<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Tom Thurlow</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/tom-thurlow/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:56:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Meanwhile, on Al Jazeera America &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/meanwhile-on-al-jazeera-america/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=meanwhile-on-al-jazeera-america</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/meanwhile-on-al-jazeera-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2013 04:40:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Thurlow]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Jazeera America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Qatar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=207758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The unholy alliance's preferred cable news network. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/1375972566000-XXX-AL-JAZEERA-network-hdb3.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-207766" alt="1375972566000-XXX-AL-JAZEERA-network-hdb3" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/1375972566000-XXX-AL-JAZEERA-network-hdb3-450x337.jpg" width="270" height="202" /></a>It has been almost two months since Al Jazeera America (AJA), the American outlet of Qatar-based news network Al Jazeera, debuted in the U.S. Viewers of the network note its impressive graphics and lack of commercials, a welcomed change of pace compared to most cable news in the States. The network also employs a host of familiar faces that help bolster AJA&#8217;s image as just another news network. It remains to be seen just how radical AJA will let its coverage becomes once it grows more assured of its acceptance into the mainstream. Already AJA&#8217;s Sunni sponsors have let the mask slip.</p>
<p>Despite a petition <a href="http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/dropaljazeera">drive</a> to exclude AJA from cable distribution, AJA’s coverage is definitely on the rise.  Last spring and summer, AJA went on a hiring spree, hiring producers, writers, technicians, and hundreds of other staffers.  AJA also snapped up big news names like Joie Chen, David Shuster and Soledad O’Brien, and then opened 12 American bureau offices.  Broadcasting began August 20.</p>
<p>Of course, AJA is not just another news network.  AJA’s parent company, Al Jazeera, is owned by the government of Qatar, the tiny, oil-rich, Sunni Muslim state in the Persian Gulf, bordering Saudi Arabia.  Qatar is ruled by Shiekh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who, despite his personal business dealings with Israel, is pro-Hamas, pro-Muslim Brotherhood and <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Features/Front-Lines/Qatari-power-and-irresponsibility-set-to-continue-318030">anti-Israel</a>.  Al Jazeera’s news coverage has reflected those views.</p>
<p>In fact, Al Jazeera is so pro-Muslim Brotherhood it recently got <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/01/us-egypt-protests-jazeera-idUSBRE97S0ZL20130901">kicked</a> out of Egypt for instigating Muslim Brotherhood protests there.  In 2008, Al Jazeera’s Beirut bureau chief threw an on-air birthday <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIkrQGz5ats">party</a> for Samir Kuntar, convicted killer of an Israeli family.</p>
<p>Americans learned to hate Al Jazeera in the days after 9-11, when Al Jazeera first repeated the charge that American Jews were warned beforehand of the attacks in New York, then repeatedly broadcast interviews of Osama bin Laden.  Al Jazeera has even described the War on Terror as “so-called,” and suicide bombings as “paradise operations.”</p>
<p>Through the years Al Jazeera has had on-air personalities who were blatantly anti-Semitic.  One popular Al Jazeera show, “Shari’a and Life,” features a host who regularly <a href="http://www.meforum.org/3147/al-jazeera#_ftn64">criticizes</a> Shiites, Americans and Jews.</p>
<p>During the height of the Iraqi war years, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/opinion/12cohen.html">described</a> Al Jazeera as “the mouthpiece of Al Qaeda,” while President George W. Bush <a href="http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jazeera-terrorist-mouthpiece-or-credible-news-organization">referred</a> to Al Jazeera as “a terrorist organization.” Upon the initial invasion of Afghanistan and later in Iraq, US military forces bombed local Al Jazeera offices because of the support they had given terrorists.</p>
<p>Now that AJA is on the air in the US, Americans will get to judge for themselves if AJA will be an independent news network covering news items important to Americans, or if AJA possesses the dispositions of its parent company.</p>
<p>While the network’s foreign news coverage is acceptable, the viewer gets the feeling that AJA is “up to something” whenever the news involves Israel, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, or the Mideast in general.</p>
<p>Take for example the network’s coverage of the civil war in Syria.  A Pew <a href="http://www.journalism.org/2013/09/16/how-al-jazeera-tackled-the-crisis-over-syria/">study</a> revealed that most of the Syrian coverage by AJA was similar to most other American networks, but AJA spent much more time covering the humanitarian aspects of the story and the hardships of the rebels.  And no wonder – Qatar has <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/qatar/10022759/Qatar-playing-with-fire-as-it-funds-Syrian-Islamists-in-quest-for-global-influence.html">funded</a> the rebels.</p>
