Day Two of the D n C Follies: 74,000 Seat Stadium Out, Jerusalem and God back in

The 74,000 seat stadium is out. The 20,000 seat stadium is in.  There’s a 20% chance of rain, see + the Dems were having a hard time filling it.

Democrats today announced that President Barack Obama’s big speech on Thursday night will move from the vast Bank of America stadium to the much-smaller Time Warner indoor arena.

While organisers blamed weather forecasts of lightning, the switch means that Obama has avoided the possibility of having to accept his party’s nomination before a partially-empty stadium. Just hours earlier, officials had been insisting the speech would go ahead in the stadium ‘rain or shine’.

We have been monitoring weather forecasts closely and several reports predict thunderstorms in the area, therefore we have decided to move Thursday’s proceedings to Time Warner Cable Arena to ensure the safety and security of our delegates and convention guests,’ said convention chief Steve Kerrigan.

But convention sources exclusively told the MailOnline on Tuesday that the real reason behind the switch was fears within the Obama campaign that there would be large numbers of empty seats in the 74,000-seater stadium. The Time Warner arena has a capacity of just over 20,000.

The chief meteorologist at a Charlotte television station took to Twitter to question the decision:

Alex Pappas of The Daily Caller reported:

“In a series of tweets on Wednesday morning after the news broke, Panovich said there’s only a 20 to 30 percent chance of rain or storms and argued that “if you are going to move inside for this small risk you could have done that days ago.”

Said Panovich: “My main point is if you were going to move inside for the small [weather] threat Thursday [,you] could have made that decision a week ago.”

“It’s a simple question.. if you had a #Panthers game, Concert or Soccer match with a 20% chance of storms would you cancel 24hrs prior?” he asked.

Remember this entertaining conversation Bret Baier had just yesterday at the D n C with Little Dick Durbin?
Bret: God was taken out of the platform, why do that?Durbin: Well, I can just basically tell you if the narrative that is being presented on your station, and through your channel and your network is the Democrats are godless people, they ought to know better. God is not a franchise of the Republican party… (Bret: no, no, but) Those of us who believe in God and those of us who have dedicated our lives to helping others in the name of God, don’t want to take a second seat to anyone who is suggesting that one word out of the platform means the Democrats across America are godless, come on Bret.Bret: No, no, no – I don’t think that’s what’s being said; we’re reporting what’s in the platform – in 2008, God was mentioned once; in 2004, it was mentioned seven times; in 2000 it was mentioned four times, so it’s just a question… (Durbin: what’s the question) So the question is, why take it out this time?Durbin: What I’m basically saying to you is if you’re trying to draw some conclusion (Bret: I’m not trying to draw…) that the Democrats are godless, present your evidence, present your evidence.Bret: I’m just asking the question: why was the word taken out?
Durbin: I’m just telling you, you are carping on a trifle. We know that both parties are are devoted to this country, both parties are God-fearing parties, let’s get on with the agenda about creating jobs in America about justice in this country.

Bret: And we’re going to talk about that in a second, we are talking about the platform here and there are two changes that we just noted, one is that God was taken out from 2008 to 2012 and two, that Jerusalem was not mentioned; I’m not drawing conclusions, I’m just asking why these changes were made.

Durbin: Bret, let me just say, I chaired the platform committee for two Democratic conventions. We produced the most unread document in the history of American politics, to suggest that this document and the insertion of two words here and one word there, now defines politics in America suggests to me that you’re not focusing on the real issues that American care about. (Bret: But senator, you know…) We want the American people to get back to work (Bret: I understand that…) We want to continue to create jobs.

Bret: And let’s talk about that in one second, but you know that Democrats in Tampa talked about the Republican platform and what was and what is not in there, so when I’m asking you about these two changes and two words, I’m just asking why, I’m not drawing conclusions.

Durbin: First, I’m telling you your conclusions are wrong if you’re drawing them, (Bret: I’m not) and secondly, let me tell you the first president to recognize the state of Israel was Harry Truman, a Democrat and every president since, Democrat and Republican, has stood closely with Israel. I know what’s going on here, (Bret: okay…) It’s an effort to justify Sheldon Adelson and the money he is spending in the name of really standing up for Israel (Bret: Listen), the Democrats and Republicans are committed to Israel’s future and security, and I’m one of them.

Bret: Understand, no Republican took those words out of the Democratic platform, so I’m just making the point.

Durbin: and your taking those two words coming out means our relationships with Israel has changed

Bret: No, I’m just asking the question.

Durbin: Is that fair?

Bret: I’m just asking why it was changed.

Durbin: Is that fair, is that balanced?

Bret: Why was it changed?

Durbin: I wasn’t on the platform committee…

Bret: I’m going to move on.

Gee, did he seem just a tad defensive, there? First it was Faux News presenting a faux narrative and Bret Baier  drawing the wrong conclusion, how dare he? How dare he accuse Dick Durbin and Company of being Godless freaks. “Present your evidence! Present your evidence!”

Then somehow, #1 on Obama’s enemies List, the Dems’ Emmanuel Goldstein du Jour is drawn into it…

It’s an effort to justify Sheldon Adelson and the money he is spending in the name of really standing up for Israel (Bret: Listen), the Democrats and Republicans are committed to Israel’s future and security, and I’m one of them.
And just asking a question is no longer deemed “fair and balanced” by denizens of the Democrat shame culture. The only thing that inspires them to change course is fear of the kind of exposure that leads to reprisals. The specter of lost Christian and Jewish votes  is reprisal enough for these shameless Dems to “carp on trifles!”
Tonight, the Democratic National Committee suspended the rules of the convention and inserted language regarding God and the State of Israel back to its platform. They had to vote three times to do it – and they had to lie to deem it passed, even though it was clear that the measure did not pass a voice vote in the chamber. The original 2012 Democratic Party platform had excised all mention of God and Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, the head of the Democratic National Convention, got up and asked for a two-thirds vote on the amendments to the platform. He took a voice vote, with people stating aloud “aye” and “nay.”

The first time, he couldn’t determine if two-thirds of the voters had said “aye”; a loud “no” vote was heard. He asked for a second vote.

The second time, he couldn’t determine whether the voice vote had passed. Again. Villaraigosa looked around in confusion.

Finally, on the third attempt, Villaraigosa took a voice vote and simply declared, in the “opinion of the chair,” that it had been passed. There were widespread boos in the convention hall to the renewed inclusion of God and language about Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. And Villaraigosa was lying, in any case – there is no way that the voice vote had passed. Opponents stood up and protested, waving and shouting. The fix was in. The Democratic leadership had to ram a mention of God and a mention of Jerusalem through, violating their own rules, to avoid the fallout within their own ranks.

You can watch the vote,  here.

Thomas Lifson of the American Thinker weighed in the fiasco:

I expected that the Democratic National Convention would feature one or more deeply embarrassing moments, when Democrats couldn’t help themselves from showing the world who they really are. The talk of patriotism and values, scripted for the prime time TV audience, was all a masquerade. The “low information voter” (i.e., the readily deceived) is the target of this Potemkin patriotism. I figured that, gathered together with like minded folks, Democrats would shoot off their mouths, say outrageous things, demonstrate in cringe-inducing fashion, and maybe let slip something really horrifying.

But I never suspected the party would officially reverse itself through a crooked vote, in public, when its attempt to undercut Israel and religion was exposed. I never thought that they would demonstrate their contempt for democratic procedures by visible example.   And I never thought that they would boo God.

Not good optics, Dems. Tsk Tsk Tsk….


Big Journalism: Media Fail to Fact-Check Michelle’s Speech:

National Public Radio, among other mainstream media outlets, whitewashed First Lady Michelle Obama’s fib-filled speech to the Democratic National Convention last night. At the end of a roundup of perfunctory attempts to fact-check some of the Democrats’ speeches, NPR gave Mrs. Obama a clean bill of health: “As for first lady Michelle Obama’s address to the convention, the fact checkers don’t seem to have any faults to find.”

That is because they weren’t looking. The basic premise of Mrs. Obama’s speech–that she and her husband had struggled economically like so many other Americans–is false. Not only did they enjoy many advantages that others do not, but CNS News reports that Barack Obama inherited half a million dollars in stock from his grandmother, a bank vice president who Michelle misleadingly cited as a victim of gender discrimination.

These fibs are not new for the Obama camp. The UK Daily Mailreported during the 2008 campaign that Michelle Obama has benefited from vast exaggerations of her “working-class origins,” substituting a humble single-room residence for what was in fact a middle-class home, and obscuring the fact that her family shared in the spoils from the Democratic Party’s regime of (segregated) patronage in Richard Daley’s Chicago.

Surprised anyone?

JWF: Obama Bundler and Solyndra Scammer Hits the Red Carpet at DNC as ‘Finance Guest’, Then Flees News Camera:

If we had a functioning Justice Department this guy would probably be cooling his heels in Leavenworth. Instead he’s given the VIP treatment at the DNC.

But remember, Obama is for the middle class or something.

The Obama campaign rolled out the red carpet this week for a former top Energy Department official who was at the center of the ill-fated government loan to Solyndra, a California solar panel firm that wound up in bankruptcy.

Steven J. Spinner joined other top fundraisers for a VIP tour of the Democratic National Convention floor in Charlotte Monday evening, posing and waving for a photographer while standing behind the podium. When he saw ABC News cameras, however, he ran for the exit.

Well, so much for transparency.

Remember – this is the Most “Open and Accessible” Convention in History.

The guy actually spoke earlier tonight, too. He’s much braver when he has a script, and no ones asking him pesky questions.

Ace of Spades HQ: Are Democrats Giving The Game Away With Their Radical Non-Primetime Speakers?:

The Republican convention was relentlessly on-point, perhaps too much so.

That’s not true of the Democratic convention, which has a decidedly schizophrenic nature. “Centrists” speaking calmly of “conservative values” in primetime — and red-meat radicalism in all the hours before 10 PM.

As a rule, Democrats win when they run as mainstream conservatives — not as radicals. Thus, a born again Christian from Georgia named Jimmy Carter was elected president in 1976 — and a “new” Democrat from Arkansas named Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996. Even Chicago’s Barack Obama — who made sure you knew he wasn’t against all wars (just the bad one) — was able to pull off the maneuver.

But if the first night of the Democratic Convention is any clue, the ruse might be up.

Oh dear…Obama camp forced to walk back the DNC’s heinous opening video: DNC video: Not our video, says Obama campaign:

An Obama aide emails that the Charlotte host committee, not the Obama campaign, produced the video:

“The video in question was produced and paid for by the host committee of the city of Charlotte. It’s neither an OFA nor a DNC video, despite what the Romney campaign is claiming. It’s time for them to find a new target for their faux outrage.”

That’s super. Now how do they explain the “doing things together” rhetoric?

Video: DNC Trots Out Fake Lifelong Republican Maria Ciano

Everybody remembers “lifelong Republican”, Maria Ciano, from the Obama campaign video called Republican Women For Obama, right? The video featured four or five women who claimed to be Republicans, or to have been Republicans until recently. John Hinderaker was able to prove that at least two of the women as hard-core leftists including Maria Ciano.

But, of course, they are appalled by Mitt Romney–it is hard to say why, apart from a couple of discreet references to abortion, but did they really just now figure out that the Republican Party is pro-life? The ad is surprisingly ineffective, but it is also dishonest. At least one of the women who pose as “Republican women for Obama” is a long-time Democrat.

Her name is Maria Ciano, and BuzzFeed finds that she has been a registered Democrat in Colorado at least since 2006.


In addition to the fact that she is a registered Democrat, check out her Facebook “likes.” They make it obvious that Ms. Ciano is a devoted Democrat and a left-wing activist. Here are some of her “likes,” beginning with the earliest in time:

* Democracy For America
* Tar Sands Action
* Amy Goodman
* Barack Obama
* Being Liberal
* Bernie Sanders Tells You A Secret the GOP Would Rather You Didn’t Know
* Miss Piggy Delivers the Best Takedown of Fox News We’ve Seen All Month
* Think Progress
* The Best Quote From Barack Obama We’ve Seen This Week
* Dow and Monsanto Join Forces to Poison America’s Heartland
* Climate Reality
* The Amazing Victory Scored With Obama That More People Should Be Talking About
* The Sierra Club
* The Buffett Rule
* Obama For America–Colorado
* Denver Young Democrats
* Obamacare
* Latinos For Obama
* Michelle Obama
* Veterans For Obama
* I Love It When I Wake Up In the Morning and Obama Is President
* Obama Truth Team
* Democratic Party

But the Obama campaign describes Ms. Ciano as a “Republican Woman!” Right. There are liars; there are compulsive liars; and then there is the Obama campaign.

Here’s her dopey DNC speech where she begins, “I grew up in a conservative Republican family in Aurora Co. Many of my relatives can’t believe I’m doing this – I guess I can’t either!”

One of the relatives who most certainly, isn’t surprised by her appearance at the D ‘n C is her “conservative Republican” mother, who Hinderaker discovered also appeared in the Obama campaign video with her.

The women in the video aren’t named, but she is Delia Ciano–none other than Maria Ciano’s mother. Her Facebook page, like her daughter’s, is revealing. She put up a link to the Obama video and writes, “Maria and I are part of this video. I hope you watch.”


I love the part where someone comments, “Just saw you on TRMS [The Rachel Maddow Show]!” And she responds: “TRMS is my favorite show! Amazing!” Sure, just like all Republicans, she is a big Rachel Maddow fan. Delia Ciano also shared a link via the Rachel Maddow show:


Elsewhere on the page, she refers to Republicans as “this idiots.” No surprise, then, that her page consists mostly of attacks on Republicans. Here are just a couple of many screen shots that could be taken. In the first one, note the reference to “Mitt Romney and his party”:

What a farce.  The only “idiots” are the people who buy this hokum.


Oh Debbie! DNC Chair Caught Lying Again – Egg All Over Her Face – Will MSM Report?

This amazing scoop by Phillip Klein explains why Obama is trying so hard  to quash conservative media access at the DNC.

On Monday, at a DNC training session for Jewish Democrats for Obama, Debbie Wasserman Schultz  claimed that Israel’s ambassador to the United States had accused Republicans of being “dangerous” to Israel by criticizing President Obama’s record.

Phil Klein of the Washington Examiner reported:

As she [Schultz] was wrapping up her remarks, she claimed that, “We know, and I’ve heard no less than Ambassador Michael Oren say this, that what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel.”

Yesterday, Ambassador  Oren released a diplomatic statement forcefully denying Schultz’s allegation.

“I categorically deny that I ever characterized Republican policies as harmful to Israel. Bipartisan support is a paramount national interest for Israel, and we have great friends on both sides of the aisle.”

Alana Goodman of Commentary was curious about how Debbie would handle this.

The question now is whether Wasserman Schultz responds. She’d be better off keeping her mouth shut, but obviously that’s going to be hard to do at a convention teeming with reporters. What’s her best option here? Dig in against the embassy, and say she stands by her characterization of Oren’s comments? Make up some lame excuse for why she apparently manufactured a remark from the Israeli ambassador? Schedule an emergency root canal?

She didn’t have to wait long for an answer. Last night at the Democrat Convention, Shepard Smith read the statement on the air while Debbie was sitting there, and asked for her comment. (Kudos to Shep Smith!) Turns out Goodman left out one option…

She tried to weasel out of it by blaming the messenger.

I didn’t say he said that,” Wasserman Schultz insisted. “And unfortunately, that comment was reported by a conservative newspaper. It’s not surprising they would deliberately misquote me. What I always say is that unfortunately the Republicans have made Israel a political football, which is dangerous for Israel. And Ambassador Oren has said that we can’t ever suggest that there is any daylight between the two parties on Israel because there isn’t. And that that’s harmful to Israel. That’s what I said, and that is accurate.”

When a Democrat begins a sentence with, “What I always say….” or in Obama’s case, “What I’ve always said” – know that some desperate dissembling is under way.

She had said exactly what the conservative newspaper said she said, and luckily, Phillip Klein was able to prove it because he had recorded her statement.

Ooftah! What a despicable liar!

Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard wonders, will Debbie be dumped?”

So: Debbie Wasserman Schultz lied on national TV. And she did so while impugning the character of the reporter (Klein) who quoted her accurately. And she appears to have been lying about what an ambassador allegedly told her in private—which she then repeated for apparent political gain.

We’re all used to politicians exaggerating, misstating, and the like. But being caught in flat out lies? Won’t the Obama campaign—which, it’s been widely reported, is none too fond of Wasserman Schultz in the first place—decide it’s time for Debbie to go?

A few things come to mind…

#1 – As far as I can see – this is only a story in the conservative media. No MSM “factcheckers” have called DWS out on the lie. Dems have no problem brazening out lies if they can keep them from being exposed to the wider public.

#2 – The entire Obama campaign is running on lies and smears…if David Axelrod and Stephanie Cutter get to keep their jobs after all the lies they’ve told, why shouldn’t Debbie? DWS hasn’t done anything any one of them wouldn’t do. She only gets thrown under the bus if this story gets wider play, which it won’t.

#3 Didn’t Michelle Obama give a magnificent, masterful speech, last night? My goodness, she sure outclassed that rich rube, Ann Romney, didn’t she?

That’s what the MSM is talking about, today. Not Debbie Downer.

I would love to be proven wrong on this.


John Nolte: Media Savages Ryan for Telling Truth, Accepts Wasserman-Schultz’s Bald-Faced Lies:

Because the media knows that on a level playing field Barack Obama has absolutely no chance of winning reelection, this very same media is thrilled to see that the Obama campaign has launched a negative, divisive, and dishonest quest for a second term. The media wants him to win and if this is how a failed Democrat has to win, they are all for it.

But the lies!

The lies!

The bald-face black and white lies the Obama  campaign tells are legion and by the day growing in number, desperation, and sheer audacity.

But the media doesn’t care.

In fact, they love it.

@adamsbaldwin linked to  this  edifying Dr Sanity piece that explains the Democrat shame culture:

Most psychological theorists (Erikson, Freud, Kohut) see shame as a more “primitive” emotion (since it impacts one’s basic sense of self) compared to guilt, which is developed later in the maturation of the self. Without the development of guilt there is no development of a real social conscience.

Hence, we see Republicans as a group are far more likely to resign positions when their unethical or immoral behavior is exposed.

Democrats don’t tend to do this. In the first place, they will not even acknowledge a “scandal” unless it remains in the national media for an extended period of time (they hope it will go away, and if it does, then they can continue to go about their business as if it never happened). They can always count on the MSM to minimize the damage–even not to report it at all if they can.

Thus the first and foremost rule: if no one knows about their shame, then it doesn’t count and they can continue to pretend they are innocent. Just think of the likes of Charles Rangell; Chris Dodd or Barney Frank. Could a Republican politician ever recover from being responsible for the death of a young woman while he saved himself and didn’t even report the accident to the police? Yet, someone like Ted Kennedy is now a revered senior statesman on the Democratic side of the aisle. No one talks of his crime. Do you imagine Larry Craig–whose indiscretion hurt no one– could ever make a comeback like that? Not on your life.

No, because Democrats, on the whole, firmly believe that they are “better people”–i.e., more loving, more compassionate, more intelligent etc. etc. ad nauseum; they go to great lengths to avoid shame; and hence, to avoid responsibility for their behavior. For every corrupt Ted Stevens, there are at least three John Murthas, Charlie Rangells, and William Jeffersons.

They lie, they deceive, they distort. They take kickbacks and are self-righteous about how innocent they are. They vow to eliminate pork, but think all they have to do is take their name off the bill they support and they are in the clear. They wonder what the meaning of “is” is. They insist they” did not have intercourse with that woman” because rhetorical maneuvers are a key postmodern method to avoid having to deal with shame and oral sex isn’t really sex anyway. They deny deny deny, and they pretend that they are innocent victims of vast rightwing conspiracies or, as in the case with ex-Governor Blagojevich, they emphasize what “champions” of the little guy they are. They ignore facts and when that doesn’t work, they are prepared to ignore the whole of reality itself. Because the cost to their fragile self-esteem if they are discovered is far too catastrophic.

Republicans tend to be amused when they watch Democratic scandals unfold–they, at least have few illusions about human frailty. Democrats, OTOH, immerse themselves in an orgy of self-gratifying excitement and jubilation when they hear of a Republican who fails to live up to the morality he espouses. “HYPOCRISY!” they scream in delight, cheered by the fact that they can once again feel superior.


See? There wasn’t much media blowback so ditzy Deb is doubling down:

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) told the Washington Free Beacon Wednesday evening that she will not be apologizing to Washington Examiner reporter Philip Klein after she falsely accused him of “deliberately misquoting” her.

“No, I definitely will not” offer Klein an apology, Wasserman Schultz said with a slight laugh as she was exiting an event meant to honor Center For American Progress founder John Podesta.

Asked if she had a message for Klein, Wasserman Schultz bristled.

“I don’t,” she said.

Members of the shame culture are not shamed as long as there are still people who believe them.