Saturday Movie Matinee: “Operation Martha’s Vineyard”

Last night, Shannon Bream, filling in for Megyn Kelly, had Ed Henry, retired Lt. Gen Tom McInerney, Charles Krauthammer on to discuss US actions in Iraq.

McInerney said that the fact that the operation doesn’t yet have a name, was “very significant.”

“I think the White House had better get their hands on this, or people are going to call it Operation Martha’s Vineyard. The president doesn’t want that,” McInerney pointed out. “We in the military operate under different operations – ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’, ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ – all those types of terms have to do with our campaign and our history.” He added, “it shows the significance of the operation when you put a name on it, and unfortunately, he’s making it sound like it isn’t significant.”

As for the air strikes that have been conducted, so far, McInerney said,  “the mission ought to be simply, to protect the Kurds and Kurdistan and stop genocide.”  He continued, ” I would have expected 100-200 targets hit today. I think he hit probably less than 10 maybe less than 5. I don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow, but they had better get up with a very aggressive campaign or this is going to fail.”

He went on to express his alarm at how quickly the Islamic Caliphate was spreading like  a cancer throughout the Middle East, and reiterated his warning that we needed to get more aggressive and right now.

Krauthammer gave Obama credit for putting pressure on the Iraqi government to get rid of Maliki, but the political situation there, he said is completely different from what is happening in the North.  He slammed the WH for saying “we’re not going to do anything major – it all has to be done by Baghdad –  all we’re here is to help them repel ISIS.”

“That’s ridiculous. There is nothing coming out of Baghdad. That army fell apart entirely at Mosul.” He went on to urge the administration to arm the Kurds, fierce fighters who want to fight ISIS.

“These ridiculous legalisms that this administration puts in the way of supplying them are simply incomprehensible. If the president were to give the order tonight, we’d have the weapons the Kurds need- antitank weapons and all sorts of low caliber stuff that they need — RPGs. If the president were to give the order, they could arrive from Germany where we have supplies in one day.”

Fox News: Second Airdrop After Airstrikes Against ISIS Militants In Iraq:

SEE ALSO:

DrewM at AoSHQ: An Important Announcement From The Ministry Of Truth: Obama Always Wanted To Leave Troops In Iraq:

Q Mr. President, do you have any second thoughts about pulling all ground troops out of Iraq? And does it give you pause as the U.S. — is it doing the same thing in Afghanistan?

THE PRESIDENT: What I just find interesting is the degree to which this issue keeps on coming up, as if this was my decision. Under the previous administration, we had turned over the country to a sovereign, democratically elected Iraqi government. In order for us to maintain troops in Iraq, we needed the invitation of the Iraqi government and we needed assurances that our personnel would be immune from prosecution if, for example, they were protecting themselves and ended up getting in a firefight with Iraqis, that they wouldn’t be hauled before an Iraqi judicial system.

“As if it were my decision”. See Obama apparently wanted to leave troops behind but those mean Iraqis wouldn’t let him. That’s the new and approved version of events.

Old History is a little bit different.

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. As a candidate for President, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end — for the sake of our national security and to strengthen American leadership around the world. After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011. As Commander-in-Chief, ensuring the success of this strategy has been one of my highest national security priorities. Last year, I announced the end to our combat mission in Iraq. And to date, we’ve removed more than 100,000 troops. Iraqis have taken full responsibility for their country’s security.A few hours ago I spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki. I reaffirmed that the United States keeps its commitments. He spoke of the determination of the Iraqi people to forge their own future. We are in full agreement about how to move forward.

So today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America’s war in Iraq will be over.

The media now have their marching orders. That’s the new “truth” that needs to be disseminated throughout the land. Obama didn’t want to “end the war” and bring the boys home. He was forced into it against his will.

Allen West: ISIS is beheading children, and Obama drops two bombs

Everyone is talking about an F/A-18 aircraft striking an ISIS artillery piece — hardly a strategic objective. This does back up what Obama so narrowly defined last night as his intent – address the threat to Americans in Irbil and Baghdad. I am pleased that we took the action to provide humanitarian relief.

The president was very careful in his words, and they were mostly political – not practical. But Obama was more adamant in declaring what he is not going to do — meaning the enemy has been provided a gap to exploit.

However, why was Barack Hussein Obama in such a rush to provide U.S. military resources in Libya supporting Islamist forces? We were told it was a humanitarian crisis, but it seems now hardly so. And please, don’t tell me it was just NATO — America is NATO. And now Americans know Libya as the place where an ambassador and three other Americans were killed in a terrorist attack, our embassy has been evacuated, and as we reported here, the same Islamists we supported have established a caliphate in eastern Libya.

Last night, President Obama had the chance to define a clear and present evil in our time. ISIS represents the Nazis of this century. There is no clearer portrayal of 7th century barbarism than this movement which we have allowed to gain strength, momentum and victory. Its blitz across Syria and Iraq can easily be compared to that of the 20th century blitzkrieg of Hitler. And the savagery being inflicted is beyond belief — consider the marking of Christian homes — history does repeat itself.

Steyn Online: You Want Nazis?

There have been Christians in Mosul for just shy of two millennia, since the first century. There are none today.

The Yazidi are practitioners of Kurdistan’s oldest religion, fire-worshippers whose presence in the region predates Islam. They’re either being executed or starved to death on a mountain:

We are being slaughtered. Our entire religion is being wiped off the face of the earth.

ISIS are fast-track Nazis. No messing about with a few property restrictions and intermarriage laws as a little light warm-up: They’re only in the business of “final solutions”, and they start on Day One and don’t quit until the last Christian and Yazidi is dead or fled. As I’ve often remarked about today’s exhaustively cleansed Maghreb, Levant and Araby, Islam is king on a field of corpses. But pikers like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Baathists, the House of Saud take their time. ISIS are shooting for the Guinness Book of Records.

Jon Gabriel, Ricochet: Obama’s War:

The Obama Doctrine is to ignore problems until they metastasize into vast international crises, then react with an ineffective spasm of concern. In this, the President has been consistent, be it Libya, Egypt, Boko Haram or Ukraine. The truly serious situations get a Twitter hashtag.

The Daily Mail: Lined up and executed, their severed heads put on display as a warning to others: Horrific new photographs of ISIS atrocities

  • WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT
  • Sunni tribesmen marched into desert, made to kneel and shot in the head
  • Tribe made deal with ISIS to be left alone but agreement collapsed
  • Shocking close-up photos of splattered brains and severed heads released
  • ‘Punishment for those who fight Allah and his Messenger is to crucify or cut off hands and feet’

The Daily Mail: Dramatic first strike on Islamic State by American forces revealed as aid airdrops finally reach besieged Yazidis on mountainside

  • Videos show three separate military strikes by the U.S. – the first since it withdrew troops from Iraq in 2011
  • Troops dropped 500lb bombs on Islamic State vehicles to stop ‘campaign of terror’ with ‘hallmarks of genocide’ 
  • Obama says more strikes are likely around the Sinjar Mountains where thousands of refugees are besieged 
  • 28,000 meals parachuted to members of religious minority today cornered by militants for Islamic State  
  • Britain joins campaign as government pledges another £8m in aid and two supply planes leave RAF Brize Norton 
  • Military action by U.S. prompted violent response by militants amid fears UK could be drawn into another conflict
  • Cobra emergency committee met at 3pm today convened by the Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond
  • British Special Forces are in the region, some of whom speak Arabic – but MOD insists operation is humanitarian

MARK LEVIN: There’s Genocide Going On And Obama Vacations At The ‘Whitest Place On Earth':

Bill Whittle: Radical Islam vs Radical Christianity:

PJTV: What would it take to get a Senate ‘guilty’ vote on Obama Impeachment?

PJTV Trifecta: Outrageous! Democrats Using Fake Impeachment for Fundraising:

Via the DCCC: SIGN YOUR NAME: DEMAND JOHN BOEHNER CLOSE THE DOOR ON IMPEACHMENT:

unnamed

PJTV Trifecta: Those Who Can’t Teach…Are White:

Flashing Children Prank!

Linked by AoSHQ, thanks!

Krauthammer: “The President Is The Problem – He’s Strategically Clueless” (Video)

Charles Krauthammer told Hugh Hewitt in an interview, today, that “we have a president who is strategically clueless,” and who has “deliberately or by accident, or by incompetence, weakened the United States” bringing the country to a very weak position in the world.

Earlier in the day, CNN’s Jake Tapper had asked Obama’s deputy national security adviser Tony Blinken why the White House waited so long to do anything about ISIS.  Blinken’s answer was an insult to anyone who can remember as far back as eight months ago.

Transcript via Twitchy: 

Tapper: Tony, a lot of people have been warning about ISIS for months and months with no action — no serious action — by the White House. Was the intelligence not there? Why is it only now that you’re acting?

Blinken: Actually, we’ve been warning about this for a long time, ourselves, well beyond that. When, initially, in 2012, we said to the Iraqis, AQI — which is ISIS’ predecessor — may be on its heels, but the only way to keep them there is to go after them constantly, and we propose to engage with them to help them do that. The politics in Iraq wouldn’t allow that. But it took a while, and finally in 2013 — a year ago — we began to increase the capacity of the Iraqis to deal with AQI and then what became ISIS. And of course, the Syrian conflict added fuel to the fire. So we’ve been focused on this for well over a year, and unfortunately, the ISIS threat overtook the efforts that the Iraqis were making to deal with it. Now, unfortunately, everyone is seized with this, but what we’re seeing increasingly is coordination among the Iraqis and the Kurds, which is unique. We haven’t seen that in a long time. And countries in the region who’ve responded to this threat, which, it’s a threat to them as well, all getting together and looking to take action.

“We said initially AQI was on their heels,” but-but-but- we had to “go after them constantly” which makes Obama’s decision to pull out entirely instead of  working out that Status of Forces agreement all the more irresponsible and inappropriate – to use a couple of the Regime’s favorite terms. But Obama was running on ending the war so –

Tapper, to his credit – didn’t buy the weak spin.

Tapper: Tony, you say you’ve been warning about it, but in January, President Obama told The New Yorker magazine’s David Remnick that ISIS — which was then still considered a part of al-Qaeda fighting in Syria — was like a JV basketball team. He said, quote, “The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.” Just how badly did President Obama underestimate the threat of ISIS?

Blinken: No, there are two different things going on here, Jake. One is the question of the threat that ISIS poses to us here in the homeland, and unlike core al-Qaeda, right now, their focus is not on attacking the U.S. homeland or attacking our interests here in the United States or abroad. It’s focused intently on trying to create a Caliphate in Iraq and a base from which, over time, to operate. And that’s what we’re focused on. We’re focused on making sure that we can help empower the Iraqis and others to prevent them from doing just that. The president was exactly right: They did not pose a threat like al-Qaeda central to us in the homeland. We want to make sure that they don’t get to the point where they can pose that threat.

You know the Regime’s really in trouble when they pull the “core al Qaeda” malarkey.

Here’s what ISIS/ISIL/JV – whatever you want to call it – has managed to accomplish in a fairly short time via NRO’s , Jonah Goldberg

Now that same junior-varsity team controls more territory than any terrorist organization in history, has some 5,000 battle-hardened jihadists with Western passports, hundreds of millions of dollars at its disposal, and is earning millions more every day by selling oil on the black market. It is slaughtering Shiites, Christians and other “infidels” with a medieval abandon that makes the alleged A-team of al-Qaeda blanch with horror. At this moment, it has cornered tens of thousands of Yazidi villagers on a mountaintop. ISIS presents them with a choice: Convert to Islam at gunpoint or die of thirst.

They have also taken control  of Iraq’s largest dam which could be used as a weapon of mass destruction against a half million Iraqis.

We are asked to believe – for no other reason than to spare Obama some embarrassment –  that this  newly empowered Islamic caliphate that is promising to plant their black flag at the White House – is no threat at all to the homeland.

 Hugh Hewitt’s  interview of Charles Krauthammer: 

HH: Now let me ask you about boots on the ground, Charles Krauthammer, because the Kurds have an enormous facility structure that we built for them. I have an associate producer who served in Kurdistan with the Marines not too long ago. We could put boots on the ground there that would effectively deter ISIS if we put even a few Marines in. But the Kurds are not, they are like, in many respects, the Israelis. They are not part of this al Qaeda world. They’ll get slaughtered if ISIS moves on them. Are we obliged morally to come to their aid if this advance on the 650 mile front continues?

CK: I don’t think it’s come to that. I don’t think it has to come to that. I don’t think it should have come to that. I mean, let me count the ways. Forget about the withdrawal in 2011, which I mean, all of us knew was going to eventuate in something like this kind of collapse. I wrote a column, it’s in my book, that’s called Who Lost Iraq. It was written December, 2011. It was clear what was going to happen. But let’s not even talk about it. Let’s just talk about the last month. What in God’s name have we been doing refusing, refusing to send in the weaponry – bullets…

HH: Yup.

CK: …to the Peshmerga, the Kurdish military, who are strong and brave and battle-hardened and loyal. They don’t throw off their uniforms and run away. But they were outmanned, outgunned by ISIS with, of course, U.S. equipment that they took from Mosul. And they’re running out of bullets. They literally, this what I read in, I think the word was used by the Times, they begged Washington to send them ammunition, and Obama refused on the grounds that it would undermine Iraqi sovereignty. I mean, what in God’s name is he thinking about?

Hewitt played the audio from Tapper’s interview with  Tony Blinken.

HH: Charles Krauthammer, the President was exactly right, unlike core al Qaeda, the focus not on attacking the U.S? Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi said I’ll see you in New York. I don’t know how he can escape the consequences of being this badly off of his assessment of ISIS?

CK: I think today or yesterday, that same barbarian said that we will raise the flag of Islam over the White House. First of all, they don’t have to organize planes and pilots. They are now headquarters, world headquarters, training headquarters, for hundreds of Westerners who will flow in and out, go back to their countries, including the United States, and they’re going to blow themselves up in some terrible place and kill a lot of people. So the idea that for terrorism you have to plan a full aircraft attack is, you know, as usual with this White House, not even near to a correct analysis. So A) they can seed us with terrorists anytime they want in vast numbers, or they are developing that as we speak. This is the worst training area, in other words, the most threatening, a lot worse than Afghanistan. It’s right in the heart of the Middle East, and it’s got tons of Westerners. So that’s number one. It is a current threat, even as it is right now as a training area. And second, this idea that somehow all they’re doing is taking over the bloody Middle East, and that’s not a real threat to us, is insane. It’s got the world’s oil, It would threaten and intimidate all our allies in the region. And it will become the base even from where they are now if they don’t expand for, I mean, a terribly strong military machine with unlimited funds in the heart of the Middle East, geographically located near everything. And that’s a huge threat to the Western economy, to Western Europe…

HH: Sure it is.

CK: …and all of the Middle East to the United States. What are these guys thinking?

HH: I don’t know. I’ve got one minute left. I’m going to talk to a leftist after the break, Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies. I’ll ask her. But my question to you. There are a half dozen guys who could change public opinion in America. Four of them are named Petraeus, Mattis, John Allen, and Stanley McChrystal. Literally, 45 seconds, do you expect any of them to stand up and say what needs to be done right now, which is to stop ISIS?

CK: No. I think there’s a sense that the military does not involve itself in politics, even though these guys are officially out of the military. I think there is that kind of respect for the political system, which in some ways is a glory of the U.S. But right now, we could use it. No, I think the problem is that the President is the problem. It’s not advice, not public opinion. It is that we have a president who is strategically clueless, and who has deliberately or by accident, or by incompetence, weakened the United States. I don’t know. You pick which of those is true. And we are in a very weak position.

HH: We are indeed. 40 years after Nixon resigned, we’re back to a low point in American power projection around the world. Charles Krauthammer, we’ll be watching you on Special Report tonight. Thank you.

It’s impossible to be this incompetent, frankly. This is obviously deliberate. The only puzzle is how he still can still have so many enablers.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks

Krauthammer: America’s Decline Is A Choice (Video)

America is in decline -but not as a result of  events, Charles Krauthammer explained on the O’Reilly Factor, Thursday night. “What we have with Obama is a president choosing decline.”

“We are in a position to dominate again, he continued, “but we have a president who doesn’t believe in American exceptionalism, American greatness and he has chosen for American to retreat from the Middle East, to not lift a finger in the Ukraine – basically to make us one nation among others and that is a choice. It can be reversed, but that’s the challenge America faces.”

Without mentioning any names, O’Reilly brought up certain conservative radio personalities who were saying what Krauthammer said right from the beginning.

“They said, ‘this guy…he wants America to decline in power, he is not going to promote our best interests. This was on right-wing talk radio, and many people – including me – were skeptical of that approach. (We know, Bill.)

Of course, O’Reilly is referring to people like Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh, who famously declared, “I hope he fails.”

Krauthammer said, “this is a man who believes America ought to retreat as a matter of ideology and in part because he wants to see all of our efforts on domestic affairs to become the Social Democracy like Europe.”

“It is very clear that he believes that America in some way perhaps doesn’t have a moral right to be the leader of the world. And I think that he feels that the sins we have created in the past the injuries we’ve inflicted on others – the Iraqis I think he would list, among others –  does not entitle us to a hegemonic position dominant position we had after the cold war,” Krauthammer concluded.

Here’s Rush’s “I hope he fails” monologue from January 16, 2009 while the the mortifying cult of Obama was in full swing. You may remember the intense indignation, anger and hysteria this incited on the left culminating in another effort on the part of Democrats to “hush Rush.”

RUSH: I got a request here from a major American print publication. “Dear Rush: For the Obama [Immaculate] Inauguration we are asking a handful of very prominent politicians, statesmen, scholars, businessmen, commentators, and economists to write 400 words on their hope for the Obama presidency. We would love to include you. If you could send us 400 words on your hope for the Obama presidency, we need it by Monday night, that would be ideal.”

Now, we’re caught in this trap again. The premise is, what is your “hope.” My hope, and please understand me when I say this. I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, “Well, I hope he succeeds. We’ve got to give him a chance.” Why? They didn’t give Bush a chance in 2000. Before he was inaugurated the search-and-destroy mission had begun. I’m not talking about search-and-destroy, but I’ve been listening to Barack Obama for a year-and-a-half. I know what his politics are. I know what his plans are, as he has stated them. I don’t want them to succeed.

If I wanted Obama to succeed, I’d be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he’s talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don’t want this to work. So I’m thinking of replying to the guy, “Okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.” (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here’s the point. Everybody thinks it’s outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, “Oh, you can’t do that.” Why not? Why is it any different, what’s new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what’s gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don’t care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: “Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails.” Somebody’s gotta say it.

Were the liberals out there hoping Bush succeeded or were they out there trying to destroy him before he was even inaugurated? Why do we have to play the game by their rules? Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed? This is affirmative action, if we do that. We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he’s doing simply because of the color of his skin? Sorry. I got past the historical nature of this months ago. He is the president of the United States, he’s my president, he’s a human being, and his ideas and policies are what count for me, not his skin color, not his past, not whatever ties he doesn’t have to being down with the struggle, all of that’s irrelevant to me. We’re talking about my country, the United States of America, my nieces, my nephews, your kids, your grandkids. Why in the world do we want to saddle them with more liberalism and socialism? Why would I want to do that? So I can answer it, four words, “I hope he fails.” And that would be the most outrageous thing anybody in this climate could say. Shows you just how far gone we are. Well, I know, I know. I am the last man standing.

I’m happy to be the last man standing. I’m honored to be the last man standing. Yeah, I’m the true maverick. I can do more than four words. I could say I hope he fails and I could do a brief explanation of why. You know, I want to win. If my party doesn’t, I do. If my party has sacrificed the whole concept of victory, sorry, I’m now the Republican in name only, and they are the sellouts. I’m serious about this. Why in the world, it’s what Ann Coulter was talking about, the tyranny of the majority, all these victims here, we gotta make sure the victims are finally assuaged. Well, the dirty little secret is this isn’t going to assuage anybody’s victim status, and the race industry isn’t going to go away, and the fact that America’s original sin of slavery is going to be absolved, it’s not going to happen. Just isn’t, folks. It’s too big a business for the left to keep all those things alive that divide the people of this country into groups that are against each other. Yes, I’m fired up about this.

 

 

Video: Krauthammer and Greta Van Susteren Discuss Federal Judge’s IRS Ruling

Counsel for the IRS appeared before a federal judge, Thursday morning, to explain why they failed to tell him thousands of IRS emails were lost, and why they filed a demonstrably false status report.

Today’s civil case was brought by Judicial Watch, the government watchdogs who been pursuing information about IRS targeting of conservative groups since last year.

The notoriously tough Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave the IRS one month to explain under oath how it lost so many emails to and from Lois Lerner, a central figure in the controversy.

The AP report via Townhall:

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave the tax agency a month to submit the explanation in writing. Sullivan issued the order Thursday as part of a freedom of information lawsuit by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group.

Greta Van Susteren had Charles Krauthammer on to talk about the latest developments. The two agreed that if not for the FOIA and tough, no-nonsense  judges, the IRS would still be successfully stonewalling.

Dr. K said, “you see this pattern of deception and concealment on the part of Lois Lerner and  the IRS consistently.”

He added later, “they’re playing a game – unless you ask us the absolute right question, we’re not going to answer you.”

Greta naively declared, “I think that president Obama should order Eric Holder – the Attorney General –  to appoint a Special Prosecutor, and if he won’t – he should get rid of him.”

I can’t imagine she really thinks Obama would get rid of the  firewall of protection Eric Holder provides him. The most corrupt Attorney General in American history will step down only when an equally corrupt collectivist is secured to take his place..

“The absurdity of all of this, is that all of this is being discovered through the Freedom of Information Act,” Krathammer continued. “This was never intended to uncover this kind of scandal – it was so that people would be transparent. But because the administration and the IRS have literally shown contempt for Congress —- the only way we’ve been discovering all these things is through the FOIA, and this tough judge on the Circuit court who is no nonsense.”

“But that’s nothing,” Greta chimed in. “If you think Judge Emmet Sullivan is making their heads spin over at the IRS, there’s another IRS hearing before Judge Reggie Walton who I’ve known for twenty years.”

“I’m tellin’ ya,” Greta continued, “get ready because Judge Reggie Walton is also not afraid and he’s tough.”

Excellent news.

MORE:

Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy commented  on the latest revelations in the IRS scandal and the judge’s ruling on The Kelly File.

He thinks –  like I do – that a Special Counsel is no panacea here, because the Regime gets to pick who that person would be – and it would assuredly be someone who is “controllable.”   That investigation would go dark because suddenly no one would be able to talk on advice of their lawyers, and the whole story would disappear from the news as a whitewash ensues. McCarthy  said he’s surprised they haven’t jumped at the chance of appointing one.

Maybe they haven’t found someone crooked enough? Nah – in Washington DC, there’s no shortage of corrupt lefties on the take.

Krauthammer: Obama Has No Policy for Immigration Crisis (Video)

On Special Report, tonight, Charles Krauthammer called the humanitarian crisis on the border a microcosm of the Obama administration.

Instead an actual policy, he said,  “all the argument, all the debate, all the back and forth is about the optics, the politics – the presentation.”

Dr. K said  the $4 billion Obama wants to spend on the crisis “is simply a way to absorb all these people…and not do anything to stop the influx.”

SEE ALSO: 

The Washington Times: Appeals court rules immigrant ‘dreamers’ can get driver’s licenses

 

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:

SEE ALSO:

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

Previously: 

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

SEE ALSO:

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 http://www.regulations.gov, 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.”

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,616,448 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: