Dan Pfeiffer Eats Crow – Publicly Apologizes to Charles Krauthammer

The Churchill bust controversy was discussed on America Live with Megyn Kelly, earlier today, and as of airtime, there were still crickets in response to Krauthammer’s demand for an apology. Kelly had the perfect guest on to discuss the issue, Niles Gardiner, the Director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation. He declared that Pfeiffer should be issuing “a full, unequivocal apology”, adding later that,  “what you have here, is a White House that is constantly trying to bury the fact that it has a very strong anti-British record.”

Gardiner also made the very important point that Obama was given the option to keep the bust, but chose to send it back, which was seen as a “hugely insulting move.”  The White House, now, is saying that there was no snub at all –  they merely returned the bust when the loan was over, per “tradition”, or something..

They’re lying, as usual.

Via The White House Blog:

Yesterday following his column, I sent the following email to Charles Krauthammer. Charles asked that I make the email public and I have agreed.

Charles,

I take your criticism seriously and you are correct that you are owed an apology. There was clearly an internal confusion about the two busts and there was no intention to deceive. I clearly overshot the runway in my post. The point I was trying to make – under the belief that the Bust in the residence was the one previously in the Oval Office — was that this oft repeated talking point about the bust being a symbol of President Obama’s failure to appreciate the special relationship is false.  The bust that was returned was returned as a matter of course with all the other artwork that had been loaned to President Bush for display in his Oval Office and not something that President Obama or his Administration chose to do. I still think this is an important point and one I wish I had communicated better.

A better understanding of the facts on my part and a couple of deep breaths at the outset would have prevented this situation.  Having said all that, barring a miracle comeback from the Phillies I would like to see the Nats win a world series even if it comes after my apology

Thanks,

Dan Pfeiffer

Notice how his first weaselly instinct was to make the apology in private. Fortunately, Krauthammer demanded full vindication.

Charles Krauthammer responded today on Special Report:

On Special Report, Krauthammer reacted to the apology saying, “Well I must say it’s a gracious apology. I was stunned; I didn’t expect it to happen. I actually wrote in my column that I thought the Nationals would win the World Series before I’d see an apology, so now I suppose the Nationals are going to win the World Series. But it’s a gracious apology, they’re still clinging to a tiny point on this, but the argument is over and I appreciate the correction and retraction.”

Video here.

My own theory as to why this happened discounts the idea that there was “internal confusion” in the White House over the two Churchill busts. They always knew the truth, but it was time to invent a new narrative to replace the deadly ‘Obama’s anti-Brit’ narrative that took root after he returned the bust. Depending on the sad fact that Americans have short memories,  they put up a post pointing out that there was still a Churchill Bust in the White House residence, (the one that had been there for fifty years) and feigned ignorance about the Oval Office bust because you see, the loan had “expired”.  The returning of the bust was simply a small matter someone on the transition team handled, so White House bigwigs completely forgot about it.  Never mind that it caused a firestorm in the British media and in conservative US media, and was considered by many to be a serious,  early misstep.

They forgot all about it!!!!

Ain’t buying it Skippy.

The truth will be whatever the Obama team wants it to be – especially this election year.

SEE ALSO:

Niles Gardiner, the Telegraph: Churchill bust debacle: ‘amateurish’ Obama White House remains firmly in denial over snub to Britain

The Foundry: The White House Attack Machine Backfires

Hat tip: NRO Media Blog

Michell Malkin: Lying Obama press flack apologizes to Krauthammer over Churchill bust story

Lesson, once again:

When you ignore false narratives, you lose. When you fight back fast and hard, the truth can and will out.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!

As Media Jackals Hound Romney in Poland, a Star is Born (Video)

Charles Dharapak/AP

Okay, I’m a little late to this story because I’ve been too busy to blog, today, so even though you’ve  already heard about this,  I’m going to have to get some licks in myself. (Thank you for bearing with me.)

Apparently, the journolisting left-wing media is trying to turn their own disgraceful behavior near the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Poland  into a gaffe for the Romney campaign:

What you can’t quite make out at the end of the tape was Romney’s traveling press secretary’s furious response:

“Kiss my ass; this is a holy site for the Polish people,” said aide Rick Gorka. “Show some respect.”

Gorka then told a reporter to “shove it.”

Gorka subsequently called a pair of reporters to apologize, saying he lost his cool.

As John Nolte aptly pointed out,  this media ambush was designed to be a lose lose for Romney:

What this gaggle of locusts did do, though, was to obnoxiously shout, scream, and holler questions from Pilsudski Square — just a hundred yards from where the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is laid. And there really should be a law that requires crybaby left-wingers to actually kiss an ass after doing something so craven and disrespectful.

The media’s behavior was childish and disrespectful, but most of all it was obviously an organized attempt to “create a moment” designed to hurt Romney by furthering The Narrative that his trip overseas has only been made up of gaffes.

Even if the Romney guy hadn’t popped off, if you watch the video of the moment (below) what you see is a conspiracy playing out where a gang of Obama-supporters disguised as journalists attempt to embarrass Romney by hurling shrill questions about what they perceive to be gaffes.

To me, this was another Joe Wilson moment. Back in September, 2009, just when you didn’t think you could stand another insufferable speech from the Liar in Chief spewing his obvious  lies about ObamaCare, one man stood up and said “You lie!!!”,becoming an instant hero to the right.

Rick Gorka’s “Kiss my A$$” to the Obama-loving media is the new “YOU LIE”.

A guy who says, “kiss my ASS” right to the faces of the journolisters who are doing everything they can to stack the deck against our candidate, is my hero.

Yes, Gorka would later apologize for his “inappropriate” comments”, just as Joe Wilson eventually did, but after watching that tape, I’m sure few Americans would find fault with Gorka for exploding.

As @iowahawkblog deadpanned: “If there’s anything the American public won’t abide, it’s someone who insults screaming reporters and Palestinians.”

Exactly.

“What about your gaffes?” That was some reporter’s idea of a question? “Do you have a statement for the Palestinians?”

Why would Romney have a statement for the perpetually outraged Palestinians? How about this: “lighten up, Frances.”

Those weren’t serious questions –  those were journolisting media jackals heckling the big bad Republican, Occupy style. It wasn’t long ago that occupiers were  hounding the Republican candidates at their events throughout the primaries… They shouted similarly obtuse questions and slogans at the candidates… Similar tactics. Similar goals. The only thing missing, here,  was a mic check.

More must read Nolte, today: Ugly Americans: To Justify Appalling Behavior, Media Distorts Romney’s Overseas Press Availability

Question: Which is worse? Screaming shrill, partisan questions in a sacred place or being told to kiss an ass for doing so?

Less than a hundred yards from Poland’s Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and in obvious coordination with one another, the media conspired to fabricate a gaffe to feed their insatiable anti-Romney narrative about his overseas trip.

What we’re seeing now is that in order to justify their screaming of shrill, partisan questions within throwing distance of a sacred place (talk about epitomizing the Ugly American stereotype), the media is now lying through an act omission by fabricating the idea that this was all Romney’s fault because he refused to make himself available to the media.

and Politico Exposes Romney Press Corps as Partisan, Petty, and ‘Bitter’

Even though consumer spending dipped again today and we just learned that 60,000 crimes have been committed by illegals Obama refused to deport, if Their Precious One is going to get reelected, the corrupt media knows it must ignore all of that and do everything in its power to keep the blistering spotlight on Mitt Romney. This is why, this morning in Poland, our Ugly American media disrespected Poland’s war dead in order to fabricate a Romney “gaffe.”

And be sure to check out Ace’s: New Dance Smash, Presstitutes (“What About Your Gaffes?”)

There’s another one at the link.

UPDATE:

Rush’s take via The Daily Rushbo: Reporters Are Harassing Romney, Trying To Create Gaffes. On Behalf Of Obama:

He also said Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for all intents and purposes endorsed Obama: .Rush: Romney’s Trip Has Been So Successful Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Endorsed Obama:

MORE:

The Jawa Report: Is the White House Orchestrating Lies About Romney? I’d Bet On It:

I find this all too coincidental.

First, the White House accuses Charles Krauthammer — and, by extension Mitt Romney — of being a liar. When caught, they double down and use the “fake but accurate” defense. But when that didn’t pass the smell test the White House was forced to apologize.

Remember, the real attack here was not aimed at Krauthammer, it was squarely at Mitt who, while abroad, had brought up the Churchill statue.

So, the White House calls Mitt a “liar” when, in fact, it’s the White House that lied.

Keep reading….

Linked by Doug Ross, and Michelle Malkin, thanks!

Chicago churches find common ground with Chick-fil-A

Chicago churches, irked at Rahm Emanuel’s stance on Chick-fil-A, are siding with the purveyor deluxe, char grilled, and spicy fast food.

Must those whose personal values do not conform to those of the government of the day move from the city,” George wondered. “Is the City Council going to set up a ‘Council Committee on Un-Chicagoan Activities’ and call those of us who are suspect to appear before it? ( Cardinal Francis George, Archdiocese of Chicago)

When it comes down to family values Chicagoans are not looking to city leaders for guidance. The excess exposure of post modern family groups have once again turned the perception of what is decent upside down.  Churches also have a big pulpit and they are starting to push back.  Read More on Fox News

August 1 has been declared Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day to show support for traditional marriage

Mr Nicedeb

 

Posted in Stuff. 2 Comments »

GOP Report Names Five ATF Officials Responsible for Fast and Furious

Graphic via My Gun Culture, Click to enlarge.

Fast and Furious, the fatally flawed  operation that allowed  2,500  guns to walk across the border into the hands of Mexican drug cartel killers, began in fall 2009 and was only  halted after U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed in December 2010. Approximately 300 Mexicans were killed or wounded by Operation Fast and Furious guns, which have been found in the vicinity of at least 200 crime scenes.

In a final report likely to be released later this week, Republican congressional investigators have concluded that five senior ATF officials are responsible for the failed operation that they say was “marred by missteps, poor judgments and inherently reckless strategy.” The five managers are highlighted in bold type, in the paragraphs below.

Richard Serrano at The LA Times has the exclusive report:

The five ATF managers, since moved to other positions, have either defended Fast and Furious in congressional testimony or refused to discuss it. They could not be reached for comment Monday. At the Justice Department, senior officials, including Holder, have steadfastly maintained that Fast and Furious was confined to the Arizona border region and that Washington was never aware of the flawed tactics.

The joint staff report, authored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, was highly critical of the ATF supervisors.

They found that William Newell, the special agent-in-charge in Phoenix, exhibited “repeatedly risky” management and “consistently pushed the envelope of permissible investigative techniques.” The report said “he had been reprimanded … before for crossing the line, but under a new administration and a new attorney general he reverted back to the use of risky gunwalking tactics.”

His boss, Deputy Assistant Director for Field Operations William McMahon, “rubber stamped critical documents that came across his desk without reading them,” the report alleged. “In McMahon’s view it was not his job to ask any questions about what was going on in the field.”

They added that McMahon gave “false testimony” to Congress about signing applications for wiretap intercepts in Fast and Furious.

His supervisor, Mark Chait, assistant director for field operations, “played a surprisingly passive role during the operation,” the report said. “He failed to provide oversight that his experience should have dictated and his position required.”

Above Chait was Deputy Director William Hoover, who the report said ordered an exit strategy to scuttle Fast and Furious but never followed through: “Hoover was derelict in his duty to ensure that public safety was not jeopardized.”

And they said Melson, a longtime career Justice official, “often stayed above the fray” instead of bringing Fast and Furious to an “end sooner.”

But, the investigators said, ATF agents said that they were hamstrung by federal prosecutors in Arizona from  obtaining criminal charges for illegal gun sales, and that Melson “even offered to travel to Phoenix to write the indictments himself. Still, he never ordered it be shut down.”

This is just the first of three final reports that investigators say will deal with “the devastating failure of supervision and leadership” at the DOJ and an “unprecedented obstruction of the  investigation by the highest levels of the Justice Department, including the attorney general himself.”

Shameless and brazen Democrats have demonstrated that they are willing  to circle the wagons for this most corrupt of Attorney Generals so it looks highly unlikely, at this point, that he will step down, or be forced to step down before the election.

After all, Holder has a very important role to play, this year, IYKWIMAITYD.

Hat tip: Hot Air

Linked by Doug Ross and Michelle Malkin, thanks!

Presidential Wimp Factor – The Movie

Posted in Awesome. 1 Comment »

White House Spokesman Calls Miniter’s Bin Laden Bombshell “a Fabrication”, Miniter Responds: “Let’s See the Timeline”

Oh yeah, this is getting good.

The White House’s principal deputy press secretary, Josh Earnest, filling in for Jay Carney, at today’s WH press briefing, dismissed the revelation in Miniter’s book,  Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him, that Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s closest and most trusted aide, talked Obama out of executing the bin Laden operation on three separate occasions.

Neil Munro of The Daily Caller reports:

“That is an utter fabrication,” Earnest said.

“It seems pretty clear that Mr. Miniter doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” he insisted, adding that Jarrett “was not ‘read in’ on the operation on the mission against Osama bin Laden.”

“So I wouldn’t put any stock into that vignette — or into the book itself,” he added.

Earnest’s answer was focused on Jarrett’s role. He did not explicitly deny Miniter’s revelation that the raid was delayed three times.

Miniter, a well respected investigative journalist, and best selling author, responded by demanding that the white House back up its denials with some documentation.

“I call on them to release the full [planning] timeline, starting in October 2010, of each of the major decisions that the president made relating to the bin Laden mission,” author Richard Miniter told The Daily Caller.

TheDC asked Miniter if his inside sources might go public with their accounts of presidential indecision. “Yes, yes,” he replied. “There is a chance.” (RELATED: Book: Obama canceled Bin Laden ‘kill’ raid three times at Jarrett’s urging)

Any confrontation between national security officials and President Barack Obama in the months preceding the 2012 election could hamper to his chances of winning a second term.

That is putting it mildly. The administration and its media flunkies spiked the football, and repeatedly called the decision to take out bin Laden a “gutsy call” by Obama.
Their partisan end zone dance  cheapened what all Americans should see as a national security triumph -sadly for this administration, its only foreign policy triumph.
Read the rest of the report at the Daily Caller as Munro makes the excellent case  that Obama’s claims of national security competence are severely undermined by the rising power of Islamist political parties, and by Iran’s rush to develop nuclear weapons.
PREVIOUSLY:
Linked by Doug Ross and  Michelle Malkin, thanks!

Monday Ketch-Up: Obama’s Secret Collectivist Plan For His Second Term

A new poll shows  Americans are  unenthusiastic about Obama campaign priorities.

Unenthusiastic? They should be more than “unenthusiastic”.   Obama’s goals should he win a second term should have middle class Americans hyperventilating in terror.

Ron Radosh, PJ Media: The Book to Defeat Obama: Stanley Kurtz’s Spreading the Wealth:

What Stanley Kurtz has accomplished in his new book Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities, to be published on August 2, is nothing less than the complete exposure of President Barack Obama’s secret plans for his second term in office — plans that in reality amount to an assault on the values, well-being ,and quality of life of the very middle-class voters he claims to represent.

The unfortunate title — not an attention-grabber in bookstores —does not covey the breadth of his research, the scholarly yet readable and comprehensive analysis of where the president is coming from, and the nature of the social policy Obama will put into practice if he wins a second term. They amount to an entire gamut of initiatives, some well underway, to redistribute wealth not from the fabled 1% — who really do not have enough to save us from fiscal Armageddon even if the government took 80% of their profits — but from the average, middle-class, hardworking citizens who sought better lives and realized the American dream by moving to the suburbs, where the air is cleaner, the schools are decent, and life is peaceful and integrated.

These citizens are the very swing voters Obama is now courting; his many TV commercials about helping the middle class target them. What Kurtz reveals in chilling detail is that the group of radicals surrounding the president — names most of us (including me) are not familiar with — are nevertheless as dangerous and extreme in their goals as Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. While those three are persona non grata in the White House, these unknown radicals are just as important, and they are planning social policy with Obama’s approval.

***

If Obama were honest, Kurtz says, he would say the following to the American people:

My fellow Americans, to be honest, I have some serious reservations about the way this country is structured. In America we have this strong bias toward individual action. … But individual actions, individual dreams are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations. Locally those collective actions… have got to be pushed at the regional level in such a way as to unite small towns and suburbs with nearby cities.The whole federalist system, as the founders created it, is too geared toward John Wayne-style individualism. You pick up and move to a suburb in search of your American dream. But this leaves less well-off folks behind, so classic federalism extracts a price this country can no longer afford to pay. The only way to make certain this nation’s wealth gets more equally divided among all Americans is to run our country more centrally. That way no one can pick up and take his tax money to another town, suburb, or state without sharing it with someone less fortunate. That’s why I plan to do everything in my power to advance federal and regional control of America’s tax money and especially of America’s system of education, so as to eliminate the  local differences upon which our long but troubled tradition of John Wayne-style individualism rests.

***

Obama, Kurtz shows, is running an active Alinskyite program in the present, not simply in the 1980s. It is a radicalism of a hidden, regionalist agenda, carefully kept below the radar, something that its exponents actually brag about. The programs waiting to be implemented actually are “nothing less,” Kurtz writes, “than a direct attack on large sections of his own middle-class supporters.”

Read the whole disturbing thing. Kurtz is definitely on to something…

Flash back to March 30, 2012, March 30, 2008, December 1995: The Collectivist Makes His Case: “You’re On Your Own” Economics Doesn’t Work:

Via RCP, here’s Obama speaking at a fund-raiser at one of his favorite types of venues; a college in Vermont:

“You know, each of us is only here because somebody somewhere felt responsibility, yes to their families, but also to their fellow citizens. Also to our country’s future. That’s the American story. The American story is not just about what we do on our own. Yes, we’re rugged individualists, we expect personally responsibility and everybody out there has got to work hard and carry their weight,” President Obama said at a fundraiser with college students at the University of Vermont.

“We also have always understood that we wouldn’t win the race for new jobs and businesses, and middle class security if we were just applying some ‘you’re on your own economics,’” Obama said.

“It’s been tried in our history and it hasn’t worked,” Obama said. “It didn’t work when we tried it in the decade before the Great Depression. It didn’t work when we tried it in the last decade. We just tried this. What they’re peddling has been tried — it did not work!”

Back in 2008, I directed attention to this December 1995 Chicago Reader interview of then candidate for IL State Senate, Barack Obama. I found his attack on individualism  to be quite alarming. Sadly, when you read his words from 1995 and compare them to what he is saying, today, you find that his collectivist philosophy has remained remarkably consistent over the years.

“In America,” Obama says, “we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.”

Out of appreciation for the fact the most Americans have this “bias” for rugged individualism, Obama still pays  lip service to it, today,  to even left-wing college crowds. But the song remains the same - individual actions are not sufficient.

***

Expose Obama: Video: Obama:People Shouldn’t Be Able ‘To Own Guns’:

Something to keep in mind the next time you hear Obama says he believes in the right to bear arms. He doesn’t. In a second Obama term the “under the radar” efforts to curb gun rights will likely intensify.

***

The American Spectator: DOJ Weasel Keeps Weaseling  Sharia Law comes to America under the guise of “civil rights”:

Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the United States, is one of the most destructive forces against the rule of law in our nation, including being the man responsible for the DoJ dropping charges against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation in Philadelphia during the last presidential election. (If you want to understand more about just how bad this man is, read “Injustice” by Christian Adams.)

Perez appeared before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Constitution (glad to know we have one of those!) which is a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) chairs that committee, and the congressman posted a clip of the questioning to his YouTube page with the following introduction:

In a Constitution Subcommittee hearing yesterday, Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-02) questioned Assistant Attorney General, Thomas Perez, over the Administration’s commitment to 1st Amendment rights. Franks’ questions were prompted by a Daily Caller article from late last year in which Perez was quoted as warmly embracing the proposals of Islamist advocates in a meeting at George Washington University, among them a request for “a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.”

Perez’s refusal to answer Franks’ question suggests a further dangerous inroad by Islamists into the policy-making of this administration (by which I do not mean that Perez is a Muslim, but rather that he is sympathetic to any force, such as Islam, which runs counter to the rule of law in this country.)

***

Jack Cashill is enjoying a little too much schadenfreude, here, if you ask me: Maraniss Gets Testy as New Obama Bio Tanks

David Maraniss, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Barack Obama: The Story, is getting testy.  And it is not hard to understand why.  The Washington Post diva spent the last four years on his career book, released it in the heart of a heated re-election season, got the kind of exposure a Kardashian would envy, and now finds the book heading for the remainder racks weeks after its release.  Oy vey!

As of this writing, the book ranks 1,696 on Amazon’s bestseller list.  By contrast, Edward Klein’s unfriendly Obama tome, The Amateur, has outsold just every book this summer not centered on female bondage, spent weeks on top of New York Times top-ten list, and now ranks 55 on Amazon despite being out a month longer than The Story.

Rather than assess why his book tanked — it is too honest for the left and too dishonest for the right — Maraniss has turned his wrath on the people he seems to hold responsible for the book’s failure — namely, “obsessed conspiratorialists” like me.  His pique has found its outlet in a mean-spirited Washington Post op-ed, a minor classic of journalistic myopia.  Allow me to address its concerns.

***

Cashill says that Maraniss comes across as “testy” in his new Post column because his book about Obama has not done well, and that his massive advance “will never be recouped by the publisher.” This may be the case. But he may also be testy because he realizes he missed the importance of the Frank Marshall Davis story, and that the Obama critics were right all along.

Paul Kengor points out that writers and historians always focus on the mentor, in order to explain the background, history and future policies of a major political figure like a presidential candidate—except when it came to Obama. Why?

Although Maraniss should be commended for exposing Obama as a major drug abuser, something Obama concealed from voters in 2008, the superficial treatment of Frank Marshall Davis is a major blot on Maraniss’s record. He will never be able to recover from it.

My stories about Davis have become a broken record, but it is necessary to play this record again and again because “journalists” such as Maraniss persist in their dishonest campaign to ignore his influence on the current occupant of the Oval Office. His Post article is only the latest example of his deceptive writing on this matter.

Why does he do it?

The short answer is that he thinks he can get away with it. He thinks his writing, based on the reputation of someone who writes long books about important people, can drown out all of the others who seek the truth and raise inconvenient and uncomfortable questions.

But why ignore such a critical and central fact about Obama? The answer in this case has to be that the truth is so powerful and so damaging to Obama that it has to be ignored. The lid has to be kept on this story, to the best of the ability of Maraniss and his ilk to do so. That is why the cover-up continues.

Admitting Obama was a doper is one thing; writing about his Communist mentor is something far more serious that opens a Pandora’s box.

But is the story more than that of an agent of a Moscow-funded political party having access to our President for eight years of his young life? This is where the story of Frank Marshall Davis takes a very bizarre sexual turn.

John Nolte, Big Journalism: New Anti-Romney Meme: Complimenting Israel’s Prosperity Is Racist:

First we saw it with Romney’s comments about the Olympics, now we’re seeing it with Romney’s comments comparing the state of Israel’s economy with that of the Palestinian-controlled territories: Speaking the truth is now politically incorrect and undiplomatic.

Romney’s quote via the Associated Press:

“As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality[.]”

And yet, this is the AP’s headline: Romney outrages Palestinians by saying Jewish culture helps make Israel more successful

As if on cue and standing by, the Palestinians screamed RACISM:

Not to put too fine a point on it, unlike SCOAMF, Romney is making all the right enemies:Hamas Official Calls Romney A “Racist” And An “Extremist” After Speech In Israel…

***

Brandon Darby, previously an FBI informant, is speaking out on the DOJ’s hesitancy to help human trafficking victims, particularly minors. Read more of his shocking account.
***

Anti-communist leader Lech Walesa told Mitt Romney today that he must be successful in the November elections not just for America but for the rest of the world too. The former Solidarity leader understands how the economic decisions by US leaders influence global markets.
The Washington Post reported:

I wish you to be successful because this success is needed to the United States, of course, but to Europe and the rest of the world, too. Governor Romney, get your success, be successful!” Walesa said through a translator following their joint meeting in Gdansk.

For all you naive and foolish Americans that voted for a black radical leftist thinking that it would move us toward a colorblind society … here’s yet more proof it was a big mistake:

Under our supposedly postracial president, everything is all about race — including school discipline, which Obama has decreed will be meted out according to skin color:

President Barack Obama is backing a controversial campaign by progressives to regulate schools disciplinary actions so that members of major racial and ethnic groups are penalized at equal rates, regardless of individual behavior.

***

Charles Krauthammer: Busted: Mr. Pfeiffer and the White House blog:\

Shortly after 9/11, President George W. Bush received from Prime Minister Tony Blair a bust of Winston Churchill as an expression of British-American solidarity. Bush gave it pride of place in the Oval Office.In my Friday column about Mitt Romney’s trip abroad and U.S. foreign policy [“Why he’s going where he’s going,” op-ed], I wrote that Barack Obama “started his Presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office.”

Within hours, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer had created something of a bonfire. Citing my statement, he posted a furious blog on the White House Web site, saying, “normally, we wouldn’t address a rumor that’s so patently false, but just this morning the Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer repeated this ridiculous claim in his column . . . This is 100% false. The bust [is] still in the White House. In the Residence. Outside the Treaty Room.”

Except that it isn’t. As the British Embassy said in a statement issued just a few hours later, “the bust now resides in the British ambassador’s residence in Washington D.C.”

As the British Embassy explained in 2009, the bust “was lent for the first term of office of President Bush. When the President was elected for his second and final term, the loan was extended until January 2009. The new President has decided not to continue this loan and the bust has now been returned.”

QED.

At which point, one would expect Pfeiffer to say: Sorry, I made a mistake. End of story.

Don’t hold your breath, Charles.

***

James Delingpole, The Telegraph: Global Warming? Yeah, right:

What Watts has conclusively demonstrated is that most of the weather stations in the US are so poorly sited that their temperature data is unreliable. Around 90 per cent have had their temperature readings skewed by the Urban Heat Island effect. While he has suspected this for some time what he has been unable to do until his latest, landmark paper (co-authored with Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville) is to put precise figures on the degree of distortion involved.

For the full story go to Watts Up With That NOW!

There is, of course, one very, very sad aspect to this story – and truly it pains me to mention it but journalistic duty compels me to do so – and that’s the dampening effect it may have on the grandstanding of a hapless fellow by the name of Professor Richard Muller.

Poor Professor Muller has been telling anyone who’ll listen – his amen corner in greeny-lefty MSM, mainly – that as a former “skeptic” he has now been forced by weight of evidence to conclude that global warming is definitely man-made and there has been lots of it (a whole 1.5 degrees C – Wow! that’s like almost as much as you’d get if you drove from London to Manchester!!!) since 1750. Tragically – as Watts has very reluctantly and by-no-means-experiencing-any-kind-of-Schadenfreude had to point out is that the data used by Muller to draw these conclusions was unreliable to the point of utter uselessness.

***

Fox Nation: After Obama Blocks Keystone Pipeline, China Readies $15.1 Billion Canadian Oil Deal:

When President Barack Obama blocked the Keystone Pipeline, Republicans said the move would encourage Canada to pursue oil deals with China instead of the United States and cede a massive chunk of North American oil assets to the communist nation.

Now, with China’s state-run oil company CNOOC poised to cut a $15.1 billion deal–the largest ever foreign acquisition for a Chinese company–with Canadian oil company Nexen, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are in full backpedal mode.

In a draft letter to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), Sen. Schumer writes:

I respectfully urge you, in your capacity as chairman of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), to withhold approval of this transaction to ensure U.S. companies reciprocal treatment.

Similarly, Rep. Pelosi is now sounding alarms of concern.  In a statement, Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hamill said:

This deal prompts great concern about the Chinese government’s continued attempts to use its state-owned enterprises to acquire global energy resources.

Saying “I told you so” offers little solace to concerned Republican lawmakers.

***

A federal court in Washington, DC, held today that political appointees appointed by President Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the New Black Panther Party.

The ruling came as part of a motion by the conservative legal watch dog group Judicial Watch, who had sued the DOJ in federal court to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents pertaining to the the New Black Panthers case. Judicial Watch had secured many previously unavailable documents through their suit against DOJ and were now suing for attorneys’ fees.

Obama’s DOJ had claimed Judicial Watch was not entitled to attorney’s fees since “none of the records produced in this litigation evidenced any political interference whatsoever in” how the DOJ handled the New Black Panther Party case. But United States District Court Judge Reggie Walton disagreed.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!

Obama passed on the Bin Laden kill three separate times at Jarrett’s Urging (Update: DC Report up now)

Some Call Him Gutsy

Just passing along a fascinating web rumor I saw via Doug Ross, who says, stay tuned to The Daily Caller tomorrow for a blockbuster story based on a new “book bombshell”..

If true, the story would partially or perhaps fully confirm what a blogger published on his site, The Ulsterman Report, shortly after the raid, based on intelligence provided by the enigmatic “White House Insider” .

I was correct in stating there had been a push to invade the compound for several weeks if not months, primarily led by Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, David Petraeus, and Jim Clapper.  The primary opposition to this plan originated from Valerie Jarrett, and it was her opposition that was enough to create uncertainty within President Obama.  Obama would meet with various components of the pro-invasion faction, almost always with Jarrett present, and then often fail to indicate his position.  This situation continued for some time, though the division between Jarrett/Obama and the rest intensified more recently, most notably from Hillary Clinton.  She was livid over the president’s failure to act, and her office began a campaign of anonymous leaks to the media indicating such.  As for Jarrett, her concern rested on two primary fronts.  One, that the military action could fail and harm the president’s already weakened standing with both the American public and the world.  Second, that the attack would be viewed as an act of aggression against Muslims, and further destabilize conditions in the Middle East.

Q: What changed the president’s position and enabled the attack against Osama Bin Laden to proceed?

A:  Nothing changed with the president’s opinion – he continued to avoid having one.  Every time military and intelligence officials appeared to make progress in forming a position, Jarrett would intervene and the stalling would begin again.  Hillary started the ball really rolling as far as pressuring Obama began, but it was Panetta and Petraeus who ultimately pushed Obama to finally act – sort of.  Panetta was receiving significant reports from both his direct CIA sources, as well as Petraeus-originating Intel.  Petraeus was threatening to act on his own via a bombing attack.  Panetta reported back to the president that a bombing of the compound would result in successful killing of Osama Bin Laden, and little risk to American lives.  Initially, as he had done before, the president indicated a willingness to act.  But once again, Jarrett intervened, convincing the president that innocent Pakistani lives could be lost in such a bombing attack, and Obama would be left attempting to explain Panetta’s failed policy.  Again Obama hesitated – this time openly delaying further meetings to discuss the issue with Panetta.  A brief meeting was held at this time with other officials, including Secretary Gates and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but Gates, like Panetta, was unable to push the president to act.  It was at this time that Gates indicated to certain Pentagon officials that he may resign earlier than originally indicated – he was that frustrated.  Both Panetta and Clinton convinced him to stay on and see the operation through.

What happened from there is what was described by me as a “masterful manipulation” by Leon Panetta.  Panetta indicated to Obama that leaks regarding knowledge of Osama Bin Laden’s location were certain to get out sooner rather than later, and action must be taken by the administration or the public backlash to the president’s inaction would be “…significant to the point of political debilitation.”  It was at that time that Obama stated an on-ground campaign would be far more acceptable to him than a bombing raid.  This was intended as a stalling tactic, and it had originated from Jarrett.  Such a campaign would take both time, and present a far greater risk of failure.  The president had been instructed by Jarrett to inform Mr., Panetta that he would have sole discretion to act against the Osama Bin Laden compound.  Jarrett believed this would further delay Panetta from acting, as the responsibility for failure would then fall almost entirely on him.  What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound.  Basically, the whole damn operation was already ready to go – including the specific team support Intel necessary to engage the enemy within hours of being given notice.  Panetta then made plans to proceed with an on-ground assault. This information reached either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates first (likely via militarycontacts directly associated with the impending mission) who then informed the other.  Those two then met with Panetta, who informed each of them he had been given the authority by the president to proceed with a mission if the opportunity presented itself.  Both Gates and Clinton warned Panetta of the implications of that authority – namely he was possibly being made into a scapegoat.  Panetta admitted that possibility, but felt the opportunity to get Bin Laden outweighed that risk.  During that meeting, Hillary Clinton was first to pledge her full support for Panetta, indicating she would defend him if necessary.  Similar support was then followed by Gates.  The following day, and with Panetta’s permission, Clinton met in private with Bill Daley and urged him to get the president’s full and open approval of the Panetta plan.  Daley agreed such approval would be of great benefit to the action, and instructed Clinton to delay proceeding until he had secured that approval.  Daley contacted Clinton within hours of their meeting indicating Jarrett refused to allow the president to give that approval.  Daley then informed Clinton that he too would fully support Panetta in his actions, even if it meant disclosing the president’s indecision to the American public should that action fail to produce a successful conclusion.  Clinton took that message back to Panetta and the CIA director initiated the 48 hour engagement order.  At this point, the President of the United States was not informed of the engagement order – it did not originate from him, and for several hours after the order had been given and the special ops forces were preparing for action into Pakistan from their position in Afghanistan, Daley successfully kept Obama and Jarrett insulated from that order.

This insulation ended at some point with an abort order that I believe originated from Valerie Jarrett’s office, and was then followed up by President Obama. This abort order was later explained as a delay due to weather conditions, but the actual conditions at that time would have been acceptable for the mission.  A storm system had been in the area earlier, but was no longer an issue.  Check the data yourself to confirm.  Jarrett, having been caught off guard, was now scrambling to determine who had initiated the plan.  She was furious, repeating the acronym “CoC” and saying it was not being followed.  This is where Bill Daley intervened directly.  The particulars of that intervention are not clear to me beyond knowing he did meet with Jarrett in his office and following that meeting, Valerie Jarrett was not seen in the West Wing for some time, and apparently no longer offered up any resistance to the Osama Bin Laden mission.  What did follow from there was one or more brief meetings between Bill Daley, Hillary Clinton, a representative from Robert Gates’ office, a representative from Leon Panetta’s office, and a representative from Jim Clapper’soffice.  I have to assume that these meetings were in essence, detailing the move to proceed with the operation against the Osama Bin Laden compound.  I have been told by more than one source that Leon Panetta was directing the operation with both his own CIA operatives, as well as direct contacts with military – both entities were reporting to Panetta only at this point, and not the President of the United States.  There was not going to be another delay as had happened 24 hour earlier.  The operation was at this time effectively unknown to President Barack Obama or Valerie Jarrett and it remained that way until AFTER it had already been initiated.  President Obama was literally pulled from a golf outing and escorted back to the White House to be informed of the mission.  Upon his arrival there was a briefing held which included Bill Daley, John Brennan, and a high ranking member of the military.  When Obama emerged from the briefing, he was described as looking “very confused and uncertain.”  The president was then placed in the situation room where several of the players in this event had already been watching the operation unfold.  Another interesting tidbit regarding this is that the Vice President was already “up to speed” on the operation.  A source indicated they believe Hillary Clinton had personally made certain the Vice President was made aware of that day’s events before the president was.  The now famous photo released shows the particulars of that of that room and its occupants.  What that photo does not communicate directly is that the military personnel present in that room during the operation unfolding, deferred to either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates.  The president’s role was minimal, including their acknowledging of his presence in the room.

Keep reading, here.

The crazy thing about The Ulsterman Report is that  just when you want to dismiss it as so much hokum–something he reported weeks, months, or even a year and a half  before anyone else, turns out to be true. He’s hit the nail on the head too many times to be dismissed.

If this new bombshell pans out, it would make Keith Koffler’s mocking White House Dossier  Fawning Interview with Obama from 5/9/2011 even funnier:

WHD: Now, How did you handle the incredible tension in the Situation Room the day you took out Bin Laden?

Obama: It’s all part of being a leader, of being, you know, basically a badass.

WHD: Yes, absolutely

Obama: And I was there for the others. I noticed Hillary about to collapse, and I comforted here with a hug and a shot of tequilla. But me, you know, I have to admit, it was tense. But I can handle it. I just can.

WHD: Is the story true that your national security aides were divided on this, but you just knew what had to be done?

Obama: Yes, some of my advisers were sissies. They were wringing their hands, and pissing on themselves.

Me, I knew we only had a 50-50 shot. It could have gone either way. But I just said, “Sometimes, folks, you just have to go for it. You have to trust your gut. You have to say, ‘Danger? Risk? Bring it on! Tension? Uncertainty? I eat if for breakfast!’ America needed to bag this dude. And so I sad, ‘Go for it, punk. Make my day. A man has to do what a man has to do.’ And so forth.”

WHD: Wowwww.

Obama: Would you like a glass of water?

WHD: No, I’m OK. And what did you say after you knew you’d killed Bin Laden?

Obama: I was as taciturn and cool as John Wayne putting his gun back in his holster. I just said, “We got him.”

WHD: Hot damn!

UPDATE:

The Daily Caller report is now up: Book: Obama canceled Bin Laden ‘kill’ raid three times at Jarrett’s urging:

At the urging of Valerie Jarrett, President Barack Obama canceled the operation to kill Osama bin Laden on three separate occasions before finally approving the May 2, 2011 Navy SEAL mission, according to an explosive new book scheduled for release August 21. The Daily Caller has seen a portion of the chapter in which the stunning revelation appears.

In ”Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him,“ Richard Miniter writes that Obama canceled the “kill” mission in January 2011, again in February, and a third time in March. Obama’s close adviser Valerie Jarrett persuaded him to hold off each time, according to the book.

Miniter, a two-time New York Times best-selling author, cites an unnamed source with Joint Special Operations Command who had direct knowledge of the operation and its planning.

-

We’re laughing at you,Newsweak…
-
After Scripted Question From Reporterette Moves Courageous Leader of the Free World to Smirk, Gloat, Taunt, and Spike the Football During Press Conference, After Lengthy End Zone Dance, Navy SEALs weighed in: Yeah, Obama Should Probably Shut Up About bin Laden Now:

A serving SEAL Team member said: ‘Obama wasn’t in the field, at risk, carrying a gun. As president, at every turn he should be thanking the guys who put their lives on the line to do this. He does so in his official speeches because he speechwriters are smart.

‘But the more he tries to take the credit for it, the more the ground operators are saying, “Come on, man!” It really didn’t matter who was president. At the end of the day, they were going to go.’

Chris Kyle, a former SEAL sniper with 160 confirmed and another 95 unconfirmed kills to his credit, said: ‘The operation itself was great and the nation felt immense pride. It was great that we did it.

‘But bin Laden was just a figurehead. The war on terror continues. Taking him out didn’t really change anything as far as the war on terror is concerned and using it as a political attack is a cheap shot.

In years to come there is going to be information that will come out that Obama was not the man who made the call. He can say he did and the people who really know what happened are inside the Pentagon, are in the military and the military isn’t allowed to speak out against the commander- in-chief so his secret is safe.’

MORE:
It is not a coincidence, I’m sure that two Special Op super PACs have formed to defeat this pathetic,  preening, grandstanding SCOAMF…
and
Linked by Doug Ross and Michelle Malkin, thanks!
-
UPDATE II:
-
For those of you having trouble getting into The Daily Caller, @DailyCaller reports on Twitter, that they came under malware attack. They claim to have ” turned back the enemy & reclaimed our land. Site is safe to visit. Thanks 4 your patience.”
-
I’m still seeing the Attack Site notice, however.
-
There are no coincidences is politics, folks.
UPDATE III:
What some deemed a prepostorous fabrication is once again being proven accurate – a new book details how Barack Obama called off the Bin Laden mission no less than three times due to the demands of senior adviser Valerie Jarrett – a book being published over one year AFTER our own  White House Insider gave the very same details.

BOOM: Mitt Romney: “It Is Deeply Moving” to Be in “Jerusalem – The Capital of Israel” (Video)

And the crowd roars ….

Via Gateway Pundit:

Start listening at 4:18:

Take that Ba-rack.

Compare that to this pathetic performance by Obama’s Propaganda Minister, Jay Carney:

SEE ALSO:

Daniel Pipes: Romney’s Remarkable Speech in Jerusalem:

Mitt Romney, the all-but-official Republican presidential candidate, delivered a stem-winder of a speech to the Jerusalem Foundation today, packing emotional support with frank policy statements. The contrast with Obama could hardly be more dramatic. Indeed, one could go through the speech and note the many refutations of Obama. For example, the opening comment that “To step foot into Israel is to step foot into a nation that began with an ancient promise made in this land” directly contrasts with Obama’s crabbed statement in Cairo about “the aspiration for a Jewish homeland [being] rooted in a tragic history.”

Also, in contrast to the nonsensical Obama administration stance on Jerusalem – sneaking in changes to captions that identified it as such and going through verbal gymnastics to avoid calling it that – Romney came out and plainly called Jerusalem “the capital of Israel.”

Freedom’s Lighthouse: Gov. Mitt Romney Visits the “Western Wall” in Jerusalem – Video:

Romney in Israel today where he visited one of Judaism’s holiest sites – the Western Wall, also called the “Wailing Wall.” It is a “remnant of the ancient wallthe surrounded the Jewish Temple’s courtyard.” Romney paused to pray at the Wailing Wall.Well-wishers wished Romney luck, and one person can be heard in the video below calling him, “President Romney.”

Twitchy: Left enraged that Romney called Jerusalem capital of Israel:

Call the Waaahmbulance.

Doug Ross: Highlights: Romney’s Speech in Jerusalem

 

Your Sunday Hymn: Ode to Joy – Flash Mob Edition

Flash Mob – Ode to Joy,  Beethoven Symphony No.9:

I love that people are still doing this sort of thing:

Saturday Movie Matinee: Best GOP Ads

This RNC ad is nothing but Obama speaking in his own words – no “splicing or dicing” no “out of context”… “The More Context You Get, The Worse It Sounds”:

No shite…

Since the “out of context” defense isn’t working out so well, the left has come up with a new one: Racism!11!!1 as espoused by the utterly moronic Jonathan Chait. There have been many responses to that – I liked Quinn Hillyer’s best: Jonathan Chait is Vermin:

Please forgive me if that headline is too strong. But I’ve always thought so, and now I know. Chait is actually suggesting that racism is driving the negative reaction to Barack Obama’s “you didn’t build that” remark. Give me a break. What a skunk this guy is. The last refuge of a scared, cheap-shot, leftist scoundrel is to yell “Racism” in a clouded, weirder way than ever attempted before. As in:

Mitt Romney’s plan of blatantly lying about President Obama’s “you didn’t build that” speech is clearly drawing blood. But what makes the attack work so well is not so much the lie itself but the broader subtext of it. …The key thing is that Obama is angry, and he’s talking not in his normal voice but in a “black dialect.” This strikes at the core of Obama’s entire political identity: a soft-spoken, reasonable African-American with a Kansas accent. From the moment he stepped onto the national stage, Obama’s deepest political fear was being seen as a “traditional” black politician, one who was demanding redistribution from white America on behalf of his fellow African-Americans….The entire key to the rise of the Republican Party from the mid-sixties through the nineties was that white Americans came to see the Democrats as taking money from the hard-working white middle class and giving it to a lazy black underclass. Reactivating that frame is still the most mortal threat to the Democrats and to Obama. …

What a steaming load of diseased dung this is. The time has come to call this “racism” wolf cry what it really is: the Left’s version of McCarthyism. As with the original, the game is to accuse adversaries of something awful, and awfully untrue, purely for political effect, to cause a political wound. (The difference is that at least McCarthy had some small basis for his vilely overstated accusations, as the Venona documents have since shown; this cry of racism, here as in so many of the Left’s uses of it in recent years, has not even a shred of truth to it.)

I associate myself with the remarks of John Nolte at Breitbart, who called Chait’s dung heap “equal parts hilarious, maddening, unAmerican, and just plain pathetic.”

Keep reading…

See aso:

Matthew Continetti, Washington Free Beacon: Wreck it Barack:

One cannot help noticing the struggle between Barack Obama’s natural instincts and the serene and benevolent persona he projects to the world. Beneath the visage of a cosmetically populist, post-racial, post-partisan reformer who wants to “perfect” America and to have “millionaires and billionaires” “pay their fair share” is just another condescending, self-important, sarcastic, academic liberal Democrat, who believes in false consciousness and in scholastic theories that success in life can be attributed to birth or luck or community but not to individual effort and grit. Obama may be talented at self-fashioning, but he cannot maintain his public face constantly. The mask sometimes slips.

The real Obama emerges. He lets loose in the self-consciously ironic and pretentiously omniscient argot of the American ruling class, lecturing audiences in what he, Elizabeth Warren, and the segment producers at MSNBC treat as the new catechism. The reaction to these gaffes is always the same. His remarks spark justified criticism. There is a frenetic effort to paper over his comments and restore the impression that he is just another dad who wants to take care of one big American family. He and his lieutenants and other members of the “truth” posse indulge in mock outrage. They say the president’s words have been distorted, that he did not really say what he said, that he meant something else entirely. The activity is convulsive and furious because David Axelrod and David Plouffe understand that an unplugged Obama will damage his brand. He is not actually likable at all. And he is liable to wreck years of hard work and mythmaking the moment he goes off script.

Read the whole thing – it’s brillant.

***

It’s awesome that Obama keeps handing the RNC rapid response team such golden material to work with: “It Worked?”

***

They cut to the chase in this TV ad — With the economy on the verge of collapse due to Obama’s disastrous policies, his only  plan for the next four years is to do all the same things….AGAIN?:

***

Not hard hitting enough if you ask me, but they’re trying to talk the undecideds off the fence – “It’s okay”…

***

Another RNC Ad just rubbing it in…These aren’t Gaffes:

***

Democrats Running from their own Convention:

NRCC Political Director Mike Shields discusses North Carolina Democrats who won’t be attending the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina.

This is funny – especially when he talks about the poor Obamacrat who is actually from the same district in which the convention is being held, but will be avoiding it like the plague…

“He’s going to have to have to be driving around in his district, going in the opposite direction to avoid being there by accident.”

OUCH…

***

The Daily Rushbo: Rush: Lakoff Inspired “You Didn’t Build That”:

***

Obama MIA, Hasn’t Met With Budget Chair In a Year:

Laura Ingraham interviews Paul Ryan, July 27th, 2012:

ICE Union Chief: Agents Face Threat Of Pink Slips If They Enforce The Law:

Sen. Sessions held a press conference yesterday with top officials from two unions that represent U.S. immigration law enforcement agencies.

ICE agent Chris Crane is President of the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, the union representing America’s more than 7,000 ICE agents and personnel. Border Patrol agent George McCubbin, III is President of the National Border Patrol Council, the union representing America’s more than 17,000 border agents and personnel.

SEE ALSO:

Union Label: Illegal Aliens Ignored: Govt. Union Boss Says Obama’s Policies Don’t Follow The Law

Doug Ross: Top Immigration Officials Describe Border Chaos Resulting From Obama Amnesty Policy

***

Blame Righty Syndrome Exposed! – Michelle Malkin vs. Tamara Holder – Sean Hannity:

Watch Malkin tell Holder to “shush!”:

***

Carney Refuses To Identify Capital Of Israel Twice In White House Press Briefing:

Reporter: “Which is the Capital of Israel, Jerusalem or Tel Aviv?”

Carney: “Our position on that has not changed.” NEXT QUESTION!!!!

responds with a powerful new ad:

This one hits Obama for traveling everywhere in his first four years, but Israel.

SEE ALSO:

Commentary almost a year ago: Obama Re-Writes History on Bush and Jerusalem:

Now this is just getting silly. The Obama White House is gearing up for a Supreme Court case in which it will defend its refusal to list “Jerusalem, Israel” on the passports of Americans born in the Israeli capital. As part of its preparations the administration recently scrubbed all the captions on a White House photo gallery of Vice President Biden in the city, changing “Jerusalem, Israel” to “Jerusalem.” The optics of methodically erasing the word “Israel” from the White House webpage caused a predictable uproar.

Those who make it their business to rationalize White House hostility toward Israel were relieved, then, when the Washington Jewish Week’s Adam Kredo published an article claiming that the Bush administration had enforced an identical policy. Kredo cited a “search of the Bush White House’s archives” and photos of Laura Bush touring the Western Wall to conclude that the Bush White House webpage “never explicitly labeled [Jerusalem] as part of Israel.” Though he was otherwise unsparing in criticizing the White House’s “horrible, simply ridiculous… photo mistake,” Obama’s defenders latched on to his article anyway. The NJDC and J Street found particularly grating and obnoxious ways to pass along the article. You should read them because they’re about to become deeply embarrassing.

Elliot Abrams responded in a quote he gave to Jennifer Rubin, forcefully insisting that Kredo was “just wrong” and that the Bush White House “did not have a hard and fast rule that prohibited referring to Jerusalem” as part of Israel in documents and captions.

Basic Google searches are enough to show that Abrams is right and Obama’s defenders are flat wrong.

Gateway Pundit: Mark Levin: “Obama Hates Israel And He’s Demonstrated It Time And Again” (Audio)

Mark Levin ripped into Barack Obama over the administration’s contempt for all things Israel. This week the administration proved it further by refusing to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Mark Levin told his audience,

“Obama hates Israel and he’s demonstrated it time and time again… I never thought I’d be living in a time to hear an administration which wouldn’t even state what the capital of an ally is.”

***

 Mark Levin Interview with Andrew McCarthy on Muslim Brotherhood infiltration in the Obama administration:

SEE ALSO:

The Right Scoop: Allen West backs up Michele Bachmann on the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration inquiry

PJTV: More MSM Lies: ABC Falsely Blames Tea Party for Batman Shooting Rampage:

The mainstream media just can’t help itself. Brian Ross at ABC accused the alleged Colorado killer James Holmes of being a Tea Party member. His source: a Google search. Why is the MSM so eager to blame the Tea Party, but not Occupy Wall Street, and its criminal element? Find out on this Trifecta.

***

The Daily Rushbo: Rush: Mayors Menino and Emanuel’s Threats Against Chick-fil-A Are ‘A Direct Assault On Christianity':

El Rushbo articulates exactly how I feel on this nontroversy: WTF???

There is no “intellectual argument” to be made with these Stalinists who want to shut down free speech…..

SEE ALSO:

Star Parker: Chick-fil-A protest could set back gay activism:

The current hate campaign being waged by homosexual activists against fast food chain Chick-fil-A, because of the firm’s Christian values, may well turn out to be a bridge too far. The effort may prove to be a setback for homosexual activism.

The vile attacks on the firm and its owners, the Cathy family, should make clear, finally, that the “gay rights” movement is not about refining and advancing American freedom, but about rewriting American values and advancing, not freedom, but the homosexual political agenda.

***

John Bolton On The Record with Greta Van Susteren: John Bolton Discusses Mitt Romney’s Foreign Trip to Israel, Poland and the U.K.:

***

Via Publius Forum: Rep. Kelly’s Rousing Floor Speech Receives Standing Ovation and Chants of “USA!”:

Linked by Daily Pundit and Pirate’s Cove, thanks!

WH Is Trying to Rewrite Recent History Now? Says Obama Didn’t Return Churchill Bust?!


Good grief…We all know he did. It was huge news at the time – it was seen by many as a petty slap at the British, who of course, adore the man. Who doesn’t?

And now it’s an election year, so we have to stamp out narratives that don’t help Dear Leader.

White House “Fact Checker”, Dan Pfeiffer, reporting for duty!:

Lately, there’s been a rumor swirling around about the current location of the bust of Winston Churchill. Some have claimed that President Obama removed the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office and sent it back to the British Embassy.

Now, normally we wouldn’t address a rumor that’s so patently false, but just this morning the Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer repeated this ridiculous claim in his column.  He said President Obama “started his Presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office.”

This is 100% false. The bust still in the White House. In the Residence. Outside the Treaty Room.

News outlets have debunked this claim time and again. First, back in 2010 the National Journal reported that “the Churchill bust was relocated to a prominent spot in the residence to make room for Abraham Lincoln, a figure from whom the first African-American occupant of the Oval Office might well draw inspiration in difficult times.” And just in case anyone forgot, just last year the AP reported that President Obama “replaced the Oval Office fixture with a bust of one of his American heroes, President Abraham Lincoln, and moved the Churchill bust to the White House residence.”

Really?

Is it possible that there were two Churchill busts, and the one that was on loan to George W. Bush was returned when Obama entered office? Yes, I believe it is…

How could “fact checker” , Dan Pfeiffer get this so wrong?

Sir Charles awaits his apology.

Why Obama Has No Intention of Losing This November

I have to confess I have a nagging fear about the upcoming election. Even though all indications point to Romney winning in November, I worry that the usurper currently in office has no intention of leaving and will be manipulating events to keep himself in place. Whether through dirty tricks, voter fraud, a Wag the Dog scenario, civil unrest leading to martial law, or a combination of all of those things, Bam is planning on staying.

Tyrants don’t go quietly.

Obama tells his audiences that he’s not through transforming the nation into…..whatever it is that he’s trying to turn it into. But beyond that, there is another powerful motive for him to cling to power.

Think about it. If Mitt manages to triumph in November – if we are able to cleanse the executive branch of the filthy commies who have taken root there, the aftermath will look a lot worse than it did when the Clintonistas left in 2001. That flurry of last minute pardons by the outgoing Clinton ( aided by Holder), the  vandalism to the White House by outgoing staffers as well as the the missing White House artifacts pale in comparison to what we would see in the wake of an Obami expulsion.

The slimy residue that will be left behind by this current crew will result in not only massive scandals but possibly prison terms when the extent of the treachery becomes known.

The only thing that protects them now, is the firewall provided by Obama’s thoroughly corrupt and compromised Justice Dept. With Holder no longer there to protect him, things could go very badly for Obama and co.

Do you think Obama’s looking forward to no longer being able to assert  executive privilege to protect himself and his fellow partners in crime?

The “Fast and Furious” gun-running fiasco which led to the assertion of executive privilege by Obama  is only the tip of the iceberg.

There is also the question of the horrendous White House national security leaks, that we know  came from Obama’s inner circle.

Not to mention the Solyndra/Green energy boondoggle of which even the cautious Romney campaign is making an issue.

And the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the State Dept and the White House.

Jon Corzine’s “MF Global”, which disappeared $1.6 billion in client funds, was represented by Eric Holder’s law firm.

Then there’s the question of Obama’s birth certificate,  selective service card, and SS# – all of which have been deemed fraudulent by Sheriff Arpaio’s  criminal investigation.

The point is, without a doubt, all of the scandals mentioned above barely scrape the surface.  We’ll have to get rid of him and put a Republican administration in place to see just how criminally corrupt his administration has been.

And that’s why he is going to do everything he can to make damn sure that doesn’t happen.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

Romney “looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again”, Meets With Cameron (Video)

Hopefully this will undo some of the damage done by Mitt’s numerous missteps in Great Britain…

Via The Weekly Standard:

At an event in London, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said, “I’m looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again.”

Mitt Romney at London fundraiser: “I’m looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again.” #watersedge?

— Kasie Hunt (@kasie) July 26, 2012

President Obama famously sent Churchill’s bust back to Britain soon after coming into office.

***

After making a rude dig at Mitt Romney by insulting Salt Lake City, Obama BFF, David Cameron was all smiles as he greeted the former governor at his Downing Street office in London today.

Romney stressed the importance of the longtime trans-Atlantic alliance in meetings with Cameron and other top British political leaders as he kicks off his first official appearances in a weeklong international trip.

Cameron reportedly “felt a vote of confidence” from what Romney said to him.

Whatever.

SEE ALSO:

Sooper Mexican: Remembering Obama’s Humiliating 2011 Visit to Britain:

The press is absolutely delighted with any tiny mistake Mitt Romney might make while visiting England for the Olympics. Think they’ll harken back to the time when President Dog-Eater humiliated himself and America with his gaffe-a-minute visit to the “sceptered isle?” Yeah, I doubt it…

Don’t worry gringos, I got your back:

Keep reading. And thanks for jogging my memory, el Sooper!

Liberal Madness: Mayor of Chicago Welcomes “Fruit of Islam”, Rebuffs Chick-fil-A

Chick-fil-A President, Dan Cathy set off a liberal firestorm when he was quoted July 16 in the Baptist Press saying he was “guilty as charged” for supporting “the biblical definition of the family unit. “We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.”

To the  unhinged left – this is tantamount to hate speech – and must be stamped out. How dare they have such Christian, pro-family opinions (that most Americans agree with) and how dare express them in public.

The horror.

The Boycott Chick-Fil-A website, plaintively asks – “How can something so good be so evil.”

Because everybody knows, if you don’t agree with the left-wing values, (or lack thereof),  you’re evil…

Case in point: After Shooting Tragedy, Aurora Chick-fil-A Gives Free Meals to Police Working Case

Everyone knows cops are tools of the one percent.

The Mayors of two of America’s most liberal cities, Boston, and Chicago wholeheartedly agree that Christian views on homosexuality must be stamped out..  How dare these Christians express Christian opinions! Not in our fair cities!!!

Chicago Tribune: Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values,” said Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a statement. “They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents.”

Emanuel was vowing his support for Alderman Moreno’s announcement that he would block construction of a Chick-fil-A restaurant in his district.

Boston Mayor Menino said he would block the chain from opening in Boston because of Cathy’s opposition to gay marriage.

Yahoo News: “In recent days you said Chick-fil-A opposes same-sex marriage and said the generation that supports it has ‘an arrogant attitude,’” Menino wrote in a letter dated July 20.  “Now—incredibly—your company says you are backing out of the same-sex marriage debate. I urge you to back out of your plans to locate in Boston.”

While stiffing Chick fil A, Emanuel is welcoming Louis Farrakhan‘s “Fruit of Islam” the paramilitary arm of the Nation of Islam into the streets of Chicago, ostensibly to help fight crime.

Ignoring Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan’s history of anti-Semitic remarks, Mayor Rahm Emanuel welcomed the army of men dispatched to the streets by Farrakhan to stop the violence in Chicago neighborhoods on Wednesday.

According to The Sun Times, Chicago’s first Jewish mayor has no interest in revisiting Farrakhan’s history of making anti-Semitic statements.

I’m sure he’s not interested in revisiting one of Farrakhan’s most recent statements, either: All White People Should Be Scientologists To Prevent Them From Being “Devil Christians” And “Satan Jews”…
Garvey Ashhurst from the Global Grind applauds Emanuel, saying, “we should all take a page out of his (Emanuel’s)  book and put aside petty differences for the greater good of man.”

No doubt Chick-fil-A President, Dan Cathy agrees.
SEE ALSO:

You know him best as the Alabama man who scared away a potential rapist, but Antoine Dodson has a lot more to say than just “Hide yo kids, hide yo wife.”

Dodson, who is gay, voiced his support for Chick-fil-A and pledged his continued patronage. In spite of Dan Cathy’s personal opposition to gay marriage, Dodson believes the fast-food chain’s CEO is entitled to his own opinion, and he resents being told where he can and cannot eat by those who disagree with Cathy’s views.

Hold the phone — Dodson believes in freedom of speech and the right to make personal decisions for oneself? It sure looks that way, at least when it comes to where and what he eats.

But I fear the loveable viral Youtube star will soon be bullied into reversing course.

Who the Hell do these people think they are? More importantly, who and what is America any longer if despicable, Stalin-esque tactics like this from the left in this country are allowed to continue. Bloomberg in NYC, Emanuel in Chicago, these thugs deserve to be handcuffed, frog marched for the cameras and thrown in jail for their usurpation of political power and travesty, while official elected representatives in a what was once a free democracy.

UPDATE:
Via Andy at AoSHQ:

Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino backed away from his threat to actively block the fast-food chain from setting up shop in the city.“I can’t do that. That would be interference to his rights to go there,” Menino said, referring to company president Dan Cathy, who drew the mayor’s wrath by going public with his views against same-sex marriage.

I wonder if this had anything to with the discovery by Michael Graham of Menino’s prior support for the notorious gay-bashers at Chick-fil-A.

Oh, wait. Did I say Chick-fil-A? Sorry, I meant the Muslim Imam who wants to kill gays, not serve them a tasty chicken sandwich.

If you’re a conservative who holds the same position on same-sex marriage that Barack Obama publicly held up until a couple of months ago, you’re a bigot unworthy of even getting a business license. If you’re a practitioner of the Religion of Peace™ who advocates putting gays to the sword, though, no problem.

Does anyone have a flowchart that explains the left’s pecking order here? Or do they just make this shit up as they go?

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,616,475 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 516 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: