the Obama regime spews. As history would have it, just like children, the day will come that the myth of Santa Claus is realized.    - Koncerned Citizen

Obama: Reagan Supported Gun Control

President Barack Obama loves to quote GOP hero Ronald Reagan to make points about his current Republican opponents and other issues. Here’s a look at how he’s used the words of the 40th president.

What Obama said: At a press conference Wednesday, Obama quoted Reagan's support of an assault-weapons ban: "Weapons designed for the theater of war have no place in a movie theater. A majority of Americans agree with us on this. And, by the way, so did Ronald Reagan, one of the staunchest defenders of the Second Amendment, who wrote to Congress in 1994, urging them — this is Ronald Reagan speaking — urging them to 'listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of [military-style assault] weapons.'”

What Reagan said: During the debate over the assault-weapons ban in 1994, Reagan and former presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter signed a letter to all members of the House backing the legislation. "While we recognize that assault-weapon legislation will not stop all assault-weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals," the letter read. "We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons"

Obama quotes Reagan on taxes

What Obama said: While pushing for higher taxes on the wealthy in 2012, Obama quoted Reagan's comments on taxes: "He gave a speech where he talked about a letter he had received from a wealthy executive who paid lower tax rates than his secretary, and wanted to come to Washington and tell Congress why that was wrong. So this president gave another speech where he said it was 'crazy' — that's a quote — that certain tax loopholes make it possible for multimillionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary. That wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior was Ronald Reagan."

What Reagan said:
As fact-checkers noted, Reagan was actually pushing for a plan to lower tax rates while getting rid of loopholes that allow some wealthy people to dramatically reduce their taxes: "We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that's crazy. It's time we stopped it."

Obama quotes Reagan on the debt ceiling

What Obama said: In a televised speech in 2011 about the debate over raising the debt ceiling, Obama quoted Reagan as supporting a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes: "The first time a deal was passed, a predecessor of mine made the case for a balanced approach by saying this: 'Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer.' Those words were spoken by Ronald Reagan."

What Reagan said:
In a speech in Billings, Mont., Reagan discussed a proposal to raise taxes, noting it was part of a broader budget that also cut spending: "Now, this tax program is part of the entire budget process, and it was essential in getting support for further reductions in spending. In order to get $280 billion in reduced outlays over the next 3 years against those deficits, we had to agree to the added revenues of $99 billion. The ratio of reduced spending outlays to revenues is 3 to 1. The bottom line is this: Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer."

Obama quotes Reagan on infrastructure

What Obama said: While pressing Congress to support a bill to repair and replace bridges and other infrastructure in 2011, Obama quoted Reagan: "Now, if you don’t want to take my word for it, take it from one of my predecessors. It’s one of the previous Presidents. He said that — and I’m quoting here — 'the bridges and highways we fail to repair today will have to be rebuilt tomorrow at many times the cost.' He went on to say that 'rebuilding our infrastructure is common sense' — that’s a quote — and 'an investment in tomorrow that we must make today.' That President was Ronald Reagan."

What Reagan said: In a 1982 radio address, Reagan called for an increase in the gas tax to pay for repairs to highways and bridges: "We simply cannot allow this magnificent system to deteriorate beyond repair. The time has come to preserve what past Americans spent so much time and effort to create, and that means a nationwide conservation effort in the best sense of the word. America can't afford throwaway roads or disposable transit systems. The bridges and highways we fail to repair today will have to be rebuilt tomorrow at many times the cost."

Obama quotes Reagan on the campaign trail

What Obama said: While campaigning in 2008, Obama took an old Reagan attack line and pushed it in a new direction to criticize his opponents over the cratering economy: "Here in Indianapolis and all across America, you’re seeing your hours getting cut or realizing that you can’t pay every bill that’s sitting on the kitchen counter. You know, back in 1980 Ronald Reagan asked the electorate whether you were better off than you were four years ago. At the pace things are going right now you’re going to have ask whether you’re better off than you were four weeks ago."

What Reagan said: During his closing statement at a 1980 debate, Reagan argued President Jimmy Carter's term had been unsuccessful in a legendary attack: "“Ask yourself: Are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we’re as strong as we were four years ago?”

Obama quotes Reagan to religious leaders

What Obama said: In an off-the-record meeting in 2008 with 30 Christian leaders, Obama quoted Reagan, as he later said in an interview: "I opened up the meeting by quoting Ronald Reagan, which was saying, I know you can't endorse me, but I endorse you. I endorse the good works that are being done, the wonderful ministries that are taking place all across the country and my goal here is just to have a dialogue to listen, to learn, to share my faith journey and I think people came out of it, not necessarily agreeing with me on every issue, but I think that they recognized that I respected them, I respected their faith, I respected what they're trying to achieve."

What Reagan said: In 1980, Reagan gave a speech to a group of thousands of religious conservatives in Dallas, famously winning over the crowd by saying "I know you can't endorse me, but I endorse you."


Liberal Stupidity making leaps and bounds

Jan. 19, 2013

Just when you thought the left couldn't get any more foolish and idiotic than they already are. A new liberal comes out of the swamp with something even more retarded than the last time...

