Witch’s Will For A Mourning In May
I will remain in “mourning” so long as Obama’s unworthy ass sits in the Oval Office.
Quote of the day:
Newspaper Headlines in the Year 2035
Ozone created by electric cars now killing millions inthe seventh largest country in the world, California.
White minorities still trying to have English recognized as the California’s third language.
Spotted Owl plague threatens northwestern United States crops & livestock.
Authentic year 2000 “chad” sells at Sotheby’s for $4.6 million.
Baby conceived naturally…. Scientists stumped.
Last remaining Fundamentalist Muslim dies in the American Territory of the Middle East (formerly known as Iran, Afghanistan, Syria,and Lebanon.)
Iraq still closed off; physicists estimate it will take at least ten more years before radioactivity decreases to safe levels.
Castro finally dies at age 112; Cuban cigars can now be imported legally, but President Chelsea Clinton has banned all smoking.
George Z. Bush says he will run for President in 2036. Hillary Chesea Clinton will run against him.
35 year study: diet and exercise is the key to weight loss.
Texas executes last remaining citizen.
Upcoming NFL draft likely to focus on use of mutants.
Average height of NBA players now nine feet, seven inches.
Microsoft announces it has perfected its newest version of Windows so it crashes BEFORE installation is completed.
New federal law requires that all nail clippers, screw-drivers and baseball bats must be registered by January 2036.
My Top 3 Stories:
Bouncing Ball Politics
by Thomas Sowell
If you are driving along and suddenly see a big red rubber ball come bouncing out into the street, you might want to put your foot on the brake pedal, because a small child may well come running out into the street after it.
We all understand that an inexperienced young child who has his mind fixed on one thing may ignore other things that are too dangerous to be ignored. Unfortunately, too much of what is said and done in politics is based on the same tunnel vision pursuit of some “good thing,” in utter disregard of the repercussions.
For years, home ownership was a big “good thing” among both liberal Democrats like Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd, on the one hand, and moderate Republicans like President George W. Bush on the other hand.
Raising the rate of home ownership was the big red bouncing ball that they pursued out into the street, in utter disregard of the dangers.
A political myth has been created that no one warned of those dangers. But among the many who did warn were yours truly in 2005, Fortune and Barron’s magazines in 2004 and Britain’s The Economist magazine in 2003. Warnings specifically about the dangerous roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were made by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in 2005 and by Secretary of the Treasury John W. Snow in 2003.
Many, if not most, of the children who go running out into the street in pursuit of their bouncing ball may have been warned against this by their parents. But neither small children nor politicians always heed warnings.
Politicians are of course more articulate than small children, so the pols are able to not only disregard warnings but ridicule them. That was what was done by Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd, among many other politicians who made the pursuit of higher home ownership rates the holy grail.
In pursuit of those higher home ownership rates, especially among low-income people and minorities, the many vast powers of the federal government — from the Federal Reserve to bank regulatory agencies and even the Department of Justice, which issued threats of anti-discrimination lawsuits — were used to force banks and other lenders to lower their standards for making mortgage loans.
Lower lending standards of course meant higher risks of default. But these risks — and the chain reactions throughout the whole financial system — were like the traffic ignored by a small child dashing out into the street in pursuit of their bouncing ball. The whole economy got hit when the housing boom became a housing bust, and we are still trying to recover, years later.
Dems Launch Preemptive Strikes on Benghazi Hearing
On one hand, Washington Democrats are publicly brushing off Wednesday’s fresh hearings into Benghazi as a stunt by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) not worthy of much note.
On the other hand, they are steadily launching preemptive strikes against the exposition of whistleblower information that could prove damning to the Obama administration.
The ranking member on the Oversight Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), reacted angrily last month to House Republicans’ interim report on Benghazi, which noted an April 19, 2012, cable on which Hillary Clinton’s signature accompanies an acknowledgment of a request for extra security even though she then withdrew security assets.
As Oversight Democrats prepare for a slew of cameras pointed at the committee on Wednesday, Cummings today called for “bipartisan and responsible” investigations into all matters, “particularly those involving our national security.”
“Whistleblowers must have the ability to come forward to Congress and be protected from retaliation when they report waste, fraud, or abuse,” he added.
