A Message From Lucianne  



Now More Than Ever
Get Your Eagles Up!
Lucianne Tees - in
Black or White
Click to Buy


































        
 

 
Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute
Register | Rules & FAQs | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password


  Topic: Panetta opens combat
roles to women
Change your user profile.
If you are having trouble posting, please take the time to register.
Your User Name :
Your Password
  I forgot my password
Your Reply  :
Preview Reply     Post Reply
Panetta opens combat
roles to women

Associated Press, by Staff

Original Article

Posted By:Judy W., 1/23/2013 3:53:54 PM

Senior defense officials say Pentagon chief Leon Panetta is removing the military´s ban on women serving in combat, opening hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando jobs after more than a decade at war. The groundbreaking move recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule banning women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units. Panetta´s decision gives the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believe any positions must remain closed to women.

Comments:
Good grief, what are we coming to? (That´s the whole article.)

  

Post Reply  

Reply 1 - Posted by: yuban, 1/23/2013 3:58:50 PM     (No. 9134868)

Send HRC to the front lines NOW.


Reply 2 - Posted by: Susieq1, 1/23/2013 4:01:10 PM     (No. 9134875)

Foolish!


   

 

  


 
Reply 3 - Posted by: aasilver, 1/23/2013 4:01:52 PM     (No. 9134876)

Our first line of defense -- Gays and women.

Sounds like a plan -- to destroy the USA.


Reply 4 - Posted by: fhancock, 1/23/2013 4:06:41 PM     (No. 9134892)

When do they sign up for Selective Service ...if they are good enough to go into the infantry they should be eligible if and when a draft comes...otherwise they are STILL second-class soldiers...


Reply 5 - Posted by: wsdiego, 1/23/2013 4:06:45 PM     (No. 9134893)

They won´t last long on an Amtrac!
Semper Fi The Dirty Bird, Marine Amtracs


Reply 6 - Posted by: Johnny Angle, 1/23/2013 4:07:22 PM     (No. 9134895)

How do now they justify Selective Service for men only?


Reply 7 - Posted by: JoniTx, 1/23/2013 4:08:50 PM     (No. 9134899)

Doesn´t Congress have a voice on this decision? Just curious...


   

 

  


 
Reply 8 - Posted by: GOPinTN, 1/23/2013 4:13:53 PM     (No. 9134907)

Rarely do we find men who willingly engage in hard, solid thinking. There is an almost universal quest for easy answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to think.- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.


Reply 9 - Posted by: TXknitter, 1/23/2013 4:16:19 PM     (No. 9134912)

A lot of women say fine, go for it. BUT no whining, special treatment or lawsuits if you get your body parts blown to smithereens.


Reply 10 - Posted by: Coy860, 1/23/2013 4:16:32 PM     (No. 9134914)

ANY woman in combat better damned well be qualified to carry my grandson to safety if he is wounded in combat. IF not, get OUT.
This is a stupid move.


Reply 11 - Posted by: Not your typical New Yorker, 1/23/2013 4:16:57 PM     (No. 9134917)

The democrats continue to turn our military into politically correct mush.


Reply 12 - Posted by: Attila DiMedici, 1/23/2013 4:20:30 PM     (No. 9134924)

#7, that was my though as well. I thought that the ban on women in combat was legislated. However, I just did some research and such is apparently not the case.


   

 



 
Reply 13 - Posted by: on fire, 1/23/2013 4:30:36 PM     (No. 9134942)

Yep, the guys on the front line love nothing better than squandering time carrying gear for tired females or helping them keep up.

Panetta is ridiculous.


Reply 14 - Posted by: RIsailor, 1/23/2013 4:30:56 PM     (No. 9134946)

The Marine Corps runs a combat school for new Marine officers and opened the school to women last year. Several tried out and flunked. No more women lieutenants are applying.


Reply 15 - Posted by: tulipwood, 1/23/2013 4:34:55 PM     (No. 9134952)

Say good-by to men. Men will not compete with women, nor will they compete against a culture that has become so repulsively feminized. Ladies, you are on your own.


Reply 16 - Posted by: lazyman, 1/23/2013 4:38:00 PM     (No. 9134959)

We could have used them in Nam. We still would have lost but the year would have gone faster for me.


Reply 17 - Posted by: Trust No One, 1/23/2013 4:42:55 PM     (No. 9134969)

How I see it.

Next step - required to sign for Selective Service.

Wars in Africa and Defending Japan from China

Need for more soliders

Draft reinstated

Call up Men AND Women to fight global wars to inrich bankers, military complex and to TRY to keep global economy from crashing DOWN into FIAT oblivion.


   

 

  


 
Reply 18 - Posted by: stablemoney, 1/23/2013 4:44:27 PM     (No. 9134973)

The chiefs will stand far in the rear while they are sent forward for cannon fodder.


Reply 19 - Posted by: King of all trolls, 1/23/2013 4:46:01 PM     (No. 9134977)

There goes chivalry. Why should a man bother to endure what he does in the service if some chick can do the job for him. Stay home. Play video games. What´s the point?


Reply 20 - Posted by: whyyeseyec, 1/23/2013 4:48:49 PM     (No. 9134982)

Send only women into combat. Men have carried the load far too long. If we `need` more women in govn and business then we need more women in combat.


Reply 21 - Posted by: Scribelus, 1/23/2013 4:49:22 PM     (No. 9134983)

The women involved are volunteers, just like the men. Time will tell if the nation can bear larger female casualty lists.


Reply 22 - Posted by: TexasHillCountry, 1/23/2013 5:06:11 PM     (No. 9135000)

A VERY BAD IDEA.

Not what casualties the public can bear, but the real, and known, loss in combat efficiency? The biggest part of combat for the front-line troops is hard, brutal, dirty work that makes physical, emotional, and psychological demands that have to be experienced to be understood.


   

 



 
Reply 23 - Posted by: dittohead, 1/23/2013 5:11:34 PM     (No. 9135008)

True Confession: NO ONE would want to depend on ME on the front lines!!! VERY FOOLISH MOVE!


Reply 24 - Posted by: 6079 Smith, W, 1/23/2013 5:12:00 PM     (No. 9135009)

Oh, dear! Another opportunity for us to be beat over the head with "the first woman in combat", "the first black woman in combat", "the first transgendered woman in combat", "the first latina woman in combat", "the first woman killed in combat", "the first black woman killed in combat"...


Reply 25 - Posted by: fayebeck, 1/23/2013 5:14:48 PM     (No. 9135012)

I say only women who support abortion or have had one thereby qualifying them for killing, be put on the front lines. Also just a piggish comment from a pig. Seems women are the only "minority" who lobbied to give up special status. Of course that special status would be considering them "ladies". BUT today´s slutty women would make great soldiers. You won "ladies" now go for it.


Reply 26 - Posted by: HistoryBuff, 1/23/2013 5:19:36 PM     (No. 9135019)

Whoppee! The Academics have ruled!

The sign of equality is that now women can become trained killers.


Lets see how that works out.


Reply 27 - Posted by: Freeloader, 1/23/2013 5:23:07 PM     (No. 9135028)

And from the foxholes, torpedo rooms, tactical command posts, bivouac areas and boondocks around the globe, the new "battle cry" will be heard..."Come on baba, you drive me crazy...Goodness gracious great balls of fire!"


Reply 28 - Posted by: msjena, 1/23/2013 5:25:34 PM     (No. 9135034)

This is progress? Well, I suppose if you think there are too many people already it is.


Reply 29 - Posted by: Packard Man, 1/23/2013 5:25:45 PM     (No. 9135035)

Interestingly revealed on the day Hillary goes before congress.


Reply 30 - Posted by: chumley, 1/23/2013 5:29:11 PM     (No. 9135040)

I served with a lot of women during my time in. The vast majority did their regular jobs exceptionally well.
When we went into the field or on a remote was another matter entirely. Very few had the strength or stamina to do the work. Their very presence created resentment as someone else had to do two jobs.
Plus, they create drama just by being there. Romances develop all the time, and the last thing some lonely GI needs is to see someone else playing high school lovey games. I saw it on every assignment and every deployment.
This is a bad idea, which means it will be embraced by those who wish to further degrade our military.


Reply 31 - Posted by: semperparatus, 1/23/2013 5:30:08 PM     (No. 9135042)

Of course this is a bad idea, another moronic event in the life of liberals and their followers. Ask anyone aboard ship what they think of this idea.

#27 - I believe the United States has already passed the test when it comes to women killers. A disgusting topic to be sure, but, are we not at the 55 million abortion mark now?

55 million... more than the number of deaths (conservative number) in World War II. Hitler and Stalin would be proud.

Semper Paratus


Reply 32 - Posted by: viking diver, 1/23/2013 5:32:18 PM     (No. 9135046)

unbelievable and simply stupid, panetta playing PC with the very lives that men will give their lives to defend.
Are women ready to be raped repeatedly by the enemy before being killed.
some of the villages that were friendly and provided security and food to us in Nam, sometimes would be overrun if found out and it wasn´t pretty what was left.
what a way to ruin a combat effective squad by putting a woman in the mix, will she be able to carry 65 lbs of equipment or more while on foot, walk long distances. I remember the Air Force in its infinite wisdom once put a woman with the 5 of us on a mountain top for a remote 6 month tour, we had to give up space for her privacy, and set aside time for the shows just for her, and she still ended up getting pregnant and I don´t think her husband was too pleased by that either.


Reply 33 - Posted by: cav160, 1/23/2013 5:57:57 PM     (No. 9135086)

Well since we are on a PC role lets have a couple of all female Infantry Battalions, commanded by first female Battalion Commander! Throw them into Horn of Africa to show how effective they can be.


Reply 34 - Posted by: FL_Absentee_Voter, 1/23/2013 5:58:42 PM     (No. 9135089)

Sea duty has been opened up to women since 1978 and it seems to be working our real well: more than half of the commanding officers relieved of their commands last year were fired due to some form of sexual misconduct.

Just saw Howitzer Explosion Guy ("Party on, Wayne!") on the cafeteria flat screen - he´s all giddy over the news and had out-of-the-closet helo pilot tammy duckworth on as his guest. Finally, something brings a smile to her face. Up until now, she´s always worn a frown - I didn´t know if it was because she´s merely another angry lesbian or that she lost both legs while fighting in George Bush´s War.


Reply 35 - Posted by: Magic8Ball, 1/23/2013 6:01:09 PM     (No. 9135094)

War against women.


Reply 36 - Posted by: oldsfc, 1/23/2013 6:05:08 PM     (No. 9135102)

The strongest women is still weaker than the average male. I would love to see Mary hump a 50lb ruck. Hah!


Reply 37 - Posted by: Antiquegolf, 1/23/2013 6:06:23 PM     (No. 9135104)

Reply 26, any population control secondary to abortion and other factors is more than canceled by the illegal alien invasion. The population of the USA is increasing at the rate of a 3rd world country. Almost all of the growth is due to immigration. And it´s not just hispanics. The average muslim "family" in USA has 7 children.


Reply 38 - Posted by: mythman, 1/23/2013 6:06:50 PM     (No. 9135107)

It´s been tried before in other armies. As I recall, besides the strength issue there are two more: 1) the maiming of women soldiers in combat has a devastating effect on all present 2) women decide to opt out by getting pregnant in considerable numbers.


Reply 39 - Posted by: Alpha91c, 1/23/2013 6:07:06 PM     (No. 9135109)

Mark my words, this will not end well. PC run amok.


Reply 40 - Posted by: anonymous, 1/23/2013 6:08:02 PM     (No. 9135112)

Well, if this is to be then the Obama administration should immediately require that all young women register for the draft.


Reply 41 - Posted by: Ida Lil, 1/23/2013 6:14:29 PM     (No. 9135120)

Oh My the yang factor at work Obama style. He voices all out protection for women while his minion declares women will be in combat.
Of course the protection from Obe is only in matters of lady parts in political sexual terms while pretending those parts are not included in death or dismemberment in combat.
Like everything else in his governing agenda open mouth stick in foot then cram in the opposite one.


Reply 42 - Posted by: ScarletPimpernel, 1/23/2013 6:21:07 PM     (No. 9135138)

And earlier this afternoon, Valerie Jarrett tweeted, "If there´s one thing we should all agree on, it´s protecting women from violence. Congress needs to pass the Violence Against Women Act." (You can access the link on Drudge.) How screwed up is this Administration??


Reply 43 - Posted by: HistoryBuff, 1/23/2013 6:34:00 PM     (No. 9135159)

Good.

Now make all 18 year old women of America REGISTER FOR THE DRAFT.

It´ll get reeaaallll quiet.


Reply 44 - Posted by: Penney, 1/23/2013 6:48:43 PM     (No. 9135186)

Poster is exactly right. This is 0bama´s war against women, indeed the entire dem party´s decades-old war against women. The radical militant lefty/libs have betrayed femininity and demeaned masculinity since the 1960s! Their statist policies have fractured the American family unit over the past 4 decades. ...This will NOT work out well.


Reply 45 - Posted by: Rafter, 1/23/2013 6:55:20 PM     (No. 9135190)

#1 and #3...

Remember that old bromide...
"kill two birds with one stone"... ?

Well...
Send Hill-err-ee-ass Herself to combat...
and you got gay women at the front!

Pretty certain she´ll come out as gay before the next election.
Wants all those votes.
Nothing to stop her this time.

Probably plans to marry Jodie Foster in the White House in 2017.
That is...
If she survives her combat role.
Army boots and a camo pants suit.
Trendy.


Reply 46 - Posted by: BaseballFan, 1/23/2013 7:05:58 PM     (No. 9135204)

I envision that this will be as "successful" as putting women on Navy ships. Until they decide (at the last minute) they don´t want to deploy.
Then some poor GI is going to find out he´s being FORCED to do back-to-back deployments.


Reply 47 - Posted by: OC Jackson, 1/23/2013 7:12:00 PM     (No. 9135210)

Lousy idea. One poster talked about a 50 lb. rucksack. More realistically, try a 75 lb. load.

Register all 18 year-old females for the draft. Those who are "selected" for motor pool specialties, are required to change tires on their own. Those selected for the Artillery must be capable of loading an 8" howitzer. The rounds weigh 200 lbs, by the way.

I´ve served with females, officer and enlisted. In the office, they were fine soldiers. The problem came with their relationships (inevitable) with their male counterparts. Young women and men, thrown together in stressful environments will become sexually involved. Problems will range from jealousy to physical conflict.

This is a stupid, PC idea.


Reply 48 - Posted by: dr fate, 1/23/2013 7:27:51 PM     (No. 9135229)

Hey, if Demi Moore could do it so well in a movie, then what´s the big deal?


Reply 49 - Posted by: Bubby, 1/23/2013 8:00:18 PM     (No. 9135269)

This is just another attack by Democrats to destroy the greatest army on earth. First gays and now women. This is purposeful and destructive. I would not go into combat with women period! I don´t care what anyone thinks of this post I wouldn´t do it. It won´t be long before all the physical strength requirements will be revised downward to accomodate women. The result will be more combat deaths to be pc. It´s discusting what the Democrats are doing to this country!


Reply 50 - Posted by: grandpa, 1/23/2013 10:24:40 PM     (No. 9135472)

Come on guys, this could be a good thing. Now soldiers won´t need so many camp followers or local whores. Between this built-in nookie supply and being serviced by the open gays, soldiers are going to be in sexual heaven. Wow, what a country!


Reply 51 - Posted by: bighambone, 1/24/2013 12:56:43 AM     (No. 9135680)

The only reason that the liberals are able to run with such a ludicrous policy change is that only about 1% of the US population ever serves in the military these days. The percentage that make up the army and marine ground combat units that close with the enemy during ground combat is much less then that 1%. The rest of the about 99% of the population knows little about the military and it´s traditions, or the extreme hardships that marines and soldiers actually face and experience during sustained ground combat operations.


Reply 52 - Posted by: broken01, 1/24/2013 11:47:58 AM     (No. 9136494)

This may look good on paper in the liberal halls of the WH, Pentagon, ACLU, and college campi but being a Navy veteran of 20yrs I´m here tell you this will blow up the dopey liberal´s faces. How you might ask? The first time that ANY terrorist group gets their filthy hands on a female servicemember and uses her to either make her give it up(secrets folks not what your thinking)or tortures her to make some other captive spill the classifed beans. The blowback would make the above institutions rethink this ridiculous idea. Mark my words that will happen.



Post Reply   Close thread 720286




Below, you will find ...

Most Recent Articles posted by "Judy W."

and

Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)




Most Recent Articles posted by "Judy W."



Obama´s most fiendish plot yet
Daily Caller, by Mickey Kaus    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/17/2013 8:55:18 AM     Post Reply
An idea so crazy it just might … Opponents and supporters of “comprehensive immigration reform” (i.e. amnesty) agree it doesn’t do well on the front burner of public debate. (Snip) Back in March, I didn’t see how the Obama team, however brilliant, was going to protect its amnesty bill from this threat of publicity, given that the mainstream press was “commmitted to overcovering this issue.” Now we know the answer! In its most fiendish strategem yet, Team Obama has launched a series of not-quite-devastating but press-obsessing scandals against itself! The confluence of the Internal Revenue Service, Benghazi and AP

In defense of Jason
Richwine and Charles Murray
Washington Examiner, by Michael Barone    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/16/2013 8:52:17 PM     Post Reply
My American Enterprise Institute colleague Charles Murray came to the defense of our former colleague Jason Richwine, who was fired by the Heritage Foundation amid protests about his Harvard Ph.D. thesis, on nationalreview.com. Charles was entirely accurate in stating that Richwine’s conclusion that Hispanics have lower-than-average IQs is accurate and, among specialists in this area, non-controversial. Richwine was careful to say that the average Hispanic IQ might rise over time, as has been observed of other groups’ average IQs. And the Heritage Foundation paper co-authored by Richwine estimating the fiscal cost of legalizing current illegal immigrants

Obamacare isn´t about health
care, it´s about power
Washington Examiner, by Jim DeMint    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/16/2013 8:27:29 AM     Post Reply
Members of the House of Representatives are scheduled to vote Thursday to repeal all of Obamacare. Given that the House voted to repeal the law last year, some commentators and observers have questioned the need for another repeal vote. However, the scandals coming to light over the last week perfectly make the case for why Congress must eradicate the law from the statute books. (Snip) While we don´t yet know all the details about these scandals, we do know that the IRS grossly abused its power at a time when Obamacare grants it massive new authority.

Even liberals are leaping
off bandwagon
Boston Herald, by Margery Eagan    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/16/2013 7:09:14 AM     Post Reply
You know the worm has turned when even MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow hold their noses at the stench from Barack Obama’s scandals — when so many stories from the so-called liberal press now describe the erstwhile Messiah as “aloof,” “arrogant” and “holier than thou.” (Snip) The same media types accused of covering Obama on bended knee — such as myself — are now turning our collective backs. And no wonder. What we’re learning about his administration has undermined our basic trust in government. Yet the president seems oblivious to how serious and unsettling these scandals are,

Quabbin Reservoir Tests
Normal After Trespassing
Associated Press, by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/16/2013 6:08:11 AM     Post Reply
BELCHERTOWN, Mass. — Testing done on water samples from the Quabbin Reservoir showed no abnormalities after seven people were seen at a reservoir park entrance shortly after midnight, officials said Wednesday. The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority said water quality samples were analyzed at its lab Tuesday and all came back normal after the alleged trespassing incident. The central Massachusetts reservoir supplies drinking water to Boston. State police spokesman David Procopio said a trooper saw two cars parked at a reservoir park entrance at 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, then saw five young men and two young women

Soros Gave $6.1 Million to
Groups Linked to Pressure on IRS
to Target Conservative Nonprofits
Cybercast News Service, by Mike Ciandella    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/15/2013 1:12:08 PM     Post Reply
With Soros funding, anything is possible. The growing scandal where the IRS unfairly targeted politically-conservative groups can be traced back to a lobbying effort begun by George Soros-funded liberal groups in 2010, after the Supreme Court´s Citizens United ruling. The talking points of these groups then bounced around a carefully created progressive "echo chamber," until they eventually made their way into established media outlets. Key IRS policy changes about how it investigated conservative groups took place soon after it received three separate letters sent by Soros-funded liberal organizations.

True Grit
Townhall, by John Stossel    Original Article
Posted By: Judy W.- 5/15/2013 7:55:58 AM     Post Reply
Are you a real man (or woman)? Do you have "grit"? Compare yourself to the man on the $20 bill: Andrew Jackson, our seventh president. During the Revolutionary War, Jackson volunteered to fight. He was just 13 years old at the time. The British captured him and made him a servant for British officers. (Snip) Jackson had grit. Do your kids have that much grit today? I doubt it. Parents now try to protect kids from all danger. In New York City, some won´t let teenagers go to school by themselves. Lenore Skenazy, author of Free-Range Kids, thinks that´s absurd.



Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)



Analyze this
76 replie(s)
Power Line, by Scott Johnson    Original Article
Posted By: MissMolly- 5/19/2013 11:33:33 AM     Post Reply
What did President Obama do on the evening of 9/11/12 when our men were under attack in Benghazi? The invaluable Andrew McCarthy reminds us that Obama and Secretary Clinton had a 10:00 p.m. phone call of which many (including, I think, Chris Wallace) have lost sight. This morning when Wallace asked Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer what Obama was up to that evening, Pfeiffer declared the line of inquiry “offensive.” Translation: Obama and his minions would prefer to “move on” and are warning the likes of FNC off:(Snip for video)The Weekly Standard’s Daniel Halper has posted the rush transcript

Evidence emerges that Obama
administration official knew of
IRS targeting during 2012 campaign

59 replie(s)
CBS News, by Margaret Brennan    Original Article
Posted By: earlybird- 5/18/2013 9:01:39 PM     Post Reply
WASHINGTON - There were new questions Saturday night concerning if anyone in the White House was aware of the IRS´ targeting of conservative groups. Inspector General Russell George said he informed a deputy at the Treasury Department in June of 2012 about the probe into the IRS. The Treasury Department confirmed the timeline but said they did not know the details of the investigation until last week.(Snip)Marcus Owens ran the tax-exempt division at the IRS for 10 years. He said it isn´t difficult to figure out who´s doing what at the agency.

Obama: "As An African American
You Have To Work Twice As Hard
As Anyone Else If You Want To Get By"

53 replie(s)
Real Clear Politics, by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: Desert Fox- 5/19/2013 6:55:47 PM     Post Reply
PRESIDENT OBAMA: You are the mantle of Frederick Douglass and Booker T. Washington and Ralph Bunche and Langston Hughes and George Washington Carver and Ralph Abernathy and Thurgood Marshall and, yes, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. These men were many things to many people and they knew full well the role that racism played in their life. But when it came to their own accomplishments and sense of purpose, they had no time for excuses. Every one of you has a grandma or an uncle or a parent whose told you at some point in life

Camelot Is Burning
47 replie(s)
Breitbart´s Big Government, by Christopher Burton    Original Article
Posted By: mitzi- 5/18/2013 8:16:11 PM     Post Reply
It began in earnest last Friday. A flash mob of latte drinking, tofu eating media that has done its best to quell, rather than fan the flames of truth, turned on one of their own. Jay Carney lay bludgeoned at the base of the podium, a victim of friendly fire. Ironically, the attack was reminiscent of the one in Benghazi he has repeatedly denied the Administration he represents bears any responsibility for. “Changed twelve times?!” came the cries. And with good reason. We were misled; no, lied to.

Watergate 2.0 -- why the
IRS scandal is far worse

46 replie(s)
Fox News, by Matt Kibbe    Original Article
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/18/2013 5:59:17 AM     Post Reply
In the wake of one of the worst abuses of government power in recent history, many are rushing to frame the Internal Revenue Service scandal as simply an attack on conservative activists. That view risks creating a partisan political football and misses a fundamentally scarier abuse that exceeds the scandals of Watergate or any other prior government abuse. The IRS has admitted that since May 2010 it targeted grassroots-conservative organizations that had applied for tax-exempt status, unfairly subjecting them to rigorous scrutiny due to their political leanings. Such groups were told they were required to comply with IRS requests,

Lew asks Congress for debt increase,
says it’s ´not open to debate´

46 replie(s)
The Hill, by Peter Schoeder    Original Article
Posted By: DW626- 5/18/2013 6:12:33 PM     Post Reply
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew on Friday urged congressional leaders to raise the debt limit and insisted that the White House is not going to negotiate over the increase because lawmakers have "no choice." "We will not negotiate over the debt limit," Lew wrote. "The creditworthiness of the United States is non-negotiable. The question of whether the country must pay obligations it has already incurred is not open to debate." Lew said that while President Obama is willing to discuss plans to reduce the nation´s deficit with Congress, those talks must be kept separate from any effort to raise the nation´s debt cap.

McCaskill Calls For Firing Of All
Involved In IRS Targeting Scandal

43 replie(s)
KMOX [St, Louis], by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: BuckeyeRon- 5/18/2013 2:46:31 PM     Post Reply
Washington – Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-MO, issued a video statement Friday in response to reports that the Internal Revenue Service unfairly targeted conservative nonprofit groups. (Snip) “There’s a reason Lady Justice wears a blindfold in America. That is because in America, we don’t apply the law based on who you are, who you know, or what you believe. We apply the law equally.” “We should not only fire the head of the IRS, which has occurred, but we’ve got to go down the line and find every single person who had anything to do with this and make sure


Post Reply   Close thread 720286





Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | Register | Rules & FAQs | Search | Post | Contact | RSS | Contribute | Logout | Forgot Password


© 2013 Lucianne.com Media Inc.

~~~c~~~