Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, blasted Wolf Blitzer for asking if the FAA's travel ban to Israel was motivated by political reasons and called the tone of the question "insulting to America."
Blitzer asked Bloomberg if the decision was made for political reasons, and Bloomberg, a good friend of Barack Obama, blustered:
Don’t be ridiculous! Why would you think that? It’s an outrage to accuse one of our agencies––by asking the question, you’re implying that our government does things for political reasons, and maybe everyone once in a while they do it, but it’s your job to prove it. Just the allegation against our government, I personally take as an offense.
Bloomberg dismissed the premise of the question, asserting that he "didn't know," before adding, "the tone of the question, of trying to create dissension, it’s insulting to America.”
Yet he tweets…
Mike Bloomberg @MikeBloomberg Follow
Safely landed at Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv - here to show support for Israel's right to defend itself.
8:08 AM - 23 Jul 2014
Apparently FFA travel bans don’t apply to him.
Blitzer asked Bloomberg if the decision was made for political reasons, and Bloomberg, a good friend of Barack Obama, blustered:
Don’t be ridiculous! Why would you think that? It’s an outrage to accuse one of our agencies––by asking the question, you’re implying that our government does things for political reasons, and maybe everyone once in a while they do it, but it’s your job to prove it. Just the allegation against our government, I personally take as an offense.
Bloomberg dismissed the premise of the question, asserting that he "didn't know," before adding, "the tone of the question, of trying to create dissension, it’s insulting to America.”
Yet he tweets…
Mike Bloomberg @MikeBloomberg Follow
Safely landed at Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv - here to show support for Israel's right to defend itself.
8:08 AM - 23 Jul 2014
Apparently FFA travel bans don’t apply to him.
GOP Admits It's Hypocritical To Sue Obama Yet Urge Him To Act Alone On Border Crisis
The Huffington Post | By Igor Bobic
Posted: 08/01/2014 10:16 am EDT Updated: 3 hours ago
A pair of House Republicans admitted on Friday that it made little sense to sue President Barack Obama over executive overreach and, at the same time, urge him to act without Congress to solve the border crisis.
"Look, you can't say on the one hand that the president is overreaching by acting without legislative authority and direction and then refuse to give him legislative authority and direction in another area," Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a frequent voice of moderation in the House GOP conference, said on MSNBC's "The Daily Rundown."
In a stunning defeat on Thursday, House leadership scrapped a scheduled vote on a border bill after a last-minute revolt by conservative members. The conference is meeting again Friday morning to discuss retooled legislation, delaying the planned August recess. In a statement explaining the postponement, House GOP leaders placed the onus on the White House to act without congressional authority.
"There are numerous steps the president can and should be taking right now, without the need for congressional action, to secure our borders and ensure these children are returned swiftly and safely to their countries," they said in a joint statement.
But that rationale raised eyebrows across Washington after House Republicans voted the day prior to authorize House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to sue the president for acting without Congress in delaying enforcement of the health care law they oppose.
Cole, an ally of Boehner, conceded as much on Friday.
"We've got a good bill that actually addresses the problem, a problem the president has identified but refused to produce a solution to, provides an adequate amount of money to get us to the end of the year," he said. "We'll give him additional resources next year. But the first thing is to actually pass legislation across the House floor. So I'll tell you that's what we're going to do today. I'm not going to point a lot of fingers at the president until we get our own job done."
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) echoed Cole's remarks on MSNBC, promising Republicans were not leaving town until they vote on some sort of legislation to address the influx of unaccompanied minors crossing the border.
"We can't go home until we pass a bill. That's why we're staying here, that's why we're going to get the job done," he said.
Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer lambasted House Republicans for the "ridiculous" move on Thursday night.
"It is ridiculous to sue the president on a Wednesday because he oversteps the law, as he has done a dozen times illegally and unconstitutionally," the conservative commentator said on Fox, "and then on a Thursday say that he should overstep the law, contradict the law that passed in 2008 and deal with this himself."
Boehner appeared to acknowledge the matter on Friday, when he tweeted that, "Every president issues executive orders & takes action where he can. Most of them, though, do so within the law."
That prompted a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to tweet back, "This is officially a hot mess."
The Huffington Post | By Igor Bobic
Posted: 08/01/2014 10:16 am EDT Updated: 3 hours ago
A pair of House Republicans admitted on Friday that it made little sense to sue President Barack Obama over executive overreach and, at the same time, urge him to act without Congress to solve the border crisis.
"Look, you can't say on the one hand that the president is overreaching by acting without legislative authority and direction and then refuse to give him legislative authority and direction in another area," Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a frequent voice of moderation in the House GOP conference, said on MSNBC's "The Daily Rundown."
In a stunning defeat on Thursday, House leadership scrapped a scheduled vote on a border bill after a last-minute revolt by conservative members. The conference is meeting again Friday morning to discuss retooled legislation, delaying the planned August recess. In a statement explaining the postponement, House GOP leaders placed the onus on the White House to act without congressional authority.
"There are numerous steps the president can and should be taking right now, without the need for congressional action, to secure our borders and ensure these children are returned swiftly and safely to their countries," they said in a joint statement.
But that rationale raised eyebrows across Washington after House Republicans voted the day prior to authorize House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to sue the president for acting without Congress in delaying enforcement of the health care law they oppose.
Cole, an ally of Boehner, conceded as much on Friday.
"We've got a good bill that actually addresses the problem, a problem the president has identified but refused to produce a solution to, provides an adequate amount of money to get us to the end of the year," he said. "We'll give him additional resources next year. But the first thing is to actually pass legislation across the House floor. So I'll tell you that's what we're going to do today. I'm not going to point a lot of fingers at the president until we get our own job done."
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) echoed Cole's remarks on MSNBC, promising Republicans were not leaving town until they vote on some sort of legislation to address the influx of unaccompanied minors crossing the border.
"We can't go home until we pass a bill. That's why we're staying here, that's why we're going to get the job done," he said.
Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer lambasted House Republicans for the "ridiculous" move on Thursday night.
"It is ridiculous to sue the president on a Wednesday because he oversteps the law, as he has done a dozen times illegally and unconstitutionally," the conservative commentator said on Fox, "and then on a Thursday say that he should overstep the law, contradict the law that passed in 2008 and deal with this himself."
Boehner appeared to acknowledge the matter on Friday, when he tweeted that, "Every president issues executive orders & takes action where he can. Most of them, though, do so within the law."
That prompted a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to tweet back, "This is officially a hot mess."
Just another .001%-er who blathers about "fair share" showing how greedy he is:
[h=1]Robert Redford sues New York over $1.6 million tax bill[/h]
Actor Robert Redford is suing the state of New York for what he says are unfair taxes from the sale of the Sundance Channel.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/6/robert-redford-sues-new-york-over-16-million-tax-b/
[h=1]Robert Redford sues New York over $1.6 million tax bill[/h]
Actor Robert Redford is suing the state of New York for what he says are unfair taxes from the sale of the Sundance Channel.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/6/robert-redford-sues-new-york-over-16-million-tax-b/
"Anti-Inequality" Professor Robert Reich Sticks It To Poor People With $242,613 Salary For Teaching ONE CLASS This Semester
Robert Reich, who served as U.S. secretary of labor for four years under Bill Clinton, is currently a public policy professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
The ultra-progressive economist — inasmuch as a mere law school graduate can be an economist — raked in an impressive income of $242,613 from the taxpayer-funded school in 2013, according to EAGnews.org.
For that sweet salary of $20,217 per month, Reich is slated to teach exactly one course this fall.
He will teach a more normal course load of four courses during the spring 2014 semester, notes EAGnews.
Reich, who served on the economic advisory board of then-President-elect Barack Obama in 2008, has a lengthy history of criticizing rich people.
The front page of Reich’s Fecebook page is currently festooned in all-capital letters with an appropriate motto: “INEQUALITY FOR ALL.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/06/r...aching-one-class-this-semester/#ixzz39dSLmsiq
Robert Reich, who served as U.S. secretary of labor for four years under Bill Clinton, is currently a public policy professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
The ultra-progressive economist — inasmuch as a mere law school graduate can be an economist — raked in an impressive income of $242,613 from the taxpayer-funded school in 2013, according to EAGnews.org.
For that sweet salary of $20,217 per month, Reich is slated to teach exactly one course this fall.
He will teach a more normal course load of four courses during the spring 2014 semester, notes EAGnews.
Reich, who served on the economic advisory board of then-President-elect Barack Obama in 2008, has a lengthy history of criticizing rich people.
The front page of Reich’s Fecebook page is currently festooned in all-capital letters with an appropriate motto: “INEQUALITY FOR ALL.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/06/r...aching-one-class-this-semester/#ixzz39dSLmsiq
