Scott with Teaneck resident Joshua Meier, a finalist in the 2014 Intel Science Talent Search, in my Washington, D.C. office. We discussed the project that earned him this prestigious recognition and his plans for life after high school. Joshua is an impressive young man and I wish him all the best at tonight’s award ceremony.
Rep Scott Garrett is a Strong Supporter of Israel Unlike the Obama Administration and their clones like Roy Cho November 2,2014 the Staff of the Ridgewood Blog
Ridgewood NJ, The Crisis in U.S.-Israel Relations Is Officially Here .
“Obama Official Calling Netanyahu ‘A Chickens**t’
It’s probably safe to say that U.S.-Israel relations aren’t exactly at a high point. In an article published Tuesday at The Atlantic by Jeffrey Goldberg, the Obama administration’s preferred conduit for all things Israel-related, an unnamed senior Obama administration official called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “a chicken-bleep.” “The thing about Bibi is, he’s a chicken-bleep,” the official told Goldberg. “The good thing about Netanyahu is that he’s scared to launch wars,” he continued. ““The bad thing about him is that he won’t do anything to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians or with the Sunni Arab states. The only thing he’s interested in is protecting himself from political defeat.” https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/10/the-crisis-in-us-israel-relations-is-officially-here/382031/
Just one more misstep in a long line of anti Israel ,anti Jewish gaffs by the Obama Administration .Meanwhile its important to remember that Congressman Garrett supports the right of Israel to exist as a sovereign, democratic nation and defend itself against attacks from neighboring territories. While Congressman Garrett supports efforts to have peace between Israel and the Palestinians, he does not believe Israel should jeopardize its security by creating borders that could potentially leave it vulnerable to attack by neighbors.
At Congregation Bnai Yeshurun
The Congressman supports strong ties with Israel, and is a strong supporter of ensuring that Israel has the full support of the United States. In the 113th Congress, Congressman Garrett introduced the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act of 2013. This important legislation would require that the United States Embassy in Israel move from its current location in Tel Aviv to Israel’s legal capital, Jerusalem. Congressman Garrett acknowledges the vital role that US support plays in promoting Israel’s safety and security. Not only does US aid to Israel help promote a more stable Middle East, but also approximately 75 percent of the aid delivered to Israel returns to the United States in the form of military supply purchases.
Congressman Garrett co-sponsored H. Res. 657, a resolution that reaffirms the United States’ support for Israel’s right to defend its citizens and ensure the survival of the State of Israel, condemns the unprovoked rocket fire at Israel, and calls on Hamas to immediately cease all rocket and other attacks against Israel. In July Garrett told the Save New Jersey blog , “As Israel defends itself against countless rocket attacks from Hamas, it shouldn’t also have to defend itself against those in the White House,”
Garrett declared in a statement released Thursday. “While the Obama administration says it supports Israel, these comments obviously stand in stark contrast to that commitment and must be retracted. My heart goes out to those who have been the victims of these attacks. I wholeheartedly support our greatest friend and ally in the Middle East as they seek to eliminate those who are perpetrating this violence.” https://savejersey.com/2014/07/garrett-israel-battling-hamas-and-white-house/
Garrett’s words to the NJJN on October 10 2012 summed the present situation best , “I think the Obama administration has been an absolute disaster from Day One in its handling of foreign affairs and Israel specifically,” said Garrett in an Oct. 4 phone interview. “When Obama came into office, he promised that the United States would be more respected because of his style of handling the world community. I think we are less respected, and we find ourselves in a more vulnerable position than we were four years ago.” https://njjewishnews.com/article/14719/jewish-issues-debated-in-redrawn-fifth-district#.VFFIZ_TF_fE
Last Weekend Garrett honored to receive the endorsement of NORPAC, which is at the forefront of promoting strong US-Israel relations!
WOODWARD: LOTS OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ON OBAMA’S INVOLVEMENT IN IRS SCANDAL
Sunday on Fox News Channel’s “MediaBuzz,” Bob Woodward said there are, “lots of unanswered questions,” about the Obama administrations involvement in the IRS scandal surrounding the targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny.
Woodward said, “The reality now in my view that in the Obama administration, there are lots of unanswered questions about the IRS, particularly. If I were young, I would take Carl Bernstein and move to Cincinnati where that IRS office is and set up headquarters and go talk to everyone.”
The administration’s Ebola evasions reveal its disdain for the American people.
The administration’s handling of the Ebola crisis continues to be marked by double talk, runaround and gobbledygook. And its logic is worse than its language. In many of its actions, especially its public pronouncements, the government is functioning not as a soother of public anxiety but the cause of it.
An example this week came in the dialogue between Megyn Kelly of Fox News and Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control.
Their conversation focused largely on the government’s refusal to stop travel into the United States by citizens of plague nations. “Why not put a travel ban in place,” Ms. Kelly asked, while we shore up the U.S. public-health system?
Dr. Frieden replied that we now have screening at airports, and “we’ve already recommended that all nonessential travel to these countries be stopped for Americans.” He added: “We’re always looking at ways that we can better protect Americans.”
“But this is one,” Ms. Kelly responded.
Dr. Frieden implied a travel ban would be harmful: “If we do things that are going to make it harder to stop the epidemic there, it’s going to spread to other parts of—”
Ms. Kelly interjected, asking how keeping citizens from the affected regions out of America would make it harder to stop Ebola in Africa.
“Because you can’t get people in and out.”
“Why can’t we have charter flights?”
“You know, charter flights don’t do the same thing commercial airliners do.”
“What do you mean? They fly in and fly out.”
Dr. Frieden replied that limiting travel between African nations would slow relief efforts. “If we isolate these countries, what’s not going to happen is disease staying there. It’s going to spread more all over Africa and we’ll be at higher risk.”
Later in the interview, Ms. Kelly noted that we still have airplanes coming into the U.S. from Liberia, with passengers expected to self-report Ebola exposure.
Dr. Frieden responded: “Ultimately the only way—and you may not like this—but the only way we will get our risk to zero here is to stop the outbreak in Africa.”
Ms. Kelly said yes, that’s why we’re sending troops. But why can’t we do that and have a travel ban?
“If it spreads more in Africa, it’s going to be more of a risk to us here. Our only goal is protecting Americans—that’s our mission. We do that by protecting people here and by stopping threats abroad. That protects Americans.”
Rep Scott Garrett Statement on the Obama Administration’s Decision to Spread Too-Big-To-Fail to more companies Sep 4, 2014
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), Chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government-Sponsored Enterprises, issued the following statement regarding today’s Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) decision to spread too-big-to-fail:
“Today’s irresponsible and inappropriate designation of another U.S. business as too-big-to-fail only strengthens my resolve to reform the out-of-control FSOC. First and foremost, we must ensure taxpayers are not on the hook for FSOC’s dangerous regulatory overreach. This designation flies in the face of a unanimous, bipartisan vote in the House of Representatives to postpone any additional designations.
“The FSOC makes politically motivated decisions to expand the Fed’s power with little-to-no real-world analysis. To make matters worse, the FSOC refused to even provide today’s designee with the same minimal level of review that the Council provided for asset management companies. It is obvious that the FSOC refuses to improve its operations, conduct, or decision-making processes. Accordingly, it is incumbent upon Congress to help FSOC improve itself. I look forward to having members of the FSOC come before the Committee in the near future to explain today’s actions.”
Opinion: U.S. stance on Israeli-Palestinian conflict weakens Israel
August 21, 2014 Last updated: Thursday, August 21, 2014, 1:21 AM
By ROBERT B. YUDIN
The Record
SINCE THE founding of Israel in 1948, it has been the bedrock of U.S. foreign policy to support Israel politically, economically and militarily. The one inviolate rule was that Israel must always retain its qualitative military superiority. Until now, both political parties have in a very non-partisan manner adhered to this principal.
A recent Gallup poll shows a change in this thinking. When asked about the current conflict between Israel and Hamas and specifically “Americans’ Views of Israel’s Action in Current Middle East Conflict,” 31 percent of those identifying themselves as Democrats felt Israel was justified while 47 percent felt Israel was not justified. Among those identifying themselves as Republicans 65 percent felt Israel was justified and 21 percent felt unjustified.
When you couple this with President Obama’s freezing military shipments to Israel in the middle of a shooting war with a terrorist organization – Hamas – many people have a right to be concerned.
Hamas has stated in its charter that it is dedicated to the annihilation of Israel and to the death of world Jewry. To date, Hamas has fired over 3,000 missiles into Israel as well as using tunnels into Israel for the purpose of killing Israelis.
The freezing of military shipments indicates a basic change in Obama’s policy to Israel. Reuters is quoted as saying that State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf says it is not a diminution of U.S. support of Israel. Yet actions speak louder than words, and withholding delivery of munitions speaks volumes.
In addition, Obama says Israel has a right to defend itself but that he is concerned with civilian casualties. I hear that as code for saying Israel does not have a right to defend itself because if Hamas puts missiles in the basement and purposively places civilians on the first and second floor when Israel, in defending itself, sends a missile into that basement to take out Hamas missiles before they are fired into Israel, the civilians on the first and second floor will become casualties. That is what Israel means when it says Hamas uses civilians to shield its missiles.
Leading up to World War II, few people believed Hitler when it became clear what his intentions were toward the Jews – it was the Holocaust. How can anyone fault Israelis for believing Hamas when its own charter calls for the same Holocaust?
Whether it is Hamas, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, al-Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood, their goals are the same: the destruction of Judaic-Christian religions, the destruction of our way of life and the domination of the world through the establishment of a Worldwide Caliphate.
Israel’s fight against Hamas is also our fight. If Israel loses, we are next.
Robert B. Yudin, a resident of Wyckoff, is chairman of the Bergen County Republican Organization.
Barney Frank ‘Appalled’ By Obama Administration: ‘They Just Lied To People’
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama made a major political mistake by lying about the details of his health care plan, according to former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.).
“The rollout was so bad, and I was appalled — I don’t understand how the president could have sat there and not been checking on that on a weekly basis,” Frank told HuffPost during a July interview. “But frankly, he should never have said as much as he did, that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it. That wasn’t true. And you shouldn’t lie to people. And they just lied to people.”
Obama has taken significant flak in conservative circles for claiming that his health care overhaul would allow all existing health care plans to continue, when, in fact, new consumer protection standards would require some people to sign up for more comprehensive insurance. The law provides government subsidies to help people of modest means pay for the more robust plans. Frank is a strong supporter of the law, and he has repeatedly defended Obama and his legislative agenda.
“He should have said, ‘Look, in some cases the health care plans that you’ve got are really inadequate, and in your own interests, we’re going to change them,'” Frank said. “But that’s not what he said.”
Supreme Court rebukes Obama on recess appointments BY ROBERT BARNES June 26 at 2:14 PM
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that President Obama exceeded his constitutional authority in making high-level government appointments in 2012 when he declared the Senate to be in recess and unable to act on the nominations.
Obama made appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) at a time when the Senate was holding pro forma sessions every three days precisely to thwart the president’s ability to exercise the power.
“The Senate is in session when it says it is,” Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote for the court, stressing that if the Senate is able to conduct business, that is enough to keep the president from making recess appointments.
But the court stepped back from handing Obama — and those who will follow him in the Oval Office — a more substantial loss. A bare majority of the justices upheld, in theory at least, the president’s ability to make recess appointments when the Senate is indeed on extended break, saying history weighs in favor of a broad power.
The decision comes at a time when Republican opposition to the president’s policies and Obama’s vow to bypass a gridlocked Congress by using his executive powers have consumed Washington.
More than 57,000 veterans are awaiting initial appointments at Veterans Affairs hospitals and clinics around the country 90 days after requesting them, according to the Associated Press.
The AP’s story was based on an audit of facilities ordered by the White House that is expected to be released on Monday.
The results show patients are waiting much longer than the 14 days that the agency has said was its target for scheduling an appointment.
An additional 64,000 who enrolled in the VA health care system over the past 10 years have never had appointments, the AP reported.
The audit covered 731 VA hospitals and large outpatient clinics, and found that the agency’s scheduling practices concealed long wait times and created “confusion among scheduling clerks and supervisors.” The audit also says a 14-day goal for seeing first-time patients was unattainable given the growing demand among veterans for health care and poor planning, and that 13 percent of VA schedulers reported supervisors telling them to falsify appointment dates to make waiting times appear shorter.
A partial audit, released May 30, had found widespread tampering with appointments at 64 percent of VA facilities, and prompted the resignation of former Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki.
The initial audit found evidence that Veterans Affairs employees hid evidence of longer waits by veterans for healthcare.
White House staff tried to ‘un-ring the bell’ after revealing CIA chief’s identity
• White House press office unaware it had circulated name • Washington Post journalist sounded alert after filing report
The White House blew the cover of the top CIA agent in Afghanistan on Sunday, when the person’s name was included on a list given to reporters during a visit to the country by President Barack Obama.
The name was then emailed by the White House press office to a distribution list of more than 6,000 recipients, mostly members of the US media.
The agent in question, listed as chief of station, would be a top manager of CIA activity in Afghanistan, including intelligence collection and a drone-warfare programme under which unmanned aerial vehicles mount cross-border attacks into Pakistan.
The name appeared on a list of attendees requested by White House officials for the president’s visit to Bagram air base to mark Memorial Day, the national day of tribute to fallen service members. The list of 15 people was drawn up by the military, written into a routine press report and sent to Washington. The Obama press office then sent the list, unredacted, to the larger group.
The mistake did not come to light until the reporter who had filed from Afghanistan, the veteran Washington Post correspondent Scott Wilson, looked more closely at what he had sent and noticed the name and title.
“I drew it to their attention before they had noticed what had happened,” Wilson said on Monday, hours after returning from the 33-hour trip overseas.
The Veterans Administration Scandal Hits Home May 5, 2014 By Kay Daly
For anyone laboring under the assumption that the scandal that plagues the VA hospital in Phoenix, Arizona must be anomalous, think again. Without even delving into the medical malpractice testimonials of my three relatives who work at a VA Medical Center on the East coast, the recent near-death experience of my brother confirms our worst fears: the culture of corruption and indifference that afflicts the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is systemic.
The horrifying picture my brother cheerfully sent me one afternoon illustrates the story better than any narrative I can tell. It was a “selfie.” An old Army buddy had sent him a pair of sunglasses and my brother suddenly thought he was Joe Cool, happily taking pictures and texting away about his new treasure.
But I wasn’t quite as pleased. Behind the sunglasses was a face that bore so little resemblance to my brother I would not have recognized it had I passed him on the street. Tears streamed down my face as I gazed upon the sunken lines and permanent grimace that now marked a face marred by years of excruciating pain.
Obama administration looks to curtail free speech and squelch dissent with New IRS 501c Regulations
commentary by Ron DuBois
Jan 27
Well, once again I am saddened by the illegal and unconstitutional machinations of our Government. The fraud and illegal maneuverings of the last three elections pale in comparison to this. The IRS is issuing “regulations” that would prevent 501 (c) (4) organizations – mainly Conservative organizations – from doing just about anything opposing the President. People cannot support a group or candidate, or even mention them, can’t donate money, or even volunteer their time. They cannot do a get-out-the-vote drive, hold a bi-partisan meeting, or hand out flyers. Nothing. This would effectively prevent any opposition from being mounted against any Democrat, the President, or any Presidential appointment. The IRS does this knowing there is insufficient time to mount a legal challenge prior to the November elections. I would hope there would be a way for Congress to intervene, but the Democrats still control the Senate. This is a major, major, development. Ron D.
New IRS Regs can Tip 2014 Elections
With his signature ‘stroke of the pen’, Pres. Obama’s IRS has proposed sweeping new powers to oversee campaign laws. As you will see, these rules stack the deck against opposition to the President.
Under a proposed regulation, Pres. Obama is using the IRS to close the loophole that allows §501(c)(4) groups to spend 49% of their budget on elections without disclosing the names of their donors.
By itself, that disclosure may not be bad, but the new IRS regs do not stop there. If these rules go into effect, many of the activities readers are engaged in right now could lead to fines and imprisonment.
The new rules require reporting on all §501 (c)(4) donations that engage in any form of political activity. (See below for the expanded definitions of ‘political activity’.) But, the same does not hold true for groups like Planned Parenthood that can segregate their donations between abortion activities and other activities.
While most conservative groups use §501 (c)(4) organizations, liberal groups tend to use §527 organizations that do not fall under these new rules.
For the first time in our history, the rules consider administration appointments and the confirmation process itself as political activities. This give the IRS the authority to police opposition to any administration nominations.
Once an issue has been raised for or against a candidate or appointee, the IRS sees discussion of that issue or even retaining information about that issue in website archives as political activity that can be controlled. This includes distributing voter guides, registering voters or getting out the vote drives. While one can argue that voter guides can be distributed by either party, therefore this applies to liberals and conservatives alike, not really. Once the practice is controlled by the government, the sitting administration is the only one left that can guide the electorate.
These are the proposed regulatory changes:
1. The IRS would declare that a broadly expanded category of “candidate related political activity”, including voter registration drives and non-partisan voter education, is not beneficial to the community as a whole and does not promote social welfare. Therefore it is treated as political speech.
2. The definition of “candidate” is expanded to include anyone who is proposed by another for selection, nomination, or appointment to any public office in a political organization, or to be a Presidential or Vice-Presidential elector.
3. “Candidate political activity” would include the appointment and confirmation of executive branch nominees.
4. Issue oriented communications would be treated as “candidate related political activity” even if it is neutral or non-biased or if it is just intended to explain a non-electoral action such as a vote on pending legislation. Voter guides and get-out-the-vote drives would be defined as “candidate-related political activity.”
5. “The Treasury Department and the IRS contend that content previously posted by an organization on its Web site that clearly identifies a candidate and remains on the Web during the specified pre-election period would be treated as candidate-related political activity.”
6. Any event an organization hosts within the 60/30 day election timeframe, at which a candidate appears, whether or not it was previously scheduled, would constitute “candidate-related activity.”
7. The definition of “express advocacy” is radically expanded to include any communication that makes “reference to a particular issue or characteristic distinguishing the candidate from others.” (For example, during an election that included Pro-Life and Pro-Choice candidates, any reference to the abortion issues would become express advocacy, even if the election was not mentioned.)
8. The IRS would include statements about political parties, not just candidates, in its definition of express advocacy.
9. Any contribution to a §501(c) organization that engages in “candidate-related political activity” would itself constitute “candidate-related political activity” by the donor.
10. Contributions would be defined to include in-kind donations and volunteer services as well as cash.
This regulation severely represses Free Speech and Free Association of those opposing the president, while leaving his supporters relatively untouched. While it is likely most of this ruling is unconstitutional, the point is moot for the short term. By the time any opposition case makes its way through the court system, the 2014 elections will be over.
Then there is the perception issue. The media will hail the fairness of finally forcing §501 (c)(4) organizations to reveal their donors while ignoring the colossal trampling of Free Speech.
There still is an opportunity until February 27th to make comments to the IRS on IRS REG-134417-13.
