NBC, ABC Gush Over ‘Celebrity-Packed Secret Soiree’ at White House

While NBC’s Today and ABC’s Good Morning America ignored longtime Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal testifying before the House Benghazi Committee on Tuesday, both morning shows eagerly touted a “celebrity-packed secret soiree” at the White House “with 500 guests, including a couple of music legends.” 

On Today, co-host Carson Daly proclaimed: “Now to that secret soiree at the White House hosted by the President and First Lady, featuring Prince and Stevie Wonder. Not too shabby. It happened over the weekend.”

 Moments later Daly revealed: “You know who was at this event? Our friend Al Roker.” News anchor Natalie Morales noted another NBC host at the exclusive presidential party: “And Tamron [Hall]. And Tamron was there.” 

Roker gushed about the event: “Well, it was very nice, some lovely hors d’oeuvres. And got to watch the First Lady and the President get down. So it was – but to see Prince and then Stevie Wonder together performing was worth everything....it was unbelievable.”

Daly wondered: “How do you get on the list?...How did you get invited to this secret party at the White House?” Roker joked: “I don't know. I think it was a mistake. They actually wanted [my wife] Deborah and I had to come along.” 

In reality, it was not the first time Roker attended a White House bash. In 2014, Roker could not contain his excitement while describing another party with the Obamas: “I actually got to boogie a little with the First Lady....Deborah and I were dancing and all of a sudden I turned around and there was Mrs. Obama....And I'm thinking, ‘Oh, my gosh, I'm dancing with the First Lady.’” 

On Good Morning America, correspondent Jim Avila declared: “It's tough to keep a concert secret when the headliner is Prince, the accompanist is Stevie Wonder, the audience is the First Family, and the venue is the White House – especially in the age of social media.”

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading.....

Hillary's huge lead over the GOP? Maybe it never existed

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton delivers a speech at Texas Southern University in Houston, Thursday, June 4, 2015. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)

Through all of Hillary Clinton's recent troubles — emails, foundation, Benghazi — Democrats have taken comfort in their all-but-assured nominee's formidable lead over top Republicans in head-to-head matchups. Now that lead is shrinking, and the Democratic comfort level is falling along with it.

 

But it's possible Clinton's big lead was never as big as Democrats thought. Yes, some of the margins looked enormous:

* A CNN poll in March showed Clinton up by 15 points over Republican Jeb Bush, 13 points over Marco Rubio, 11 points over Rand Paul, and 15 points over Scott Walker.

* An ABC News poll in March showed Clinton up by 15 points over Rubio, 14 points over Walker, and 13 points over Bush.

* A CNN poll in April showed Clinton up by 22 points over Walker, 19 points over Paul, 14 points over Rubio, and 17 points over Bush.

Big margins. But at the same time, at least one other poll — by Public Policy Polling, the Democratic polling firm — showed Clinton with much more modest leads over her GOP rivals. A PPP survey in late February showed Clinton with an eight-point lead over Walker, a seven-point lead over Rubio, a seven-point lead over Paul, and a 10-point lead over Bush.

A PPP poll at the end of March showed Clinton with a four-point lead over Walker, a four-point lead over Paul, a three-point lead over Rubio, and a six-point lead over Bush — at a time the other polls showed Clinton far ahead of those rivals.

"I am definitely skeptical that Clinton was ever really up by 15 points like some of the early polls were showing," says PPP director Tom Jensen. The reason for those big leads, Jensen suggested in an email conversation, might have more to do with the other polls' methods rather than any overwhelming Clinton advantage.

We use tighter controls on who we call for our polls than most national surveys do. Although we don't do an actual likely voter screen this far out, we do pull lists based on people who have voted in at least one of the last three elections. So I think we end up with samples that are a little bit more conservative than if we were calling all adults or even just registered voters with no respect to voting history.

If Jensen and PPP are correct, then the core assumption of much political analysis in the last few months was little more than irrational exuberance. Now that Clinton is returning to earth in other polls as well — PPP has a new poll out in about 10 days — the question will be how Democrats react to the realization that there once-inevitable shoo-in president might not be an inevitable shoo-in after all.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading.....

Benghazi Panel to Hear from Clinton Friend Blumenthal in Private Testimony

Long-time Hillary Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal is set to be interviewed on June 16 by the House committee investigating the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya. 

The committee, in announcing Blumenthal's appearance Friday, said his deposition will be conducted in a closed session. The media will be barred from coverage.

Blumenthal has become a focus of the House Select Committee on Benghazi since revelations he has been sending Clinton what she called "unsolicited" memos about Libya, where he was trying to arrange business deal, while she was secretary of state.

Special: Simple Trick Eliminates Up to 15 Years of Mortgage Payments..

Latest News Update

Get Newsmax TV At Home »

Those briefings included early suggestions that terrorists were responsible for the 2012 Benghazi attacks in which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed.

Blumenthal had also been employed by the Clinton Foundation full-time from 2009 to 2013, at which point he became a consultant for the organization, which was founded by Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Democrats have accused the House committee, chaired by Republican Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, of stringing out its investigation of the Benghazi attacks to undercut Hillary Clinton's campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.


Via: NewsMax

Continue Reading.....

How Hillary Politicized Benghazi

The 848 emails that were released last week are a small fraction of Hillary Clinton’s emails, but they are sufficient to paint a troubling picture of what Clinton knew about Benghazi, when she knew it, and how she politicized the tragedy. The emails show that within hours after the attacks on the Special Mission Compound (SMC) and Annex in Libya that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, Clinton received information from Sidney Blumenthal, a former associate and longtime friend, that offered a very different narrative from what the White House claimed were the cause of the attacks. Specifically, the Blumenthal September 12 and 13, 2012 emails report the attacks were planned and carried out by an Islamist militia group, Ansar al-Sharia, which is in sharp contrast to early White House claims that the attacks were a spontaneous reaction by enraged Muslims to an internet video that depicted the prophet Mohammed in an offensive manner. If Clinton had publicly disclosed the Blumenthal emails immediately however, she would have contradicted the White House’s version of events and increased the risk of political damage to President Obama’s bid for re-election. Faced with the choice of disclosing the Blumenthal emails or remaining silent for political reasons, Clinton chose the latter.

The following is an account of events that led to the murder of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi. With the exception of references to Clinton’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, all of the facts, dates and people presented below are based on information contained in the newly released emails.

Everyone knew that a U.S. presence in Libya was dangerous. In 2011, there was a continuing concern over the safety of American personnel in Libya. As early as April 2011, then-Special Envoy Christopher Stevens and his team remained in their hotel, “moving only for meetings as required.” By April 9, 2011, Clinton received an email that Stevens was doing a “phased checkout” and was considering leaving Benghazi. Clinton also received an email on April 24, 2011 that hotels were being targeted and that Stevens would be making a written request to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for added security at the hotel and for better security-related coordination. 

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading....

The 15 Benghazi Emails You Need to Read

The State Department released close to 900 pages of emails from Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary on Friday, providing a detailed looked at how an embattled agency responded to terrorist attacks in Benghazi and how Clinton, the frontrunner for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, deals with her inner circle of advisers and well-wishers.

POLITICO read the documents to find the most insightful and telling emails. There are deadly serious moments — Clinton learning of the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, for instance — and light-hearted ones, as when she jokes about her concussion. And there are political moments, with glimpses of top officials’ concerns about how the attack on the Libyan compound would affect the 2012 elections. While there doesn’t seem to be the kind of “smoking gun” that many Republicans imagined, the exchanges provide plenty of one-liners that will surely be used against Clinton when she testifies before a House panel later this year.

Here are the emails you should read:

‘The public face of Libya’

Clinton’s critics are sure to seize on this email. Jake Sullivan, a former Clinton deputy chief of staff, wrote Clinton outlining what appears to be talking points on her leadership in Libya. In that memo he declares that Clinton has been “the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya.” Sullivan, it seems, was referring to the American-led efforts to topple former Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi. “She was instrumental in securing the authorization, building the coalition and tightening the noose around Qadhafi and his regime.”

The document that was eventually classified

Clinton has insisted she didn’t share classified information through her email account, but the State Department concluded that one email exchange on potential arrests after the attacks was indeed classified. The document appears to have been formally classified Friday by the State Department.

Her “cracked head”

In December 2012, Clinton was scheduled to testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Benghazi, but her appearance was scuttled after she fainted and suffered from a concussion. In a Dec. 20 email, Clinton joked that she was still “nursing my cracked head” in an email to two aides, William Burns and Thomas Nides. Burns responded that he felt “very luck to serve in your State Department” — one of many notes of flattery contained in the documents.

Flubbed name

On Sept. 11, a State Department employee named Sean Smith was killed in the attacks, along with Ambassador Chris Stevens. Smith’s death was confirmed by the Libyans, Clinton wrote in an email to top advisers, where she mistakenly called him “Chris Smith.”

Via: Politico

Continue Reading....

Chris Matthews Defending Hillary: FDR Was 'Secretive' and Turned Out Best President of 20th Century

Read more at NewsBusters | Wrapping up a segment dealing with fresh revelations from newly-released Hillary Clinton emails pertaining to  Benghazi, MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews on Thursday night dutifully spun that Hillary's "secretive" nature was not a drawback but may in fact be a net positive, comparing her to  "secretive" and "manipulative" FDR, who, in Matthews's estimation, was America's best president of the 20th century, if not the entire history of the Republic.

Via: CNS News
Continue Reading....

SHOCK EMAIL: Hillary Clinton Did Not Even Know Dead Ambassador’s Name

Emails released by the Obama State Department Friday reveal that Hillary Clinton did not know the name of the Ambassador to Libya.

Ambassador Chris Stevens was murdered in a terrorist strike on the US Consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.

The Obama administration knew at the time that it was a planned terrorist attack but decided to lie to the American public to save face and win an election.

Hillary Clinton sent out an email that night and did not know the name of the deceased Ambassador to Libya.

Chris Stevens was killed that night by terrorists – not Chris Smith.
The Washington Times reported:

The night a U.S. ambassador was killed in a terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, Hillary Clinton sent a message three senior State Department officials.

The recepients were Jake Sullivan, Deputy Chief of Staff to then-Secretary of State Clinton, Cheryl Mills, an adviser to Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and Counselor and Chief of Staff to the Secretary, and Victoria Jane Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs.

“Cheryl told me the Libyans confirmed his death. Should we announce tonight or wait until morning?” Clinton says in the email, time stamped 11:38 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012.

The email had as its subject line: “Chris Smith.” The murdered ambassador was Chris Stevens.

The Secretary of State didn’t even know the name of the U.S. ambassador to Libya — even after terrorists stormed an American compound and killed him.

Via: The Gateway Pundit

Continue Reading.....

BOMBSHELL: What Was Just Revealed About Benghazi Gives Gowdy EXPLOSIVE New Fuel To Grill Hill

Given the bombshell revelation about Benghazi that’s just been pried loose from the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton’s anticipated appearance before the House Select Committee investigating the deadly attack in Libya could prove to be even more explosive and potentially damaging for the Democrats’ leading presidential contender. Mrs. Clinton is expected to testify sometime this summer before the panel headed by GOP Rep Trey Gowdy, reportedly after the State Department has provided the committee with a number of requested documents relating to the former secretary of state’s tenure.

Now, a potentially damning new document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) — a memo obtained by Judicial Watch after a court challenge to obtain its release — clearly shows that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not disclose to the public credible intelligence about terrorist planning for an attack on the Benghazi compound, even as she and other administration officials blamed the deadly assault on an amateur video. The Daily Caller provides details of the latest revelation showing that Clinton participated in an apparent coverup of believable intel while misleading the American people, and quite possibly congressional investigators as well.

Via: Western Journalism

Continue Reading....

Chris Matthews: Unlike IRS, VA Scandal Is Real, Except When He Compared IRS to ‘Profiling’ Innocent Arabs

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews seems determined to kill the idea that unlike the Veterans Administration scandal, past Obama scandals such as the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups are not in fact legitimate issues to investigate. 

Appearing on his nightly Hardball program on Wednesday, May 21, Matthews declared “For the first time, President Obama speaks out about the VA scandal and this is no phony IRS or Benghazi nonsense, this is the real deal.” [See video below.] 

While Matthews is correct that the VA scandal is in fact serious, his dismissal of the IRS scandal contradicts his past statements on the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups. On May 22, 2013, the Hardball host proclaimed that “profiling” by the IRS was akin to targeting innocent Arabs: 

I go to the airport and I'm running TSA. Instead of deciding based upon people's movements around the world that might be suspicious, going to countries that cause us trouble, I just look for everybody that looks Arab and I put them in one line. The American people would say that's outrageous.

While Matthews insisted that in 2013 “The IRS scandal is like profiling” he maintained on Wednesday May 22, 2014 that it was not a scandal. Speaking to the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson and former Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE), Matthews cheered “President Obama today, as you saw, addressed a growing scandal that unlike the phony, if you will, scandals like Fast and Furious and Benghazi, has the potential, the real potential, to cause some real political damage.”

The MSNBC host went on to promote Robinson’s recent article entitled “Heads Need to Roll at the VA” and swooned that “I loved the way you said this is a real one, not like the other ones.” The Washington Post columnist reiterated Matthews’ argument and maintained “It’s not like the phony ones. Bad stuff happened, right?” 

Despite Matthews’ decision to change his tune on the legitimacy of the IRS scandal, he was not the only MSNBC host who in 2013 held this same viewpoint. On May 16, 2013, Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski lamented that “Unfortunately the information and the guts of the story are there and it's an opportunity.” On May 10, 2013, MSNBC contributors Chris Cilizza and Ruth Marcus, who both write for the Washington Post, were stunned by the “outrageous dumbness” of the IRS.  

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading....

[CARTOON] Obama’s View

Via: California Political Review
Continue Reading....

Obama criticizes Republicans for focusing on Benghazi, Obamacare

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama chastised his Republican opponents on Monday for focusing criticism on the events surrounding the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, and on his signature healthcare law.

"The debate we're having now is about what, Benghazi? Obamacare? And it becomes this endless loop. It's not serious. It's not speaking to the real concerns that people have," Obama said.

He was speaking to more than 60 people at a fundraising dinner for Democratic candidates for the House of Representatives.

The event took place at a physician's home in the Washington suburb of Potomac, Maryland, as Obama seeks to persuade Democrats to organize for a voter turnout effort to prevent Republicans from ousting Democrats from control of the Senate and from building on their majority in the House.

Republicans in the House have begun a new investigation of the deaths of the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, and three other Americans during a militant attack on September 11, 2012.

The new probe was spawned by the disclosure of an email from Obama national security aide Ben Rhodes. Rhodes used the email to prepare Obama aide Susan Rice for television appearances, telling her to stress that the protests rocking the Muslim world at the time were not rooted "in a broader failure of policy."

Republicans have also directed election-year fire at Obama's Affordable Care Act, focusing on the rocky rollout of the law last October.

Via: Reuters

Continue Reading....

Dems Slam 'Unfair' Benghazi Probe Plan

House Democrats are threatening not to participate in a special select committee on Benghazi, accusing Republicans of making an “unfair” framework for the panel that underscores its partisanship.

"This is nothing more than a kangaroo court in the making,"Democratic Caucus Chairman Xavier Becerra told reporters Wednesday. "They have not explained to us on the Republican side what’s so important to do this over and over again."

Top Democrats told GOP leaders in a letter last night that they reject the proposed makeup of seven Republicans and five Democrats on the panel, as well as its granting of subpoena authority only to chairman Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy.

“If you truly want this new select committee to be bipartisan and fair – and to be taken seriously by the American people – we call on you to reconsider this approach before bringing this measure to the House floor for a vote,” they wrote.

Other Democrats went even further, saying flatly that they should ignore the panel entirely.

"I would be dead-set against it," top Rep. Jim Clyburn of South Carolina said of a committee that didn't have equal representation of Republicans and Democrats. "I'm not bringing a noose to my hanging."

Republicans will vote Thursday on a resolution to formally establish the rules for the special select committee. Democrats are expected to oppose that measure.

House Speaker John Boehner insisted Wednesday that the special select committee is intended for “transparency and accountability,” not for political points.

“This is all about getting to the truth,” he told reporters. “There's not going to be a side show, there's not going to be a circus, this is a serious investigation.

Via: NBC News

Continue Reading....

DNC Chairwoman: Benghazi Committee ‘Political Ploy’

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Wednesday accused House Republicans of creating a select investigative committee on the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, solely to motivate their base to turn out in the November midterm elections.

“Let’s call this what it is — it is nothing more than a political ploy because continuing to focus obsessively on repealing the Affordable Care Act has lost its luster, even among their own party members,” the Florida lawmaker said at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

Republicans selected Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., to lead the committee and gave their party seven slots on the 12-member panel, to just five for Democrats. House Democratic leaders sent a letter to Speaker John A. Boehner Tuesday night urging him to reconsider the committee’s partisan split.

Wasserman Schultz said she agrees with the request from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., and believes they “should seriously consider not participating if the process is not going to be fair.”

If House Republicans “want to ensure that the investigation — which, like I said, I believe is really just an election-year turnout operation for their base — if they want to make sure it’s fair, there is no reason to reject the leader’s request to have the committee be evenly split.”

In response, Republican National Committee spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski said, “Republicans want answers from a White House that spent more time politicizing this issue than trying to figure out how Americans died.”

The chairwoman pointed to the special election in Florida’s 13th District — which in the immediate aftermath served as a red flag for Democrats already concerned about turnout in November — as an example of the GOP’s own turnout issues, saying Republicans should have “run away” with the open-seat race.

Despite polling showing a challenging climate for Democrats, she said the party is headed for a successful midterm cycle, particularly when looking at the races individually, rather than at a macro level.

“We’re looking forward to the midterms,” Wasserman Schultz said, citing some gubernatorial opportunities in Pennsylvania, Florida and Maine. “We have opportunities in the Senate in Georgia and Kentucky, and keep a close eye on Mississippi. When it comes to our incumbent senators, the Republicans and pundits are pointing some of the vulnerable incumbents — these are challenging races, but we have incumbent members who have their finger on the pulse of their constituencies, know the people that they represent, and I think we’ll be successful in November.”

Via: Roll Call

Continue Reading.....

Gowdy: 'I Want to See Every Single Solitary Document'; Death of 4 Americans 'Transcends Politics'

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who has been chosen to chair the select committee on Benghazi, went “On The Record tonight.

When asked what he would say to Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff who oppose the committee, Gowdy said, “At least let the process have a chance to work before you declare it null and void.”

Gowdy said the committee will lay out all the facts and evidence, and then a jury will come to a decision. He said he hopes for a reasonable, fair-minded jury.

The South Carolina congressman told Greta Van Susteren that witnesses have come forward and shared that there was a systematic effort to keep certain documents under wraps. He also said there is a lot of over-classification of documents to protect people’s careers.

“I’m not interested in summaries, I’m not interested in synopses, I’m interested in access to the document and the witness, and I’ll decide whether or not I think the appropriate questions were asked in the past,” he said.

“There are certain things in our culture that have to transcend politics. And I don’t mean to sound naive, but the murder of four fellow Americans and an attack on a facility that is emblematic of our country should transcend politics, and I know our fellow citizens can handle the truth, but only if they get access to it,” he said.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading.....

Impeachment Lessons: The Nineties taught us it’s not guilt that matters; it’s political will.

Well whaddya know: The topic of impeachment reared its head at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday.

Jonathan Strong’s report here at NRO noted the wincing consternation of GOP-leadership aides at utterances of the “i-word” during the testimony of prominent legal experts. For the Republican establishment, it seems, history begins and ends in the 1990s: No matter howtimes have perilously changed, any talk of shutdowns or impeachment is bad, bad, bad. Yes, the Obama “uber-presidency,” as left-of-center law professor Jonathan Turley called it, has enveloped the nation in what he conceded is “the most serious constitutional crisis . . . of my lifetime,” but GOP strategists would just as soon have us chattering about immigration “reform” and bravely balancing the federal budget by, oh, around 2040.

But as we discussed in this August column — back when the first anniversary of the Benghazi massacre loomed, back when many Americans still believed that if they liked their health-insurance plans, they could keep their health-insurance plans — it is not crazy to talk about impeaching President Obama. And if you’re going to have a congressional hearing about systematic presidential lawlessness, it is only natural that the word “impeachment” gets bandied about. Not only is impeachment the intended constitutional remedy for systematic presidential lawlessness; it is, practically speaking, the only remedy.

Via: NRO

Continue Reading......

Obama Says His Policies Are Built On ‘Kindness’

One day after a new poll showed that only a minority of Americans trust President Barack Obama, the president told an audience that his policies are based on kindness.

“Kindness covers all of my political beliefs,” Obama told his audience of wealthy investors, high-tech donors, journalists and fellow Democrats Tuesday, only two months after he slashed at GOP legislators, calling them arsonists, nuclear blackmailers, economic wreckers, hostage-takers, obsessives and irresponsible extremists.

“When I think about what I’m fighting for, what gets me up every single day, [kindness] captures it just about as much as anything,” he told his audience at the DreamWorks studio in Glendale, Calif., which he visited as part of a seven-stop fundraising trip.

“Kindness; empathy — that sense that I have a stake in your success,” said Obama, who told supporters during the November election “Don’t boo. Vote. Voting is the best revenge.”

Since Obama’s inauguration, the government’s debt owed by taxpayers has climbed by $7 trillion, the workforce participation rate has fallen from 65.7 in January 2009 to 62.8 percent in October, 2013, leaving roughly 9 million people on the sidelines, and Obama has pushed the Senate to pass a bill that would ensure the distribution of 30 million work permits and green-cards to foreigners during the next decade.

Also, during his first term, four U.S. civil servants were killed in Benghazi without any presidential intervention, inspectors at the Internal Revenue Service throttled regulatory approval for Tea Party activities, and justice department officials allowed hundreds of automatic guns to be sent to Mexican drug gangs.

The new poll by CNN and ORC, showed that “53% of Americans now believe that Obama is not honest and trustworthy.”

Only 46 percent of Americans think Obama is honest and trustworthy, down from 60 percent in January 2011, and 58 percent in May 2013, the poll showed.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

Obama’s call to close Vatican embassy is ‘slap in the face’ to Roman Catholics

The Obama administration, in what’s been called an egregious slap in the face to the Vatican, has moved to shut down the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See — a free-standing facility — and relocate offices onto the grounds of the larger American Embassy in Italy.

The new offices will be in a separate building on the property, Breitbart reported.

---

SEE ALSO: Pope Francis takes veiled swipe at ‘progressive’ Democrats

---

And while U.S. officials are touting the relocation as a security measure that’s a cautionary reaction to last year’s attacks on America's facility in Benghazi, several former American envoys are raising the red flag.

It’s a “massive downgrade of U.S.-Vatican ties,” said former U.S. Ambassador James Nicholson in the National Catholic Reporter. “It’s turning this embassy into a stepchild of the embassy to Italy. The Holy See is a pivot point for international affairs and a major listening post for the United States, and … [it’s] an insult to American Catholics and to the Vatican.”

Via: Washington Times

Continue Reading....

Barack Obama, Derelict

Derelict: ('derəˌlikt/) neglectful of duty, delinquent; a person guilty of neglect of duty; a bum. SYNONYM-see Obama, Barack.

A thought experiment can be useful to explain why America is in a mess.

Let's take Barack Obama at his word -- a stretch certainly for anyone who would lie about his own mother's death to score partisan points will lie about...well, anything.  But let's put the most positive spin on what President Obama has been conveying to his fellow Americans. One can try to be optimistic even in these perilous times -- it is one of the great traits of being American.

Barack Obama and those who serve at his whim have declared that he knew nothing about the IRS witch-hunt of Republicans, spying by the NSA on Americans and foreign leaders, Fast and Furious, ObamaCare website problems, that he actually set red lines regarding Syria (though he denied it later), security problems at the Benghazi consulate, and spying on the Associated Press. When asked, Obama has asserted that he learned about all these problems only after reading about them in the media. Who knew our presidents would model themselves after Sergeant Schultz on the old Hogan Heroes television series (Obama has admitted he watched a lot of television when he was younger -- and some with reason believe he still does).

What conclusions can be drawn from these excuses? One is immediately apparent: the sequester did not go far and deep enough. After all, we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars and the president of the United States has to rely on newspapers to be informed of what is happening in his own administration. Time to outsource everything to people who work for peanuts -- such as bloggers (yours truly, for one example -- I would like to see a return on, or of, my taxes).

But the second conclusion is more pointed: we have elected (twice!) a derelict as president.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading.