Daily news sites

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

The Benghazi debacle and subsequent cover up requires, in fact DEMANDS answers from the inept administration who is responsible for it. From the Boston Herald.

Last week, in the final presidential debate on foreign policy, Mitt Romney made a deliberate decision not to go after the president on Benghazi. Romney’s task was to present himself as a plausible commander in chief. To do so, he needed to remain above the fray and avoid getting into a spat with the president over the details of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya.

Romney was right (politically) to avoid a tit-for-tat with Obama on Benghazi. With the White House changing its story daily, any attempt by Romney to criticize the president on this issue would only have left him with a major case of whip-lash.

But the public and the media must demand answers. What exactly happened this past Sept. 11 in Libya? And why was the Obama administration unable or unwilling to prevent it?

The Benghazi controversy is not one, but four separate scandals — each of which calls into question the president’s leadership.

First, Benghazi raises legitimate questions about Obama’s competence as commander in chief. In last week’s debate, the president said that his No. 1 job is to keep Americans safe. Then why did he not do so in Benghazi?

Was the president unaware of the threat in Libya? Or did he simply fail to treat it with the requisite level of seriousness? The British saw the danger and closed their consulate months earlier. Once the attack was under way, why did the president fail to send assistance?

Second, the president’s reaction to Benghazi reveals his utter lack of integrity. That he allowed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to fall on her sword rather than man-up and accept responsibility for his administration’s failure was not only despicable, it was cowardly.

Third, Benghazi reveals the president to be dishonest. It is now clear that the administration knew almost immediately that the Benghazi attack was a premeditated act of terrorism. But, in order to protect his own political hide, the president engaged in a misinformation campaign aimed at deceiving the American public.

And the president continues to lie daily in order to hide the cover-up... {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

And she lives!

Thank you all for your get well soons while I was out. That was no doubt the worst flu I've had in...as long as I can remember. I wouldn't say I'm back to 100% yet, but 85% will do. I've heard that the flu shot isn't so strong this year, but I'd still say get one if you can. Although, people seem to have strong opinions about wether or not to get flu shots. Have you ever said 'flu shot' in a crowded room? Oy! Anyway, do what you can to stay healthy.

As I ease myself back into the standing position I thought I'd share a simple DIY that took all of 20 minutes. (my favorite kind)

I picked this bench up off the side of the road (better than a hitchhiker) and then promptly put it in my basement for the next two years. Par for the course, I know. These are the only true before pictures I have.

I don't even want to know what the stain on that seat is from. Dirty. Ugly. But sturdy.



I love the color and pattern on this fabric but thought it was a bit too delicate to have as a pillow in this house. Who knows if a bench will keep it safe any better than a pillow would, but we shall see.


It appears to be a wonderful place to sit and look out the window with friends.


Mother tested. Kid approved.

This bench will be residing in the living room. Along with several other things that have been finished and added. This week I'll be featuring a completed project everyday. I feel bad about the big tease last week and then bailing last week.

So how was your weekend?

 Every woman needs a great collection of shoes in her wardrobe, including sneakers :) Well, I started to build this section because I love sneakers for practicality and comfort in long busy days.
Here is another pair of Nike "oceania"on red this time, bought recently . I wore them last week in our way at Ikea in grey-white-red combination.  Red sneakers, red pants- why not? along with a Benetton scarf, white bag and I borrowed Bogdan's cardigan again :) total comfort!



                                                                              Cardigan: J.Crew/ similar Here
                                                                              Pants: Mango/ another option Here
                                                                              Sneakers: Nike / different color Here 
                                                                              Bag: Pulicati/ another version  Here
                                                                              Scarf: Benetton
                                                                              Cuff bracelet :H&M

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

In regard to the terror attack on the Benghazi Consulate, and the Presidents bungling, Senator McCain's analysis is right on.

The Hill - Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday questioned whether the Obama administration was engaged in a Watergate-esque “cover-up” of its handling of the September attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya.

"This is either a massive cover-up or an incompetence that is not acceptable service to the American people," he said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

McCain said that information that has surfaced since the attacks, which claimed the lives of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, indicates the narrative provided by the White House in the days following was "patently false."

"There was no demonstration. So for literally days and days they told the American people something that had no basis in fact whatsoever," he said.

The White House initially claimed that the attacks on the consulate in Benghazi were sparked by spontaneous anger over an anti-Muslim film created in the U.S., but later said the attack had been planned and carried out by armed militants.

The administration has said their public statements on the attack were based on the intelligence that was then available.

President Obama's handling of the situation has become a campaign issue, with Mitt Romney and congressional Republicans accusing him of waiting too long to call the assault a terrorist act and questioning if the administration downgraded security ahead of the violence.

The issue has provided the Romney campaign an opening on foreign policy, an issue that the Obama team saw as a strength thanks to the president’s drawdown of troops from Afghanistan and Iraq and the successful mission to kill al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

And McCain, in his advice to Romney, indicated foreign policy should become a larger part of the discussion in the waning days of the campaign.

"I think that national security, as I said, foreign policy has entered into this discussion," he said.

Watch video here.

Via: Memeorandum

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

This site has been the object of a steady and ongoing attack by one Anon whose sole purpose has been simply to harass. The prior post was worded and published precisely as it was because I knew it would draw out its true and sinister intention, to shut down someone who dared to differ with its controlling, progressive collectivist, and fascistic ideology.

My work with Anon is now complete. It has been banned from this site for as long as Rational Nation USA remains in operation. Which, health permitting will be for a very long time. Hopefully Anon the Cowardly will be the last troll I will ever have to ban from this site. Honest dialogue and opinions are welcome here. Personal attacks on anyone of the type Anon freely engaged in will not get published in the future.

Anon, and other progressives just like it have but one goal in mind, that is to silence opposing views. They demand to dictate the terms and in so doing control the debate. Individuals that value freedom and liberty, indeed cherish it, should be be very concerned with the its that make up the extreme progressive collectivist fringe. Anon, and his disingenuous progressive brethren are the greatest danger to freedom of speech and individual liberty this nation has ever known. When they cannot win their argument in rational discourse they resort to bludgeoning their opponents with belligerence, lies, and the use of defamation and/or character assignation.

Unfortunately there is little difference between the major political parties as I noted in previous posts. As it now stands in 2012 the differences are simply a matter of degree. Either a slow ride to the cliff edge and the eventual fall, or an accelerated and perhaps headlong leap to the same cliff  edge and ending.

There is certainly still time. It will however take Americans who value private property rights, freedom of choice and individual liberties, confined within the laws of a free society respecting the same rights of all to enjoy the benefits of freedom, for this nation to retain the rights and freedoms fought for over two centuries ago.

Go to the polls November 6th, vote your conscience, and never let the likes of one it Anon convince you otherwise.

Goodbye Anon...

SITE DOWN INDEFINITELY.

DON'T FORGET TO VOTE.

EVEN THOUGH AT THE END OF THE DAY,

IT WILL MAKE ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

As America moves closer towards a collectivist society, a movement that has been supported by rEpublican and dEmocrat Presidents and Congresses alike, one should ask themselves the question... Does it really matters who is elected President November 6th? Observing present realities, and looking at the national trend for the past 100 plus years it should be obvious to everyone that socialism has been, and continues to be on the march. Irrespective of which political party holds power, who the President is, or whether the Supreme Court is liberal or conservative, socialism has been steadily woven into the fabric of this once capitalist and individualistic nation.

Whether or not the majority understands why this is occurring, or the dangers it presents to property rights, freedom, and individual liberties is debatable. For freedom and liberty to survive as this nation (rightly) understood the concepts at the time of its founding requires an understanding of the concepts and principles that define rights.

Individual Rights

A “right” is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the others are its consequences or corollaries): a man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action—which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life. (Such is the meaning of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.)

The concept of a “right” pertains only to action—specifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.

Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positive—of his freedom to act on his own judgment, for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice. As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligations on them except of a negative kind: to abstain from violating his rights.

The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.

Bear in mind that the right to property is a right to action, like all the others: it is not the right to an object, but to the action and the consequences of producing or earning that object. It is not a guarantee that a man will earn any property, but only a guarantee that he will own it if he earns it. It is the right to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values.

Man holds these rights, not from the Collective nor for the Collective, but against the Collective—as a barrier which the Collective cannot cross; . . . these rights are man’s protection against all other men. {Excerpts, Ayn Rand Lexicon

These are concepts and principles that have been handily and readily rejected by rEpublican and dEmocrat leaders alike. The reason? Both desire and lust after power and control.

Good luck future generations of Americans. Unless something changes soon the citizens of this nation will be little more to their rulers than property to be used however the state wishes.

When I bought this Ralph Lauren trench back in February I was so excited. Now I'm even more excited, having the chance to wore it. It is a versatile piece, and can be worn with a belt and look like a dress or unbelted and it looks a little bit more edgy. Polka print is a plus and also the color scheme navy-white.
I wore it these days belted along with my red bag and nude pumps. A Mary Poppins of these days:)


                                                                       Trench coat: Ralph Lauren/ another option Here
                                                                       Bag : Phillip Lim/ different color Here
                                                                       Pumps: Aldo/ similar Here
                                                                       Bracelet : is actually one strap from my Gucci bag :)
                                                                       Sunglasses: Betsey Johnson

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


As the Obama administration continues the Benghazi spin more relevant information continues to surface. It isn't at all supportive of the administration or recent CIA narrative.

The Weekly Standard - Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”

So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.

It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?

Can there be any doubt but what the spin from the administration will continue? Perhaps soon the nation will know the complete truth. It can't come soon enough.

Via: Memeorandum

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


The President is interested in dictating CEO's compensation. Government control of salary rather than market determination. First the CEO and executives of companies. How long one wonders before this President and his progressive dEmocrat party comes after salaries of the next echelon of managers. And so on. Remember, socialism takes many forms. One is called fascism. Like communism it subjugates the individual and individual initiative and success to the "collective good" of society. Or put another way what an all powerful government by the few decides is good.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said in an interview released on Thursday that the next important step for making the financial sector safer is to make sure executive pay is less closely tied to risky bets.

In an interview to be published on Friday in Rolling Stone magazine, Obama said that despite passage of Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation, there is more to be done to make financial markets safe after the damage caused by the crisis of 2007-2009.

"The single biggest thing that I would like to see is changing incentives on Wall Street and how people get compensated," Obama said. It's questionable, even after enactment of Dodd-Frank reforms, that those incentives have completely been changed, he added.

The Rolling Stone interview stirred controversy because of the president's use, at one point, of a barnyard epithet that some saw as an attack on Republican Mitt Romney.

The White House did not dispute the remarks but a re-election campaign official stressed that the comments were "part of a casual conversation at the end of the interview." The wide-ranging interview covers Obama's first term, what he views as his biggest accomplishments and his fierce fight with Romney for the White House.

Via: Memeorandum

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Considering President Obama's leftist progressive philosophy the following comes as no surprise.

The Blaze - In a new interview with journalistic standard-bearer Rolling Stone, President Barack Obama gives a back-handed smack to vice presidential hopeful Paul Ryan and famed author Ayn Rand.

t’s no secret that Paul (and countless others) are fans of Rand’s work. “I grew up reading Ayn Rand, and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are and what my beliefs are. It’s inspired me so much that it’s required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff,” Ryan has said previously. But liberals have slandered Ryan, portraying him as more of a fanatic than a fan. Rob Zerban, the Wisconsin Democrat trying to unseat Ryan in the House of Representatives, claims that the Republican congressman has a “disturbing” obsession.

President Obama is seizing on this running meme and continuing his efforts to paint his Republican challengers as scary right-wing extremists. When Rolling Stone lobbed him a softball about Ryan’s admiration for Rand’s work, Obama responded:

“Ayn Rand is one of those things that a lot of us, when we were 17 or 18 and feeling misunderstood, we’d pick up. Then, as we get older, we realize that a world in which we’re only thinking about ourselves and not thinking about anybody else, in which we’re considering the entire project of developing ourselves as more important than our relationships to other people and making sure that everybody else has opportunity – that that’s a pretty narrow vision. It’s not one that, I think, describes what’s best in America. Unfortunately, it does seem as if sometimes that vision of a ‘you’re on your own’ society has consumed a big chunk of the Republican Party.”

When asked if he himself had ever read Rand, Obama replied, “Sure.”

Ha: I’d love to know which one of his “Marxist professors” had Ayn Rand on their required reading list.

Precisely, a very big Ha indeed.

Via: Memeorandum

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Click to Enlarge

Having read the recent ABC/Washington Post poll I can only conclude the American electorate has yet to make up its mind.

A poll that reflects a majority of likely voters leaning to Romney and trusting him on the economy while at the same reflecting a majority of registered or likely voters expect Obama will win reelection says the outcome is still very uncertain. So, we wait impatiently until Tuesday November 6th after the "fat lady sings" to find what the future might bring. Given the two major candidates the future may very well not be bright.

ABC News - Mitt Romney has seized further advantage on economic issues at the core of the 2012 campaign, taking him to 50 percent support among likely voters vs. 47 percent for Barack Obama – Romney’s highest vote-preference result of the contest to date.

The difference between the two candidates is within the margin of sampling error in the latest ABC News/Washington Post daily tracking poll, and their individual support levels have not significantly changed. But the momentum on underlying issues and attributes is Romney’s.

Romney’s gains are clear especially in results on the economy. This poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, finds that likely voters now pick Romney over Obama in trust to handle the economy by 52-43 percent – the first time either candidate has held a clear lead over the other on this central issue.

Equally important, Romney has erased Obama’s customary advantage on which candidate better understands the economic problems of average Americans. Today, 48 percent pick Obama, 46 percent Romney – essentially a dead heat. Yesterday and today mark the first time in the campaign that Obama hasn’t had at least a marginally significant lead on economic empathy.

Within-group trends on both these economic measures were covered in yesterday’s analysis; they reflect movement in Romney’s direction almost exclusively among white men, and particularly among less-educated white men.

SIGNALS – There are other signals of Romney’s gains. Expectations are one: Fifty-two percent of likely voters now expect Obama to win the election, down from a peak of 61 percent in late September. Forty percent expect Romney to win – still well fewer than half, but up by 8 percentage points.

Notably, political independents divide by 42-46 percent on whether they expect Obama or Romney to win; that’s shifted dramatically from 61-31 percent in Obama’s favor. Whites, likewise, have moved from a 55-38 percent expectation in Obama’s favor Sept. 29 to 44-48 percent now. {Read More}

Really all this tells us is that over the next 11 days it will continue to be close, that neither candidate is strong, and that America is not happy. But we already knew that didn't we?

Via: Memeorandum

Sorry I've been MIA y'all. (I swear this wasn't part of my 'teasing' plan). This flu is no joke!! I'm going on day two and still no better. I'll be back as soon as the room stops spinning.

via Tumblr