‘Transparent’ Obama Administration Blocks Inspectors General From Conducting Investigations

More than half of the Federal government’s 78 inspectors general (IGs)complained to Congress last week that the Administration of President Barack Obama habitually obstructs their lawful mission to conduct investigations into government waste and corruption.

The letter, submitted to the ranking members of the House Oversight and Homeland Security Committees by 47 of the 73 Federal IGs, never mentions Obama by name, instead citing numerous examples of stonewalling from agencies whose policies are guided by the Obama Administration — including the Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency.

From the letter:

We have learned that the Inspectors General for the Peace Corps, the Environmental Protection Agency (in his role as Inspector General for the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board) and the Department of Justice have recently faced restrictions on their access to certain records available to their agencies that were needed to perform their oversight work in critical areas. In each of these instances, we understand that lawyers in these agencies construed other statutes and law applicable to privilege in a manner that would override the express authorization contained in the IG Act. These restrictive readings of the IG Act represent potentially serious challenges to the authority of every Inspector General and our ability to conduct our work thoroughly, independently, and in a timely manner.

Congress passed the IG Act in 1978, expanding the powers of IGs in a 2008 reform measure. IG offices have law enforcement powers similar to those enjoyed by the FBI; many IG officers are armed as they go about their duties. IG offices have subpoena power independent of the Department of Justice and have broad powers of surveillance over  government employees and contractors.

Even though a number of IG positions are Presidential political appointments, under Obama there has nevertheless been significant backlash from IG offices for stonewalling — a puzzling phenomenon that belies the Obama Administration’s oft-repeated boast of offering a precedent-setting degree of transparency.

“It’s not as if the IGs are a clique of obsessive, conservative Inspector Javerts,” observes National Review’s John Fund. “President Obama appointed most of the IGs in office today, and all those who were appointed by him have been confirmed by a Democratic Senate… That makes the complaints raised in the IGs’ letter all the more serious. More and more agencies are setting documents off-limits by declaring them “‘privileged.’”

Yet the Obama Administration continues to just say whatever sounds good, regardless of the crescendo of voices pointing out the obvious contradiction between wishful fiction and fact. Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s Monday letter to the Society of Professional Journalists, in response to SPJ’s recent transparency complaint against the Administration, is insistent that Obama’s transparency is real and magnanimous. 

“Simply put, we’ve backed up — with action — the President’s ambitious, early and ongoing commitment to transparency,” wrote Earnest:

The President’s commitment to transparency and the crucial role of the independent press is unwavering. The President has set an historically high standard of transparency that is part of the legacy to which future presidents will aspire and the President and his Administration are justifiably proud of these accomplishments.

How did SPJ president David Cuillier receive that? 

“Typical spin and response through non-response.”

Federal Work-From-Home Program Rife With Fraud As Employees Collect Checks For Doing Nothing

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has a program that allows its patent examiners to work from home. The results of an investigation into the efficacy of that practice, sprung from multiple complaints, has now revealed that a lot of those employees have routinely lied about the number of hours they’ve worked, and they have even received bonuses for work that was never done.

Sounds like a government program alright.

The internal investigation, done by a special Patent Office “task force,” reveals employees falsely logged time when they had not been working, massaged work dockets to receive unearned bonuses and “mortgaged” their work by “submitting incomplete work for credit before the end of a bi-week [pay period] and then going in after the bi-week to submit valid work.”

The Washington Post reported Sunday that top officials at the Patent Office had even stymied past attempts by the employees’ supervisors to investigate the allegations.

Some of the 8,300 patent examiners, about half of whom work from home full time, repeatedly lied about the hours they were putting in, and many were receiving bonuses for work they didn’t do. And when supervisors had evidence of fraud and asked to have the employee’s computer records pulled, they were rebuffed by top agency officials, ensuring that few cheaters were disciplined, investigators found.

From the “Time Fraud” portion of the Patent Office’s memo, the report on which The Post based its story:

d. The agency is not policing or monitoring abuse of timesheets.

e. Conduct issues and time fraud are routinely overlooked as long as an examiner’s production levels are acceptable.

f. There is a lack of accountability for Patent Examiners participating in the Hoteling [work from home] Program.

g. Unnamed Patent Examiners are receiving overtime pay for time they are not working.

h. Management is dissuading supervisors from questioning employees about time and attendance discrepancies.

It goes on and on like that.

The Patent Office appears to have redacted the worst examples of employee abuse from the version of the report it eventually delivered to the Commerce Department inspector general last year. “The Washington Post obtained copies of the internal report and the version provided to the inspector general, which at 16 pages is half the length of the original,” the story observes.

Meanwhile, the Patent Office has amassed a backlog of patent applications “swelling to more than 600,000 and estimated waiting times of more than five years,” according to The Post. The Patent Office employs 11,627 people.

U.S. Intelligence Official Fires Back At Obama: Iraq Catastrophe Not A Product Of ‘Intelligence Failure’

A day after President Barack Obama indicated that the Iraqi advance of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, had proceeded more rapidly than U.S. intelligence had predicted, an intelligence official told The Wall Street Journal that’s nonsense.

“This wasn’t a U.S. intelligence failure,” said the unnamed official. “It was an Iraqi military failure. The job of the intelligence community is to warn. We did that. If there was a surprise, it was in just how quickly Iraqi forces initially disintegrated when the shooting started.”

On Saturday, Obama had said intelligence coming out of Iraq over the past months had not led his Administration to anticipate the terrorists’ ability to so quickly and effectively surge through the country and claim territory for its caliphate.

“There is no doubt that their advance; their movement over the last several months, has been more rapid than the intelligence estimates, and, I think, the expectations of policy makers both in and outside of Iraq,” Obama said.

The Journal reported that U.S. intelligence in Iraq was limited following the 2011 American withdrawal.

“A decline in U.S. spy resources after the U.S. military pulled out of Iraq in 2011 has limited American intelligence capability in the region,” the report stated. “In some cases, intelligence officials have been frustrated by the Obama administration’s reluctance to get more involved in Iraq and Syria, current and former U.S. officials said.”

But the unnamed intelligence official resisted the Administration’s assertion that it was caught off guard, saying the U.S. has been watching al-Qaida spinoff groups “for years” – including the militants that coalesced in the aftermath of the Syrian civil war to form what’s now known as the Islamic State – and that these groups’ strategic strengths and weaknesses among the U.S. intelligence community is well known.

Obama’s ‘Jayvee Team’ Dismissal Of Islamic State Militants Comes Full Circle

What a difference a few short months of fundraising and golf outings make.

Back in January, President Barack Obama started the year with what seemed at the time a fresh optimism, sitting down with The New Yorker for a sympathetic interview in which he dismissed the boiling kettle of Sunni extremism in Syria and Iraq as the bumblings of an inept “Jayvee” team – as in, these guys are lightweight terrorists compared to the al-Qaida we just decimated.

“The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,” Obama told The New Yorker’s David Remnick in January. “I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.”

In Obama’s imperfect comparison, the jayvee has turned out to be Kobe. Obama just saw the opponent he wished he had, instead of the opponent the Islamic State has been in the process of becoming all along.

Asked Friday whether the White House still considers the Islamic State to be the kiddie team, Obama Press Secretary Josh Earnest made this ridiculous adjustment to the President’s analogy:

I think what is appropriate to say is there is no question that the Lakers uniforms that were worn, to use that analogy a little bit, that were worn by the al Qaeda leadership in Afghanistan has been decimated and defeated in Afghanistan…We do remain concerned about the military proficiency that has been demonstrated by ISIL and that’s why you’ve seen the president take steps, including the authorization of military force that would protect American citizens who might be harmed by them.

Three years after an Iraqi pullout that left no residual force behind, and in the aftermath of a bipolar contribution to “resolving” the Syrian conflict, coach Obama has known all along that Sunni sectarians holding U.S. weapons in a power vacuum weren’t “jayvee” — he just didn’t think they’d appear on this year’s schedule. Perhaps not even next year’s. Another President can worry about the Middle East; Obama’s got a domestic agenda to complete.

Presidents don’t govern over a theoretical closed-system agenda containing only their own pet projects. Things happen — unexpected things that call for a response, whatever that response may be. 

In Syria and in Iraq, things were happening long before the Islamic State handed Obama a camera-worthy opportunity for intervention by trapping a host of Yezidis on a mountain and threatening Americans in the Kurdish city of Erbil. If you have a strong stomach, you can easily google and view a pictorial montage of the many damnable things the Islamic State has been doing for months.

They hold the Mosul dam, which essentially means they hold Baghdad’s fate in their hands. They hold an unknown number of militants from Europe and the U.S. — passport-holding jihadi extremists who don’t need a convenient U.S. border crisis to freely enter the country. Their leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, said last week (and has said before) that the Islamic State fully intends to target the United States — and he can bring varsity resources to Obama’s “game.” Christianity in Iraq is on the verge of extinction; the Yezidis — a pre-Islamic religious population that doesn’t evangelize — are on the verge of annihilation. 

And that’s just what’s happening in Iraq. There are plenty of other fires, though:

At this late hour in the Iraqi debacle, even Obama’s most perfect strategy — whether’s it’s to do nothing; do something, or, as he’s so far indicated, some noncommittal combination of the two — will mean choosing from among the least awful of nothing but truly awful options.

This is what happens when the President of the United States sends no signal. Or, rather, when he knows only how to send political signals. 

“The world is less violent than it has ever been. It is healthier than it has ever been. It is more tolerant than it has ever been. It is better fed then it’s ever been. It is more educated than it’s ever been.”

Obama said this only two months ago. 

There’s a midterm election this year, and — like Obama’s “jayvee” dismissal of the terror group too abhorrent for al-Qaida — that was a political signal. It reflects what any sitting President would like to be able to say to the Nation. It may even be true. But Obama’s closed-system optimism isn’t about truth — it’s about politics. The rest of the world just won’t cooperate with his game plan. And he’s a thinker, not a doer; a campaigner, not a leader. Obama is still looking down at his 2007 playbook, even as the Nation, and the world, changes all around him. 

He doesn’t know how to call a new play. He only ever had that one plan.

More Than Half Of All Americans Can’t Come Up With $400 In Emergency Cash… Unless They Borrow

Count yourself fortunate, or something, if you’re among the 48 percent of Americans who can cough up a spare $400 in emergency cash without having to beg, borrow or steal. According to a Federal Reserve report on American households’ “economic well-being” in 2013,  fewer than half of all Americans said they’d be able to come up with four Benjamins on short notice to deal with an unexpected expense.

The report, released last week by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, indicates a disparity between how Americans view their financial situation and the reality of where their finances actually stand — a signal that the recession of the late 2000s fundamentally altered the concept of doing well for many, as well as an indication that the subsequent recovery may yet be more nominal than real.

Under a section titled “Savings,” the report notes that “[s]avings are depleted for many households after the recession,” and lists the following findings:

  • Among those who had savings prior to 2008, 57 percent reported using up some or all of their savings in the Great Recession and its aftermath.
  • 39 percent of respondents reported having a rainy day fund adequate to cover three months of expenses.
  • Only 48 percent of respondents said that they would completely cover a hypothetical emergency expense costing $400 without selling something or borrowing money.

Obviously, an enormous financial gulf separates the 39 percent who can live for three months off their savings and the 48 percent who can’t even come up with an extra $400 on their own.

“Overall, the survey found that many household were faring well, but that sizable fractions of the population were at the same time displaying signs of financial stress,” the report observed.

Yet more than 60 percent of those surveyed said they were either “doing okay” or “living comfortably” — in spite of the fact that some of those same people aren’t able to afford even a minor financial emergency.

Note from the Editor: Hyperinflation is becoming more visible every day—just notice the next time you shop for groceries. All signs say America’s economic recovery is expected to take a nose dive and before it gets any worse you should read The Uncensored Survivalist. This book contains sensible advice on how to avoid total financial devastation and how to survive on your own if necessary. Click here for your free copy.

911 Dispatcher Tells Octogenarian To Lower Her Weapon And Wait For Police While Thug Breaks Into Her Home

N.J. Logan, an 80-year-old Florida woman who had recently had hip replacement surgery, was resting at her home Holmes Beach, when some noises outside her window startled her. After discerning that it wasn’t her husband — who wasn’t expected home yet — her attention focused on protecting herself.

“Once I realized it wasn’t my husband… you have no idea how fast you can go,” Logan told Tampa’s Fox 13 News. “All I wanted was my gun.” The invader had smashed the plate glass of Logan’s door, and had then cut out the screen behind it. Logan didn’t know whether someone was still inside her house, or where in the house an intruder might be.

According to the report, Logan headed toward the source of the noise, gun in hand, yelling warnings at whomever had entered her home. “I really didn’t want to have to shoot anybody,” she said.

Only after arming herself did she call 911 for help. But the dispatcher repeatedly told her to put down her weapon.

“When I called 911, she [the dispatcher] kept saying, ‘put the gun down, put the gun down,’” Logan told Fox 13. “I said, ‘I’ll put the gun down when I see the police.’”

Not only is it a bad idea to throw away your best option for self-defense when someone intends to do harm to you or your property — it’s also a bad idea to take a firearm out of your own hands and place it in neutral territory, where the bad guy has an opportunity to grab the weapon and use your own gun against you.

Logan didn’t come face to face with the intruder (or intruders). They fled after she announced that she was armed. Local police had not found a suspect in the break-in as of Thursday afternoon.

“I believe in guns inside your house, because I don’t think anybody has a right to break into your private domain,” Logan said.

Holmes Beach Police Chief William Tokajer evidently sees things Logan’s way. “I think it’s a wake-up call to any would-be burglar,” he told Fox 13.

Dartmouth Student With A Stalker Problem Can’t Carry A Gun, According To School Officials

Taylor Woolrich, a student at Dartmouth College, knows she’s being stalked. When she was living in San Diego, as a high school student, a man in his 60s began showing a sinister interest in her while she worked at a local café, and since then, no amount of legal cajoling has gotten him off her back – even though she moved across the country.

It started when she was 16 years old; now she’s a 20 year-old junior at the Ivy League school. She took out a restraining order on her alleged stalker, 67 year-old Richard Bennett, but, according to a Wednesday article at Fox News, “it did little to keep Bennett away.”

Woolrich says he constantly harassed her during her first two years at Dartmouth, stalking her on social media and sending messages in which he “promised” to fly across the country to see her at college.

“I thought they were empty threats, but when I came home from school last summer, he was at my front door within eight hours of my plane landing,” she said. “That’s when I realized how serious it was.”

Woolrich and her family called the police, and Bennett was arrested. A search of his car uncovered a slip noose, a knife, gloves and other items.

Right now, he’s in jail in California, awaiting a court date later this month for violating the restraining order and for felony stalking.

Uncertain as to her alleged stalker’s immediate future, Woolrich wants a gun for personal protection – and she wants it to be with her at all times, which of course includes the times she’s on the Dartmouth campus. But college officials are adamant that that’s not going to happen.

After researching gun laws in both California and New Hampshire, where Dartmouth’s located, Woolrich realized both States have provisions that could afford her an exemption from their restrictive gun laws.

But that exemption ends where the Dartmouth campus begins.

“[Guns on campus are] strictly prohibited and we are not in the habit of making exceptions,” college spokesman Justin Anderson told Fox News. “But we certainly do everything we possibly can to make all our students feel safe.”

That’s a relief – so much so that Woolrich says she will leave Dartmouth if Bennett is released from jail while she’s still a student there.

“Every morning I check the inmate lookup online to see if he has made bail. I feel safe for now, but the day he gets out is the day I will have to leave Dartmouth,” she said.

IRS Won’t Have To Allow An Independent Expert To Hunt Down Lost Lerner Emails In True The Vote Lawsuit

A conservative group suing the IRS for political discrimination was dealt a crucial defeat today when a Federal judge ruled that the tax agency would not have to allow an outside expert to follow a forensic trail back to Lois Lerner’s “lost” emails.

Federal Judge Reggie Walton denied the request from Texas-based nonprofit True the Vote, which had asked the court to appoint an independent computer expert to locate two years’ worth of Lerner’s missing emails, or to explain to the court why they can’t be recovered. True the Vote had also sought an injunction prohibiting the IRS from destroying any more documents.

Walton said True the Vote had failed to persuade him that a special hunt for the lost emails was warranted in order to prevent irreparable harm to its interests, and that such an investigation would be redundant in light of a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration investigation that (presumably) seeks the same end.

Walton’s remarks (by way of POLITICO):

Despite the general distrust of the defendants expressed by the plaintiff, the Court has no factual basis to concur with that distrust … and therefore concludes that the issuance of an injunction will not further aid in the recovery of the emails, if such recovery is possible, but will rather only duplicate and potentially interfere with ongoing investigative activities.

…Walton also said although it is in the public’s interest to find Lerner’s email, it’s not in the public’s interest to “allow … a third party, as requested by the plaintiff, to inspect IRS computers” because it would “necessarily result in the disclosure of tax returns and return information to that third party.”

Also on Thursday, reports surfaced that another government agency had deleted emails relating to the rollout of Obamacare, comprising its ability to cooperate in a House Oversight Committee investigation into the botched deployment of the Obamacare website last year.

Marilyn Tavenner, head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), deleted an unspecified number of emails during the months leading up to the launch of Healthcare.gov – a fact revealed in a letter CMS sent to the National Archives and Records Administration Thursday “out of an abundance of caution” against any future accusation of a wilful failure at CMS to disclose information.

“There is no evidence that Marilyn Tavenner, an Obama appointee who leads the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, intentionally hid information or deleted records; rather, the gaps appear to be the result of sloppy record keeping,” reported MSNBC in an article sympathetic to the Obama Administration. “But Republicans have attempted to turn missing emails into a political scandal before, as they did with Lois Lerner, a former IRS official at the center of a separate controversy over alleged targeting of conservative nonprofit groups.”

Can Obama’s progressive bureaucrats not even take credit for their own scandals?

Civil Rights Commissioner Blasts Obama Amnesty’s ‘Disastrous Effect’ On Black Americans

A member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) penned a letter to President Barack Obama on Tuesday, urging the President to consider the effect any executive action granting amnesty to illegal aliens will have on black Americans, a demographic that has fared especially poorly since Obama entered the White House.

Commissioner Peter Kirsanow, who sits on the eight-member Federal agency created when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act, told the President an executive act of amnesty isn’t good for Americans generally, and it especially isn’t good for blacks.

From Kirsanow’s letter:

I write as one member of the eight-member U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and not on behalf of the Commission as a whole. It has been widely reported in the press that you are preparing to issue an executive order that purports to grant legal status and work authorization to millions of illegal immigrants. I write to remind you of the disastrous effect of illegal immigration on the employment of all Americans, but particularly black Americans. Any grant of legal status will serve as a magnet to prospective illegal immigrants and further depress employment opportunities and wages for African-Americans. Given that the labor force participation rate is at an historic low, the unemployment rate is 6.2 percent, and there has been a precipitous decline in household wealth, the timing for such a grant of legal status could not be worse.

Kirsanow went on to cite the USCCR’s own data on how illegal immigration has harmed job opportunities and wage levels among black Americans, referencing a 2008 study that found blacks were affected more profoundly by illegal immigration and its economic consequences than was the general population.

From that report, Kirsanow reminded Obama that “Professor Gordon Hanson’s research showed that ‘Immigration . . . accounts for about 40 percent of the 18 percentage point decline [from 1960-2000] in black employment rates.’ Professor Vernon Briggs writes that illegal immigrants and blacks (who are disproportionately likely to be low-skilled) often find themselves in competition for the same jobs, and the huge number of illegal immigrants ensures that there is a continual surplus of low-skilled labor, thus preventing wages from rising.”

He also takes aim at the Obama Administration’s complicity in encouraging — or, at the very least, certainly not discouraging — illegal immigrants from making the journey across the border:

“Since 1986, we have seen that granting legal status to illegal immigrants, or even mere rumors that legal status will be granted, increases illegal immigration. Likewise, the evidence indicates that the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border is mostly attributable to your directive granting temporary legal status to people allegedly brought to the United States as children. This is unsurprising. When you incentivize bad behavior, you get more of it.”

There’s much more, including the inherent unfairness of granting amnesty to a horde of illegal aliens while holding aspirants who seek legal status to rigid naturalization standards, as well as the incisive observation that an act of amnesty is, ironically, “at cross-purposes” with the Obama Administration’s stated efforts “to increase employment opportunities” for black Americans.

“The proposed executive order will… necessarily disproportionately benefit people who are Mexican and Central American, which means that it will disproportionately disadvantage other ethnic groups,” Kirsanow writes. “In other contexts, this would be considered a violation of Title VII.”

A violation of Title VII? No problems for Obama there; Eric Holder’s the Attorney General. Title VII only has to work whenever the Obama Administration needs it to.

Read Kirsanow’s full letter here.

…In A Handbasket: New Poll Finds Americans Have Grave Opinion About The Future Of This Country

More than three quarters of Americans now believe their kids won’t inherit a better life than the lives they themselves enjoy, according to a far-ranging poll released Wednesday that finds aught but bleakness among most Americans’ attitudes on an array of economic and cultural topics.

Findings in the poll, conducted for NBC News and The Wall Street Journal, read like a statistical elegy for America, penned by its own inhabitants.

“Two words sum up the mood of the nation: Fed up,” begins NBC – normally among the mainstream media’s most robust water-carriers for the Obama Administration – in its summary of the poll’s revelations:

“Six in 10 Americans are dissatisfied with the state of the U.S. economy, more than 70 percent believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, and nearly 80 percent are down on the country’s political system, according to the latest NBC News / Wall Street Journal poll.

“The frustration carries over to the nation’s political leaders, with President Barack Obama’s overall approval rating hitting a new low at 40 percent, and a mere 14 percent of the public giving Congress a thumbs up.”

The Obama approval rating is an all-time low, by the NBC/WSJ poll’s count, and falls at or near the level of concurrent tracking polls from other outlets. It also closely mirrors former President George W. Bush’s approval rating at the same point in his two-terms presidency.

Across the ideological spectrum, economic concerns seem to drive the malaise. Forty percent of respondents said “someone in their household lost a job in the past five years.” Sixty-four percent indicated they’re still feeling the effects of the “Great Recession” personally. Fifty-seven percent said they were mad enough to “carry a protest sign for a day.”

NBC presented two “word cloud” graphics, each reflecting the most common phrases that Democrats and Republicans would put on their hypothetical protest sign in that scenario. As different as those two word clouds are (and they indeed are very different), the one significant phrase both share in common is “Focus on our own country.”

“This is a bad poll for President Obama, and not a good poll for anybody else,” said Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster who helped conduct the survey.

If you’ve still got an appetite for more, you can see the poll’s full results here.

BLM To Re-educate Native Americans On How To Live With Nature; Mitigate Climate Change

Native Americans, infamous throughout human history for their notoriously scornful attitude toward nature and their lustful despoliation of pristine land, are about to get learned on how they can modify the way they interact with the environment and save their corner of the planet from climate change – all thanks to the missionary outreach of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.

In the Federal government’s latest noble attempt to soften the edges of brutish native savagery, the BLM is spending nearly half a million dollars to teach Indians in the American northwest how to incorporate climate adaptation plans into their routine interactions with the great outdoors.

From a report Tuesday at CNS News:

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) plans to spend up to $450,000 in taxpayer dollars to teach Native American tribes in the Great Basin region ”climate adaptation plans” for their hunting, fishing and gathering activities.

… The Great Basin Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GBLCC) is one of 22 LCCs nationwide established by the Department of the Interior (DOI) in 2010 to “better integrate science and management to address climate change and related issues.” The Great Basin area covers parts of Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and California.

… Todd Hopkins, GBLCC’s science coordinator, told CNSNews.com that the trainings will focus on “actions that the tribes can take in response to changing climatic conditions.”

The initiative involves four tribes, each of which has GBLCC representation, and will follow a climate change curriculum developed by the Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals.

“In July, President Obama announced the Tribal Climate Resilience Program to ‘help tribes prepare for climate change,’” CNS News reported. “As part of this initiative, Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell will ‘dedicate $10 million in funding for tribes and tribal organizations to develop tools to enable adaptive resource management, as well as the ability to plan for climate resilience.’”

There’s no word on whether the BLM will be handing out Bibles (or the Obama Administration’s religious book du jour.)

Michelle Obama’s School Nutrition Plan Kills Bake Sales, School Fundraisers

Over the past week, you may have seen a story or two about the rollout of more Federal school nutrition standards as the implementation timeline for the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 continues to unfold.

As the new school year begins, many districts have again begun another round of grousing about how they’ll handle the difficult and unpopular food restrictions championed by first lady Michelle Obama — part of her one-size-fits-all nationwide approach to curbing child obesity and promoting public health at a young age.

In tiny Pawleys Island, S.C., the local newspaper brought a ground-level perspective to the law’s real effect on efforts to carry on school-based civic traditions — traditions that forge close bonds across the beachfront community in the spirit of doing good.

The Coastal Observer ran a recent story on how the first lady’s well-intentioned, cookie-cutter, nanny-state ideas are proving to be anything but helpful:

When Waccamaw Middle School students began a campaign to raise money to send a World War II veteran on the region’s final Honor Flight to Washington, D.C., they turned to the kitchen. They baked cupcakes and cookies and sold them at lunch as part of the effort that raised $2,500 in just over three weeks.

This year, that strategy won’t fly.

Federal nutrition standards that took effect this month limit the calories, sodium, fat and sugar content of food sold in schools as snacks and as fundraisers. “It’s going to be devastating,” Georgetown County School Superintendent Randy Dozier said.

… The standards are part of the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act that has changed the menus in school cafeterias. “They changed the menu so that it isn’t as attractive to kids,” Dozier said. The district’s cafeteria managers have continued to come up with new recipes to make the healthier ingredients more appealing.

The Barack Obama Administration doesn’t exactly have a strong track record of reaching out to the Honor Flight veterans anyway, as any observer of last year’s government shutdown — and its neglect of Honor Flight veterans who faced rows of barricades at Washington, D.C. landmarks — illustrates.

Now, a small community that appeared to be doing just fine on its own has to come up with some way to continue sending veterans on the Honor Flight, as well as support an array of other school-sponsored activities — all in the name of slimming kids down (or keeping them hungry, depending on your point of view).

“Milkshake Mondays and Biscuit Fridays are out,” the Coastal Observer reports. “The fate of candy sales to benefit the Calypso Gators steel drum band is uncertain. The guidelines apply to food sold on campus during school hours, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which created the standards.”

So what kind of foods can you still fundraise on? Probably not the kind that people want to pay for. “Maybe we’ll have Kiwi Wednesday,” Waccamaw Intermediate School principal Tim Carnahan joked.

Obamacare Incentivizes Doctors To Deny Treatment To Patients Covered Under ACA

It’s begun: doctors turning away patients covered under the Affordable Care Act because the physicians aren’t being reimbursed at a rate that allows them to “keep the lights on.”

It’s a twofold problem, because doctors need patients in order to stay in business, and patients need doctors because, well, they’re either sick or trying to manage their health to reduce their chances of getting sicker.

But more and more doctors are beginning to decline patients covered under Obamacare plans because the reimbursement rates are too low to make accepting their insurance an economically viable option. Meanwhile, many patients under ACA plans are funneled into coverage networks that offer limited healthcare choices in order for insurers on the network to keep their costs manageable.

NPR recently interviewed Connecticut doctor Doug Gerard for a story on Obamacare — from a physician’s point of view. Gerard said it makes no sense to admit Obamacare patients whose coverage pays out at a rate that’s roughly 80 percent of what he receives from private insurers that cover patients who aren’t participating in an Obamacare exchange.

On a recent afternoon at his office in Hartford, Conn., Dr. Doug Gerard examines a patient complaining of joint pain. Gerard, an internist, checks her out, asks her a few questions about her symptoms and then orders a few tests before sending her on her way.

For a typical quick visit like this, Gerard could get reimbursed $100 or more from a private insurer. For the same visit, Medicare pays less — about $80. And now, with the new private plans under the Affordable Care Act, Gerard says he would get something in between, but closer to the lower Medicare rates.

That’s not something he’s willing to accept.

“I cannot accept a plan [in which] potentially commercial-type reimbursement rates were now going to be reimbursed at Medicare rates,” Gerard says. “You have to maintain a certain mix in private practice between the low reimbursers and the high reimbursers to be able to keep the lights on.”

Three insurers offered plans on Connecticut’s ACA marketplace in 2014, and Gerard is only accepting one. He won’t say which, but he will say it pays the highest rate to doctors.

“I don’t think most physicians know what they’re being reimbursed. Only when they start seeing some of those rates come through will they realize how low the rates are they agreed to.”

Smaller private practices have much more difficulty maintaining that “certain mix” of patients at different coverage levels in order to run a business that’s both ethical and profitable. But even hospitals, which have historically accepted more types of coverage from broad patient demographics, are beginning to struggle with the small returns on Obamacare plans.

“[H]ospitals — especially top-tier ones that treat the most difficult diseases — are also increasingly rejecting the low reimbursement rates,” The Daily Caller observed Monday. “The nation’s best cancer treatment centers are often covered by very few exchange plans in their states; if Obamacare customers end up with a difficult-to-treat cancer, they’re likely to face a lower quality of care right off the bat.”

Over time, this trend could lead to a form of quality-of-care segregation in which certain types of health care providers who accept Obamacare patients dole out faster, cheaper and poorer services than providers who limit their acceptance of Obamacare-backed plans.

“If reimbursement rates to doctors stay low in Obamacare plans, more doctors could reject those plans. And that could mean that people will get access to insurance, but they may not get access to a lot of doctors,” NPR reported.

“I think it could lead potentially to this kind of distinction that there are these different tiers of quality of care,” Kevin Counihan, manager of Connecticut’s AccessHealthCT insurance exchange, told the network.

Sheriff In North Carolina Understands Law Enforcement Isn’t The First Line Of Defense

Harnett County, N.C. Sheriff Larry Rollins gets it. He wants his deputies to respond to calls as fast as they can, but he knows that it takes a while to drive from point A to point B, no matter how urgent a call sounds.

He also knows that citizens who’ve been targeted by criminals have the right to protect themselves and hold down the fort until help arrives.

“When I am out with my family, even though I am a cop, I don’t go anywhere without a gun,” Rollins told a packed crowd Monday evening at the Spring Hill United Methodist Church in Lillington, N.C.

“I mean it’s sad we have to have that attitude,” Rollins continued, “but I am going to protect myself and my family. I want my deputies at your house just as fast as they can when you got a problem, but you better be able to take care of business until we get there if you have to protect your family.”

According to local television news station WTVD, the crowd was there in response to a recent “explosion” in violent crime, having answered a call to a community meeting to discuss solutions with law enforcement.

In late July, a rash of violent incidents in the area shocked small-town residents in Harnett County, home to 120,000 people. There was a murder in Spring Lake, in nearby Cumberland County, on or around July 30. Two other men were shot in the town of Cameron, about half an hour away from Lillington, on Aug. 1. A crash resulting from a high-speed police chase in Lillington sent a man to the hospital July 29.


LAPD Cries Foul After Private Citizen Flies Drone Over Police Station

Following an incident in which a drone enthusiast stood on a public sidewalk and piloted his camera-equipped drone above the Los Angeles Police Department’s Hollywood station, the LAPD is attempting to find a legal basis for prohibiting the practice.

Last week, the LAPD consulted with city and county attorneys in an attempt to come up with a legal argument against operators of drones who would seek to gain a bird’s-eye view of their facilities. The topic came to a head for the department after the police confronted privacy advocate Daniel Saulmon, who films police officers on the job in order to underscore the “double standard” that protects bad cops from facing true accountability, as he operated his drone recently outside the Hollywood station.

Saulmon, who goes by the Internet handle “Tom Zebra,” published the drone footage to YouTube following the incident.

Saulmon gets arrested often in order to prove his point. In his YouTube commentary on the Hollywood video, he explains why he keeps going back for more:

Police violate our 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights on the regular. Suddenly they want to talk about expectation of privacy? Oh, is that how it works? They want privacy, but want to give none?

LAPD Lt. Michael King’s remarks to the Los Angeles Times Friday set forth the department’s argument.

“What concerns us is that they are filming over private property and it’s gated – you’re looking at the layout of the police station, how we operate, personnel license plates,” he said. “It’s kind of like if it was your house, if they’re flying over your backyard you’d start asking questions about it.”

Saulmon insisted that argument constitutes a double standard – one that favors the state by denying the same freedoms to the citizen.

“They bring up the expectation of privacy, I’m not buying it,” he told the Times. “Suddenly they’re talking about how I’m trespassing on a public sidewalk. They do not have an expectation of privacy…if you want privacy, build a roof.”

A Plurality Of Registered Voters Wants A Republican-Controlled Congress

Voters may be sick of Congress, but they appear to be more disgusted with Democrats in Congress than Republicans. A new poll indicates that a plurality of voters not only wants the House of Representatives to continue with a Republican majority, but that they also want a Republican majority in the Senate.

The poll, sponsored by NBC News and The Wall Street Journal, predictably found that people view Congress negatively, with 50 percent indicating Congress has been “very unproductive” this year. Another 24 percent said Congress has been “somewhat unproductive.”

But the survey then asked voters which party they preferred in the majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate individually.

For the House of Representatives, 43 percent of registered voters said they want to see a Republican majority, while 41 percent said they favor a Democratic majority. An identical question concerning a Senate majority yielded the same numbers: 43 percent favoring Republicans and 41 percent favoring Democrats.

The poll also asked “residents” who indicated they are not registered voters the same series of questions. Interestingly, the plurality that slightly favored a Republican majority in both chambers among registered voters was reversed when non-voting “residents” weighed in. Forty-two percent of “residents” said they favored a Democratic majority in the House, compared with 41 percent that favored a Republican majority; 43 percent of “residents” said they favor a Democratic majority in the Senate, compared with 42 percent who favored Republicans.

Another interesting piece of data lies in the political demographics of the pool of voters who participated in the randomized survey. Twenty-five percent of voters said they consider themselves “Tea Party Supporters,” while another ten percent said they weren’t sure. The remaining 65 percent said they do not identify with the Tea Party.

In addition, a combined 45 percent of voters said they were either “very conservative” (13 percent) or “conservative” (32 percent), while only a combined 22 percent said they were either “very liberal” (eight percent) or “liberal” (14 percent). The remaining 33 percent described themselves as “moderate.”

View the full results here.

Sharp Jump In Public’s Low Opinion Of Obamacare

Polls, polls, polls. Useful as media fodder and for backseat political punditry. But polls, especially tracking polls that follow a single topic over time, can be useful in gauging the general direction of public opinion.

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation’s monthly tracking poll for July is out today, and – in spite of Kaiser’s efforts in helping to introduce and explain Obamacare to the public in a positive light since the October 2013 rollout – the Obamacare numbers aren’t good.

“[T]he news for Obamacare is bad,” wrote Reason’s Peter Suderman today. “Really bad. So bad, in fact, that I’m not entirely sure I believe it.”

In one month, the percentage of Americans who indicated they held an unfavorable opinion of the Affordable Care Act rose from 45 percent (June) to 53 percent (July) – an eight percent increase. At the same time, 37 percent of Americans said they still hold a favorable opinion of the law in July, down from 39 percent in June.

Since Kaiser began tracking public opinion on Obamacare, there’s never been a percentage of Americans who view the law negatively as high as the 53 percent who did so through the end of July.

There’s little reason to expect that number to fall significantly between now and the November Congressional midterm election, regarded in many States as a voter referendum on Obamacare.

A Federal health official predicted this week that Healthcare.gov will still have functionality problems when enrollment begins this October; Californians are paying an average of 55 percent more for health insurance since the law went into effect; and lawsuits beset Obamacare on all sides.

“It’s beginning to look like the health-care law will never attract the public’s support,” wrote The Daily Caller’s Sarah Hurtubise today. “Premiums are rising, against the promise of Obamacare supporters, but the most drastic premium hikes will likely not take effect until 2017, according to experts.”

One wonders what the Kaiser tracking poll will look like when that happens.

Irony Alert: Pelosi Asks The Press To Shill For Democrats

Asked today why Congressional Democrats haven’t been able to effectively persuade people that evil Republican obstructionists are what’s wrong with America, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) admonished the news media to “be messengers” for her party’s position throughout the midterm election campaign season.

A reporter at a press briefing asked Pelosi why Democratic messaging, designed to warn voters away from the GOP’s “anti-government premise,” hasn’t been “resonating” as the Democrats had hoped.

“So you make this case about the skepticism that people have of this anti-government premise here,” the unidentified reporter said. “You talk about, you know, ‘they’re riding this impeachment horse, and lawsuit horse, and all these things they are doing in the election.’

“Why, for every political analysis that we see – and including the top people in your party [who] don’t believe that the Democrats have a message that can get the House of Representatives back; what government shutdown? Why are these things not resonating with the electorate and won’t resonate this fall?”

Pelosi’s first line of blame was aimed straight at the media. “Well, first of all, we need you to be messengers about what is actually going on here,” she responded, either not satisfied with, or oblivious to the existence of, an already-pliable mainstream press.

She went on to promote her “Middle Class Jump Start” – a final push, in the months leading up to the November midterms, for Democrats to foment voter anxiety http://www.democraticleader.gov/middle-class-jumpstart/ about “House Republicans…stacking the deck for the wealthy and their special interest friends at the expense of middle class families.” That initiative pledges a bevy of implausible measures a Democratic-controlled House would enact within “the first 100 days of 2015.”

“But, apart from that, we have come forward with our Middle Class Jump Start,” she offered. “Over the month of August, we go forward with how the jump start talks about bringing jobs home. The Republicans have tax breaks to send jobs overseas. Democrats want tax breaks to keep jobs here at home.”

Go do your job, media: Get Pelosi’s propaganda out there on the streets.

Sheila Jackson Lee Cries Over Obama Impeachment Talk: We Never Tried To Impeach Bush! (Even Though She Did)

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) spoke passionately on the House floor Wednesday against any talk of impeaching President Barack Obama, arguing that Democrats never tried to impeach Republican President George W. Bush when he went to war with Iraq under false pretenses. One small problem with her claim: Lee co-sponsored the Bush impeachment bill in 2008.

Leaving aside the possibility that Democrats are driving impeachment talk, in order to gin up midterm fundraising panic, far more than their Republican opponents these days, Jackson Lee took Republicans to task over a House vote on whether to move forward with a lawsuit against Obama:

I ask my colleagues to oppose this resolution, for it is in fact a veiled attempt at impeachment, and it undermines the law that allows a President to do his job. A historical fact: that President [George W.] Bush pushed this Nation into a war that had little to do with apprehending terrorists. We did not seek an impeachment of President Bush, because as an executive, he had his authority. President Obama has the authority…

Well, here’s the Library of Congress’ bill summary page for H.R. 1258, Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s (D-Ohio) impeachment bill that died in committee in June of 2008. Titled “Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors,” H.R. 1258 not only is an impeachment bill – it’s an impeachment bill Jackson Lee herself co-sponsored, along with ten other Congressmen.

A Jackon Lee spokesman later tried to clarify her remarks, tersely telling Yahoo News Thursday, without elaborating, that “she misspoke.”

“Despite Democratic protests on the House floor, however,” wrote Yahoo News’ Chris Moody, “[Democratic] party lawmakers seem downright gleeful about the exercise after fundraising successfully from the lawsuit and talk of impeachment.”

In March, you might recall, Jackson Lee took to the House floor to celebrate our 400 year-old Constitution.

Two Months Ahead Of Sign-Up Start, Obamacare Website Still Doesn’t Work

An official from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) on Thursday told a Congressional panel that Americans shouldn’t expect this year’s Obamacare enrollment period to go smoothly, despite months of bad publicity about Healthcare.gov’s infamous rollout problems and hundreds of millions of dollars spent to correct them.

“It’s a bumpy process at time. We have committed people, but there will clearly be bumps,” Andy Slavitt, CMS Principal Deputy Administrator told the House Energy and Commerce Oversight subcommittee on Thursday.

Under questioning from Congressman Michael Burgess (R-Texas), Slavitt admitted the underpinnings of the Federal Obamacare website still aren’t completed – and that insurance companies are being subsidized at estimated rates because the “back end” of the website is still not live and able to spit out rates that reflect real-time values.

The Washington Free Beacon provided a transcript of the relevant portion of Burgess’ exchange with Slavitt:

REP. MICHAEL BURGESS: When this thing went live the back end part of the system was not built. Is it now built, available and ready to use? The part that pays providers?

ANDY SLAVITT: The part that pays the issuers, the issuers are getting paid today.

BURGESS: How about the doctors and hospitals?

SLAVITT: The doctors and hospitals get paid by the health plans not by the marketplace.

BURGESS: So the back end part of the system is up and fully functional?

SLAVITT: No. No No. The back end part of the system is going through continuous releases. Today we are paying the issuers at an estimated basis that would be a coming release this year where by the end of this year they’ll begin to get paid at a policy level basis and next year continued automation will occur to tie everything to do with the back end of CMS’ systems.

Slavitt’s attempt at lowering expectations for Obamacare in its second year coincides with the released of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that places the cost of last year’s botched launch at $840 million. That report places much of the blame on CMS bungling, as well as changes to the law that moved the goalposts even as the rollout loomed.

“In summary, we found that CMS undertook the development of Healthcare.gov and its related systems without effective planning or oversight practices, despite facing a number of challenges that increased both the level of risk and the need for effective oversight,” the GAO stated in prepared testimony.

“…New and changing requirements drove cost increases during the first year of development, while the complexity of the system and rework resulting from changing CMS decisions added to FFM [Federally Facilitated Marketplace] costs in the second year.”


Note from the Editor: As you’ve just read, the Obamacare abomination doesn’t bode well for anyone. But if you know how to navigate the system you can still control your own healthcare—as every American should! My trusted friend and medical insider, Dr. Michael Cutler, and I have written a concise guide to help you do just that. I urge you… Click here for your free copy.

Watch D.C.-Area Residents Support Bringing In Illegal Immigrant Children, Then Decline To House Them

Media Research Center’s Dan Joseph is at it again, trolling well-meaning progressives who can’t reconcile their big hearts with the practical demands of their everyday lives.

Joseph spent about an hour getting people in Old Town Alexandria, Va. to sign a petition supporting the idea of bringing illegal immigrant children to the area – and, for those who signed up, asking them to follow through by signing a second petition indicating their willingness to house a child in their own homes.

Several people (but not all) signed the first petition. But nobody wanted to sign the second one. “I quickly learned that their sympathies only went so far,” Joseph said in an accompanying article Wednesday for CNS News.

“Obviously, the idea of bringing these kids to beautiful Northern Virginia all seemed great – in theory – to many of the people I talked to. But, support for my initiative stopped at agreeing to sign a piece of paper. When I asked these citizens to do anything more to help solve the problem, their sympathy seemed to quickly evaporate.”

Accused Of Invading Users’ Privacy, Google Implores Court To Protect Its… Privacy

Google, Inc. just settled the last of several lawsuits in which the plaintiffs alleged the company violated their privacy. The plaintiffs alleged Google violated Federal law and peeked too far into their personal lives by scanning the habits and tendencies of the users of all its services, and then “commingling” all that data in order to form a more educated guess at what kind of ads its users would respond to.

Now, in the wake of the settlements, the media want to get at the court documents the cases generated. Guess who can’t abide the thought of that? Google.

According to Courthouse News Service, lawyers for the company have asked U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh not to allow the court documents to be made public — even though a consortium of media outlets (including The New York Times, The Washington Post, Forbes, Reuters, POLITICO, Courthouse News Service and many more) maintains that “[u]nder the First Amendment and the federal common law, the press and the public have a presumptive right of access to court proceedings and documents.”

No way, say Google attorneys, who call the curious press corps — and we are not making this up — “media intervenors.”

Their argument, essentially, is that the cases have been settled, there’s no longer a plaintiff “class” of millions of Google users and, therefore, there’s no far-reaching public interest in the details of the case. 

Here’s Courthouse News Service quoting from one of the Google attorneys’ filings:

“The self-styled media intervenors’ perceived need for public access to the information sought to be sealed is significantly diminished by the court’s denial of class certification with prejudice,” Google attorney Whitty Somvichian, of the firm Cooley LLP, wrote in an answer filed Thursday [July 24]. “The media intervenors opposed the motions to seal on the basis that ‘the public interest cannot be overstated,’ in part, because ‘this case has the potential to affect the rights of the millions of class members.’ Now that the court has denied class certification with prejudice and each of the representative plaintiffs’ cases has been dismissed, the need for the ‘millions of class members’ to have access to Google’s confidential information is necessarily diminished.

But what if they only want to sell Google something?

For more on Google’s “commingling” method of aggregating information about user behavior in order to target advertising, see this 2012 article from Courthouse News Service.

Note from the Editor: Under the Obama Administration, the NSA, the IRS, and the State and Justice departments are blatantly stepping on Americans’ privacy—and these are just the breaches we’re aware of. I’ve arranged for readers to get a free copy of The Ultimate Privacy Guide so you can be protected from any form of surveillance by anyone—government, corporate or criminal. Click here for your free copy.

Sexist Bloomberg Gun Control Ad Unintentionally Makes A Case For Gun Ownership

The latest frightful television ad from Everytown for Gun Safety — the new iteration of Michael Bloomberg’s gun control group — features an angry man bursting through his ex’s door to shoot the mother and haul away their toddler son. 

Giving fresh credence to the evergreen saying that, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away, the unarmed woman in the video reaches for the phone to call 911. That’s not exactly stopping power, so the guy shoots her anyway — fade to black.

That’s obviously not the message Everytown was trying to send when it published the video on Monday. “Tell Senator [fill in the blank]: Stop gun violence against women.” 

That’s the message Everytown was going for; it’s the one that takes over the screen as the bad guy fires the gun. It’s an ambiguous message, and the Internet wasted no time in pointing out that the woman in the ad was, herself, the best hope in this scenario for stopping the “gun” violence against her.

“The video by Everytown for Gun Safety is intended to show the dangers of guns in the hands of domestic abusers,” wrote MyFox New York Wednesday, “but the victim, a woman, is seen helpless because she has no gun to protect herself.”

The four female co-hosts of ABC’s daytime talk show “The View” spent some time talking about the ad Tuesday, and, remarkably, three of them walked away from the piece with a different perspective than Everytown intended: “Get a gun in your home!” as co-host Sherri Shepherd put it.

Here’s Shepherd after viewing the ad:

The flipside is when I was at my home and the alarm went off, and I ran to my son’s bedroom and Jeffrey was crying, and I realized all I had to protect me and somebody coming around that corner was a daggone wicker trash basket. And I said to myself and everybody said to me, “well get a bat.” You got one chance to use a bat and if they take it away — “Get pepper stray.” You know how close they got to get to you, if you use pepper spray? You got one of these? [makes a gesture like she’s holding a gun and makes a sound of cocking a gun] They’re not gonna come near you and your child! So when you’re standing there, and you don’t know how to protect your child? Get a gun in your home!

Hosts Jenny McCarthy and Juliet Huddy shared similar experiences from their own lives that led them to the same conclusion. ABC’s Lara Spencer played the odd woman out, insisting that guns are too dangerous to keep in a home with children. Both McCarthy and Shepherd told Spencer, “I used to think like you.”

The other noteworthy thing about the Bloomberg ad — and it’s a feature common to much progressive propaganda that seeks to level the playing field by taking away freedoms and opportunities — is its implicit sexism, as well as its implicit assumption that people are passive victims until the state comes to their rescue. 

“Stop gun violence against women.” If — when confronted by a snorting, irrational man who lacks the character to check his own proclivity to use muscle against her — an unarmed woman is indeed the weaker creature, then a gun is exactly what places her on equal physical ground. And it allows her to be an active agent in determining the safety of herself and her family. Isn’t that a message worth sending?

YouTube user Dan Troop, commenting on The Washington Free Beacon’s posting of the segment, summed it up nicely:

Looks like Bloomberg ignored an important consideration — women aren’t as dumb as he thinks they are. This PSA will, if anything, convince women that the only protection and defense they can count on is self-protection and self-defense and that the best tool for that job is a firearm.