Attorney: Girl, 5, in trouble for chatting about shooting bubble gun

MOUNT CARMEL - Talking with a friend about a pink toy bubble gun got a five-year-old kindergarten girl in the Mount Carmel Area School District labeled as a terrorist threat, according to an attorney.
The incident occurred Jan. 10 while the girl was waiting in line for a school bus, said Robin Ficker, the Maryland lawyer retained by the girl's family. He would not identify the girl or her parents, but gave this version of events:

Talking with a friend, the girl said something to the effect “I’m going to shoot you and I will shoot myself” in reference to the device that shoots out bubbles. The girl did not have the bubble gun with her and has never shot a real gun in her life, Ficker said.

Elementary school officials learned of the conversation and questioned the girls the next day, Fickler said. He said the girl did not have a parent present during the 30 minutes of questioning.

The result, he said, was that the student was labeled a "terrorist threat" and suspended for 10 days, Ficker said. The school also required her to be evaluated by a psychologist, Ficker said.

"This little girl is the least terroristic person in Pennsylvania,” he said.

Ficker, who said he was contacted because the mother had read he handled a similar case in Maryland, suggested she ask the principal to expunge the record. That did not happen, but her suspension was reduced to two school days, and the reason for it changed to being labeled as a threat to harm another student.

“She’s branded,” Ficker said.

School district solicitor Edward Greco said Friday the allegations are being looked into but neither he nor school officials could discuss disciplinary actions. Greco and Ficker acknowledged they are trying to arrange a meeting next week to discuss the situation.

Ficker believes the girl’s record should be expunged and she be offered an apology.


Small Town Corruption Involving Death Leaves Many Questions Unanswered

Jan 19, 2013


More than two years ago, Roberta Neill's 61-year-old brother called 911 to report a stolen bicycle.

Robert "Bob" Neill then died after responding Mount Joy Borough police officers repeatedly shocked him with a Taser.

The passage of time has only made Roberta Neill angrier, and in an interview Friday she said that she and the public deserve a complete explanation for the police officers' conduct in the early hours of Nov. 6, 2010.

"I would just like for somebody in the police department to say what happened that night," Neill said. "What happened between Bob's call for help and being Tasered?"

She added, "The community is still confused. People are saying, 'We don't believe the police anymore. We believe there's something that happened that's never come out."

A year after the incident in which police allegedly shocked Neill 15 times for a total of 119 seconds, the state attorney general's office investigated the case, but found "no evidence of any criminal conduct."

But last April, one of the officers, Tyson Woods, was terminated for violating the police department's use-of-force policy. Then last August, Chief John O'Connell Jr. was placed on leave while still drawing his $83,591 salary. And last month, the borough agreed to a $900,000 settlement after Neill's children filed suit.

Borough officials have never explained their actions, Neill said.

According to what Woods told state police, Neill talked to him outside his apartment, complaining about being harassed and having his motorized bicycle stolen. He then turned and ran into his apartment.

When Woods and another officer went to the door, Neill, in a state of rage, charged them, according to the state police. The borough officers used Tasers to subdue him.

"Why did they use any force?" Roberta Neill asked. "He's 61 years old with no record of anything. ... Why did they not check into the story that he gave them? And if they did, they would not have used any force."

Neill also wonders why the police did not investigate the crime her brother was reporting. Neill said she believes she knows who was harassing her brother and who took his bicycle. But she said it does not appear an investigation was undertaken.

Neill said her brother was a widower and a Vietnam War veteran who had retired after many years at New Cumberland Army Depot. She described him as a kind, generous and well-liked member of the community who loved to volunteer at his church and the Elizabethtown senior center.

She said her brother was not violent. She said she believes he simply was in a highly agitated state and was rushing down the apartment hall to get outside.

The officer "had no legal right to trap my brother in that hall and not let him out that door," Neill said. "You let him out the door and you let him go. You do not Taser him."

Mount Joy officials have said they cannot comment on the police chief's suspension because it's a personnel matter. In a news story last Saturday, Mayor Mary Ginder said she understands the public's frustration, but she said finding a resolution has taken longer than expected.

"The reason, in my opinion," Neill said, "is a total, complete, 100 percent mishandling of the entire event that led to my brother's death."


Crabtree travels with team amid sexual-assault allegations

Jan. 19, 2013

Wide receiver Michael Crabtree is the subject of a San Francisco Police Department allegation into an alleged sexual assault following the 49ers’ playoff-opening win last weekend.

Crabtree traveled with the 49ers on Friday night to Atlanta for the NFC Championship Game. He was not spotted walking with teammates into the lobby of the team’s downtown hotel, which was cordoned off by hotel security. CSN Bay Area, however, did see Crabtree exit the team buses with a security escort.

The 49ers issued the following statement from general manager Trent Baalke just after the team arrived in Atlanta, at nearly 11:30 p.m. EDT:

“We are aware of the allegation against Michael and understand that he has fully cooperated with authorities. The 49ers take such matters very seriously. We will have no further comment at this time as the legal process is ongoing. Additional requests for comment should be directed to Michael’s attorney.”

For more on this developing story, please check back on the Bay Area News Group’s related sites. Here is the most recent story from our news department.

Here is the press release issued by SFPD:

The San Francisco Police Department is investigating an allegation of a sexual assault involving San Francisco 49ers Michael Crabtree. The alleged assault occurred in a San Francisco hotel in the early morning hours of Sunday, Jan 13. The incident is being investigated by the Special Victims Unit.

Michael Crabtree has been interviewed with his lawyer present and has cooperated in this investigation. Michael Crabtree has not been detained or arrested and has agreed to make himself available to investigators in the future.

When the investigation is completed, it will be presented to the District Attorney’s Office.

Anyone with information on this incident is asked to contact the SFPD Special Victims Unit at (415) 553-9225, the Anonymous Tip Line at (415) 575-4444, or Text a Tip to TIP411 and begin the message with SFPD.”

source: mercury news

Friday, January 18, 2013

Other Tyrants Who Have Used Children As Props

Jan. 18, 2013

Obama’s shameless exploitation of children as set pieces is hardly new or original. In fact, tyrants and dictators have used kids as props down through the ages.

Here are a few more recent examples:

The Soviet Union’s Joseph Stalin

China’s Mao Zedong

Germany’s Adolf Hitler

Cuba’s Fidel Castro

North Korea’s Kim Il-sung

Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez

Dictator Obama Exploiting the Children for Executive Action on Gun Control

source: infowars

Obama 'High on His Own Power'

Jan. 18, 2013

Republican senator Ted Cruz of Texas said Thursday that Barack Obama is "high on his own power" with regard to the president's announced efforts on gun control. Speaking on Laura Ingraham's radio talk show, Cruz, who was just elected to the Senate last November, said "this is a president who has drunk the Kool-Aid."

"He is feeling right now high on his own power, and he is pushing on every front, on guns," Cruz said. "And I think it's really sad to see the president of the United States exploiting the murder of children and using it to push his own extreme, anti-gun agenda. I think what the president is proposing and the gun control proposals that are coming from Democrats in the Senate are, number one, unconstitutional, and number two, they don't work. They're bad policy."

Cruz told Ingraham that he does not believe Obama will be successful in passing gun control legislation and that the political ramifications of pursuing such laws could be bad for Democrats.

"I think he's going to pay a serious political price, and I think the price that's going to be paid on this is going to manifest in Senate races in 2014, in some red states," Cruz said. "And there have got to be some Democrats who are up for reelection in 2014 who are very, very nervous right now that Presidnet Obama is picking this fight."

Listen to the segment here.

source: Weekly Standard

Wires Trumpet ’5-Year Low’ in Seasonally Adjusted Jobless Claims, Ignore Year-Over-Year Rise in Raw Claims

Jan. 18, 2013

None of the three major wire services covering today’s report from the Department of Labor on initial unemployment claims is reporting the major news: For the first time in a long while, actual claims filed during the most recent week ended January 12 were almost 6 percent higher than the number filed during last year’s comparable week, an indication that the current employment market may be worse than it was a year ago. Instead, all three wires are headlining how today’s questionably created seasonally adjusted claims number is the lowest in five years.

Both weeks had five business days. Both weeks represented the first such week in the new year. So how did higher raw claims result in the lowest seasonally adjusted claims number in five years, a number which is 8 percent lower than last year’s comparable week? The answer, as will be seen after the jump, is that the seasonal adjustment factor used this year is sharply higher than the one used last year.

The following graphic lays it out:

DOL’s data in the top section of the graphic show that actual claims (NSA, or not seasonally adjusted, in the green boxes) this year exceeded last year’s analogous week by over 30,000, or 5.8%. I believe that this is the first time that year-over-year claims in truly comparable full business weeks have risen in two years, if not longer. Yet seasonally adjusted claims (SA, in the red boxes) came in 8 percent, or 29,000, lower than last year.

The three calculations below DOL’s data show why this happened. The 2013 seasonal adjustment factor of 1.660 (expressed as “166.0″ in results obtainable at this interactive DOL link) is far higher than the factor of 1.442 (or “144.2″) used in last year’s analogous week. Again, both weeks had five business days, and both weeks represented the first full business week after the new year. Why this year’s seasonal adjustment factor is 15% higher (1.660 divided by 1.442) than last year’s is something I certainly can’t explain, and I suspect that DOL can’t defensibly explain it either. Readers won’t see anything except vagueness in what DOL had to say in the wire reports which follow below.

The highlighted column on the right shows that if last year’s seasonal adjustment factor had been applied to this year’s raw claims, seasonally adjusted claims would have come in at 385,000, or 50,000 higher than the “five-year low” DOL is reporting today. I believe that 385,000 more properly reflects underlying labor market conditions, which are not improving, and that today’s reported 335,000 does not.

The Associated Press, Bloomberg News, and Reuters all hemmed and hawed about seasonal adjustments, but failed to report the really important news that raw claims increased (links are to screen grabs at roughly 9:30 a.m., as the wires typically revise their reports as the day goes on; bolds are mine):

Associated Press, via Christopher Rugaber (“US JOBLESS AID APPLICATIONS FALL TO 5-YEAR LOW”)

The number of Americans seeking unemployment aid plummeted to a five-year low last week, a hopeful sign the job market may be improving. But much of the decline reflects seasonal volatility in the data.

… The department seasonally adjusts the numbers to account for such trends, but the data can still be choppy.

Bloomberg, via Alex Kowalski (“Jobless Claims in U.S. Fell to Lowest Level in Five Years”)

The number of Americans filing first-time claims for unemployment insurance payments fell more than forecast last week to the lowest level in five years, pointing to further improvement in the labor market.

… A spokesman for the agency said the drop may reflect the difficulty the government has in adjusting the data after the holidays when seasonal workers are let go.

Fewer claims indicate businesses have grown comfortable with their current headcounts, a necessary development before hiring starts to pick up.

Reuters, via Lucia Mutikani (“Jobless claims drop to five-year low”)

The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment benefits tumbled to a five-year low last week, a hopeful sign for the sluggish labor market.

… While last week’s decline ended four straight weeks of increases, it is probably not the start of a new trend or a sign of a material shift in labor market conditions as claims tend to be very volatile around this time of the year.

This is because of large swings in the model used by the department to iron out seasonal fluctuations.

While it would be fair to say that AP and Reuters restrained their enthusiasm a bit in their content, the same cannot be said about their unqualified headlines. Bloomberg’s Kowalski was especially week in mentioning “falling claims” in his content when actual claims really rose.

Of course it’s the headlines which will dominate radio and TV broadcasts, and it’s the headlines people will see in news feeds on their computers, tablets, and smart phones. They all convey a sense of improvement which has no support in reality.

Cross-posted at

source: bizzyblog

Pa. detective: Prankster registered as 'Obama'

Jan. 18, 2013

Pittsburgh - A Pennsylvania detective is trying to figure out how a prankster was able to fill out a 2008 voter registration card signed "Barack H. Obama."

Butler County Detective Scott Roskovski says nobody voted using the bogus voter registration card, though filling it out falsely could be a felony.

Elections officials in the county north of Pittsburgh had processed the card, and it went into the state's computerized database with the last name "Obana" -- that is, with an "n" in place of the "m." But Roskovski says that whoever did it was clearly trying to register using President Barack Obama's name.

The card was discovered last week when a jury commissioner was compiling a list of potential jurors which can be drawn from voter-registration lists.

source: Lancaster online

Data Protection: All You Need to Know about the EU Privacy Debate

Jan. 18, 2013

Mining your data: The European Union's institutions are currently split on Internet privacy reform.  Corbis
The European Union is seeking to increase the private sphere of its citizens by strengthening data protection laws for the web. Large Internet firms and lobbyists are fighting the plans. Here's an overview of the debate in Brussels.

When it comes to hysteria over coming data protection rules in Europe, the most extremist warnings from lobbyists these days are coming out of the law firm Field Fisher Waterhouse. The head of the firm's privacy and information law group, Eduardo Ustaran, recently told the American technology news service ZDNet that if the EU's draft privacy and data protection law isn't changed, Gmail and Facebook may be forced to abandon their ad-supported models and start charging their customers in Europe or stop providing them with these popular services altogether.

"If they weren't able to use your data in the way that is profitable or useful for them for advertising purposes, then either the user has to pay for it or stop using the service," Ustaran, whose company represents Facebook, Google and Zynga among other companies, told ZDNet.

Not even industry associations representing the IT industry, who have been particularly critical of the draft European Data Protection Regulation, have gone that far. The demonstratively dark picture Ustaran paints of the regulations shows just how tough the fight between Web giants and regulators is growing over the issue of data protection reform.

So why has the debate grown so shrill? SPIEGEL ONLINE takes a stab at the most pressing questions.

The Story So Far?

The European Commission headquarters in Brussels: the European Parliament,
the European Commission and the European Council are debating the path
forward for data.
European Commissioner for Justice Viviane Reding presented a draft (the Reding draft) for a new EU data protection regulation at the beginning of 2012. The draft is intended to update EU data protection laws to make them fit for the Internet age. At the time, Reding promised the "right to be forgotten" for consumers who post personal information on Internet platforms. All those embarrassing Facebook photos, she promised, could be gone with just a few mouse clicks.

At the same time, Reding pledged a "one-stop shop" for the clarification of data protection questions -- a unified EU policy and a clear point of contact for every company. Since then, Jan Philipp Albrecht, a Green Party member and the rapporteur for the European Parliament's Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee, has also presented a modified version (the Albrecht draft), reflecting the concerns of the EU's democratically elected legislative body.

The suggested changes included in the Albrecht draft are based in part on the extensive feedback submitted by companies, industry associations, civil rights organizations and others during the past year. Members of the different party groups in the European Parliament also submitted their own suggestions and remarks.

Where Do Things Stand Now?

Requests for changes to the draft can still be submitted to the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee until Feb. 27. The committee is tentatively expected to vote on a completed draft in late April or early May. In parallel, a working group of the powerful European Council, the body that is led by the leaders of the 27 EU member states, will add its revisions to the draft. Parliament could then vote on the final text in June or July. The final regulation needs to be approved by both the European Parliament and the European Council, but Albrecht believes this will happen by the end of the year.

Who Is Fighting against Whom?

The main parties in the debate are companies, civil rights proponents and data protection officials in the EU member states. The latter want to prevent a situation in which they lose influence to Brussels and a regulation is passed that might make it easier for companies to interpret the data protection regulation to their own advantage. Meanwhile, companies and civil rights activists are arguing over the definition of private data and how it should be dealt with. Companies would like as much flexibility as possible and little by way of strict regulations. They argue that a surfeit of regulations would act as a corset that strangles innovation and growth. But privacy advocates argue that reliable data protection is the necessary foundation for gaining the trust of users and ensuring growth.

Which Data Is Considered Private?

Geodata collected in an iPhone: Should this be considered protected private data? SPIEGEL ONLINE
Jan Philipp Albrecht isn't pleased with the European Commission definition of personal data as laid out in Reding's draft. The reason is that, taken individually, many pieces of data may not be considered to be personal. If combined, however, it may be possible to clearly identify the end user using these bits of data. These are defined as "online identifiers provided by their devices, applications, tools and protocols, such as IP addresses or cookie identifiers."

But Albrecht's draft goes further, including the term "and other unique identifiers" in its definition of potentially private data. "Since such identifiers leave traces and can be used to single out natural persons, this regulation should be applicable to processing involving such data, unless those identifiers demonstrably do not relate to natural persons, such as for example the IP addresses used by companies, which cannot be considered 'personal' as defined in this regulation."

The debate is still raging over the precise definition of what can be considered personal data.

When Must User Consent Be Sought?

Fortune Cookie: Should users' consent be required before laying a cookie in their browser?
The precept of the new regulation is that firms can use personal data if they have obtained the consent of the user in question or if the law explicitly permits the processing of that data -- and both the European Commission and parliament rappateur Albrecht are also in agreement here.

But what exceptions to this principle are allowed and what kind of user consent will be required?

The Reding draft includes an exception that is as sweeping as it is vague: namely that the "legitimate interests pursued by" the party processing the data may make consent unnecessary. Under the exception, the processing of personal data can also be considered legal as long as such interests are not "overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject."

What Is Considered to Be Consent?

The Albrecht draft goes a long way in reining in Reding's language, which leaves broad room for interpretation. It offers a more concrete definition of the "concrete interests" of the "controller," or party processing the data. More specifically, for example, it cites processing of personal data that takes places as part of "the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, the media and the arts." It also explicitly identifies "direct marketing," a clear attempt by Green Party member Albrecht to formulate a compromise that will not get immediately rejected by the large lobby groups.

The Albrecht draft also provides a firmer definition of what would be considered consent. The standard prompt often seen on websites today that is automatically checked unless a user unchecks it would not be permitted under his version. He has also included an additional criteria for the determination of what is a valid consent: the market position of the party processing the data. If a company is in a "dominant market position with respect to the product or services offered to the data subject," then consent "does not provide a valid legal ground" for the processing of personal data.

The European Parliament committee version also goes another step further on the issue than the Commission proposal. It regulates that consent would not be valid in cases where a company changes its service terms in a way that gives a person "no option other than to accept the change or abandon an online resource in which they have invested significant time." This could be a reference to Facebook's strategy of constantly declaring increasing areas of its user's data as "public" without obtaining the explicit consent of users.

Who Will Regulate Companies in the EU?

Google's European headquarters in Dublin: Should Irish data protection authorities have the last word?
The European Commission would prefer that in situations where Internet companies have several offices in Europe that supervisory authority for those firms would be handled by the member state in which they have their European headquarters. Take Facebook, for example, which has its European headquarters in Ireland. The Irish government's data protection commissioner would then be responsible for the concerns of all EU citizens relating to the company's privacy policies.

It's a centralization of supervisory authority that Albrecht rejects. Under his draft for the new data protection regulation, EU citizens would still be able to address their problems with the authority in their own country and in their own language. But the local supervisory authority would be "competent" for addressing any problems but not solely "responsible". They wouldn't have the last word and they would have to consult with their colleagues in other countries before making any final decisions.

Under the Albrecht draft, the planned European Data Protection Board, which would feature top data protection officials from each member state, would be also be equipped with a veto power. If, for example, a German data protection commissioner complained to his or her Irish counterpart about a company that is based in Ireland and the official in Berlin didn't believe the Irish had handled the case correctly, the conflict would then be resolved by the board at the EU level. The board could overrule an Irish decision if it mustered a two-thirds majority. Under the Reding draft, the European Commission would have had the last word in unresolved disputes.

The European Commission's draft itself offers several advantages to companies. They are given a single point of contact for resolving issues and greater legal certainty. But it would have plenty of disadvantages for everyone else. Users would have to seek help outside the countries they live in, the competition of ideas in the design and implementation of EU regulations is diminished. It could also lead to a situation in which corporations choose the sites of their European headquarters based on the strength, or lack thereof, of data protection supervision in that country. That kind of competition between countries in attracting companies to locate their offices there has already been a phenomenon in the EU for some time now. Apple and Amazon for example, sell all of their e-books and some other goods from Luxembourg, an EU state with lower taxes.

How Much Power Will the European Commission Have?

European Justice Commissioner Viviene Reding of Luxembourg: The European Commission is seeking to gain supervisory power.
Under existing privacy regulations, data protection supervision in EU countries must be conducted entirely independently of public authorities, and data protection controllers are not under the supervision of the European Commission. But the EU wants to weaken this policy and install itself as the data protection agencies' supervisory authority.

In Reding's draft, the European Commission establishes for itself the right to suspend planned measures by member state data protection authorities. In certain cases, the Commission is also seeking to provide itself with "implementing acts" that would give it power over data protection authorities.

There is resistance to these plans within the European Parliament. Under the Albrecht draft, the Commission would not be permitted to suspend measures. According the draft, it would only be permitted to demand detailed information on the reasoning behind the authority's decision. As a last resort, it could challenge binding decisions of the European Data Protection Board before the EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg, the bloc's highest legal authority.

source: spiegel

Google Denies Killing Donkey With Maps Car

Jan. 18, 2013

Animal lovers' minds have been put at rest after Google showed a dormant Democrat donkey - with some people thinking it had been run over.
The Street View car approached the beast as it lay in the dirt in Botswana

Google has assured users that no animals were harmed in the making of its popular Maps after a Street View picture showed a donkey lying on the side of a road.
Some internet users were up in arms, believing a Google Maps car had run over the donkey on a dirt road while gathering Street View images in Botswana.

Google Maps group product manager Kei Kawai was forced to make a blog post titled "Never ass-ume" in response to concerns about the animal's wellbeing.

He said the donkey had merely been enjoying a roll in the dirt when the car approached the animal in the Kweneng district in the southern African country.

As the car approached, the donkey stopped its dust bath and stepped aside

"Because of the way our 360-degree imagery is put together, it looked to some that our car had been involved in an unseemly hit and run, leaving the humble beast stranded in the road," Mr Kawai said.

"I'm pleased to confirm the donkey is alive and well."

His blog post included a set of images showing the donkey standing and moving aside as the Google Maps car neared, and then staring inquisitively at the vehicle as it drove away.

The displaced animal stared at the car as it drove past

Social media users were left assured that the beast had not been harmed.

Twitter user Anastasia Bodnar posted: "Turns out the donkey was not run over by Google and walked away happy :)"

And Graham Cluley tweeted: "Google has been accused of many things but killing a donkey with a Street View car?"

source: Sky News

Anxiety, Russian immigrants push Israeli voters rightward

Jan. 18, 2013

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 
addresses an election campaign rally in the
southern city of Ashdod on January 16, 2013.
The face of the Israeli electorate has had an
extreme makeover in the 20 years since Labour's
Yitzhak Rabin signed a peace deal with the
Palestinians and his leftwing party held 44 seats
in parliament.
AFP - The face of the Israeli electorate has had an extreme makeover in the 20 years since Labour's Yitzhak Rabin signed a peace deal with the Palestinians and his leftwing party held 44 seats in parliament.

Disillusioned by a failure of the Oslo peace agreement and hardened by a series of bloody conflicts with the Palestinians, today's voters stand well to the right.

Two years after signing the 1993 Oslo Accords, Rabin was assassinated by a right-wing extremist, marking the start of a decline for Labour which today has eight seats, although it is expected to double that number in Tuesday's vote.

But analysts see the political horizon in 2013 as more complex than simply a drift rightward by the Israeli electorate.

"I think that the categories 'left' and 'right' are not subtle enough to cover the changes in Israeli public opinion," said Yehudit Auerbach, a political scientist at Bar Ilan University near Tel Aviv.

Chart showing the composition of Israel's outgoing
parliament. The face of the Israeli electorate has had
an extreme makeover in the 20 years since Labour's Yitzhak
Rabin signed a peace deal with the Palestinians and
his leftwing party held 44 seats in parliament.

"Thirty or 40 years ago there were very many people who said there is no such thing as the Palestinian people," she told AFP.

"Today -- apart from the most absurdly extreme right -- the sane right and most of the public accept that there is a Palestinian people, (and) they are even prepared to accept a Palestinian state."

Gideon Rahat, of the Israel Democracy Institute think tank, said that while the mainstream right, such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, may have edged toward the centre, the Israeli voter has in tandem moved to the right.

In June 2009, Netanyahu for the first time publicly endorsed the concept of a Palestinian state, although he has not made progress in realising it.

"The parties moved to the centre and the voters clearly moved to the right," Rahat told AFP.

An alliance of Likud and the hardline nationalist Yisrael Beitenu is seen picking up around 33 mandates, well down from their combined total of 45 in the 2009 race, although overall the right-wing-religious bloc is seen commanding 71 seats -- easily enough to form the next ruling coalition.

Ukrainian-born Roman Bronfman came to Israel in 1980 and became an MP for a leftist party representing Russian-speaking immigrants. He quit politics in 2006 to go into business.

Co-author of a new book, "A million who changed the Middle East", he argues that the mass migration of Soviet Jews in the 1990s redrew the local political map, bolstering the hardline right.

"It connected with the non-democratic forces in Israel," he told AFP. "It joined them because it had no democratic tradition."

He said many of those million immigrants, who made a huge demographic impact on the Jewish state -- which today has a population of 7.93 million -- have become part of broader Israeli society, but the "Russian vote" still exists.

"It's about half of what it was 10 years ago," Bronfman said.

"The younger ones vote more for the established Israeli parties, but about half still wants to see the Russian-speaking community represented in the Knesset."

The Russians are a key source of electoral strength for Moldovan-born former foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman and his Yisrael Beitenu party which is running on a joint list with Likud.

"The Russians vote from the centre to the right, most of them according to surveys vote for Likud-Beitenu," Rahat said.

"There is a Russian vote and it's more right-wing."

Bar Ilan's Auerbach believes much support for the right is driven by anxiety stemming from the failure to end the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the perception that peace became even more remote after Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007, ousting forces loyal to Western-backed Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas.

"There is a feeling of desperation, a growing lack of faith in the other side, a feeling that there really is no partner and the greater part of the population share that feeling," she said.

"It is a feeling that this is not the time for possibly dangerous breakthroughs in the peace process, when there is nobody on the other side to deliver the goods."

Sandy Hook 'truthers' target Gene Rosen, Newtown hero

Jan. 18, 2013

and then there are those who neither the right nor left claim as one of their own...

Sandy Hook 'truthers,' conspiracy theorists who believe the government could have faked the massacre to build support for gun control laws, are threatening local man Gene Rosen

On the morning of the Sandy Hook massacre, retired psychologist Gene Rosen found six first-graders and a school bus driver in front of his Newtown home. They told him they had run away from the school because someone had killed their teacher, 27-year-old Victoria Soto. Rosen, who gave a series of emotional interviews in the days following the shooting, invited the terrified children into his home for food and juice while they waited for their parents.

"I comforted them because I'm a grandfather," the 69-year-old Rosen told "Today" a few days later.

Rosen is now a prime target of a group of people dubbed the Sandy Hook Truthers -- conspiracy theorists who believe the Sandy Hook shooting is part of some kind of media or government cover-up, or a ploy to enact stricter gun control laws.

“I don’t know what to do,” Rosen told Salon. “I’m getting hang-up calls, I’m getting some calls, I’m getting emails with, not direct threats, but accusations that I’m lying, that I’m a crisis actor, ‘how much am I being paid?’”

“The quantity of the material is overwhelming,” Rosen said of the rumors flooding the Internet. “There must be some way to morally shame these people, because there were 20 dead children lying an eighth of a mile from my window all night long."

The Sandy Hook Truther movement has gathered steam in recent weeks. Gawker points to a 30-minute video, "The Sandy Hook Shooting - Fully Exposed," which summarizes most of the conspiracies circulating the Internet. Posted January 7, the video now boasts more than 8.5 million views.

"When Sandy Hook first happened i just had a feeling like it was all too perfect," the man behind the video explained to Gawker. "I just had this feeling deep down that these people and the whole town had this artificial vibe about them."

One of the Truthers' seemingly more mainstream voices is Florida Atlantic University communications professor James Tracy, who wrote in a blog post: "The public’s general acceptance of the event’s validity and faith in its resolution suggests a deepened credulousness borne from a world where almost all news and information is electronically mediated and controlled."

The condition is reinforced through the corporate media’s unwillingness to push hard questions vis-à-vis Connecticut and federal authorities who together bottlenecked information while invoking prior restraint through threats of prosecutorial action against journalists and the broader citizenry seeking to interpret the event on social media.

FAU distanced itself from Tracy saying, "James Tracy does not speak for the university. The website on which his post appeared is not affiliated with FAU in any way."

source: UPI

Man arrested for Molotov cocktail threat

Jan. 18, 2013

Next they will try to ban gasoline... oh wait

MILWAUKEE (UPI) -- A Milwaukee man has been arrested for attempting to carry Molotov cocktails into Wisconsin's Capitol building in Madison, police said.

Kvon R. Smith, 20, was arrested Tuesday for allegedly bringing explosive materials into the Statehouse, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.

Police called in a bomb squad to deal with Smith's backpack after learning he posted a threat on his Facebook page early that morning.

The post was a video titled "haha" in which a man is heard saying, "So check it out. I made a few Molotov cocktails. I still have some stuff to add... This is for today. We'll see what they'll have to say when I bring it to the Capitol."

He continues, "If they want peace, bring it to Milwaukee. If they want peace, I want my money."

Bottles of non-explosive and non-flammable liquids were found in Smith's backpack, Madison Fire Department Division Chief Lance Langer said.

One bottle contained motor oil, another contained clear water and chalk, and the third contained rubbing alcohol, he said.

Gov. Scott Walker praised the "tremendous job" of Capitol police and local law enforcement in responding to the incident.

"I called two of the officers today and thanked them for the professional work, because it was a credible threat. It could have ended up very dangerous -- it did not thankfully. It was good work all around," Walker said.

Typical Leftist Poll: Flattering news followed by results for the issue they really care about

Jan. 18, 2013

No Fear: Polling halts and are only released when they show the result they hoped for. So there is no doubt a poll out there to accommodate your view

Poll: NRA more popular than Hollywood

NEW YORK, Jan. 18 (UPI) -- The National Rifle Association is more popular than Hollywood, but most Americans want stricter gun-control laws, an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows.

The powerful lobby for gun makers and gun owners has a 41 percent positive approval rating, while Hollywood and the entertainment industry have a 23 percent favorable rating, the poll found.

The NRA and other critics have blamed the entertainment and video-game industries for contributing to an American culture of violence.

The poll found 34 percent of respondents gave the giant gun-rights group a negative rating, while 46 percent said the same about Hollywood and the entertainment industry.

At the same time, 56 percent of Americans said laws covering the sale of firearms should be made stricter, the poll found.

Thirty-five percent said the laws should be kept as they are, with no changes, and 7 percent said gun laws should be loosened.

Views about guns were closely tied to whether the respondent households had a gun, the poll found. Sixty-seven percent of people in homes without guns favored stricter laws, while 44 percent in homes with guns favored making them stricter.

The survey found 41 percent of Americans said someone in their household owned a gun.

On other topics, President Barack Obama had a 52 percent approval rating ahead of his second inauguration Monday, while Congress had a 14 percent approval rating.

The No. 1 thing respondents said they'd want to tell Obama is to create jobs. The No. 1 thing they'd want to tell leaders in Congress -- compromise and work together.

The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Jan. 12-15 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

Thursday, January 17, 2013

INTRODUCING OUR NEWEST SEGMENT - BETWEEN THE LINES: Now Obama Thinks He Also Dictates the Acts of Congress

Jan. 17, 2013

White House Delivers Bold Blatant Gun Safety Unconstitutional Proposals

The president signed 23 executive actions unconstitutional infringements while calling on federal lawmakers to pass controversial illegal steps to reduce gun violence ownership.

Vice President Biden had been tasked with surveying various anti-gun interests
President Barack Obama says enacting stricter gun laws "will be difficult" but is necessary following the Newtown massacre.

"The world has changed and it's demanding action," (but he won't tell you that we actually need more guns, not less to protect our families) Vice President Joe Biden said, acknowledging the political challenges ahead. Mr Biden had been tasked with bringing (illegal) recommendations to the president.

 The president said in a news conference on Wednesday he will sign 23 executive actions (many of which are unconstitutional and illegal), but said they are not a substitute for action in Congress.

 As part of his $500m (£311m) plan, he called on federal lawmakers to pass several proposals (to reduce the constitutional right of gun ownership) "right away", including universal background checks for anyone trying to buy a gun. 

 Right now, some 40% of US gun purchases are made without background checks (meaning 60 percent of gun purchaser's rights are already being violated).

 Mr Obama also asked Congress to restore the (unconstitutional) expired ban on military-style assault weapons and to enact a (NEW and unconstitutional)10-bullet limit on high-capacity ammunition magazines (to limit law-abiding citizens ability to protect themselves not only from direct harm but from a tyrannical government).

 And he said Congress has to "help (by aiding and abetting his constitutional violations,) rather than hinder" law enforcement DOJ's efforts on gun safety confiscation, calling on lawmakers to confirm his radical nominee for the next Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms director, Todd Jones.

"If there is even one life that can be saved, then we've got an obligation to try (excluding the million kill by coat hangers of course). And I'm here to do my part" (by playing your heartstrings so you won't think about the amount of lives saved by firearms), the president said.

 He called on constituents in parts of the country that are traditional gun ownership strongholds (who recognize the importance of exercising the God-given constitutional rights) - specifically "responsible gun owners" - to make their support for stronger controls known (and violate their own personal beliefs, similar to the forced contraceptives that Christians now must endure) so "the usual suspects (aka Americans who love their freedom and who speak for the majority)" do not solely dominate voices are silenced in the debate. 

 The announcement promises to set up a bitter fight (for our republics survival) with a powerful pro-gun lobby that has long warned informed supporters that Mr Obama wants to take away their guns (and are 100% correct). The US has the highest rate of gun ownership of any country in the world (because of the constitution).

 "This is the land of the free and the home of the brave and always will be" (ROFL!!!), Mr Obama said, acknowledging the Constitution's Second Amendment right to bear arms. "But with rights, come responsibilities" (which can all be achieved without gun control).

 "We live in a society. A government dictatorship of, for and by the people government. We are responsible for each other. We here at the government have taken responsibility for you"

 The fundamental rights to life and liberty have been denied to the victims of gun violence (so  law-abiding citizens should lose theirs too), he said.

He added: "Those Your rights are at stake. We're You're responsible."

 Following his speech the president signed some of the executive actions that do not need Congressional approval. They are reported to include measures to stiffen enforcement of existing laws and launching a national responsible gun ownership campaign (that will continually be expanded until cost and out of reach expectations push gun ownership out of reach).

Type "D" typical: Children being used as props to gain sympathy, guilt and panic among
low-information, useful idiot voters is a tactic common among Democratic politicians
The move comes just over a two months after the massacre election (in an advertised gun-free zone) at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, that took the lives of 20 young children and six school employees by a mental patient walking the streets freely with stolen guns which were legally owned by a law-abiding citizen.

 Mr Obama said 900 Americans had been killed by gun violence in the month since that deadly shooting and dozens in the already gun-free city of Chicago.

In response to Wednesday's announcement, the National Rifle Association issued a statement saying, "attacking firearms and ignoring children is not a solution".

"Only honest, law-abiding gun owners will be affected and our children will remain vulnerable to the inevitability of more tragedy," the statement said.

Meanwhile, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said on Wednesday he will begin hearings in two weeks on gun safety proposals.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont – a gun owner – said he wants to hold a series of hearings examining violence in popular media and how to keep guns safe, among other topics.

 His plan could lead to a slower process in Congress than gun control advocates would like   (meaning yesterday).

source: sky news
additional editing: mine