Archive for Barack Ilyich Obama

Transparent Hypocrisy

Everything Barack Obama touches turns to dreck: it’s the reverse Midas touch. What a pleasure it has been lately watching his reputation swirl down the cistern where dreck belongs:

Right now, here ON THE RECORD, fired “New York Times executive editor, JILL ABRAMSON.

While working at “The New York Times” and after decades of covering presidential administrations, Abramson calling President Obama’s White House the most is he secretive White House that she’s covered. And she’s not the only one.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BYRON YORK, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER: This is not the most transparent administration in history.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I will make our government open and transparent.

One of the things I want to do is open things up. I want transparency. I want accountability.

BOB CUSACK, MANAGING EDITOR, ‘THE HILL’: This White House came in saying we’ll do things differently, we’ll change Washington. They didn’t change Washington.

OBAMA: The more transparency we can bring to Washington, the less likely it is Washington will be run by lobbyists and special interests.

Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.

A.B. STODDARD, ‘THE HILL’: He’s broken a promise.

OBAMA: This is the most transparent administration in history.

VAN SUSTEREN: You said have this administration is the most is the secretive. What is your support? Why do you say that?

ABRAMSON: I think it’s easy to demonstrate that that’s true, starting with — I love the name of your show, “ON THE RECORD.” I have never dealt with an administration where more officials — some of whom are actually paid to be the spokesmen for various federal agencies –demand that everything be off the record. So that’s secretive and not transparent.

But the most serious thing is the Obama administration has launched eight criminal leak investigations against sources and whistleblowers. And they have tried to sweep in journalists, including – it’s almost the one- year anniversary exactly that your college, James Rosen, had his record secretly looked at by the government in a leak investigation.

VAN SUSTEREN: Is it profoundly different thought than the other administrations?

ABRAMSON: It is profoundly different. Before these cases, these eight cases, and all of history, there have been fewer than half of those. And so it is different.

So, this has been an historic administration, after all.

Oh, and about “not changing Washington”, there is agreement:

VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: This is within our power to change. Everybody says because we tried in ‘08 and it didn’t happen, it’s not possible.

Give yourself a little credit, Joe. You changed Washington plenty. Never before has an administration that “ended” two “wars” and governed over a five-year “recovery” been so wretchedly unpopular. If you guys were the ones we were waiting for, I wish we had been less patient.

Comments

Smidgen of Corruption Update

Another red line is crossed:

STEVE KORNACKI, MSNBC: Jonathan, let me bring you in now. [...] Presidential overreach, executive orders they think sort of undercut Congress, but you know, you’ve been following this, their complaints for the last few years, really. Legally speaking, is there any kind of a case here?

JONATHAN TURLEY, PROFESSOR OF LAW: Oh, I think there is a case against the president for exceeding his authority. I happen to agree with the president on many of his priorities and policies, but as I testified in Congress, I think that he has crossed the constitutional line.

KORNACKI: Where has he crossed it? Like what specific issue has he crossed it on?

TURLEY: When the president went to Congress and said he would go it alone, it obviously raises a concern. There’s no license for going it alone in our system, and what he’s done, is very problematic. He has shifted $454 million of the ACA from appropriated purpose to another purpose. He’s told agencies not to enforce some laws, like immigration laws. He has effectively rewritten laws through the active interpretation that I find very problematic. While I happen to agree with him, I voted for him, I think this is a problem.

One broken law is a tragedy. A million is a statistic.

Comments

Lois, You Got Some ‘Splainin’ To Do!

Seriously, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry (from laughter):

Congressional investigators have uncovered emails showing ex-IRS official Lois Lerner targeted a sitting Republican senator for a proposed internal audit, a discovery one GOP lawmaker called “shocking.”

The emails were published late Wednesday by the House Ways and Means Committee and pertain to the woman at the heart of the scandal over IRS targeting of Tea Party groups.

The emails appear to show Lerner mistakenly received an invitation intended for Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, in 2012.

“Looked like they were inappropriately offering to pay for his wife. Perhaps we should refer to Exam?” she wrote.

Her colleague, though, pushed back on the idea, saying an offer to pay for his wife is “not prohibited on its face.” There is no indication from the emails that Lerner pursued the issue any further.

America’s Madame Defarge has blood dripping from her knitting needles. But was she acting alone?

“We have seen a lot of unbelievable things in this investigation, but the fact that Lois Lerner attempted to initiate an apparently baseless IRS examination against a sitting Republican United States Senator is shocking,” Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., said in a statement.

“At every turn, Lerner was using the IRS as a tool for political purposes in defiance of taxpayer rights.”

Grassley, incidentally, is a member of the Senate Finance Committee — which is one of the congressional panels investigating the IRS over the targeting scandal.

Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., told Fox News that the revelation that Lerner tried to scrutinize Grassley over an invitation is another example of the administration using the agency as a “political tool, as a weapon.”

The liberal media is weepy that they’re going to tear down the parking garage where Deep Throat met with Bob Woodward. I just hope that IRS HQ is declared a historic building. A site of such epic corruption needs to stand as long as Rome’s crumbling columns have (the only other site of equivalent venality).


The Corps of Rome in Ashes is entombed,
And her great Spirit rejoyned to the Spirit
Of this great Mass, is in the same enwombed

Comments

See No Evil

How the IRS investigates itself:

REP. TREY GOWDY (R-SC): You have already said multiple times today that there was no evidence that you found of any criminal wrongdoing. I want you to tell me what criminal statutes you have evaluated.

JOHN KOSKINEN, IRS COMMISSIONER: I have not looked at any.

GOWDY: Well, how can you possibly tell our fellow citizens that there’s not criminal wrongdoing if you don’t even know what statutes to look at?

KOSKINEN: I have seen no evidence that anyone –

GOWDY: Well, how would you know what elements of the crime existed? You don’t even know what statutes are in play. I’m going to ask you again. What statutes have you evaluated?

KOSKINEN: I think you can rely on common sense that nothing I have seen –

GOWDY: Common sense. Instead on the criminal code, you want to rely on common sense? No, Mr. Commissioner, you can shake your head all you want to, Commissioner. You have said today that there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing and I am asking you what criminal statutes you have reviewed to reach that conclusion?

KOSKINEN: I reviewed no criminal statutes.

All you had to do back in the Bush years was say Donald Rumsfeld’s or Dick Cheney’s names and people would respond with spittled fury or deranged laughter. They became punchlines without jokes. Yet Lois Lerner can go underground; this ghoul, Koskinen, can lie and prevaricate before Congress; Hillary Clinton can shrug off terrorist murders; Eric Holder can be held in contempt (not just mine, but Congress’s); and on and on.

These people should be held in the stocks in a public square, and pelted with overripe produce.

Comments

A Federacy of Dunces

It is the nature of organizations and bureaucracies that when they don’t get some things done right, they don’t get anything done right. If they can’t keep the copier full of toner or the phone bills paid, they can’t keep the wheels falling off the cars, or the drug smugglers from the border:

U.S. officials have neglected the rise of drug trafficking and transnational criminal groups in Latin America for so long that the problem has now reached America’s southern border, creating a humanitarian crisis and raising the costs of any U.S. response, a leading U.S lawmaker and experts said on Tuesday.

Rep. Matt Salmon (R., Ariz.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, said in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) that the United States “has been AWOL in the hemisphere all together, not just in the war on drugs.” The most recent indication is the surge in young immigrant children crossing the U.S. border, where between 60,000 and 80,000 children are expected to seek safe haven this year.

“I Iay this at [President Barack Obama’s] doorstep,” Salmon said, pointing to administration policies such as deferred action that offer deportation relief for some undocumented immigrants who arrive as children. “It is because of his failed policies that this is happening.”

Transnational criminal groups have now begun to infiltrate corrupt governments and police forces in Central America and partner with gangs to traffic drugs, such as Barrio 18 and Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) in El Salvador. Honduras and El Salvador have some of the world’s highest murder rates—largely due to organized crime and gang-related violence.

However, U.S. military resources in the region have declined in recent years due to budget cuts known as sequestration. Marine Gen. John Kelly, head of U.S. Southern Command, told lawmakers at committee hearings earlier this year that he lacks the assets to interdict about three-fourths of “suspected maritime drug smuggling” into America.

“This shows us the lack of priority and focus that our government has given the scourge of drug trafficking right here in our own hemisphere,” Salmon said. “Violence near our shores poses a direct threat to our national security and destabilizes our region.”

I realize that many of the eff-ups of this administration are with problems not originally of their own making: Iraq, the VA system, Guantanamo and the war on terror, drug cartels, etc. all pre-existed Obama’s ascension to the seat of power. But after five and-a-half years in office, you own the nation and the world you have made.

This regime has been all about politics, nothing about power. If you have power and choose not to use it, others will: Al Qaeda, ISIS, China, Russia, MS-13. While we’ve been dic*ing around with ObamaCare, global warming, and equal treatment for shemales confused by their gender identity, those with a less nuanced view of the ways of the world (a 19th century view, as John Kerry once observed) just get on with it. If they want Iraq, Ukraine, some rocky islands in the western Pacific, or even Arizona, USA, they just take it. Who’s going to stop them, Obama? Putin’s still laughing. Assad’s sides still ache.

And as Arizona goes, so goes Ohio:

Sheriff’s detectives in rural northeast Ohio have made the county’s biggest drug seizure ever as part of an investigation that could have ties to Mexican drug cartels.

Investigators in Geauga County, east of Cleveland, raided a home in a secluded neighborhood in Newbury Township last week and seized 6 pounds of crystal methamphetamine, 2.2 pounds of black tar heroin, 100 pounds of marijuana and $128,000 in cash.

A sheriff’s department official says deputies arrested four people and that a number of loaded firearms were found during the raid. The official says it’s possible the ring had ties to Mexican drug cartels.

As columnist James Taranto likes to quote: “everything seemingly is spinning out of control”. Because it is. Obama’s chickens have come home to roost.

PS: What’s deliciously ironic about this story is that Obama has been telling us for months what an awesome country Mexico is behind those nasty “sensational headlines” of decapitated bodies and mass graves. Today, Nogales; tomorrow, Nebraska.

Comments

Practicing Journalism w/o a License

Sharyl Attkisson lost her job at CBS for questioning the Obama administration. At all.

Now she is reduced to the lowest form of life, a phylum that looks upon pond scum and banana slugs with the greenish tinge of envy: bloggress.

According to the House Ways and Means Committee, the IRS reports having “lost” former IRS manager Lois Lerner’s emails to and from other IRS employees sent between January of 2009 and April of 2011 due to a ‘computer crash.’

In light of the disclosure, these are some of the logical requests that should be made of the IRS:

Please provide a timeline of the crash and documentation covering when it was first discovered and by whom; when, how and by whom it was learned that materials were lost; the official documentation reporting the crash and federal data loss; documentation reflecting all attempts to recover the materials; and the remediation records documenting the fix. This material should include the names of all officials and technicians involved, as well as all internal communications about the matter.

Please provide all documents and emails that refer to the crash from the time that it happened through the IRS’ disclosure to Congress Friday that it had occurred.

Please provide the documents that show the computer crash and lost data were appropriately reported to the required entities including any contractor servicing the IRS. If the incident was not reported, please explain why.

Please provide a list summarizing what other data was irretrievably lost in the computer crash. If the loss involved any personal data, was the loss disclosed to those impacted? If not, why?

Please provide documentation reflecting any security analyses done to assess the impact of the crash and lost materials. If such analyses were not performed, why not?

Please provide documentation showing the steps taken to recover the material, and the names of all technicians who attempted the recovery.

Please explain why redundancies required for federal systems were either not used or were not effective in restoring the lost materials, and provide documentation showing how this shortfall has been remediated.

Please provide any documents reflecting an investigation into how the crash resulted in the irretrievable loss of federal data and what factors were found to be responsible for the existence of this situation.

I would also ask for those who discovered and reported the crash to testify under oath, as well as any officials who reported the materials as having been irretrievably lost.

You can take the girl out of journalism, but you can’t take the journalist out of the girl. If Andrea Mitchell weren’t so high on hydrogen peroxide fumes and David Gregory weren’t so intoxicated with himself, they might think to ask even one of these questions.

Nah.

You can see why Attkisson had to get out of the business: she has an unspellable name and too many scruples. Welcome to the Lower Depths, sweetie. You’ll find it’s not so bad when you get used to the swamp gas.

PS: But then, you come from the network of Dan Rather, so you probably already are.

Comments

It’s Mysterious!™

I just checked my email. As I thought, I still have emails from late 2006. I see names of people I had forgotten, even names of people now dead. It’s eerie.

What’s even eerier is that I don’t have a 28-month gap in my emails. Near as I can tell, they’re all there. (Unfortunately.)

The Internal Revenue Service has lost two years worth of emails to and from embattled former tax official Lois Lerner, the agency told congressional investigators on Friday.

The IRS promised on May 8 to turn over all her emails but now blames a computer crash for huge tranches of missing documents.

Lerner is under investigation for allegedly orchestrating a years-long program that targeted tea party groups and other conservative organizations for unusually intrusive scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status beginning in the year before the 2010 congressional midterm elections.

The House Ways and Means Committee, one of two bodies probing the case, said Friday that the IRS says that for the period of January 2009 through April 2011, the only Lerner emails it can find are those that were sent to or from other IRS employees.

Emails whose sender or recipient was outside the government, or inside other agencies, have mysteriously disappeared.

You say mysterious, I say eerie. Whatevuh! It’s almost like the IRS HQ is haunted.

Put a pointy hat on her and she does look like a witch. Actually, forget the pointy hat.

California Republican Darrell Issa isn’t buying it. ‘Isn’t it convenient for the Obama administration?’ the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee said in a statement.

‘Do they really expect the American people to believe that, after having withheld these emails for a year, they’re just now realizing the most critical time period is missing?’

The American people will believe almost anything, Congressman—up to and including that they could keep their doctor. Of course it’s “convenient” for Obama, just like tee times at Andrews AFB and Ft. Belvoir and annual vacations in Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard.

Nixon was impeached in part over an 18-minute gap on an audiotape. You tell me what we do with a president whose jackbooted thugs “lost” 28 months of incriminating emails.

Hundreds of the right-wing organizations were forced to wait more than three years for action on their applications, while politically liberal groups were typically approved quickly.

In one case Lerner, then in charge of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations Division, personally signed the approval granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a charity headed by the president’s half-brother.

That approval was granted in less than a month, and back-dated – a highly unusual move – to allow the charity to avoid paying taxes on money it had raised prior to applying.

We’re no longer a nation of laws (which may be a good thing, considering the laws we’ve passed lately). We’re a nation of declarations, diktats, and whims. We change the rules to suit our fancy, and admire our cleverness daily. If only Russia, China, ISIS, Iran, et al could see us as we see ourselves. They’d want to be our best friends. Given this behavior, we no better than them.

Comments

Nice Memoir Ya Got There

Shame if somethin’ happened to ya—I mean it.

Shame if something happened to it:

In his memoir, “Stress Test: Reflections on Financial Crises,” Geithner wrote that he objected when [Dan] Pfeiffer wanted him to say Social Security “didn’t contribute” to the federal deficit.

“It wasn’t a main driver of our future deficits, but it did contribute,” Geithner wrote. “Pfeiffer said the line was a ‘dog whistle’ to the left, a phrase I had never heard before. He had to explain that the phrase was code to the Democratic base, signaling that we intended to protect Social Security.”

Did I say Social Security did contribute to the deficit? Silly me. Nothing could be further from the truth:

In an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier, the former Obama Cabinet member denied that the White House attempted to get him to mislead the public.

“I was never, ever in the position where anyone in the White House asked me to do that,” he told Fox News. “And of course, I would never have done it. But Dan Pfeiffer never asked me to do that.”

Heckuva guy, that Dan. A mensch.

You remember him:

Dan Pfeiffer, a top White House advisor, told David Gregory on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” that the end of March is, in fact, the deadline for the open enrollment period, noting that those who haven’t yet secured a plan should do so as soon as possible.

“That will not happen,” Pfeiffer said, when asked if the individual mandate would be delayed.

It did, of course.

More:

Edie Littlefield Sundby may not have thought she’d ignite a national debate when the stage-4 cancer survivor asked us to publish her Monday op-ed on losing her oncologist due to the Affordable Care Act. But she certainly has, and it’s important to understand why. Mrs. Sundby and millions like her must be denied their medical choices if ObamaCare is going to work as its liberal planners intend.

Dan Pfeiffer, President Obama’s chief political spinner, sent out a now infamous tweet on Monday linking to a left-wing website that blamed Mrs. Sundby’s policy loss on UnitedHealthcare. The White House default is always to blame the insurers. But UnitedHealthcare only fled the state because ObamaCare’s subsidized exchanges are meant to steal their customers. As more people are pulled into government coverage, policies like Mrs. Sundby’s are harder to sustain economically, so insurers bail.

More:

[Obama Adviser Dan] PFEIFFER: [W]e are for cutting spending. We’re for reforming our tax code. We’re for reforming our entitlements.

What we’re not for is negotiating with people with a bomb strapped to their chest.

He knee-caps a stage-4 cancer victim and likens Republicans to Arab suicide bombing terrorists—who doesn’t believe he told little Timmy exactly what little Timmy said? Dan Pfeiffer is President Obama’s H.R. Haldeman.

They already had an enemies list.

Remember how Geithner—an admitted tax cheat—was sold to us as the only person who could save the US from financial ruin (I do, he was)? Then, ‘splain this:

In his book, Geithner also recalled an incident in January 2009, having been on the job as secretary for less than a week, in which he rejected what a Democratic strategist wanted him to say at an Oval Office press event.

“I was supposed to have my first one-on-one meeting with President Obama,” Geithner wrote. “As I was about to walk into the Oval Office, Stephanie Cutter, a veteran Democratic operative who was handling our communications strategy, told me we would have a ‘pool spray,’ a photo opportunity for the White House press.

“The president and I would make brief remarks about executive compensation, responding to a report that Wall Street firms had paid their executives big bonuses while piling up record losses in 2008. ‘Here’s what you’re going to say,’ Cutter said.”

Geithner wrote that Cutter handed him the text, and he “skimmed the outrage I was expected to express.”

He wrote: “I’m not very convincing as an angry populist, and I thought the artifice would look ridiculous.”

According to his memoir, he told Cutter he wouldn’t do it.

“Instead, I sat uncomfortably next to the president while he expressed outrage. Americans were furious about bailouts for overpaid bankers, and the White House political team wanted us to show we were on the right side of the backlash,” he wrote.

They were telling Boy Genius what to say from the first to the last—they still are. And he’s every bit the coward he looks like.

It’s all politics. Sorry to hear about your cancer, Mrs. Sundby. Ya want, I can make some calls. I know a guy who knows a guy.

Comments

Emails? We Thought You Said Shemales!

Jail and a loaded pistol tend to focus a mind:

The IRS has finally agreed to hand over all of ex-IRS official Lois Lerner’s emails to the House Committee on Ways and Means, The Daily Caller has learned.

New IRS commissioner John Koskninen previously said that it could take years to provide all of Lerner’s emails to congressional investigators. But Ways and Means’ referral of criminal charges against Lerner to the Department of Justice, coupled with the House of Representatives’ holding Lerner in contempt of Congress Wednesday, has changed the tenor of the investigation into the IRS conservative targeting scandal.

You know how you “provide” emails? Use the Forward button, works every time. This is the stuff of cheap comedy, but that’s we’ve come to expect from Benny Hill Obama. Low humor.

“It is almost a year to the day since Lois Lerner ‘apologized’ for the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, and we need to get to the bottom of this,” Camp said. “These documents are critical to an investigation that is holding the IRS accountable and ensuring the constitutional rights of these groups are never trampled on again. The Committee will thoroughly review the Lerner documents and follow them wherever they may lead.”

You say “apologized”, I say “took the 5th”. Whatever. All I know is that a bipartisan majority of Congressmen voted to hold her in contempt, and a pack of Democrats only tried to bury the story. May they choke on it.

Comments

Oh, That’s “Social Justice”!

I asked the other day what the hell the term meant, and concluded: “’social justice’ would seem to mean a vicious cycle of liberal nonsense”, in which a do-gooding government would stick its nose into the marketplace of labor and management for the benefit of the former and the detriment of the latter (that’s the justice part), only to see its heavy-handed, anti-capitalist efforts lead to layoffs and economic sclerosis.

I kinda talk that way sometimes.

But God bless Prager University (and Professor Jonah Goldberg) for taking a crack at the question too.

The video won’t play for me, but here are selections from the transcript:

Try this at your next party. Ask your guests to define the term Social Justice.

Since everyone on that side of the spectrum talks incessantly about social justice, they should be able to provide a good definition, right?

But ask ten liberals to tell you what they mean by social justice and you’ll get ten different answers.

That’s because Social Justice means anything its champions want it to mean.

“The mission of the AFL-CIO is to improve the lives of working families — to bring economic justice to the workplace, and social justice to our nation.”

In short, “social justice” is code for good things no one needs to argue for — and no one dare be against.

This very much troubled the great economist Friedrich Hayek.

This is what he wrote in 1976, two years after winning the Nobel Prize in Economics.

“I have come to feel strongly that the greatest service I can still render to my fellow men would be that I could make the speakers and writers among them thoroughly ashamed ever again to employ the term ‘social justice’.”

Pro or con, good or bad, it still has no concrete meaning (which is Goldberg’s point).

So what the hell does it mean?

Hayek understood that beneath the political opportunism and intellectual laziness of the term “social justice” was a pernicious philosophical claim, namely that freedom must be sacrificed in order to redistribute income.

Ultimately, “social justice” is about the state amassing ever increasing power in order to, do “good things.” What are good things?

Well whatever the champions of social justice decide this week.

But first, last and always it is the cause of economic redistribution.

Well, “Professor” Goldberg, that’s what you say, you reactionary killjoy. Maybe it means flowers and butterflies to other people.

You don’t have to take my word for it.

That is precisely how a UN report on Social Justice defines the term:

“Social justice may be broadly understood as the fair and compassionate distribution of the fruits of economic growth.

Social justice is not possible without strong and coherent redistributive policies conceived and implemented by public agencies.”

I repeat: “Strong and coherent redistributive policies conceived and implemented by public agencies.”

And it gets worse.

The UN report goes on to insist that: “Present-day believers in an absolute truth identified with virtue and justice are neither willing nor desirable companions for the defenders of social justice.”

Translation: if you believe truth and justice are concepts independent of the agenda of the forces of progress as defined by the left, you are an enemy of social justice.

Yet again, if you scratch a liberal, you find a fascist underneath. (And probably need a tetanus shot.)

The self-declared champions of social justice believe the state must remedy and can remedy all perceived wrongs.

Anyone who disagrees is an enemy of what is good and right.

And the state must therefore coerce them to do what is socially just.

And that, as Hayek prophesized, is no longer a free society.

It is, rather, ObAmerica.

Comments

He Almost Had Me

It starts so well:

Zaid Jilani, a former blogger with the left-wing think tank Center for American Progress, explained this week how the Obama administration frequently tries to censor the progressive organization’s content when it departs from the White House’s agenda.

Do tell:

“One of the controversial topics that was very constrained in our writing at ThinkProgress in 2009 was Afghanistan.,” he wrote. “CAP had decided not to protest Obama’s surge, so most of our writing on the topic was simply neutral — we weren’t supposed to take a strong stand.”

That was tough for Jilani, a strong opponent of the war. And as congressional opposition to the war increased over time, he found he was able to criticize the White House more directly.

But in 2011, one post went too far.

Jilani had just published a story — “one of the most successful things [he] had ever written at that point” — which indicated troops levels at the end of Obama’s Afghan “surge” would actually be higher than at any point in the George W. Bush administration. And it came complete with a graph, which congressional opponents of the war took into committee hearings on Capitol Hill.

