You all saw David Axelrod’s enraged response to Jennifer Rubin’s tweet, last night, right?
After Secretary of State Hillary Clinton threw herself under the bus for President Barack Obama regarding the deadly assault at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the Washington Post’s Jen Rubin observed:
First Bill humiliates her and now Obama does.. Hillary no feminist, more like doormat
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) October 16, 2012
The tweet outraged Obama campaign mouthpiece David Axelrod, who replied
Sick. Mitt mouthpiece jumps shark.RT @jrubinblogger: First Bill humiliates her and now Obama does.. Hillary no feminist, more like doormat
— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) October 16, 2012
Rubin fired back
@davidaxelrod so is Obama going to hide behind her skirt Tuesday night? Why would the president let Hillary end her career in disgrace?
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) October 16, 2012
A Think Progress blogger also slammed Rubin, calling her tweets, “sexist” and “personal.”
Why the hyperventilating panic?
Because polls are now showing that Romney has closed the once-formidable gender gap.
One conservative insider mused that the new polling is causing Democratic operatives to lose their cool: “Obama was losing the women’s vote before this happened, so no wonder they are frantic. It is unseemly for the president to hide behind her skirt.”
So what will the regime do to stop this burgeoning narrative in its tracks?
John Nolte thinks he has the answer at Big Journalism:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly accepting blame for the security failures in Libya the night before a hugely important presidential debate might be nothing more than a fabricated set-up to allow President Obama to dig himself out of a hole. Hillary’s statement was obviously timed so that it would take some of the pressure off of Obama and swamp today’s pre-debate news — which it has. But the timing also pretty much ensures it will come up during tonight’s debate, and that’s where I smell a rat.
Is the Obama campaign playing a simple game of checkers where Hillary’s statement is meant to let Obama off the hook 24 hours prior to the debate? Or is the Obama campaign playing a more complicated game of chess that potentially sets up a powerful presidential moment for Obama?
Think about it: If Obama were to stand up before the American people tonight and thank Hillary for being The Greatest Secretary Of State In The History Of The Americas and then pull her out from under the bus and accept 100% of the responsibility himself, he’d look like some kind of hero.
A moment like this would be dramatic, make the president look good, and likely command a lot of the attention in post-debate coverage. Pulling a manufactured stunt like this also presents almost no downside (everyone blames Obama anyway) and almost 100% upside.
Remember – it only took one disingenuous “race speech” in March, 2008 to make the lapdogs in the media heel on the Reverend Wright matter, (oh – by the way: despite Obama’s 2008 claims, political relationship with Rev. Wright began as early as 1987), and I suspect the MSM is looking for any excuse to drop this story. Obama’s chivalry will be their signal stand down, and let the regime’s “investigations” run their course.
As Nolte says, there’s no downside to taking responsibility:
Obama’s already going to be held responsible regardless of what Hillary does or doesn’t say and accepting responsibility is not the same as saying the security failures in Libya were his fault. It’s a win-win.
What we can count on Obama not doing is laughing like a hyena at everything Romney says like Biden did with Ryan (women didn’t like that it turns out), and I predict Obama will try a little harder to control his body language and make eye contact with Romney, since that aspect of his first debate performance was viewed negatively by almost everybody.
I hope Mitt’s ready to make Obama feel the heat that comes with taking responsibility. And he should ask him directly, who in the White House sent Susan Rice out on the Sunday talk shows Sept. 16, with the false You Tube video narrative, and why he continued the charade at the UN.
UPDATE:
The National Journal reports: Susan Rice: I Relied on Talking Points:
In an interview with The Washington Post published on Tuesday, Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, said, according to The Post’s characterization, that “she relied on daily updates from intelligence agencies in the days before her television appearances and on a set of talking points prepared for senior members of the administration by intelligence officials.”
Since when do members of intelligence agencies give officials “talking points”?
SEE ALSO:
Draw and Strike: Why Obama Loses The Second Debate Too
October, 16, 2012 at 4:09 pm
The American people won’t admire The Dog Eater for manning up tonite. It will ring as tin as the miraculous down tick in the unemployment rate after 140,000 jobs are added to the economy. Heh? This is a wag the dog campaign. The Benghazi boondoggle was a flubbed effort to create a hostage situation that The Dog Eater could miraculously resolve and appear presidential (funny how when one is president one would already appear presidential, but oh well, The Dog Eater is a perpetual candidate).
The Dog Eater is going to have to man up about his failed foreign policy despite admitting responsibility for the death of the Ambassador and the other 3 Americans. Where has he been? Why is he responsible. It’s going to take more than just saying “oopsie!” This dumb lummock has been playing golf and campaigning instead of leading the Nation. He can’t lead from behind if he is not BEHIND his desk over 50 per cent of the time.
Barack Hussein Obama and David Axlerod deserve to be hung from their necks until dead and their families sent to live in Yemen for the rest of their lives without restitution.
October, 16, 2012 at 5:00 pm
obama needs to come out swinging and needs to score some points tonight. He needs to be very careful though. He is losing major support in some demographics, among them women. The problem is he has Mitt standing in front of him when he tries to attack, who will respond in kind. It’s going to be tedious for him because he doesn’t have much fodder to support his positions with a 4 year record now. Mitt can respond with some devastating blows in response to any attack.
As far a Mr gutsy manning up. . . . . and taking responsibility. I don’t think so, it’s not a character trait of narcissism. The i-i’s and me-me’s are usually reserved for “taking credit”, not “accepting responsibility”. Besides if he does, it opens him up for everything else they’ve been lying their collective azzes off on.
October, 16, 2012 at 5:14 pm
I am sure the faithful will find enough to like (or gush over) tonight. Unfortunately for Obama there are simply not that many left. Romney turned the tide, he will sweep into the White House, it will be a landslide… IF enough real people vote to offset the planned democratic voter fraud.