Archives:

Categories:

Presidential Seal

Get a Hillary Is 44 button! Here's How:

Please Send a Donation to us at Hillary Is 44 So We Can Continue Our Work. Donate $10.00 or more and we will send you a pink Hillary Is 44 button.

Get a Hillary Is 44 T-Shirt! Here's How:

Donate $100.00 or more and we will send you a pink Hillary Is 44 T-shirt as well as a button.

Donate To Hillary Is 44 below:





Suscribe To Our RSS Feed

The Funnies

See Our Funnies Archive.

February 17, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Hillary Clinton Wants To Accomplish On Her Trip Overseas

10 Exchange U.S. dollars for currency that's worth something

9 Win respect defeating Japan's top-ranked sumo wrestler

8 Shift world's perception of America from "hated" to "extremely disliked"

7 Personally thank all of her illegal campaign donors

6 Three words: stylish Indonesian pantsuits

5 Visit burial site of revered Chinese military leader, General Tso

4 Get drunk with that Japanese finance minister guy

3 Convince China to switch from lead-tainted products to mercury-tainted products

2 Catch Chinese screening of Benjamin Button entitled "The Strange Adventures of Freaky Grandpa Baby"

1 Pick up carton of duty-free smokes for Obama

February 16, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Abraham lincoln Would Say If He Were Alive Today

10 "Sup?"

9 "I see Madonna's still a slut"

8 "Who's that handsome sumbitch on the five?"

7 "Is that free Grand Slam deal still going on at Denny's?"

6 "I just changed my Facebook status update to, Tthe 'ol rail splitter is chillaxing'"

5 "How do I get on 'Dancing with the Stars'?"

4 "Okay, Obama, you're from Illinois, too. We get it!"

3 "Hey Phelps, don't Bogart the weed!"

2 "What's the deal with Joaquin Phoenix?"

1 "A Broadway play? Uhhh, no thanks. I'm good."

January 28, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Overheard at the Meeting Between Barack Obama and the Republicans

10 "I miss the Clinton administration when we'd meet at Hooters"

9 "Can we wrap this up? I've got tickets to the 4:30 'Paul Blart: Mall Cop"

8 "Smoke break!"

7 "You fellas really need to take it easy on the Old Spice"

6 "Mr. President: don't misunderestimate the Republicans"

5 "Another smoke break!"

4 "What was the deal with Aretha Franklin's hat?"

3 "About that tax the rich stuff -- you were joking, right?"

2 "Sir, it's refreshing to have a Chief Executive who speaks in complete sentences"

1 "Senator Craig's offering his stimulus package in the men's room"

January 27, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Ways Rod Blagojevich Can Improve His Image

10 Star in new television series, "America's Funniest Haircuts"

9 Quit politics and become a fat, lovable mall cop

8 Start pronouncing last name with Jerry Lewis-like "BLAGOOOYYYJEVICH"

7 Offer a senate seat with no money down, zero percent interest

6 Team up with John Malkovich and Erin Brockovich for hot Malkovich-Brockovich-Blagojevich sex tape

5 Change his name to Barod Obamavich

4 Safely land an Airbus on the Hudson River

3 I don't know...how about showing up for his impeachment trial?

2 Wear sexy dresses, high heels and say, "You Betcha!"

1 Uhhh...resign?

January 16, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Signs Obama's Getting Nervious

10 New slogan: "Yes we can... or maybe not, it's hard to say"

9 In moment of confusion, requested a $300 billion bailout from the bailout industry

8 He's up to not smoking three packs a day

7 Friends say he's looking frail, shaky and...no, that's McCain

6 He's so stressed, doctors say he's developing a Sanjay in his Gupta

5 Been walking around muttering, "What the hell have I gotten myself into?"

4 Offered Governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, $100,000 to buy his old Senate seat back

3 Standing on White House roof screaming, "Save us, Superman!"

2 Sweating like Bill Clinton when Hillary comes home early

1 He demanded a recount

January 8, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Barack Obama Plans To Fix The Economy

10 Encourage tourists to throw spare change in the Grand Canyon

9 End our dependence on foreign owls

8 Sell New Mexico to Mexico

7 Put a little of that bailout money on the Ravens plus 3 at Tennessee. Come on! It's a mortal lock!

6 Rent out the moon for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs

5 Lotto our way out of this son-of-a-bitch

4 Appear on "Deal or No Deal" and hope to choose the right briefcase

3 Bail out the adult film industry -- not sure how it helps, but it can't hurt

2 Release O.J. from prison, have him steal America's money from China

1 Stop talkin' and start Obama-natin'!

January 7, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Overheard At The Presidents' Lunch

10 "Sorry, you're not on the list, Mr. Gore"

9 "If Hillary calls, I've been here since Monday"

8 "Laura! More Mountain Dew!"

7 "You guys wanna see, 'Paul Blart: Mall Cop'?"

6 "Call the nurse -- George swallowed a napkin ring!"

5 "Hey Barack, wanna go with us to Cabo in March? Oh that's right, you have to work!"

4 "Kissey kissey"

3 "Obama? I think he's downstairs smoking a butt"

2 "Did you ever see a monkey sneezing?"

1 "I hope Clinton's unbuckling his belt because he's full"

Recent Articles Calendar

January 2014
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Networked Blogs

Ariel Sharon’s Finest Leadership Hour: Lessons For Hillary Clinton 2016, Christie, Obama, Gates

So much of what we have written about for years is on the front pages that it is an LSD-style flashback to watch the news these days. Whether it is news about Bob Gates and Hillary Clinton versus Barack Obama in the White House, or blasts from the past election of 2008 “news”, more and more of what we have written is confirmed by Big Media these days. We’ll discuss in our next article the Hillary’s Hit List report which misses what really went on with John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Claire McCaskill and other assorted scum and why they are on the top ten of the “hit list”.

Bob Gates helped Hillary in the not very secret war waged by Barack Obama and John Kerry (and Donilon) against Hillary so we’ll then add some clarity to a high profile quote from the Gates book which some mistakenly assume will hurt Hillary Clinton 2016. And there is also the bloodbath to come for the nomination and control of the Democratic Party to discuss.

While Republicans from other potential 2016 campaigns temporarily enjoy the travails of Chris Christie (until they get in the sights of Big Media shotguns), the same outlets writing about Hillary’s Hit List (yes, we mean the Politico co-author) only want to talk about the Republican divide and coming nomination fight. But does anyone think that we have at all been wrong when we write that Barack Obama and his thugs will do what they have to do to keep control of the party and destroy Hillary - or that when/if Hillary Clinton becomes the party nominee the blood bath at the DNC will drench Georgetown and other neighborhoods? As a taste of our next article compare what Politico writes today to what we wrote about a year ago. Here’s today’s Politico take:

Years later, they would joke among themselves in harsh terms about the fates of folks they felt had betrayed them. “Bill Richardson: investigated; John Edwards: disgraced by scandal; Chris Dodd: stepped down,” one said to another. “Ted Kennedy,” the aide continued, lowering his voice to a whisper for the punch line, “dead.”

This is what we wrote in February of last year:

“LANNY DAVIS today makes us smile and makes the Hopium Guzzlers tremble. The Hopium-laced blood will flow in rivers down the corridors of the DNC if and when Hillary Clinton gets the nomination in 2016. Donna Brazille, the DailyKooks, Judas Richardson, certain Kennedys, and everyone else who sided with Barack Obama over Hillary in 2008 will be disemboweled.

The blood will flow. We haven’t forgotten, Lanny hasn’t forgotten, the racebaiting of 2008. Bill and Hillary have to play a different game, but who thinks they have forgotten?”

Hillary Clinton’s 2008 enemies list: John Kerry, Claire McCaskill, et al. None of us have forgotten. Hear us Donna and Claire “None of us have forgotten. None of us is fooled by your attempts to wash the past with an endorsement. None of us have forgotten. None of us have forgiven.

* * * * * *

Today we want to focus on a man who should not be forgotten. That man is/was Ariel Sharon.

Ariel Sharon lived and governed to keep alive the idea and the state of Israel. In a world that wanted and still wants Israel to commit suicide by adoption of policies that would kill it, a defiant Ariel Sharon saw his duty to save Israel and he did it. Ariel Sharon did not worry about his “brand”. Sharon well knew his actions were not welcome in a world that desired elixirs of hope rather than the cold bath of reality.

Ariel Sharon was the last of a generation of leaders that helped create in 1948 the state of Israel, a state that had for so long disappeared from the roster of world nations. Via Wikipedia, a brief, select history of that man that became the eleventh Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon:

“Sharon was a commander in the Israeli Army from its creation in 1948. As a paratrooper and then an officer, he participated prominently in the 1948 War of Independence, becoming a platoon commander in the Alexandroni Brigade and taking part in many battles, including Operation Ben Nun Alef. He was an instrumental figure in the creation of Unit 101, and the Retribution operations, as well as in the 1956 Suez Crisis, the Six-Day War of 1967, the War of Attrition, and the Yom-Kippur War of 1973. As Minister of Defense, he directed the 1982 Lebanon War.

Sharon was considered the greatest field commander in Israel’s history, and one of the country’s greatest ever military strategists. After his assault of the Sinai in the Six-Day War and his encirclement of the Egyptian Third Army in the Yom Kippur War, the Israeli public nicknamed him “The King of Israel,” and “The Lion of God”, a pun on his given name.”

Ariel Sharon was a great military strategist. But Sharon’s finest hour of leadership and courage came about because he was a brilliant political strategist.

The obese, grey haired, pasty Sharon looked over the landscape and saw trouble. A young, brilliant, charismatic, hard working, American president was determined to bring peace to the region through creation of a Palestinian state and a “two state solution”. President Bill Clinton thought his legacy would be a lasting Middle East peace. It was rumored that Bill Clinton was so immersed in maps and geography of Israel and the surrounding areas that he would trade one boulder for another boulder as he tried to reshape Israel and the region.

If it wasn’t for the recalcitrance of Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat (a hostile recalcitrance that continues unto today) it is likely that Bill Clinton would have succeeded. President Clinton would have gained a well earned, well deserved legacy item for the history books (and probably his legacy item would have been adorned with a glittering Nobel Peace Prize, at a time when that award required monumental achievement). The vast majority of the world wanted President Clinton to succeed. Who didn’t want peace in our time?

President Bill Clinton had as a partner a distinguished Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, hoping a two state solution and peace could be achieved. President Bill Clinton and Ehud Barack proposed a fair and just solution and had a fair chance to achieve a lasting peace. But there was one flaw, one fly in the ointment, one necessary participant who was not participating in good faith.

Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian leadership did not really want peace. What they wanted was the destruction of Israel. Ariel Sharon saw this clearly but how could he prove it? How could Ariel Sharon expose the Arafat rejection of a genuine peace? It was an election season as Prime Minister Barak and President Bill Clinton continued to try to convince Arafat to climb on board the peace train so any statement from Ariel Sharon denouncing Arafat would have been seen as so much election season bombast.

What to do? Ariel Sharon came up with a plan that was as daring as it was despised:

“As part of his election campaign in September 2000, Sharon, then leader of the opposition party, led a Jewish delegation to the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is part of the compound that Jews call the Temple Mount and is considered the third holiest site in Islam. The visit, which was aimed at emphasizing the Jewish claim to the holy place, sparked outrage among the Palestinians who called it a deliberate provocation.

The day after Sharon’s visit, following Friday prayers, large riots broke out around the Old City of Jerusalem. In the following days, demonstrations erupted across the West Bank and Gaza.

Many mark Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount as the start of the Second Intifada and the end of the peace process. An estimated 3,000 Palestinians and 1,000 Israelis were killed in the violence that did not end until 2005.”

Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was not the start of the Second Intifada. It was the start of a growing realization that the Palestinians did not want a genuine peace but rather a territorial entity from which to attack Israel with the intent of destroying Israel. And yes it was a deliberate provocation which could have backfired on Sharon. But Sharon’s dramatic ploy worked because it proved Sharon was right about Palestinian intentions.

Imagine the reverse consequences if the Palestinians had welcomed the Sharon visit. Sharon claimed his visit was not a provocation because Sharon believed that provocation was in the eyes of the beholder. Sharon would have lost the election and Ehud Barack reelected and a Palestinian state would eventually be birthed IF the Palestinians had only had the decency and good intentions of welcoming Ariel Sharon. But that is not what happened:

“Tightly guarded by an Israeli security cordon, Ariel Sharon, the right-wing Israeli opposition leader, led a group of Israeli legislators onto the bitterly contested Temple Mount today to assert Jewish claims there, setting off a stone-throwing clash that left several Palestinians and more than two dozen policemen injured.

The violence spread later to the streets of East Jerusalem and to the West Bank town of Ramallah, where six Palestinians were reportedly hurt as Israeli soldiers fired rubber-coated bullets and protesters hurled rocks and firebombs.

I brought a message of peace,” Mr. Sharon said after a one-hour tour that Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, condemned as a ”dangerous action” against Muslim holy sites.

The complex, known to Muslims as Haram al Sharif, or the Noble Sanctuary, contains Al Aksa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, sacred shrines of Islam. It is revered by Jews as the site of the First and Second Temples as well as the place where Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his son, Isaac. A dispute about sovereignty over the area, in Jerusalem’s walled Old City, has created an impasse in the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

I believe that Jews and Arabs can live together,” Mr. Sharon declared as stones and rubber-coated bullets flew at the holy site. ”It was no provocation whatsoever,” he said of his visit. ”It’s our right. Arabs have the right to visit everywhere in the Land of Israel, and Jews have the right to visit every place in the Land of Israel.” Injured Palestinians and police officers were carried off on stretchers minutes after the visit ended.”

Ariel Sharon was right. The world was angry that he exposed delusions and lit the dark corners of reality. If the Palestinians ever gained control of any portion of Jerusalem, Jews would lose all rights to attend the sites they wished to attend. Under Israeli control all people had the rights of access to holy sites. But Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount demonstrated what the future would be like for Jews and non-Muslims in the holy land:

“Mr. Sharon’s tour was meant to assert Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount, but the vast security operation organized for the visit suggested that he had anything but free access to the compound, which is effectively run by Islamic officials.

Mr. Sharon entered as a police helicopter clattered overheard and a thousand armed policemen were positioned in and around the Temple Mount, including antiterror squads and ranks of riot officers carrying clubs, helmets and plastic shields. Throughout the tour, Mr. Sharon was ringed tightly by agents of the Shin Bet security service.

Faisal Husseini, the top Palestinian official in Jerusalem, said that the extraordinary police deployment belied Israeli claims of sovereignty over the Temple Mount, which was captured along with the rest of East Jerusalem in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. ”Israel has no sovereignty here,’‘ Mr. Husseini said. ”They have military might, they have the power of occupation, but not sovereignty.”

Mr. Sharon went into the compound through a gate used by tourists above the Western Wall, a remnant of a wall that surrounded the ancient temple plaza. His head was barely visible in the crush of security men and police officers around him. Inside, police officers kept Palestinians behind barriers as Mr. Sharon and his entourage walked around, pausing to listen to explanations by an Israeli archaeologist.

Scuffles broke out when a few hundred Palestinian youths shouting ”God is great!” and ”With soul and blood we will redeem you, Al Aksa!” surged against police lines in an attempt to reach Mr. Sharon. Palestinian officials and Israeli Arab lawmakers who were with the crowd said that they were pushed and beaten.

As Mr. Sharon left, dozens of youths hurled stones, chairs and metal objects at the police, who responded with rubber-coated bullets and riot sticks. At least four Palestinians were later reported to have been treated for injuries.

Mr. Sharon was trailed by Israeli Arab legislators who shouted ”Murderer, get out!” and ”Al Aksa is Palestinian!” [snip]

Mr. Sharon’s visit was ”a direct attempt to derail the peace process and an attempt to inflame the whole region,” Mr. Husseini said.

Peace efforts were further shadowed by an overnight bombing in the Gaza Strip that killed an Israeli soldier and wounded another. Two roadside charges were detonated near an army-escorted convoy of cars heading for the Israeli settlement of Netzarim.

Despite the unrest and injuries in Jerusalem, Mr. Sharon said, his visit had been worthwhile.

”I’m sorry about the casualties, and I wish the wounded a speedy recovery, but a Jew in Israel has the right to visit the Temple Mount,” he said. ”The Temple Mount is still in our hands.”

In one masterstroke, one that was almost universally deplored, Ariel Sharon demonstrated that the proposed “peace” was in reality appeasement that would have deadly consequences to Israel and the greater region if not the world. Eventually President Bill Clinton would confront Arafat and blame him for the failure to achieve a just and lasting peace.

Had the Palestinian leadership and people welcomed their visitor, Ariel Sharon would not have become Prime Minister and a Palestinian state seeking peace in good faith would have been born – a long time ago. But Ariel Sharon was elected and the Palestinians still do not have leadership that will bargain in good faith and with the majority support to win a peace and a homeland.

Ariel Sharon has been proven right unfortunately. Now even Arab Christians are waking up to the need for Israel in a region where Christians are an endangered minority:

“For decades, Arab Christians were considered part of Israel’s sizable Palestinian minority, which comprises both Muslims and Christians and makes up about a fifth of the country’s citizens, according to the Israeli government.

But now, an informal grass-roots movement, prompted in part by the persecution of Christians elsewhere in the region since the Arab Spring, wants to cooperate more closely with Israeli Jewish society—which could mean a historic change in attitude toward the Jewish state. “Israel is my country, and I want to defend it,” says Henry Zaher, an 18-year-old Christian from the village of Reineh who was visiting Nazareth. “The Jewish state is good for us.”

The Christian share of Israel’s population has decreased over the years—from 2.5% in 1950 to 1.6% today, according to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics—because of migration and a low birthrate. Of Israel’s 8 million citizens, about 130,000 are Arabic-speaking Christians (mostly Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox), and 1.3 million are Arab Muslims.

In some ways, Christians in Israel more closely resemble their Jewish neighbors than their Muslim ones, says Amnon Ramon, a lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a specialist on Christians in Israel at the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies. [snip]

As a minority within a minority, Christians in Israel have historically been in a bind. Fear of being considered traitors often drove them to proclaim their full support for the Palestinian cause. Muslim Israeli leaders say that all Palestinians are siblings and deny any Christian-Muslim rift. But in mixed Muslim-Christian cities such as Nazareth, many Christians say they feel outnumbered and insecure.

“There is a lot of fear among Christians from Muslim reprisals,” says Dr. Ramon. “In the presence of a Muslim student in one of my classes, a Christian student will never say the same things he would say were the Muslim student not there.”

“Many Christians think like me, but they keep silent,” says the Rev. Gabriel Naddaf, who backs greater Christian integration into the Jewish state. “They are simply too afraid.” In his home in Nazareth, overlooking the fertile hills of the Galilee, the 40-year-old former spokesman of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Jerusalem is tall and charismatic, dressed in a spotless black cassock. “Israel is my country,” he says. “We enjoy the Israeli democracy and have to respect it and fight for it.” [snip]

“We were dragged into a conflict that wasn’t ours,” says Father Naddaf. “Israel takes care of us, and if not Israel, who will defend us? We love this country, and we see the army as a first step in becoming more integrated with the state.” [snip]

“We are not mercenaries,” says Mr. Khaloul, who served as a captain in an IDF paratrooper brigade. “We want to defend this country together with the Jews. We see what is happening these days to Christians around us—in Iraq, Syria and Egypt.”

Since the Arab revolutions began in Tunisia in 2011, many Christians in the region have felt isolated and jittery. Coptic churches have been attacked in Egypt, and at least 26 Iraqis leaving a Catholic church in Baghdad on Christmas Day were killed by a car bomb. Islamists continue to threaten to enforce Shariah law wherever they gain control.

These Christian groups are learning the lesson Ariel Sharon taught at the dawn of the new century.

There is no hope for Obama or from Obama. But whoever becomes president in 2016, Hillary or Christie or Paul or Cruz or any of the many who will soon need a campaign theme song we hope they learn the lessons taught by Ariel Sharon.

Ariel Sharon did not worry about his “brand” he cared about policy and what was best for his country no matter that the world hated him for bringing the harsh light of truth instead of gauzy hopey feely. The world needs leadership. America needs leadership. We hope that all American leaders learn the lessons from Ariel Sharon’s finest leadership hour.

Be Sociable, Share!

191 comments to Ariel Sharon’s Finest Leadership Hour: Lessons For Hillary Clinton 2016, Christie, Obama, Gates

  • admin

    The Hit List.

    Some of what we wrote on the day Ted Kennedy died:

    http://www.hillaryis44.org/2009/08/26/the-death-of-ted-kennedy/

    “Yesterday we would have mourned, perhaps wept.

    If yesterday was before the foisting of the inexperienced, unqualified Obama on the nation, if yesterday was before helping George W. with No Child Left Behind, if yesterday was before the dynastic promotion of the inexperienced, unqualified Caroline, we would have mourned, perhaps wept. [snip]

    But, one yesterday in 2008, Ted Kennedy snuffed out the fire he was entrusted with.

    We do not mourn, we do not weep today. We can however remember our own innocent days when we defended Ted in Palm Springs. We can remember happier days before he drove the party of FDR over the bridge.

    We can remember the “Teddy” before he blocked Hillary from having any meaningful leadership role in the Senate on health care because he wanted to lead the charge. Instead of leading the charge, he took with himself a crucial vote. What he wanted to cradle, he strangled.

    We will remember the young Ted, voice breaking for his slaughtered brother and for his other slaughtered brother. We will remember the young Ted, smooth-skinned, black haired, and slender.

    But too many of us have been driven over the bridge to weep today. We can remember.”

  • admin

    On a lighter note, anyone remember a few years ago when Barack Obama wasn’t wearing his wedding ring? His excuse was that the wedding band was out for repairs. Everyone knows it takes weeks to get a president’s simple gold wedding band “fixed”. Right??? Right???? We wrote about the ring incident at the time and we also wrote about Michelle calling Barack “stinky” and a “boy raised by wolves”. Barack called Mooch selfish and other less flattering words. Now:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/rumours-of-marriage-problems-threaten-to-overshadow-michelle-obamas-50th-birthday/story-fnb64oi6-1226800021887#

    Rumours of marriage problems threaten to overshadow Michelle Obama’s 50th birthday

    A LEADING American divorce mediator will visit Washington this week to offer members of Congress advice on ending the “tiresome bickering” between Republicans and Democrats.

    If US tabloids are to be believed, she may need to visit the White House first.

    Michelle Obama’s extended absence from Washington and a flurry of renewed speculation about the state of the first couple’s marriage are threatening to overshadow her 50th birthday party at the White House on Saturday.

    Not for the first time in their 22-year marriage the Obamas are approaching what should be a happy family milestone under a cloud of rampant tabloid innuendo, summed up by a National Enquirer headline: “World exclusive: Obama marriage explodes!”.

    The Enquirer has earned a measure of respectability in Washington with its reporting of political scandals – most notably its exposure of the double life of John Edwards, a former senator and once a Democratic presidential contender.

    Yet its so-called bombshell Obama report was based on nothing more substantial than the vague allegations of an unnamed “Oval Office insider” who claimed the first couple “are now sleeping in separate White House bedrooms” – tame stuff compared with the adventures of the president’s French counterpart Francois Hollande.

    In one sense the report was partly right: Barack Obama returned to Washington from his Christmas break in Hawaii last week while his wife remained in Maui to spend more time with friends, reportedly at a holiday home owned by the media mogul Oprah Winfrey.

    Before the Enquirer could detonate another bombshell, a White House spokesman offered a different explanation for Michelle’s solo break: it was a birthday present from her husband.

    If you have kids, you know that telling your spouse that they can go spend a week away from home is actually a big present,” said Jay Carney, the White House press secretary.

    Mr Obama acknowledged long ago that his marriage to Michelle had had ups and downs as they coped with the pressures of dual careers – she was formerly a lawyer and a hospital administrator – and the arrival of their two daughters, Sasha and Malia.

    The latest tabloid report appears to have been provoked by the notorious incident at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service when Mr Obama and David Cameron posed for a selfie with Helle Thorning-Schmidt, the prime minister of Denmark – or as the National Enquirer described her, “a leggy blonde foreign leader”.

    Malia and Sasha will love to hear that a week away from them is a “big present”. Sounds just like Barack and his daddy and mommy. Like father like son.

    And is Mooch still in Hawaii???????

  • wbboei

    Admin: I am glad you are talking about the term “brand” now, because that is what all the consultants in both parties, and most of all dead media has reduced our politics too. The good news, I suppose, it brand may get you to try a new product, brand may prevent you from trying other products for a period of time, but the long term brand alone is no substitute for experience. And when the brand is one thing, experience is another, brand fails and the project is rejected. It has been the devil’s work of big media to make the buyer, i.e. the voter, believe that the brand, i.e. Obama is working, and to cover up all evidence to the contrary and to destroy is critics, because he has been able to redirect the growing ire of the underclass away from the uber wealthy to the middle class, who is being systematically destroyed by Obama. And under is leadership, the democratic party who was once the champion of the middle class has become its foremost victim–all big media propaganda to the contrary nothwithstanding. Well, it took the failure of Obamacare, and the adamant refusal of Obama and his party to any mitigation thereof to show the middle class, in personal and concrete terms how the democrat party is destroying their lives, their health and their future. The Republican Party stands to benefit from the fall of Obama, but they cannot and will not solve the problem. Oh, they do have people in their ranks who would stand tall for the American People but they are vastly outnumbered by the RINO, and the lack of trust the American People should feel at this point for the RINO should cause them to stay home. The only way the American People can win is to take the power away from those who have abused it which is the entire Washington establishment of which big media is the tip of the spear. If I am right, it will be a slow business for the American People to wrest power from the elites, and the condition precedent to any of this will be the presence of credible leaders who are willing to buck a system which is gorging itself on the people and killing our nation. The starting point must be for Hillary to win the presidency and the Ted Cruz wing of the Republican Party to take charge.

  • wbboei

    A birthday present, paid for by the voters?

    Well, a messy divorce would be better.

    She gets the White House silverware–purloined of course.

    He gets Air Force One.

    Yes, split everything right down the middle.

    The American People should not be on the hook for child support, however.

  • wbboei

    Wedding rings, flag pins etc. have one obvious deficiency.

    They are removable.

    Not so an American flag tatooed on his ass.

    As symbolism goes, that would be highly symbolic.

    More important, however, it would be a fine example of art imitating life.

  • wbboei

    Big media has perpetrated a blizzard of pro Obama propaganda over the past six years, to advance their own interests against those of the country and the American People.

  • jeswezey

    I’m happy you’re talking about the now-famed hit list.

    Note that the list does not contain “hits” only. The various political figures helped by the Clintons are ranked from 1 to 7, with 7 being the most treacherous.

    But then there are those ranked 1, and those in between.

    The play-out of the most treacherous, among which McCaskill ranks perhaps the highest, is yet to be seen.

    I don’t see Hillary doing any dirty dealing in return for dirty dealing. I don’t think it’s in her DNA. Witness Hillary seeking McCaskill out after her treachery, and giving her a call after her (very) early 2016 endorsement.

    There’s something very Christian about Hillary. Her God is all-forgiving, the black sheep can return to the fold. Remember, when once asked what was a person’s most important quality, she answered without batting an eyelash: “Forgiveness”.

    And What is the easiest thing to forgive? Again, without batting an eyelash: “Stupidity”.

    Note that treachery is not the easiest thing to forgive, but it must be forgivable anyway.

    So, she may be on good terms with McCaskill now, though McCaskill will never be part of the inner circle, can never again ask for a favor.

  • mcnorman

    Exactly what his name implies: Lion of God. RIP Ariel.

  • Shadowfax

    I still think MO could be a beard for Barry, an arranged marriage to get him elected as the first black president .

    Even a woman like MOO would have a smile on her face now and then, if she was in love and the intimacy was exciting…

  • jeswezey

    Hillary gets a defense in Ohio concerning Benghazi in particular:

    http://www.limaohio.com/news/letters-news-opinion/659093/Hillary-Clinton-gets-unfair-abuse

    If only big media and the American sheeple could be convinced to see it that way…

  • admin

    Just in:

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2014/01/13/michelle-obama-return-hawaii-wednesday/

    Alas, it’s over.

    After 24 days on vacation in Hawaii, including ten without her husband and children, First Lady Michelle Obama will return to Washington by Wednesday.

    Michelle, who has been holed up at Oprah Winfrey’s fabulous spread on Maui since President Obama and their daughters departed Hawaii January 4, has an event – a White House screening of an educational movie – scheduled for Wednesday at 4 pm. That means she’ll leave Hawaii Tuesday night at the latest.

  • jbstonesfan

    Thank you administrator for mentioning the great Ariel Sharon. He was. arguably, Israel’s greatest general. He understood you had to fight first to achieve peace. While the liberals and Arabs/Muslims will focus on the fake narrative of Sabra and Shatila , I refer you to the article below for what actually occurred :

    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/sharon-dershowitz-death-Israel/2014/01/03/id/545011

  • Any one surprise Obama didn’t attend the funeral??? :mad:

  • Just days after dismissing two top advisers for their roles in the George Washington Bridge scandal, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie faced questions over the use of Superstorm Sandy relief funds.

    CNN has learned that federal officials are investigating whether Christie improperly used some of that money to produce tourism ads that starred him and his family.

    The news couldn’t come at a worse time for the embattled Republican, who is facing two probes in New Jersey of whether his staff orchestrated traffic gridlock near the country’s busiest bridge to punish a Democratic mayor who refused to endorse his re-election.

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/politics/christie-feds-investigating-sandy-ads/index.html

  • A comment from NQ. :)
    The delightful irony is Obama now going after Christie, wipes out the Christie-Obama 2012 love fest image. Is this what the Dems really want to do? They are rehabilitating Christie now as the underdog, rather than the out of control junk yard dog.

  • Shadowfax

    So MOO was in Hawaii for 10 days without her husband and children. Hmmm, as a single mom, I couldn’t imagine leaving my child at their age for 10 days, I would miss him terribly.

    Also, Oaf-ra is the woman that many devotees go to for marriage counseling.

    Moo is probably pist that Barry is more interested in body men and blond leaders than her holier than thou.

  • Leanora

    Lt. Gen. McInerney: The Brotherhood Is Inside the White House

    Lt. Gen. McInerney, addressing Bob Gates’ book, said “There are Muslim Brotherhood in the White House”, which is common knowledge, but it’s good to hear it from a general.

    One has to wonder where our military heroes are. They’ve remained silent as Obama guts the military. Mc Inerney said the Middle East is coming apart with this administration. We know that too. It’s hard to miss.

    Listen to this clip with Lt. Gen. McInerney:

    http://www.independentsentinel.com/lt-gen-mcinerney-the-brotherhood-is-inside-the-white-house/

  • wbboei

    Email from a friend 5 minutes ago:

    Newly trotted out spin shift the focus
    on enemies lists over to HRC
    to take the heat off Elephant Boy.
    Pretty transparent. Or as the quote
    Rightly or wrongly attributed to
    Churchill goes, ” if you ever want to
    Make the case against democracy
    Spend five minutes talking to
    The average voter.”

  • wbboei

    This morning, I told my chiropractor that my premium with blue shield went up from $450 per month to almost $700 per month and my deductible (which I never come close to exceeding) went from $350 to $500 per month, and the rumor is that this is only the beginning, because as young people fail to sign up because the economics for them make no sense, and adverse selection takes its toll, the original premium will double within two years. For those reasons, I told him I was considering forgoing insurance altogether and paying the Obamacare fine, to help pay for Michelle’s birthday gift from Obama, which big media is still slobbering about. I asked him what he thought. He told me that the whole Obamacare program is highway robbery as he put it, there is more than enough money in the system to provide sound health care, but it is being wasted thanks to politicans and lobbyists. However, he told me this was really a financial planning question because if I have a heart attack, cancer or some other serious medical condition that requires a high level of medical treatment it will cost a minimum of $150,000. He went on to say that one half (1/2) of the bankruptcies in this country today are due to medical costs for major medical procedures. So the question Obamacare is forcing me to ask myself is this: How lucky do you feel, punk?

  • wbboei

    correction: my deductible went from $3500 to $5000/

  • Leanora

    This is becoming absurd.
    ====

    MSNBC To Host One-Hour “Bridgegate” Special…

    As if MSNBC’s ratings aren’t bad enough.

    Via Mediaite:

    There are many questions swirling around about the ever-deepening Bridgegate scandal, and for the media, one such question is “how much is too much?”

    The answer to that depends partially on who you ask, and partially on how this story evolves, but MSNBC’s All In with Chris Hayes has provided its answer by lining up a special hour, Monday night, devoted to Christie and the reporting surrounding the scandal.

    All In host Chris Hayes‘ colleague Rachel Maddow was an early adopter of the Bridgegate story, but Hayes’ show has also followed the developments since before the rest of the world caught up last week, and has also tracked the Hurricane Sandy relief effort in New Jersey, now a source of speculation as other New Jersey mayors let the latest revelations marinate.

    http://weaselzippers.us/msnbc-to-host-one-hour-bridgegate-special/

  • admin

    Christie poll:

    http://www.people-press.org/2014/01/13/christie-story-attracts-little-public-interest/

    Christie Story Attracts Little Public Interest

    Recent Opinions of New Jersey Governor Are Largely Unchanged

    The public paid far more attention to last week’s cold snap than to the controversy swirling around New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. There also has been little short-term change in opinions about Christie: 60% say their opinion of Christie has not changed in recent days, while 16% now view him less favorably and 6% more favorably.

    The national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Jan. 9-12 among 1,006 adults, finds that just 18% paid very close attention to Christie’s apology on Jan. 9 for the highway lane closures ordered by his aides. By contrast, 44% very closely followed news about the cold winter weather that gripped much of the U.S. and 28% tracked news about the economy. [snip]

    The survey finds that majorities of Republicans (69%), Democrats (55%) and independents (60%) say that their opinion of Christie has not changed lately. Among Republicans, about as many say their opinion has become more favorable (9%) as less favorable (10%).

    More Democrats say their opinion has become less favorable (25%) than more favorable (3%). Among independents, 14% say their opinion of Christie has become less favorable and 6% more favorable.

    Those who followed news about Christie’s apology at least fairly closely are more likely to have changed their opinions about the New Jersey government in recent days. Nonetheless, 57% of those who tracked news about Christie say their opinion of him has not changed; 29% say it has become less favorable, while 11% say it has become more favorable.

    Republicans are about as likely as Democrats to have followed the Christie story at least fairly closely last week (43% vs. 46%). Like Republicans overall, those who followed the story at least fairly closely are closely divided between those who are more favorable to Christie (18%) and less favorable (17%), with 62% saying their opinion hasn’t changed.

    Democrats who closely followed Christie’s apology have come to have sharply less favorable opinions of Christie: 43% say their opinion is now less favorable, 3% more favorable, and half (50%) say their opinion hasn’t changed.

  • wbboei

    Leanora

    January 13, 2014 at 6:09 pm

    This is becoming absurd.
    ——————
    Not quite yet.

    When it gets to the 24 hour telethon stage I will agree with you.

    We can all take heart because that is, without question, the next logical step

    For the sewer rats at MSNBC

    And their bottom feeding audience.

    Who devoted zero coverage to Obama scandals

    Including, but not limited to fast and furious, IRS gate, NASA gate, Obamacare gate, inter alia.

    Because, as their president Phil Griffin freely admits

    We are insiders in the Obama administration.

  • admin

    Another Christie poll:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/01/13/poll-post-bridgegate-christies-job-approval-in-new-jersey-falls-to-59/

    As noted, 59 percent approve of his job performance and many more view him favorably on balance than unfavorably (44/28), although that’s several points below where he was just before Hurricane Sandy. Jerseyites are skeptical that he’s being honest about what he knew about Bridgegate, but they believe him when he says he wasn’t involved: 51 percent say he’s not being completely honest and 52 percent think he knew about the damning traffic e-mails before the scandal broke, but 52 percent also say he wasn’t involved (versus 34 percent who think he was) and 62 percent think he dealt with things responsibly. In fact, when asked if they still would have voted for Christie knowing then what they know now, 88 percent (including 75 percent of Democrats) said yes. The problem for Christie opponents, I think, is convincing people that he’s guilty of some special sin here even if they already believe he’s guilty of something. [snip]

    A majority of Jersey voters think this wasn’t typical of Christie’s M.O. and, of those who think it was, fully three-quarters think other politicians behave that way too. Hard to make the argument stick that he’s a bully who can’t be trusted with power when the response is “hey, all politicians are like that.” Or is it just that Jersey voters, so used to scandal, feel this way while voters nationally might not?

  • wbboei

    Democrats who closely followed Christie’s apology have come to have sharply less favorable opinions of Christie: 43% say their opinion is now less favorable, 3% more favorable, and half (50%) say their opinion hasn’t changed.
    ——————–
    Now that is counter intuitive.

    First of all, if they followed the apology closely the odds are they had an unfavorable opinion of him any way.

    Second, in that case all this has done is give them the reason they were looking for to hate him.

    So this claim that they have a less favorable opinion of him now, is a smokescreen, and not to be believed.

  • TheRock

    foxyladi14

    January 13, 2014 at 2:57 pm

    I just got home and was about to post the same thing! I REALLY wonder what our allies think of us behind closed doors with bumbles at the helm. He moved heaven and earth for the photo-op at Madiba’s funeral, but he sent Uncle Joe to Israel. 2016 can’t get here fast enough….

    Asshats.

    Hillary 2016

  • S

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/what-if-americans-rebel-against-the-obamacare-mandate/article/2542038

    What if Americans rebel against the Obamacare mandate?
    By BYRON YORK | JANUARY 12, 2014 AT 10:37 PM

    The Obama administration is trying to persuade millions of uninterested, or perhaps reluctant, Americans to purchase health insurance through the Obamacare exchanges. But the heart of Obamacare is coercion. If Americans fail do what the law’s Democratic authors believe is best, the federal government will punish them, through the progressively higher penalties of the individual mandate, until it hurts more not to buy coverage than it does to give up and purchase it.

    But what if many of those Americans rebel? Even if they know having health insurance is better than not having it, what if they refuse to be forced to buy the kind of coverage dictated by the government — which may not really meet their needs — at prices they don’t want to pay? What then?

    “I don’t think Obamacare can survive without people wanting to buy it,” Bob Laszewski, the respected health care analyst whose writings on Obamacare have become essential in recent months, told me in an email exchange recently. “How the hell are you going to enforce a mandate to buy something that people don’t think is valuable enough to buy? If the uninsured don’t start to see value in Obamacare and buy it, is the Democratic solution to fine the heck out of them until it hurts so much they have to buy it? Great political strategy!”

    Of course, that’s exactly what the strategy is. Democrats designed the penalty for not having “minimum essential coverage” to start low and increase rapidly. For this year, according to a chart prepared by the Kaiser Family Foundation, the penalty is $95 per adult and $47.50 per child. But the penalty cannot rise above $285, or one percent of family income, whichever is higher. (Obamacare uses a measurement called Modified Adjusted Gross Income to determine penalties — a measure that is usually higher than the Adjusted Gross Income many taxpayers are familiar with.)

    In the second year, the penalty will rise dramatically, to $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, or two percent of family income, whichever is higher. The year after, the penalty will take another big jump, to $695 per adult and $347.50 per child, or 2.5 percent of family income. The only limit on the penalty is that it cannot be higher than the national average premium for a Bronze Plan purchased on the Obamacare exchanges. According to the Congressional Budget Office, that could be as much as $5,000 in 2016. And after that initial increase in the penalty, future penalties will rise according to the cost of living.

    But Democrats in Congress feared public reaction to actually forcing Americans to write a check to the government to cover the penalty. So instead, the Internal Revenue Service, which is charged with enforcing Obamacare, will subtract the penalty from the tax refunds of those Americans who incur the penalty, provided they are due a refund. Otherwise, the IRS will not have a way to collect the money.

    “In the first year, the mandate is useless,” said Laszewski. “One percent isn’t strong enough. The IRS can’t really collect it anyway from anyone who wants to flaunt it. Then we get to the second and third year. Two percent in 2015 and 2.5 percent in 2016. Now we have real money. The IRS still can’t collect it, but lots of people will still be troubled by it because they won’t like getting nasty letters from the IRS.”

    As Laszewski sees it, the mandate could become extremely unpopular — it’s already by far the least popular part of Obamacare — if policies are not what the public wants to buy. Who would want to be forced to buy something he or she doesn’t want? That something is not insurance itself — it is insurance that is ill-fitting and overpriced. “The problem is that the government will be hard pressed to collect a fine on something lots of people don’t believe has value,” Laszewski said. “This is when it will become a huge political albatross. At the core Obamacare is not sustainable, and the mandate/fine is not politically sustainable, if there are lots of middle class people who see Obamacare as a poor value.”

    I got in touch with Laszewski after reading an interview he did with the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein in which Laszewski explained that if Obamacare had been designed by businesspeople, it might have had more features to appeal to customers. But it was designed by lawmakers and lobbyists and is something quite different. “The problem with Obamacare is it’s product driven and not market driven,” Laszewski told Klein. “They didn’t ask the customer what they wanted. And I think that’s the fundamental problem with Obamacare. It meets the needs of very poor people because you’re giving them health insurance for free. But it doesn’t really meet the needs of healthy people and middle-class people.”

    Of course, the individual mandate forces people to buy coverage whether it meets their needs or not. And Laszewski sees a real possibility that it won’t work. If enough dissatisfied Americans simply don’t buy the product, he said, that would create political momentum “to get rid of the mandate/fine — which is effectively the same thing as getting rid of Obamacare.” And if that happens, the American health system will be in entirely uncharted territory.

  • S

    imho…if democrats try to extort money in those increased penalties mentioned in Byron York’s article above…and actually try to take over 2.5% of their income and give nothing back to them in return while they give free health insurance to friends, the poor, probably illegals and their kids, on and on etc…

    …then the democratic party will truly begin to self destruct…frankly Hillary better come up with something without this mandate because it is going to be a dealbreaker for the Dims…no doubt about it…

    you want to see a revolution…just wait until the american people see their hard earned money they have their own plans for being taken from them by the government with the strong arm of the IRS and then leaving them with nothing for their labor and hours worked,etc…

    the dim party will be over as we know it…

    btw…yesterday i heard that most of the employee policies and others to be cancelled will be cancelled in Oct 2014…something to do with the billing, etc…and supposedly millions are due to be cancelled…just in time for the nov elections…

  • gonzotx

    America needs a Sharon…now

  • freespirit

    If Hillary and her peeps don’t have a list, her supporters will gladly compile one for them. We well know who belongs on it.

    This is not a particularly newsworthy story/allegation, yet it has received much media attention. Does the timing seem telling to anyone else? Media is ratcheting up the anti-Hillary effort kind of early, it seems. We knew it would happen. In fact it was discussed thoroughly at Big Pink a few months ago during the Dem and MSM Hillary love fest. At that time, Hillary was receiving positive media coverage, and Claire, Nancy, and others were pretending to be Hillary’s biggest fans. McCaskill is listed as a prominent member of the Ready for Hillary PAC. Is this the beginning of the public attack on Hillary? I even saw a story a couple of days ago in what appeared to be a legitimate newspaper. it quoted an article from The Globe claiming that Hillary had a brain tumor and had been told by the doctor that a presidential run would kill her. Such professionalism. I guess next week they will claim that Bill is actually the father of Princess Kate’s baby.

    We can probably look forward next to stories confirming that Warren is really full blooded native American, accidentally switched at birth. A public reunion with parents may be planned. Maybe there will be warm fuzzy stories about Joe Biden’s special relationship with Barack. They probably will be said to enjoy cooking up a pot of hearty soup together in the WH kitchen every Monday night, over which they discuss serious matters, sharing their heartfelt concerns about the lives of Americans.

    I hope that if/when MSM decides to support old Joe, they will remind the public of his age, as they have done about Hillary so frequently.

  • wbboei

    The problem with Obamacare is not simply the mandate.

    The problem with Obamacare is:

    a. the destruction of the insurance market as a whole through adverse selection

    b. skyrocketing premiums,

    c. onerous deductibles i.e. loss of insurance

    d. coerced coverage which people do not want

    e. the fraud Obama perpetrated about it to win an election

    f. the party supported him like poodles not realizing the political risks

    g. the loss of jobs when employers cut their payroll over Obamacare

    h. the sticker shock when people are thrown on the exchanges

    I. the Kafkaesque world which they will then encounter

    j. the death panels which will take life or death situations away from physicians

    k. the two tiered system, where the wealthy are insulated from this fate

    l. the coming depression which this toxic legislation will ultimately engender

    m. the naked attempt to create a have and have not society through illegal immigration and amnesty.

    And while this is a bi partisan problem, the axe will fall on the neck of the democrat party, once things reach a tipping point, as they undoubtedly will. Then as now, the mandate will be a mere subset of the much wider problem. I have no doubt that Roger Simon is right when he says, we are living in pre revolutionary times. And so was the Irish poet Yeats when he said things fall apart the center cannot hold. And despite what beltway apologists like Ignatius may try to tell us, there is no luke warm hell. Towit:

    The Second Coming

    Turning and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

    Surely some revelation is at hand;
    Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
    The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
    When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
    Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
    A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
    A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
    Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
    Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
    The darkness drops again; but now I know
    That twenty centuries of stony sleep
    Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
    And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
    Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

  • wbboei

    92 million people of working age not working? And the problem getting worse by the day? And the beltway elites making millions and telling us these are the best of time. This is worse than myopia. It is worse than hypocrisy. This is provocation for something they do not see and cannot fathom. I am talking about a systemic collapse.

  • wbboei

    I forgot doctor shortages–Obamacare will cause that as well.

    I do not hear as much talk these days from the beltway elites about a monument to Obama carved in Mount Rushmore next to Washington and Jefferson. Those who have profited through the looting of our economy which he has perpetrated may be tempted, but it is really not an advisable thing to do. Liars should not prosper, or be turned into demi gods. It is contra bonus mores.

  • wbboei

    I am not suggesting that this Great Reckoning will be driven by Obamacare alone. It is a function of two other variables. One is mega politics, as identified by Lord Rees-Mog and James Davidson over 20 years ago. Reese Mog wasw then head of the BBC and editor of the London Times, if memory serves. He was also one of the 99 members of the Quantum Fund in the Antilles, managed by the old Nazi George Soros. The other factor is the failure of the American elites to prepare for it, and to engineer a soft landing for the American People. The choice for them was as stark as it was obvious: to protect the nation, or to line their own pockets. Simply put, they chose the latter.