The Obama administration was furious.

“Phone calls from the White House started pouring in,” Jilani claimed, “berating my bosses for being critical of Obama on this policy . . . Soon afterwards all of us ThinkProgress national security bloggers were called into a meeting with CAP senior staff and basically berated for opposing the Afghan war and creating daylight between us and Obama.”

You think this doesn’t go on at CBS, NPR, etc., etc? Ha! That’s why we call it the Democrat-Media Complex.

He wasn’t done, either:

“It confused me a lot because on the one hand, CAP was advertising to donors that it opposed the Afghan war,” Jilani noted. “In our ‘Progressive Party,’ the annual fundraising party we do with both Big Name Progressive Donors and corporate lobbyists (in the same room!) we even advertised that we wanted to end the war in Afghanistan.”

“What that meeting with CAP senior staff showed me was that they viewed being closer to Obama and aligning with his policy as more important than demonstrating progressive principle, if that meant breaking with Obama,” Jilani explained.

“Essentially, they were doing the same thing to us RT [Russia Today] America is telling its American producers to do now — align with your boss, who is the president of the country.”

Obama = Putin. Perfect. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

So where’s the problem?

The blogger eventually left his post at CAP, citing “reasons of other censorship and dealing with both corporate sponsors and that institution’s fealty to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).”

Great. Super. Just when I thought I had a soul brother, he shivs me with his scimitar.

PS: “Fealty”? Get over yourself.

Comments

Lois, You Got Some ‘Splainin’ to Do

Now, where were we?

House Republicans announced Tuesday that they are recalling Lois G. Lerner, the former IRS employee at the center of the tea party targeting scandal, to testify to Congress next week, saying she has critical information.

Ms. Lerner asserted her right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination at a hearing last year, but at the time she also proclaimed her innocence. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell E. Issa, California Republican, said she effectively waived her Fifth Amendment rights with that claim and made her open to being compelled to testify.

“Ms. Lerner’s testimony remains critical to the committee’s investigation,” Mr. Issa said in a letter to her attorney, William W. Taylor III. “Documents and testimony obtained by the committee show that she played a significant role in scrutinizing applications for tax exempt status from conservative organizations.”

In a dramatic hearing in May, just weeks after the targeting was revealed, Ms. Lerner appeared before the oversight committee and refused to testify.

Republicans initially seemed prepared to excuse her, but Rep. Trey Gowdy, South Carolina Republican and a former prosecutor, raised an objection saying her statement of innocence amounted to waiving her right to remain silent.

Technically, Gowdy had a point. If you assert your 5th Amendment right to remain silent, you remain silent. You don’t get to apply it selectively. Politically, however, it would appear as bullying if mean old Republicans compelled this damsel in distress to answer their questions.

But aren’t we past that now? It’s now clear not only what happened, but why. The Tea Party (more a movement than a party) rose up to swing the 2010 elections to Republicans; that was not going to happen in 2012 if Obama and his shock troops had anything to do with it. And they did. And it didn’t.

Obama feigned outrage, once, when the story broke, but he got over it. Now it’s a “phony” scandal. What’s he going to do, investigate himself? His myriad agencies and departments are too busy mobilizing against any dissent or opposition to look into malfeasance from the Oval Office. Heck, we just learned the that Treasury Secretary himself placed a scathing call to S&P for lowering the nation’s credit-rating directly AFTER meeting with Obama. He learned that one from his hermano de una otra madre, Hugo Chavez (may he burn in hell).

Eric Holder has already announced his intention to enforce only those laws that meet his fancy; he recently encouraged state AGs to follow suit. Along with the IRS and FEC disenfranchisement of conservative Americans, the FCC floated the idea of “monitoring” media newsrooms. Even signature pieces of legislation (constitutional legislation, bitches) are applied only according to taste.

This is statism out of control. Obama is more than just the evil twin of Chavez. No wonder he made a bee-line to his true idol—or as close as he could get:


Do please tell Fidel that I send my best—and that I bowed.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »