Search This Blog

Monday, May 27, 2013

Common Core - A Trojan Horse for Education Reform

 Common Core - A Trojan Horse for Education Reform

By Orlean Koehle, State President of Eagle Forum of California

“Common Core State Standards Initiative” is the latest education program coming down from the Obama administration, preparing the way for Obama’s “Race to the Top Assessments,” which will take place in 2014, when all the computer software is in place to test the minds of the nation’s children to see how well Common Core (CC) has been sufficiently taught.    CC pretends to be a benign “State” program, State-written and controlled.  It is touted as being “more rigorous” and will “better prepare students for college and the workplace.”  However, none of the above is true.  CC is really a deceptive Trojan Horse, a national program, written by a national cartel, supported by President Obama and the Federal Department of Education. It is imposing national standards and curriculum on all of the 46 States that have signed onto it.  [Texas, Alaska, Nebraska, and Virginia have refused it.  Minnesota has adopted part of it – only the math.]  CC is not improving education standards but is dumbing them down.  The following are facts and reasons why parents and educators should be concerned and reject Common Core in their states:
  • No Vote by Congress:  Since Obama has his “cart blanche” stimulus money, he did not go to Congress for permission or funding to come up with a new education program.  He just went straight to the governors and enticed them with funding if they would sign on to Common Corp.
  • No Vote by State Legislators:  Legislators have had no vote concerning Common Core either. They were bypassed in the decision to accept it into their states.  If this truly is a state and local program why have they been left out?
  • No Vote or Voice of the People:  The majority of Americans know nothing about this program and have had no opportunity to voice an opinion on it.
  • Bribes and Enticements for the State Governors:  State governors and State education boards have signed onto Common Core because of promised grants and competitions to get those grants, but with strings attached.  Governors had to apply and sign on the dotted line “sight unseen”—before ever seeing the curriculum or standards.
  • Waivers:  If states sign onto Common Core, they are rewarded by receiving waivers to get out of the rigid requirements and accountability of No Child Left Behind. (According to NCLB, all students in a state are to reach a certain proficiency level by the year 2014 which is almost impossible to achieve.)   
  • Threats:  As more “incentives” for states to sign on to Common Core, Obama stated in November of 2009 that “Title One Money” might be withheld. Title One money is a huge grant of money that goes to the states to help in the education of poor and needy children.  It is a big part of every state’s budget.  Of course, in these difficult financial times, states desperately need their Title One money.
  • Nationalized Education is Contrary to States Rights and the U.S. Constitution:  A national education program, top-down, centrally controlled is not what our Founding Fathers ever wanted.  They realized that by controlling all the information going into the minds of the people is how a despotic government and dictators take over a nation. Education then becomes indoctrination and propaganda.  Our Founding Fathers purposely left the word education out of the Constitution; what was left out was to be left up to the states and to local and parental control. 
  • Education Laws Against National Standards, Curriculum and Control: 1)The Department of Education Organizational Act (1979), 2) The General Education Provisions Act and 3) The Elementary and Secondary Act (1965) and most recently amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002.  Each of these says the same thing that “The Federal Department of Education shall not be involved in developing, supervising or controlling instructional materials or curriculum.”
  • Parents and Local School Boards are to be in Charge of Education: Bill Evers, a Research Fellow of the Hoover Institute located at Stanford, stated the following about the importance of local control:  “The insight of competitive federalism is that the 51 state school boards are better than a single federal executive branch office, and 15,000 local school boards are better than either 51 state school boards or a single federal office.
  • Increased Data Collection:  The Federal Department of Education, in December 2011, amended the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to exceed the agency’s statutory authority and thus allows them to collect invasive data on our children.  How does that improve education if student information is made available to marketers and snoopers? Why the obsession with data?
  • Math Standards Not Improved But Lowered:  Where the CC math has been tried, it is not any improvement or has actually lowered the test scores from prior programs. In Utah, it was no better; in Massachusetts, it lowered the scores.  CC math postpones teaching algebra from the traditional 8th grade to 9th grade.  How is that any improvement?
  • English Standards Cut Out Much Classical English Literature:  The CC language arts curriculum lowers the standards to only 50% classical literature from what was traditionally 80%.  The other 50% is just informational text, such as reading a computer manual.  Why is that so bad?  Classical literature is the foundation of our nation.  It teaches children to: “investigate their surroundings; to make wise decisions, to have empathy; it teaches them how to exercise their liberties.”  Anthony Esolen, a professor of Renaissance English Literature at Providence College in Rhode Island states:

·         Enormous Cost to the States:  In spite of the grants that some governors are receiving, it is estimated that the over-all costs for the states to implement the program will be $16 billion.  It is mainly for the cost of the computers and software that is needed for the assessments. California who did not win the federal government grant is stuck with a bill for and estimated $1.6 billion.     

What appalls me the most about the Common Core Standards is the cavalier contempt for great works of human art, thought and literary form… We are not programming machines; we are teaching children.  We are not producing functionaries, factory like.  We are to be forming the minds and hearts of men and women.  Frankly, I do not wish to be governed by people whose minds and hearts have been stunted by a strictly utilitarian miss-education.
  • National Tests Tied to Common Core:  Common Core is preparing the states for a national assessment, which students can only do well on if they have the common core curriculum.  Teachers are forced to teach to the test.  Their salaries are dependent on how well the students do on the tests.
  • Teachers are Being Forced to Use CC Standards at Peril of their Jobs:  Teachers are concerned that they are being forced into a program that has not really been tried or tested at peril of losing their jobs. The reaction of teachers is as follows: “a maelstrom of pent-up resentment over being forced to do what's wrong for kids, and being afraid of losing gainful employment by speaking out.”
  • Much Money to be Made for Text Books and E-Books:  Special interests and billions of dollars are driving the push to Common Core for people like Bill Gates and the Pearson book companies who will be making $millions because of every child using and e-books for their learning.  The e-learning market in the U.S. is expected to grow to $6.8 billion by 2015, up from $2.9 billion from 2010.
  • Common Means “Nothing Special”:  Many believe Common Core is lowering the curriculum and standards to “common” as defined by Webster’s  Dictionary as meaning: “ordinary,” “of little value,” “lacking distinction” and “belonging equally to all the people.”   No mother wants her child to be regarded as common and ordinary, nothing special.
  • Who really wrote Common Corea Cartel of the Chiefs”:It consisted of members of: the CCSSO, Council of Chief State School Officers, the NGA, National Governor’s Association, and a chief education policy group part of the NGA.  These groups were joined by members of the Obama Administration and a progressive group called Achieve, FTA, NEA, ACT and the College Board.”
  • “Suggestion Box Input” from State Board Members: That was the only influence that states had.  CC was not states-written, or is a state’s initiative.
  • CC is Really International, driven by UNESCO and Agenda 21: This is how sustainable development will be pushed into every school and university. 
  • What Can We Do? Do your own research and gather more information.  Form a coalition to help fight it.  Speak out in school board meetings; write letters to the editor; contact your state legislators; give them information about it; contact your governor and state school board members.  Let them know how strongly you oppose this. See what other states have done. 


 Common Core: Subversive Threat to Education

Published on Apr 23, 2013
Karen Bracken ( ) Presents Common Core: Subversive Threat to Education on 18 April 2013 at the Chattanooga TEA Party meeting. Introduction by Mark West, President of the Chattanooga TEA Party.

Parents and Educators come together to stop Common Core

Published on May 12, 2013
Eagle Forum organized A Rally to Stop Common Core Standards at California state capitol. This is the Trojan Horse of the Education system.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Audience Chants "Si Se Puede!" After Senate Committee Passes Gang of Ocho Immigration Bill

Audience Chants "Si Se Puede!" After Senate Committee Passes Gang of Ocho Immigration Bill

This was nauseating. The audience today at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing chanted, "Si Se Puede!" after the Gang of Ocho Illegal Immigrant bill was passed.

Senate Judiciary Committee approves immigration overhaul bill

Far-reaching legislation to grant a chance at citizenship to millions of immigrants living illegally in the United States cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on a solid bipartisan vote Tuesday night after supporters somberly sidestepped a controversy over the rights of gay spouses.

The 13-5 vote cleared the way for an epic showdown on the Senate floor on the measure, which is one of President Barack Obama's top domestic priorities yet also gives the Republican Party a chance to recast itself as more appealing to minorities.

The committee's action sparked rejoicing from immigration activists who crowded into a Senate committee room to witness the proceedings. "Yes, we can!" they shouted as they clapped rhythmically to show their pleasure

In addition to creating a pathway to citizenship for 11.5 million immigrants, the legislation creates a new program for low-skilled foreign labor and would permit highly skilled workers into the country at far higher levels than is currently the case.

At the same time, it requires the government to take costly new steps to guard against future illegal immigration.

There was suspense to the end of the committee's deliberations, when Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who serves as chairman, sparked a debate over his proposal to give same-sex and heterosexual spouses equal rights under immigration law.

"I don't want to be the senator who asks people to choose between the love of their life and the love of their country," he said, adding he wanted to hear from others on the committee.

In response, he heard a chorus of pleas from the bill's supporters, seconding private appeals from the White House, not to force a vote that they warned would lead to the bill's demise.

"I believe in my heart of hearts that what you're doing is the right and just thing," said one of them, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill. "But I believe this is the wrong moment, that this is the wrong bill."

In the hours leading to a final vote, the panel also agreed to a last-minute compromise covering an increase in the visa program for high-tech workers, a deal that brought Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah over to the ranks of supporters.

Under the compromise, the number of highly skilled workers admitted to the country would rise from 65,000 annually to 110,000, with the possibility of a further rise to 180,000, depending in part on unemployment levels.

Firms where foreign labor accounts for at least 15 percent of the skilled work force would be subjected to tighter conditions than companies less dependent on H-IB visa holders.

The compromise was negotiated by Hatch, whose state is home to a growing high tech industry, and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. It is designed to balance the interests of industry, which relies increasingly on skilled foreign labor, and organized labor, which represents American workers.

AFL-CIO President Rich Trumka attacked the deal sharply as "anti-worker," although he also made clear organized labor would continue to support the overall legislation.

Robert Hoffman, senior vice president for government affairs at the Information Technology Industry Council, welcomed the deal. "We obviously want to keep moving the bill forward and building support for the legislation, and this agreement allows us to do so," he said

Read more:

Please don't sit back and do nothing. Let's burn up the phone lines to tell them not on our watch! Please Call Your Senators And Tell Them To Vote No!

In addition to calling them, please write them, fax them, etc.  Let you voice be heard.

Remember.... Silence Implies Consent! 

(sample letter)
Senator ________,
I am writing to encourage you to vote NO to this amnesty (immigration) bill.

We have already seen a complete lack of respect for laws already on the books by this administration. 

They have:
1) Refused to enforce current immigration laws
2) Tied the hands of ICE and others trying to protect our borders and 
3) Shown complete disrespect for the American citizens when this administration released thousands of ILLEGAL criminals back on the streets of our cities and then lied and continue to lie about it. 
4) Tried to silence those in law enforcement that don't agree with this legislation

It is a complete farce to think they will enforce laws to secure our borders now or in the future. 

We must secure our borders, enforce laws already on the books and demand that citizenship is not a right, it is a privilege that is earned by following our laws. 


(your name)
The following article is from this administrations puppeteers that run the Center For American Progress.  They are also the ones that constructed Obamacare, in case you weren't aware. You can see their fingerprints, as well as LaRaza and Obama's union minions all over this farce.  This is not an immigration bill, it's another way to load up the voting rolls with illegal voters and overwhelm the system in order to destroy it.  Period!

“Sí Se Puede”

A Phrase with a Rich History

By Teresita Perez | September 22, 2008
Much to my surprise, over the past few years the rallying cry “Sí se puede” has become pretty ubiquitous. This phrase, which literally translated means, “yes, it can be done,” was the chosen phrase used by participants in the immigration reform marches in 2006. Later on, Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) adopted the English equivalent “Yes we can” as his presidential campaign slogan.

Having grown up in the agricultural town of Oxnard, California, the phrase “Sí se puede” has a lot of political significance for me personally. That’s why this month, as we celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month, I would like to take a moment and remember where it comes from.

“Sí se puede” is a term rooted in the struggle of working-class Latinos. It was the rallying cry of the United Farm Worker’s Union in the 1970s. Co-founders Dolores Huerta and Cesar Chavez adopted the motto during a 25-day fast in Phoenix, Arizona where they were trying to organize farm workers to demand fair wages and better working conditions. This mantra was meant to galvanize workers and inspire them. Yes, we can start a movement against all odds. Yes, we can stand up against exploitation. Yes, we can fight for fair wages and medical and pension benefits. Over the years, “Sí se puede” has also been adopted by other civil and labor rights groups involving Latinos around the country.

But use of this phrase comes with the obligation to truly honor its history and deliver on its promise. We simply cannot ignore the fact that Latinos have been left by the wayside and currently face tremendous economic disparities. Consider the following statistics:
  • The poverty rate among Latinos was 21.5 percent in 2007 compared to 8 percent among their white counterparts.
  • The percentage of Latinos who lacked health insurance in 2007 was nearly three times higher than their white counterparts.
  • And in 2007, the median family income for a white family was $54,920, compared to a Hispanic median family income of $38,679.
As a nation that values equality and human dignity, we cannot ignore these disparities. The future of our nation depends on being able to make the ladder of opportunity accessible and increase economic mobility for working class people everywhere, all while embracing our nation’s diversity and talent.

Our nation faces many challenges today, but a key priority should be to integrate this growing population so that we can capitalize on this demographic change. The next president will therefore need to ensure that we promote more equal opportunity programs and that we make more progress toward reducing these disparities.

With 45.5 million Latinos, the United States has a larger population of Latinos than just about any country in Latin America. What this means is that this voting bloc is emerging as a pivotal constituency for the presidential candidates and will play a key role in our economic future. This is no passing trend. Latinos are projected to become nearly a quarter of the U.S. workforce by 2050, and they will account for almost 30 percent of the projected population of 429 million people in the United States by that same year.

As we celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month this year, let’s not forget the history and power of the phrase “Sí se puede.” As we strive to create a more equitable and just nation, let us remember where it comes from and honor intent of its creators Dolores Huerta and Cesar Chavez, who have challenged us to create a better society–one that values and provides all its people with equal opportunity to succeed. As Chavez once said:

"We shall strike. We shall organize boycotts. We shall demonstrate and have political campaigns. We shall pursue the revolution we have proposed…We will build power through boycotts, strikes, new union – whatever techniques we can develop. These attacks on the status quo will come, not because we hate, but because we know America can construct a humane society for all its citizens…."
"Sí Se Puede!"

Sunday, May 19, 2013

4th Benghazi Whistleblower Says Obama admin ignored security warnings in Libya

 4th Benghazi Whistleblower Says Obama admin ignored security warnings in Libya


Lt. Col. Wood on Benghazi Attack: "We Were Last Flag Flying-It Was a Matter of Time"

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, former head of the security team in Libya told CBS News this week that in spite of multiple pleas from himself and other U.S. security officials in Libya for "more, not less" security personnel, the State Department removed as many as 34 people from the country in the six months preceding the terrorist attack in Benghazi that took the life of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Col. Wood is scheduled to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee this week as they continue investigations into security decisions prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.
Wood said that when he found out his own 16-member team and a six-member State Department elite force were being pulled from Tripoli in August, less than a month before the terrorist attack, he felt, "like we were being asked to play the piano with two fingers. There was concern amongst the entire embassy staff."
Wood said other staffers approached him with their concerns when the reduction in security personnel was announced.
"They asked if we were safe. They asked what was going to happen, and I could only answer that what we were being told is that they're working on it - they'll get us more (security personnel), but I never saw that."
Wood said that staff in Libya, including Ambassador Stevens, State Department Regional Security Officer Eric Nordstrom, and himself, all wanted and had requested enhanced security.
"We felt we needed more, not less."
When asked what response their repeated pleas got from the State Department, Wood said they were simply told "to do with less. For what reasons, I don't know."

"We tried to illustrate... to show them how dangerous and how volatile and just unpredictable that whole environment was over there. So to decrease security in the face of that really is... it's just unbelievable," Wood said.

A State Department source responded that the security teams weren't "pulled," that their mission was simply over; the families of four Americans would dispute that point.

The State Department responded to Wood’s comments by claiming he was not part of the security assessment in Benghazi and that his assignment to Tripoli means he was unfamiliar with the local situation in the smaller port city in the country's east.

Wood says, however, that some of the members of his own team and additional personnel from the State Department's elite security detail, that left Libya in August, would have traveled to Benghazi with Ambassador Stevens had they still been in the country.

Lt. Col. Wood’s testimony this week is expected to highlight poor decision-making at the State Department in light of heightening tensions in Libya and intelligence that warned of potential terrorist attacks.

The matter became even more problematic for the administration after reports emerged that in Ambassador Stevens had written in his personal journal that he feared for his own safety.

The timing couldn't be worse for the president as the polls show a tightening race and the likelihood that information revealed in congressional hearings will play a part in the next debate.

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Eric Holder Testifies Before Congress~What We Uncovered: HE IS CLUELESS AND KNOWS NOTHING

Attorney General Eric Holder testified about Justice Department investigations, including revelations that the Justice Department had gathered two months of telephone records of Associated Press (AP) personnel from April and May 2012. The records included incoming and outgoing calls, how long each call lasted, the phone numbers of various reporters and editors and other information.

The video of the entire hearing is over 4 hours long and can be found after this video.  To help to condense the entire hearing, this video has been put together with the most informative clips. This condensed version includes some some short clips from a previous appearance of Eric Holder before Congress.  I hope you find this informative. 

Published on May 17, 2013
After more then four hours of testimony on front of Congress, I think it's safe to say that Eric Holder doesn't know. Not anything. At all.

And now here's what the president has to say about Eric Holder's testimony today.....

Obama Has 'Complete Confidence in Eric Holder'


Full video of Eric Holders testimony before Congress:

Rep. Schock Q&A During IRS Hearing with Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller

Published on May 17, 2013
May 17, 2013: Congressman Schock Questioned Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller over the ongoing IRS scandal.

Friday, May 17, 2013

Rep. Mike Kelly Receives Standing Ovation at Ways & Means Hearing on IRS Scandal

Rep. Mike Kelly Receives Standing Ovation at Ways & Means Hearing on IRS Scandal


Congress Begins Investigation into IRS Targeting Conservative Organizations for Extra Scrutiny

House Ways and Means Hearing on IRS - Part 1

Congress Begins Investigation into IRS Targeting Conservative Organizations for Extra Scrutiny

House Ways and Means Hearing on IRS - Part 2

Washington, DC
Friday, May 17, 2013
The House Ways and Means Committee holds the first Congressional hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) subjecting applicants for tax-exempt status to higher levels of scrutiny based on political leanings.

Witnesses include Acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller who resigned on Wednesday and the Treasury Department’s Inspector General Russell George for Tax Administration.

Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) said the IRS' targeting of "American taxpayers based on politics is both astounding and appalling."  He stated that the Committee will "get to the bottom of this practice and ensure it never takes place again.”
In announcing the hearing, Ranking Member Sander Levin (D-MI) said that it is "essential that there be a thorough and bipartisan investigation and effective remedial action.”

Since June 2011, the Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating whether the Internal Revenue Service discriminated against taxpayers based on political opinions.

Rep. Kevin Brady asks IRS Commissioner: "Is this still America?"

Listen to this case of the absolute abuse of power by the IRS against tax abiding citizens!  This is an outrage!

Published on May 17, 2013
Texas Congressman Kevin Brady, a senior member of the House Ways & Means Committee goes on the offensive for answers from the IRS which has been targeting conservatives for intense scrutiny.

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX) In A Fiery Exchange With Eric Holder About The FBI Probe Into Boston Terrorists

WOW!  Louie Ghomert and Eric Holder "face off" in a Justice Dept Oversight hearing... Unreal! 
Published on May 15, 2013
Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) questioned US Attorney General Eric Holder in a House Judiciary Committee Hearing. He asked Holder about the FBI probe into the Boston terrorists and got into a fiery exchange.

(VIDEO) John Boehner On The IRS Scandal, "My Question Isn't Who's Going To Resign, My Question Is Who's Going To Jail Over This Scandal"

To Watch the clip from today's new conference, listen here:

John Boehner On The IRS Scandal, "My Question Isn't Who's Going To Resign, My Question Is Who's Going To Jail Over This Scandal"

Watch the entire new conference here:

Following their weekly conference meeting, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and other Republican leadership hold a news briefing. (Video) 13 minutes

Speaker John Boehner, and several other Repulicans held a short new conference this morning to discuss Benghazi, the IRS scandal, the AP scandal as well as their plan to vote on repealing Obamacare today. 



Senator Max Baucus, now investigating IRS, urged IRS to target conservative groups in 2010

Baucus, now investigating IRS, urged IRS to target conservative groups in 2010

Democratic Montana Senator Max Baucus is leading an investigation into why the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative nonprofit groups for extra scrutiny despite the fact that Baucus once wrote a letter urging the IRS to do exactly that.

Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, will head the committee’s investigation into the IRS, which apologized Friday for targeting groups with the terms “Tea Party” and “Patriot” in their titles for extra scrutiny of their nonprofit status as early as 2011.

However, Baucus once wrote a letter requesting that the IRS engage in that very conduct.
Baucus wrote a letter to then-IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman dated September 28, 2010 urging the IRS to investigative nonprofit conservative groups during the Tea Party-dominated 2010 midterm elections.

“With hundreds of millions of dollars being spent in election contests by tax-exempt entities, it is time to take a fresh look at current practices and how they comport with the Internal Revenue Code’s rules for nonprofits,” Baucus wrote in the letter.

“I request that you and your agency survey major 501(c)(4), (c)(5) and (c)(6) organizations involved in political campaign activity to examine whether they are operated for the organization’s intended tax exempt purpose and to ensure that political campaign activity is not the organization’s primary activity,” Baucus wrote in the letter.

“The tax exemption given to non-profit organizations comes with a responsibility to serve the public interest and Congress has an obligation to exercise the vigorous oversight necessary to ensure they do,” Baucus said in a 2010 statement accompanying his letter.

Though Baucus identified 501 (c) (5) groups — or labor unions — as worthy of investigation, the only organizations cited in his request were conservative, pro-Republican groups.

Baucus specifically named Americans for Job Security, which is described as a “pro-Republican organization,” as a specific target for the IRS to investigate.

