Stoopid Party: Paul Ryan Loves Hillary Clinton, Plus Immigration, Benghazi, And How To Stop Kerry And Stop Hagel, Part I

Update: Our next article will answer the question “Why was Susan Rice sent to lie about Benghazi for Obama on the Sunday talk shows and not Hillary?” Tonight, on Fox News, Hillary friend Greta Van Susteren will get a chance to ask Hillary questions.

Greta will probably ask better, tougher (a.k.a. impertinent) questions to Hillary than the guy from Sixty Minutes thought of asking. We hope Greta won’t play pattycake with Hillary as did the “60 Minutes” reporter on pattycake Obama/Hillary interview: They knew we weren’t going to “play gotcha” with them.

We hope Greta, a Hillary friend, still proves true what Margaret Thatcher said: “If you want something said, ask a man; if you want something done, ask a woman.” Which brings us to Lindsay Graham.

Bill Clinton impeachment manager Lindsay Graham must be trying to appear tough again. Petulant Lindsay said:

Hillary Clinton got away with murder in my view. She said they had a clear-eyed view of the threats. How could you have a clear-eyed view of the threats in Benghazi when you didn’t know about the ambassador’s cable coming back from Libya?” the South Carolina Republican told host Greta Van Susteren Monday on “On The Record”.

Our guys tried to ask questions, she is very good on her feet, deflecting the questions. But she said two things that will come back to haunt her, they had a clear-eyed assessment of the threats in Libya, and they had close contact with the Libyan government. I don’t believe either one of them,” the lawmaker added.”

“Our guys tried to ask questions”. Really? We missed that. Republicans on the House and Senate committees had a well deserved chance to get answers. Did they even try? We saw a fawning display of flattery and bumbling but hardly any questions that hit the mark. Republicans caved on Benghazi long ago and Lindsay should try to devise a coordinated plan of questioning instead of going on TV flinging about the word “murder” as if Vince Foster was back in Lindsay’s impeachment bed.


There is a time to fight and a time to retreat. There is a time to cooperate and a time to obstruct. Being smart is knowing what time it is and doing what that time requires. Being the stoopid party is doing the wrong thing at the wrong time. Guess who the “stoopid party” is now?

The GOP is doing all the stoopid things at the wrong time – cooperating with Obama when they should be fighting. Hillary Clinton is doing all the smart things at the right time – lulling the enemy until… – when the time comes the DailyKooks and other Obama supporters will find their heads on the floor separated from their bodies.

The DailyKooks are lulled and gulled but soon enough orders will come down for the opposition to Hillary Clinton to begin from the left. Hillary supporters who have never forgotten or forgiven what happened in 2008 are on the move already:

“A group of Hillary Clinton supporters is launching a campaign to draft her to run for president — the first major push from an outside group for her to run.

The group, “Ready for Hillary,” filed as a super-PAC with the Federal Election Commission late last week and plans to roll out a website in the coming weeks.

It has already been active online, with nearly 50,000 Twitter followers and almost 30,000 people following the group on Facebook.

The effort is being spearheaded by Allida Black and Judy Beck, two longtime Clinton supporters who were on Clinton’s Virginia Women’s Steering Committee in 2008 and helped her raise more than $100,000.

The two also were behind Women Count, a political action committee that ran ads pushing back against calls for Clinton to drop out early from the 2008 presidential race.

Wise Republicans will stock up on popcorn to watch Hillary supporters go up once again against the DailyKooks. But right now Republicans/conservatives are mostly worried and seeing Obama as a Hillary ally for the nomination fight in 2016.

Two years from now, as it becomes clearer that Barack Obama will do everything in his power to block Hillary Clinton from the nomination in 2016, yesterday’s Sixty Minutes interview will be seen as we have described it not as many others are seeing it (tonight the O’Reilly show will probably be particularly dumb when Karl Rove and Brit Hume join in on this discussion). And a warning from us to HillaryLand: Wake up, Obama will not remain neutral as the efficient Mack McLarty hopes.

No doubt tonight Rove and Hume will repeatedly cite Sunday night’s Sixty Minutes show as Obama embracing Hillary and vice versa instead of mutual convenience for the moment. For Kirsten Powers: That Obama-Clinton interview looked just like “state-run media propaganda”:

“It was really something you would expect from like, the state-run media. It was that kind of level of propaganda as far as I’m concerned. … I can understand maybe in agreeing to the interview, letting them have maybe one softball question in the beginning and then move on to more important things. This was a joke. Just not challenging basic things like the president claiming that Hillary’s been a great secretary of state in part because they have dismantled Al Qaeda. Now, I’m sorry, is anyone paying attention to what’s going on in North Africa? Why is the president not asked about Algeria, Mali, Libya? These are front and center in the news right now.”

Poor Kirsten Powers thinks she is in 20th or 21st century America and does not realize we are in Borgia Italy where shadowboxing and palace intrigues are all that matter. Kirsten is not alone in her temporal dislocation. Paul Ryan is suffering from temporal dislocation too.

Poor Paul Ryan wants to get things done. It’s one of the great stupidities of we Obama opponents.

Hillary Clinton is a serious person who has a lifetime of policy work she wanted to accomplish. But in 2008 Barack Obama worked the palace intrigue angles and managed to get Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelousy to gift him the Democratic Party nomination in 2008.

John McCain is a former prisoner of war with a long history of policy work (such as immigration reform) he wanted to get done. Barack Obama played the race card on McCain too and while McCain talked policy and shadowboxed with Big Media and Obama’s cult Obama romped.

Mitt Romney is a career business person who specialized in turning around failing companies. Romney had a career in government too. But Mitt Romney did not realize he was living in Borgia Italy. Romney never took into account that palace intrigues and shadowboxing are what matter in Borgia Italy. Romney made the supremely foolish mistake of selecting a policy man for vice president instead of one that would have been a shield against Obama’s race baiting history.

Paul Ryan is a serious person. He has been a serious person since his father died when Ryan was a very young man. Paul Ryan is a serious man who does not realize he is in Borgia Italy. Paul Ryan wants to get things done so he continues to fight the good fight. On Sunday Paul Ryan appeared on Meet The Press:

“DAVID GREGORY, HOST: It was interesting on the day of the inauguration, Brian Williams and I and others were talking, and we noticed some video during the luncheon after the inauguration. And one of the things that caught our eye was a great moment here. You have your back to us. But there you are speaking, you’re with Secretary Clinton but also President Clinton. And that’s just one of those moments where you say, gosh, what were they talking about? Any advice there coming from the former President?

CONGRESSMAN PAUL RYAN (R-WISCONSIN): We were talking about personal health. Both of us lost our dads when we were young, and we were just talking. I got concussions when I was young, and Hillary was telling me about hers. We were just kind of chumming it up.

Look, if we had a Clinton presidency, if we had Erskine Bowles chief-of-staff at the White House, or President of the United States, I think we would have fixed this fiscal mess by now. That’s not the kind of presidency we’re dealing with right now.

GREGORY: And you don’t blame conservatives, particularly in the House, for thwarting that effort?

RYAN: Both parties – forget about just the recent past – both parties got us to the mess we are in, this fiscal crisis, Republicans and Democrats. And you know what? It’s going to take both parties to solve this problem. That’s the kind of leadership we need today.

For his desire to get things done Paul Ryan’s remarks have further angered many Republicans/conservatives.” We can’t blame them. Paul Ryan wants to get things done not just obstruct – even though now is the time to obstruct.

Paul Ryan was not alone on Sunday. With his appearance on the Sunday talk shows Senator Bob Corker employed his time to also discuss Hillary Clinton. Republican Senator Corker had this to say on Fox News:

“Appearing on Fox News Sunday this morning, Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) said the blame for the misinformation about Benghazi lies squarely with U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice‘s Sunday talk show appearances, and not with outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Asked by host Chris Wallace whether there was truth to Hillary’s phrase that it doesn’t make a difference whether the administration was “telling the truth to the American people” in the days following the Benghazi attacks.

The deception around the Benghazi issue did not come from the State Department, and no doubt emanated from Susan Rice on this program and others, on that Sunday morning,” Corker told Wallace.

“She didn’t do it by herself,” Wallace cautioned.

It was more of a White House political operative deception that was carried out. Not from the State Department,” said Corker. “I do think that Senator Johnson and Secretary Clinton were talking past each other. I understand the point she was making. Certainly, I understand the emotions of the American people who feel like they have been misled and, in fact, Americans were misled in the beginning about what happened around the Benghazi attack.”

Both Paul Ryan and Senator Corker are doing something smart. It might not appear to be so to those that think they live in a 21st century democracy and not Borgia Italy. But what they did was very smart and it is the key to stopping Chuck Hagel and to a lesser extent John Kerry from further destroying this country. But, as we previously promised to answer, that’s for Part II.


Some Answers: Hillary Clinton, Benghazi, And The Nomination Fight For 2016, Part II

Update: [note: we posted this update Sunday night but for some reason it did not take.]

Sixty Minutes anyone? We don’t watch hostage tapes so we won’t watch this either.

We know that both Hillary and the Obamination are saying “let by-gones be by-gones and we are all over that 2008 reality”. We also know that they will say that at first, right after 2008’s Obama race-baiting, it was difficult to forgive and forget but now they are best of friends. Can any of this be true? Even if it does, we remember, and we do not forgive being called racists nor any of the other Obama/DailyKooks ugliness.

Is any of this lovey dovey real? Well, we remember the Hillary/Obama kiss of 2008 and it was as phony then as it is phony now. What we wrote in 2008 applies equally to today:

“Not since Michael Jackson kissed Lisa-Marie Presley has there been a more tortured embrace.

Michael Jackson/Lisa-Marie legally united for publicity – they untied themselves soon thereafter.”


As we document below, Barack Obama will do his utmost to make sure Hillary Clinton never becomes the 2016 nominee. Hillary’s tough and ugly job is to dance with demons until the time comes to cut their throats. We’ll play Cary Grant to notorious Ingrid Bergman and not like a minute of it.

So why the show? The Obamination needs Hillary’s hard poll numbers to overcome his flaccid droop. Hillary needs to gull Obama’s Hopium Guzzlers into complacency until we can take over the DNC again, squash the DailyKooks, and begin from there to restore America to sanity.


Want to know about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? Read on as we get real.

We live in Borgia Italy but too many Obama opponents who are usually smart continue to insist we are in 21st century America. We live in the Age of Fake but too many Obama opponents who are usually perceptive try to fit the world into their notion of truth. It’s so sad it’s laughable.

In 2008 at the Obama inauguration Yo-Yo Ma and Itzhak Perlman, among others, pretended to play live music. We briefly wrote about that flim-flam in the context that it was another small example of the much greater Obama “Age of Fake”.

Comes inauguration day 2012 and all the talk is about Beyonce and the Marine Band lip synching songs. Somehow lost to Obama opponents, particularly those belonging to the party very smart Republican Governor Bobby Jindal correctly calls “the stupid party”, is the real lip synching scandal.

The real lip synching scandal is not Beyonce but the Senate and House Republicans at the Kabuki theater experience some fools expected to be about Benghazi.

Benghazi??? Isn’t that the place Mitt Romney completely ignored at the alleged foreign policy debate during last year’s presidential election? Benghazi was ignored when it mattered but somehow it is supposed to matter now.

Somehow, according to these dullards who sought to resurrect Benghazi as some kind of issue, fear of Benghazi led Hillary Clinton to hide under hospital beds faking illness for months. At least that silly notion is put to rest. Anyone who thinks Hillary Clinton cannot smash irksome ‘interrogators without a clue’ had only to watch Hillary go up against Senate and House Republicans “leaders”.

Before and after Hillary’s appearance we read all sorts of comments about all sorts of evidence that proves Hillary Clinton is a liar. Well, it that is true why wasn’t any of this incredible proof utilized to destroy Hillary? Here, take a look at what even Hillary haters (please note the worst Hillary haters are not on Fox News but on the left as we will discuss below) on Fox News had to say:

Note that in the video Jon Stewart says that there are serious questions about what happened in Benghazi and we deserve answers. We agree.

Is Benghazi important? You betcha. Should Republicans have attempted to “grill” Hillary. Yes.

But, as we will have to expound upon in another article coming real soon, questions about Benghazi have to be made relevant to what is happening NOW. “What difference at this point does it make?” is entirely correct. Cartoonist Ramirez on the “difference” might be funny but not the clue Republicans need to get.

Hint for Republicans that want to uncover what happened in Benghazi not act like fools: the nomination of John Kerry, the appointment of Denis McDonough, Egypt, F-16s, the coordinated attacks on Hillary by Barack Obama over foreign policy.

That article, made clear the Obama secret war against Hillary Clinton. But for the dullards who cannot accept the fact that the America they knew is no longer, that we live in Borgia Italy where palace intrigues and shadow boxing reign, all these dullards see is Hillary Clinton (along with Bill) and Barack Obama arm in arm walking happily along. These dullards are wrong.

It’s easy for dullards to see Hillary, Bill, and Barack as one corrupt whole. But that is shadowbox analysis and you do not win boxing shadows. For Republicans to win, or Obama opponents to win it is imperative to see beyond the shadows and tackle the shadow making machinery and players.

What do we mean by all this? We mean that most Republicans, conservatives, and otherwise sane Obama opponents assume Hillary Clinton will be the next nominee of the Obama Dimocrat party and that Barack Obama will do everything to get Hillary the nomination because (a) he owes his reelection to Bill Clinton’s oratorical skills and Hillary Clinton’s silence; (b) some sort of deal was worked out with Bill to secure Hillary the nomination and the presidency. This is all wrong.

Barack Obama and his minions will do everything in their power to destroy Hillary Clinton and make sure she does not get the nomination in 2016 let alone the presidency.

There is no way that the crazed Obama left is going to go back to the hated paradigm of clinton-bush-clinton-bush interrupted by Obama for clinton-bush years. The crazed left minions might think they love Hillary Clinton now, but wait until their overlords decide they will oppose Hillary and the minions will fall back into the Hillary hate line.

The crazed Obama left is not going to have Hillary Clinton, THE CLINTONS, be the culmination of their revolution by having Hillary inherit the mantle of Obama. The left might be crazed but it is not stupid and the leadership of the totalitarian Obama left is not about to surrender its power to Hillary and Bill and Terry and the hated DLC.

The crazed left is happy that Bill Clinton made some smart calculations in backing Obama. Loathe his decision or not Bill Clinton saw what many of us saw: Romney was a weak candidate unable because of RomneyCare to effectively attack ObamaCare from the get-go; and Romney would not go for the jujular and do what was necessary to take down Obama.

Bill Clinton made some smart calculations to survive and take the party back from Obama but he might have been too smart for his own good. Bill better have some other tricks up his sleeve because as we always have written:

“Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.”

The crazed left is not happy that Obama had to go to “racist” Bill Clinton and that Hillary Clinton is now more popular than their beloved Barack. The crazed left is looking for a candidate and a way to get rid of the Clintons and thanks to Barack Obama they think they have found the answer.

This past week the announcement of the Obama campaign organization’s new role was announced. Many within the Obama Dimocratic party are baffled and exposing the divisions within the party. But the answer to many questions about why this new organization has been formed is very simple: this latest version of the Obama campaign is the way to keep Hillary away from the nomination in 2016 and to keep Obama in control of the abomination he now owns:

Dem officials fret over new Obama nonprofit

Some key Democrats worry that President Obama’s new Organizing for Action group will marginalize the traditional party apparatus, cannibalizing dollars and volunteers while making it harder to elect down-ballot candidates.

State party leaders grumbled Tuesday at the Democratic National Committee’s meeting in Washington about a lack of detail on how exactly the new tax-exempt advocacy organization will work.

“It’s still a big question mark right now,” said Minnesota Democratic chairman Ken Martin. “We were told before the end of this campaign that all of that [the Obama campaign machinery] would fold into state parties. Now we’re being told something different, which is they’re going to set up this 501(c)(4).” [snip]

“I’m not a dummy,” he said. “I understand post-Citizens United the necessity to set up vehicles for different types of money to flow, but the reality is you can’t strip the party bare and expect in four years that we’re going to be able to pick up the pieces and get a Democrat elected president if you’ve completely stopped building capacity within the party.”

Contrary to his protestations, Martin is a dummy. Obama intends to keep control of the party and that means good bye Hillary. The answer is staring them right in the face but they refuse to see, or rather they refuse to admit to themselves, what Obama is up to:

“People are very concerned. They don’t know where it will lead,” said North Carolina Democratic Party Chairman David Parker. “The concerns vary. Nothing in particular, and everything in general. … There’s always a question of what does a successful reelection campaign do after the show is over. Is there another play to be involved with? Or what? And we’re in the ‘or what’ stage?”

“I would love to know,” he added. “It’s like the three wise men come to [King] Herod, and Herod says, ‘Well, this is really cool. After you find the baby Jesus, come back and tell me where he is so that I too may go worship,’” Parker added. “Now, was he acting in good faith or did he kill all the children in Bethlehem? I don’t know how the story ends.” [snip]

“Essentially, it’s an end run around the DNC and state parties,” said a third state chairman. “For the long-term health of our party, I don’t think it is the way to go. I don’t think fighting for donors is the way to do it. … We’ve won five of the last six popular votes in the general elections, so something’s working.

“The simple truth of the matter is that OFA 4.0, or whatever it is now, is not going to work to elect our local legislators,” the chairman added. “It’s not going to work to elect our local governors. It’s going to work to push the president’s agenda. I come from a state where the president’s not very popular. My elected Democrats are not always going to line up with him, and getting the activists all juiced up over it doesn’t help elect Democrats.” [snip]

Behind the scenes, though, the new incarnation of OFA will undoubtedly diminish the DNC’s relevance and overshadow Wasserman Schultz. Many insiders believe Obama’s decision to allow her to stay on as chairman for another term suggests a lack of interest in the party as much as a vote of confidence in her leadership.”

It’s all about Obama guys. It’s about Obama retaining a death grasp on the party. It’s all about keeping Hillary away from the nomination and the presidency.

Only now do we read about the past tensions and the present and future tensions that result from the Obama cult control:

“DNC members said they were caught off guard when the leaders of the president’s reelection team announced Obama for America was morphing into Organizing for Action (OFA), a nonprofit group that can take unlimited “soft money” donations.

The group will be spearheaded by former Obama campaign manager Jim Messina and advocate for Obama’s policies by mobilizing the millions-strong list of grassroots supporters built by the campaign.

While the new group will seek to go toe to toe with GOP outside groups like Crossroads GPS, some Democrats aren’t pleased that Obama didn’t fold his powerful grassroots operation back into the DNC. [snip]

We’re not quite clear on what exactly OFA is going to be doing. We saw an email [announcement] just like everyone else saw an email the other day,” Kanoyton said. “I had no advance warning. [snip]

There has been some tension between the DNC and OFA in the past — even when OFA was technically operating as a part of the broader Democratic Party apparatus — with fights over sharing resources and prioritizing issues.

Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.), an outgoing DNC vice chairman, said he’d found out about the change to the Obama organization from young staffers of his who were on OFA’s mailing list.”

About that mailing list and other assets of the Obama campaign:

“The tech team behind the 2012 Obama campaign has probably received more attention than any political programmers in history. A so-called “dream team of engineers from Facebook, Google and Twitter [who] built the software that drove Barack Obama’s reelection” were extolled in the press for bringing Silicon Valley strategies like Agile development to the normally hidebound process of a political campaign. In the post mortems that followed Obama’s victory, many credited the superiority of the Democrats’ tech team and its famous Narwhal platform, in contrast to the failure of Mitt Romney’s digital efforts, with mobilizing the vote and winning crucial swing states.

But in the aftermath of the election, a stark divide has emerged between political operatives and the techies who worked side-by-side. At issue is the code created during the Obama for America (OFA) 2012 campaign: the digital architecture behind the campaign’s website, its system for collecting donations, its email operation, and its mobile app. When the campaign ended, these programmers wanted to put their work back into the coding community for other developers to study and improve upon. Politicians in the Democratic party felt otherwise, arguing that sharing the tech would give away a key advantage to the Republicans. Three months after the election, the data and software is still tightly controlled by the president and his campaign staff, with the fate of the code still largely undecided. It’s a choice the OFA developers warn could not only squander the digital advantage the Democrats now hold, but also severely impact their ability to recruit top tech talent in the future.

If the code OFA built was put on ice at the DNC until 2016, it would become effectively worthless. “None of that will be useful in four years, technology moves too fast,” said Ryan. [snip]

While the campaign and winning the election were fulfilling for these developers, Ryan isn’t planning a return to politics. The aftermath has jaded him. “I think it just reiterates the fact that change won’t come from Washington,” says Ryan. “If techies want change, we have to do it from the outside.

It’s all about Obama guys. It’s a cult the cult leader intends to keep for himself. Barack Obama now has the apparatus to ignore the DNC. All Barack needs now is a candidate or a willing dupe.

There are rumors of a lantern jawed Michelle Obama throwing her garish self into the ring. We believe Martin O’Malley will be the crazed left candidate for the DailyKooks (after Montana’s clownish Brian Schweitzer is filtered out). Barack Obama is keeping his own clown close to the vest:

Obama Is Boosting Biden’s 2016 Prospects

In case you haven’t noticed, President Obama and his vaunted PR machine are orchestrating a full-court press to boost the presidential stock of his loyal vice president, Joe Biden.

It is not clear whether Biden will seek the Oval Office next time — he will be 73 years old when 2016 rolls around. But just in case, the political foundation is carefully being laid and the public expectation is being buttressed by White House strategists, and dutifully documented by the media.

“Biden stokes talk of presidential campaign in 2016,” said a headline in Sunday’s Washington Examiner.

Since the Obama-Biden re-election in November, the loquacious vice president has been all over the place, doing everything from the ceremonial (attending the Army-Navy football game in Philadelphia) to the monumental: leading a high-profile presidential task force on gun violence that will make recommendations to Obama on Tuesday.

Thanks to the president putting him in charge, rather than someone such as the FBI director or a prominent jurist, the work of the task force — a big deal since the Newtown, Conn., shootings last month — has given the vice president a lot of face time on television. He met last week, amid much media hoopla and commentary, with groups such as the NRA, video-game executives and representatives of the entertainment industry.

In addition to all that, Biden found time to negotiate an eleventh-hour “fiscal-cliff” compromise deal with Senate Republicans, visit devastated New Jersey in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, lead the official U.S. delegation to the inauguration of Mexico President Enrique Peña Nieto, and meet or phone a bevy of world leaders including Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, European Parliament President Martin Schulz, and Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos.”

Swearing in new members of the U.S. Senate, shopping at Costco (co-founded owned by an Obama bundler), planned Sandy Hook publicity stunts with families of the dead, Ezra Klein incense lightings, Barack calling him his “extraordinary” vice president and providing him lots of assignments are some of the Barack-to-Biden love. It’s a dead fish message:

“Perhaps the president is sending a message to Hillary Clinton that he will not automatically back her if she decides to run in 2016. With Biden in the field, Obama has a ready excuse as to why he can’t endorse the early front-runner. To be sure, Clinton has been a loyal secretary of state. But Biden’s loyalty has been second to none, and Clinton was Obama’s strongest and bitterest rival for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

Moreover, her recent health problems might compromise her presidential prospects. Though younger than Biden, she still would be 69 shortly before Election Day 2016.”

It used to be that Hillary’s age would be the line of attack against her by the crazed left. Now it will not be her age, because she is younger than Biden, it will be her health. You know the health problems that many dolts derided as a fig leaf for cowardice.

But is Biden running? The Washington Post thinks so:

“One thing became abundantly clear during the past several days of inauguration festivities in Washington, D.C.: Joe Biden is running for president in 2016.

Ok, Biden isn’t technically in the race. (Technically, there isn’t a race yet either.) And, of course, minds can change between now and 2016. But, Biden is doing everything that someone who is planning to run would do. Everything. [snip]

* Biden — with Beau, a major rising star in both Delaware and nationally, in tow — not only stopped by the Iowa State Society’s inaugural ball on Saturday night but also delivered this gem of a line: “I am proud to be president of the United States, but I am prouder to be Barack — I mean, excuse me.” [snip]

* Biden invited New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan to attend his private swearing-in for a second term on Sunday at the vice presidential residence. [snip]

* Biden was in full Biden mode during the inaugural parade on Monday, working the crowd in a way that had “Vote for Me!” written all over it.”

Republican/conservative Hotair sees the Biden hot air as a 2016 prep too and quotes CNN’s report of private sit-downs with DNC delegates.

Politico thinks Biden is gunning for the top spot in 2016 too:

“Joe Biden ‘intoxicated’ by 2016 run

Joe Biden summoned more than 200 Democratic insiders to the vice presidential residence Sunday night to chat about the 2012 triumph — but many walked away convinced his rising 2016 ambitions were the real intent of the long, intimate night.

“I took a look at who was there,” said longtime New Hampshire state Sen. Lou D’Allesandro, “and said to myself, ‘There’s no question he’s thinking about the future.’ ”

He’s intoxicated by the idea, and it’s impossible not to be intoxicated by the idea,” said a Democrat close to the White House. And the intoxication is hardly new. Officials working on the Obama-Biden campaign last year were struck by how the vice president always seemed to have one eye on a run, including aggressively courting the president’s donors. Obama aides at times had to actively steer Biden to places where he was needed — like Pennsylvania — because he kept asking to be deployed to Iowa, New Hampshire and other early states. [snip]

A Democrat close to both Biden and Clinton said it is extremely unlikely that they would challenge each other. “They’re both going to build up teams and see how it goes,” the Democrat said. “One of them will fade away, as it becomes more obvious which one of them should be the standard-bearer for the Obama legacy. I can’t see them both announcing for president. But both of them will have teams that try to get to that.”

It always will come down to Hillary and the will she won’t she question. Politico continues somewhat along the lines of what we see:

“Here’s a little intrigue that only Obama knows the answer to: Will the president really want a Clinton to replace him after spending eight years redirecting the party away from the centrism of Bill Clinton? After all, it was Clinton who declared the era of Big Government is over. And it was Obama, in his second inaugural speech, who declared it very much back on.

Obama would rather be succeeded by a Biden type than a Clinton type,” a prominent Democrat told us. But the same Democrat went on to say that if Hillary Clinton were running, she would be running on the Obama legacy, not her husband’s.

The crazed left will never trust that Hillary is “running on the Obama legacy.” The crazed left hates Hillary and won’t believe her on this issue once Obama puts out the word that his man is not a woman. We are in Borgia Italy and so we have to continue to watch as Hillary moves in the shadow world to determine what we will do in the general election. For the nomination we will strongly back Hillary Clinton if only to spite the Obama left.

Back to Politico and Biden:

“Biden’s most revealing move may have been to hold a little-discussed Sunday night party at the vice president’s mansion. He invited about 200 Democratic insiders over to his home and the guest list included some of the most influential figures in national and early-state Democratic politics.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, NAACP head Ben Jealous, Delaware Gov. Jack Markell, Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear, Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy, Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory and Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon all were in attendance.

But what really raised eyebrows among the attendees were just how many Democrats from the traditional first nominating states made the trek to the Naval Observatory.

There were big names such as South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat and a Palmetto State powerhouse, but also lesser-known activists.”

Hillary hater and race-baiter Jim Clyburn will assist Barack Obama to make sure Hillary Clinton never gets the nomination in 2016.

Stu Rothenberg thinks Biden is gunning for the top job too:

“The 2016 Presidential Race Begins Today

After recent work on congressional deals, Biden looks like a more serious contender in 2016, if he chooses to run. [snip]

After Clinton and Biden, the list becomes more speculative. New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley are seen as ambitious and interested. Former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer probably should be on the list as well.

Cuomo’s oratorical skills and access to New York state’s Democratic dollars can’t be ignored, and while O’Malley didn’t exactly set the world on fire at the 2012 Democratic National Convention, his state has put up good numbers on education and his very liberal views could be appealing to Democrats. Schweitzer has a folksy quality that many like, though I have felt for years that he tries way too hard.”

We believe Biden is merely a stop Hillary candidate and a place for Barack Obama to hang his hat. Eventually it will be Martin O’Malley, Governor of Maryland an Hopium guzzler extraordinaire who will become the darling of the crazed left. If O’Malley can gin up sufficient support then Barack will back him as the best stop Hillary candidate.

Already O’Malley has gun control laws prepared as the way to signal he wants the nomination:

“HUSTLING TO keep pace with New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D), Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) is preparing to lay out his own package of tough new gun laws in the aftermath of December’s bloodbath at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. Many Republicans, in thrall to the gun lobby, have scoffed at both governors as intent more on burnishing their viability as presidential candidates in 2016 than on halting gun violence.”

It will be O’Malley or some other Hopium guzzling loon who will get the crazed left vote. For those that doubt the left will attack Hillary, just read Michael Kinsley’s early January article Hillary Clinton’s Ego Trips.

John Kraushaar has a smart article that notes the gun control issue won’t help O’Malley or Cuomo in 2016 while noting that it might help get attention at least:

“The bigger question is whether Cuomo and O’Malley merit the first-tier presidential stature they’ve been receiving lately. I’ve written about how thin the Democratic presidential bench looks for 2016, sans Hillary, with a bunch of secondary politicians looking to punch above their weight class. Desperate to build their national stature and fill a vacuum, they’re looking to grab at national issues to please the base ahead of a presidential run.

O’Malley (after dispatching Schweitzer) will be the candidate of the loon left. Biden will be the placeholder for those wanting to stop Hillary from getting the nomination. Barack Obama will orchestrate the next nomination in the same way that Reid, Ted Kennedy and Pelosi orchestrated Obama’s gifted nomination.

But, but, but, Hillary will appear with Obama on Sunday, skeptics will retort. Well, Obama wants to get some of that Hillary luster near him to help his poll numbers and maybe borrow one of Hillary’s ovaries for the coming fights with congress and the courts.

For her part Hillary will try to co-opt Obama supporters with her appearance as she leaves government service for now. What??? You don’t like the idea of Hillary Clinton making moves out of political motivation? You used to like Hillary but you want the “truth” and a “principled stand” – for her to blast Obama in Congress and on TV – and because that prancing unicorn is not in your stocking you now hate Hillary? Maybe you’ll be happier with Michelle Obama as the next nominee of the party with a closet full of race baiting tricks to wear.


Some Answers: Hillary Clinton, Benghazi, And The Nomination Fight For 2016, Part I

Update: Hillary’s opening statement on Benghazi: “I take responsibility”. Other than a spirited John McCain not much has happened this morning. As we wrote below Republicans have caved on Benghazi like they have on the fiscal cliff and the debt ceiling. Perhaps this afternoon the House Republicans will ask some pertinent questions.

Most ridiculous “question” came from Durbin of Illinois who spent his time remembering Bush era “weapons of mass destruction” stories which at the time even Al Gore thought were true. Somehow Durbin forgot Hillary voted for the authorization on that Iraq issue. Even if Durbin has a point on the weapons of mass destruction issue, shouldn’t everyone of every political stripe be against misinformation and lies in situations such as Benghazi? People died, Obama lied.


It’s going to be an update kind of day here with Hillary Clinton testifying before the foreign policy committees of Congress. Hillary will be at the Senate starting at 9:00 a.m. and this afternoon she will appear before the House committee. The topic is Benghazi.

We’re going to use the focus on Hillary Clinton this week to answer questions about what we are going to do in 2016 and all manner of questions as to what is going on with Hillary Clinton and 2016. The Hillary Clinton for President Federal Elections Committee reports a surplus with all debts paid so there are a lot of answers to questions available for those without need of political seeing eye dogs.

Those without political sight write silly things about us such as this:

“…that place will be fascinating to watch if Hillary decides to run as they’ll now have to reverse course and launch internal purges against all the tea party dreck they’ve attracted since Hillary conceded.”

By “that place” they mean good ol’ Big Pink. We’ll try to ‘splain to these illiterates what we are going to do in 2016 and what they are going to do as well. They’re so stupid and incapable of understanding they spew nonsense about us calling Elvis “gay” (we never wrote anything so silly about Presley although we did write that Jailhouse Rock is the gayest song to hit the American top ten and all you have to do is read the lyrics to know we are right”) so we will explain to them as clearly as possible what we believe they are going to do before they receive their marching orders and do what they are told to do.

Hint for these are other DailyKooks: Barack Obama will do everything in his power to make sure Hillary Clinton does not get the nomination of the party in 2016. The DailyKooks will dredge up every attack they employed against Hillary Clinton in 2008 because they will not surrender the Obama Dimocratic Party to Hillary or Bill or Terry or Penn or anybody. But that’s all for another in this series of articles and we will explain it all in Part II or III.

For those wondering why we are talking about 2016 when Hillary Clinton will be “grilled” on Benghazi today let’s get real and understand that 2016 is the subtext of today’s hearings. We will always put country above party or personality and we want answers about what happened in Benghazi as well as the entire catastrophe presided over by Barack Obama in the Middle East and the abomination termed by Obama managed declinists as the “Arab Spring”.

But we now doubt there will be any answers because it appears that Republican policy is now to cave on anything they previously said they cared about. Tomorrow we will see the complete collapse of Republicans on the debt ceiling after they earlier collapsed on the fiscal cliff and today we might just see a complete collapse of opposition on foreign policy.

Will Republicans dare face down Hillary? Probably not (not even in the House) especially as the latest WaPo/ABC poll shows Hillary Clinton popularity peaking.

We want answers as to what happened in Benghazi. On this issue politics should be put aside and let the chips fall where they may. As we have repeatedly written we believe if the entire story is told Hillary will come out smelling like a rose. But we doubt the entire story will be told while Barack Obama is in office.

Perhaps Republicans are being wise by caving on the fiscal cliff, the debt ceiling and Benghazi. Perhaps their cowardice on budgets, debts and deficits will pay off sometime in the future. Perhaps they want to use the Benghazi disaster against Barack Obama and John Kerry not the outgoing Secretary of State.

Meanwhile there are a lot of questions that need answers.

The New York Times reports some of the Egyptian terrorists from the hostage taking in Algeria were in Benghazi. There are a lot of questions that require answers:

“Congressional investigators have pieced together a series of decisions that led State Department officials to inexplicably draw down security in Libya last year even as threats and attacks against Western diplomats were rising in the violent, chaotic city of Benghazi where America’s ambassador was killed last Sept. 11.”

It’s going to take much more than a top to bottom review to explain all the Obama failures of leadership in the Middle East.


Hooray! And Hurrah! For The Newly Elected Leader!!! – Of Israel

Our very good advice was not taken in 2008 by Hillary or McCain. In 2012 our very good advice was not taken and now we all pay the price.

This is the long weekend of 2012 when we all pay the price for Mitt Romney and other appeasers saying Barack Obama is a nice guy instead of Barack Obama is a nasty twit. We’ll all suffer every day for the next four years.

We’ll suffer every day for the next four years knowing we have to hear that ceaseless drone Barack Obama as well as his tedious lantern-jawed wife. We’ll suffer every day for the next four years knowing that a majority of our countrymen and women are ever so stupid.

Think we should respect the decision of our fellow countrymen and countrywomen instead of laughing at them? Well, watch as Jimmy Kimmel helps expose, to a small extent, the hive mind of cult stupidity that elected and re-elected Barack Obama:

Big Media tells these dopes to jump and they jump. Oy vey!

* * * * * *

Oy vey indeed. It’s a good thing the Israeli public is not so dumb, vacuous, or as easily manipulated by American Big Media. It’s a good thing the Israeli public is not willing to commit national suicide. Or at least so we are led to believe by the electoral prognostications of Israeli political observers:

“Defiant Netanyahu set to confound critics

Two polls published on Friday showed Mr Netanyahu’s rightwing Likud Beiteinu bloc on course to form Israel’s next government as the largest party by far, with 32 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. If they are correct, the 63-year-old will become Israel’s longest-serving prime minister since David Ben-Gurion, its founding father.

The expected victory will confound and frustrate his many critics in Israel and abroad. They argue Mr Netanyahu has deepened Israel’s isolation, forced mainstream political discourse to the right and buried hopes of peace with the Palestinians by embarking on an unprecedented expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, including nearly 200 units approved this week.”

Just as David Ben-Gurion was at the founding of the state of Israel, Netanyahu is there at an hour of great peril – as the United States inaugurates four more years of horror with Israel hating Barack Obama at the helm:

“Tensions with the US, Israel’s closest ally, were laid bare this week with leaked comments attributed to President Barack Obama warning that the expansion of settlements was driving the Jewish state towards “near-total isolation” and reportedly saying: “Israel doesn’t know what its own interests are.”

“No one decides for the citizens of Israel,” Mr Netanyahu later told the rightwing Israel Hayom newspaper in response to the remarks. “I think that President Obama knows that the ones determining Israel’s vital interests are the citizens of Israel, and they will be the ones to choose who will protect those interests in the best possible way.”

Americans have opted for four years of horror. Israeli’s are about to accept the reality of the region and American government hostility and vote for national survival:

“If, as the adage holds, every nation gets the government it deserves, a plurality – though not a majority – of Israelis on January 22 will re-elect a leader who reflects a defiant, introspective, pessimistic public mood.

A poll published on Friday showed that while 52 per cent of Israelis favoured an independent Palestinian state, 62 per cent did not think a peace agreement was possible. Most Israelis see Likud as the most credible party on security.

“Netanyahu is not telling people, ‘We can get to a solution,’ ” says Rafi Smith, a pollster. “He’s telling them that because everyone around us hates us we have to be strong and hawkish in the way we look at life and at the security issue.” [snip]

Whatever the make-up of the next coalition, Mr Netanyahu on Friday signalled to Israeli media that afterwards he would resist any peace initiative put forward by the Europeans that included a return of Jewish West Bank settlers to Israel’s pre-1967 boundaries – suggesting no retreat from the policies that have frayed Israel’s relations with its allies.

“I don’t deal in giving away concessions,” he told the Maariv newspaper. “Our record has proved this.”

Israel wants peace with Palestinians and most Israelis want a two-state solution but the Israeli public knows that the Palestinians do not want peace or a two state solution. The Palestinian leadership wants the destruction of Israel. That is why the Israeli public is poised to reelect Netanyahu.

The Israeli public knows that this is a particularly perilous time. The inauguration of Barack Obama is dangerous for Israel. The Israeli public will vote for Netanyahu partly because Barack Obama and his attempted diktats is a danger to Israel:

“‘Political coward’ Binyamin Netanyahu sees rift with Barack Obama widen

Israeli prime minister’s aides accused American president of interfering in Israel’s elections

Already fractious relations between Binyamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama have been further strained in the runup to the president’s inauguration on Monday and the Israeli prime minister’s anticipated victory in Tuesday’s election.

Netanyahu aides accused Obama of interfering in the Israeli election following publication of an article by Jeffrey Goldberg, which quoted the president as saying: “Israel doesn’t know what its own best interests are.” Obama, wrote Goldberg, viewed Netanyahu as a “political coward”. [snip]

The Goldberg article, along with Obama’s nomination of Chuck Hagel as defence secretary, has been interpreted in Israel as clear signs of the president’s exasperation with Netanyahu and possible payback for the latter’s support of Obama’s rival, Mitt Romney, in the US election in November. Hagel is seen as “anti-Israel” because of his questioning of Israeli government policy and the pro-Israel lobby in the US.

Goldberg, who is known to be close to the president, wrote that Israel risked becoming “more of a pariah” and that Obama was reluctant to invest fresh effort in the Middle East peace process in the face of Netanyahu’s continued settlement expansion. [snip]

“Obama… has been consistent in his analysis of Israel’s underlying challenge: If it doesn’t disentangle itself from the lives of West Bank Palestinians, the world will one day decide it is behaving as an apartheid state.” The White House did not deny the words attributed to the president.

“Barack Obama said, simply and clearly, what he thinks about Israel’s prime minister and where he is leading Israel,” wrote former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinkas in Yedioth Ahronoth. “These are grave, alarming statements, which are without precedent.”

Barack Obama has never visited Israel as president even as he visited Muslim capitals and larded his speeches with anti-Jewish fictions. That should surprise no one. Barack Obama wants to be the “Arab’s lawyer”:

“The new model drawing attention from Democratic foreign policy hands, he said, is to build support among Arab leaders for a U.S. plan and then present that to Israel — to serve as the Arabs’ lawyer, rather than as Israel’s, in one formulation used to describe the effort in the region.”

The Israeli public wants peace but not at the price of national suicide. Unlike the American public and American Big Media the Israeli public is not running away from reality:

“A Far-Right Israeli Electorate?

Contrary to conventional wisdom, Israelis haven’t become radicals. They’ve just abandoned a delusion. [snip]

According to one recent poll, 67 percent of Israeli voters support a peace deal with the Palestinians. Even on the right, a majority said they back the prospect of two states for two people, with 57 percent of Likud supporters backing such a deal and 53 percent of those likely to vote for Bennett’s Jewish Home Party also favoring the two-state solution.

Still, as much as Israelis want peace with the Arabs, they are skeptical of that happening anytime soon. [snip]

Instead, they’ve adopted the central paradigms of both the left and the right. “Most Israelis are very pessimistic about reaching a peace deal with the Palestinians, and the Arabs in general. This is a core paradigm of the right,” Schueftan told me. “And yet a majority is willing to reach a compromise that would partition the land into two states for two people. This is a core paradigm of the left. They’re not saying we don’t want peace, but that even if they make concessions they don’t think it will lead to peace.”

Israelis haven’t abandoned the dream of peace; they’ve faced reality and are refusing to continue to pay lip service to an illusion. “The last 20 years have seen a process of depolarization,” said David Hazony of the Israel Project. [snip]

If the second Lebanon war and two wars in Gaza marked disillusionment with the peace process, then Netanyahu’s 2009 speech at Bar-Ilan University promoting the two-state solution marked, at last, the acceptance of the idea in the political mainstream. Netanyahu, for all the criticism he gets in the international press, should get credit for leading even the Israeli right into philosophical acceptance of the two-state solution. And perhaps Bibi’s infamous bluster has had its purpose. While his belligerent rhetoric unnerves his many critics, including world leaders, it’s helped keep Israel out of armed conflict. He has presided over more economic success and less war than almost any other Israeli leader in history.

Big Media portrayals of Netanyahu lead many to believe that Israel is in economic depression and daily war while the United States is in great peace and prosperity. But it appears that reality is contrary to those Big Media distortions.

Acccording to Big Media Israel is disunited under Netanyahu and America is a happy state united in love of Barack Obama. But the reality is that the United States is very divided and getting even more so while Israel grows ever more united ever day:

“With Netanyahu, Israeli politics have reached a state of equilibrium, at least internally. On the major security issues like the Palestinians and Iran, the Israeli electorate has reached a broad consensus, and there is little within the system—right-wing or left-wing—that can affect it at this stage. The question is how that consensus, embodied by the prime minister, will interact with external forces, especially the Obama Administration, and particularly as Israel decides how to handle Iran.”

The problem for Israel is Barack Obama. And Chuck Hagel:

“Indeed, with the nomination of Chuck Hagel as defense secretary, some fear that the White House may be moving in the other direction, toward a grand bargain with Tehran—as Hagel has previously suggested. “Let them think about the substantial carrots of improved relations, not just the sticks, and there may be a deal to be had,” he wrote in 2008. Hagel has opposed not only military action against Iran, but even sanctions. Moreover, if Abrams believes that an Israeli-Arab peace deal might come out of a strike on Iran, Hagel sees it the other way around. “The core of all challenges in the Middle East remains the underlying Arab-Israeli conflict,” Hagel said in 2006. According to this view, resolving the Israeli-Arab crisis makes everything else possible.

This notion—often called linkage—still holds tremendous force among many American policymakers. But most Israelis believe, understandably, that it is not in their power to solve the region’s most pressing issues. No Israeli policy is going to help Mohamed Morsi feed Egypt, or stop the civil war in Syria, or convince the Iranian regime to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Hence the increasing possibility for yet another showdown between Obama and Netanyahu. This dispute between the United States and Israel, said Dan Schueftan “is the product of the unrealistic belief that you can reach a permanent peace with the Palestinians under the prevailing circumstances, and the bizarre proposition that if you reach such an agreement it will make a major contribution toward stabilizing the Middle East.”

Chuck Hagel as the Israel hating American Secretary of Defense is just one example of the next four years of horror.

Tomorrow the week and the next four years begins with Barack Obama inaugurated in Washington. Fortunately this week will aso see the reelection of Benjamin Netanyahu.

For the next four years Barack Obama is the nightmare. This week, Israel’s Netanyahu is the wake up call and the hope.


Walking The Dead – Another Lesson From Bill Clinton, Part II

Update: Three Republican writers disagree with our analysis as to what Republicans should do regarding the debt ceiling and fighting Barack Obama. They are Peter Wehner of Commentary, Ross Douthat of the New York Times, and Matt Lewis of DailyCaller. The comments at DailyCaller agree with us. Example 1:

The GOP cannot avoid this fight. If it caves the Republican base will be in full rebellion and it won’t be just conservatives wondering what is the purpose of an opposition party that never opposes effectively.”

Example 2:

“The Republican Party is going to have to stand up for something, sometime. If not now, when?”


Is it really possible that we might have some genuine “news” to report? Is it really possible that the “news” is “good” news? Shocking, but true.

When last we published we tried to get the point across that the only question that matters, and it is a question that remains unanswered, is “Will Republicans fight?” We made the case that strategically speaking NOW is the most opportune time for Republicans to challenge Barack Obama on issue after issue they say they care about.

We did not, in our previous article, invoke that bit of brilliant Bill Clintonism that goes like this: “Better to be strong and wrong than weak and right.” Smart Republicans should remember that Clintonism and take it to heart without us having to elaborate on why that is such a smart political strategy. No, in our last article we did not provide that bit of advice to Republicans. Instead we focused on why now, when the next elections are furthest away, is the time to fight.

Last Thursday, Donald Trump on Sean Hannity echoed much of what we wrote and he too advised Republicans not to worry about being blamed (for whatever) because they will be blamed (by Big Media) for anything and everything anyway. Trump also reminded Republicans that news cycles change so frequently that by the time the 2014 elections come up the fights of early 2013 will be long forgotten or put into context by the public.

We suspect that in 2014 the issue central to elections and the anger of the public will be the abomination called ObamaCare. It’s not just the sticker shock that is already bending the cost curve way upwards that will enrage. As we wrote at the time, the U.S. government as a thug enforcer, Al Capone-Frank Nitti style, for Big Insurance is going to infuriate the public. Big Insurance is already asking the U.S. government to thug up more customers for them (“That’s why some insurers want HHS to give them more sticks.” “The health insurers have a vested interest in asking for the extra measures, of course. They want as many customers as possible — which is one of the reasons they pushed for the individual mandate in the first place.”)

Yup, in 2014 the health scam abomination called ObamaCare and its failures will be the issue. But that changed issue landscape is not why Republicans should stiffen their spines and fight Barack Obama now.

As we pointed out previously, Republicans in the very bad low point election year of 2012, won 219 seats in the House of Representatives from congressional districts that Mitt Romney won. Control of the House requires 218 votes. Do we really have to connect the dots and bludgeon the heads of Republican “leaders” with this very obvious point? Now is the time to fight guys. Now is when you have the least to lose because the elections are so far away.

Now is the time to fight because the bigger the fight on fiscal issues that highlight Obama economic irresponsibility and lack of job creating plans the less damage Barack Obama can do in other arenas of American life.

Today, instead of talking about jobs and economic plans to grow the American economy we heard some additional stupidity and distractions from irresponsible Obama: I’ll “vigorously” pursue a “meaningful” assault-weapons ban. Obama wants to distract the DailyKooks crowd and the American public with more nonsense instead of addressing how we get out of the economic mess we are in. ABC and National Journal are asking “why Obama is doing this” when the answer is that Obama the flim-flam man understands that he must distract attention from the economy and the looming disaster which is ObamaCare with new flim-flams.

* * * * *

Now, what about that “good” news we wrote about up top? It’s not about the open thread: final Obama presser of first term being over. It’s not about Obama forced to open the binders full of women who are willing to work at lower pay than men in the Obama big house.

No, remember when we called the cooked Susan Rice nomination for Secretary of State “the first clear domestic policy defeat for Obama post election“? That devoured Rice victory came about because opponents fought, not sat back and whined, fought.

Now it might be possible (we’re from Missouri on this and refuse to believe it until we see it) that something along the lines of a fight might be taking shape:

“House Republicans are seriously entertaining dramatic steps, including default or shutting down the government, to force President Barack Obama to finally cut spending by the end of March.

The idea of allowing the country to default by refusing to increase the debt limit is getting more widespread and serious traction among House Republicans than people realize, though GOP leaders think shutting down the government is the much more likely outcome of the spending fights this winter.

“I think it is possible that we would shut down the government to make sure President Obama understands that we’re serious,” House Republican Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state told us. “We always talk about whether or not we’re going to kick the can down the road. I think the mood is that we’ve come to the end of the road.” [snip]

To the vast majority of House Republicans, it is far riskier long term to pile up new debt than it is to test the market and economic reaction of default or closing down the government.

GOP officials said more than half of their members are prepared to allow default unless Obama agrees to dramatic cuts he has repeatedly said he opposes. Many more members, including some party leaders, are prepared to shut down the government to make their point. House Speaker John Boehner “may need a shutdown just to get it out of their system,” said a top GOP leadership adviser. “We might need to do that for member-management purposes — so they have an endgame and can show their constituents they’re fighting.” [snip]

“No one wants to default, but we are not going to continue to give the president a limitless credit card.”

It’s in many ways a ploy of the Republican “leadership”. The Republican leadership wants a sham “fight” to “show their constituents they’re fighting” then they will turn around and betray the very constituents that sent a Republican majority to the lower house of congress.

But even with these conniving liars and hypocrites there are roadblocks to implement their schemes:

“To pacify conservatives, he made two promises to his members that will greatly restrict his ability to craft a compromise in the spending fights ahead. The first promise was to bring to the floor only legislation a majority of his members support and do it through the committee process. The second was to increase the debt limit only in exchange for a dollar-for-dollar decrease in spending in the time period covered by that debt increase. [snip]

They are willing to take that risk because they believe the future consequences of more spending are more severe.

If Republicans really believe what they are saying, or rather, if Republican “leaders” really believe what they are saying then they should stand on principle and do what their constituents sent them to Washington to do.

Instead of calling Barack Obama a nice guy Republicans should fight Obama and speak the truth. Today that somewhat began to happen. Some Republicans/conservatives who have been advocating capitulation today reminded their public of the Obama lies and deceits when it comes to the debt ceiling. Obama ’06: Raising the debt ceiling means America can’t pay its bills; Obama ’13: Not raising the debt ceiling means America can’t pay its bills.

These days it sometimes seems like the only Republican leader fighting is combat veteran of World War II George H.W. Bush. Today H.W. left the hospital – which shows that refusing to die when Big Media declares you dead, near dead, or about to die, is a smart strategy.

If Republicans believe what they say, then they should fight for what they believe in. The more resistance to Obama on the debt ceiling and other financial issues the less damage Obama can do in other areas.

Republican “leaders” should get a clue from 41 and 42. The time to fight is now. It’s fight or die.


Walking The Dead – Another Lesson From Bill Clinton, Part I

Still not much going on. It’s the second week of the new year but not much is going on. There’s a lot of noise and traffic and Kabuki posturing, but not much of political consequence that is going on.

Not much will go on until one question is answered. The rest is as Bill, Shakespeare not Clinton, stated “sound and fury signifying nothing“.

The question that needs to be answered is “Will Republicans Fight?” Until the answer to that question is “Yes, Republicans are fighting with deeds – not words or promises to fight – and the evidence is that they did this and this and this, etc.” not much will matter. Not much will matter.

Republicans could get undisputed evidence against those they hate, wrongly or rightly – that Hillary Clinton, with a mask on, attacked the embassy in Benghazi herself while yelling “Allah Akbar” or that Obama is minting trillion dollar coins for personal use and hiding them in Michelle’s gunboat sized shoes or that Obama is in the pay of the Muslim Brotherhood and purposefully destroying America and Israel with appointments such as Chuckles Hagel and Kerry the Clown. But none of this would matter if the Republicans don’t finally decide to fight.

Republican “leaders” could get all the evidence proving them right on everything since the beginning of history but it won’t matter unless they decide to fight. There is no Republican leadership and there is already a moderate Republican group dropping “Republican” from name. A lack of leadership has even more dire consequences than a lost election.

Let’s talk a little Bill Clinton and a lesson for Republicans.

* * * * * *

But first….

Not much is going on politically but musically it was a fun filled day we thoroughly enjoyed.

Consider: David Bowie released a new single today called “Where Are We Now?” It’s the first Bowie single in over a decade and it is a somber work (the recent Rolling Stones release “Doom and Gloom” has an ominous title but is much more energetic if not upbeat).

The David Bowie video about his days in the great city of Berlin is filled with foreboding and very much reminds us of Irving Berlin and his darkly ominous and prescient 1936 song “Let’s Face The Music And Dance”.

“Where Are We Now?” was released today as part of the Bowie celebrations of his 66th birthday. Today is also Elvis Presley’s birthday (Elvis would have been 78).

There was also a new release today from boy band New One Direction called “Kiss You” which is the gayest thing we’ve heard since well, since Elvis released a certain song which lyrics few fully examined. In “Kiss You” New One Direction borrows heavily from the Elvis song and movie “Jailhouse Rock”.

A cycle of Elvis, New One Direction, Bowie – it was a fun filled day. From Bowie we borrowed “walking the dead” for our title and suggest Republicans (as well as all of us) take to heart the question which is the name of the song.

Now back to the days when Bowie was playing with Tin Machine and Bill Clinton was teaching Republicans a lesson they did not understand then and still don’t grasp. It’s about timing.

Ever notice that there are some times when you can say anything you want about Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton? There are some times when you can talk all the trash you want about them and not much will happen. There might be some pro forma responses or weak defenses from the Clinton armories but not much else.

Ever notice that there are some times when even the slightest bad words against Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton will be met with scalding counterattacks that will persist on many levels for many days or months?

Ever notice that? Ever notice these periods typically last for a cycle of at least a year? Guess why? Hint: it’s about election cycles.

Back when Bill Clinton was president the Republican congress and the Republican/conservative movement beat up Bill Clinton regularly. Bill won office in 1992 and right from the start he had the stuffing beat out of him. There was some push back from Clinton but it was mostly a time of getting his sea legs.

By 1994 Gingrich had a major victory. The Republicans won. The congress went red for the first time in 40 years. It was a shock.

Bill Clinton went into fight back mode. It was a strange fightback. It appeared to many that Bill Clinton for most of 1995 was caving in to Republicans on just about everything. By the end of 1995 the Republican congress felt so impervious and triumphant they made demands which Bill Clinton finally refused. There was a government shutdown.

To many it appeared that Bill Clinton after the 1994 elections had completely caved to Republicans. As it turned out Bill Clinton had a strategy and a time chosen for that strategy to unfold.

What Bill Clinton did was “give ’em enough rope”. Eventually the Republicans hung themselves with the rope Bill gave them. We recall at the time making jokes about how Bill “yanked the leash” after letting the dog run wild. It’s a lesson Republicans need to understand because they have learned the wrong lesson from those years and those battles.

The lesson Republicans learned from the shutdowns of 1995 and 1996 are that the president wins during government shutdowns because the president has the bully pulpit and it is the president that determines what gets shut down first and then proceeds to shut down programs Americans support the most (for instance Bill Clinton shut down national parks and passport offices). That’s the wrong lesson.

The real lesson from the government shutdowns of 1995 and 1996? Timing matters.

Bill Clinton understood that it is election years that matter. Bill “yanked the leash” late in November of 1995 just as his reelection campaign was on the move. Bill knew when it was time to pick a fight:

Clinton’s approval rating fell significantly during the shutdown. According to media commentators, this indicated that the general public blamed the President for the government shutdown.[8] However, once it had ended his approval ratings rose to their highest since his election.”

It is true that Newt Gingrich made a pompous ass of himself during the first government shutdown. But that is not the reason Republicans lost the battle and the war to Clinton. Republicans lost because strategically Bill Clinton understood that what mattered was the election. Bill Clinton timed events so that Republicans would be punished and he would be rewarded.

Bill Clinton won the 1996 reelection campaign, Republicans gained in the Senate but lost seats in the House. Republicans in 2013 should learn from 1996.

The lesson for Republicans is that timing matters. Now is the time to fight, not later. The further away from an election Republicans are the stronger their political position is. The closer to election time the weaker Republicans are. Why? Because they are up for election and Barack Obama is not.

As we have pointed out previously there are 219 House Republicans who won in districts Romney won in 2008. That is evidence as strong as you can get that Republicans will keep control of the House if they live up to the promises they made to their constituents.

Too bad Republican “leaders” don’t read. If they read this website or this quote from before the House fiscal cliff vote – “But Obama and his staff believe Americans would have blamed him for taking the country over the cliff” – or the latest poll and the accompanying impressive graphic about second term presidential popularity, 2013 might look a lot different than it now temporarily does.

* * * * * *

The lesson from Bill Clinton is that timing matters and a strategic plan really matters. Republicans have no sense of timing in the current fights and they certainly are not preparing the landscape for battles to come.

There is also the question of good faith negotiating. Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich hated each other but they managed to get things done because although they were engaged in political warfare there was a level of trust on both sides and both sides negotiated in good faith behind closed doors.

The present Republican “leaders” don’t seem to have a clue about negotiating. Minority Leader McConnell talks about “it takes two to tango” and that he needs a dance partner – completely oblivious to the fact that Obama does not negotiate in good faith. Obama cannot be trusted.

How to negotiate made simple, via The Maltese Falcon:

Spade flung his words out with a brutal sort of carelessness that gave them more weight than they could have got from dramatic emphasis or from loudness. “If you kill me, how are you going to get the bird? If I know you can’t afford to kill me till you have it, how are you going to scare me into giving it to you?”

Gutman cocked his head to the left and considered these questions. His eyes twinkled between puckered lids. Presently, he gave his genial answer: “Well, sir, there are other means of persuasion besides killing and threatening to kill.”

“Sure,” Spade agreed, “but they’re not much good unless the threat of death is behind them to hold the victim down. See what I mean? If you try something I don’t like I won’t stand for it. I’ll make it a matter of your having to call it off or kill me, knowing you can’t afford to kill me.”

“I see what you mean.” Gutman chuckled. “That is an attitude, sir, that calls for the most delicate judgement on both sides, because, as you know, sir, men are likely to forget in the heat of action where their best interests lie and let their emotions carry them away.”

Spade too was all smiling blandness. “That’s the trick, from my side,” he said, “to make my play strong enough that it ties you up, but yet not make you mad enough to bump me off against your better judgment.”

Republican “leaders” need to learn about negotiating from Sam Spade, Gutman, and Bill Clinton.