Krauthammer: WH Discriminates Against Women in Moderation (Video)

Fox News contributors Charles Krauthammer and George took turns slamming the White House for employing questionable stats in order to push Obama’s equal pay executive order.

Krauthammer ridiculed  White House press secretary Jay Carney for suggesting that the White House’s own smaller gender pay gap is evidence the White House simply discriminates in “moderation” compared to the national average.

Via Washington Free Beacon:

“Is there anybody who thinks that Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett and the other important people in this administration are deliberately discriminating against women in the White House? Of course not. In fact, when Jay Carney was asked about this he gave the remarkable answer of ‘well, that’s better than the others are doing. As if he is saying ‘well this White House discriminates against women but we discriminate in moderation.’ The correct answer is that these are not the results of deliberate discrimination by any means,” he said.

Krauthammer complained that Obama’s executive order put the burden of proof on employers should employees find a disparate impact in gender compensation and that’s “not the American way.”

George Will  added “it’s the American way if your political party is heavily dependent on the contributions of trial lawyers. That’s what this is a gift to.”

Referring to the White House’s use of the sketchy 77% statistic, Will disdainfully said Obama is acting as an “intellectual incompetent the way he’s handling as propaganda social science.”

Via Washington Free Beacon:


The Conversation: WH ‘Roughed Up By Its Own Pay Equity Rhetoric’ (Video)

The Conversation:  Carney: Republican Opposition To Paycheck Fairness Act Just Like Their Opposition To Civil Rights

Charles Krauthammer Calls On The House To Withhold Funding For FCC Study (Video)

On Thursday evening’s Special Report Charles Krauthammer called the FCC’s controversial newsroom gambit “an outrage disguised as a study.”

He continued,  “the FCC regulates the media and it has the power to remove your license – meaning to ruin you overnight. So any questions it asks are never innocent. And what is it asking about critical information needs? Who decides what’s a critical information need? A critical information need is a concept that you have in Kiev or Moscow – not in the United States. Everyone decides on their own. The idea that we don’t have enough diversity in the media in the United States? We have more media today than in the history of mankind – including cave drawings.” Krauthammer then recommended that the House pass a law withholding funding from such a study.

Video via National Review


Greta Van Susteren: Obama’s News Police Meant to Intimidate, Stifle and Chill Speech (Video)


The Anchoress: Over FCC Plans, MSM Finally a Bit Curious re Obama Admin:

“What are they thinking?” Mr. Kurtz, it’s pretty obvious; they’re thinking no one in the mainstream press has asked them a difficult or challenging question in 7 years, so why would they start now.

  • They’re thinking an obsequious press that couldn’t be bothered to sustain outrage over intrusions into its own phone and internet records won’t have a problem with the government parking itself into the newsroom.
  • They’re thinking that if the mainstream press could forgive them for considering espionage charges against a member of the press — for doing what reporters are supposed to do — and then re-commence their habitual boot-licking, there is no real risk of media folk suddenly calling out a “red line”, or even being able to identify one.
  • They’re figuring that with this president, the mainstream media has no idea what “a bridge too far” might mean. Nor, “abuse of power”; nor “cover-up”; nor “mendacity”,“incompetence”“ineptitude” or “constitutional illiteracy.”
  • They know that half the people in the newsroom are either married or to (or social buddies with) influential members of this government, and that everyone is all comfy and nicely settled in for the revolution.
  • They know that the press willfully surrendered its own freedoms some time ago, in the interests of ideology, and so they really won’t mind a little editorial supervision from the masters:

Video: Krauthammer predicts In The End, Obama Will Cancel Employer Mandate

Bret Baier asked his panelists about the late breaking news Monday afternoon, that the Regime would delay for yet another year the Employer health-care mandate.

“It’s a double whammy here,” said Charles Krauthammer, combining “the loss of the equivalent of 2 million jobs from people choosing idleness” because of the  ObamaCare subsidy out of other people’s tax money, and “the people who would be losing their jobs involuntarily as a result of the mandates.”

“They are getting tremendous complaints from small business that they can’t do this. It will destroy their business, and that’s why it’s a delay. It’s a political delay,” Krauthammer said. “I think in the end they are going to decide they’re going to have to cancel it because there is no way it will not increase joblessness on top of the 2 million who will be leaving on their own.”


Video via National Review

Saturday Movie Matinee: ObamaCare Is A Job Killer

WFB: CBO: Obamacare is a Job Killer:

The president and his allies have taken to defending, indeed celebrating, this finding, by saying Obamacare will end the problem of “job lock” in which Americans work in order to pay for their health insurance, as opposed to not working and having other people, such as the taxpayers, pay for their health insurance instead.

Impact Of White House’s Obamacare Control On Pres’ Credibility – Obama Lied! – The Kelly File:

For the love of God – when is this man going to stop lying to the American people?

Krauthammer: Carney’s Comment Will Be “Emblazoned on the Tombstone of Liberalism”:

SEE ALSO: The Right Scoop: MUST WATCH: Ben Domenech Clears Up Entire CBO Report Debate In Four Minutes

Townhall: New IRS Scandal Concerns–Guy Benson Debates Liberal:

Doug Ross: Powerful and frightening testimony on Obama intimidation:

Catherine, her husband, their company and her nonprofit, have been repeatedly targeted, first in frivolous lawsuits by the Texas Democratic Party (which the Democrats lost, every single one, but they didn’t care, because it cost about $1 million for Catherine to defend – money fortunately provided by others as they are not rich), then outrageous, unprecedented demands from the FBI, the IRS and the ATF. Watch her testimony and share it.

This administration is literally revealing itself to be a tyranny. We all need to wake up before it is too late if it is indeed not too late already. The IRS has now proposed a new regulation that can only be described as a despotic attempt to throttle free speech. If codified, this rule will make legal, the criminal suppression of conservative groups that they have been engaging in since 2010, and continue to engage in. Add your comments to the chorus of outrage rising across the land against this IRS proposed rule that will literally destroy free speech. Submissions may be sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at, please include this citation: IRS REG-134417-13.

Glenn Beck: Rand Paul On Freedom:

Huh?!? Progressive Professor Says Left is Too Rational, Right Too Emotional:

A left wing Berkeley professor is warning progressives that their mindset is ruining the world. Is he right? Do progressives even understand that for which they are fighting?

New SooperVideo! Obama’s Facebook ‘Look Back’ Video!!

Sheriff Arpaio Opens 2nd Criminal Investigation: Two Events May Happen:

(Feb. 7, 2014) — For the first time in more than two months, Maricopa County Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo was a guest on Carl Gallups’ “Freedom Friday” during the first hour which began at 5:00 p.m. EST/4:00 p.m. EST.

Gallups greeted Zullo by saying that he had been “immersed in alligators” since Zullo’s last appearance on the show in November of last year.  Release of the audio of the interview is credited to ORYR.

During the 8:35 segment, Zullo announced that Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has opened a “second criminal investigation” relative to the investigation into the birth certificate image posted on the White House website in April 2011.

The posse began its investigation into the image in September 2011, which publicly declared on March 1, 2012 that it was a “computer-generated forgery.”

Zullo had announced in November that new information would be released in March, but today, he said that “more information” which is “very intense” has been gathered.  Zullo added that because of the new information and second criminal investigation, there might be “two events” held in the future to discuss the two topics separately.

SEE ALSO: “Punish Your Enemies”: ABC: Joe Arpaio to be deposed in Justice Department lawsuit:

U.S. Justice Department officials who filed a civil rights lawsuit against the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office say they’ll question Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his former top aide next month.

The Justice Department says Arpaio’s deposition is scheduled for March 11 and former aide David Hendershott’s deposition is set for March 4.

Avalanche strikes town in Italy:

An avalanche strikes a small town in Italy, burying houses, and causing significant damage. The authorities managed to rescue 20 people by helicopter before the avalanche covered the whole town. No one is thought to have been killed.

Krauthammer: Obamacare Strips Americans of Dignity (Video)

On Special Report, Charles Krauthammer was asked about the recent CBO report that shows that over 2 million workers will leave the full time workforce because of ObamaCare.

“This is the liberal’s idea of the opportunity society. Of course, in a free society you can decide if you want to work, but what ObamaCare does – it’s sort of the essence of liberalism – is that you can then choose not to work, and the people who do work end up subsidizing you.” Agreeing with the CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf’s contention that the law creates a disincentive for people to work, Krauthammer  said it was particularly in a place where you want the incentive because people on the low end of the  ladder need to work “to get the training, the habit and the dignity of work – and this does exactly the opposite.”

Video via Rare:

Via National Review, Charles Krauthammer sparred with Ron Fournier about about the CBO report. In an article at National Journal, Fournier contended that the report is being distorted by the right in order to score political points.

Fournier takes the administration’s absurdist position that the law helps people get out of jobs they were otherwise locked in to because they provided health-care. With Mara  Liasson backing him up, Fournier made the argument that if one takes issue with Obamacare, why not get rid of similar programs such as Medicare and Social Security?

“There’s no argument over those who are either elderly, disabled, elderly, or children who can’t work — what we’re talking about is people who can work and don’t,”​ he countered.

He pointed out that, as CBO director Douglas Elmendorf said before Congress earlier in the day, that the Obamacare subsidies disincentivize​ people from working because they are reduced as income rises. “If you have a part-time job and you’re getting a big subsidy, and you’re offered a better job, you do the calculation,” Krauthammer said

“It’s a huge incentive not to take that job — it’s irrefutable,” he concluded.

Fox News: Fmr CIA Director Morell Altered Benghazi Talking Points To Help Obama Politically (Video)

Fox News reported today that former CIA Director Mike Morell may have altered the Benghazi talking points to help the Obama administration politically during the 2012 election.

Via WFB:

On September 15 one day before Susan Rice made her infamous appearances on various Sunday shows, according to the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report Morell received an email from the CIA station chief in Libya indicating the Benghazi attacks were “not/not an escalation of protests.” The report does not indicate when Morell read the email, but that same day Morell cut the word “Islamic” from the talking points and left the word “demonstration.”

On September 16, Morell emailed embassy staff in Tripoli asking for more information. The FBI and CIA reviewed the closed circuit footage on September 18 showing there were no protests. Yet, President Obama still employed the “demonstration” verbiage just days later.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) said Morell accompanied Susan Rice in a closed November meeting to discuss the attack. According to Graham, Morell defended Rice and tried to emphasize there was confusion about what happened in Benghazi. Moreover, Graham alleged Morell did not accept responsibility for altering the talking points, instead blaming the FBI. ”I called the FBI. They went ballistic. Within 24 hours, his statement was changed where he admitted the CIA had done it,” Graham said.

Charles Krauthammer responded to the report and Obama’s pre-Super Bowl interview.

“When Obama talks about this as if he didn’t know, I think he’s simply continuing a successful stonewall,” Krauthammer explained, pointing to multiple diplomatic and security officials providing contemporaneous accounts differing from the administration’s initial characterization of the events. “He talks around it — he talks in a way that is not answering the question.”

Additionally, due to the story’s complicated nature and “huge cast of characters,” the media has also stayed away from investigating the story, which the president is well aware of. “He knew, he pretends he doesn’t, and he has succeeded in not getting the program he should have as a result of that.”

Catherine Herridge reported on the Morell story on The Kelly File where she made the point that people “are speculating that Morell may have higher political ambitions considering his employment at Beacon Global Strategies, a government relations firm founded by close Hillary Clinton confidante Philippe I. Reines.”

Megyn Kelly also had on SC Congressman Trey Gowdy to discuss Obama’s statements on Benghazi and the IRS scandals.

Editor’s note: the  headline was altered since originally posting to reflect that Morell is the former CIA Director not the current one.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

Video: Krauthammer Mocks Obama’s “Pathetic” Executive Pen and Phone Threat: “The Caudillo Waves His Pen”

Charles Krauthammer was invited on to Greta Van Susteren’s Fox show to explain why Obama seems to have ditched his mission to change Washington in favor of his executive pen and phone.

“He’s going to eliminate Article One of the Constitution which says that legislation comes from Congress. This is the way they do it Venezuela, Cuba and other places, Dr. K snarked, “the Caudillo waves a pen, he shows it on Twitter and says I will rule from the pen. (For those of you in Rio Linda, a Caudillo is a Latin American military dictator.)

“What makes it sort of pathetic,” he continued,  “is that it sounds like a tough threat and it is unconstitutional, it’s not how you ought to be the president of the United States, but in the end there’s very little he can do.”

Krauthammer reminded viewers of Obama’s big “we can’t wait” tour of 2011, which was largely ineffectual. “In the end, the only thing the president can do with a pen –  executive orders – is fairly limited,” he said, making sure to note that the exception to the rule is the EPA which can shut down whole industries.

“He can’t even do what normal presidents have done – which is work with other side.”

Greta noted that Clinton actually liked members of Congress – even those on the other side.

“You get the impression he chose the wrong field,” Krauthammer quipped.

Neither of them mentioned Obama’s executive order in June of 2012 that bypassed Congress to enact the Dream Act, an executive overreach Krauthammer called “out and out lawlessness” at the time. It seems to me that chances are good that we will be treated to more such lawlessness because of Obama’s complete and utter failure to work with Congress.

Krauthammer’s Advice to GOP: “Take the Side of the Little Sisters of the Poor – You Can’t Lose” (Video)

After yesterday’s “media tempest in a teapot” over some misquoted lines from a Mike Huckabee’s speech, pundits are debating whether Republican men should discuss women’s issues or just zip it. In a speech before the NRC, the former Arkansas Governor said Democrats want to “insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control, because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of government.” Some media outlets reported the line as if Huck himself believed women can’t control their libido. Many took offense that he characterized Democrats as believing the same.

John Hayward weighed in at the Conversation, arguing that men shouldn’t shy away from important issues, but learn to avoid certain words and phrases that can be easily mischaracterized.

The other conservative backlash I’ve noticed against this specific passage of Huckabee’s speech is that he was foolish to set himself up for misquote mania by daring to talk about women’s libidos and reproductive systems, even if he was sarcastically describing Democrats’ views of women, or more precisely their political agenda to make women see themselves that way.  Republicans are therefore supposed to avoid using any words that could be randomly resorted to make them look really bad.  In fact, maybe it would be best if male Republicans avoided talking about women altogether, especially in the context of social issues.

There are a few topics that could be judged especially radioactive – the fallout zone around Todd Akin is large, and it’s got a half-life that take years to decay.  But it seems to me that backing male Republicans away from “women’s issues” entirely would be ceding a great deal of rhetorical territory to the Democrats, who incessantly make proclamations on those subjects.  In fact, if male Republican candidates never say a word about women, they will soon be attacked for their silence on women’s issues.  Is the challenge really more about avoiding certain words and phrases?  That’s really a universal political skill, when you think about it.  Every conceivable segment of the electorate has words and phrases that are guaranteed to provoke a negative reaction.  And when you’re a Republican, you can guarantee the media will never, ever ignore your utterance of those hot-button phrases.

Bret Baier asked the panel to weigh in on the question on Special Report, Friday evening. He noted that Republicans (ever in a defensive posture)had chosen Congresswoman Kathy McMorris Rogers to give the Republican response to Obama’s State of the Union speech – hoping to mitigate the Democrats’ “War on Women” b.s.

Krauthammer declared, “that kind of cosmetic change is not going to work if you keep having people talk about the psychology of women’s sexuality. For God’s sake, why do you have to talk about that?!” My thoughts exactly. Republicans are not impressed with symbolic gestures – (if that’s what it is.) They need to learn how to talk about women’s issues without giving Democrats any openings to attack them on, and go on the offensive where we’re on solid ground.

Dr. K.’s advice to Republicans is for them to talk about issues like late term abortions – which everyone agrees are an abomination – or the Regime’s attacks on the Little Sisters of the Poor.

“When there’s a suit between the leviathan State of Obama and the Little Sisters of the Poor”, Krauthammer declared,  “take the side of the Little Sisters of the Poor. You can’t lose.”

So true.

Video via National Review.

Krauthammer: The Only People Who have Been Held Accountable For Benghazi Are 15 Libyans Who Are Now Dead (Video)

The Senate Intelligence Committee finally released a report Wednesday faulting both the State Department and the intelligence community for not preventing attacks on two outposts in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador, in 2012.

The bipartisan report laid out more than a dozen findings regarding the assaults on a diplomatic compound and a CIA annex in the city. It said the State Department failed to increase security at its mission despite warnings, and blamed intelligence agencies for not sharing information about the existence of the CIA outpost with the U.S. military.

The committee determined that the U.S. military command in Africa didn’t know about the CIA annex and that the Pentagon didn’t have the resources in place to defend the State Department compound in an emergency.

“The attacks were preventable, based on extensive intelligence reporting on the terrorist activity in Libya — to include prior threats and attacks against Western targets — and given the known security shortfalls at the U.S. Mission,” the panel said in a statement.

Today, on Special Report, the panel discussed the report, and reactions to it on Capitol Hill. Even though Hillary Clinton’s name wasn’t mentioned in the Senate report, the panel agreed that Benghazi is going to be a problem for Hillary in the 2016 race. As Charles Krauthammer pointed out – no one was held accountable in the report, other than buildings and entities like the entire State Dept., the military, the CIA. “No individuals – no humans were held responsible on either side of the attack.”

Krauthammer then brought up the chilling fact that “15 people in Libya who cooperated with us – are now dead. They’ve been held accountable.”

That bit of information comes courtesy of the House Intelligence Committee report of previously classified information by the House Armed Services Committee.

Via CNN:

According to the documents, senior military officials told the panel there were no discussions related to any specific threat in Libya despite general warnings about the possibility of terror attacks around the anniversary of 9/11. As a result, additional military assets were not deployed to the area.

On the investigation, the FBI was quoted in the report as saying the 15 deaths have severely hampered its probe.

“The FBI’s investigation into the individuals responsible for the Benghazi attacks has been hampered by inadequate cooperation and a lack of capacity by foreign governments to hold these perpetrators accountable, making the pursuit of justice for the attacks slow and insufficient,” the report said.

Krauthammer Explains the 20 New ObamaCare Taxes: ‘How Do You Think Sandra Fluke Gets Her Free Contraceptives?’ (Video)

Charles Krauthammer was on the O’Reilly Factor Thursday night to talk about all the new Obama taxes that are getting ready to drop, next year.

Juan Williams, filling in for Bill O’Reilly, began the segment by asking the question, “can Americans withstand the crushing new costs of ObamaCare in the new year?”

“In all, you’ve got  20 new taxes in ObamaCare- nine that are taking effect this year or next. What are all of these new hidden taxes and fees coming for? What are they going to do for anybody?” Williams asked.

Krauthammer quipped, “well how do you think Sandra Fluke gets her free contraceptives? Remember all the free stuff people are getting? The free mammograms, the free preventative care, the free everything? Nothing is free in this world. What ObamaCare managed to do very cleverly when it was selling itself, was to hide all these taxes. They’re a trillion dollars a year.”

Krauthammer said the “hidden tax” is the fact that millions of people have been dropped from their insurance in the individual market, and later, millions more off the employer market to force them to pay higher premiums for coverage they don’t need — in order to subsidize other people. “The costs people are paying out, is huge,” he said.

“The middle and upper middle class …are being asked to subsidize anybody up to 3 times over the poverty line, Krauthammer continued.. “This is a huge transfer of wealth that was always in the bill, it was never anything that couldn’t have been seen, but the media and most analysts and of course, Democrats were uninterested in looking at it at all.”

“This is a huge tax on the middle class, but Obama posed as a defender of the middle class against the very rich,” he noted.

Krauthammer has been warning for the past week, that Obama plans to bail out the insurance companies to prevent an ObamaCare “death spiral.”

“That’s why the administration is somewhat serene,” he explained. And that’s why Republicans have to get up right now and pass a bill that says, “no bailout” – at least in the House.”

Monday Catch-Up: Holder Taps Dishonest Radical to Oversee Federal Election Law



J. Christian Adams: Meet the Dishonest Radical Academic Eric Holder Tapped to Oversee Federal Election Law:

PJ Media readers already know Pam Karlan as the professor who published dishonest scholarship about the Bush Justice Department’s voting rights enforcement.  From PJ Media’s “The Dangerous Dishonesty of Possible Supreme Court Nominee Pam Karlan“:

Karlan’s dishonesty goes beyond womyn’s issues, and extends to the election system. She falsely attacked the Bush administration’s Justice Department for not protecting racial minorities. This is a favorite and well-worn tactic; it’s what old segregationists like Coley Blease and Woodrow Wilson used to do — stoke racial division by lying about opponents.  Unfortunately, Karlan’s lies were published with an air of respectability in the Duke Journal of Law and Public Policy (4 Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Pol’y 17, 2009). She writes:

“For five of the eight years of the Bush Administration, [they] brought no Voting Rights Act cases of its own except for one case protecting white voters.”

This is demonstrably false; any visit to the DOJ website demonstrates this. Karlan says the Voting Section brought no cases to protect minorities under the Voting Rights Act in five of eight years — let’slook at the record.

My article then traces out in detail the lies that Karlan published in a Duke Law scholarly publication.

I contacted the editors of the Duke Journal of Constitutional Law in September 2013 to see if Karlan ever submitted a correction for her false scholarship.  She hadn’t.

The Daily Caller: ‘Deliberate attempt to distort’: Krauthammer savages Obama over Iran sanctions politics [VIDEO]

Krauthammer appeared on Fox News’ “Special Report” Friday night, joining The Washington Post’s Chuck Lane and The Weekly Standard’s Steve Hayes to comment on Friday afternoon’s presidential press conference.

The panelists largely panned Obama’s performance, but reserved special ire for his dismissal of the many Senate Democrats — including power players Chuck Schumer and Robert Menendez — opposed to his deal with Iran over its nuclear program. “I’m not surprised that there’s been some talk from some members of Congress about new sanctions,” the president said. “I think the politics of trying to look tough on Iran are often good.”

Krauthammer was furious:

KRAUTHAMMER: That is a quintessential Obama statement. Notice how he completely discounts the substance of the arguments, of those who think he cut a really bad deal, and it needs to be backed up by sanctions that a Congress can pass. Instead he says, “I understand the motives of the other guys: Political. Re-election.” He acts in the national interest, anybody who opposes him is acting for a base motive. He does that all the time! And the reason it upsets me is I have seen him in private twice over these five years. He knows that there are strong arms on lobbyists, he is sophisticated thinker on politics. He understands the other side. And that is pure demagoguery. The worst part of it is it’s not ignorance. It’s a deliberate attempt to distort and devalue the other side.

Weasel Zippers: Pelosi: Obamacare “Going To Be A Glorious Thing”…


Some Democrats, particularly in the Senate, are worried about facing voters having backed the health law, which has seen a rocky rollout and is costing millions of Americans their health plans — even as it is aided millions of others to sign up or get on their parents’ plans.

“It’s worth the trouble, it’s going to be a glorious thing,” Mrs. Pelosi said.


Twitchy: Lou Dobbs: A&E’s ‘Duck Dynasty’ marathon will teach Christians a lesson:

A&E might have suspended Phil Robertson from “Duck Dynasty” for his comments to GQ, but viewers next week will have nearly 36 hours to watch Phil and his family do their thing as the network goes ahead with a “Duck Dynasty” marathon.How about that?

Washington Free Beacon: A Year of Inspiring Democratic Quotes:

As in any other year, 2013 provided countless Democratic pearls of inanity and incoherence as President Obama’s administration and colleagues found themselves engulfed by multiple scandals, the horrific rollout of Obamacare and a near-disaster abroad with the Syrian crisis.

It was a 2013 that saw one top White House adviser call the law “irrelevant” in the wake of the IRS targeting fiasco, many Democrats and the president himself spin the “Lie of the Year” about Obamacare as being totally true, and one congresswomanseek to give unemployment insurance to “working men and women.”

Wayne Allyn Root: Is President Obama ‘too big to jail?’:


This president has no shame. How many Americans know that a cancer patient merely discussing the disastrous ramifications of ObamaCare in public (thereby embarrassing Obama), is now being persecuted by the IRS?

Yes, it’s true. Bill Elliott is that terminally-ill cancer patient. He wasaudited by the IRS within days of an appearance on Fox News.

The IRS scandal is far more widespread than the American public knows. It is not just about Tea Party groups.

The IRS was used by Obama to go after any citizen daring to criticize him in the national media.

I’m one of those victims. These actions by a president are absolutely criminal. Richard Nixon’s articles of impeachment included the exact same charge of using the IRS to punish critics and silence free speech. But terminally ill cancer patients?

Obama has sunk to new lows. I’m a big boy. What he did to critics like me is disgusting and un-American. But what he did to a terminally ill cancer patient is disgraceful and unimaginable. This president is an out-of-control bully, pure and simple.

Will anyone show the courage to investigate and prosecute Obama?

The Other McCain: So, Justine Finally Landed …

The unfortunate Justine Sacco, whose Friday tweet inspired the hashtag#HasJustineLandedYet, went into full grovel mode:

Today Sacco spoke to ABC News, saying, “My greatest concern was this statement reach South Africa first.” After sending her statement to South African newspaper The Star, Sacco shared the following apology:
“Words cannot express how sorry I am, and how necessary it is for me to apologize to the people of South Africa, who I have offended due to a needless and careless tweet,” Sacco said. “There is an AIDS crisis taking place in this country, that we read about in America, but do not live with or face on a continuous basis. Unfortunately, it is terribly easy to be cavalier about an epidemic that one has never witnessed firsthand.
“For being insensitive to this crisis — which does not discriminate by race, gender or sexual orientation, but which terrifies us all uniformly — and to the millions of people living with the virus, I am ashamed.
“This is my father’s country, and I was born here. I cherish my ties to South Africa and my frequent visits, but I am in anguish knowing that my remarks have caused pain to so many people here; my family, friends and fellow South Africans. I am very sorry for the pain I caused.”

As Ace accurately observed Friday, Sacco is a liberal, and her joke was actually a self-deprecating reference to white privilege. No one can deny that it was tasteless and, as she says, “insensitive,” but it scarcely justified her public crucifixion. Her apology, while no doubt sincere, is also a signifier: “I get it! I’m a liberal, too!

My latest at the Conversation: 

Justice For Tuffy

Tuffy the Clown made national news back in August, after a liberal recorded his clownish antics at the Missouri State Fair Rodeo, and put the video up on youtube for the world to see. Dec 17, 2013 9:10 AM PT

Krauthammer: Mary Landrieu Will Be Too Busy Reorganizing Her Closet To Attend Obama Event In New Orleans, Friday (Video)

Via, when Obama  appears at the Port of New Orleans tomorrow for a speech about boosting exports, he won’t be joined by Louisiana’s only statewide elected Democrat, U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu.

The U.S. Senator has a long-standing engagement in Lake Charles that takes place at the same time and she can’t be in both places at once, staff said.

On tonight’s Special Report, Charles Krauthammer quipped that she was going to be too busy “reorganizing her closet” to make it to the event. “Look, the president now is toxic”, Krauthammer continued. “The thing is called ObamaCare. There’s no running away from it.”

He thinks the  likelihood of the website being fixed and running smoothly by Dec. 1 is slim, which means that the Regime will be under pressure to postpone things – at which point, the whole thing starts to unravel.

On the eve of the president’s visit, Louisiana Gov Bobby Jindal attacked him on his stances on education, health care, energy and economic growth, which he says are hurting the American people.

Jindal reiterated he “welcomes” the president’s visit Friday (Nov. 8) to the Port of New Orleans, and confirmed he will tour the port along with Obama. The president is later slated to give a speech about the need to boost U.S. exports.

While the governor agreed Obama’s target of doubling exports by 2015 is a worthy objective — and one Louisiana is helping the president fulfill – he said the administration’s energy policies “are actually getting in the way” of this goal.

He called for the president to approve the controversial Keystone XL pipeline and also blasted the EPA’s plans to block construction of new coal-fired power plants across the country.

On health care, Jindal again stood by his decision not to accept the option to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. While it would have extended health care coverage to up to 400,0000 uninsured Louisianians, Jindal said the decision was right for Louisiana’s taxpayers.

“The reality is here in Louisiana we’ve cut taxes. We’ve done things like invest in workforce training. We’ve cut people’s regulations. We’ve made this a business-friendly state. I think there’s a lesson there for the president,” Jindal said.

While the focus of Obama’s visit will be the economy, Jindal said he hopes the president will also have time to discuss an ongoing legal battle between the U.S. Department of Justice and his administration over Louisiana’s expanded school vouchers program.

The federal government filed suit in August, saying 2012-13 voucher assignments violated civil rights by worsening racial imbalances in 13 Louisiana school systems.

After the press conference Thursday, Jindal spokesman Kyle Plotkin said the White House has not responded to requests from the governor to visit one of the city’s many vouchers schools.

Charles Krauthammer: Narcissistic President Trying To Shift Responsibility On Syria To Congress But Everyone Knows It’s About Him

On Fox News’ Special Report, tonight, Dr. K psychoanalyzed our narcissistic Commander in Chump who likes to claim ownership for everything he thinks will benefit him and is quick to shift the blame/responsibility onto others when it doesn’t.

“Now he wants to imply that it isn’t him who’s made this ultimatum essentially, it’s the Congress and they need to live up to its obligations, Krauthammer noted.  This is the way the president who narcissistically  always speaks about “me” and “my” –in fact a week ago he spoke about “my military” (an astonishing formulation) – who when it suits him, decides it’s not “me” or “my” but this is a responsibility that belongs to Congress… I don’t think it’s going to work – everybody understands it’s about him- he’ll be the one who’s damaged if it doesn’t pass in Congress.

(Oh, I wouldn’t underestimate the power of the MFM in protecting their SCOAMF.)



Oh, how I long for the days when liberals wailed that “the rest of the world” hated America, rather than now, when the rest of the world laughs at us.

With the vast majority of Americans opposing a strike against Syria, President Obama has requested that Congress vote on his powers as commander in chief under the Constitution. The president doesn’t need congressional approval to shoot a few missiles into Syria, nor — amazingly — has he said he’ll abide by such a vote, anyway.Why is Congress even having a vote? This is nothing but a fig leaf to cover Obama’s own idiotic “red line” ultimatum to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria on chemical weapons. The Nobel Peace Prize winner needs to get Congress on the record so that whatever happens, the media can blame Republicans.No Republican who thinks seriously about America’s national security interests — by which I mean to exclude John McCain and Lindsey Graham — can support Obama’s “plan” to shoot blindly into this hornet’s nest.It would be completely different if we knew with absolute certainty that Assad was responsible for chemical attacks on his own people. (I’m still waiting to see if it was a Syrian upset about a YouTube video.)
The Conversation: Andrew McCarthy Weighs In On Syria’s Chemical Weapons:

In response to Re: False Flags:

Another skeptic of the Obama administration’s “slam dunk” case on Syria has emerged.

Writing at PJ Media, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy details Al-Qaeda’s ceaseless endeavors over the years to acquire, manufacture, and eventually use chemical weapons, and links to a report in the Long War Journal about an al Qaeda chemical weapons cell recently broken up in Iraq.

He concludes:

I believe the concentration on chemical weapons, including President Obama’s credibility-crippling recklessness in labeling their use a “red line,” misses the point — at best. It diverts attention from the issue the interventionists do not want to discuss: the fact that al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood would be the chief beneficiaries of U.S. attacks against Assad’s regime, the fact that the toppling of Assad could very well be even worse for American national security than Assad himself has been.

But if we are going to make this a debate about chemical weapons, is it not worth factoring in that Assad’s opposition includes elements that have been seeking to use chemical weapons against the United States for more than two decades? That al-Qaeda recently and repeatedly used chemical weapons in Iraq? And that — as Bill Roggio notes — al Nusrah, an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria, is suspected of using chemical weapons in Syria just six months ago?

And he links to Bryan Preston’s piece, also penned at PJ Media yesterday: Yossef Bodansky: ‘Did the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack?’

Russian President Vladimir Putin didn’t mince words today at a meeting of his human rights council in the Kremlin regarding the use of US force against the Syrian regime.

Reuters reports that he declared “anything that is outside the U.N. Security Council is aggression, except self-defense. Now what Congress and the U.S. Senate are doing in essence is legitimizing aggression. This is inadmissible in principle.”

And he also accused US Secretary of State John Kerry of outright lying to Congress about al Qaeda’s role fighting on the rebel side of the Syrian civil war.

He said, “they lie beautifully, of course. I saw debates in Congress. A congressman asks Mr Kerry: ‘Is al Qaeda there?’ He says: ‘No, I am telling you responsibly that it is not,’”
“Al Qaeda units are the main military echelon, and they know this,” he said, referring to the United States. “It was unpleasant and surprising for me – we talk to them, we proceed from the assumption that they are decent people. But he is lying and knows he is lying. It’s sad.”
Video at link.

The Washington Post called Senator Ron Johnson’s question about the Syrian rebels, and Kerry’s answer (which Vladimir Putin called a huge lie)  one of the 10 most interesting moments in Tuesday’s Senate hearing on Syria.

SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-Wis.): What — what do we know about the opposition? … It seems like, initially, the opposition was maybe more Western-leaning, more moderate, more democratic. You know, as time has gone by, it’s degraded, become more infiltrated by Al Qaida. …

KERRY: No, that is actually basically not true. It is basically incorrect. The opposition has increasingly become more defined by its moderation, more defined by the breadth of its membership and more defined by its adherence to some, you know, democratic process and to an all-inclusive, minority-protecting constitution, which will be broad-based and secular with respect to the future of Syria.

From what I’ve been hearing – contra what Kerry said – the Syrian opposition hasbecome increasingly defined by its extremism, which is why many conservatives have been lamenting that we didn’t help the rebels  years ago – before the foreign jihadis flowed in. What I hear is that they have infested most of the rebel groups – (7 out of the 9 largest according to Ted Cruz.)

Maybe the numbers seem distorted because stories about the moderate rebels just aren’t as sensational as ones about al Qaeda affiliated rebels (who do things like raid Christian villagesbehead all the passengers on a train including a mother and her baby, and cut out and eat the hearts out of Regime soldiers.)

So I’ve been doing a little research of my own to see if the reports of al Qaeda’s involvement in Syria have been overblown. From what I can see – they have not.

On Tuesday, The Guardian’s Middle East editor Ian Black answered readers’ questions about Syria.  Here is his answer (in part) to the following questions;  “how many different opposition parties exist in Syria? Which party is representing which interests, what goals do they have, and who are the supporting parties? To what extent are they infiltrated by al-Qaida or not?”

Nowadays the main political grouping is the Syrian National Coalition, set up in Qatar in 2012, again with Gulf backing. The main legal internal opposition is the Damascus-based National Co-ordination Body, which calls for a negotiated settlement with the Assad regime.

 There are now hundreds and perhaps thousands of armed rebel groups. More moderate outfits such as Liwa al-Tawhid answer to the Supreme Military Command, headed by Selim Idriss, a senior army defector. The SMC is used to channel Gulf, especially Saudi, funds and is thought to have received US and British training in Jordan.

Islamist groups have become stronger and tend to be better armed and financed than others. Two of the strongest are Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State in Iraq, both of them linked to al-Qaida. JAN insists on a future Syria becoming an Islamic state under sharia law, and has openly pledged its allegiance to the al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Another important group is Ahrar al-Sham. Sectarianism is also becoming more pronounced, with foreign Arab Shia fighters (including Lebanon’s powerful Hezbollah) arriving to fight Sunni extremists. Large numbers of liberal and secular opposition figures have left the country. Important work is still done on the ground by the Local Co-ordination Committees.

More at link…

Last year the AP reported the Syrian regime had threatened to use their chemical weapons if attacked by a foreign power:

The Syrian regime threatened Monday to use its chemical and biological weapons in case of a foreign attack, in its first ever acknowledgement that it possesses weapons of mass destruction.


“No chemical or biological weapons will ever be used, and I repeat, will never be used, during the crisis in Syria no matter what the developments inside Syria,” Makdissi said in news conference broadcast on Syrian state TV. “All of these types of weapons are in storage and under security and the direct supervision of the Syrian armed forces and will never be used unless Syria is exposed to external aggression.”

Peter Wehner, Commentary: In Stockholm, Obama Loses Touch with Reality:

…literally everyone else in the world is to blame except the president.

Mr. Obama appears to be suffering from a variation of what psychiatrists refer to as dissociation, which is characterized by everything from mild to severe detachment from reality and one’s immediate surroundings.

In this particular case, the president seems to have dissociative amnesia, apparently having forgotten that a year ago last month he did, in fact, draw a red line. (Note the use of the first-person pronouns by the president — “That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”) The president may have forgotten, too, that he promised that crossing this red line would be a “game changer” (it was not). That Assad had to go (Assad is still in power, stronger than before). That he promised to arm Syrian rebels (he hasn’t). That his “coalition of the willing” may include, if we’re lucky, one other country besides America. And that on the matter of the Use of Force Resolution he was against going to Congress before he was for going to Congress.

The cause of Mr. Obama’s dissociation appears to be the psychological trauma induced by his multi-year fiasco in Syria. And in order to cope, we are seeing signs of anger, petulance, and hero syndrome and, as is always the case with this president, blame shifting.

On a slightly more serious note, Mr. Obama’s presidency is being wrecked by reality. He’s being exposed at every turn, and in every crisis, as inept. He can’t handle that truth so he’s trying to distort it.

There’s something poignant and painful in watching Obama’s presidency collapse and seeing what it’s doing to the man who promised to repair the world and slow the rise of the oceans.

Hot Air: House whip count: 46 votes in favor of Syria attack right now — and 169 against:

The big caveat: Many of the yays and nays aren’t firm. TP’s trying to divine intent from casual statements made by House members about how they’re likely to vote, which is especially dicey in the case of Democrats who might be whipped by the White House and Pelosi later to come through for O in a pinch. If the tally’s right, though, then opponents of intervention are already within 50 votes of winning with more than 200 representatives (and nearly 100 Republicans) still undecided.

Time to panic in the West Wing?

As members of Congress consider President Obama’s request to authorize military force in Syria, following evidence that President Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons killed over 1,400 people, a ThinkProgress analysis of the public statements of 289 Representatives found that 169 lawmakers have either decisively ruled out supporting the measure or say they are unlikely to back it.

Just 46 of the 289 members of the House of Representatives said they will definitely or likely vote in favor or the resolution. Seventy-four are undecided.

Of the 169 nays, 124 come from the GOP and 45 come from liberal Democrats.


Bryan Preston, PJ Media: Obama’s Syria Hail Mary: Another Speech. By Bill Clinton.

Former (?) President Bill Clinton is set to deliver a speech in Little Rock, AR today. The topic was supposed to be another Obamacare sales pitch, but Syria erupted, so now former (?) President Clinton will pitch Barack Obama’s limited, mostly pointless military strike on Syria.

Bill “I loathe the military” Clinton will join John “Winter Soldier” Kerry in selling a war –sorry, kinetic activity — that Barack “I didn’t set no stinkin’ red line” Obama cannot sell himself. Bill “let’s launch missiles at tents and pharma factories” Clinton is Barack “really, it won’t be a war, I swear!” Obama’s go-to guy, his elder statesman, his fail safe. Bill “that woman” Clinton must now save Barack “it was a movie!” Obama.

Remember how W diminished our standing in the world, and everyone hated us? No, I don’t either. The left made all that up. All of the world’s bad actors hated (and feared) us, (that’s what we want) and sometimes effete Euroweenies groused about our “cowboy president”, but they didn’t abandon him in a pinch like they are President Pinprick. President Bush was sometimes resented, but always respected. Unlike the current teleprompter dependent chump. They’ve got his number. Most of them have figured out that Obama’s a weasel and chump.

Weasel Zippers: Al-Qaeda Promises To Slaughter Christians After Obama Helps Topple Assad…

Arabic news agency Al Hadath gives more information concerning this latest terror attack on Syria’s Christians, specifically how the al-Qaeda linked rebels “terrorized the Christians, threatening to avenge themselves on them after the triumph of the revolution.”

Keep reading…



Krauthammer: Bumbling Obama’s War Plan “incoherent” – Can He Be Trusted To Respond Adequately If Syria Retaliates?

Charles Krauthammer analyzed Obama’s Syrian war plan, which he said is being resisted because it has no clear objective.

Given the bumbling, the hesitation, the zig-zags of Obama’s policy up until now which is entirely incoherent, do you trust him to be the one to respond adequately, wisely if and when a response happens? Because once you sign on to this, no matter what’s in the resolution, you sign on to Obama conducting the operation and the follow-up, which could happen. The assumption is we do it – we go home – nothing happens… Could be true – but is unlikely to be true.

On the O’Reilly Factor he debated a delusional Bill O’Reilly who has apparently been asleep for the past five years. He has no idea why some conservatives would oppose Obama on Syria except for partisan reasons. Krauthammer sets him straight.

Ann Coulter on Fox and Friends Tuesday morning, said “you can’t trust Democrats to be Commander in Chief’:

And expanded on what that on Hannity, Tuesday night:

After first noting how much more Saddam Hussein had gassed the Kurds, Coulter showed a healthy degree of skepticism, asking, “what is our proof by the way?” She quipped that “we need to check with Hillary here to make sure the chemical gas was not released by a Syrian upset by a YouTube video – um – you cannot trust these people on national security, they are Democrats…”

See Also: 

Gateway Pundit: U.N. Secretary Says U.S. Can’t Act Against Syria Without Security Council Permission: 

When he was a candidate in 2008, Barack Obama made it clear that, as he told the German people, he was a “citizen of the world.” During his first four years in the White House, as the Obama team boasted, this meant his management style consisted of “leading from behind.” A significant part of “leading from behind,” of course, was making American foreign policy subordinate to the United Nations.

Now, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon wants to hold Obama to that promise. He issued a general warning that any strikes against Syria to punish it for chemical weapons would be illegal without UN Security Council approval:

As I have repeatedly said, the Security Council has primary responsibility for international peace and security,” Ban said at a news conference. “The use of force is lawful only when in exercise of self-defense in accordance with article 51 of the United Nations Charter and or when the Security Council approves such action.

He also warned that a military strike against Syria could unleash more turmoil and bloodshed in a crisis that has already killed more than 100,000 people.

Twitchy: ‘So ronery’! Obama’s terrible relationship with Congress sparks snark:

Weasel Zippers: Senate Crafts Resolution Authorizing Military Force In Syria, Gives Obama 90-Days To Take Action…

An outright ban on ground troops sought by Republicans was left out of the resolution.

Via Politico:

A new use-of-force resolution for Syria sets a 60-day deadline, with one 30-day extension possible, for President Barack Obama to launch military strikes against the regime of Syria President Bashar Assad — and it will also bar the involvement of U.S. ground forces in Syria.

The revised resolution was crafted by Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman and ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, following several days of negotiations. The panel could vote on the proposal by Wednesday.

Aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) were also involved in the discussions over the revised resolution.


During a Tuesday Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Syria, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had a tense exchange with Secretary of State John Kerry over the finer points of the Constitution.

“Make me proud today, Secretary Kerry,” the Kentucky senator began after voicing his concerns over reports President Barack Obama may act on Syria even if Congress disapproves. “Stand up for us and say you’re going to obey the Constitution and if we vote you down — which is unlikely, by the way — you would go with what the people say through their Congress and you wouldn’t go forward with a war that your Congress votes against.”

Sen. Paul then asked Secretary Kerry to be more specific on what the White House plans to do if Congress votes against intervening in Syria.

“I don’t know what the decision is,” Kerry answered, “but I’ll tell you this … [President Obama] still has the Constitutional authority and he would be in keeping with the Constitution.”

Paul disagreed, saying he doesn’t believe the president has the authority to order military action in a foreign country — especially after Congress votes against it:

Rand Paul: Filibuster a possibility on Syria vote

Washington Post:  Rand Paul: Filibuster a possibility on Syria vote:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the most outspoken opponents of military action in Syria, wouldn’t rule out the possibility Tuesday of launching a standing filibuster over the issue in the Senate.

“I can’t imagine that we won’t require 60 votes on this,” Paul told reporters on an afternoon conference call. “Whether there’s an actual standing filibuster — I’ve got to check my shoes and check my ability to hold my water. And we will see. I haven’t made a decision on that.”


Krauthammer: Obama Looks Like He’s Chickening Out – US Credibility On The Line (Video)

Appearing on Fox News  after Barack Obama’s Syria speech, Saturday, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer accused the president of leaving the region hanging, and making it look like he was “chickening out.”

“This is amateur hour,” Krauthammer said, and if you were sitting in Syria, Iraq, or Moscow watching this speech, then it looked like Obama was looking for a way out of striking Syria after he had boxed himself in.

After listing the arguments in favor of going war, he noted, “the only thing that matters at this point, is the word of the United States. That overrides everything.”

“Even though I think a limited attack is not the right thing to do, at this point he has to do something, or we will have reached the lowest ebb of American influence in the region since 1970,” he said.

As for Obama’s murky timetable for action, Krauthammer said:

“They hear a president who has no idea what he is doing and speaks about this in a leisurely way. What he ought to do, (and I can’t believe he actually decided otherwise!) is bring back Congress tomorrow. We’ve got Reagan Airport, we’ve got National Airport, we’ve got Dulles….you bring in the members of congress, you have a debate for two days, and you have a resolution. You can’t leave the region hanging…It looks absolutely as if the president has chickened out. And that;s the work of the president because of the way he did this.

John Bolton found Obama’s Rose Garden speech to be “absolutely stunning.” He continued, “I’ve been trying to fill in the blank in the following sentence, ‘Barack Obama is the weakest president since….uh – and I have to say, the best I can come up with is James Buchanan who watched the country dissolve into the Civil War. “


White House Dossier: Obama’s Serial Syria Mistakes:

Let’s count the ways in which President Obama has screwed up his Syria policy.

1. He failed to take a stand in a conflict that clearly involves our interests. Bashar Assad is an ally of our enemy, Iran, and a supporter of Iran’s interests and of terrorism throughout the Middle East. He arms people who want to destroy Israel, and Israel is our friend, whose continued existence we safeguard militarily. The chance to eliminate Assad should have been seized early with a robust program of assistance to rebels before Islamists and al Qaeda had fully infiltrated their ranks.

2. Obama drew a red line without thinking. He committed to United States to action without thoroughly understanding the consequences. America must be considered true to its word or it will not be taken seriously, and national security will be severely damaged. This type of irresponsibility is what happens when you elect someone with no relevant experience for the job to be president.

Keep reading at link…

Twitchy: Golf, war: After putting on Syria, President Obama hits the links:

RS McCain: President Punchline: Are Obama’s Top Advisors Late-Night TV Joke Writers?

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,463,639 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 461 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: