Greta finally asks the burning question we all want to know about the tea party

Tom Tillison
BizPac Review

n her latest “Off the Record” segment, Fox News host Greta Van Susteren questioned why some treat the tea party so badly.

“I do not get it,” she explained. “Why are some people, politicians, pundits, and reporters in particular, so vicious and – yes, so arrogant – towards members of the tea party?”

“It’s never even about debate,” Susteren said. ”Instead, it’s smearing, trashing, denigrating, laughing at, and even demonizing the tea party, acting as though the tea party is a bunch of anarchists, terrorists, kooks and even atheists.”

After asking if the detractors have ever met these Americans, she then offered a fairly accurate account of just who these people are:

“They’re not throwing bombs or getting arrested. They are Americans exercising their right to speak up. It’s called the First Amendment. They have families, they have jobs, they pay taxes. And, yes, it is true they don’t like big government. But that’s not a crime. That is protected political thought, the First Amendment.”

“And, frankly, if you really think about it, it’s not that far out of the mainstream,” she concluded.



Watch the video at BizPac Review.



The Shocking Secret Behind Obamacare Enrollment Numbers

Michael F. Cannon
Cato Institute

Barack Obama wants you to know he enrolled 7.5 million Americans through Obamacare’s health insurance Exchanges. What he doesn’t want you to know is how.

Federal courts may soon rule that President Obama induced the majority of those enrollees to enroll by offering them taxpayer dollars he has no legal authority to spend…

…In 2011, however, the Obama administration unilaterally announced it would force taxpayers to subsidize insurance purchased through federal Exchanges as well. It cited no statutory authority for its decision, and has stubbornly refused to follow its own law despite immediate and sustained criticism.

In January of this year, the Obama administration began spending billions of dollars of unauthorized subsidies to induce Americans to enroll in the 34 Exchanges established by the federal government. The president is literally forcing taxpayers, without any legal authorization, to subsidize two out of every three Exchange enrollments.

Fortunately, unlike other ways President Obama has unilaterally rewritten the health care law, this one faces credible court challenges…



Read the complete article at



See the Shocking Letter State-Abducted #JustinaPelletier Smuggled to Her Parents

The correspondence “reveals for the first time, in Justina’s own words, how she is being abused by Massachusetts DCF.”






B. Christopher Agee
Western Journalism

…The latest, according to reports, should send chills down any parent’s spine. Justina’s father, Lou, released part of a hastily written note he received during a recent visit. The teen describes both physical and mental abuse, saying her captors “hurt me all the time[,] push me all the time and more.” She also alleges DCF officials prevent her from sleeping. Her note urged her parents to act quickly in her defense.

A family spokesperson, Rev. Patrick Mahoney, released a statement indicating Justina’s parents “are devastated to see how their daughter is being mistreated while under the custody of the State of Massachusetts.”

He explained that the correspondence “reveals for the first time, in Justina’s own words, how she is being abused by Massachusetts DCF.”…




Read the entire article at Western Journalism.


'EPA Concedes: We Can’t Produce All the Data Justifying Clean Air Rules'

Jeff G.
Protein Wisdom

Because saying “we lied, and it worked, and now we control just about every aspect of the progressive plan to ‘de-grow’ the private sector,” is just a bit too candid.  CNS NEWS:

Seven months after being subpoenaed by Congress, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy conceded that her agency does not have –  and cannot produce – all of the scientific data used for decades to justify numerous rules and regulations under the Clean Air Act.

In a March 7th letter to House Science, Space and Technology Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), McCarthy admitted that EPA cannot produce all of the original data from the 1993 Harvard Six Cities Study (HSC) and the American Cancer Society’s (ACS) 1995 Cancer Prevention Study II, which is currently housed at New York University.

Both studies concluded that fine airborne particles measuring 2.5 micrograms or less (PM2.5) – 1/30th the diameter of a human hair – are killing thousands of Americans every year.

These epidemiological studies are cited by EPA as the scientific foundation for clean air regulations that restrict particulate emissions from vehicles, power plants and factories…

…Congress is expected to review the bill this summer, and it’s something that we as conservatives and classical liberals should make sure gets passed by a unified GOP vote in the House; and then if Harry Reid tries to stop it, the GOP — and in particular, those Visigothic Hobbit types who have been calling upon Congress to rein in the EPA, which has become one of the enforcement arms of the progressive march through our institutions — should hit them hard with their own tactics, talking about the need for “transparency” and then citing the two new studies as the prevailing “settled science” showing that the EPA used bogus studies to justify its onerous, job killing regulations for over 2 decades.

This also dovetails nicely with one of Mark Levin’s liberty amendments, which would allow states to vote to overturn economically burdensome regulations…



Read the entire article at Protein Wisdom.



Related: Give up meat, coal, oil, economic growth and national sovereignty–orders new IPCC climate report

…This action will set back economic growth, involve significant “behavioural change” and “devalue fossil fuel assets”, the report admits. But only with “major institutional and technological changes” can the world avert an even greater threat. If no action is taken, it warns, temperatures may rise by as much as 4.8 degrees C by 2100.

“There is a clear message from science: to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system we need to move away from business as usual,” said Germany’s Otmar Edenhofer, one of the three co-chairs of the report…



Update: Regulator Without Peer. By at least one measure, Obama surpasses all of his predecessors.

…Washington set a new record in 2013 by issuing final rules consuming 26,417 pages in the Federal Register. While plenty of government employees deserve credit for this milestone, leadership matters. And by this measure President Obama has never been surpassed in the Oval Office…



Judge Strikes Down Costly Provision Of Dodd-Frank


Regulation: In a victory for common sense, a federal judge has voided a race-based mandate of the Dodd-Frank Act that would have cost manufacturers and retailers billions in compliance expenses.

Marking the first time a court has ruled that a provision of Dodd-Frank violates the Constitution, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the financial “reform” law’s bizarre rule requiring companies to disclose whether their products contain “conflict minerals” from Africa violates the First Amendment.

As we’ve argued, the rule had zero to do with financial reform and was sneaked into the law by Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters to protect the Congo.

The little-noticed Dodd-Frank provision, tucked away under “Misc. Provisions,” requires manufacturers to prove the metals they use in products aren’t mined by rebels in the Congo and nearby countries.

Makers of cellphones, computers and consumer electronics, for example, must trace the origin of minerals back through their supply chains, then report to the SEC or face punishment.

It would have cost manufacturers at least $16 billion a year to comply by tracing the origin of tin and tungsten used in electronics and other items. They would have had to hire independent auditors to certify to the SEC their products use “conflict free” minerals…



The editorial continues at



Cornyn Presses Holder on Gun Comments

Gov’t could require gun owners to wear biometric bracelets to operate firearms

Elizabeth Harrington
The Washington Free Beacon

Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) is demanding answers from Attorney General Eric Holder on the Justice Department’s pursuit of “smart gun” technology, warning that the government could require all gun owners to wear biometric bracelets to operate their firearms…

…“Your testimony has raised serious concerns for my constituents given President Obama’s track-record of acting beyond the scope of his legal authority and your hostility to the individual right to self-defense under the Second Amendment,” Cornyn wrote.

Cornyn is concerned that the administration may attempt to require every gun in America to be equipped with fingerprint-reading technology and be linked to biometric bracelets.

The Texas senator asked Holder to address five questions, including if the administration is “currently exploring the possibility of and executive order requiring all firearms to possess the technological capabilities.”…



The complete article is at The Washington Free Beacon.