A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Scientology Cult Follower Greta Van Susteren Makes More False Claims

Posted: May 6, 2015

Fox's Van Susteren Falsely Claims White House Didn't Connect Texas Shooting To Terrorism Fox host Greta Van Susteren claimed the White House "has not yet connected" the Garland, TX shooting to terrorism. In fact, the White House described the shooting as "an attempted terrorist act" earlier that day. On May 5, the Islamic State (also known as ISIS) claimed responsibility for the May 3 shooting in Garland. CNN noted that the group "offered no evidence" of their connection to the attack, and quoted an FBI agent saying the shooters "may not have had formal contact" with ISIS and that he did not think "they were directed by ISIS." On that day's edition of Fox News' On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren claimed that "the White House has not yet connected this to terrorism," and asked: "Is the Obama administration being overly cautious and could it hurt national security?" But the White House had referred to the shooting as an act of terrorism earlier that day. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said that what "we can say definitively, because of the quick, professional, brave work of local law enforcement forces, is an attempted terrorist act was foiled." The criticism represents another instance of a long-standing trope at Fox News. Fox has repeatedly suggested that President Obama did not call the Benghazi terror attack an act of terror. In 2014, an on-screen timeline asserted the White House did not call the attack an act of terror until September 20, when in fact Obama described it as such in his initial statement on September 12. In January, Fox personalities were not satisfied by the White House calling the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack an "act of terror" and insisted the administration specifically mention "Islamist terror." Last year, Fox host Ainsley Earhardt complained that Obama had referred to the Pakistani Taliban terror attack as "terrorism" but had not specifically mentioned the Taliban. ***** Here we go again with the Fox News outright lying again. These lies sound like the same old crap that Fox has been spewing about Benghazi that is costing the taxpayers millions to re- re- re- reinvestigate them over and over and over. A Fox News team is probably busy right now trying to find a way that they can blame Hillary for the whole thing and connect it all to Benghazi. Quick, somebody call for an investigation. Time to hook Greta up to the Scientology cult nonsense E-Meter electrode cans and have her brain cleared of all the utter nonsensical garbage that spews forth from her lying mouth and delivered nightly straight to the trusting ears of the gullible masses.;

Can we stop with the news media bashing already? - make a point....

[ In Reply To ..]
I read this board to find out what "the other side" is thinking but lately all I find out is the poster's opinion of Fox, CNN, MSMBC. What is the issue with this post? Scientology? And why is it political? Or is it just taking another opportunity to bash Fox news.

We get it. Left doesn't like Fox, right doesn't like CNN, MSNBC or the - NY Times. Enough already!

[ In Reply To ..]
The reference to Scientology (and throwing in the word "cult") is just an obvious smear, and utterly irrelevant to the topic.

Also, a suggestion: Comments that are so extreme that we can literally see you shaking your fist with rage have much less value as far as I'm concerned than positions that are temperate, objective and well-reasoned.

Cuts both ways--if no news source, asked - for source

[ In Reply To ..]
if list news source, constant degrading of source.

Anybody out there know of a commonly accepted source? Purely academic sources are considered "too liberal." FOX is considered too right. MSNBC/CNN/etc are all considered too left. It goes on forever.

Heck, people can't even agree on history anymore--like the discussion on the Confederate flag and whether it should be controversial and all of the hubbub about history books in school being too honest/bashing American history.

Which has what to do with the "Scientology" reference etc? - No one is saying not to CITE sources...

[ In Reply To ..]
Cite the source, support or refute it with objective facts. All the rest of the "lying blah-blah-blah whatever-source-God-I-Hate Them" junk is just extraneous garbage.

Sure, but this page is born of emotionality - not facts--political opinions

[ In Reply To ..]
xx

The "emotionality" is ugly, nasty, and in no small part - explains the mess we're in as a country.

[ In Reply To ..]
The entire concept of democracy rests on one critical assumption: an INFORMED electorate that has some ability to differentiate truth from fiction.

An "emotional" electorate doesn't figure into the idea of democracy whatsoever.

Most people that USED to post facts left because of the nonsense - Truthhurts

[ In Reply To ..]
I'm still here but not very often anymore. Too much baloney and hate. I don't need my blood pressure going through the roof, so I skip a lot of posts, but it's rare that I post without sources unless they're my own words...and some still come close to calling me a liar. Oh, well. To each his own.

Make a point? - OP

[ In Reply To ..]
That post was precisely worded that way for a reason.

Reading the posts that follow and the "spinoff" post, I'd say I made my point spectacularly well. :D

Oh thank goodness someone else sees it besides me :) - I was beginning to worry lol

[ In Reply To ..]
thanks for the confirmation about "spinoff" posts that I'm surprised at the number of votes on. Not buying things are impartial as they appear in them.

And by the way, despite what's being debated below, your post was clear, Greta said the White House refused to call it terrorism, not Obama himself. Neither you, the article nor Greta mentioned Obama, not sure why that's in question.

The video vs. Josh's quote proved Greta got it wrong and there's just no disputing that. As I already said, not crazy about the Scientology thing, but otherwise, ya nailed it, good job :)

I should have known you would figure it out, Miss Independent -- Good Form :) - OP

[ In Reply To ..]
I almost didn't post it because I value every American's right to join whatever cult or religion they choose and worship God or the Eighth Dynamic and vilify Lucifer or the space alien god Xenu or whomever and love and marry whomever they choose to, regardless of gender. I believe in the Constitution and the Amendments thereto outlining separation of church and state and freedom of speech, etc.

Interesting to see the "patriots" defend Greta's religious choice and decry the ad hominem attacks and call for censorship on the Politics board...... totally hypocritical, to be certain, but nevertheless very interesting. :)

(Re: the irony) I know! For a minute it was a like a parallel universe here. lol. And I confess - I DID guilty laugh at your Scientology joke

[ In Reply To ..]
I almost said, "I'm sorry, I think I stepped into the wrong room" here today!" things were so flipped lol

Your post was hilarious. The scientology part was a JOKE, South Park style, which some people get, some are horribly offended by. I get it and guilty-laughed, but I felt I had to be fair and concede it could be construed as "faith attack" ;) ;) ;) ;)

If you think about it, the only people who could possibly truly be bothered by it most likely wouldn't be conservatives, they'd be libs who are scientologists, because Greta is an exception, most scientologists are libs. It is unlikely a lib would've focused on scientology rather than your actual point about Greta/Fox's story being wrong.

And most conservatives are Christians, with the average Fox News viewer being far right fundamentalist Christians, believing this nation should follow only Christian values.

So had conservatives not figured out they could use the scientology aspect to detract from the truth about Greta's mistake, they would've otherwise been throwing their $199 Pat Robertson "miracle" prayer cloths at the monitor for someone having even mentioned another faith but Judao-Christianity;)

PS - To the OP, thanks for being fair and posting she corrected her mistake, when you didn't have to after yesterday. It's honest and shows character:)

Thanks for exposing the lies with facts - see messaage

[ In Reply To ..]
I note the conservatives just hate it when they are exposed with the facts. They like to bash legitimate news sources by opinions only and reinforcing their propaganda with their echo chamber.

Which part? - I see no facts in OP.

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

... and therein lies the problem. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]

Greta is a high level Scientologist, and Greta was incorrect in her reporting. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
!

News sources in such a hurry to politically spin before 2016, they aren't checking facts - freedom of speech re: political press

[ In Reply To ..]
Since both Texas and Fox News have been so vocal about the president overstepping his bounds, I'm surprised they're so interested in what he or his reps have to say about the incident. It doesn't matter what he says, he's danged if he comments about it, danged if he doesn't, but it's sad that whatever he says gets so twisted. Seems to me he does a good enough job saying things he oughtn't himself, he doesn't need any extra help.

As for the current visible request for you and others to "stop" your freedom of speech about the political press, I encourage you and others NOT to. We need to be correctly politically informed and it is appropriate to discuss it on a political forum when we are not. Whenever someone tries to shut someone up on a political forum (who's not harassing others), it usually means they're doing something right;)

Sometimes people take it overly personally when the news programs they watch are criticized or even joked about, especially for getting the story wrong. I wonder if "loyal viewers" of any program ever stop to think news programs aren't being loyal in return when they incorrectly report their news. In fact, they don't even know or care who we are, they just want ratings.

The same could be said for politicians. I understand somewhat if people feel insulted when their registered party is insulted, but criticism, jokes and even insults about actual candidates aren't about us personally. Just like news programs, politicians don't even know or care who we are unless we contribute big money to their campaigns, they just want our vote.

Having good personal boundaries = realizing though news sources and politicians may espouse our beliefs, they are not extensions of ourselves, they ARE separate entities. It is important for us to hold our news sources and politicians accountable, not protect and enable them when they're wrong like a dysfunctional family.

Those news sources are bought and paid for - by the right wing, whose leaders - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
are bought and paid for by Corporate America.

Wrong...they are bought and paid for by - the money people who

[ In Reply To ..]
support BOTH left and right. The bankers are left-wingers. They have control of the money and the politicians. Corporate America happens to be left-wing and right-wing.

Sorry, but American bankers are NOT left-wing. - It would go against their greedy DNA.

[ In Reply To ..]
Genetics trumps education every time.

Sorry to tell you this, but yes they ARE left-wing - Greedy DNA is democrat

[ In Reply To ..]
The greedy wall street bankers and money people ARE in fact left-wing. They put Obama in and fund him, they are funding the beast. They prop up all the democrats, so YES in fact they ARE left-wing.

In what alternate universe are bankers left-wing? - After all, if our nation's wealth --

[ In Reply To ..]
were more evenly distributed (which is one of the things the left believes in), then bankers and others like them would stand to lose a lot of their blood money.

Villifying a news source/anchor and refuting a news report are - two very different things.

[ In Reply To ..]
...and I doubt very seriously that an election that's still a long, LONG way off is causing news agencies to "hurry to spin" anything, at this point anyway.

If it's ok to vilify politician Hillary, it's okay to vilify political commentator Greta - especially since neither comment here

[ In Reply To ..]
I personally don't like to "vilify" anyone, (okay, except maybe Ted Cruz), and both Hillary and Greta have their good points, but what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

And the news isn't spinning before 2016 or just Fox isn't?

I disagree. I think the news has been "spinning" politically for a long time now on both sides.

As I said in my other comment, these people are not personal extensions of ourselves we should get sore over. We should be holding them accountable for what they are paid to do rather than enabling them.

As for her scientology beliefs, I also don't like to bring in/bash beliefs myself, but if accusing others of being Muslim is okay and considered relevant here, scientology accusations are fair game too.

Now, if mention of faith is the problem, then we're all in trouble at one point or another.

Excellent points - nm

[ In Reply To ..]

Hardly. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
x

GOPers don't like it when their own tactics - are used against them.

[ In Reply To ..]

Sounds more like the DemAlinsky meltdown that occurs - when their tactics are used against THEM

[ In Reply To ..]
Truth.

"Meltdown" as in laughing our heads off? - Then yeah, were melting down, alright.

[ In Reply To ..]

Out of control hysterical laugh indicative of mental instabilty - Then yes.

[ In Reply To ..]
x

So are paranoia, habitual lies, and loss of - ability to relate to others.

[ In Reply To ..]

Not talking about what's "okay". I'm talking about - effective political argumentation.

[ In Reply To ..]
Take even a basic course in logical reasoning, and you'll quickly discover that "ad hominem" attacks are not only impoverished from the standpoint of argumentation, but are ineffectual in communicating any ideas that you might have that are worth consideration.

Show me an attack on a person, and you've immediately lost my interest in anything else you might have to say. Show me a position based on logic and reasoning, and I'm interested in hearing what you have to say.

Anything else is just partisan gobbage - and that amounts to about 99% of what I see on this forum. Yes, I know - developing a position based on logic is much harder than spewing gobbage, but gobbage stinks.

If logical reasoning comments are made - frequently only response

[ In Reply To ..]
is baiting with emotionality and attacks. How do you have logical reasoning discussion with people who willfully believe nonsense.

Also, the news sources almost have to be included in the discussion as they are pretty much the only "education" source, which is downright scary.

As I said, no one is saying not to CITE sources, but that is - different from INDICTING sources.

[ In Reply To ..]
"Oh, that comes from X News", or "so-and-so anchor said that". This is not logical argumentation. It comes under two headings of logical error:

1. Poisoning the well.
2. Ad hominem attack.

I'm sick of it, and I'm really sorry that we seem to have an electorate that considers such logical errors to constitute "political reasoning".

Lazy - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
xx

I'll take "Things said if unable to produce factual basis for opinions for 100", Alex - Jeopardy Fan - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

I agree, vilifying personal habits is weak argument and irrelevant. But why only complain - when it happens to our side?

[ In Reply To ..]
I don't like vilifying either, especially on irrelevant points, and I agree with you it's weak argument. But if the complaint is the argument itself is illogical or irrelevant, then we should see these same complaints by the same people when it happens to the opposing political side, too

Regardless of how illogical, unfair, irrelevant or unpleasant we think someone else's free speech is, we do have a choice to read it or not and the most we can do is exercise our own free speech in dissent. Trying to silence someone else (who isn't harassing other commenters) just because we don't like it is unfair, unpatriotic and unAmerican.

I agree with Voltaire when he said, "I may disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

No one identified a "side", and nothing I said - can be applied to "one side" either.

[ In Reply To ..]
Every post I've made along these lines has VERY CAREFULLY included examples from BOTH SIDES, mentioning both PEOPLE AND SOURCES from BOTH SIDES.

"Our" as in collectively, and I said a side only complains when the opposing side does it - No "I" or "you" about it - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
The only time I said "I" and "you" in my comment was to say I agree with you, character assassination on irrelevant personal habits is weak argument.

And when I said "our" side, I meant that collectively depending on our personal side, because we are clearly not on the same side of this argument. And "side" doesn't just mean party, it means opposing sides of an argument, too.

Nothing personal, it was just my observation about people on opposite sides of arguments in general here

Now you have to bash her religion? She was right in all instances. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

The facts - OP

[ In Reply To ..]
Scientology is a cult, not a religion. Greta make an incorrect statement about the White House. Perhaps Greta needs to be "cleared" of the aliens inhabiting her being and will see the error she made? That is what Scientologists believe, that we have up to hundreds of alien beings called thetans that are inhabiting our spirits that keep us from being "clear."

Surely those who believe that Obama is a Muslim actively engaged in the destruction of America can understand how Greta's faith in evil aliens inhabiting her being might influence her faulty news reporting of political events like Benghazi and Garland, Texas?

:D

Media Matters, really? - Heather Pescadero

[ In Reply To ..]
I've yet to hear what your president calls it.

What does scientology have to do with the shootings? - Every religion is a cult

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Technically, the president didn't call it a terrorist attack - Truthhurts

[ In Reply To ..]

the president didn't. You are taking Josh's comments as coming from the president, but they didn't. They came from a press secretary who keeps the public informed but rarely quotes a president.

To quote Obama:

“There is no act of expression, even if it’s offensive, that justifies an act of violence,” press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters aboard Air Force One as the president flew to New York for fund-raising and a TV appearance with David Letterman.

“The president was informed last night of the violence outside Dallas,” Earnest said, condemning “extremists” who have responded with violence after expressions they find offensive. “We have seen extremists try to use expressions that they considered to be offensive as a way to justify violence not only in this country but around the world, and in the mind of the president there is no form of expression that would justify an act of violence.”

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/05/white-house-on-garland-attack-no-act-of-expression-justifies-violence-even-if-its-offensive.html/

Wherever you got your news item, you are taking Josh's comments as coming from the president, but they didn't. They came from a press secretary who keeps the public informed but rarely quotes a president. The president makes his own comments and I don't see where he stated it was a terorrist attack. Now, why you brought religion into your post has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Hate all you want of someone's religion but unless Josh or the president condemed her religion, it had no place here.
____________________________________________________
To quote Josh Earnest on 5/4:
“There is no act of expression, even if it’s offensive, that justifies an act of violence,” press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters aboard Air Force One as the president flew to New York for fund-raising and a TV appearance with David Letterman.“The president was informed last night of the violence outside Dallas,” Earnest said, condemning “extremists” who have responded with violence after expressions they find offensive. “We have seen extremists try to use expressions that they considered to be offensive as a way to justify violence not only in this country but around the world, and in the mind of the president there is no form of expression that would justify an act of violence.”

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/05/white-house-on-garland-attack-no-act-of-expression-justifies-violence-even-if-its-offensive.html/

Now, on 5/5, the press briefing quotes Josh Earnest answering the questions on C-Span. He did not quote the president:

Josh Earnest Darlene, do you want to start?
	Q Thank you. Does the U.S. have any information at this point to corroborate the claims by the Islamic State group that they're responsible for the shooting attack near Dallas on Sunday?
	Josh Earnest Darlene, at this point, this is still under investigation by the FBI and other members of the intelligence community to determine any ties or affiliations that these two individuals may have had with ISIL or other terrorist organizations around the world. So it's too early to say at this point.The thing that we can say, definitively, is that because of the quick and professional and brave work of local law enforcement officers, an attempted terrorist attack was foiled. And that certainly is, again, a testament to the courage and professionalism of those public servants who were there to keep the peace.
	Q So then is it also too early to say whether this attack means that the Islamic State has now come to the U.S.?
	Josh Earnest Well, I think before we made a pronouncement about anything like that we certainly would want to make sure that we knew a whole lot more about the facts. What we do know is we know that there are extremists around the globe, including some who are affiliated with ISIL, who are trying to capitalize on the opportunity that's presented by social media to try to communicate with individuals around the world, including inside the United States.There have been a large number of -- not a large number, but there have been a number of individuals, Americans, who have been apprehended by law enforcement who were attempting to travel to the Middle East to -- that at least is an indication of their level of sympathy for ISIL or for extremist organizations around the world. And so we're very vigilant about the efforts that are underway by ISIL and other extremist organizations to try to radicalize some individuals in the United States. And we're working closely with community leaders, law enforcement officials, of course, to try to counter that threat and to mitigate that threat. And it's something that we continue to be vigilant about.You'll recall that a few months ago the President convened a summit on countering violent extremism to try to collate best practices that are used in communities across the country, and that can be used in other communities to repel this threat. But it's one that we continue to be exceedingly vigilant about.

http://www.c-span.org/video/?325823-1/white-house-briefing

Does the person who disliked my post do it because it's from me? - Truthhurts

[ In Reply To ..]
What it because it came from neutral sources?

What was it about this post? I'm asking a serious question here.

I find it funny that someone would dislike a post if they dislike the poster.

Have a nice day, whoever you are. :)

Of course it is. I'll bet they even reported you - just cos they don't like your opinions

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

I didn't vote, but I have to say that neither the OP, the article nor Greta ever said Obama, - they all said The White House

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Bet they reported you, too. You know how DemAlinsky's - hate any truth, sources, links

[ In Reply To ..]
The DemAlinsky's skip right to the knee-jerk, left-wing extremist attacks.

Nope. I just pointed out the OP, the article & Greta never mentioned Obama. Period. - paranoid projection

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

What part is confusing? - OP

[ In Reply To ..]
You said: "Technically, the president didn't call it a terrorist attack. Wherever you got your news item, you are taking Josh's comments as coming from the president, but they didn't."

Actually, you are incorrect there; I am not taking Josh's comments as coming from the president, I am taking Josh's comments as coming from the Obama administration, since Josh is the press secretary for the Obama administration.

If you really want to get technical, Truthhurts, Greta Van Susteren never once used the word "president" so anyone taking steps to prove the "president" didn't technically say that and proving who did say it are actually providing quotes that are technically irrelevant since Greta said nothing remotely about the actual "president" himself saying the words.

Greta claimed that, quote: "The White House has not yet connected this to terrorism." She also asked: "Is the Obama administration being overly cautious and could it hurt national security?" If you will review the video clip from Fox News, you will also find that Greta never once says the word "president." If what Greta said wasn't clear enough, in huge capital letters on the Fox News video clip, are also the words:

"WHITE HOUSE REFUSES TO CALL TEXAS SHOOTING A TERROR ATTACK"

If you want to get extremely technical, the "White House" is a structure and cannot speak, and "the Obama administration" is a term that refers to an extremely large group of people; this is undoubtedly why there is a spokesman like Josh Ernest to speak for "the White House" and "the Obama administration."

You can go on defending Greta's lie and playing word games and semantics and mincing words about technicality, but Greta got this one totally wrong, another lie on Fox News.

You said: "Now, why you brought religion into your post has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Hate all you want of someone's religion but unless Josh or the president condemed her religion, it had no place here."

I'm a liberal who believes in separation of church and state and even "cult and state" and "all men are created equal," first amendment, freedom of speech, etc., and I couldn't care less what cult or religion she belongs to. Scientology is a cult, you know, and not a religion. BTW, I will word my posts the way I want to word my posts and include whatever opinions I decide to include in them.

My post was very carefully worded and precisely meant to be thought provoking and shine a light on the hypocrisy of conservatives...... done and done! :D

The closer we get to 2016, the more paranoia - will rear its head on the right.

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Nothing more than another hate-filled, hate-flamed rant here - Heather Fuscadaro

[ In Reply To ..]
We all get it - this poster hates Fox, big deal.

Yet Media Matters has stated time and again, they will lie about anyone at anytime to get what they want.

Is it possible this is one of MM paid trolls? Stranger things have happened.

We don't "hate" Fox, we just think it's funny - there are grownups who believe it.

[ In Reply To ..]

Similar Messages:

May 07, 2015
Fox's Greta Van Susteren Issues Correction For False Claim That White House Didn't Call Texas Shooting Terror From the May 6 edition of Fox News' On The Record with Greta Van Susteren, Greta corrects her mistake. (see link) Credit where credit is due to Greta Van Susteren of Fox News. As I pointed out yesterday in the OP where I reported this as yet another Fox News lie, Greta totally got that one wrong. She did, however, step up to correct her mistake. Since it is a conserv ...

Mar 14, 2012
There is an official spreadshet of government spending at http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/MTS.xls. This should be examined before making false claims such as those that come from the right-wing echo chamber of late. This spreadsheet shows that George H.W. Bush spent over $19 trillion during his 2 terms. So far, Obama has spent $1.2 trillion. Hmmmm..... If we take the record back to 1980, the federal government has expended more than $45 trillion. Hhhmmmm.&nb ...

Feb 19, 2015
Karl Marx - compare = JOBS FOR JIHADIS Link ...

May 29, 2016
I had recorded it from last week and then watched it last night. What a classy family! It will be nice to have some class and elegance representing the USA again. And here's a question for all the Trump haters: If Trump is such a bad person, how in God's world did his children turn out so great, i.e., intelligent, ambitious, respectful, etc.? Just boggles the mind, eh? ...

May 04, 2011
I hadn\'t really seen al of those pictures in color. She had some good pictures on there. I particularly love the one of the meeting where they are all watching as the mission takes place. The military officer, I suppose he\'s a General, is totally immersed in his laptop computer. What an amazing time that must have been! I\'m so proud of America because we are able to get things done. I also like the fact that they were taking the situation very seriously. ...

Sep 21, 2012
Tell me I'm not the only one who is creeped out by this. More here: http://www.humanevents.com/2012/09/20/the-creepy-obama-cult/ ...

May 28, 2017
"Look at us. God has given to us. I can fix this. All you have to do is be like me.' You can understand how you might think that way, if you grew up here," Boote says later, as we take one final glance at the mansion over its tall, iron gate. "If you come from the small, sheltered, privileged environment of Holland, you are most likely going to have a very limited worldview—including how to fix education." ...

Nov 13, 2012
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/secission-petitions-filed-20-states-190210006.html ...

Aug 05, 2013
Good thing the Obama oligarchy is spying on us, so they got this information about terrorism against the west, from a decimated Al Qaeda, no less. So, are you liberals buying this load of garbage? Link ...

Jul 21, 2011
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20110721/BUSINESS04/110721020/Unemployment-claims-up-again?odyssey=nav%7Chead ...

Sep 19, 2012
Link to Factcheck.org's analysis below. BTW, Mr. Romney's 47% of people who end up paying NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX is already out of date. It has dropped to about 46% under current policies and is expected to fall to 44% in 2013, under current policies. @50% are employed people, but low income, who do pay employment taxes. (No doubt many MTs fall in this group he won't be bothering about these days.)@22% are seniors, i.e., most retired workers, living on limited incomes. (Mos ...

Aug 09, 2017
He is now taking credit for our updated arsenol. LOL It's never-ending humor with this guy. ...

May 07, 2011
These videos are not of Bin Laden, of course! OBL was left handed. In one video he moves the paper he is reading from left to right, however Arabic is written from right to left, he would have moved the paper that direction, also he moves it with his right hand, completely Western way. Of course no need to point out that in the TV video he has the remote in right hand. Now anyone can do this , but why, if you are left handed and relaxing. Another example of poorly-executed fakery. Hoax: White ...

Apr 26, 2011
For all who are sincerely interested in truth supported by facts, CNN sent an investigator to Hawaii. Apparently they are better than Trump\\\'s hired investigators as they seem to have cleared up the matter lickety-split. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/04/26/exp.nr.toobin.birther.claims.cnn?iref=allsearch ...

Aug 19, 2010
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-economy/2010/08/unemployment_is_in_this_countr.html He needs to quit even speaking of this as a "recovery"... its not. ...

Aug 19, 2012
intentionally limiting the size of their crowds!! That's one of Obama's best BS lies yet!! ...

Aug 23, 2012
link to Market Watch ...

Jul 19, 2013
Run by Democrats for how many years? ...

Feb 04, 2010
I don't know where this is going to end, but it looks like the big guys have given our jobs away. What happened to that trickle-down success politicians were promising us a few years ago? It isn't working. Politicians on both sides have sold us out, in my opinion. This isn't good, folks. New jobless claims rose unexpectedly last week to 480,000 as layoffs continue ...

Nov 05, 2010
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=12053876 ...

Oct 09, 2014
Incidence is higher in locations (secret locations) where the illegals are being housed. Wait till Ebola hits Central America and there's a line to get in here. I'm afraid us Texans will be the first to be exposed. ...

Jun 28, 2011
Before attacking Karl Bremer, be sure to check out Bachmann's own financial disclosure forms (conveniently linked to in the article) which tend to back up every single claim he makes. There are a ton of alternate sources out there reporting on this, but I chose this piece because it is thorough yet concise, well referenced and very much to the point. By Karl Bremer Michele Bachmann kicked off her presidential campaign in the farm state of Iowa by lying about the federal f ...

Aug 05, 2010
Yep, quite the great recovery we are seeing. http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/05/news/economy/jobless_claims/index.htm ...

Jul 14, 2010
Around 3 years ago I had a credit card that I put a pair of tires put on (about $180). I then promptly essentially lost my job and had a series of job hopping over the next year, going through about five jobs, none of them living up to their lofty promise of easy platform and lots of work. In keeping the soap opera-esque quality, I was also dating an alcoholic at that time, and after I lost my job I moved in with him so I could save on electricity, internet, cable, telephone, etc.&nb ...

Aug 09, 2012
which is the lowest it's been in 18 months. If the Romney camp is banking on a downward spiralling economy to win the election for him, they might want to consider dragging out Plan B and dusting it off, just in case those pesky indicators don't wanna cooperate. ...

Oct 11, 2012
I missed this earlier today. This supports the 7.8% unemployment number that came out last week. Good news for all working Americans. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits slid last week to the lowest level in more than four and a half years, ...

Nov 01, 2012
Maybe it's because it's already too late for them to upstage the National Guard, so now that the photo op has gone bust, it's back to BAU with last-ditch stump stops in Lean Obama Territories, which almost NOBODY is paying attention to. It's all good. Their decision to stay out of the way and let the big boys do their jobs is probably a wise one. ...

Dec 01, 2012
The Associated Press Published Saturday, Dec. 1, 2012 10:26AM EST SANAA, Yemen -- Yemen's Interior Ministry says police have arrested an al Qaeda leader who is one of the country's most wanted fugitives. The ministry, in a statement late Friday, said Suleiman Hassan Mohammed Murshed Awad was arrested in Zinjibar, the capital of southern Abyan province, once an al Qaeda hotbed. It did not say when he was arrested. Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/yemen-claim ...

Feb 09, 2013
"Thanks to Fox News and its expert commentators, millions of Americans now understand the real, hidden reason why Germany's solar-energy industry is so much further along than ours. Turns out it has nothing to do with the fact that Germany's government has long supported the industry far more generously, with policies like feed-in tariffs that stimulate investment in green technologies. No, the real reason is much simpler, explained a trio of journalists on Fox & Friends: It's alw ...