Crossroads GPS, co-founded by Karl Rove, and American Action Network, chaired by former Republican senator Norm Coleman, were also cited in press coverage related to Baucus’ letter as pro-Republican groups helping to elect GOP congressional candidates in 2010.

Those organizations appeared in a September 16, 2010 TIME article by writer Michael Crowley titled, “The New GOP Money Stampede.” Baucus cited that piece in his letter to the IRS.

Whatever the fallout might be from such a conflict of interest, Baucus won’t be around too much longer to deal with it.

He’s already announced his retirement from the Senate, and won’t run for re-election in 2014.
A Baucus spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment.

Sen. Max Baucus asked IRS in 2010 to investigate 501(c) groups, letter shows

By Robert Romano
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) in a 2010 letter requested that then-Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Commissioner Douglas Shulman deeply investigate 501(c) non-profit political organizations.

The letter called on Shulman to “survey major 501(c)(4), (c)(5) and (c)(6) organizations involved in political campaign activity to examine whether they are operated for the organization’s intended tax exempt purpose and to ensure that political campaign activity is not the organization’s primary activity” and to “to determine whether they are acting as conduits for major donors advancing their own private interests regarding legislation or political campaigns, or are providing major donors with excess benefits.”

In his own letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Americans for Limited Government President Nathan Mehrens noted, “Considering the invasive questions the IRS was asking the targeted organizations, it appears that Sen. Baucus got exactly what he asked for, which was a witch-hunt.”

Baucus’ letter also instructed Shulman that “Possible violation of tax laws should be identified as you conduct this study. Please report back to the Finance Committee as soon as possible with your findings and recommended actions regarding this matter.”

Baucus specifically referenced a Sept. 16, 2010 Time article, “The New GOP Money Stampede” reporting that “Democrats fear [what] could be a $300 million Republican spending blitz this year.” The story detailed allegations that local tea party groups were actually “shadow Republican groups formed by longtime party officials.” The article referenced the tea party, but also American Crossroads, American Action Network, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as forming a wider campaign front for the 2010 Republican election campaign effort, financed “in the form of secret undisclosed contributions.”

Baucus also referenced “a group transforming itself into a non-profit under 501(c)(4) of the tax code,” ensuring, as the Time article put it, that the group would “not have to publicly disclose any information about its donors.” That “group” Baucus referenced was actually Crossroads GPS.

“The Time article Baucus so prominently referenced was all about the financing of Republican election efforts and right of center political and advocacy organizations,” Mehrens noted in his letter, adding, “It did not scrutinize any left-wing groups. Nor did Baucus include in his letter to Shulman any footnotes to articles that detailed Democrat campaign activities or left of center groups. The implicit task was to investigate the political right from start to finish. And that’s exactly what the IRS did.”

Yesterday, Baucus issued a statement suggesting “Targeting groups based on their political views is not only inappropriate but it is intolerable, promising a “full investigation into this matter by the Senate Finance Committee.”

But that is not possible, Mehrens said, considering Baucus’ letter to Shulman. “Senate Democrats were complicit in the IRS scandal targeting the tea party and other groups, per Baucus’ explicit letter to Shulman. The Senate majority must therefore recuse itself from any ensuing investigation in order to ensure that the public’s trust in the inquiry’s findings is not tainted.”

The only good option, Mehrens wrote, was for Senate leaders to call on Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special counsel to prosecute the case. “Just as the Senate majority cannot be trusted to investigate its own complicity in this affair, neither can the Obama Administration.”

He concluded, “These targeted attacks by the IRS were not about restoring ‘transparency’ to our political process, they were a part of a brazen partisan assault using the instrumentalities of the state to harass political opponents and stifle dissent to achieve a partisan end. It is beyond Nixonian in its flagrant disregard for the rule of law. Only a special counsel can get to the bottom of this.”

Mehrens joined others, including the Republican Governors Association, who today also demanded a special prosecutor be appointed.

Robert Romano is the Senior Editor of Americans for Limited Government.


The IRS Predicted Scandal: Baucus Demanded IRS Investigation Before He Condemned It

The IRS targeting conservative groups has reached scandal stage in record time in Washington, D.C. with even Michael Gerson writing in the Washington Post,
It is precisely because police powers are essential to the public good that abusing them is so offensive. The same holds for overzealous or corrupt airport-security agents. And it is doubly true with IRS personnel who misuse their broad and intimidating powers. It is enough to bring out the Samuel Adams in anyone.”
Senate Democrats also jumped on the bandwagon of criticism, most notably led by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus who promised Committee hearings saying in a release on the Committee website:
“These actions by the IRS are an outrageous abuse of power and a breach of the public’s trust. Targeting groups based on their political views is not only inappropriate but it is intolerable.
“Americans expect the IRS to do its job without passion or prejudice. We need to get to the bottom of what happened here. I want to see all the facts. We need to know who knew what, and exactly what mistakes were made. The American people have questions for the IRS and I intend to get answers. I want to review the Inspector General’s report first, but the IRS should be prepared for a full investigation into this matter by the Senate Finance Committee. The IRS will now be the ones put under additional scrutiny.”
The outrage after the 2012 elections is palpable from both sides of the aisle as a consensus is developing on Capitol Hill that political points can be scored by beating up on the one part of government that everyone hates — the IRS.

But the Internet may not be kind to those Democrats like Max Baucus who demand the IRS hides today.  Veteran Bing or Yahoo! users can easily find that the retiring Senator from Montana had a different view of what the IRS should do back in 2010 in the wake of a Supreme Court decision that clarified what third party groups could do related to electioneering.

In 2010, Democrats were scrambling to pass something known as the DISCLOSE Act which was designed to stifle political speech of those who traditionally opposed them.

The inconvenient Internet reveals that Senator Baucus was a leader in demanding that the IRS investigate outside groups way back in 2010.  In a letter he wrote to the Agency, Mr. Baucus wrote:
“I request that you and your agency survey major 501(c)(4), (c)(5) and (c)(6) organizations involved in political campaign activity to examine whether they are operated for the organization’s intended tax exempt purpose and to ensure that political campaign activity is not the organization’s primary activity. Specifically you should examine if these political activities reach a primary purpose level — the standard imposed by the federal tax code — and if they do not, whether the organization is complying with the notice or proxy tax requirements of Section 6033(e). I also request that you or your agency survey major 501(c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) organizations to determine whether they are acting as conduits for major donors advancing their own private interests regarding legislation or political campaigns, or are providing major donors with excess benefits.”
Considering the over burdensome and intrusive questions — about donor histories, lobbying activities, connections to political campaigns, etc. — that the agency was asking of tea party and other groups, it appears Baucus’ request was fulfilled in full. Quite specifically.

Americans for Limited Government’s Bill Wilson immediately and forcefully responded to Baucus at the time writing in a widely discussed article:
“Not only has the tax code under section 501(c) been used to limit the types of speech that certain organizations can engage in — which on its face violates the First Amendment — now Baucus wants to use the IRS to intimidate groups and threaten their tax-exempt statuses ‘[e]ven if political campaign activity is not the primary purpose’ of the group. This is designed purely to have a chilling effect on the speech of any organizations that are otherwise lawfully exercising their rights to freedom of speech.”
As Wilson so clearly warned, Baucus’ letter, if followed by the IRS could only have led to the singling out and targeting non-profit groups not favored by the party in power. That was clearly Baucus’ intent in 2010, so it is hypocritical even by Washington, D.C. standards for Montana Max to show faux outrage now that it has been revealed that the IRS did exactly what he asked.

As Democrat politicians jump on the carcass of the already dead man walking IRS officials, let the voter beware.   In the world of spin control, it is more likely that they are trying to control the investigation and headlines about the scandal than actually getting to the bottom of it.

Because more than likely, you can find the bottom by looking at their own demands of the Agency and it is almost certain that Max Baucus and the congressional Democrats don’t want to look in that mirror.

If they did, the people might go all Samuel Adams on them ruining their hopes for the 2014 election.
Rick Manning (@rmanning957) is the Vice President of Public Policy and Communications for Americans for Limited Government

Senate Dems Led by Senator Schumer called on IRS to harass Conservatives and the Tea Party. 202-224-3121

Senators Charles E. Schumer, Max Baucus, Michael Bennet, Sheldon Whitehouse, Jeff Merkley, Tom Udall, Jeanne Shaheen and Al Franken. Carl Levin will be added to this list as of a report I saw this morning. (Max Baucus was not on the list but is instrumental in demanding the IRS investigate Conservative groups.


More On the IRS Scandal: 
This video is from 2012.  It is now known that the IRS was well aware of the targeting of Conservatives,  as well as those on Obama's enemies list in 2011.  If that is the case, the IRS' Commissioner, Douglas Shulman,  committed perjury in front of Congress.

Published on Mar 23, 2012
Congressman Charles W. Boustany, Jr., M.D. (R-South Louisiana), Chairman of the House Ways & Means Subcommittee on Oversight, held a hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), its operations and budget, and the 2012 tax return filing season on March 22, 2012. Chairman Boustany questioned IRS Commissioner, Douglas Shulman, on whether or not Tea Party groups' and other groups' tax-exempt status are being targeted due to their political views.

University to Bestow ‘Face of IRS Scandal’ with Honorary Tribute

The woman in charge of the IRS division responsible for reviewing tax-exempt status applications and who is at the heart of an ongoing scandal over revelations the agency targeted conservative groups is set to receive an honorary tribute from Western New England University School of Law on Saturday.

Lois Lerner – director for the IRS Exempt Organization Division – is slated to deliver the school’s commencement address and be given the university’s “President’s Medallion.”

Established in 2002, the award is “bestowed upon those who have distinguished themselves in a particular field or in service to an important cause that has benefited society locally, regionally, nationally, or internationally,” the college’s website states.

In the wake of revelations that her division zeroed in on and gave extra scrutiny to groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, Lerner, 62, has been thrust into the national spotlight, dubbed by some as the “face of the IRS scandal.”

Lerner knew of the inappropriate focus in her division on conservative groups since June 2011. She recently apologized publicly, but won’t comment on whether IRS employees will be disciplined, and denied any political bias was involved in the effort.

In touting Lerner’s impending arrival to the Springfield, Mass., campus – her alma mater – university officials noted she graduated from the law school in 1978 and now oversees nearly 1,000 employees charged with reviewing IRS applications for tax-exempt status and conducting examinations and compliance efforts.

Campus officials also tout how she is past president of the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws.
More recently, she has become the butt of jokes on social media and news websites after she revealed during a conference call with reporters Friday that “I’m not good at math.”

“You’re with the IRS, thank you,” replied Tom Costello of NBC News with a chuckle. He had asked the question that prompted her admission.

“I am a lawyer, I am not an accountant,” Lerner had quickly replied.

Revelations on the ongoing IRS scandal reveal Lerner’s division demanded much of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, including information “under penalties of perjury” on donor lists, names of family members and spouses, and whether people affiliated with the groups were planning to run for office.

Western New England University School of Law officials announced May 1 that Lerner is set to give the upcoming commencement speech and receive the honorary award, roughly one week before the controversial news surfaced.

Jennifer Kabbany is associate editor of The College Fix.

5/15/13 1:40pm UPDATE: "I just called the Dean of Western New England University School Of Law, Arthur R. Gaudio, to express my concern over them having Lois Lerner (the face of the IRS scandal) as their commencement speaker this Saturday and recipient of their "President's Medallion" award.

He said that they hadn't removed her BUT due to the obvious negative press out there, SHE removed herself.

He went on to say that this is a conspiracy and if I read her actual transcript of the conversation that brought attention to this, there really wasn't anything she had done wrong, that there is more to the story, and she is an 'honorable' person." ~Michele

Maybe they should read the IRS Inspector General’s report before Saturday. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

If this outrages you as much as it does me, Please contact the Dean of Western New England University School Of Law, Arthur R. Gaudio, and let him know they must remove this woman from their commencement ceremony and must NOT give her any honorary tribute: 413-782-1413 or Media Relations: David Stawasz 413-796-2026

This is an outrage!  Having her speak at a school of law when she has blatantly broken the law?   
She has already admitted to having knowledge of the illegal activities of the IRS, under her supervision, as early as 2011. 

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

BREAKING NEWS! Saudi Arabia Warned US of Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2012 IN WRITING – Refused Entry Into Mecca

Today Barack Obama praised and defended the FBI and Department of Homeland Security for the investigation of Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
"But what I can say is that based on what I’ve seen so far, the FBI performed its duties, the Department of Homeland Security did what it was supposed to be doing."

So did these agencies do what they needed like Obama says.  By all accounts so far, ALL of the agencies in charge of security for our country failed miserably! Now we are learning this:

The Daily Mail reported Saudi Arabia warned USA IN WRITING about Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2012, and rejected his application for an entry visa to visit Mecca in 2011.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia sent a written warning about accused Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2012, long before pressure-cooker blasts killed three and maimed hundreds, according to a senior Saudi government official with direct knowledge of the document.
The Saudi warning, the official told MailOnline, was separate from the multiple red flags raised by Russian intelligence in 2011, and was based on human intelligence developed independently in Yemen.
Citing security concerns, the Saudi government also denied an entry visa to the elder Tsarnaev brother in December 2011, when he hoped to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. Tsarnaev’s plans to visit Saudi Arabia have not been previously disclosed.
The Saudis’ warning to the U.S. government was also shared with the British government. ‘It was very specific’ and warned that ‘something was going to happen in a major U.S. city,’ the Saudi official said during an extensive interview.
H/T The Gateway Pundit