[VIDEO] CNN: DNC Not Backing Iran Deal ‘Big Embarrassment’ for Obama

President Obama suffered an “embarrassment” with the Democratic National Committee not passing a resolution over the weekend in support of his Iran nuclear deal, CNN panelists said Sunday.

According to the Washington Post, party chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) blocked the resolution at the summer meeting in Minnesota.

“The Obama-controlled DNC could not pass a resolution this weekend expressing support for President Obama’s Iran deal,” New York Timesreporter Jonathan Martin said. “It’s a bit of an embarrassment for the administration seeing as it’s how his party, he appointed Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and it’s revived the sort-of latest round of eye-rolling among Democratic operatives about the state of the party.”

CNN host John King said Martin was being diplomatic, saying it was a “big embarrassment for the president.”

Via; WFB

Continue Reading......

[VIDEO] Fiorina: 'I Will Not Replace a Single' Retiring Federal Worker

(CNSNews.com) - "We have never succeeded in shrinking the size of government," Republican Carly Fiorina told "Fox News Sunday." She said she would do it.

"We have a bunch of baby boomers who are going to retire out of the federal government over the next five to six years. I will not replace a single one," she promised. 

"And yes, we need to actually get about the business of reducing the size, the power, the cost, complexity and corruption of this federal government."

Host Chris Wallace played a video clip of Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) criticizing Fiorina for nearly driving Hewlett-Packard, a Fortune 500 company, "into the ground." Schultz noted that Fiorina "fired 30,000 people when she was CEO."

"You know, if you end up as Republican nominee, the Democrats are going to put that in every ad -- she fired 30,000 people," host Chris Wallace told Fiorina. "It's exactly the kind of thing, Ms. Fiorina, that sunk Mitt Romney."

Fiorina said she's "flattered" that the head of the DNC would come after me because it must mean she's "gaining traction."

"But here's the facts: I led Hewlett-Packard through a very difficult time, the dotcom bust post-9/11, the worst technology recession in 25 years. I would remind Debbie Wasserman Schultz that it has taken the NASDAQ 15 years to recover.

Sometimes in tough times, tough calls are necessary. However, we also took a company from $44 billion to almost $90 million. We quadrupled its growth rate, quadrupled its cash flow, tripled its innovation to 11 patents a day, and went from lagging behind to leading in every product category in every market segment.

And yes, I was fired at the end of that, in a boardroom, which I've been very open about. And I was fired because when you challenge the status quo, which is what leadership is about, you make enemies.

Steve Jobs was fired. Oprah Winfrey was fired. Walt Disney was fired. Mike Bloomberg was fired. I feel like I'm in good company. And we need somebody to challenge status quo of Washington, D.C. and get something done."

Wallace predicted that Democrats will find "that poor, unfortunate person" who was fired, and suffered, because of Fiorina's management.

She said there's nothing harder for a chief executive to do than to tell an employee, "we don't have a job for you."

"It's also true that the vast majority of Americans know that in tough times sometimes tough decisions have to be made. And what they're frustrated by is the federal government never makes a tough decision."

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading....

Democrats: They're All Socialists Now by LARRY ELDER

Socialism, according to Dictionary.com, is defined as: "A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, recently appeared on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews." Matthews asked, "What is the difference between a Democrat and a socialist?"

Wasserman Schultz laughed, looked stunned, and began hemming and hawing. Matthews helpfully interjected, "I used to think there was a big difference. What do you think it is?" Still, Wasserman Schultz refused to give him a straight answer. "The difference between -- the real question," she said, "is what's the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican."

Matthews tried again: "Yeah, but what's the big difference between being a Democrat and being a socialist? You're the chairwoman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a socialist."

Still, Wasserman Schultz wouldn't answer the question .

A few days ago Chuck Todd of NBC's "Meet the Press" offered her a chance for a do-over. He replayed the exchange with Matthews, then asked: "Given that (Democratic presidential candidate) Bernie Sanders is an unabashed socialist and believes in social democratic governments -- (he) likes the ones in Europe -- what is the difference? Can you explain the difference?"

And again she either could not or would not answer, and wanted to discuss the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

On the one hand, Wasserman Schultz might have refused to answer because she did not want to put her thumb on the scale of the self-described socialist candidate Bernie Sanders or the likely nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton. No matter what Wasserman Schultz would've said, it would injure one while helping the other.

That's one explanation. But the more likely explanation is simple. There is no real distinction between today's Democrats and socialists. A few years ago Congresswoman Maxine Waters, D-Calif., conducted hearings in which she grilled oil executives for alleged price fixing. She threatened to nationalize their business. Did (SET ITAL) any (END ITAL) Democrat speak out against her threat? No.

Newsweek, in 2009, ran a cover story with the headline: "We Are All Socialists Now." Jon Meacham wrote:

"The U.S. government has already -- under a conservative Republican administration -- effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries. That seems a stronger sign of socialism than $50 million for art. Whether we want to admit it or not -- and many, especially Congressman (Mike) Pence and (Sean) Hannity, do not -- the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state. ...

"... If we fail to acknowledge the reality of the growing role of government in the economy, insisting instead on fighting 21st-century wars with 20th-century terms and tactics, then we are doomed to a fractious and unedifying debate. The sooner we understand where we truly stand, the sooner we can think more clearly about how to use government in today's world. ...

"... This is not to say that berets will be all the rage this spring, or that Obama has promised a croissant in every toaster oven. But the simple fact of the matter is that the political conversation, which shifts from time to time, has shifted anew, and for the foreseeable future Americans will be more engaged with questions about how to manage a mixed economy than about whether we should have one."

Polls, too, show that most Democrats are quite comfortable with socialism. A recent poll found 52 percent of Democrats had a favorable opinion about socialism.

Bernie Sanders has always caucused with Democrats, and they are perfectly comfortable with him. He's still a long shot for the Democratic nomination, but he is rising in the polls. If there is a distinction between him and President Barack Obama on anything major, what is it? Both pushed "universal health care." Both oppose the Keystone pipeline. Both believe taxes should be raised on "rich" people. Both believe in the redistribution of income. Obama wants two years of "free" community college. Sanders wants to make college "free" altogether. Both attack "corporate greed" and both belong to the school of economics that says, "you didn't build that."

Andy Stern, then the head of the Democratic Party-supporting Service Employees International Union, said, "I think Western Europe, as much as we used to make fun of it, has made different trade-offs which may have ended up with a little more unemployment but a lot more equality."

That's an acceptable trade-off in today's Democratic Party.

Jack Kennedy, a tax cutter, defended his plan by arguing it would invigorate the economy. He wanted growth and said, "A rising tide lifts all boats." Today's Democrat, like Wasserman Schultz, would deride Kennedy as a greedy Republican advocate of "trickle down."

Larry Elder is a best-selling author and radio talk-show host. To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an "Elderado," visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on Twitter @larryelder. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2015 LAURENCE A. ELDER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

Via: GOPUSA

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Wow! DNC Chair FREEZES-CAN'T ANSWER: 'What's The Difference Between Democrat Party And Socialist'?’

Things got very awkward today when Chris Matthews asked DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz what the difference was between the modern Democratic Party and Socialism.

Because we all know there is no difference between today’s Democrat Party and the radical Socialists in Venezuela or Argentina.

THIS MAY BE THE MOST REVEALING VIDEO YOU WATCH THIS YEAR—

Chris Matthews: Will Sanders speak at the Democrat convention, win or lose? Do you want to have him up there as a Socialist representing the Democratic Party?… You want him up there? You want him on the floor of the convention?

Debbie Wasserman Schulz: Bernie Sanders has been a good Democrat. He caucuses with the Democrats.

Matthews: Should he speak? Speak at prime-time?

Wasserman Schultz: Of course he should speak.

Matthews: In prime-time with everybody watching? (laughing)

Wasserman Schultz: Of course Bernie Sanders should speak…

Matthews: What’s the difference between the Democratic Party and Socialist?

Wasserman Schultz: (Speechless) (Laugh)

Matthews: I used to think there’s a big difference. What do you think it is?

Wasserman Schultz: Wuh… The difference between…

Matthews: Like Democrat Hillary Clinton and Socialist Bernie Sanders?… Well what’s the big difference between the Democrat Party and Socialist. You’re chairman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a Socialist?…

Wasserman Schultz: (She won’t answer) The relevant debate we will be having over the course of this campaign is what’s the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.

Wow!
Even the DNC Chair knows there is NO DIFFERENCE between the Democratic Party and Socialism.

Via The Gateway Pundit

Continue Reading.....

Will Democrats Apologize for Slavery and Segregation?

An open letter to DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Dear Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz:

I note with interest this statement from you with regard to the controversy over the flying of the Confederate flag on the grounds of the South Carolina State Capitol. You said:

For decades community leaders in South Carolina — and across the country — have been calling to get rid of this symbol of hatred, and action has been long overdue.

But this is just the beginning of a conversation we as a society need to have about race, bigotry and violence in this country — not the end of one.

Good enough. It’s good to know you wish to begin this conversation and I am happy to oblige. Let me begin with this question:

Will the Democratic Party finally apologize for supporting slavery, segregation, lynching, and the Ku Klux Klan?

Let me recall these lines from some of your party platforms.

From your 1840 platform: 

Resolved, That congress has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such states are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts by abolitionists or others, made to induce congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our political institutions.

And again in your 1844 platform:

That Congress has no power, under the Constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several States; and that such States are the sole and proper judges of everything pertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the Constitution; that all efforts, by abolitionists or others, made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our Political Institutions.

This staunch support for slavery — not to mention the unsubtle threat that accompanied it (there would be “alarming and dangerous consequences” if serious attempts to abolish it were made) is repeated again in your party platforms of 1848 and 1852.

Via: American Spectator

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.....

Van Hollen: Dem Caucus Told ‘Don’t Run Away from the Affordable Care Act’

The past chairman of the Democratic National Campaign Committee predicted “Democrats are going to be increasingly on the offense on the Affordable Care Act even as we talk about other critical issues” heading toward the midterm elections.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told MSNBC that “the number one issue, of course, on the minds of American people, jobs and the economy, but the Affordable Care Act will get people more economics certainty.”

“I think Republicans are going to make a big mistake by doubling down on their anti-Affordable Care message. People are tired of it,” he continued. “They want to improve it as we go along, not shut down the government to get rid of it, not vote for the 53rd time to get rid of it — especially, one, as you know, and the American people know, the Republicans have not put any alternative on the table. They want to go back to the days when the insurance companies called all the shots.”

Van Hollen echoed DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) in saying that anyone who thought the Florida special congressional election last week was a referendum on Obama “misread” the results.

“It is a Republican-leaning district, then they got more Republicans out. But, in terms of the message on the Affordable Care Act, the Republican message did not work there just like it did not work in the Virginia governor’s race where Terry McAuliffe said he would support the Affordable Care Act, he want to improve it where it was broken, but move forward on it,” Van Hollen said.

“…Let them talk all about the Affordable Care Act and how they want to get rid of it. We’re going to talk about how it helps people, but also where our voters are focused, which is of course jobs, economy, minimum wage, and it’s part of the package of economic security and moving the country forward. So, Republicans have only a negative message, people know that, they want a positive message that’s going to move the country forward.”

Van Hollen said the message in the Democratic caucus is “don’t run away from the Affordable Care Act.”

“Be strong about Obamacare, but also, again, focus on those other fundamental questions, right, economic security issues, minimum wage, trying to make sure that more people have benefit from a growing economy, getting the economy kicked in the higher gear, all that is part and parcel of said message. The Affordable Care Act is an important piece of it.”

Via: PJ Media

Continue Reading.....