Why Do Republicans Want To Prop Up A Scandal Plagued President?


I’m so confused.

It was only a month ago, that major scandal eruptions were rocking the Regime off balance,  and Republicans like me were finally smelling blood in the water. We had Benghazi, which had been festering for months, and before that Fast and Furious,  we had the wretched IRS scandal, which the average American could understand, the AP/James Rosen scandals that outraged the press, massive ongoing scandals at the EPA, and finally the NSA scandal – which seems to be mostly an issue about trust and competence.  These scandals should be burying this Regime. Obama is sliding badly in the polls. People not only don’t trust this government – they fear it.

A month ago, I said, Obama’s agenda for his second term is dead. Even “the Stupid Party” knows better than to work with a Regime as corrupt and scandal plagued as this one, right? Time to stick a fork in Obama’s agenda, right?

We’ve got multiple instances of Regime officials lying under oath to Congress. Anyone at all have a problem with that? Republicans should be spending most of their time undoing the damage this Regime has done, fighting Obama’s agenda, investigating their many scandals, and  holding hearings. Period.

What the hell are we doing “reaching across the aisle” to make deals with the same moral cretins who circled the wagons during Fast and Furious and Benghazi,  wanted the tea party targeted by the IRS, and were against NSA spying (during the Bush years) before they were all gung-ho for it, (all hail Obama.)

It should be obvious by now, that everything this president does is destructive in one way or another. He started his second term with the transparent desire to win the House in 2014 so he could finish off the Republican party. And damned if we don’t have a Republican party that is helping him do it.   We have a president who should be in a free-fall right now, but instead of kicking him while he’s down, we have Republicans who  are  helping him back up.

Ann Coulter dubbed Marco Rubio “the Jack Kevorkian of the Republican party” and she’s right. Instead of dropping  comprehensive immigration like a hot potato after all of the scandals erupted, he stayed right with it –  doing Obama’s bidding it turns out to pass the “Gang of Nine” bill.

Although some pundits are predicting that the Immigration bill will die in the House, this year, hope springs eternal when we have  “conservatives” like Rep. Paul Ryan gushing that the Senate’s  action “makes final passage on immigration ‘even more likely.’


Are you kidding me, Paul Ryan?

Do these R-words have any idea how badly they’re screwing up, right now?


Ryan talked about  the House’s plan to a dubious  Mark Levin, last week. Levin noted the government’s history of breaking its promises to secure the border, so why should we trust anything that’s passed, now?

Granted the House plan is leaps and bounds better than the Senate plan, but what happens  when the two bodies reconcile their versions of reform? Secure the border now – then take incremental steps toward immigration reform.


We live in a country in which this happens, and Republicans shrug: IRS Sent $46,378,040 in Refunds to 23,994 ‘Unauthorized’ Aliens at 1 Atlanta Address:

(CNSNews.com) – The Internal Revenue Service sent 23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 to “unauthorized” alien workers who all used the same address in Atlanta, Ga., in 2011, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

That was not the only Atlanta address theoretically used by thousands of “unauthorized” alien workers receiving millions in federal tax refunds in 2011. In fact, according to a TIGTA audit report published last year, four of the top ten addresses to which the IRS sent thousands of tax refunds to “unauthorized” aliens were in Atlanta.

The IRS sent 11,284 refunds worth a combined $2,164,976 to unauthorized alien workers at a second Atlanta address; 3,608 worth $2,691,448 to a third; and 2,386 worth $1,232,943 to a fourth.

Other locations on the IG’s Top Ten list for singular addresses that were theoretically used simultaneously by thousands of unauthorized alien workers, included an address in Oxnard, Calif, where the IRS sent 2,507 refunds worth $10,395,874; an address in Raleigh, North Carolina, where the IRS sent 2,408 refunds worth $7,284,212; an address in Phoenix, Ariz., where the IRS sent 2,047 refunds worth $5,558,608; an address in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., where the IRS sent 1,972 refunds worth $2,256,302; an address in San Jose, Calif., where the IRS sent 1,942 refunds worth $5,091,027; and an address in Arvin, Calif., where the IRS sent 1,846 refunds worth $3,298,877.

Where’s the outrage?!

Meanwhile Obama is trying to use the “Cool factor” and public schools to sell his disastrous, unpopular and ungodly health care law.

Welcome to the USSA says Matt Bracken: California Schools to Train Kids to Sell ObamaCare:

Ca kids

Is anyone at GOP HQ looking at this or are they too busy trying to suck-up to college kids by holding “Google hangouts” about student loans?

A new Fox Poll: 82% of Americans Say Founding Fathers Would Disapprove Of How Things Are Going In Washington Today…

And Rasmussen reported today that  72% Think NSA May Have Monitored Congress, Military Leaders, Judges.

72 freaking percent of us think that Obama’s NSA is likely to have “violated one of the country’s most cherished constitutional standards – the checks and balances between the three branches of government – by spying on the private communications of Congress and judges.”

This concern takes on even more significance given that 57% of voters believe it is likely the NSA data will be used by other government agencies to harass political opponents.

And what are our leaders in the Grand Old Party doing? Holding Google Hang-outs with teenyboppers!



Holder Refuses to Answer If DOJ Spied on Members Of Congress (Video)

Today, Attorney Gen. Eric Holder testified before a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Justice Department’s FY2014 budget. He was asked about the seizure of Associated Press phone records and the IRS targeting conservative groups for investigation.

Senator Kirk (R-IL) asked Holder if the DOJ monitored phones for members of Congress, and shockingly, he refused to answer.

The guy who wouldn’t answer this very basic question, has “no intention” of stepping down, mind you.

Cruz explained why on Twitter:


via The Blaze:

Jar Jar weighs in…

In an interview with the Huffington Post, White House Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett said there’s no chance Attorney General Eric Holderwill resign in light of revelations that his Justice Department has spied on journalists.

“You can take it from me,” she said. “He will be in his position for quite a while.”

The audacity of totalitarianism.

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.

Video: Ditzy Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “I Have No Idea of the Political Affiliation” of the Priorities USA PAC”

Really lady? No idea?

It’s a mind boggling mystery we’ll be studying for years to come, that one… Someday, maybe, just maybe we’ll know the political affiliation of the folks who made the despicable claim that Republican candidate  for President, Mitt Romney is responsible for a woman’s death from cancer.

Until then, we can only wonder, while pondering the hypocrisy of the Republicans for crying foul.

So says Ditzy Debbie:

Begging to differ, the Washington Post gave its  Worst Week in Washington Award  to Priorities USA for its steelworker ad.

It seemed like a powerful message.

On Tuesday, Priorities USA Action — a Democratic super PAC run by two former Obama White House aides and blessed by the president himself — released an advertisement featuring a former steelworker named Joe Soptic. He told a devastating story about losing his job and his health insurance just as his wife got sick with what turned out to be terminal cancer. Soptic’s job was eliminated by Bain Capital, the company that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney helped found.

And so on and so forth. As we all know,  it was based on scurrilous lies:

Priorities USA, for hitting a new low in a campaign full of negative ads, you had the worst week in Washington. Congrats, or something.

Joining Priorities USA in infamy are its shameless Democrat defenders, first and foremost among them, Ditzy Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Meanwhile on CBS, the Obama campaign’s Stephanie Cutter was spared the opportunity to make an ass of herself: CBS Refuses To Confront OFA’s Cutter About Massive ‘Cancer’ Ad Lie.

Today’s “Meet the Press” was the first opportunity for a journalist to confront Ms. Cutter on this blatant and brazen lie and over the twelve minute interview, the subject was never broached.

Even worse, when Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom charged the Obama Campaign with dirty politics, guest host Nancy Cordes carried water for President Obama by saying, “Well, I think we’ve seen some petty, negative politicking from both sides this week…”

And on ABC, Via Weasel Zippers: Video: Axeldouche Won’t Say If President Obama Condemns His Super PAC’s Cancer Ad…

Naturally, that would take some class, of which Obama has none.

On ABC’s “This Week” David Axelrod won’t say if Obama condemns the false Super PAC ad by Priorities USA (August 12, 2012).

Photoshop: Baghdad Debbie “Pretty Happy” With Our Job Growth

After Friday’s dismal job report, even the water-carrying Obama fans at the Washington Post said it’s become “increasingly difficult for the president to argue that what he has tried is working well, or that he has something new to offer. Each month that the economy produces fewer jobs than are needed just to keep pace with population growth adds to the burden the president faces as the clock ticks toward November.”

But Baghdad Deb isn’t worried. She says she’s “pretty happy” with our job growth. How can she say this? By defying basic laws of economics and hoping the average voter doesn’t notice:

I’m pretty happy with twenty-eight straight months of job growth in the private sector-DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

No, really. She said that:

The “job growth” of which she speaks is not only anemic – it’s not keeping pace with population growth. Poor Baghdad Deb is just doing her part to further Obama’s talking point that the private sector is “doing fine”.

But as this chart via The Foundry shows, if anyone is “doing fine”, it’s the public sector:

This goes beyond the far more generous pension and health benefits they enjoy. While the private sector lost 4.6 million jobs (a 3.9 percent drop) since the recession began, government payrolls have only fallen by 240,000 jobs (a 1.1 percent drop). Federal employment has actually grown nearly 12 percent since the end of 2007, and while the country suffers from 8.2 percent unemployment, the unemployment rate for government employees is just 4.2 percent.

Via of Fox News:

“14.9 percent”

— The percent of Americans unable to find work, forced to take part-time work or who have given up looking work in the month of June, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The rate has been essentially steady since February.

Fox’s John Lott opined, the private sector is not doing fine, Mr. Obama:

There is one measure of employment that shows “4.3 million jobs [were created] over the last 27 months” since February 2010. But Obama ignores how private-sector job creation during this recovery compares to other past ones. The total actual number of private-sector jobs has grown by 2.8% during the “recovery” – the average for recoveries since 1970 is 8%, and 11% after severe recessions.

The growth also looks anemic when it is compared to what was lost. 36 months into the recovery and the private sector hasn’t even made up half the jobs lost during the recession, let alone make up for the fact that there are about 7.6 million more working age people than when the recession started.

What about the 4.2 million that were lost between when Obama became president and February 2010? The “growth” just replaces what was lost during the first part of his administration. Let alone the 8.8 million private sector jobs that were lost between when the recession started.

See Also:

Rebutting his Democratic counterpart, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who appeared right before him, Priebus argued that the country is absolutely not better off than it was four years ago. He said that Obama “can’t fulfill a promise” and accused the Democrats of “living in Fantasyland,” declaring that the best way to help stimulate the economy in the long-run is firing Obama and hiring Mitt Romney in November.

When guest host John Roberts asked Priebus if Romney can effectively run on the weak jobs numbers that came out on Friday, Priebus added that the number is actually worse because, as he claimed, 30 percent of the jobs added were just temporary employment. He ripped into the Democrats for pushing a class warfare mentality.

“All of this stuff is small ball that they’re playing, all of this nastiness and division about investments and money and rich vs. poor. This is going to come down to how people feel in November, how people feel about this president. Did he fulfill the mission he promised this country?”

Priebus declared, “For the sake of the very idea of America, Mitt Romney has to win for liberty and freedom.”

According to Dem Source, Obama Told Debbie Wasserman Schultz, “Don’t forget you work for me.”

Javier Manjarres has managed to  find a Democrat source who is “a close associate” of Democratic National Committee Chairwoman,  Debbie Wasserman Schultz, an “insider”, if you will.

Wasserman Schultz, who represents the 20thcongressional district in Florida, is known to be one of those most strident,  polarizing and egocentric members of Congress. Apparently, that  has not made her popular with the Narcissist in Chief, who according to this source, once snapped at her, “It’s not about you, it’s about me.” (Oooooh…burn)

Rumors have been swirling around that Wasserman Schultz was not in President Obama’s top tier of candidates to sit at the helm of the Democratic National Committee.

A source within the Democratic Party who is a close associate of Wasserman Schultz has told the Shark Tank the details about the process that took place when the vetting of prospective candidates for the DNC chair.

The source told the Shark Tank that, “she (Wasserman Schultz) was not the first choice,” and that Wasserman Schultz feverishly lobbied her case of being a sitting ‘Jewish’congresswoman in a very safe Democratic district.  According to the source, Obama was pressured into picking Wasserman Schultz because she impressed upon him that he needed her as a loyal foot soldier to run cover him and shore up his dwindling support with the Jewish voters as well as with women.

But while Obama has been able to rely on Wasserman Schultz to carry his water, the President has grown increasingly annoyed with the polarizing manner in which she attacks her political opposition-a style that has galvanized her Republican opponents and chased many of those coveted ‘Independents’ away.

Just recently, Wasserman Schultz defended her former aide and current DNC Jewish Outreach liason for her juvenile misstep of posting pictures of herself on Facebook that referred to her and her fellow Jewish girlfriends as “Jewbags.” President Obama was reported to be so upset with the aide’s publicized antics that he did not allow Wasserman Schultz to introduce him at any of the events during his most recent trip to Florida.

Wasserman Schultz is known to always introduce the President whenever he is in Florida, and he did so during his previous visit to the Sunshine State, a little over a month ago.  Then ‘Jewbag-gate’ broke, and on Obama’s subsequent trip a couple of weeks back, Wasserman Schultz only introduced the President at a couple of events and merely acknowledged her presence at others. Ouch!  But in all fairness, the truth is that Wasserman Schultz’s role in President Obama’s recent trip was already scripted by his campaign.

It seems as if the relationship has soured to the point that according to the source, “He does not want her in the DNC anymore.”

Apparently, President Obama had discussions with the DNC Chairwoman regarding her approach, even telling her, “Don’t forget you work for me.”

It’s not about you, its about me. – attributed to President Barack Obama to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, as per our source.

Manjarres opines that this would be an awkward time for Obama to dump her because it would look like the party was in disarray, but “it would be very hard to find someone that is both in lock-step with his agenda and willing to run cover for him as she has done.”

Oh, I don’t know about that – there are plenty of lick-spittles in the Democrat party, (and the MSM, BIRM) who are willing to carry Obama’s water. Most of them come off as insane, but that’s beside the point.

Stay tuned at The Shark Tank for more exciting revelations to come from his new source!