<p>In its domestic news coverage, AJA is clearly left-leaning.  Typical of a pattern, in a recent day’s news broadcast, President Obama is shown speaking and blaming Republicans for the government shut-down, then the GOP response was only paraphrased in passing by the show’s anchor.</p>
<p>Strictly as a marketing issue, this liberal domestic news slant puts AJA in the same crowded category as most other American news channels, like ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, NPR and MSNBC, leaving Fox News alone in the right-of-center TV news coverage.  Granted, AJA is only weeks old, but so far it is positioning its domestic news coverage in a pretty crowded field.</p>
<p>One recent episode of an in-depth news talk show on AJA, “The Stream,” revealed a definite anti-Israeli bias.  The episode addressed the issue of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and how to get Israel to discuss peace.  Special guests included members of the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6233">International Solidarity Movement</a> (ISM), which is a scandal in and of itself. The ISM is an organization, not of peace activists, but of para-militants who actively work with Palestinian terrorists and who call for armed force against Israel. ISM activists protect weapons-smuggling tunnels and have been photographed with assault weapons. Another group on the show calling itself Combatants For Peace (CFP) equates Israeli soldiers with Palestinian &#8220;combatants&#8221; (i.e. terrorists).  Neither the CFP nor ISM&#8217;s websites acknowledges Israel’s right to exist, even with defensible borders.  The Stream even included a former Israeli soldier, who complained of Israeli aggression against Palestinians.  He was probably trying to be Israel’s version of John Kerry, circa 1971.</p>
<p>The show featured furrowed brows and hand-wringing about how to get “both sides to stop talking past each other,” and how to “open a dialogue.”  A stream of viewer tweets across the bottom of the screen confirmed that the viewers were of the same mindset.  There was also some talk of “Israel’s occupation” and the need to boycott Israel’s products in order to foster peace talks.</p>
<p>AJA also maintains a website to supplement its on-air overage.  Recently, the website reported on a study that calculated the number of deaths from the Iraqi war to be over 500,000, dramatically higher than estimates from most other studies.  The website also included a letter from an inmate and hunger-striker at Guantanamo, complaining of the force-feeding he has to endure to keep him alive.  Poor guy!</p>
<p>So what is a news-watcher to do?  When it comes to foreign news coverage, most of the important news involves Middle East matters, a subject where AJA is pretty biased. For domestic news, so far AJA’s coverage is similar to the coverage of several other networks.</p>
<p>But beyond these questions, what is the point of Al Jazeera even coming to America?  Why would the Emir of Qatar go through the hassle and expense?  One theory could be that AJA is some sort of pan-Arab pride project.  And it is true that most significant regions of the world have at least one major news network.  Some have also speculated that AJA is just a vanity project on the part of the Emir of Qatar, which is possible.</p>
<p>One other theory, and it is speculative but worth pondering, is that AJA may be getting into the American mainstream, slowly getting accepted, so that if there is another 9-11, a war involving Israel, or some other mass terrorist event, AJA will be there to share its pro-Al Qaeda or anti-Israel side to American viewers.  Kind of an “embedded news network,” ready to propagandize at a moment’s notice. Given Al Jazeera’s past loyalties to Al Qaeda and positions against the US and Israel, it is certainly possible.</p>
<p>When Al Gore sold Current TV to Al Jazeera, he is reported to have said that Al Jazeera “gives a voice to those who are not typically heard,” and “speaks truth to power.” Actually, in the event of a war involving Israel or another large-scale terrorist attack against Americans, AJA will be a vehicle for arguing <i>against</i> speaking truth to terrorist powers. It may in fact be terrorized Americans who will be forced to speak truth to AJA.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/meanwhile-on-al-jazeera-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Five Game-Changing Questions on ObamaCare</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/five-game-changing-questions-on-obamacare/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=five-game-changing-questions-on-obamacare</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/five-game-changing-questions-on-obamacare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 04:37:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Thurlow]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CLASS act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer mandate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Healthcare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monty Python]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[swallow]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=205975</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What the president doesn't want you to ask. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Obamacare-protest-AP3.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-205998" alt="HEALTHCARE LAW PROTESTS AT SUPREME COURT" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Obamacare-protest-AP3-450x315.jpg" width="270" height="189" /></a>“What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?” is the question that tripped up the bridge-keeper in the 1975 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, resulting in the bridge-keeper’s immediate death.</p>
<p>Well-thought out questions about ObamaCare directed at President Obama would not result in the same fate, but politically-speaking, they could be just as much of a game-changer.  Maybe this is why President Obama has allowed so few questions following his recent statements concerning ObamaCare.  This is an unpopular law that is being promoted with empty slogans and outright lies.</p>
<p>But tough questions must be asked.  Here are five of my suggestions:</p>
<p>Question 1: “Why do you refer to ObamaCare as a law that is already in place when your administration has been treating it as a malleable bill for three years?” There are many examples of administrative actions taken that contradict the wording of the Affordable Care Act, but here are a few: over 1200 ObamaCare waivers have been granted since the law’s passage, <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/06/labor-unions-primary-recipients-of-obamacare-waivers/">primarily</a> to labor unions.  The administration has also <a href="http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/10/14/8325174-obama-administration-halts-part-of-health-care-law">abandoned</a> the CLASS Act part of ObamaCare, and the administration has recently announced a <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/29/obama-not-even-pretending-he-has-legal-authority-to-delay-the-obamacare-employer-mandate/">delay</a> of two years for the employer mandate.  None of these actions have any basis in the wording of the law as passed by Congress.</p>
<p>So why not make a few more changes to ObamaCare, especially if they are supported by the general public?  Republicans in Congress only seem to be taking their cue on the changeability of ObamaCare from the Obama administration itself.  It is pretty inconsistent to spend three years changing a law and then claim that because it is a law, with the president’s signature, that the law cannot be changed.  Of course it can be changed – President Obama has been changing it on the fly for three years!</p>
<p>Question 2:  “Why is it so wrong to bargain with congressional Republicans on a continuing resolution that changes some or all of ObamaCare when you have essentially been bargaining with your supporters on ObamaCare since it passed three years ago?” This is the problem with granting waivers and exemptions from the law that is binding on the general public.  Apparently it is fine to bargain with supporters of the administration – and that is what it is, an implicit bargain for continued political support &#8212; but not OK to bargain with Republicans.</p>
<p>I will answer my own question here, which is that the Republicans cannot threaten to withdraw political support for President Obama, because Republicans are the loyal opposition.  But the question should be asked anyway.  It exposes the cynicism at work here.</p>
<p>Question 3:  “When you were a senator in 2006 and a Republican president requested that Congress raise the debt ceiling, you <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-voted-against-debt-ceiling-increase-2006-2013-1">spoke</a> on the Senate floor that such a request showed a ‘lack of leadership’ and you voted against the increase.  Now your aide <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/324981-white-house-adviser-compares-republicans-to-terrorists">compared</a> congressional Republicans who oppose raising the debt limit to terrorists and arsonists.  Do you stand by that characterization?”</p>
<p>Let’s face it: President Obama is asking senators and representatives to vote “yes” on something.  And instead of meeting with these people and making the case for a higher debt limit, he calls them names and threatens them with blame for a “no” vote or not acting at all.  Not only is this childish, but it is also unrealistic.  Calling people names is not a good way to get them to do what you want them to do.</p>
<p>Question 4: “Why not equalize the applicability of ObamaCare to everyone, including yourself, the entire executive branch, Congress, their staffs and families?”  This different treatment may be the most annoying part of ObamaCare.</p>
<p>The public has watched with disgust the shenanigans in Washington, where healthcare policies for the political class and federal workers are exempt from the healthcare laws that apply to the rest of us.  Even the IRS agents who are in charge of enforcing ObamaCare on the rest of us do not want to be <a href="http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/1780">subject</a> to it.</p>
<p>Question 5: “How could you have been so wrong in <a href="http://youtu.be/N8Jfku9aL_c">promising</a> a $2,500 annual drop in healthcare premiums for a typical family of four under ObamaCare?”  President Obama mentioned this figure many times throughout his 2008 campaign, and in the months preceding the passage of the law.  President Obama may claim that he was making a good faith projection, but the reality is that when he repeatedly made this promise he was way off.  Instead of going down, <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2013/09/25/the-dodgy-new-hhs-report-on-obamacare-pr?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reason%2FHitandRun+%28Reason+Online+-+Hit+%26+Run+Blog%29">most</a> family’s healthcare costs are going up.  <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505144_162-57604782/study-insurance-costs-to-soar-under-obamacare/">Way</a> up.  Healthcare premiums may well replace the mortgage, food and car payments as a typical American family’s top monthly expense.</p>
<p>So, after all these and other questions, a typical ObamaCare supporter might complain of ineffective messaging – they usually do.  But in this case the Obama administration has already <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/317205-hhs-announces-obamacare-navigators">pledged</a> $67 million to over 100 organizations to help “navigate” consumers through their health insurance options under ObamaCare.  <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/307821-celebs-you-might-see-promoting-obamacare">Celebrities</a> have signed up to help promote ObamaCare.  Now NBC News has <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/53125456/ns/local_news-reno_nv/#.UkpMFYasiSq">decided</a> to spend a whole week extolling the virtues of ObamaCare.</p>
<p>Maybe NBC News can persuade me that the letter I received last week telling me of a 71% premium increase, for a worse health insurance policy, was not in fact true.  Or maybe NBC News can tell thousands of employees whose hours were dropped to part-time because of ObamaCare, that their demotions were for the best.  ObamaCare is a disaster and anyone trying to sugarcoat it or even explain it has a tough road to hoe.</p>
<p>Reality is difficult to hide.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/five-game-changing-questions-on-obamacare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ObamaCare on the Edge</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/obamacare-on-the-edge/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obamacare-on-the-edge</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/obamacare-on-the-edge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2013 04:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Thurlow]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filibuster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ted Cruz]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=205500</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The nation's revolt against the health care overhaul could come sooner than we think. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/41188240001_2636975066001_vs-521f9fd2e4b068e86c06344e-86366013001.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-205502" alt="41188240001_2636975066001_vs-521f9fd2e4b068e86c06344e-86366013001" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/41188240001_2636975066001_vs-521f9fd2e4b068e86c06344e-86366013001.jpg" width="212" height="160" /></a>Recall from history that one of the Eastern Block’s longest-serving and brutal dictators, Romanian President Nicolae Ceausescu, fell from power after a single <a href="http://youtu.be/uv7-LVFgd8U">speech</a> in front of his subjects.  On December 21, 1989, President Ceausescu spoke from a balcony in Bucharest to a group of about 80,000 Romanians, during which opposition to Ceausescu’s rule galvanized.  A few people in the crowd began booing and jeering, totally unheard-of during Ceausescu’s rule.  The booing spread, then the crowd began chanting opposition slogans, and eventually charged the presidential building en mass.</p>
<p>The popular opposition galvanized despite unanimous support of the military and state-run media.  Within three days of the speech, Ceausescu and his wife had been deposed and executed, and Romania became a newly-freed, former communist country.  It was a staggeringly-swift turn of events.  And it all began and gathered momentum during a single speech, now known as the Ceausescu Balcony Speech.</p>
<p>Metaphorically, Obamacare has just now walked onto the balcony and has begun to speak to its subjects, us Americans, who will be held captive by its new regime of laws, regulations and distortions.  Despite widespread positive coverage from the mainstream media, liberal <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/307821-celebs-you-might-see-promoting-obamacare">celebrities</a>, and even politicians who accuse opponents of <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/29/louisiana-democratic-chair-opposition-to-obamacare-is-about-race/">racism</a>, doubts are coalescing.  Popular support has <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/repeal_of_health_care_law_favoroppose-1947.html#polls">never</a> been that strong, and people are only now coming face to face with the real problems of Obamacare, and they don’t like them.</p>
<p>The media is starting to cover horror stories of healthcare premiums doubling and tripling, and thousands of workers getting laid off or converted to working less than 30 hours a week.  Doctors are <a href="http://www.humanevents.com/2013/07/19/thanks-to-obamacare-doctor-shortages-set-to-quintuple/">retiring</a> to avoid having to deal with it.  Retired workers are <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-05-15/news/chi-emanuel-to-shift-retired-city-workers-to-obamacare-20130515_1_retired-city-workers-health-care-health-insurance">losing</a> their insurance and told to go to the Obamacare exchanges or coverage.  Health insurance companies are <a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/02/obamacare-impact-another-insurer-leaves-california-market/">exiting</a> states.  A new problem has also emerged: Americans are being told of a newly-discovered Obamacare “<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/23/aca-family-glitch-issues/2804017/">family glitch</a>,” in which many workers will be able to keep their healthcare coverage but their spouses and children will be dropped.</p>
<p>The hundreds of millions of dollars <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/hhs-obamacare-navigators-95575.html">spent</a> by the Obama administration to provide paid “navigators” to “get the word out,” and help from liberal celebrities can only sugar-coat things so long.  Within the next few weeks Americans will receive notices in the mail describing the true, terrible details of changes to their healthcare coverage.</p>
<p>A few lucky Americans, like some unions and members of Congress and their staffs, will be exempt from Obamacare.  Agents at the IRS, who will enforce Obamacare on the rest of us, are <a href="http://capwiz.com/nteu/issues/alert/?alertid=62634726&amp;type=CO&amp;utm_source=Illinois+Policy+Institute&amp;utm_campaign=7790111647-0613_ecompass&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_term=0_0f5a22f52c-7790111647-10830129">urging</a> Congress to vote against a <a href="http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/1780">proposal</a> that will place them in the same healthcare boat as the rest of us.  Seems like the healthcare that is good enough for the rest of us is not good enough for the IRS.</p>
<p>And whatever happened to President Obama’s promises?  Remember when he <a href="http://youtu.be/1LRcLMScEqo">told</a> us &#8220;if you like your doctor or healthcare plan, you can keep it”?  The White House doesn’t want us to remember those comments.  President Obama also probably wants us to forget when he <a href="http://youtu.be/N8Jfku9aL_c">said</a> that under Obamacare a typical family’s healthcare premium will decrease by $2,500.  The <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/obama-s-affordable-care-act-looking-a-bit-unaffordable-20130829">reality</a> is that for most Americans, their health insurance premiums will <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/09/23/its-official-obamacare-will-increase-health-spending-by-7450-for-a-typical-family-of-four/">rise</a> dramatically, and they may not be able to keep their current insurance coverage at all.</p>
<p>The dynamics in Congress are just beginning to change.  A few days ago the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution to fund the government <i>except</i> for Obamacare.  Even some Democrat representatives voted for it.  Only a few weeks earlier, this would have been unthinkable.</p>
<p>While the Democratically-controlled Senate is expected to pass a resolution that will fund Obamacare, Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid is trying his best to pass the resolution in such a way that vulnerable Democrat Senators up or re-election in 2014 do not need to publicly show their support for Obamacare.  Voters back home in Alaska, Arkansas or North Carolina, for example, might not approve of their senators voting to keep Obamacare in place.</p>
<p>Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s filibuster did not win a vote on defunding Obamacare, but he was at least successful in presenting to the general public some of the arguments against Obamacare that are usually ignored by the mainstream press, and Democrats in general are on the defense.</p>
<p>Yes, the bottom is falling out of Obamacare support, and like the end of Nicolae Ceausescu, it could be very quick.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/obamacare-on-the-edge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IRS Scandal Follows Old Obama Illinois Pattern</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/irs-scandal-follows-old-obama-illinois-pattern/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=irs-scandal-follows-old-obama-illinois-pattern</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/irs-scandal-follows-old-obama-illinois-pattern/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 04:06:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Thurlow]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ATF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Woodward]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cincinnati]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deep Throat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jack Ryan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeri Ryan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muskey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Segretti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[True the Vote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VanderSloot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Watergate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=190438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The president's unblemished record of destroying the opposition through abuse of bureaucracy &#038; regulations. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/1207-obama-bush-tax-cuts_full_6001-600x350.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-190477" alt="1207-obama-bush-tax-cuts_full_6001-600x350" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/1207-obama-bush-tax-cuts_full_6001-600x350-450x298.jpg" width="270" height="179" /></a>Boy, it sure makes a primary or election contest easier when your opponent pulls out, don’t you think?  Barack Obama has been managing to do that since he won the Democratic nomination for state senator in Illinois in 1996, and it helps explain the IRS harassment of conservatives and Tea Party groups since 2010.  Whereas once Obama targeted candidates to get them to pull out, from 2010 onward, he had the IRS and possibly other federal agencies target groups that represented a set of ideas, hoping to get those ideas to withdraw from the race.  The pattern has been the same: get the opposition to leave.</p>
<p>In 1996, as he faced an incumbent state senator and two other challengers for the Democratic nomination for state senator in a heavily-Democratic district in Chicago, then-candidate Barack Obama directed his campaign staff to challenge the candidacy petitions of his opponents.  By disqualifying signatures one by one, as one local columnist <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/29/obamas.first.campaign/">put</a> it, Obama “made sure voters had but one choice.”</p>
<p>Then, in 2004, not only in the Democratic nomination for United States Senator from Illinois, but in the general election, Team Obama perfected the art of getting confidential documents on Obama’s opponents unsealed.</p>
<p>First, Obama’s primary opponent had to try and explain to the voters the contents of recently-unsealed divorce records, which included <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-03-17/news/0403170332_1_blair-hull-gery-chico-blacks-and-liberal-whites">allegations</a> of spousal violence.  The former front-runner finished third, far behind the winner, Barack Obama.  Then, in the 2004 general election, Republican nominee Jack Ryan <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/25/il.ryan/">ended</a> his race for the Senate after child custody records were unsealed, revealing allegations of wild forays at sex clubs with his actress wife, Jeri Ryan.</p>
<p>Is it any wonder that once President Obama’s signature accomplishment, Obamacare, came under scathing criticism from Tea Party groups in 2010, that the IRS suddenly began to give extra scrutiny, and in many cases deny non-profit status to groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their name?  The extra IRS scrutiny and audits were <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/16/the-ominous-obama-nixon-comparisons-begin-to-pile-up/">blamed</a> on a few “rogue” IRS agents in Cincinnati, but the scandal is big enough to be blamed for the harassment of over 500 conservative <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/14/lawmakers-say-irs-targeted-dozens-more-conservative-groups-than-initially/">groups</a>.  Reportedly, 63% of all Tea Party-related groups that applied for non-profit status since 2010 eventually <a href="http://youtu.be/BSwnWW-y48c">withdrew</a> their applications, obviously limiting donations to these groups, and their ability to promote conservative ideas.  Government harassment works.</p>
<p>With the non-profit voter integrity group “True The Vote,” a delayed application for non-profit status was only the beginning.  In the two years since the group applied for non-profit status, the founder and her family’s business became <a href="http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/05/20/dojs-witch-hunt-against-true-the-vote-n1601527">targets</a> of other government agencies, including the FBI, the ATF, and OSHA.</p>
<p>And despite denials to the contrary, evidence suggests direction from the top of the executive branch.  An anonymous IRS official employee from the Cincinnati office <a href="http://www.examiner.com/article/anonymous-irs-official-everything-comes-from-the-top">confirmed</a> that orders of singling out organizations based on political belief is something that would only “come from the top.”</p>
<p>Old Chicago habits die hard, and during the 2012 campaign, the Obama campaign website <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304723304577368280604524916.html">posted</a> the names of 15 prominent donors to Mitt Romney’s campaign, sending the message far and wide to investigate these people, possibly unsealing any confidential files, at the least dissuading other possible Romney supporters from donating to the campaign.</p>
<p>Apparently the IRS and the Labor Department took the bait and audited one of the listed Romney donors, Frank <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/24/romney-donor-bashed-by-obama-campaign-now-target-two-federal-audits/">VanderSloot</a>.  Within weeks of being listed on the Obama website, IRS agents audited VanderSloot’s personal and business tax returns, and the Labor Department even investigated VanderSloot’s business.  VanderSloot <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=5&amp;cad=rja&amp;ved=0CEwQFjAE&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2013%2F05%2F14%2Ffrank-vandersloot-im-not-the-only-major-mitt-romney-donor-audited%2F&amp;ei=z_ebUZvzNcGViQL_54DgDw&amp;usg=AFQjCNEwTJ9Jp-zypq7">says</a> he is not the only person on that list to be audited.</p>
<p>How extensive is this scandal?  As far as we know today, the IRS took the lead in harassing conservatives and Tea Party groups, occasionally joined by the Department of Justice, OSHA, the ATF, and the Labor Department.  If you were to add some news of spying on reporters – that was <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fbi-reporter-20130521,0,661230.story">announced</a> Monday &#8212; then it all becomes reminiscent of the following <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074119/quotes">exchange</a> from the 1976 movie All the President’s Men:</p>
<p>Bob Woodward: Segretti told me and Bernstein that&#8230;</p>
<p>Deep Throat: [interupting] Don&#8217;t concentrate on Segretti. You&#8217;ll miss the overall.</p>
<p>Bob Woodward: The letter that destroyed the Muskey candidacy&#8230; did that come from inside the White House?</p>
<p>Deep Throat: You&#8217;re missing the overall.</p>
<p>Bob Woodward: What overall?</p>
<p>Deep Throat: The people behind all of this were frightened of Muskey and that&#8217;s what got him destroyed. They wanted to run against McGovern.  Look who they&#8217;re running against. They bugged offices, they followed people, falsified press leaks, passed fake letters&#8230; they canceled Democratic campaign rallies, they investigated Democratic private lives, they planted spies, they stole documents&#8230; and now don&#8217;t tell me that all of this was the work of one Donald Segretti.</p>
<p>Substitute the phrase “a few rogue IRS officers from Cincinnati”  for Doanld Segretti, and a few other updates, and this exchange gives a glimpse at how big and how far this scandal may go.  But one thing is for sure: all of these actions are part of an old Obama pattern since his days in Illinois of doing whatever it takes to get one’s opponents, be they candidates or groups, to withdraw from the competition of ideas.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/irs-scandal-follows-old-obama-illinois-pattern/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Clinton Scandal Playbook and Benghazi</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/the-clinton-scandal-playbook-and-benghazi/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-clinton-scandal-playbook-and-benghazi</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/the-clinton-scandal-playbook-and-benghazi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 04:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Thurlow]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cousin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Travel Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Travelgate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=189658</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An uncanny similarity between the Libya debacle and another unforgettable Hillary escapade. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/0123-benghazi-hearings-hillary-clinton_full_600.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-189799" alt="0123-benghazi-hearings-hillary-clinton_full_600" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/0123-benghazi-hearings-hillary-clinton_full_600-450x300.jpg" width="270" height="180" /></a>The punditocracy is pulling out its collective hair, wanting to know why there have apparently been multiple layers of cover-ups in the evolving Benghazi story.  An early scandal from the Clinton administration, the so-called “Travelgate” scandal, may be instructive.</p>
<p>Recall that in the 1993 firings of employees at the White House Travel Office, a <a href="http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9609/18/travelgate/index.shtml">determination</a> was made early on by the new president Bill Clinton and then-First Lady Hillary Clinton that the Travel Office workers, who served at the pleasure of the president, could be fired and that the Travel Office business, and the commissions that came with it, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr950227.htm">given</a> to a cousin of President Clinton’s, Catherine Cornelius, who had a travel agency of her own.</p>
<p>But simply handing over government business to a relative would have been politically embarrassing, so the Clintons concocted a story whereby the Travel Office was rife with corruption and the workers there needed to be <a href="http://www.cnn.com/US/9601/travel_office/">fired</a>.  An <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr950227.htm">audit</a> was conducted on Travel Office finances, and while the record-keeping at the office was found to have been pretty inadequate, there was no smoking gun of corruption or embezzlement.  No matter.  The FBI was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/08/opinion/essay-blizzard-of-lies.html">pressured</a> to make arrests, and the local US Attorney was charged with prosecuting the employees for corruption.</p>
<p>White House denials of any scheme, and leaks by those involved, led to a firestorm of media criticism.  Most of the Travel Office employees were eventually given other government jobs or retired.  A prosecution for corruption of the head of the Travel Office, Billy Dale, ended in an <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1995-11-17/news/mn-4111_1_white-house-official">acquittal</a>.  Clinton’s cousin was removed as new head of the Travel Office.  A later report written by Independent Counsel Robert Ray <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/dems-day-hil-hit-travelgate-role-article-1.868474">concluded</a> that, while she did not make any knowingly-false statements under oath, First Lady Hillary Clinton had made a number of inaccurate statements concerning the firings and her role in them.</p>
<p>In retrospect, it is kind of funny that the Clintons would ever complain about corruption from anyone.  Pot, meet Kettle.  That kind of thing.</p>
<p>But the point is that the initial decision to replace government employees with the president’s cousin, so that she could make commissions from arranging White House travel, was a bad decision.  Everything following that decision &#8212; the firings, the made-up charges of corruption, the federal prosecution, and the denials from the Clintons that later proven to be untrue &#8212; were an effort to distract people from the initial bad decision.</p>
<p>Fast forward to the fall of 2012, when the State Department repeatedly <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/world/africa/requests-for-bolstered-security-in-libya-were-denied-republicans-say.html?_r=0">denied</a> requests by officials at the American consulate in Benghazi for more security.  This was the initial bad decision from which flowed all other obfuscations.</p>
<p>Who would make such a bad decision?  In his recent congressional testimony, consulate security officer Eric Nordstrom blamed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, pointing to a <a href="http://freebeacon.com/blowing-the-lid-off-benghazi/">memo</a> signed by Secretary Clinton, denying additional security.</p>
<p>What would lead Clinton to make such a bad decision?  Remember that in the summer of 2008, when her presidential campaign had ended and the Russians invaded South Ossetia, Hillary Clinton was formulating what would later be her “reset” policy towards Russia.  Such a policy assumed that whatever frostiness existed between the United States and Russia had been caused by American belligerence.  If only the American side would initiate a fresh “reset,” then the Russians would be more accommodative to United States interests, like our policies concerning Iran’s nukes.</p>
<p>It may be difficult to grasp, but liberals, Hillary Clinton included, actually believe that bullies like Russia can be appeased by weakness of others, hence the “reset” policy towards Russia, and the later denial of more security for the consulate at Benghazi.  Clinton probably thought that a strong American military presence at the Benghazi consulate would be provocative.</p>
<p>Obviously this was a bad decision.  On September 11, 2012, the American consulate was attacked and overrun by terrorists in a planned, coordinated attack.  While under attack, officials at the consulate called for help, which could have made it from Italy in time.  But if provided, this military help would have highlighted the earlier, bad decision to keep security there weak, so the request for military help during the attack was denied.</p>
<p>When the smoke had cleared, an American ambassador and three other Americans were dead.  Anything besides a narrative that this attack was a spontaneous uprising because of an anti-Muslim You Tube video would have led people to question the initial, bad decision by the State Department to keep consulate security weak to begin with.  The following week, UN Representative Susan Rice <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us/politics/explanation-for-benghazi-attack-under-scrutiny.html?pagewanted=all">appeared</a> on five television news shows to reiterate the story that the deaths were caused by a spontaneous uprising related to the video. A few days later, President Obama <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/20/news/la-pn-obama-defends-embassy-security-20120920">stated</a> at a forum hosted by Univision, and again later at the <a href="http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-09-25/politics/35497281_1_libyan-people-benghazi-diplomatic-facilities">United Nations</a>, that the Benghazi attacks were provoked by the video.</p>
<p>President Obama and Secretary Clinton even filmed their own public service <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/deadly-anti-us-riots-pakistan-obamas-ad-denouncing/story?id=17291751">announcement</a>, played in Pakistan, apologizing for a private American production of the anti-Muslim video and calling for calm.  This PSA later became a self-fulfilling <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/22/world/la-fg-pakistan-rioting-20120922">prophecy</a>, when its reference to an anti-Muslim video caused riots in Pakistan that led to the deaths of 18, and scores of injured Pakistanis.</p>
<p>All these actions were taken to distract people from the initial, bad decision made by Secretary Clinton to keep consulate security in Benghazi weak.  Apparently, when defending a bad decision by Hillary Clinton, anything goes.  The standard operating procedure was apparent as far back as 1993.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/tom-thurlow/the-clinton-scandal-playbook-and-benghazi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 623/694 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 08:13:59 by W3 Total Cache -->