Biden: “I don’t believe, the president doesn’t believe, that the Tea Party is a racist organization.”

An infinite number of Bidens spewing random gibberish for eternity will eventually say something smart.  Enjoy it.  It probably won’t happen again.

"I wouldn’t characterize the Tea Party as racist," Biden said. "I don’t believe, the president doesn’t believe, that the Tea Party is a racist organization. I don’t believe that — very conservative, very different views on government and a whole lot of things, but it is not a racist organization."

The NAACP originally was considering a broadly worded resolution to "repudiate the racism of the Tea Parties," but afterward tailored the language last week to repudiate elements within the Tea Party ranks that express "racist" views.

Tea Party organizations roundly condemned the NAACP for taking the time out of its annual convention to target their movement. Organizers called the NAACP irrelevant and guilty of bigotry themselves.

FOXNews.com – The Tea Party ‘Not a Racist Organization,’ Biden Says

Religion Of Peace: Muslims Attack Village, Kill Christians with Machetes, Burn Homes

Nothing more to say really.  Islam has nothing to do with peace.

More peace and tolerance and interfaith dialogue between Muslims and ………………..non-Muslims.  Attack, slaughter, hound ……………all in a day’s work.

Muslim attack on Christian village in Nigeria kills 8 AFP

JOS, Nigeria — Muslims attacked a Christian village in central Nigeria on Saturday, killing eight people with machetes and burning seven houses and a church in fresh religious violence, an army spokesman said.

The attack followed clashes in eastern Nigeria earlier in the week that also killed eight and left six mosques and a church burnt.

"It’s true eight people were killed," Lieutenant Colonel Kingsley Umoh said.

An AFP correspondent saw the bodies, as well as the burnt houses and church in Mazzah village, near the city of Jos, where deadly religious clashes have occurred a number of times in recent months.

Umoh said Fulani Muslims entered Mazzah between 1:30 am and 5:00 am, shooting sporadically in the air to lure sleeping residents outside their homes before they were killed.

"Seven people were killed instantly with machetes while three others were seriously injured. One of them died on the way to the hospital," he said.

Muslims Attack Village, Slaughter 8 Christians with Machetes and Burn 7 Houses – Atlas Shrugs

Iowa Sheriff Refuses Gun Permit Because Person Is Pro-Life And Politically Active. Judge Overturns And Orders Sheriff To Class On US Constitution!

Out-Freaking-Standing!  Judge Mark Bennett is my hero of the hour.

Can he order the president to take the same class?

Here’s a lighter story for fans of McDonald and Heller, and perhaps a reminder of just how much gun rights have become mainstream.  A week ago, a federal judge in Iowa ordered Osceola County Sheriff Douglas Weber to take an in-depth course on the US Constitution after overturning his decision to deny Paul Dorr a concealed-carry permit.  Weber had rejected Dorr’s application because of his political activism:

A federal judge has lambasted an Iowa sheriff for denying a gun permit to an outspoken government watchdog and anti-abortion advocate whom some in the area considered “weird.”

It was wrong for Osceola County Sheriff Douglas Weber to deny Paul Dorr of Ocheyedan a permit to carry a concealed weapon three years ago, according to a court ruling issued Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Mark Bennett also ordered Weber to successfully complete a court-approved course on the U.S. Constitution within five months.

“In denying (Dorr) a concealed weapons permit, Sheriff Weber single-handedly hijacked the First Amendment and nullified its freedoms and protections,” Bennett wrote in the ruling. ….

“The court finds a tsunami, a maelstrom, an avalanche, of direct uncontroverted evidence in Sheriff Weber’s own testimony to conclude beyond all doubt that he unquestionably violated the First Amendment rights of … Paul Dorr,” Bennett wrote in the decision.

Hot Air » Judge orders Iowa sheriff to complete course on Constitution after concealed-carry denial

NYT: Obama Wrong About People Being Able To Keep Existing Health Coverage. No, Really?

Hey, Times.  The word is “LIED”.  Try using the correct words when talking about Obama.

Remember all those promises President Obama made assuring Americans that they’d be able to keep their current healthcare plans under reform legislation he was championing?

Well, the New York Times reported Sunday that could come at a huge additional cost to many that may be impractical.

Much more surprising is the Times pointed out that this wasn’t what Obama promised.

Although none of the following will shock those intelligent enough to see through the bait and switch as it was occurring, those in the media that aided and abetted this scam should be deeply ashamed:

 

As the Obama administration begins to enact the new national health care law, the country’s biggest insurers are promoting affordable plans with reduced premiums that require participants to use a narrower selection of doctors or hospitals.

The plans, being tested in places like San Diego, New York and Chicago, are likely to appeal especially to small businesses that already provide insurance to their employees, but are concerned about the ever-spiraling cost of coverage.

But large employers, as well, are starting to show some interest, and insurers and consultants expect that, over time, businesses of all sizes will gravitate toward these plans in an effort to cut costs.

The tradeoff, they say, is that more Americans will be asked to pay higher prices for the privilege of choosing or keeping their own doctors if they are outside the new networks. That could come as a surprise to many who remember the repeated assurances from President Obama and other officials that consumers would retain a variety of health-care choices.

NYT: Obama Wrong About People Being Able To Keep Existing Health Coverage | NewsBusters.org

Pre-Obamacare: It’s NOT An Unpopular Tax. Post-Obamacare: Now, It’s A Tax, Because We Don’t Have The Right To Force You To Buy Anything.

If it wasn’t destroying our nation and our economy, it would almost be comical.

The mandate that requires citizens to buy insurance is not defined under any power of the Constitution.  The federal government is not allowed to compel anyone to purchase products they want us to.

This left them in a quandary.  How to convince people they could have a power that is not theirs.  Well, as we saw, in the end, they ignored what the US wanted anyway an forced it, but before that, they did actually try to push the lie.

So, Dems started using a lame “Interstate Commerce” excuse.  It didn’t stand up to any examination, since Congress limited all interstate health insurance anyway (which was to set the stage for ObamaCare)  So, the only real excuse they could come up with was “it’s a tax”.

There are several problems with this new self-appointed power that Congress granted itself.  First, by this argument, any Congressman could push a bill requiring everyone in the US to purchase something from a company they own.  That is tyranny.  Secondly, nothing in the Constitution allows for forcing anyone to purchase something. 

This resulted in additional problems for the Dems in the days leading up to ObamaCare.  First, at the time, Obama was still pushing his “no middle class taxes” lies.  Second, because the argument of tax was so weak, they would get reamed by every intelligent person out there.  Finally, no one wanted to hear “tax” when the economy was so weak.  The result:  “It’s not a tax.  We can do it because of ‘Interstate Commerce"’”

Well, now the courts are involved.  A lot of states called bullshit on the Dems arguments and reality is setting in.  The lies are starting to be exposed and they realize that the only chance they have to defend this in court is to say it’s a tax and hope the courts are stupid.

When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

In stunning reversal, administration now defends health care insurance mandate as a tax | The Daily Caller – Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment