Democrat Responses To Gruber are Gruberrific (Video)

There are several ways  libs are handling “the endless flaming bags of sh*t being left on their doorstep by Gruber,” as Allahpundit so elegantly put it. Democrat officials, consultants, strategists and pollsters have been called upon to work their magic and the one thing all their excuses have in common is they all involve some degree of “gruberism” – i.e. lying to people they think are too stupid to know any better.

 One is the White House route, i.e. polite distancing despite the plain, painful fact that ol’ Grubes is only guilty of stating what all progressive mandarins believe.

The White House sought Wednesday to distance itself from Gruber and his comments.

“The Affordable Care Act was publicly debated over the course of 14 months, with dozens of Congressional hearings, and countless town halls, speeches, and debates,” White House spokeswoman Jessica Santillo said in a statement. “The tax credits in the law that help millions of middle class Americans afford coverage were no secret, and in fact were central to the legislation. Not only do we disagree with [Gruber’s] comments, they’re simply not true.”

Nancy Pelosi demonstrates her contempt for the American people by pretending that she’s never even heard of Jonathan Gruber. Other liberals like Angus King have run with this one, too.

Because we’re too damn stupid to remember four whole years ago, or dig up old videos like the one Fox News highlighted below.

Another gruberrific response is to pretend to be offended by Gruber’s serial dishonesty and smugness,  while simultaneously claiming that it’s commonplace to hide key provisions in bills and oh, by the way,  Republicans lie too – like when they say ‘ObamaCare is the takeover of 1/6 of the economy.'” (It is.)

As exemplified by Alan Colmes – with a big crisis management style mea culpa from Gruber at the beginning and a little Alinsky rule #4 thrown in for good measure, before Megyn (having none of it) cut him off:  “What happened to Christian forgiveness? Don’t we forgive people who make mist–” Oh shaddap.

If all else fails, there’s always liberal obfuscation. Bury Gruber’s (and by extension the Obama administration, Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media) offenses under a blizzard a liberal happy talk about how well the law is working and pretend everyone is too stupid to remember how it was passed four years ago. Gruberism at its finest as demonstrated by Dem pollster Bernard Whitman:

Yes, a 4th Gruber video came out today, and it is a bit of a disappointment because it doesn’t pack the same insulting,  Gruberistic punch as the last three.

But as Allapundit notes, “this video, although perhaps lacking the infuriating smugness and contempt exhibited by Gruber in other venues, might be more of a problem for Democrats.”

The architect of the bill isn’t just mocking stupidity and celebrating deceit and dishonesty in the process; he’s admitting that the bill itself is just an uncontrolled experiment. On Outnumbered, the panel discusses the strategies that Republicans can employ with Gruber in a discussion that took place prior to the emergence of this video. It’s time to get Gruber under oath and talk about his earlier admission that the bill intentionally prevented subsidies from being paid out of a federal exchange, as well as an explanation of his “spaghetti approach” and experimentation with tens of millions of people who already had the health insurance they wanted.

Fox News Reveals Documents Detailing Obama’s “Constitutionally Odious” Amnesty (Video)

I’m gonna start calling it “cram-nesty” because that’s what it is – the usurper cramming another grossly unpopular policy down the nation’s throat.

Via Fox News Insider:

As part of the 10-point plan, up to 4.5 million illegal immigrants living with their American born kids would be allowed to stay in the U.S., an expansion of deferred action. The plan would also expand deferred action for DACA children. There is also a proposal to raise pay for ICE officers to boost morale.

The plan would also allow family members of illegal immigrants another avenue for citizenship through the military’s delayed entry program. Sources say this avenue will likely be exploited, with people joining the military, then not showing up for boot camp.

Other proposals include a 50-percent discount to the first 10,000 naturalization applicants, 500,000 technology jobs through the State Department visa program, and increased border security.

Later during the panel discussion, Charles Krauthammer called the plan “constitutionally odious.”

He said the proposal is an advertisement to the world that you can come into America illegally, and if you wait long enough, we will legalize you.

Can we talk about impeachment now? Empty talk and huffing and puffing is not going to do a thing to stop a tyrannical president.

SEE ALSO: 

Twitchy: Executive action on amnesty? Laura Ingraham braces for ‘war on America’s middle class & working poor’ 

Apparently the ass-kicking they received a week ago wasn’t strong enough.

Big Government: Father Asks Obama to Use Executive Order to Bring Son Slain by Illegal Alien Back to Life

“While your Executive Order pad is out, can you write one to bring my son and the tens of thousands (actually over 100,000) killed by illegal aliens back to life and to bring our destroyed families back together?” asks Don Rosenberg in a letter to Obama. His son Drew was killed by an illegal alien who ran over him in 2010.

In the letter, Rosenberg notes that President Obama’s administration refused to deport the illegal alien who killed his son.

Must Read: Desert Storm Vet Hammers Obama Administration For Abandoning Iraq

fsib

The approach of Veteran’s Day got Desert Storm vet Michael Banzet to ruminating about his decision to retire from the Air Force after the elections of 2008. He wrote a powerful oped, Why I quit… Desert Storm vet explains decision to leave Air Force after 22 years that was published in his hometown newspaper in Montana, The Daily Inter-Lake in November of 2010.

Four years later, he says, “the thing that prompted me to attempt to put thought to electrons was, oddly enough, the recent massacre of 770 young men around Camp Speicher, Iraq.”

Via The Daily Inter-Lake:

I served 22 years in the Air Force, and without a doubt, the most rewarding year in my career was the year that I spent on the ground in Iraq. I was able to witness the results of the sacrifice made by so many young Americans, young and old, men and women, of all colors. I was humbled by what I found. The desperately courageous Iraqis, who had to operate in the most dangerous of circumstances, depended on the steady presence of the American armed forces. And of course, the numerous allies.

I noticed that the news coverage didn’t match what I saw with my own eyes and heard with my own ears. Everything was negative. Every setback was trumpeted, every advance muffled or ignored. There were “grim milestones” for casualties updated daily. Even an esteemed senator from Nevada claimed, while young Americans were engaged in active combat, that they were losers. I was in Baghdad for some of that. Awesome. That used to be unheard of. But it gets you re-elected today.

And eventually, with the “heads it’s negative, tails it’s not positive” coverage, people began to believe that we should leave. And why not? It was the “wrong war,” it was going badly, at least until we needed a justification to leave, and then it was “strong and stable.” So the United States elected a man who promised that he would declare victory and leave. And for those of you who are sputtering, “But BUSH!” consider this:

So completely wrong was the “declare victory and leave” position that the current administration is not only using Bush’s 2001/2 Authorizations for Use of Force for legal justification, they are also embracing the Bush Doctrine of pre-emption. For gosh’ sake, the carrier that launched some of the first airstrikes is the USS George H.W. Bush. Talk about complete reversal.

Of course, anyone with the ability to think deeply about the subject would realize that changing a culture is a long proposition. Far longer than merely the end of combat. And that really should be the end game of any war that the U.S. gets involved in. The end game of war, for us, is supposed to be a free, potentially prosperous people emerging from the carnage of war. Someone who will make a good ally in the future. And that’s what was happening in Iraq. 

Iraqis, for the first time in their lives, were able to trust. That may be a small thing for you. You, who have never feared for your life from your government. You, who have never wondered if something you say is going to get you killed at the hands of your government. You, who have been able to trust your friends, neighbors and associates; if you haven’t, it wasn’t because you thought they were a government informant, ready to turn you in at the slightest misstep, perhaps to be fed into a paper shredder.

But as the year of my duty in dusty Baghdad wore on, they were starting to trust. They were starting to timidly reach out to report IED emplacements, rocket set-ups, and bad guys in the neighborhood. The thing that moved me to write my book, “A Flowershop in Baghdad,” was this simple fact. The Iraqis who had been bombed, shot at, and we had tried to kill (in one case, actually being shot down by us), all referred to us the same way: 

“The Friendly Side.”

I wrote 341 pages about the exceptionalism of this country, and how much we were changing the young men and women who were clever enough to avoid being killed for the audacity to sign up for service in the Iraqi Air Force. The 20-somethings were great at absorbing the moral compass that guides our military operations. But I also wrote about the challenge of the older officers. It’s pretty hard to change from a life of selfishness, self-preservation and fear to one of selflessness and courage. But it’s do-able; just takes some time to reinforce the goodness in the ones who can change, and supervise the transition out of power of the ones who cannot. All the while nurturing the new generation, keeping them from harm until they can take over. It’s not an easy process.

I know that it would be pretty hard for me to completely change my world view at my age. I can certainly take in new facts, but to change a significant part of my belief system would take constant reinforcement, both in issues big and small. That requires “presence.” The simple act of being around influences behavior. That’s why the police don’t all just sit at the station, waiting for a call to come in. They actively patrol; for presence. It doesn’t cost them any more to patrol; you’ve already hired them. It’s common sense. Constant reinforcement and influence until good behavior is the norm.

Due to the type of reporting from Iraq, you never knew the progress that was being made; the connections that were being completed, the goodness that exposure to the U.S. military brings. Trust. Selflessness. Leadership. Followership. Courage. And yet you voted all that away; leaves blowing in a dishonest wind. Which brings us back to the 770 young men massacred around Camp Spiecher.

iraqi-soldiers-massacred-RIPjpg

I knew those faces. Those confused, terrified young faces. About 175 of them were Iraqi Air Force recruits; the others, Army. This was precisely the process that I helped set up. Did I know personally this group? No. But they were the same young men, full of promise and hope. Capable of immense good, ready to be molded by whatever of our influence remained. But I wondered, as I looked at some of the pictures, why were they captured without uniforms? Without weapons? Why no resistance? It wasn’t until there were a couple of witness testimonies that it all snapped into place.

They were abandoned. First by us, then by the leaders, no longer influenced by “the friendly side,” that had fallen into their old habits.

One survivor talked of the young military recruits being told to change into civilian clothes, take no weapons: they would be loaded into trucks and sent to Baghdad. Another talked of their senior officers just disappearing. In both cases, the next organization that they met was ISIS. And then, they were taken out into the desert, and as an inevitable consequence of U.S. policy, slaughtered. Did ISIS pull the triggers, draw the knives across young throats? Absolutely. Did the rush to leave, for no reason other than it was Bush’s war enable them to do it? Absolutely.

If the police patrolling your neighborhood let it be known that they would no longer be patrolling your neighborhood, but that the neighborhood watch would be taking over, do you think bad behavior would go up or down? Is that because new people moved in? And in the absence of a strong presence for good, what will happen to evil?

 Read the rest, here.

WFB Supercut: Why The Dems Lost (Video)

When Republicans talk about improving their “brand” – they don’t mean changing or concealing their principles so they can be more palatable to certain constituencies that don’t traditionally vote Republican. They mean doing a better job reaching out and explaining their principles to those constituencies.

Democrats, on the other hand, get by through stealth –  their “how can we fool them today?” M/O. The reason they have to rely on phony “War on Women”, class warfare, race-baiting tactics, is because when they tell the truth about their agenda, they are rejected. That can lead to uncomfortable moments on the campaign trail when the media actually does their job and holds them accountable.

Keep in mind as you watch this, that these guys were the Democrats’ A team.

Via Washington Free Beacon.

Hat tip: White House Dossier

Dems Saying Privately Midterm Drubbing Was “All Obama’s Fault”… DCCC Asks Supporters To Thank Obama

On Fox news’ Special Report, Wednesday night, The Hill’s AB Stoddard in a discussion about Obama’s press conference, noted that he was still “defiant” and not inclined to change anything. “He in I think a bit of denial – but so are the Democrats,” she noted. “What we hear privately from them last night and today is it’s all his (Obama’s) fault and what you hear publicly is that our people don’t come out in midterms so it doesn’t really matter. They haven’t figured out what mistakes they’re going to have to fix for 2016 and then 2018.” Via Weasel Zippers:

Meanwhile, also via Weasel Zippers, see if this makes sense: DCCC Asks Supporters To “Thank” Obama For GOP Crushing Dems Across The Board…

Via DCCC:

First off, you know we’re not afraid to be blunt. So we’ll just come out and say it: last night was rough. We registered more voters, and made more phone calls, and knocked on more doors than ever before. But we were still left with heartbreaking losses. Although make no mistake: last night’s results were no accident. It was the result of Republicans’ cynical political strategy that put hurting President Obama before helping the American people. […] So if you’re still fighting with us… if you’re still standing with the President… sign our note to President Obama thanking him for all he’s done and letting him know that we have his back.

Yep, the Democrat party still needs to figure some things out.

MORE: Bill O’Reilly had Charles Krauthammer on The Factor to talk about the shellacking. Dr. K said of Obama, “he’s a strange combination of obliviousness and recklessness.” He didn’t recommend that the GOP impeach Obama – he said they need to be very disciplined and avoid that. He later elaborated on how to do that. “You say this unconstitutional, illegal and we’re going to find every way can to make sure that it is not funded, that this does not get a penny of the purse. It is illegal to enact anything by executive order unless you get some appropriation from the Congress.” He went on to say that the E/O could be reversed in 2018.

SEE ALSO: Breitbart.com: Obama Warns: If Republicans Pass Immigration Reform, Executive Amnesty ‘Goes Away’

Obama doubled down on the amnesty threat during today’s press conference, affirming that it would happen because Republicans haven’t been willing to work with him for the past two years. He said that the best way to avoid his unlawful action would be for Congress to cooperate and put a bill on his desk. Sounding like a Chicago shakedown artist, the president promised that if Congress behaves and passes an immigration law he likes, the executive overreach will “go away.”

“I think that the best way, if folks are serious about getting immigration reform done, is going ahead and passing a bill and getting it to my desk. And then the executive actions that I take go away. They’re superseded by the law that is passed. And I will engage any member of Congress who’s interested in this in how we can shape legislation that will be a significant improvement over the existing system.

Serious question: How is it not a form of extortion for a president to threaten to take an extreme unilateral action if Congress doesn’t do what he wants?

“A Criminal Organization Masquerading As A Political Party” Part 7,692

The Democrat party has been accused of being “a criminal organization masquerading as a political party” but the New York Democrat party in recent days has taken the party’s mob-like tendencies to a new extreme.

Via the New York Post:

Democrats are telling voters that they had better head to the polls — or else.

The New York State Democratic Committee is bullying people into voting next week with intimidating letters warning that it can easily find out which slackers fail to cast a ballot next Tuesday.

“Who you vote for is your secret. But whether or not you vote is public record,” the letter says.

“We will be reviewing voting records . . . to determine whether you joined your neighbors who voted in 2014.”

It ends with a line better suited to a mob movie than a major political party: “If you do not vote this year, we will be interested to hear why not.”

The letter and accompanying post card was criticized even by party members, with one Democratic consultant saying it was the wrong way to inspire votes.

“It’s a threatening letter. It’s a scare piece that is unnecessary and inappropriate,” the insider said.

The threatening letter has created a backlash – look at the number of times the above tweet was retweeted.

Democrats in Brooklyn and Manhattan who received the note were reportedly furious, calling it “an attempt to browbeat them into showing up at the polls.”

“I’m outraged. Whether I vote or not is none of your business!” said a Manhattan voter, who was so incensed that she complained to a local Democratic leader.

“The letter is ludicrous and menacing,” said the voter, who requested anonymity. (Please don’t give them my name!)

Party sources say Governor Cuomo, who is highly favored to win his race against Republican Rob Astorino, is not behind the shame letters.

But Astorino scoffed, “Andrew Cuomo’s thuggish tactics just crossed the line into creepy territory . . . Threatening and intimidating people is not how honorable elected leaders operate.”

 

The CDC Should Reevaluate Its Ebola Protocols

So. A nurse in Dallas who had treated the Ebola-infected man from Liberia, was diagnosed with the deadly disease at 9:30 last night. She’s the second person in the United States who has been diagnosed with Ebola.

“At some point there was a breach in protocol” CDC director Tom Frieden said to explain how he thought the health care worker was infected.

Via The New York Times:

While the new Ebola patient was not publicly identified, officials said that she was a nurse who had helped treat Mr. Duncan at a hospital here and that she may have violated safety protocols. It was the first confirmed instance of Ebola being transmitted in this country. Officials expanded the pool of people they had been monitoring, because the nurse had not been among the 48 health care workers, relatives of Mr. Duncan and others whom they were evaluating daily.

***

The woman was in stable condition on Sunday. Dr. Daniel Varga, chief clinical officer of Texas Health Resources, which oversees Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, told reporters on Sunday that the worker had worn protective gear when coming in contact with Mr. Duncan, although he did not detail the type of contact.“This individual was following full C.D.C. precautions,” Dr. Varga said, adding, “Gown, glove, mask and shield.” Asked how concerned he was that the worker tested positive despite the precautions, he replied, “We’re very concerned.”

Despite Dr. Varga’s reassurances about C.D.C. precautions having been followed, Dr. Frieden said it appeared the woman had breached safety protocol at the hospital, possibly when removing the protective gear. Speaking on the CBS program “Face the Nation” and later at a news conference, he said that questioning of the worker had not identified precisely how a breach occurred, and that the cause of her infection was not known. Dr. Frieden said everyone who treated Mr. Duncan was now considered to be potentially exposed and that other cases of Ebola were possible.

National Journal’s Ron Fournier said on Twitter that he thinks it’s time for the CDC to reconsider its protocols.

I expressed my similar concern, later Sunday morning.

Some doctors are disputing the CDC’s assertions about how Ebola is spread.

A group of German medical doctors in a peer-reviewed medical journal article published by Oxford University Press have challenged a key assumption regarding the Ebola virus repeatedly asserted by Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

The researchers found that a patient showing no symptoms of the disease can still transmit a virus like Ebola by air if droplets containing the virus are transmitted to another person by a sneeze or cough.

As WND reported Tuesday, the World Health Organization has admitted that “wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently could transmit the Ebola virus over a short distance to another nearby person.”

***

Dr. Norman M. Balog, D.O., a board-certified family doctor practicing in Silver Spring, Maryland, brought the research of the German medical team to the attention of WND as evidence that the CDC’s Frieden could not prove his assertion air travel was safe as long as a person infected with Ebola were not showing symptoms. An infected person can go as long as 21 days in an incubation period before being infected.

“Dr. Freiden is either completely uninformed of this research,” Balog explained to WND in an exclusive telephone interview, “or he is deliberately lying because he does not want to panic the general public.”

Balog pointed out that asymptomatic carriers of diseases infecting others is a phenomenon that has been widely documented in virology studies for decades.

 

The Texas Department of State Health Services Commissioner Dr. David Lakey  health officials are still trying to figure out how the nurse got infected.

Meanwhile, the CDC is bracing for more Ebola patients.

The C.D.C. said it would conduct a nationwide training conference call on Tuesday for thousands of health care workers to ensure they would be fully prepared to treat a patient with Ebola.

“The care of Ebola patients can be done safely, but it’s hard to do it safely,” Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, director of the C.D.C., told reporters Sunday. “Even a single, inadvertent innocent slip can result in contamination.”

So this is our new normal.  Americans now get to deal with a hideous third world disease that causes death in up to 80% of those infected – because we have a president who refuses to authorize a travel ban from effected countries.

In Boston, a hospital quarantined a man who was showing “Ebola-like symptoms.”

He had recently been in Liberia.

During a press conference outside of Beth Israel, officials said the patient will undergo an evaluation to determine whether Ebola is a possible cause of the patient’s symptoms. If warranted, the hospital will test for Ebola and send the collected material to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC generally take 24 to 48 hours to return test results.

The patient was carried to Beth Israel by Brewster Ambulance. In a statement, company president Mark Brewster said the patient was waiting in his car, as instructed by Harvard Vanguard personnel. The Brewster Ambulance team followed its Ebola protocol when interacting and transporting the patient.

“Our staff has been carefully preparing over the last several weeks for situations like this, and today those preparations were put into practice,” Brewster said. “The actions by all emergency responders, including Braintree fire fighters and police and our EMS team, went exactly according to protocol.”

The Boston Public Health Commission now says that the patient “does not meet criteria to be considered someone at high risk for Ebola.”

Of course – all these panics, false alarms and eventually –  inevitably – “real things” could be avoided if we had one major protocol in place.

Via Attkisson’s article: Ebola: Officials Sound the Alarm:

“Failures in leadership have allowed a preventable disease to spin out of control,” write Lawrence Gostin and Eric Friedman in the current issue of the medical journal Lancet. Gostin, a Georgetown Law professor, is Director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center on Public Health Law & Human Rights. Friedman is Project Leader for the Joint Action and Learning Initiative on National and Global Responsibilities for Health.

If nothing changes, public health officials estimate there will be 1.4 million Ebola cases worldwide by January. There are no current projections as to how many of those might be in the U.S.

U.S. officials have repeatedly stated that we “will” have more Ebola cases here. How do they know?

“It’s inevitable,” one official told me. He asked not to be quoted by name.

Fair is fair…

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama said in May of 2008.

If Western Africa gets Ebola – then so should we.

UPDATE:

And see – I’m not the only one saying this. 

Via Moonbattery, Psychiatrist Keith Ablow tries to understand Obama’s refusal to stop to  Africans from infected West African nations from traveling here.

Such a travel ban would go some distance to stem the tide of Ebolophobia [i.e. Ebola anxiety], too. It would symbolize our country’s intention to shore up its defenses against the illness. But President Obama is very sensitive to being defined in any way by the borders of this country. I think he sees himself as a citizen of the world and sees Americans as having infected others with our deadly economic policies [i.e., capitalism] for a long time, thereby inflicting untold suffering on developing nations. To now lead the way to America insulating itself from a scourge sweeping the very countries he seems to think we have preyed upon could, of course, strike him (if only unconsciously) as profoundly unfair.

I believe the president may literally believe we should suffer along with less fortunate nations. And if he does, that is a very dangerous psychological stance from which to confront Ebola.

Let me say this plainly, as a psychiatrist who has studied this president only from a distance: In order for President Obama to keep thinking of himself as the leader of the world — and not just the free world — it may be that our boundaries must remain porous, allowing illegal immigrants and, potentially, even diseases to flow through them. …

The toll of having a president who seems to see America as having no particular manifest destiny may be seen in the spread of ISIS abroad. And it could be seen, God forbid, in not mounting a sufficient immune defense here at home, to Ebola.

Obama believes in spreading our wealth and their misery