So we are allowing UN election monitors to come into our country to monitor our US elections for the purpose of making sure that election officials in various locations do not require identification at the polls. You have to show an ID to cash a check, buy alcohol or tobacco, buy a gun, enter the US Justice Department, but somehow the Eric Holder, who is protected by such ID verification in his Ivory Tower Justice Dept. Bldg., and his socialist allies have the audacity to try to convince the American public that it would be a violation of individuals' civil rights to require them to show a valid ID to vote in our most important national election. The Justice Dept. and the UN are not concerned about Union intimidation at the polls or armed Black Panther members intimidating voters in PA, but they don't want anyone asked to show an ID to vote. Let me repeat that the United Nations is sending election monitors into the United States of America and our Justice Dept. is allowing and supporting them in doing so!!!!
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Friday, October 12, 2012
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Obama Administration Tells Defense Contractors to Ignore Federal Law
Outrageous! How much more can the Obama Administration get away with? Read Fox News Article below:
The Obama administration has advised defense contractors not to warn employees of looming layoffs 60 days in advance, as specified in the law, as Congress and the White House hurtle closer to a deadline for avoiding severe defense spending cuts in January. Both sides of the aisle say they intend to prevent those cuts from happening, though they face an uphill climb to reaching an agreement.
Republicans particularly object to promises made to the contractors to pick up the cost -- at taxpayer expense -- of any financial liability the contractors incur for withholding the layoff notifications.
"Companies have a choice whether to rely on (the Office of Management and Budget's) politically-motivated guidance or to comply with the law," McCain, the Arizona Republican, said. "But I can assure them that I will do everything in my power to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to compensate contractors who do not comply with the law."
Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said the notice amounted to a "threat" to contractors. And warned that the administration was using tax dollars to win over companies to follow the "dubious" and "politically motivated" guidance to ignore the federal law known as the WARN Act.
Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., also said it was "troubling that the Obama administration would openly encourage the violation of federal law and offer to pay the legal fees that resulted."
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., claimed Obama was trying to prevent layoff notices from hitting mailboxes "right before the election."
"This is typical Barack Obama politics -- being supportive of the WARN Act when convenient and against it when it creates political downside," Graham said. "This is the most outcome-based White House in memory."
Lockheed Martin has reportedly already backed off threats to issue thousands of layoff warnings ahead of the election, in response to the administration's latest assurances and guidance.
The offer to pay the legal fees was included in a memorandum issued by the administration Friday that also restated the Labor Department's position from July that contractors should not issue written notices to employees because of the "uncertainty" over the across-the-board cuts to the defense budget and other federal spending that will occur Jan. 2 unless Congress reaches a new deal.
The notices are required under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act and generally require employers with more than 100 employees to provide 60-day notices of "mass layoffs if they are reasonably foreseeable."
The projected $500 billion in Pentagon cuts under the so-called sequestration will occur because Congress failed to agree on a deficit-reduction plan in the wake of the deal last summer to raise the debt ceiling. The guidance issued by the Labor Department this summer stated "it is neither necessary nor appropriate" for federal contractors to issue the warnings.
The latest memorandum states the federal government would cover employee compensation under the WARN Act -- "irrespective of the outcome" as long as the contractor follows the Labor Department guidelines.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/03/mccain-vows-to-block-funds-linked-to-possible-warn-act-suits/#ixzz28NfZNYDN
The Obama administration has advised defense contractors not to warn employees of looming layoffs 60 days in advance, as specified in the law, as Congress and the White House hurtle closer to a deadline for avoiding severe defense spending cuts in January. Both sides of the aisle say they intend to prevent those cuts from happening, though they face an uphill climb to reaching an agreement.
Republicans particularly object to promises made to the contractors to pick up the cost -- at taxpayer expense -- of any financial liability the contractors incur for withholding the layoff notifications.
"Companies have a choice whether to rely on (the Office of Management and Budget's) politically-motivated guidance or to comply with the law," McCain, the Arizona Republican, said. "But I can assure them that I will do everything in my power to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to compensate contractors who do not comply with the law."
Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said the notice amounted to a "threat" to contractors. And warned that the administration was using tax dollars to win over companies to follow the "dubious" and "politically motivated" guidance to ignore the federal law known as the WARN Act.
Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., also said it was "troubling that the Obama administration would openly encourage the violation of federal law and offer to pay the legal fees that resulted."
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., claimed Obama was trying to prevent layoff notices from hitting mailboxes "right before the election."
"This is typical Barack Obama politics -- being supportive of the WARN Act when convenient and against it when it creates political downside," Graham said. "This is the most outcome-based White House in memory."
Lockheed Martin has reportedly already backed off threats to issue thousands of layoff warnings ahead of the election, in response to the administration's latest assurances and guidance.
The offer to pay the legal fees was included in a memorandum issued by the administration Friday that also restated the Labor Department's position from July that contractors should not issue written notices to employees because of the "uncertainty" over the across-the-board cuts to the defense budget and other federal spending that will occur Jan. 2 unless Congress reaches a new deal.
The notices are required under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act and generally require employers with more than 100 employees to provide 60-day notices of "mass layoffs if they are reasonably foreseeable."
The projected $500 billion in Pentagon cuts under the so-called sequestration will occur because Congress failed to agree on a deficit-reduction plan in the wake of the deal last summer to raise the debt ceiling. The guidance issued by the Labor Department this summer stated "it is neither necessary nor appropriate" for federal contractors to issue the warnings.
The latest memorandum states the federal government would cover employee compensation under the WARN Act -- "irrespective of the outcome" as long as the contractor follows the Labor Department guidelines.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/03/mccain-vows-to-block-funds-linked-to-possible-warn-act-suits/#ixzz28NfZNYDN
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Voter ID Laws
How can any rational, intelligent human being believe that laws requiring voters to verify their identity before voting are designed to violate any citizen's civil rights? Do the politicos who make such accusations believe any part of what they are saying? Can they really be that ignorant or are they that evil -- so evil that they will do anything to win this election? Requiring identification can only contribute to the sanctity and integrity of the election process. No legal citizen, regardless of race, age, gender, national origin, religion, or even sexual preference would be prevented from voting in any state by any voter ID law under attack by Eric Holder's "Justice" Department. All legal citizens have the right to obtain an official ID from their respective State and all have had the opportunity to obtain an official ID. The fact is that voter ID laws do not discriminate and the only reason for opposition is to ensure that people who are not legally eligible to vote can still vote because the Democrats plan to steal this election if that's what it takes to win. The media has allowed the liberals to take demagoguery to an extreme during this campaign. Every American who cares about freedom, liberty, democracy and the principles of our founding fathers should be outraged. The power of evil men lives on the cowardice of good men. For too long, good people have been too complacent and too afraid to stand up. My God, how far do we have to go before people wake up? Perhaps Americans are just too brainwashed, politically correct, complacent and cowardly to even stand up for their freedom. If so, Americans deserve everything they will get in the near future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)