So is FOX NEWS turning Left?
Fox News shakes up their line-up of Political Contributors, and seems to be pulling away from their conservative viewer-base who look to them for equal time in a media full of leftist reporting.
Fox News let go conservative icon Sarah Palin, a great woman who has become a voice of the American people since her 2008 debut into the world of national politics.
Then Fox News let go the very knowledgeable Dick Morris, who though helped Bill Clinton become President in the 1990s has become pretty conservative since the World Trade Center 9/11 terrorist attack.
And who does Fox News add in their place? Fox has added ultra-liberal Dennis Kucinich, and believe it or not Massachusetts RINO (Republican In Name Only) Scott Brown.
That's right! Fox News Channel is hiring former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown as a Political Contributor. And believe it or not, the RINO is making his debut in prime time tonight.
So why hire someone with little to no political experience? Who the hell knows!
Brown is supposedly a member of the Republican Party, and faced the Democratic candidate, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, in the 2010 special election to succeed U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy for the remainder of the term ending January 3, 2013.
Brown ran for a full senate term in 2012, but lost to Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren. He subsequently joined the board of directors of Kadant paper company and is in talks to join Fox News as a commentator.
So why would I, and many others consider Scott Brown a RINO (Republican In Name Only)?
It's easy, it's because he has demonstrated himself to be just that.
Following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting last December, Scott Brown became the first Republican Senator to support a Federal Ban on so-called assault weapons.
And back in 2010, after entering the US Senate, RINO Scott Brown joined in on the effort to pass a Democrat Party "jobs bill" - in fact, praising Democrats Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senator John Kerry.
Brown was only one of five Republican senators to vote for cloture on the jobs bill. The motion passed in the Senate 62–30 on February 22, 2010. In an up or down vote on the bill itself on February 24, 2010, Brown voted for final passage, helping to pass the bill 70–28.
Brown's defeat in the 2012 U.S Senate race was no surprise since many conservatives in Massachusetts believe that Brown betrayed them once elected the first time.
So now Fox News says that Scott Brown will offer commentary across several programs, starting with Sean Hannity on Wednesday.
Brown lost his seat to Elizabeth Warren in November and declined to run in a special election to fill the Senate seat vacated by now-Secretary of State John Kerry. Probably because he'd get beaten again.
Fox has been remaking its contributor lineup in recent months. Cutting ties to Sarah Palin and Dick Morris while hiring ultra-liberal Dennis Kucinich and RINO Scott Brown, may ultimately hurt the station that I depend on for television News.
I'm just hoping that Fox News is not pulling away from its conservative base and turning to the left to become another MSNBC.
If it does, it will lose it's number one place in the news.
The NRA unveiled a new online ad on Tuesday night that adopts a kinder, gentler tone than its last campaign, which drew criticism from all sides for highlighting the security surrounding President Barack Obama’s daughters.
The new commercial, which is narrated by Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, rather than executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, who spearheaded the last effort, cites the administration’s own research to take down its gun proposals.
The ad’s debut coincided with President Obama’s State of the Union address, in which he made emotional introductions for several victims of gun violence who were in the audience and said they deserved a vote on the issue.
Showing an internal Justice Department memo, the new ad highlights statements saying that an assault weapons ban is unlikely to affect gun violence without buybacks of those weapons already in the hands of the public. Another document suggests that universal background checks wouldn’t work without gun registration.
Gone is the rhetoric of the last ad, which concluded with the question, “Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” That was widely seen as detracting from the NRA’s message at a time when it was on the defensive after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in which 20 first-graders were killed.
Even veteran NRA lobbyist James Baker disagreed with the tone of that commercial, telling Reuters it was “ill-advised.”
The new ad ends with the words “mandatory gun confiscation” and “requiring national gun registration” in bold on a plain background before Cox returns to ask, “Still think President Obama’s proposals sound reasonable?”
The ad will appear on websites visited frequently by people in South Dakota, Colorado, Louisiana, Arkansas and Alaska, all of which have Democratic senators facing mid-term elections in 2014.
Why is the Department of Homeland Security buying so many bullets?
The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. Those sorts of numbers are roughly the equivalent of 5 bullets for every person in the United States
It says it needs them, all of them for law enforcement agents in training and on duty.
The government's explanation is much less sinister then conspiracy theorists saying that our government is "gearing up for total collapse, they're gearing up for huge wars."
Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia.
The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.
Miss Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities.
The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella.
The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year.
The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency.
ICE's ammunition requests in the last year included:
--450 million rounds of .40-caliber duty ammunition
--40 million rounds of rifle ammunition a year for as many as five years, for a total bullet-buy of 200 million rounds
--176,000 rifle rounds on a separate contract
--25,000 blank rounds
The Homeland Security ammo buy is not the first time the government's bullets purchases have sparked concerns among conspiracy theorists. The same thing took place in 2012, last year, when the Social Security Administration posted a notice that it was buying 174,000 hollow point bullets.
Study finds Smoking Marijuana linked to Higher Risk of Stroke
Many who support the legalization of marijuana often tout the drug’s benign side effects, asserting that long-term marijuana use has no lasting impact on an individual’s health.
However, many studies have surfaced that shed doubt on this claim.
Recent research from Duke University in Durham, N.C., found that smoking marijuana habitually during their adolescence showed a decrease in their general intellectual ability as they progressed into adulthood.
But than again, dumb might be in? Look who they supported as president.
And now, now there is an even more chilling possible side effect of cannabis use – an increased risk of stroke.
According to a new study from the University of Auckland in New Zealand, marijuana may double the risk of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) – even those who had no risk factors that often contribute to an attack.
Liberal Media Throws Up Diversions
Senator Rubio vs The Liberal News Media
MSNBC, NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, all liberal news outlets. All having a great time being critical with Senator Marco Rubio for taking a drink of water while giving the Republican rebuttal to President Obama's State of the Union speech.
One idiot actually in CNN announced their Senator Rubio segment - a discussion on his taking a drink of water no less - by asking if his water-swig is a "career ender".
No kidding! Imagine the idiot that came up with that one. Imagine his throwing out the idea of running a whole segment, a discussion, a news report, breaking news, on a Senator taking a drink of water during a speech?
Imagine for a moment what they were really doing here. And yes, ask yourself, where's the beef? Where's the substance to their angst with Senator Rubio as to what he said?
Folks, I watched it and I can't tell you where they find problems with Sen. Rubio's speech. They did not talk about his rebuttal or any of the "specifics" that Senator Rubio addressed.
The only thing that they could come up with was that Senator Rubio stopped his rebuttal to take a drink of water. Horrifying as that might be to the liberal left, it just shows their impotency to articulate what they don't agree with - as well as their determination to divert the converation away from real concerns.
The liberal left, the liberal news media, simply can't bring anything to the table, they have no game, they are weak, they want to distract people from the real issues, they cannot refute what was being said so they talk about crap like a drink of water.
I just don't know how else to say it. The liberal news media, MSNBC and CNN being the worse of the bunch, throw distraction after distraction to steer the discussion away from what needs to be talked about.
They talk about this Republican saying this and that Conservative doing that, but they don't address the problems and concerns that Americans are really worried about.
- Out of control government spending,
- unemployment highest it has been in years,
- gasoline is at or above $4 a gallon,
- everyone is getting more taxes taken out of the paychecks,
- rising taxes across the board,
- more small businesses are shutting down than ever before,
- big businesses are not hiring or relocating,
- home foreclosures are at an all time high because people are out of work,
- manufacturing jobs are being sent overseas because the liberals wanted to make "their lives" better,
- more Americans are on food stamps than ever,
- more Americans are below the poverty line under President Obama than any other president in our entire history,
- more government intrusion in the lives of Americans,
- the fact that a majority of Americans feel threatened by the U.S. government more than ever before,
- Americans losing hope --
We have a president that does not want water-boarding of terrorists even if it means saving American lives, but he sees no problem in ordering a drone missile strike to kill unarmed Americans overseas if they are merely "suspected" of working with a terrorist network..
We have a president that wants to ban guns and limit the sale of ammunition, even for reloading which no criminal does, because he is worried about saving the life of "just one child," but at the same time he is for late term abortion of children -- those who are about to be born.
And yes, Democrats feel that abortion is OK even though they have sanctioned the death of over 45 Million children over the last 40 years -- all while saying that they are worried about "the children."
They want to stop Global Warming even though it doesn't exist, because they say they are worried about the children. They wan a gun ban, because they say they are worried about the children. they want to stop people from Smoking cigarettes, because they say they are worried about "the children."
All, all, while never saying that they want to prevent or slow down the rising rate of abortions in this country.
Why? Because they are NOT worried about "those children."
Did Senator Rubio taking a drink of water on camera seem a little awkward? Sure.
Did anyone at home watching it think it was as big a deal as prissy jerkweeds like Chris Matthews did? Probably not. The reason is that the people had home have bigger concerns.
As for it being a "career-ender?" Well, believe it or not, that's the question CNN posed regarding Sen. Marco Rubio's water-swig during his response to the State of the Union Tuesday night.
No, they did not take that time to talk about the out of control cost of ObamaCare, the problems with illegal aliens committing crime in America, voter fraud like that that takes place in Chicago and Philadelphia, the issue of our having to show an ID to turn in recycling - yet not to vote, the horrible security of our schools, teacher sex crimes, gay clergy abusing children, and runaway cost of living.
No, to them, it is more important to devote a segment examining whether the a drink of water could squelch Senator Rubio's rising political career.
"Can a drink of water make or break a political career?" Wolf Blitzer asked. "A U.S. senator, possible presidential candidate. We're going to find out, whether he likes it or not."
As a clip of the swig aired, the graphic on the screen then said: "Career-Ender?"
Imagine the insanity here! The guy took a drink of water!
Later, CNN tried to say that they were just teasing and defended the graphic saying it was just a joke.
"It was simply a tease (posing a question) leading up to a segment with our political contributors -- when Wolf specifically said no one thinks this will be a career-ender," a CNN spokeswoman told FoxNews.com.
During a panel discussion, Blitzer asserted Rubio's got a "huge future ahead of him." CNN analyst Cornell Belcher, though, claimed the night would haunt him through his career.
"He goes in stylistically, he's sweating like Nixon. He goes for the water in a really awkward way which will, quite frankly, be what's most remembered from this," Belcher said. "Style matters. And he fumbled."
CNN wasn't the only outlet to find the drink of water exceedingly newsworthy.
Not surprisingly MSNBC replayed the clip roughly 155 times. The play was indicative of how some outlets tried to turn the awkward moment into something more significant.
"The Rachel Maddow Show" played a loop of the swig over and over again Wednesday night. Host Al Sharpton even took a drink from a gigantic Poland Spring jug, just to hammer home the mocking.
That's fine, it's great when they can joke and mock someone when they should have been focused on what Senator Rubio had to say in his rebuttal.
This is a one way street. They don't want to talk about the issues when they really want to distract and steer the discussion away from the big problems we face.
If they don't want to take a serious look at the problems and face, then that's up to them. If they are really too busy defending a Democrat President and fill their time by distracting their viewers away from the real issues, then why should anyone take them serious about anything?
And by the way, if they really want something funny - they should look to Obama!
Story by Tom Correa