UNBELIEVABLE … Majority of Democrats Walk Out of Benghazi Congressional Hearings Refusing to Listen to Testimony of Parents of Murdered Sean Smith & Tyrone Woods

IT REALLY DOES NOT GET ANY MORE DISRESPECTFUL OR DESPICABLE … DEMOCRATS WALK OUT OF HEARINGS REFUSING TO LISTEN TO TESTIMONY OF THE PARENTS OF SLAIN TY WOODS AND SEAN SMITH.

As reported at The Town Hall, Democrats did the unthinkable yesterday and walked out of the Congressional hearing on Benghazi and spitting on the graves of Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith. Democrats refused to hear testimony from the parents of fallen Navy Seal Tyrone Woods and the parents of Sean Smith, who were both killed by terrorists in Benghazi during an attack that the Obama administration originally blamed on a video tape. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? Do these politicians realize that they work for “We the People”? How could a supposed Representative of the people refuse to listen to the people in the “People’s” House?

Words do not even begin to describe the unconscionable act that these Democrats just did.

During the second portion of a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing about Benghazi Thursday on Capitol Hill, the majority of Democrats on the Committee left the room and refused to listen to the testimony of Patricia Smith and Charles Woods. Ms. Smith is the mother of Sean Smith, an information management officer killed in the 9/11 Benghazi attack. Charles Woods is the father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, who was also killed.

SICK, JUST PLAIN SICK! The only Democrats who stayed for testimony of the parents were Ranking Member Elijah Cummings and Rep. Jackie Speier.

UPDATE I: PJ Tatler has VIDEO of the hearings of Patricia Smith, mother of slain U.S. Foreign Service information officer Sean Smith and Charles Woods, father of slain Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods.

UPDATE II: Weasel Zippers has a list of the cowardly Democrats who walked out on the parents of two American heroes who gave their lives for this country. You might want to call their offices and give them a piece of your mind as to their disgusting and disrespectful behavior.

Carolyn Maloney
Danny Davis
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Gerald E. Connolly
Jim Cooper
John Tierney
Mark Pocan
Matt Cartwright
Michelle Lujan Grisham
Peter Welch
Stephen Lynch
Steven Horsford
Tammy Duckworth
Tony Cardenas
William Lacy Clay

IRS Spied on Tea Party after Granting Tax-exempt Status

File this one under, no kidding, really?

The Washington Times is reporting that the IRS continued to spy on Tea Party organization, even after they were granted tax-exempt status. Yea, are we really going to believe that these conservative organizations were not purposely and willfully being targeted by the IRS? This scandal is not even close to being exposed. What ever happened to that transparency that Barack Obama spoke of while campaigning to be president?

Republicans investigating the IRS targeting scandal said Wednesday that the agency continued to conduct secret surveillance on tea party groups even after approving them for tax-exempt status.

Acting Commissioner Danny Werfel said he shut down the monitoring program after he found out about it, and said he has halted all audits of tax-exempt organizations based on political activity as he tries to get a handle on the embattled agency

Mr. Werfel, who was tapped four months ago to clean up the Internal Revenue Service after the targeting came to light, also told Congress he is troubled by emails sent by Lois G. Lerner, the woman at the center of the targeting scandal, that raise questions about her behavior. He said he has asked internal investigators to follow up on those emails.

“There are certain documents that raise questions, and when I looked at them I thought they raised questions,” Mr. Werfel said. “The ones that I thought raised questions I provided directly to [the inspector general], and I also provided them to the accountability review board within the IRS, which is set up to review this matter to see what actions may warrant personnel action or discipline.”

Ask yourself, who had the most to gain by the Tea Party surveillance and harassment? That would be Obama’s reelection of course.

Michigan Bills Would Require Individuals to Work For Welfare and Pass Drug Test

Well, it is about time … Barack Obama always talks about having skin in the game, I am sure he would support this.

There are two Michigan bill, one in the Senate that would require those receiving welfare to do some “volunteer” work, while a second in the House would require drug testing in order for recipients to receive public assistance. This should not only exists in states, it should be a federal law. In order to gain public assistance, one should have to give back to the community and at the very least, not be a drug addict. If an individual has to pass a drug test in order to get a job in the United States, why would the same not be true to receive welfare? One should have to meet a standard to get tax payer government assistance, otherwise, where is their skin in the game?

A bill has passed in the Michigan Senate that would require those receiving public assistance to do some “volunteer” work. Another bill, which passed the House Commerce Committee, requires drug testing, revoking benefits for welfare recipients who refuse the test or who test positive.

“What [the legislation] does, it says, in order for your to receive your cash assistance, your welfare check, you must provide some kind of community service to the community,” said the volunteer work bill’s sponsor, State Senator Joe Hune, who represents  Livingston and Shiawasse counties in Mid-Michigan.

Hune says he was inspired by a constituent who began to volunteer while on welfare — and that community service evolved into full employment.

“The whole intention is to make certain folks have some skin in the game, and I don’t feel that there’s any problem with making folks go out and do some kind of community service in order to receive their cash assistance,” Hune said.

Daily Commentary – Thursday, September 19, 2013 – What Would Happen in the Event of a Flu Pandemic?

• A recent government report predicts that a flu pandemic could lead to 2 million deaths nationwide

Starbucks Against the Second Amendment? Ask Customers to Leave Guns at Home

So what part about the Second Amendment and the following of US laws doesn’t Starbucks quite get?

Starbucks Corp, the overpriced coffee chain is asking their US customers who have “open carry” or “conceal carry” permits to leave their guns at home. Starbucks claim that they did not want to get involved in the open carry gun debate, yet they just did. Does Starbucks serve waffles? When a company sides with one side of the debate and restricts the other, that is the definition of taking a side. Just curious, how would you know whether I have carrying or not carrying a concealed weapon while ordering a Pumpkin Spice Latte?  The Starbucks’ request does not apply to authorized law enforcement personnel.

A note to Starbucks, none of the mass shootings, especially the one in Newtown, CT was done by an individual who legally could carry a fire arm.Those who believe in the Second Amendment can always chose not to frequent Starbucks following this decision. I guess not spending money I over-priced coffee will allow for the purchase of more ammunition.

Coffee chain Starbucks Corp has asked U.S. customers to leave their guns at home after being dragged into an increasingly fractious debate over U.S. gun rights in the wake of multiple mass shootings.

While many U.S. restaurant chains and retailers do not allow firearms on their properties, Starbucks’ policy had been to default to local gun laws, including “open carry” regulations in many U.S. states that allow people to bring guns into stores.

In August, this led gun-rights advocates to hold a national “Starbucks Appreciation Day” to thank the firm for its stance, pulling the company deeper into the fierce political fight.

Locations for Starbucks Appreciation Day events included Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 children and six adults were shot dead in an elementary school in December. Starbucks closed that shop before the event was scheduled to begin.

Chief Executive Howard Schultz said in an open letter to customers late Tuesday that Starbucks Appreciation Day events “disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of ‘open carry.’ To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores.”

I wonder how many Starbucks employees would be thankful if some one legally carrying a gun actually saved them during a commission of a crime? All Starbucks just accomplished was making themselves a gun-free zone and susceptible to future crime by those who do not follow the law.