“I also believe members of Congress have an obligation to actually investigate claims before coming to conclusions and making public accusations. Unfortunately, House Republicans have taken the opposite approach. They issued a partisan report with reckless and false accusations against the former Secretary of State, they have completely concealed Mr. Thompson from Democratic Committee members, and they have failed to make even basic inquiries to the Intelligence Community, the Defense Department, or the State Department to vet specific allegations.”
Mark Thompson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism, is expected to say at the hearing that Clinton tried to cut the State Department’s counterterrorism unit out of the Benghazi response the night of the attack, as Issa revealed over the weekend.
Cummings is a hyperbolic, lying POS. There is nothing on face of the planet that can be blamed on Obama and nothing on the face of the planet that isn’t the fault of Republicans. That is according to Cummings.
Jonah Goldberg: Hillary is no Barack
Many liberals would like you to think it’s ‘her turn.’ But there’s reason for skepticism.
In a move that had some of us dropping to our knees and shaking our fists at an indifferent God, C-SPAN recently announced that it is launching its “Road to the White House” programming for 2016.
For others, however, the response was more like “it’s about time!” Chief among them is that happy band of political warriors who think it’s “Hillary’s turn.”
Last week, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi admitted that she prays Hillary will run. Also last week, Emily’s List, the liberal feminist organization dedicated to getting liberal feminist women elected to public office, announced it’s big new “Madam President” campaign dedicated to removing some imaginary “men only” sign on the Oval Office.
Emily’s List President Stefanie Schriock says the effort isn’t — wink, wink — all about Clinton, but she concedes, “There’s one name on all our minds: Hillary Clinton. Voters across the country are excited about her possible run. But if she decides not to run, we still have a deep bench of incredible female leaders to choose from.”
Translation: If Hillary runs, get out of her — and our — way. The same day Emily’s List announced its spectacularly unsubtle Madam President campaign, Quinnipiac released a poll finding that Clinton was the overwhelming favorite of Democratic primary voters. Sixty-five percent said they preferred Hillary, compared with 13% for next-in-line Joe Biden (who also may think he’s owed the presidency because it’s “his turn”).
‘Rendezvous with destiny’?
Ironically, Clinton might be borrowing a page from Barack Obama. In a less ham-fisted way, the Obama campaign cultivated a sense that America had a “rendezvous with destiny” (Franklin Roosevelt’s famous phrase) to elect the first African-American president. Obama himself often underplayed the point, merely referring to the “historic” nature of the election, his candidacy, etc. His supporters weren’t nearly so understated.
Director Spike Lee declared in the summer of ’08 that when Obama is elected, “it will change everything. … You’ll have to measure time by ‘Before Obama’ and ‘After Obama.'”
Though some of us might have rolled our eyes at that kind of hyperbole, it was precisely the kind of thing that got millions of idealistic young people and other first-time voters to rush to the polls for Obama.
The question is, in 2016 — or, if you prefer, A.O. Year One — will the same formula work?
Maybe. But there’s reason for skepticism. Leave aside the fact that it is very rare for a party to hold the White House for three elections in a row. George H.W. Bush pulled it off in 1988. Before that it was FDR in 1940 and then Teddy Roosevelt in 1904.
First of all, gender and race have different historic and political frequencies. Charges of sexism, deserved or undeserved, simply do not have the same sting as charges of racism. And while most Americans would like to see a female president, that aspiration doesn’t pull on the heartstrings in the same way.
More specifically, the simple fact is that Hillary Clinton is no Barack Obama. In 2008, Obama was still an exciting unknown. Clinton has been in the news for two decades. And even with Obama’s glory in full fade, it’s worth noting he’s still a vastly more compelling personality.
Watch January’s (journalistically vapid) 60 Minutesinterview with both Clinton and Obama. The president comes across as engaged and energetic. Clinton seems like the person who comes up to tell you “there’s no eating in the library.”
Worth a Read:
Internet Sales Tax Faces Tough Sell in the House
Republicans who support this should be made to pay the penalty for joining the GD Dems in taxing the crap out of everything that moves!
Final Thoughts from the NRA Convention
Josh Marshall is absolutely correct when he claims that you hear “militia-style rhetoric” at the NRA Convention. But what you don’t see — and won’t see — is actual violence.
There may be guns everywhere on the showroom floor but this is a peaceful place to be; full of normal Americans from all parts of the country who are jealous in the defense of their liberties. When he wasn’t ranging into extravagance, Wayne LaPierre was remarkably effective in selling this message. As I noted on Friday:
Group by group, LaPierre asks the audience to stand up: “Stand up if you’re a teacher”; “stand up if you’re a cop”; “stand up if you’re a homemaker.” And so on, until everyone in the hall is standing. We’re not extremists, he implies — we’re you.
Nothing I saw over this weekend disabused me of this notion. Any group that combines millions of normal Americans and the defense of an unalienable right will be difficult to demonize effectively.
Krauthammer: Benghazi “By Definition A Cover-Up”
NewsBusters Interview: Marjorie Dannenfelser on the Broader Implications of the Gosnell Murder Trial
Ted Cruz on internet tax and Bill Richardson’s silly remark
Does He Listen to Himself? Matthews Compares NRA to Nazis, Decries Use of Nazi Comparisons
Apparently not even Chris Matthews listens to Chris Matthews. On Monday’s Hardball, the liberal anchor compared the speeches at the National Rifle Association’s 2013 convention to the Nazis. Three minutes later, he decried the use of Nazi comparisons. On the same program, Matthews insisted that the Republican Party has forgiven the assassination of GOP President Abraham Lincoln.
As he played clips of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck at this past weekend’s convention, Matthews railed, “First of all, it’s Hitlerian, generally speaking, demagoguery. It’s always about righteous indignation. All great demagogic speakers talk about how they’re coming to get us.” The host then played a clip of Beck showing a satirical poster of Michael Bloomberg as Vladimir Lenin. Mistaking this for Nazis, Matthews huffed, “But this idea of making moderate politicians like mike Bloomberg, who’s really a centrist, into some sort of…what? A Nazi?”
This isn’t the first time the liberal anchor has compared his enemies to Nazis. He’s also become angry over too much “hate” in politics.
Earlier, Matthews mocked the Republican Party’s embrace of gun rights, bizarrely linking: “Guns killed Lincoln. Killed James Garfield. Killed McKinley. Killed– Almost killed Ronald Reagan.” The TV host asserted, ” All that’s forgiven now by the NRA-infested Republican Party.”
Last but not least:
Benghazi Ghosts Haunt White House
By Mona Charen
My iPhone buzzes on a regular basis with “news alerts” from Politico, The Hill and other sources. Politico provides breathless, this-cannot-wait-till-you-get-to-your desk “breaking news” sirens on every hiccup emanating from the White House. On April 22, for example, the news flash permitted me to learn without delay that “President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama will on Thursday attend a memorial service for the victims of last week’s explosion in West, Texas.”
When three career employees of the State Department announced their intention to testify before Congress — contradicting the Obama administration’s carefully constructed storyline about events in Benghazi, Libya — my phone was silent. News is very much in the eye of the beholder.
One of these whistle-blowers, Gregory N. Hicks, was the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya and reportedly the last American to see Ambassador Chris Stevens alive. His testimony about the nature of the Benghazi assault should be illuminating. Mark Thompson, deputy coordinator for the State Department’s counterterrorism bureau, will apparently testify that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was keen to obscure the terror links of the attackers in Benghazi and accordingly kept the counterterrorism officers at State out of the loop in planning the response to the attack.
In anticipation of the hearings, which begin Wednesday, a few basic questions ought to be on the minds of members of Congress.
President Obama claimed repeatedly in the aftermath of the Benghazi attack that he would do everything in his power to ensure that the perpetrators are “brought to justice.” During the second presidential debate, Obama said, “We are going to find out who did this, and we are going to hunt them down, because one of the things that I’ve said throughout my presidency is when folks mess with Americans, we go after them.” Oh? For three weeks, American officials did not even visit the scene. On Oct. 18, The New York Times reported that one of the ringleaders of the attack, Ahmed Abu Khattala, was sipping a strawberry frappe on the patio of a luxury hotel and scoffing at the idea that he should go into hiding.
He was right. No one has been brought to justice, and there’s little evidence that the Obama administration has made any effort. Just this past week, eight months after the attacks, the FBI released photos of three suspects. The Tashkent municipal police department could have moved faster.
If reporting by Stephen Hayes in The Weekly Standard and accounts of what the whistle-blowers will say are correct, the shaky edifice of lies that the Obama administration erected about Benghazi is about to collapse.