Thorner/Keill: Are you angry enough yet? The ObamaCare Nightmare (Part 2)

ObamacareBy Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill – 

What should be egregious to all is what Obamacare will bring when the nightmare officially begins on Oct 1, 2013.

Obamacare Navigators Won’t Be Checked:  Fox News has reported that the Navigators who are being hired by HHS to help set up exchanges for Obamacare will not be properly screened before starting work.  Due to the little time left, Kathleen Sebelius has lifted the checks on Navigator backgrounds, fingerprints and criminal records. Their training has been dropped from 30 hours to 20 hours. These people will have access to your personal records, such as health information, Social Security numbers and income tax earnings.

There are no safeguards established yet to prevent identity theft or fraud in the use of your records.  Also, Sebelius has taken some of the $67 million needed to begin the Navigator project from the Disease Prevention Fund (20%) of Obamacare. Now you know where your Obamacare taxes are going – from one fund to another fund of the law with tricky accounting – robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Obama Waives Federal Employees Obamacare Premiums:  When the Democrats in Congress rammed through Obamacare, they forgot to exempt themselves and their federal employees from the requirements of the law.  Now, they’ve discovered how expensive and different their coverage is going to be under Obamacare.  They have been wailing about the cost and the potential loss of experienced staffers who might leave Washington, DC because they can’t afford the new health program.

Obama to the rescue:  He has ordered the Office of Personnel Management to have the American taxpayer subsidize the federal employees and they do not have to meet the law’s requirements of salary or previous insurance coverage for the Obamacare exchanges.  So, federal employees, who can make $70,000-$174,000 will now have the taxpayer subsidize their health care premiums up to 75% – because it’s too expensive for them. They voted for it; they should have to live with it; but they won’t have to now.  They’ve been excused.  And, we’re paying for it.

Department of Labor Delays the Out-of-Pocket Caps for a Year:  In 2014, the limit on out-of-pocket expenses (which you have to pay yourself) would have been $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families. This has now been postponed until 2015 for group plans like those offered by employers.  It does not apply to individual plans.  So, you have to continue paying these out-of-pocket costs, when they should have dropped in 2014.  This was announced by the Department of Labor on their website in February and we’re just now finding out about it.

Health Insurance Data Will Not Be Secured: On October 1, 2013, Obamacare insurance exchanges are supposed to be ready to go for Americans to enroll for insurance coverage. The technology needed to run the program, however, is way behind schedule in development and it is only going to be tested on September 30 – the day before the exchanges open. Without security encryption codes confirmed and tested, any medical, income and other personal information you provide for the state exchanges to sign you up for Obamacare will be left open to fraud and identity theft by anyone who can hack into the system.

Death Panels, IPAB and USPSTF: We have already told you about the ‘death panel’ in Obamacare called IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board) made up of 15 members appointed by the President (whoever that might be). The IPAB will have the authority to decide who will receive medical care and how much will/will not be paid for it.

The other ‘death panel’ in Obamacare is the “United States Preventive Services Task Force” (also known as the Mandate Task Force or USPSTF). Together, their actions will result in rationing of care, longer waits for care and possible elimination of care. This is an independent group of national experts in prevention and evidence-based medicine that works to improve the health of all Americans by making evidence-based recommendations about clinical preventive services such as screenings, counseling services or preventive medications.

The USPSTF is made up of 16 volunteer members who come from the fields of preventive medicine and primary care, including internal medicine, family medicine, pediatrics, behavioral health, obstetrics/gynecology, and nursing. All members volunteer their time to serve on the USPSTF, and most are practicing clinicians.

So, we have another committee now under Obamacare, made up of 16 non-government experts in medical prevention and evidence-based medicine. Like the IPAB, they will review what and when and how often you will be entitled to medical screenings and make recommendations on what can, or can’t, be offered for health coverage. Here are some examples of their limiting work. You have seen them in the news over the last year or so.

  • Women no longer need to get mammograms or pap smears before a certain age.
  • It has been suggested that men don’t have to get tests for prostate cancer. (PSAs)
  • Chest x-rays are also now on the list of unnecessary services on a routine basis.
  • Recommendation that heavy smokers get yearly CT scans to check for lung cancer — for free.
  • HIV screenings free for all Americans, aged 15-65.
  • Domestic violence screenings free for all women, aged 14-46.

Provisions will allow ‘forced’ home inspections by government agents:  Citing the Health and Human Services website, a report posted on Wednesday, August 15th at the Freedom Outpost says that under ObamaCare, government agents an engage in “home health visits” for those in certain “high-risk” categories.  Despite what HHS says, the program is not “voluntary.

A homeschooling family may be subject to intervention in school readiness and social-emotional developmental indicators.  A farm family may be subject to intervention in order to prevent child injuries.  While the administration claims the program only applies to those on Medicaid, the new law, by its own definition has no such limitations.

In a somewhat hilarious move, the Obama’s administration’s latest advertising scheme is a video contest aimed at convincing young people to sign up for health insurance.  Cash prizes will be offered to the winners, along with a “Stay Healthy Kit” to the first 100 participants.  This despite a conclusion by the National Center for Public Policy Research that millions of young people could save more than $1,000 next year by not signing up for insurance and paying the penalty.

Are you angry yet?  If not you should be, and you will be when we expose other infractions by the Obama administration into our privacy and our pocketbooks that are already happening, with more on the drawing board to be installed in the next year or so.

Start by calling your elected representatives.  The clock is ticking.  Don’t allow history to record that indifference of its citizens was the reason this nation lost its Constitutional Republic with the promise of liberty and freedom for all and descended into European-type Socialism and even worse!

See also Thorner and Keill’s  “The Obamacare Nightmare Part 1

Related articles

Pin It!


Ben Strident said…

Thanks to Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill for the great work they’re doing on this important topic. So few have time to review this important information – UNTIL they have the need for health care. THEN they’ll wonder “What happened to the way things used to be?” We’re in trouble as our nation gets grey and wrinkled.

Yes, we are angry and busy e-mailing our representatives, including Boehner, but they aren’t listening. Boehner especially should be flooded with phone calls and e-mails because he is cowardly and weak. He should be threatened with a loss of the conservative vote if he doesn’t even try to fight for us. Republicans are such a useless wimpy bunch and they should be told so over and over again.

ObamacareBy Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill – 

This is the first of several articles that will present an overall view of our federal government and what it is doing on a number of fronts.  Some measures are already affecting our lives.  Others are certain to evolve in the not too distant future.  Not only will the quality of our lives suffer, but unless we become angry enough to speak out and allow our voices to protest what the Obama administration has in store for us, future generations will be saddled with what we allowed to happen all because we were too busy, disinterested or too lackadaisical to care until it was too late.

Nowadays, turning on the radio or the TV and even surfing the web can be hazardous to ones health.  Lie after lie after lie is being exposed.  Some days it seems as if the Obama administration is collapsing, but nothing ever sticks to our Teflon-like President or members of his administration that would have otherwise brought the previous administration to its knees and even worse.   Now that Congress is home on its August break, ObamaCare is on the front burner as legislators not afraid of answering questions from their constituents are conducting public town-hall-style meetings.  But even before noting some of the monstrosities that make up the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), it is well to remember that real laws have been broken by the White House in the interim before the law goes into effect on January 1, 2014.

Now that Congress is home on its August break, ObamaCare is on the front burner as legislators not afraid of answering questions from their constituents are conducting public town-hall-style meetings.  But even before noting some of the monstrosities that make up the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), it is well to remember that real laws have been broken by the White House in the interim before the law goes into effect on January 1, 2014.

As George F. Will, one of today’s most recognized writers featured in more than 450 newspapers, wrote in a commentary titled:  “Obama Ignores Laws, Like Nixon“: “Barack Obama’s increasingly grandiose claims for presidential power are inversely proportional to his shriveling presidency.”

In quoting what President Obama said about his decision to unilaterally rewrite the Affordable Care Act, he said:

In a normal political environment, it would have been easier for me to simply call up the speaker and say, you know what, this is a tweak that doesn’t go to the essence of the law. . . it looks like there may be some better ways to do this, let’s make a technical change to the law.  That would be the normal thing that I would prefer to do.  But we’re not in a normal atmosphere around here when it comes to Obamacare.  We did have the executive authority to do so, and we did so.

Since Obamacare was passed in March of 2010, the administration has failed to adhere to half of its own legal deadlines:

  • A mandate that employers provide insurance next year or pay a penalty has been delayed for at least a year;
  • laws dictating that people applying for federal subsidies to buy insurance had to provide proof that they were eligible for government aid were scaled back;
  • suspended for a year were sharp limits on out-of-pocket costs to be paid for health care insurance by enrollees; and

Despite the illegal changes made to the Affordable Care Act by the White House and the Obama administration, both insist that on October 1st the Affordable Care Act’s insurance exchanges will go live online; that is, unless the push by conservatives to defund Obamacare in both the House and the Senate can be realized.  There is presently great angst over how well these online exchanges will function when millions of Americans to try to log on and choose their own healthcare coverage.

Thursday, August 22, 2013 at 07:00 AM | Permalink





By Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill – 

Could government mandated guaranteed retirement accounts (GRAs) be in Illinois’ future?

Disturbing information that could one day affect all private sector employees was discussed recently on Fox’s Neil Cavuto (w/Stewart Varney) and later in the day on Special Report with Bret Baier:


The California state legislature is pushing a new plan, called ‘Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program’, which will require private-sector employers to extract 2 percent of every employees’ paycheck and send it to the state cofferseven though the employee may choose not to participate.


The money would be put into a state fund with a guarantee – Oh, we Promise, Promise, Promise! – that all funds will be invested and you will get your money, plus gains, back at your retirement age.


California’s plan is yet another way to look for a way to open the door to grab your personal income and force you to ‘save with the state’ – whether you want to or not. Employers who do not send in this 3% requirement would be penalized $250 for each employee.


The program is supposed to supplement Social Security and provide forced retirement savings for workers who do not have access to a retirement program with their current employer, or who have chosen not to take their employers’ offered retirement program. Whether or not the individual may wish to participate, it would amount to a forced, no-choice 3% deduction out of every paycheck.


California’s proposal is the first-in-the-nation law at the state level, but of course other states have shown interest in it, as well as our politicians in Washington, DC. California’s program must have approval from the IRS and the U.S. Labor Department before it can be enacted, but quick and easy approval is expected. Once these approvals have been made, California can vote on the program, probably by next year. More here.


As far back as October of 2008, the federal government has been exploring ways to stem losses by workers and retirees who were losing money from their 401Ks and IRA accounts due to unemployment and the bad economy.  At the 2008 hearing of the House Committee on Education and Labor, Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, proposed mandatory participation in a government-run savings plan to which each citizen would contribute 5 percent of his salary, to be administered by the Social Security Administration, but separate from a citizen’s social security account.


The issue came up again in October of 2010 in another hearing, this time by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.  Ms. Ghilarducci, again a witness, proposed the same plan she advanced at the 2008 House hearing.  At that time, there was no follow through, but the concept of financial confiscation was not forgotten.


In an article published at Illinois Review by Thorner and Keill on Sunday, April 13, 2013, Sticky Fingers Eye Your IRAs, “sticky fingers” referred to a proposal, given short-shift at the time by the news media.  It was on April 10 when President Obama released his FY $3.77 trillion budget proposal.  Under current law, Americans who save money in tax-deferred retirement accounts are taxed on the money when they withdraw it.  An additional tax penalty is imposed if withdrawal is made before retirement age.


Obama’s proposal would limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more than $205,000 per year in retirement.  First Obama decides you’re wealthy if you make $250,000 or more.  Now, he’s telling you how much you can have to live on in your retirement.  What will he do with the rest of it?  Tax it, of course!


In addition, the ideas from Richard Cordray, Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for ‘helping you manage your savings’ and Jesse Jackson’s suggestion to use your savings to make loans to low-income groups, show the variety of politicians who are interested in relieving you of your hard-earned savings.


The Federal and many of the state governments are desperate for money.   They’ve gotten us into a huge mess of debt and overspending and are determined to find money anywhere they can.  They are drooling to confiscate, attach, grab and otherwise latch onto your personal savings and incomes.  These governments also have their union buddies who are demanding payback for getting them elected.  The unions want this money to back up and support their own very expensive pensions, retirements and health care plans.


We can now see there are multiple agencies who have their eyes on the estimated $20 trillion in American savings:  a ‘Social Security’ type savings account, a Presidential limit on how much you deserve to have for retirement, elimination of the tax-deferred status of savings accounts, government help in managing your money, using savings accounts to make loans to low-income groups and now California’s punitive, enforced savings – like it or not.  They are coming at us from many directions in an effort to find an opening to put their foot in the savings doorway.


When Senators and Representatives and states see billions and billions of dollars sitting out there in investment and savings accounts, it is not difficult to imagine what they thinking of  –  YOUR MONEY.


If you think this can’t happen, you haven’t been paying attention.  California’s Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program proposal should serve as an eye-opener, as it represents appealing legislation that could be rammed down the throats of Illinoisans.


If you care about your money, and object to either Illinois or the federal government latching onto your personal savings and incomes, then pick up the phone and do something about it by calling both your state and federal representatives.  Tell them not to monkey around with your money.


For Californians, if you allow this to happen you are total idiots!


For more insight, a must read is an article that appeared February 22, 2013 at the American Thinker by John White, The Feds Want Your Retirement Account.  The first paragraph of John White’s article should be enough to convince you to check out his comments.


Quietly, behind the scenes, the groundwork is being laid for federal government confiscation of tax-deferred retirement accounts such as IRAs.  Slowly, the cat is being let out of the bag.

Tuesday, July 30, 2013 at 11:48 AM | Permalink


President Barack Obama’s administration currently has 15 Cabinet Departments (State, Treasury, Defense, Justice, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security) and 7 additional positions which have Cabinet-level rank (White House Chief of Staff, EPA, Office of Management & Budget, US Trade Representative, US Ambassador to United Nations, Council of Economic Advisers, Small Business Administration) plus the National Security Administration, NSA, which is really a part of the Department of Defense.

Out of the 15 Cabinet Departments, there are currently 7 which have on-going scandals of which the American people may, or may not, be aware.   In addition, there are 2 actions going on within the Cabinet-level ranks, which are of questionable nature.  While some of these activities were begun under the Bush administration, they have exploded exponentially under Obama’s direction.  Bush has unfortunately been blamed for everything bad that has happened during Obama’s administration.  Isn’t it ironic that suddenly because Bush did it (NSA scandal), it’s acceptable for the current administration to do likewise?  (The same excuse is claimed with the drone program which has also grown enormously with extended range under Obama.)

With multiple scandals filling the news, and accusations, denials and investigations flying from all directions on a daily basis, it seemed necessary to take a step backwards to enable a broader view and better understanding of this scandal-ridden administration to prevent issue fatigue from setting in.  With the existence of so many scandals, there could be a tendency to disengage from the gross infractions of the Obama administration, throwing up our hands in despair, which would indicate passivity and disinterest, both dangerous in a democracy.

Realizing that scandals have legs of their own makes it difficult to ascertain their duration and  lasting impact, delay was considered in releasing our expose but speedily rejected on the premise that sharing what was known at this point made more sense than delaying the report.  Nevertheless, our comments still provide a fairly wide scope of the still percolating scandals, enough to realize how corrupt the Obama administration truly is, with future updates a definite possibility.

Now the question remains, will the scandal information outlined in this easy-to-understand format be heeded, or will individuals willingly blind themselves to the disturbing facts and simply dismiss them as not relative to their lives?  The act of burying heads in the sand creates a government which, having no opposition from its citizens, can run rough-shod over the populous.  Even elected Republican legislators seem to lack the fortitude to deal with the multiple scandals where justice is demanded and begs to be served.

It would be a blow to the rule of law, which forms the basis of our Democracy,  if the many scandals in the Obama administration become relics of a forgotten past, allowing the administration to skirt the justice that it so deserves.  It is often said that success begets success.  It can also be said that corruption allowed to flourish will only breed more corruption when those guilty of misdeeds and worse determine that the arm of justice has no hold over them.

The Department of State

All US embassies and consulates are under the control and responsibility of the Department of State.  Under then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, the true story behind the attacks and deaths at the Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, is still unanswered.  We have still not had answers to many questions by Secretary Clinton, and we have still never heard a word from any of the 20-30 Consular staff who were rescued from Benghazi, the night of September 11, 2012.

In recent weeks, another scandal has been exposed by the news media which relates to security personnel traveling with Secretary Clinton overseas who have been caught hiring and/or soliciting prostitutes.  In addition, the Belgian Ambassador has been accused of soliciting prostitutes and minors for sexual activity.  The Department of State has been accused of white-washing or quashing investigations into these activities.

The Department of the Treasury

The current and ever-expanding scandal of the IRS singling out and deliberately delaying applications of Conservative, religious and Tea Party groups on a political basis seems to grow worse by the day.  It’s also been suggested that, not only did the IRS deliberately limit the free speech and political rights of these groups, but the IRS may have passed group and personal information from these applications to liberal political groups to be used against the Republicans during the 2012 elections.  It has now been discovered that enormous amounts of money have been wasted on parties, hotels, travel and utter nonsense up to $50 million – so far.

On 6/13/13, the Treasury Inspector General has indicated there is evidence that up to 1,000 IRS employees were misusing their government-issued travel and credit cards in 2010-2011.

This last week, it has also come out that the IRS sent more than $46 million in tax refunds to 23,994 “unauthorized” alien workers who all listed the same address in Atlanta, Ga., in 2011, according to an audit report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

They also sent:

  • 11,284 refunds worth a combined $2,l64,976 at a second Atlanta address;
  • 3,608 refunds worth $2,691,448 to a third;
  • 2,386 refunds worth $1,232,943 to a fourth.

Other locations on the IG’s Top Ten list included:

  • an address in Oxnard, Calif., where the IRS sent 2,507 refunds worth $10,395,847;
  • an address in Raleigh, North Carolina, where the IRS sent 2,408 refunds worth $7,284,212;
  • an address in Phoenix, Ariz., where the IRS sent 2,047 refunds worth $5,558,608;
  • an address in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., where the IRS sent 1,972 refunds worth $2,256,302;
  • an address in San Jose, Calif., where the IRS sent 1,942 refunds worth $5,091,027;
  • and address in Arvin, Calif., where the IRS sent 1,846 refunds worth $3,298,87

In May, 2013, it was announced that the IRS allegedly stole medical records from more than 10,000,000 Americans during a raid on a Southern California health care facility.  More than 60 million medical records were ‘lifted’ from this facility.  This was as a result of one warrant for one person’s records, but the IRS took the other records, too.

Remember, the IRS is going to be in charge of administering the insurance side of Obamacare.  Your medical records will now be accessible to them.

The Department of Defense

Under Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, there have still been no clear answers as to why no aid was sent to Benghazi on September 11, 2012, when four Americans died in Islamic Jihadist attacks.  No one has been made to say who gave the order to ‘stand down’ or to send no support to these Americans.  Nor, do we have any good explanation why the consulate wasn’t better protected before the attacks, especially during the September 11 anniversary time.

The additional scandal of sexual assaults throughout the military has recently been brought to the forefront of the news because military authorities have not been responsive to this issue.

The Department of Justice

Attorney General, Eric Holder, has failed in major responsibilities going all the way back to refusing to prosecute the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation in Philadelphia in the national elections of 2008.  He has also slipped through the loopholes of responsibility for the Fast and Furious gunrunning program to Mexico, even though an American border guard and many dozens of Mexican citizens were killed using those very guns.  And, currently, Holder has admitted to monitoring 20 phones lines of over 100 reporters of the Associated Press and had signed a subpoena that accused reporter James Rosen of Fox News as a possible co-conspirator for leaking classified information about North Korea.  The DOJ had to go to three federal judges before they found one who would sign this subpoena.

The Department of Health and Human Services

Throughout this current series of scandals, and little mentioned by the media, is the question of whether or not Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of HHS, has been arm-twisting insurance companies and other health related industries for money to support and pay for the implementation of Obamacare.  Congress has withheld much of the funding for the health care program and it appears Sebelius is finding other ways to raise money.  The problem is that these agencies which she is reportedly strong-arming will be under her direction and administration as Obamacare is installed by 2014, a blatant conflict of interest, or more commonly known as extortion.

The Department of Veterans Affairs

Under former General Erik Shenseki, now Director of the VA, there is a current backlog of 600,000 disability claims filed by our veterans.  The average wait for attention to these claims has been running up to 300 days.  Depending on the city and office locations, some veterans may wait 800-900 days to receive determinations on their claims.

And, just recently, Secretary Shinseki has gutted the independent board which researched Gulf War illnesses and has cut its budget.  The Research Advisory Committee, which used to oversee the VA staff in this area has now been replaced by VA people it used to review.  In 2012, a no-confidence vote against the VA and a whistle-blower testified that the VA misled the public about research that would lead to expensive benefits for veterans.  Good timing, Secretary Shinseki.

The Department of Homeland Security

The massive problems produced by illegal immigrants in the country and what to do about them has been aggravated by Secretary Janet Napolitano, who chooses whom to deport and whom to put on hold, regardless of what the federal law on immigration says.  She also declares the southern border with Mexico under control and the safest in years, even though it has been shown again and again, it is not secure.  A vast swath of the procedural vote on the so-called “border surge” deal brokered by Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and John Hoeven (R-ND) paving the ways for passage of the entire comprehensive immigration reform bill, comes down to nothing more than giving the unelected current DHS Secretary, Janet Napolitano, the kind of discretionary power that one would expect to be granted to the officials of a banana republic.  She has the discretion to ignore the border fencing and any other of the so-called border triggers.

Now, let us look at the Cabinet-level agencies which are having questionable activities and scandals of their own.

The National Security Administration (NSA) (technically a part of the Department of Defense)

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”  (Italics are added.)

Recently exposed by The Guardian newspaper in England, the NSA, under the Patriot Act, has for approximately 7 years been trolling billions and billions of phone calls made by American citizens in an effort to relate any suspicious calls to terrorist links.  It appears that FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) courts just can’t say “No” to requests to pursue potential terrorist connections and have approved thousands of warrants submitted to them.  What billions and billions of phone calls made by everyday Americans have to do with foreign agents is highly questionable.   In addition, reports have been out recently that the NSA has also been requesting information from the internet, e-mails, pictures and other computer-related sources in a program called Prism.  The major internet companies (Google, AOL, Yahoo, etc.) claim the government has no ‘direct’ access to their internet customers’ information.  If the Feds don’t have ‘direct’ access, do they have some other kind of access?  All of this has been done under great secrecy with the support of certain Congressional members and committees who claim they are doing this to keep us ‘safe’ and that we should ‘trust them’.

In addition, it has also been exposed that the NSA is building a Data Center in Utah where they will store these billions of accumulated records for an indefinite period of time.  They can then go back years later and search them if they think there is a questionable person or action they want to check.

The Environmental Protection Agency

Under former EPA Director, Lisa Jackson, it was discovered that she kept and maintained a secret e-mail account under the name of a Richard Windsor, so that she could communicate with others in the government without having her messages known.  Secretary of HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, also admitted that she had a separate e-mail address beyond the agency account so she could deal with her daily work.  Supposedly, these accounts are all available under a Freedom of Information Account (FOIA) request– if – you happen to know about the account and the e-mail address and request it in the FOIA.  From additional information in the news reports, it appears there are many, many secret e-mail accounts throughout departments in the Obama administration.

It has also recently been reported that in April 2013, the EPA illegally released the names, addresses, phone numbers and e-mails of approximately 80,000 farmers across the US to environmental groups.  The apparent intent was to allow these groups to protest, picket or otherwise attack the farmers.  Further details are being developed about this issue.

As Benjamin Franklin said in 1775, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

There are those of you who will exclaim that we must do everything to fight the terrorists.  We see no good reason to pull billions and billions of records of millions and millions of American citizens for whom there have been no suspicions or warrants or probable cause and keeping them for years to be checked later.  Security programs were supposedly set up to monitor for foreign or suspicious terror connections.  Let them run the program that way.

As for the political Washington class who say, “Trust us to do the right thing,” may we suggest you read the above commentary over again.

Wednesday, June 26, 2013 at 01:45 PM | Permalink


Sticky Fingers Eye Your IRAs Nancy Thorner & Jane Keill

On Wednesday, April 10, and at long last, President Obama released his FY $3.77 trillion budget proposal for 2014 as he stood with acting Budget Director Jeffrey Zients in the Rose Garden. Both Democrats and Republicans were quick to criticize the details of Obama’s budget blueprint that was said to cut deficits by $1.8 trillion over the next decade.

One budget proposal given short-shift by the news media, but of great interest for those with retirement accounts, is how much money is needed to be able to retire comfortably? The Obama administration wants to answer that question for you.

Under current law, Americans who save money in tax-deferred retirement accounts are taxed on the money when they withdraw it.  An additional tax penalty is imposed if withdrawal is made before retirement age.

Obama’s plan would limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more that $205,000 per year in retirement, or about $3 million in 2013.   According to President Obama, “That sum is all that is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.” 

So, Obama is now going to tell you how much you can have in your retirement accounts, how much you can save and live on, and what he’ll do with the rest of it (tax it, of course).  Might it be that Obama placed the proposal in his budget to test the winds?

First Obama decides you’re wealthy if you make $250,000 or more.  Now, he’s telling you how much you can have to live on in your retirement.  

But is Obama’s proposal of allowing you to save only $205,000 per year in retirement accounts the only one?

In the recent past Richard Cordray and Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr.  have suggested other ideas for using your retirement saving.  They represent two greedy politicians, out of many, who are salivating at the possibility of grabbing the almost $20 trillion in American investment accounts, ‘taking’ your pension, IRAs, 401Ks and other savings accounts from different directions to use for other things.  Notable is that neither of these men were elected to their positions.

Here’s a brief synopsis of what Richard Cordray and Rev. Jesse Jackson had to say:

-Richard Cordray is the head of the CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) which was created by the Dodd/Frank financial act.  He was appointed by Obama on a recess appointment which was declared illegal recently by the US Court of appeals because Congress was still in session.  Cordray is still in office, however, and on January 18, 2013, during an interview it was reported that,

“The CFPB is weighing whether it should take on a role in helping Americans manage the $19.4 trillion they have put into retirement savings, a move that would be the agency’s first foray into consumer investments.”

-Then, there are the suggestions by the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr. at the 16th annual Wall Street Project Economic Summit in NYC, also in January 2013.  The Summit was held as a project to focus on creating solutions for black financial advancement that can complement government intervention. Jackson discussed a proposal for increasing the availability of capital by using pension money to make loans in low-income communities’.   In other words, let’s use the pension money from private savings accounts to help the black community to grow and develop – in conjunction with the Federal government, of course.

So, now, the government wants to get involved in ‘helping’ you manage your money because obviously they can do a better job of it than you can.  And, it will be only their first foray into this field – another method of gaining control over your assets and giving the government more money to redistribute and spend.  And, in their own words, more is yet to come.

Not new to Europe, over the past few years, articles have appeared in the Christian Science Monitor(1/2/11) and the Investors’ Business Daily, along with other radio show discussions, about the people of countries like Bulgaria, Ireland, Poland, Hungary, France, Argentina, etc. having their private pensions taken over in order to bail out the debts of their respective governments.  

Many of these pensions are similar to our social security plan, or in some cases, promised stipends if regular ‘government’ savings accounts are set up by the citizens of the country.  Governments are ‘confiscating’ billions of dollars/euros in order to pay the bills for their socialized benefits: health care, schooling, housing and jobs.  Some of these are union accounts, but they appear to be private unions, not governmental unions.  You can imagine what would happen if they tried to lift the government union pensions!

Now Democrats and the Obama administration have gone from just thinking about it, to talking about it, and having no doubt used Europe as their guide, liked what they saw and envision the same for this nation.  Having put this country into trillions of dollars of debt, Democrats are desperate to find money anywhere, not only to pay the bills, but to continue spending.  They won’t be able to resist the lure of trillions of dollars of private savings just sitting out there being used by private citizens. 

They’ll want to ‘redistribute’ those funds to all those who ‘need’ it and never worked for it – because it’s fair, don’t you see?  And, don’t think the Republicans won’t fall prey to the same lure.  We’re out of money.  Somebody has to find it somewhere, and this would be easy pickings.  Just nationalize everyone’s account and give you a receipt for what they take with a promise to pay it back – with interest.  Right?

After the ‘Cyprus Confiscation’, it didn’t take long for the President and fellow Democrats to reach with their sticky fingers for your private savings accounts. They are desperate for money, they can’t stop spending and they won’t admit they’ve run our economy into the basement.

Do you think it can’t happen?  Do you think it can’t pass Congress?  Think again.  After all, more money is demanded to run an ever larger and bloated government and a natural form of income is too good to resist.   All in all, it’s obvious the government is squirming to find a way to get our money!

You need to be on the phone to your congressional representatives, telling them in no uncertain terms to keep their sticky fingers off your money, before they try to do it!

 Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 09:07 AM | Permalink

First published at Illinois Review.

Images-3By Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill – 

In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), also known as the  Simpson-Mazzoli Act, was enacted by Congress and signed into law by President Ronald Reagan.

Briefly, the act:

1.  required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status.

2.  made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit unauthorized immigrants.

3.  legalized certain seasonal agricultural illegal immigrants.

4.  legalized illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt. About three million illegal immigrants were granted legal status.5.  required that the US borders would be controlled and secured.

Those of us who were of a responsible age in 1986 remember the public discussions the Simpson-Mazoli Act prompted at the time and the promises made by Senators and Congressmen.  There were promises that if the bill passed, all the above parts of the bill would be strictly and immediately enforced.  We were promised and promised and promised.   Instead they lied and lied and lied some more and what happened? Employers were never required to attest to the status of those they hired nor were they ever held responsible if they did hire illegals.

The border control was never enforced and now, 27 years later, we have 12,000,000+ illegal immigrants in the country.

It is evident now that the Senators and Congressmen who voted for the 1986 bill never intended to enforce the provisions of the bill.  Just as they lied to us then, they are lying to us now.

Today, we have a group of Senators, the Gang of Eight, who have been meeting secretly for months, behind closed doors, to create another Immigration Bill which they claim will solve all our immigration problems.   This group is made up of:

  • Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) (voted Yes in 1986)
  • Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) (voted Yes in 1986)
  • Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
  • Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO)
  • Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
  • Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
  • Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
  • Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ)

We don’t know what’s being put in the bill, but we do know that the special interest groups have been heavily involved in making suggestions for this new legislation.  These groups include Latino groups (like La Raza, MALDEF, LULAC), unions (like AFL-CIO, SEIU), business groups(corporations and Chamber of Commerce), but there‘s one group that isn’t represented at all:  the average American legal citizen.  And, we the public won’t know what’s in the bill until it’s done.

Once again the media is in full voice, as in 1986, in support of comprehensive immigration reform.  To sway the public into believing that illegals are entitled to the full rights of American citizens, the media pushes emotional stories of poor, sick or desperate illegals which touch the heartstrings and raise sympathy levels to convince the public we must accept whatever comes in the bill.  We’re made to feel sorry for them, and guilty, too, so we’ll be more inclined to accept the bill’s provisions, whatever they may be.

What’s more, various immigrant groups have been holding marches and demonstrations to pressure public opinion even more.  In previous years, marchers have carried signs that said, ‘Today we march; tomorrow we vote!’ and ‘Undocumented and proud of it!’  There isn’t another country in the world that would allow that kind of arrogance and insolence.  There isn’t another country in the world that would allow this many people to be in their country illegally!

In addition to the secrecy of the Gang of Eight, once again there is a push by President Obama and the Democrats to get immigration reform done and passed as speedily as possible.  Obama has already ‘ordered’ that the bill be available for his review and signature in April, 2013 for quick implementation.

As for the American people, they are being rushed to accept a massive change in our society, enacted through a rapid decision, without knowing what they are getting and also to accept something that won’t be read by most of the Congress before casting their votes.  Obamacare, theStimulus, TARP and Dodd/Frank were all done in this manner.  Congress’ mantra seems to be:  the sooner the better, the less known the better, the sneakier the better.  As Nancy Pelosi famously said, “…..But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”

If this wasn’t problematical enough, a report on April 7 in the Washington Post related how all members of the bipartisan “Gang of eight” pushing for immigration reform in the U.S. Senate will band together to block any efforts by other senators to offer amendments once the legislation is introduced.

The bill under construction is rumored to provide a ‘pathway to citizenship’ or, perhaps the illegals will be given ‘legal status’ first (which will then lead to citizenship).  The American people have indicated over and over again they do not want the illegals to be given citizenship.

Often claimed by those pushing immigration reform is that reform will provide a method for illegals to ‘come out from the shadows’ and be set on new pathways.  Many of them will, of course, do just that.  But, what if some of them don’t?  What if they like being in the shadows?  What if they’re criminals and don’t want the bright lights shone on them?  Why would illegals even need to come out from the shadows?  After all, they would still get all the benefits they’ve been receiving all along compliments of U.S. taxpayers, such as:  free education, medical care, housing, food, etc.?  And, if they are caught, will they be deported?  Or, will they be offered the new pathway, even if they don’t want it?

And, what about chain migration?  That allows for close relatives to come into the country, too.  Depending on how the bill is written, the new illegals could sponsor their family members and we could have spouses, brothers and sisters, grandparents, aunts, uncles – thousands more immigrants coming in over whom we have no control.  In 1986, chain migration was allowed and there was an immediate increase in more immigrants coming into the country, sponsored by the newly minted citizens.

Work is also apparently being done on the program for workers’ and students’ visas.  This chronic and dangerous visa problem has been going on for years.  Many people who enter the US under these programs simply overstay their visa time limits.  It is inexcusable that no one in the government has done anything about overextended and illegal visa time stays.  It was largely from this group that many of the 9/11 terrorists gained their entry and domicile in the US.

We have no idea who is in the country or what they are doing.  Many dangerous people are already here, having formed crime syndicates operating throughout the U.S.

We are importing ignorance, poverty, disease and crime.  No one wants to do anything about it because the Democrats want illegals here so they can vote for the Democrats in elections.  Republicans want illegals here so they can provide cheap labor for US businesses.  Republicans are also under the mistaken assumption that the newly minted Americans will flock to the Republican Party.

Why should we trust our Congress and President again?  Why should we fall for their siren song again?

Perhaps it would work out better if those congressional representatives who voted for the original 1986 bill not be allowed to vote this time around, recusing themselves from the vote because they failed the American people the last time around.

Perhaps we should not advance any further legislation except that which secures our borders first, with a two-year restriction to prove it can be done – and, that the Government will actually do it.

And, perhaps, those people who are here illegally should not be allowed the opportunity for citizenship (and voting) for 20 years.  That will allow those who are already in line to enter the US legally to arrive and be absorbed into our culture.  The illegals can, and should, wait their turn.

Wednesday, April 10, 2013 at 09:01 PM | Permalink

Published first at Illinois Review.

It’s up to Us!

November 3, 2012

By Nancy Thorner & Jane Keill –

As children we are taught not to hate. We do not hate Democrats themselves, but it is what they represent, their ideology, and most certainly their policies and legislation that we cannot abide.

Particularly worrisome is how our Constitution is so cavalierly treated and even ignored by those who consider themselves superior to the intellect of our Founding Fathers, as attempts are made to decry this document as antiquated and no longer relevant to this day and age.

With heavy hearts, having viewed with misgivings and fear what has happened over the past four years, the gravity of the present situation demands that we present an overview of the last four years on the cusp of what we and others view as the most important election in this nation’s history.

For more than 50 years, the Liberal/Progressive Democrats have steadily inched their way toward a socialistic, government-will-take-care-of-everything system in the United States.

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Pell Grants, WIC/food programs, the Great Society, War on Drugs, War on Poverty………hundreds of endless programs that have wasted billions and billions of dollars and not solved the problems for which they were intended no matter how compassionate they were.

Along the way, some occasional Republicans would try halting this progression for a time, but inevitably the votes swung back to the Progressives and they have continued their march toward the Nanny State.

Sadly, we have allowed it to happen. ‘We’ is the current mature generation, the Baby Boomers, which have consistently voted politicians into office who were marching down this Liberal path. Politicians elected to office over and over again have accumulated years of power and influence which they have used to their advantage and that of their party.

In recent years, the roadway leading to government control of just about everything has been lengthened and widened. There’s been more and more leeway in enforcing the laws (illegal immigration, guns, traditional marriage). There’s been softer and softer interpretation of the US Constitution, laxer and laxer application of our laws until ‘We’ elected the Democrats to Congress in 2007, 2008, 2009. It was in 2008 when the perfect storm cloud of liberal domination came to fruition.

We elected Barack Obama as President.

Many voted for Obama, proud that he was the first person of color ever elected, who further promised to reach across and heal the racial divide. Instead, Obama came with an agenda that most of us didn’t know existed — to change America in directions we did not recognize. Along with full Democrat control in the Senate and in the House in 2008 and 2009, the ideal conditions existed to wreak Obama’s will on the country. For two years, President Obama got what he wanted, and the Democrats gave it to him (Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, two Supreme Court liberals).

There was a brief braking in the Democrat’s momentum in 2010 when the Tea Party stood up to be counted because no one else would. Republican leaders, displaying a lack of spine that so often defines them, weren’t stepping up to the plate and rarely spoke up against anything that was being done. House Speaker John Boehner, Minority Senate Leader, Mitch McConnell and Congressman/Senator Mark Kirk failed to step forward to raise anything remotely resembling strength or courage. Even after the 2010 election when the Republicans took control of the House, they couldn’t leverage any effective action, always wailing that ‘This is the best deal we could get.’ Again and again, their bargains with Obama and the Democrats ended up in impotency.

When the President began to issue Executive Orders that changed standing laws and breached the Constitution, barely a voice of objection was heard. Certainly, our elected Republican representatives couldn’t find their voices.

Under Obama and the Democrats (and with the complicity of the Republicans), the United States has been buried in trillions of dollars of debt, much of it borrowed, along with government printing presses churning out money like there was no tomorrow. In the coming years, the taxes related to Obamacare, an outdated tax system, government overspending and the entitlement programs already underway will bankrupt the country.

In the state of Illinois, corruption and lying and graft and bribery are so epidemic that we have sent four governors (of both parties) to prison in the last 40 years. The state is so deeply in debt we will never pay it off. Taxes go forever upward. Spending also continues to spiral forever upward. Illinois has been controlled by the Democrats for most of the last 30-40 years, but the Republicans are just as deep in the muck as their colleagues across the aisle. And, ‘we’ continue to elect them, year after year after year.

John Kass of the Chicago Tribune suggested that no one should vote for a Democrat congressman in Illinois even if he/she is a good person, as this might be the only way to get rid of Speaker Mike Madigan who exerts tremendous destructive power and control in the state. With power comes control, which Madigan demands and gets. Yet who is to say that Republicans wouldn’t abuse power in time if entrusted with control of the Legislature?

What then must we do? Each of us must stop, look and evaluate how we have been voting over the years, who we have elected, what we have supported and what we got out of it all. Illinois, California, New York – all Democrat states — are in critical financial trouble. Who put them in these positions? If you have contributed to these problems, you must stop to rethink your support for the politicians and party that put these states in such conditions.

Our children and grandchildren are waiting on the other side of the precipice. Most of them have no real idea of what’s coming at them. Many of them have been indoctrinated to believe this is the way it’s supposed to be. They don’t know any better and many are too young to know as we do a different kind of America. In future generations, they will never believe there was a different America. Sadly no one will be around to tell them about it. Their history books will have been scrubbed of information that would give insight into how things used to be, as those in power know that ignorance is the best way of keeping control of young minds.

Now, we have one last opportunity to bring this juggernaut to a halt. We have one last election to put a solid roadblock in the path although what has already been set in place will be difficult enough to halt. We have to take responsibility for what we haven’t done during the last 50 years. We have to save our country.

On November 6, we must stand up and take back control of our leaders in Washington, DC. We must elect Republicans to enough positions that we can keep control of the House of Representatives, gain control of the Senate and replace Obama in the White House. That will at least slow the movement of the Liberal/Progressive/Democrat Party.

And, after that, we must continue to rein in those we have just sent to Washington. Despite their campaign promises, they will quickly slip into the mire and do what politicians always do – grasp for power. We will have to keep after them using all of our resources – Facebook, Twitter, texting, e-mails, phone calls, letters – whatever will get us in their faces. And, we must stand strong against their weakness and make sure they go in the direction we want them to go – not in the direction they wish to take us.

If you have not already voted, get to your polling place and vote. If you prefer to go out on election day, then go on November 6. But, get there. No excuses are acceptable. We have this one chance to correct our past votes. Take it.

It’s up to us!

Published at Illinois Review on Saturday, Nov. 3, 2012

By Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill –

Information about the attack has rapidly changed in the past weeks, and so has the Obama administration’s positions on it. The real story about what happened at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi in which four Americans were killed just gets worse and worse. Not only did Barack Obama and his team perpetuate a lie for nearly two weeks as to the cause of the attack, but in breaking news, we are now learning that during the attack, Americans called out for help, and were denied any assistance.

For several weeks, in an effort to write an article that would relate our frustration and dismay over the lack of transparency and honesty that has been forthcoming from the White House since the 9/11 Benghazi terrorist attack, we asked ourselves this question: What if we pretended to interview Barack Obama about the Benghazi attack whenever more news surfaced, asking him questions through a series of fake interviews?

We would further relate, continuing in our “Let’s Pretend” mood, that although the President agreed to sit down with us, he refused to answer any of our questions, except for one answer, “The attack was caused by an inflammatory video that was insulting to Muslims.” Beyond that, he wouldn’t say anything.

Our imaginary interviews with President Obama ended on October 25 so our thoughts could be set down to submit to Illinois Review. Little did we know that on Thursday, October 26, these new revelations would surface through Breaking News by way of Fox News:

“Sources who were on the ground in Libya, ready and available for military action during the attack on the U.S. consulate, were told to ‘stand down’ rather than to help the ambassador’s team. When shots began to be heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11, the CIA denied approval of action despite multiple requests.”

It is outrageous that the mainstreet media refuses to hold the President’s feet to the fire, instead it elects to play footsie with the President.

Four years is a long time for this nation, its people and the world to live with a Commander-in-Chief and a President who can’t be trusted.

In our series of pretend conversations with Obama, we would ask these questions:

Before the attack:

1. The President of Libya, Mohammed el-Megarif, says he advised you three days in advance that there were possible attacks coming up for the 9/11 anniversary. Did you receive those warnings? What did you do in response to them?

2. What steps did you take to protect our properties and interests around the world before the anniversary of 9/11?

3. What steps did you take specifically in Libya?

4. Are there Marine guards at all our embassies? If not, why not?

5. Do all our Marines have bullets in their guns? If not, why not? Who made this rule?

6. How many full intelligence briefings did you attend in the week before the attack in Libya?

7. Did you know that Ambassador Chris Stevens would be in Benghazi on 9/11? Did you warn him there might be an attack there on 9/11?

8. Did you know Ambassador Stevens personally? Did you know Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, the Navy Seals who were killed with him? Did you know Sean Smith, the foreign services officer who was also killed?

9. Did you write personal letters of condolence to each of the families of the victims?

Immediately after the attack:

1. When, how and by whom, were you told about the attack? Was this a ‘3 AM’ phone call?

2. Why after the attack, did you go to Las Vegas for a fundraiser? Why did you not stay in Washington and try to find out what had happened in Benghazi?

3. Why, in the days after the attack, did you go on the David Letterman show, party with Jay-Z, Beyonce, Anne Hathaway, Jerry Springer, have your picture taken with a pirate and go on The View? Do you think it was Presidential to do that?

4. Was Sufyan ben Qumu actually involved in the attack? (He’s the Gitmo detainee who was released in 2007 to Libya after we were assured he would remain in prison.)

5. Was Al Qaeda involved in the attack?

6. Ever since you ordered the death of Osama bin Laden, you insisted you would not ‘spike the football’ about it. Yet at the Democrat convention and thereafter, you, Biden, Axelrod, Clinton and many others, have constantly chanted, “Osama’s dead and General Motors is alive’. How did this contribute to the anger that Muslims around the world feel about the USA and perhaps lead to the deaths of our four Benghazi representatives?

During the weeks after the attack:

1. Why do you think the Muslim rioters in various countries were chanting ‘Obama, Obama, we’re all Osamas!”

2. Five days after the attack, UN Ambassador Susan Rice (come on now, you didn’t know she was our Ambassador to the United Nations, did you?) went on all the Sunday talk shows and repeated over and over again that the attack was the result of the nasty movie mentioned above. Was she lying?

3. What instructions did you give her to tell about the Benghazi attack?

4. What did you tell Hillary, David Axelrod, Biden, Jay Carney and everyone else to tell as the ‘story’?

5. Why did you go to the United Nations on September 27 and continue to insist that the attack was the result of the nasty movie?

6. Why did you and Hillary make a tape and have it played all over Pakistan that blamed the attack on the nasty movie?

7. Hillary Clinton is Secretary of State and our embassies are under her direction. What was Hillary’s responsibility in this?

8. When you were asked during an interview if Egypt was an ally or an enemy, why could you not answer the question?

So, it really was a terrorist attack:

1. Although early on it had become pretty evident that this was a terrorist attack, possibly with Al Qaeda connections, why was it eight days before your administration began to admit that?

2. If it was a terrorist attack, why did you not have Amb. Susan Rice return to the Sunday talk shows, and retract her earlier statements? Will you fire Rice for lying to the American public about the source of the attacks?

3. Why did you and Hillary not make another video for Pakistan and the rest of the Arab world to retract your insistence that the nasty movie caused the attack?

4. Shortly after the assault, CNN was able to get into the scene of the attack and found the journal of Amb. Stevens. In it he said he was worried about his safety. You said the FBI had been sent to begin a thorough investigation into the attack. Why did CNN find this journal and not the FBI?

5. Why was the FBI still in Tripoli while CNN and the Washington Post were able to get into the US compound in Benghazi and collect consular records and material?

6. Recent news reports also indicate that the State Department was contacted by the Libyan US embassy before the attacks with a request for more protection in US enclaves there. These requests were reportedly turned down. What has been Hillary’s explanation for turning down these requests?

7. On September 28th, the American news media were finally reporting the attack was a coordinated terrorist assault. What information about this did you have before 9/28?

8. Why did the FBI just get to Benghazi on October 5, and only stay 24 hours and then left again? Was there nothing left to find after 3 ½ weeks?

9. What happens when the Harvey Weinstein movie ‘Seal Team Six’ is shown on 11/4, two days before the election? The movie trumpets your giving the order to kill bin Laden and ‘spikes the football’ about your part in his death. What plans do you have if riots break out all over the world because of this movie? After all, look what happened all over the Muslim world when they were upset about the nasty video that caused the Benghazi attack. What effect will riots all over the Muslim world have on your possible re-election two days later?

More recently, the news about the Benghazi attack seems to have something new every day. We continued to interview Obama and he continued to refuse to answer):

1. Several security officers from Libya and the State Department have testified before a House investigation committee that they gave multiple early warnings about other recent attacks in Benghazi. When were you told about this information?

2. These witnesses have also indicated they made multiple requests for additional security for Libya and were turned down. Why were they turned down?

3. If money was the reason additional assistance was not sent to Libya, how do you justify the money spent on buying Chevy Volts and building a charging station for them at our Embassy in Austria? Couldn’t we have used some of that money in Libya for security?

4. Why has your Press Secretary, Jay Carney, not been able to give a straight answer to questions at press conferences? He keeps changing your position on this issue.

5. At the recent Vice-Presidential debate, Joe Biden stated that ‘We did not know of any requests for more security in Libya’. In view of all the additional information and testimony that has come out, why did he say this?

6. David Axelrod, from your campaign, was on Fox News Sunday on 10/14, and he said all questions about the Benghazi attack should be addressed to the State Department where this type of issue is handled. Was he throwing Hillary Clinton under the bus? Was he trying to save your skin for you?

7. Why did Hillary throw herself under the bus by admitting responsibility for the handling of the attack? Why did it take her almost five weeks to realize the State Department is in charge of this type of thing?

8. Will you ask for Hillary’s resignation as Secretary of State? If not, why not?

9 Why did she make this admission just before your second debate with Romney? What did you discuss with her about this acknowledgement and the timing of it?

10. During the debate with Romney, you insisted that you talked about ‘terror’ attacks the day after the Benghazi assault, and indeed you did mention ‘terrorist attacks’ in the Rose Garden, but it was in a much broader context than the Libya raid. Even moderator Candy Crowley admitted that – after the debate, of course.

If you thought it was a terrorist attack in the Rose garden the day after it happened, why did you and Hillary and Susan Rice and Axelrod and Jay Carney and Biden all spend the next two weeks insisting Benghazi was the result of the nasty video about Muslims? Why were you so confused about this?

As of October 25, 2012, the Benghazi attack continues to play in the news:

The CIA station chief in Libya reported that within 24 hours of the attack, he had sent a message indicating the attack was the result of militants and not because of a mob.

1. CBS and Reuters have released evidence that e-mails that detailed the first few hours of the attack were sent to all pertinent parties in your administration, including the White House situation room. What did you know about these e-mails and the information they contained?

2. Some of these e-mails reportedly said the attacks were planned and were terrorist attacks. If you had this information within hours of the assault, why did you, Hillary, Susan Rice and most of your administration spend the next two weeks telling everyone from the news media to the UN to Pakistan that the attack was the result of the nasty video?

3. According to various news reports, the battle at Benghazi lasted between 6-7 hours. Reports also indicate that US drones were sent over the area to observe what was happening. If this is true, why didn’t you send in military reinforcements or a rapid response team (from Italy or Spain) to give assistance?
Did you do anything to try and rescue our Ambassador and the other Americans under attack?

4. If the drones sent images over the satellite network, were you able to see what was happening? If you could see what was happening, why didn’t you send help?

5. Even as you, Mr. President, continue to vow that the perpetrators of the Benghazi consulate attack will be brought to justice, the man identified by witnesses as a ringleader in the attack continues to walk the streets of Libya without fear of arrest. Ahmad Abu Khattala has admitted being at the consulate during the horrific attack but has yet to be questioned by any Libyan authorities.

He has spoken to a New York Times reporter from a hotel patio as he sipped a strawberry frappe and mocked the US and Libyan governments. The FBI, when it was in Libya, did not talk with him. If the NYT could find him to interview, why haven’t your people found him? What is the status of the investigation? What have the Libyans done about it?

6. Will the investigation of the attack be completed before the November election? Oh, of course. What was I thinking? Never mind.

Realizing that any coverup attempts are many times worse than the actual “crime” itself, if and when we do decide to continue our pretend interviews with President Obama, the following two questions would head our list:

1. Mr. President, how did you think you could get away with spinning a story for weeks about Benghazi that exonerated the White House from all blame in what was known from the beginning as an organized terrorist attack? Why, instead, did you and your administration cling to the spontaneous attack script prompted by what was an obscure video?

2. Mr. President, was it your purpose to have the American people believe that the threat from Al Queda was over with the capture of Bin Laden and that knowledge of the Benghazi terrorist attack would have shattered the misconception you have presented to the American people?

Now might the mainstream media do its job by asking questions in real time of President Obama? To start with: “Mr. President, there seems to be so much more information that is available than you are telling us. It’s clear that you knew a great deal more. It’s also clear that you have been lying to us since the beginning. From the information we do know – from public sources – we can only draw the following conclusions:

-If you were warned beforehand that something was astir in Libya and you did nothing to forestall or prevent it, then you were grossly negligent and derelict in your duty to our overseas delegations.

-If you didn’t know anything was coming, you should have anticipated that something was likely to happen on the anniversary of 9/11, and should have been prepared for it.

-If you received information from the early messages and the drone images and the requests for help during the attack and you did nothing to try and assist the people in the Benghazi consulate, then you are utterly responsible for the deaths of four Americans and you should resign immediately. Their deaths are on your shoulders.

The American people deserve the truth before Nov. 6th!

Sunday, October 28, 2012 at 10:51 AM | Permalink

‘Down-Ballot’ voting

October 25, 2012

By Nancy Thorner & Jane Keill –

In our article published at Illinois Review on Oct. 23, “It’s the Electoral College, Stupid!”, we explained how important it is to vote in the upcoming election. Even though Illinois, as an all-Democrat-all-the-time state, will have its allotted 20 Electoral votes go to Obama, attention must be directed toward what is called ‘down-ballot” voting. Quite simply, you still need to vote for the candidates who are lower down on the ballot after the President/Vice-President slots at the top.

With all the hype that took place during the time span of the three presidential debates and the one vice-presidential match-up, many times it seemed like voting for president and vice president took precedence over the other races. The discussions around the water cooler at work or in the privacy of our homes were all centered on the choices at the top of the ballot.

There will, however, also be US Congressmen on the ballot who have to be re-elected every two years. There will be some Senators who are up for re-election in their six-year-term-rotation. For those of you in Illinois, Dick Durbin is up for election in 2014; Mark Kirk will be up in 2016. Now is the time to look ahead, Illinois, especially for those who espouse conservative Republican Party values. We need to search for candidates now to defeat our far left Democrat senator, Dick Durbin. And we need to look for a replacement for our much too moderate Republican senator, Mark Kirk, whose voting record makes it difficult to decide which party he has really pledged his loyalty to, despite the “R” after his name.

Lower down on the ballot will be local elections to your state capitols – your governors, representatives and senators. In some ways they are just as important as your national choices. Over the last 40 years, elected Democrat officials and legislators in Illinois have destroyed the state’s economy, its business status, its educational competence and its physical structure. Yet year after year voters in Illinois, so indoctrinated by party politics, blindly vote Democratic even though it has hurt them badly over the years. Many of these drone-like voters dwell in the city of Chicago where the Cook County and Chicago political machines demand and maintain party loyalty from its huge Democrat base.

Even lower down on the ballot you will most likely find a long list of judges (in Illinois, they are elected), and having no idea who is who, you’ll have to use the newspaper recommendations and hope they are half-way accurate.

Finally, you may have a referendum which will affect your state, county or city. Illinois has one this election which is related to the voting percentage on pension changes by our legislature.

In searching the Internet to write this article, we discovered a website ( that led us to a site recently set up, where one can select any state to learn where candidates stand on the issues in their community. You can also find and print out your own personalized ballot. It’s called “Voter 411 Voting Guide”:

Information can be printed or e-mailed to use as a reference when you actually vote. As all information is lost when you leave the site, writing in your name and address, as required to gain access to your voting information, does not pose a problem.

We were surprised when checking out the site that there were four presidential candidates on the ballots:

Gary Johnson (Libertarian)
Barack Obama (Democrat)
Mitt Romney (Republican)
Jill Stein (Green Party)

So, please don’t think your vote doesn’t count. Think of all the voters in California, Illinois, New York and other states who have been electing Democrats for years. Now, look at what condition those states are in.

That’s why your vote is important. A familiar quote, attributed to either Alexis de Tocqueville or Joseph de Maistre states, “In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.” You vote for it; you live with it.




By Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill –

It’s most interesting, and sometimes great fun, to argue endlessly about what happened in the one and only Vice Presidential candidate debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden on Thursday, October 11. In our opinion, which surely is not unlike those of many others, Joe Biden’s behavior displayed the abject fool that he is. Unfortunately, Joe Biden is the

Vice-President of the United States! At the time it was a blood-pressure-raising event and the latest polls showed Romney ahead by 1% – then Obama was ahead in Ohio, but not Florida. And, on and on and on.

Thank goodness the results in the aftermath of the 2nd Presidential debate between Governor Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama have erased, at least for the time being, our blood-pressure-related stress! The latest Gallup poll, as of Oct. 19, found that Mitt Romney has a seven-point lead over President Barack Obama.

Maybe you’re more interested in Dancing With the Stars or American Idol, and you just won’t care until election day when you finally have to make up your mind. But, turn your mind back to the 2008 election with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain. At the time most of us did the same thing as we are now. We obsessed about the latest media-provoked circus, which was in keeping with the media’s objective. In the meantime, Barack Obama and his team marched steadily down the road to the magic number of 270 electoral votes, the number it takes to win a presidential election. President Obama’s doing the same thing now, abetted by the mainstream media.

As you may remember in 2000, it is not who wins the popular vote who becomes President. It is the person with the most electoral votes. This was brought home by the Bush v Gore and the Supreme Court decision. Florida was the big state of hope in that year.

Those of us in all-Democrat-all-the-time states — Illinois (20), California (55), New York (29) — understand fully why we rarely see the candidates or their ads. We have been written off, or maybe we should say, automatically put in Obama’s electoral vote count column. We don’t really get a say in our state elections, but this does not in any way mean that we shouldn’t vote! It only means that these states, and their respective electoral college votes, are already in the bag for the Democrats. When adding three more states to the mix which usually go to the Democrats — (Maryland (10), Massachusetts (11), New Jersey (14) — Obama has an electoral count vote total of 139 before the election is even held.

From there on it’s all up for grabs, which is why everyone is watching the ‘swing’ states of Ohio (18), Virginia (13), No. Carolina (15), Florida (29). These states have the next level of electoral votes that can lead to a win. Texas, with its 38 votes, has been purposely left out here because the state usually goes Republican.

It is not our intent to predict which candidate will win which swing state. The Daily Swing State Tracking poll for the Rasmussen Reader on Friday, October 19, shows however, an interesting comparison. Of eleven key states won by President Obama in 2008 and thought to be competitive in 2012, Romney has 49% of the vote to President Obama’s 47%. Romney leads by three in Virginia. He’s ahead by four in Florida and six in North Carolina.

An October 19th Gallup Poll release of likely voters in which all were asked who they would vote for if the presidential election were held today, the response was 45% for Obama and 51% for Romney. The margin of error is given as +2 percentage points.

Despite the current poll tabulations which currently favor Mitt Romney, it is impossible to predict for certainty what the results of the November 6th end game will bring. At this cross road before Election Day, it is wise to pay less attention to the flak that serves as distraction, but instead keep your eye on the prize:

The White House
The House of Representatives
The Senate

Do not obsess about the polls. Do not become discouraged. Do not think your vote doesn’t count. Do keep your eye on the prize! And, keep your eye on the electoral count!

Initially published at Illinois Review on Saturday, October 20,
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 08:08 AM | Permalink