By The Huffington Post News Editors
Even at her tender age, this little girl is already a master videobomber. Check out her awesome dance moves in the background of Mary Ann Ahern’s live report on NBC Chicago.
Ahern clearly took the blooper in good stride. In response to HuffPost Chicago’s story on Rahm Emanuel dancing to “Blurred Lines”, she tweeted:
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post
Hours after the Boston Marathon bombings, President Barack Obama gave the standard presidential line following a tragedy: “On days like this there are no Republicans or Democrats — we are Americans, united in concern for our fellow citizens.”
And, as usual, Republicans and Democrats alike quickly ignored his don’t-politicize-this plea.
This was inevitable.
Our leaders always play politics after catastrophe, whether made by man or Mother Nature. The Newtown shootings and Superstorm Sandy. The financial crisis and Hurricane Katrina. Our history is filled with moments when something big happens and elected officials maneuver quickly to take advantage of the changing public mindset — or at least the more intense media spotlight — on a specific issue.
Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt and Congress leveraged public angst over the Depression and a worldwide war in the 1930s to enact the New Deal, overhauling financial systems, funding public works projects and creating Social Security. Some three decades later, Lyndon B. Johnson and his Democrats seized on social unrest to pass the Great Society, anti-poverty and civil rights measures, education and transportation initiatives, Medicare and Medicaid.
During the 1980s, Ronald Reagan and his GOP used the moment of sky-high inflation and a growing Soviet threat to win support for boosting the military, trimming government and cutting taxes. And, in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Republican George W. Bush rallied a fearful America behind expanding the government‘s terrorist-tracking powers, streamlining intelligence gathering and toppling Saddam Hussein.
Most recently, when he took office amid the worst economic conditions in a generation, Obama saw an opportunity to advance an audacious agenda that included ending the costly war in Iraq, improving crumbling transportation arteries and overhauling the health care system. As his first chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was fond of saying back then: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
A gray area exists in all cases.
To some people, politicians who press for new legislation after a tragedy are seizing the perfect time to make needed changes, using typically fleeting we-are-one moments to reach consensus on an issue that long had been languishing behind more pressing priorities or struggling to get the necessary votes. To other people, these politicians are exploiting a tragedy in a blatant attempt to enact their pet, partisan policies.
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Fox US News
By Dave Merrick
After I watched what might have been the last hope for a gasping America collapse last election eve, I knew that my worst fears for this nation had been realized: Mob rule had ultimately been established via the voting booth. A league of mindless dummies, who feed on media pablum the way cattle do at a trough, had been taken out of storage and mobilized long enough to reinstall the media’s chosen candidate. Obama floated back into office resting on a sea of false laurels, empty promises and promotion generated from amongst the highest priests of Hollywood’s most popular puppets. That and shamelessly obvious ballot rigging put the serious hurt on any opportunity for conservatism and reason to find an equal voice outside the ranks of its own.
But what followed the next morning was even more appalling. I began to hear ‘Republicans’ actually ridiculing Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for what they had represented. Since the two had lost, people who had just the day before been ardent supporters were now distancing themselves from the two lepers who stood to infect them politically. I was amazed at the shallowness of such fair-weather ‘team members.’ But I was even more amazed when the GOP began issuing apologies to liberal America for having so excluded the ‘valuable and noteworthy’ priorities of so many progressive thinkers who want socialized pampering, gay marriage and drive-through abortions. Incredibly, with hat in hand, the Republican Party genuflected before a pack of dogs in trying to secure some future opportunity to garner their affection (votes). It was shameful and downright weird. It was the beginning of the manifestation of the crowd of impostors we now call ‘RINOs’ (Republicans in Name Only).
But their actions had nothing to do with the real ‘Grand Old Party.’ No, it is becoming nauseatingly clear that their compromise is wholly unrelated to a regard for the welfare of our nation or any preservation of its sanity. It is entirely about a group of selfish men and women who are looking to make the world safe for themselves with job security in a climate of trendy electability. To call these people ‘politicians’ insults even the legacies of ‘Boss Tweed,’ Huey Long, Rahm Emanuel and PT Barnum. But they have done us a favor by showing us their true colors. “When a man shows you what he is, believe him.”
Of course I voted for Romney and Ryan – but, for the life of me, I could not understand how in the world we expected to win with those two AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME IN HISTORY. Make no mistake about it, I totally admire the qualities of both men and believe that their clear vision for the needs of our dying country would have been the healing elixir that we absolutely needed. Nevertheless, my most rudimentary marketing sense made me wonder why we would run the 1967 version of Batman and Robin against Obama. The ‘cool’ Barach was already expertly dialed in to the throngs of …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism
By Nathaniel Parish Flannery, Contributor
As whisky producer Maker’s Mark recently learned, when customers have strong opinions, they’ll make their complaints heard. It’s better for organizations to create feedback loops early in order to help avoid the sudden negative reaction that often follow poorly planned policy changes. …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Forbes Latest
By Doug Book
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has told Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan for the last time that she MUST honor the Constitution of the United States by doing away with her state’s ban on the concealed carry of firearms.
It was back in December of last year that a 3 judge panel of the Court found the Illinois law banning concealed carry to be unconstitutional. “The Supreme Court has decided that the [2nd] amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside,” wrote 7th Circuit Judge Richard Posner, paraphrasing the opinion of S.C. Justice Samuel Alito. Naturally, the scrupulously liberal Madigan then petitioned the entire 10 member court, hoping that the ruling might be overturned. But the full court refused to reconsider the ruling of the panel. (1)
And now the Illinois legislature has about 4 months to rewrite its unconstitutional ban into something acceptable to groups which strictly preserve the 2ndAmendment rights of the American people. And that is the REAL question: will the ONLY remaining state to disallow concealed carry abide by the ruling of the court by creating an honest and reasonable statute? If so, it will represent a truly staggering break with the leftist-inspired, Illinois tradition of governing as though rights were privileges of which the common classes are rarely if ever deserving.
After the 2010 McDonald v Chicago decision in which the Supreme Court struck down the city’s decades-old, unconstitutional handgun ban, brainless thug Mayor Richard Daley and city officials crafted a new ordinance to “comply” with the ruling. Naturally, this group of self-serving thieves and political prostitutes sought only to defy the Court with an ordinance which limited each person to ONE operable weapon; allowed no gun to be taken outside the home; prohibited the existence of gun stores and firing ranges within the city; mandated “approved” training and marksmanship; charged $100 for a 3 year pistol permit; banned handguns the police superintendent considered “unsafe due to their size” and, of course, required fingerprinting of gun owners and registration of their weapons. Needless to say, these provisions did NOT apply to law enforcement or certain city officials. (2)
Since that time, constitutional rights groups have been in court with the City of Chicago on a seemingly daily basis, suing to terminate the Daley legacy of wanton abrogation of liberty. On three occasions, the city has lost court decisions to the NRA and twice Rahm Emanuel has decided to amend the Daley ordinance, “…conceding that the city had little chance of successfully defending lawsuits against certain aspects of it.” (3)
Incredibly, Chicago City Corporation Counsel Steve Patton has accused the NRA and others of “…cherry-pick[ing] the things they thought they could marshal a challenge (on).” How does one “cherry-pick” UNCONSTITUTIONAL provisions in a city ordinance? Could anything be more typical of a Chicago official than to whine because the city’s assault on freedom has been found unacceptable by those who prefer liberty to the beneficent dictatorship of nanny-state hoodlums!
Leftist …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism
By Kevin Spak 
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Newser – Home
With student performance steadily declining in America’s public schools, standardized testing is one of the few methods available through which we can gauge the efficacy of our teachers.
Unwilling to have their own abilities as instructors measured through the performance of their students, several teachers unions have called for the discontinuation of such tests. Among the latest to make such a demand are members of the Chicago Teachers Union.
The Windy City has long since dismissed rationality in matters of its own municipal policy. Claims made by the city’s teachers serve to exemplify the spirit of anti-captialism and rampant leftism with which Chicago has now become synonymous.
“Corporate interests continue to push towards a test-centered public education system,” a union report contended, adding such tests are “clearly harmful to students.”
Both Chicago’s radically progressive mayor Rahm Emanuel and his former boss, Barack Obama, have shown support for using standardize testing to justify merit pay increases for high-performing teachers.
Proving there is room to the left of those unrepentant ideologues, the Chicago Teachers Union effectively wants to eliminate any accountability from their jobs.
While these teachers join peers in several other states in disparaging the testing process, most agree students need to be tested regularly to monitor their progress and suitability for higher education.
Many students, however, have joined their teachers in the protest.
Student groups in various school districts have voiced their opposition to standardized testing, though I remember most of my classmates were against testing of any kind.
The fact that notoriously shortsighted high schoolers don’t like the testing seems to me to indicate it is probably in their best interest.
Click here to get B. Christopher Agee’s latest book for less than $5! Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.
Photo credit: Zol87 (Creative Commons)
3:31 P.M. CST
THE PRESIDENT: Hey, Chicago! (Applause.) Hello, Chicago! Hello, everybody. Hello, Hyde Park! (Applause.) It is good to be home! It is good to be home. Everybody have a seat. You all relax. It’s just me. You all know me. It is good to be back home.
A couple of people I want to acknowledge — first of all, I want to thank your Mayor, my great friend, Rahm Emanuel for his outstanding leadership of the city and his kind introduction. (Applause.) I want to thank everybody here at Hyde Park Academy for welcoming me here today. (Applause.)
I want to acknowledge your principal and your assistant principal — although, they really make me feel old, because when I saw them — (laughter) — where are they? Where are they? Stand up. Stand up. (Applause.) They are doing outstanding work. We’re very, very proud them. But you do make me feel old. Sit down. (Laughter.)
A couple other people I want to acknowledge — Governor Pat Quinn is here doing great work down in Springfield. (Applause.) My great friend and senior Senator Dick Durbin is in the house. (Applause.) Congressman Bobby Rush is here. (Applause.) We’re in his district. Attorney General and former seatmate of mine when I was in the state senate, Lisa Madigan. (Applause.) County Board President — used to be my alderwoman — Tony Preckwinkle in the house. (Applause.)
And I’ve got — I see a lot of reverend clergy here, but I’m not going to mention them, because if I miss one I’m in trouble. (Laughter.) They’re all friends of mine. They’ve been knowing me.
Some people may not know this, but obviously, this is my old neighborhood. I used to teach right around the corner. This is where Michelle and I met, where we fell in love —
AUDIENCE: Aww —
THE PRESIDENT: This is where we raised our daughters, in a house just about a mile away from here — less than a mile. And that’s really what I’ve come here to talk about today — raising our kids.
AUDIENCE: We love you!
THE PRESIDENT: I love you, too. (Applause.) I love you, too.
I’m here to make sure that we talk about and then work towards giving every child every chance in life; building stronger communities and new ladders of opportunity that they can climb into the middle class and beyond; and, most importantly, keeping them safe from harm.
Michelle was born and raised here — a proud daughter of the South Side. (Applause.) Last weekend, she came home, but it was to attend the funeral of Hadiya Pendleton. And Hadiya’s parents, by the way, are here — and I want to just acknowledge them. They are just wonderful, wonderful people. (Applause.)
And as you know, this week, in my State of the Union, I talked about Hadiya on Tuesday night and the fact that unfortunately what happened to Hadiya is not unique. It's not unique to Chicago. It's not unique to this country. Too many of our children are being taken …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at The White House Press Office
By John Johnson 
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Newser – Home
CHICAGO, Feb. 6 (UPI) — Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel showed up for jury duty at the Richard J. Daley Center, but was sent home after a few hours.
Feeling bullied by Rahm Emanuel? Bring your business down to Texas.That’s the message Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is sending big banks and firearms companies, after the Chicago mayor urged those banks to stop lending to the gun manufacturers.
“It’s for the children” Obama proclaimed after signing the twenty-three gun-grabbing executive orders after the Sandy Hook tragedy.
“Never let a crisis go to waste,” one of Obama’s cronies once quipped. And Obama hasn’t.
We can now complete the circle with this tragedy with the events that brought about the National Firearms Act known as the NFA of 1934. It came to fruition in a similar fashion in an ill-conceived legislative effort and media frenzy (so-called “public outcry”) due to the St. Valentines Day Massacre of 1929, or so the story goes. However, it was done in slow motion and took them five years versus the speed of light Obama and his cohorts are acting out today.
It has only been two to three weeks since Obama announced his intention to ban so-called assault weapons before the legislative and executive assault began.
This latest foray into gun control is simply a national gun-registration scheme, which plays out as I first reported in a previous article. A synopsis of S.150, on Senator Feinstein’s legislation, is as follows:
“To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.”
The synopsis is simply the title of the legislation; we now know what she and her cohorts have in mind the short title is:
‘‘Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.’’
The language is troubling: “To ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited.” If we look closer, the key phrase is “not unlimited.” Our constitutional rights now come with apparent expiration dates pre-ban versus after, since it will codify specific limits to our Second Amendment right to bear arms. This legislation is not a constitutional amendment either. It is simply a bill to re-designate conventional arms, as equivalent to automatic weapons, with their large capacity magazines, which will now fall under the NFA registration requirements, and its $200.00 fee for each weapon and magazine registered.
This obviously infringes on our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
The most troubling language in the bill is “and for other purposes” which is not defined at all within the pages of the bill where we find our rights are limited and they are being curtailed for other purposes, which are undefined.
When you factor in ninety-five pages of this legislation, it lists one weapon after another, which are exempt under the act. After you include the seven pages that are specifically “banned,” the 123-page bill has 102 pages of specific weapons by name, manufacturer and model number.
Why would they need to list specific weapons?
Why are they not using descriptive legal designations that discuss their functionality: i.e., falling block, lever action, pump, single shot, bolt action, tip-up, rolling block, muzzle loading, semi-automatic, automatic etc. The only reasonable guess is to list the banned/exempt firearms in this way is to tack it on as an infamous “rider bill” that are one or two sentences long on another piece of legislation that references this legislation to implement confiscation without raising much interest sometime in the future.
After all, no one reads legislation anymore, ObamaCare was proof of that.
The specific weapons named in this bill were military type weapons at one time or another or their civilian version, specifically semi-automatic weapons and other long arms. The Supreme Court in United States v. Miller categorically affirmed the right of citizens to own, use and possess military type weapons, or in the language of the government’s prosecutor, weapons for war. Nothing has changed since then, except of course “never let a crisis go to waste” to quote Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s previous Chief of Staff.
There are reasons to own and use such weapons as proven by the Battle of Athens, which occurred in Tennessee in 1946 and affirmed the citizen’s ability and right to rise up against their corrupt county government and restore the rule of law. Tyranny is not immune to a place or time, and is ever-present wherever corruption in government exists.
So much for it cannot happen here…!
Senate Bill S.150 targets military type infantry weapons used at battlefield ranges that are used in an offensive tactical manner. The only logical conclusion to draw is our politicians wish to deny our citizens the right to raise any meaningful resistance if they decide to act against our rights and thwart our ability to respond offensively against tyranny.
The original article is at the following link, found here.