  • freespirit

    If the Dems and MSM force Hillary out of the running, I don’t give a damn who the Pubs run, I’ll vote for him (no need to even pretend it could be a female), contribute, and work like hell for him. They can even run one of their bat shit crazy, hard right fundamentalists, and I’ll support him. Pat Robertson? Hell yeah. MSM and the Dims cannot continue to get away with selecting this country’s leaders.

    They have made a joke of democratic process.

  • wbboei

    I do not think Warren would be the one to challenge Hillary, or to run for the nomination if she decided for some reason not to. And it will not be that buffoon governor from Montana, who makes Joe Biden look sober as a judge. I think it will be someone like Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, although no one is speculating on his prospects openly at this point.

  • gonzotx

    Wbb

    Thanks for the Patton video the other day.

  • jeswezey

    wbboei January 13, 2014 at 4:56 pm

    Thanks for the update on your individual health insurance situation.

    The last time you mentioned it about 3 months ago, you said your premium were going to go up from about $500 to over $900, about an 80% increase. From your figures now, it looks more like a 50% increase, which is bad enough I guess. In the end, it all depends on what your income is.

    But the deductible, whatever the amount but especially of $5000 per month, totally obliterates your coverage, as far as I can see. I don’t understand how your insurance will pay anything at all except “some serious medical condition that requires a high level of medical treatment”, and even then – you still have to fork over the initial $5 K.

    Does Blue Shield pay for any medication? BCBS copped out on my mother’s meds.

    All in all, I can see that your coverage is 50% worse now than it was before the ACA. But I think it was already bad enough before.

    Letting people buy into Medicaid was one of Hillary’s ideas for a cheapo public option – cheapo in the sense that it would just call for a 10-page bill in Congress, but cheapo also in the sense that Medicaid offers full coverage without deductibles and has only a 4% overhead compared to the 20% overhead allowed to the 1600 private insurers.

    wbboei January 14, 2014 at 12:40 am

    The problem with Obamacare is:… (“a” through “m”)

    I wholly agree with “b” through “l” but don’t agree at all with “a” – “destruction of the insurance market through adverse selection”. Obamacare is a gift to the insurance industry, that’s why they wanted it.

    And the last reason, “l”, I don’t understand. Don’t get the connection to haves and have-nots and illegal immigration/amnesty.

  • Leanora

    gonzotx
    January 13, 2014 at 10:45 pm

    America needs a Sharon…now
    ==============

    ABSOLUTELY!!!

  • Leanora

    The transcripts – “Obama Knew Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack Just Minutes After Assault” . They all lied to us. No wonder the obots hate James Rosen.
    ===

    The Benghazi Transcripts: Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ‘attack,’ not video or protest

    Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation’s top civilian and uniformed defense officials — headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama — were informed that the event was a “terrorist attack,” declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president’s Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.

    Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, told the House in classified testimony last year that it was him who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The tense briefing — in which it was already known that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens had been targeted and had gone missing — occurred just before the two senior officials departed the Pentagon for their session with the commander in chief.

    According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Ham — who was working out of his Pentagon office on the afternoon of Sept. 11 — said he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center.

    “My first call was to General Dempsey, General Dempsey’s office, to say, ‘Hey, I am headed down the hall. I need to see him right away,’” Ham told lawmakers on the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation on June 26 of last year. “I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta.”

    Ham’s account of that fateful day was included in some 450 pages of testimony given by senior Pentagon officials in classified, closed-door hearings conducted last year by the Armed Services subcommittee. The testimony, given under “Top Secret” clearance and only declassified this month, presents a rare glimpse into how information during a crisis travels at the top echelons of America’s national security apparatus, all the way up to the president.

    Also among those whose secret testimony was declassified was Dempsey, the first person Ham briefed about Benghazi. Ham told lawmakers he considered it a fortuitous “happenstance” that he was able to rope Dempsey and Panetta into one meeting, so that, as Ham put it, “they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House.” Ham also told lawmakers he met with Panetta and Dempsey when they returned from their 30-minute session with President Obama on Sept. 11.

    Armed Services Chairman Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., sitting in on the subcommittee’s hearing with Ham last June, reserved for himself an especially sensitive line of questioning: namely, whether senior Obama administration officials, in the very earliest stages of their knowledge of Benghazi, had any reason to believe that the assault grew spontaneously out of a demonstration over an anti-Islam video produced in America.

    Numerous aides to the president and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly told the public in the weeks following the murder of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans that night — as Obama’s hotly contested bid for re-election was entering its final stretch — that there was no evidence the killings were the result of a premeditated terrorist attack, but rather were the result of a protest gone awry. Subsequent disclosures exposed the falsity of that narrative, and the Obama administration ultimately acknowledged that its early statements on Benghazi were untrue.

    READ MORE:
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/13/benghazi-transcripts-top-defense-officials-briefed-obama-on-attack-not-video-or/

  • freespirit

    Hillary’s first response to Benghazi was that it was a possible terrorist attack.

    Still4hill has compiled much documentation regarding Benghazi and Hillary’s role, as well as detailed info on the restrictions and responsibilities of each department involved. http://www.still4hill.com

  • wbboei

    The last time you mentioned it about 3 months ago, you said your premium were going to go up from about $500 to over $900, about an 80% increase. From your figures now, it looks more like a 50% increase, which is bad enough I guess. In the end, it all depends on what your income is.
    ————————-
    I had several conversations at that time, two with Blue Cross, and one with the exchanges. What I was projecting, and what I said here was a 40% increase. Now, as it turns out, it will be a 50% based on the revised schedules. And, if you get creative and add the increase in deductible to the increase in premium you will approximate an 80% figure. Furthermore, the structure of these policies is such that the insurance company can impose additional increases retroactively based on loss experience, which we now know will be greater than initially anticipated by their actuaries which could reach a 60% figure. Also, if you compare the cost of the silver plan which is comparable to what I had before to the bronze plan which Blue Cross is compelled to offer now as a result of the mandate then an 80% figure would be accurate. Also, if you consider the six cost drivers mentioned in my posting above, it becomes obvious that the premiums will increase not by 80% but by 100% absent some kind of bailout. And the only bailout Obama and Zeke are talking about after fucking up our health care system until hell won’t have it anymore is a bail-out for the insurance companies. Simply put, I seriously doubt that I said an 80% increase, but even so, I think that figure is easily defensible, and middle class people will bear the brunt because they will not be eligible for the subsidies. This is why Obamacare will kill the democratic party. It is like condominiums and AIDS–they cannot get rid of it.

  • wbboei

    I wholly agree with “b” through “l” but don’t agree at all with “a” – “destruction of the insurance market through adverse selection”. Obamacare is a gift to the insurance industry, that’s why they wanted it.
    ——————————-
    It is a gift IF they can make money at it. But if the system is structured in such a manner that they do not get the good risks, only the bad, then they will lose money. That is what Obamacare does through adverse selection.

    Consider the following hypothetical:

    I am the insured, you are the insurance company. I have terminal cancer, and I want to buy insurance to pay the medical costs of treatment. What will you charge to me to provide major medical?

    If you want to make money, you will charge me a premium equal to the cost of the major medical plus the costs of administration. And in that case I will have no economic incentive to buy it, all other things being equal.

    But now suppose the government enters the picture, and mandates that you provide that coverage, at a cost significantly less than what you would charge in order to make money. And suppose further that government denies you a pool of good risk candidates, to subsidize the loss you will incur from the high risk insured.

    You will be out of business. You will demand government relief for putting you in that situation. And the government will provide that relief. In that case the American people bear the cost plus the additional costs of the insurance itself, as delineated above.

  • wbboei

    The insurance companies wanted the good risks. And under Obamacare they will not get them.

  • jbstonesfan

    Just perusing TV last night, major attacks on Hillary’s “hit list”. Begalia was great as always. I really hope should she chose to run she gets him and Carville on board.

  • wbboei

    Going back to the hypothetical for a moment, the other thing you would do in addition to seeking a bail out, is you would raise your premiums, and threaten to raise them even further if bail out relief was not granted.

  • Leanora

    This report is chilling. And no one will be able to claim that we weren´t warned. The question is, who will stop this criminal abuse of power?
    ====

    Dan Pfeiffer: ‘President Obama is ready to use every executive action available’

    White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer sent an e-mail early Tuesday to preview President Obama’s plan to use his executive power in ways Americans have never seen before.

    “President Obama has a resolution for 2014: That this will be a year of action,” Pfeiffer said in the e-mail, pointing out that Obama would no longer be waiting around for Congress to get things done.

    “Instead, the president will use his executive authority, both his pen and his phone, to work with anyone to get things done ­ whether they be leaders in business, education, Congress, states, or local communities,” he said.

    Obama’s threat to use executive action, however, is nothing new. Ever since Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in 2011, Obama has vowed to use executive actions to push forward his agenda on immigration and drug laws as well as gun control initiatives, climate change, and job creation. And, on many occasions, he has done so.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/dan-pfeiffer-president-obama-is-ready-to-use-every-executive-action-available/article/2542137

  • wbboei

    And, most important of all, you would make campaign contributions to key senators and congressmen, to wet their beak, and get them to do what they typically do, which is sell out the American People in exchange for campaign contributions.

    Tinker to Evers to Chance. . .

    You see some problem with this stategy . . ?

  • Shadowfax

    freespirit
    January 14, 2014 at 12:56 am

    If the Dems and MSM force Hillary out of the running, I don’t give a damn who the Pubs run, I’ll vote for him (no need to even pretend it could be a female), contribute, and work like hell for him. They can even run one of their bat shit crazy, hard right fundamentalists, and I’ll support him. Pat Robertson? Hell yeah. MSM and the Dims cannot continue to get away with selecting this country’s leaders.

    ——-
    :lol: bat shit fundamentalists…

    I feel like that was what I have been doing for the last two elections, even if these two were kind of moderate Repubs in my book.

    Someone like Sweaters, Ryan or that flavor, I will have have to talk myself down off the edge of a skyscraper to vote. I would just have to join the crowd of PUMAs that would burn down the DNC.

  • wbboei

    It is inimical to the general welfare?

    Well then tell me this: what do bob corker, chuck schumer, dean heller, dickhead durbin, mitch mcconnell, patty murray, houeven, inter alia care about the general welfare.

    It is like the old song “It Never Entered My (Their) Mind”.

  • Shadowfax

    How many of those 92 million American’s that are now out of the job market, have lost their health insurance, along with their jobs? (Lowest since 1978)

    When folks got caught in the real estate collapse, and massive amounts of homes were foreclosed on because of the mortgage scams…how many of these people could hang on to their health insurance?

    My guess is the media has not told the American people how bad things really are in our health care system.

  • Leanora

    Regulation, taxes and debt knock the U.S. out of the world’s top 10.

    World economic freedom has reached record levels, according to the 2014 Index of Economic Freedom, released Tuesday by the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. But after seven straight years of decline, the U.S. has dropped out of the top 10 most economically free countries.

    For 20 years, the index has measured a nation’s commitment to free enterprise on a scale of 0 to 100 by evaluating 10 categories, including fiscal soundness, government size and property rights. These commitments have powerful effects: Countries achieving higher levels of economic freedom consistently and measurably outperform others in economic growth, long-term prosperity and social progress. Botswana, for example, has made gains through low tax rates and political stability.

    Those losing freedom, on the other hand, risk economic stagnation, high unemployment and deteriorating social conditions. For instance, heavy-handed government intervention in Brazil’s economy continues to limit mobility and fuel a sense of injustice.

    More @
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303848104579308811265028066?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303848104579308811265028066.html

  • admin

    Governor Chris Christie State of the State address carried live on TV. He opened with by stating that it has been a tough week but that it will not stop him from doing the work for the people. The pivot to “fighter for the people” begins.

  • If you like your Nukes!!! :lol:

  • Shadowfax

    Foxy

    If you like your Nukes!!! :)

    —-

    Nukes, what nukes…move along, nothing going on here. We are just making new microwaves for our poor people.

  • wbboei

    ADMIN: THIS IS IMPORTANT:

    1. When Hillary’s enemies argue that she put politics ahead of the success of the mission and the welfare of the troops based on Benghazi, the editorial in today’s WSJ by four star general Jack Keane the number 2 man in the army refutes that premise as follows:

    “Mr. Gates labored mightily to maintain support for the war in a Congress where Mr. Bush had lost credibility and influence. Going through the hearings filled with vitriol, Mr. Gates hearkened back to Viet Nam and feared might once again legislate an American defeat, this time by restricting funding for the surge and forcing an abrupt termination of the war. (snip)

    In 2007, few understood how badly the war in Afghanistan was going. Commanders in the field were giving cheery updates and talking about the need for developmental assistance rather than troops (snip).

    Appointing a new commander, Stanley McChrystal, Mr. Gates charged him with conducting a full review of the war in June 2009. He was as surprised as anyone when the general reported he needed 40,000 more troops to do the job, but characteristically, the general tried to push the plan in Washington. With Iraq in 2007, he had the full support of the Administration.

    This time, he almost alone–WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON, FOR WHOM GATES HAS THE HIGHEST PRAISE IN “DUTY”.

    2. When Hillary’s enemies claim she was part of a cover-up after the fact, it is important to understand what exactly she was dealing with. Keane and Gates are forthcoming on that subject as well:

    “THE DETAILS MR. GATES PROVIDES OF WHITE HOUSE STAFFERS WITH NO MILITARY EXPERIENCE MICROMANAGING THE MILITARY CAMPAIGN ARE APPALLING: EXAGGERATING MISTAKES, MISREPRESENTING SUCCESSES, EVEN CALLING FIELD COMMANDERS DIRECTLY–SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE JUST CAUSE FOR FIRING IN ANY PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION.”

    ADMIN: the foregoing is why it was impossible for Hillary to air the dirty laundry of the Obama administration to a gleeful Republican Party and a big media who would dismiss the truth as nothing more than disloyalty to Obama, just as they are doing now to Gates. Indeed there is a maggot named Brent Stevens who on the same editorial page who is bent on defending Obama, and thus begins a mean spirited indictment of Gates which is not worth repeating.

    The other thing Hillary could not do is reveal why Obama was failed to give the command to save the troops and then lied about it later, as Colonel Bing West has proven beyond reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. The reason he did not respond was because his svenghali Jarrett cautioned him against it in the strongest terms, just as she had cautioned against him taking action in prior cases.

    Hillary was not in the chain of command, but Panetta was, and he fell through his ass. If Hillary had explained all this then Obama’s gross dereliction of duty would have been obvious, he would have been impeached, and Jarrett would have been in route to Joliette–where she belongs. Nor could she reveal the nature and extent of CIA operations. Consequently, she had no choice but to do what she did. It was Hobson’s choice.

    In sum, the Gates book needs to be mined by Clinton supporters and he favorable references to her therein need to be incorporated into their talking points when the subject of Benghazi comes up. Again, this is very important.

  • wbboei

    Bret-

    By now you have had an opportunity to read the article by four star General Jack Keane entitled “The Mask of Command”, which appeared on the editiorial page of the Wall Street Journal today adjacent to yours.

    His article provides a vigorous defense of Secretary Gates, in contrast to yours. It is fortuitous that the two articles–his and yours would appear on the same page on the same day, so an objective comparison can be made.

    You sir have an impressive biography. A Pulitzer Prize. Commentary Magazine. Bussels. University of Chicago. And the London School of Economics, the former residence of Karl Popper and the alma mater of George Soros.

    Nevertheless, when it comes to any assessment of Gates, government and Afghanistan, your resume is as nothing, compared to General Keane’s. And frankly, your shallow comments on the subject reflect as much.

    General Keane understands the concept of military leadership, and the chain of command. He knows goverment from having been in and around it. And he comprehends the situation in Afghanistan, in ways that you cannot and obviously do not.

    As such, when he gives high marks to Gates and his book, it is worth noting.

    The other thing worth noting is the concern both of those men feel for the fate of the country. One that transcends Beltway politics. I find that refreshing. You on the other hand do not.

    Therefore, as between his opinion and yours, the discerning reader would be inclined to credit his conclusions over yours. That is not just my opinion. It is the consensus of others I have talked to about this.

    Strip joint metaphors to the contrary notwithstanding.

    WBB

  • wbboei

    Bret-

    By now you have had an opportunity to read the article by four star General Jack Keane entitled “The Mask of Command”, which appeared on the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal today adjacent to yours.

    His article provides a vigorous defense of Secretary Gates, in contrast to yours. It is fortutious that the two articles–his and yours would appear on the same page on the same day, so an objective comparison can be made.

    You sir have an impressive biography. A Pulitzer Prize. Commentary Magazine. Bussels. University of Chicago. And the London School of Economics, the former residence of Karl Popper and the alma mater of George Soros.

    Nevertheless, when it comes to any assessment of Gates, government and Afghanistan, your resume is as nothing, compared to General Keane’s. And frankly, your shallow comments on the subject reflect as much.

    General Keane understands the concept of military leadership, and the chain of command. He knows government from having been in and around it. And he comprehends the situation in Afghanistan, in ways that you cannot and obviously do not.

    As such, when he gives high marks to Gates and his book, it is worth noting.

    The other thing worth noting is the concern both of those men feel for the fate of the country. One that transcends Beltway politics. I find that refreshing. You on the other hand do not.

    Therefore, as between his opinion and yours, the discerning reader would be inclined to credit his conclusions over yours. That is not just my opinion. It is the consensus of others I have talked to about this.

    Your felicitous strip joint metaphors to the contrary notwithstanding.

    WBB

  • gonzotx

    Wbb
    Are you saying Hillary had no choice but to lie about Benghazi?

  • wbboei

    Wbb
    Are you saying Hillary had no choice but to lie about Benghazi?
    ——————
    Yes. If she had shot straight on that too many things would have come unraveled. I don’t think there was much choice. And I don’t mean from the Obama idiots.

    You saw the Ronald Reagan tribute to General Patton which I posted for you a couple days ago.

  • wbboei

    Give peace a chance? My ass. Give peace in our time a chance? That is what Obama means. Like Neville Chamberlain. And, a Carthaginian peace for Israel.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/14/rouhani-world-powers-surrendered-to-iran-with-nuclear-deal/?intcmp=latestnews

  • gonzotx

    Gates on Hannity talking about Hillary.
    Gates supportive of Hillary despite Hannity’s pushing.

  • gonzotx

    Wbb,
    I did see it.Thank you. We could use such a man right now. We so need such a leader.

    I am afraid I believe Hillary did not need to lie, certainly not in the fashion she did.She is smart enough to have found a neutral ground.

  • jbstonesfan

    This is why I can’t stand Hannity. He is already using Gate’s words to claim the most egregious act was Hillary’s alleged comments re the surge .

  • gonzotx

    Neville obama

  • S

    I think I have found a real ‘contender’ for Hillary’s campaign…

    http://youtu.be/TU7rwwEUcwQ

    *******************************************

    if you want to hear more from this CD it is Christina Aguilera – ‘Back to Basics’…superlative…

  • gonzotx

    Hannity is very concrete. No gray

  • Shadowfax

    Wbb
    Hillary was not in the chain of command, but Panetta was, and he fell through his ass. If Hillary had explained all this then Obama’s gross dereliction of duty would have been obvious, he would have been impeached, and Jarrett would have been in route to Joliette–where she belongs. Nor could she reveal the nature and extent of CIA operations. Consequently, she had no choice but to do what she did. It was Hobson’s choice.

    —-
    This is what I have thought along and have tried to express this as best I could on the blog. Having the military bring all the pieces together on their side, lays most of the fault to we-know-who and his Mother-May-I.

  • Shadowfax

    all along

  • Shadowfax

    jbstonesfan
    January 14, 2014 at 10:28 pm
    This is why I can’t stand Hannity. He is already using Gate’s words to claim the most egregious act was Hillary’s alleged comments re the surge .

    —-
    This is why I have stopped watching Fox, and especially Hannity since the election ended in 2012.

    Hannity is a DB when it comes to the Clinton’s. He is embarrassed if he has to admit that either of them have accomplished anything.

  • jbstonesfan

    I rarely watch, but was interested in the Gates exclusive.

  • VotingHillary

    Anyone else find it interesting that after the Supreme Court’s questioning last week regarding Obama’s so-called recess appointments seemed to indicate they are going to set some limits on executive privilege, Obama today says this:

    “President Barack Obama offered a brief preview Tuesday of his State of the Union address, telling his Cabinet that he won’t wait for Congress to act on key agenda items in 2014.

    “I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a phone,” he said at his first Cabinet meeting of the year. Outlining the strategy, Obama said he plans to use his pen to sign executive actions and his phone to convene outside groups in support of his agenda if Congress proves unable or unwilling to act on his priorities.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/obama-state-of-the-union-2014-strategy-102151.html#ixzz2qR2xXSvy

  • TheRock

    wbboei

    January 14, 2014 at 9:51 pm

    wbb,

    It would be a sin not to cross post this over at WSJ. Homerun.

    Hillary 2016

  • freespirit

    Hillary was not in the chain of command, but Panetta was, and he fell through his ass. If Hillary had explained all this then Obama’s gross dereliction of duty would have been obvious, he would have been impeached, and Jarrett would have been in route to Joliette–where she belongs. Nor could she reveal the nature and extent of CIA operations. Consequently, she had no choice but to do what she did. It was Hobson’s choice.

    In sum, the Gates book needs to be mined by Clinton supporters and he favorable references to her therein need to be incorporated into their talking points when the subject of Benghazi comes up. Again, this is very important.

    ________

    Admin I’m so glad you brought up. I had understood from previous info that Panetta, not Hillary had command responsibility. Remember during a media interview or possibly at the hearings on Benghazi Hillary made the statement that (paraphrasing) she could speak only for the State Dept. not other departments. The way she said it at that time seemed more than just an off hand remark. It seemed almost like a deliberate disclaimer, though she couldn’t come out and say who was responsible.

    My question is this – Would it have constituted a legal, ethical, or policy and procedures violation if Hillary had spoken out and told the full story? I understand that it would have backfired if Hillary had told what was really going on – It just wasn’t the wise thing to do – not when her boss and others were keeping mum. But I wonder if there were any written, formal directives or policy statements regarding how much one department head could say about an operation for which another department head was responsible.

    Not that this is a huge issue. I’m just curious. Anyone know?

    Thank you, Admin!! You too wbb.

    And, jb, I so agree about Hannity. He’s a damn child. He and the other conservative talking heads have been spreading their faux outrage all over the place since Benghazi happened, claiming that they were only concerned about the victims’ families being given an explanation about what happened – obviously we all have much empathy for them. Now, that they’ve been given at least some of the info they claimed to so desperately seek – for the victims’ families, you understand – they don’t like it because the truth set Hillary free. They were betting the farm that they could pin some major screw-up or cover-up on her.

    So much for their heartfelt concern for the families. It was always all about politics. It always is.

  • wbboei

    Gonzo: when I prepared witnesses for cross examination I always instructed them to tell the truth, since they were under oath. But this case is different, because it involved an entire strategy and mistakes that were made, the revelation of which would have done incalculable harm to US interests. Remember the old definition of an ambassador, namely someone sent abroad to lie for his country and perhaps you will understand my drift.

    Here, there was some evidence at the time that the video was a contributing, although the weight of the evidence (including the preliminary statements of her own State Department)indicated a terrorist attack. Consequently, all other things being equal, the right response would have been to call it a terrorist attack. But when the consequences of that revelation would create enormous collateral damage to US interests, even beyond the election, and not save the lives of the people who died, her decision to advance the alternative explanation becomes more understandable.

  • wbboei

    I do not like the writer. He is an Obama whore. The title is not descriptive of the article. However, the analysis of the Christie scandal he provides below is spot on. It explains why the scandal has resonance and will not go away easily. Coincidentally, this analysis comports with the book “Nail’Em”–in re. the three factors mentioned. If the title sound familiar, that is because it is the bible for defusing scandals. I have quoted from it here previously.
    ————————————

    Chris Christie’s conservative problem

    EJ Dionne

    Using public facilities for selfish ends is the very definition of corruption, which is why this scandal bothers people far outside the conservative orbit. It took months for the episode to hit the big time because so many (the governor claims he’s one of them) had difficulty believing that government officials would act as recklessly as Christie’s gang did — and with such indifference to how their actions would affect the lives of people in northern New Jersey who were bystanders to an insider game.

    Christie was finally moved to condemn the indefensible only after the smoking gun emerged in the form of e-mails from his staff and his appointees. Their contents reflected a vindictive urge to squelch all resistance to the governor’s political interests.

    And this is the problem Christie hasn’t solved yet. At his epic news conference Thursday, he focused again and again on how loyal staff members had “lied” to him and how he felt personally victimized. What he never explained was why he did not press his staff earlier for paper trails so he could know for certain that all his vociferous denials were true. He didn’t deal with this flagrant foul until he had no choice. Saying he had faith in his folks is not enough. Christie still has to tell us why he did not treat the possibility of such a misuse of power with any urgency.

    Even assuming that Christie’s disavowal of complicity holds up, he faces a long-term challenge in laying this story to rest. History suggests that beating back a scandal requires one or more of these assets: (1) a strong partisan or ideological base; (2) overreach by your adversaries; or (3) a charge that doesn’t fit people’s perceptions of you. Christie has trouble on all three fronts.

    If Christie has a base, it consists of Wall Street donors, a media fascinated by his persona and relative moderation, and some but by no means all members of the non-tea-party-wing of the Republican Party.

    He does not have the committed ideological core that Ronald Reagan could rely on to overcome Iran-Contra. He does not have the Democratic base that stuck with Bill Clinton during his sex scandal because the excesses of a special prosecutor and then of a Republican House that impeached him came to enrage Democrats even more than Clinton’s misbehavior.

    What of Christie’s base? Wall Street is fickle and pragmatic. The media can turn on a dime. And the Republican establishment, such as it is, has alternatives. Oh, yes, Christie also has support from some machine Democrats in New Jersey who have made deals with him. But they will be even more pragmatic than Wall Street.

    Overreach by one’s enemies is always a possibility, but there are no signs of this yet. Christie’s detractors have every reason to take things slowly and methodically. They will enjoy dragging this out.

    And as has already been widely noted, the Christie operation’s penchant for settling scores is legendary. This charge fits the existing narrative about the guy so well that Christie had to say the words, “I am not a bully.” Denials of this sort usually have the opposite of their intended effect.

    Christie has one other obstacle, and this may be the most important. A great many conservatives never trusted him, and a tale that plays so perfectly into their critique of government could make things worse. Erick Erickson, the right-wing writer, captured this rather colorfully. People sometimes want a politician to be “a jerk,” Erickson wrote on Fox News’ Web site, but “they want the person to be their jerk,” not a jerk “who tries to make everyone else his whipping boy.”

    To win Christie some sympathy on the right, defenders such as former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour quickly deployed the GOP’s first-responder technique of attacking “the liberal media.” But liberals are the least of Christie’s problems.

  • Shadowfax

    Free
    My question is this – Would it have constituted a legal, ethical, or policy and procedures violation if Hillary had spoken out and told the full story?

    —-
    I posed the question a few days back- Would Hillary’s spilling the beans on what really happened in Benghazi, the president’s failure to give the order or have it followed though…constitute ‘treason’ for Hillary as far as Obama is concerned?

  • moononpluto

    Major intl trouble breaking in Turkey….

    Turkish policemen yesterday went against the Gov’t and staged raids on IHH the supposed aid carriers into Turkey……dozens of Al Qaeda were arrested.

    A top AlQaida leader is believed 2be among ppl arrested yesterday in Turkish police operation; Chiefs in charge of it were sacked from position by Govt saying raids were illegal.

    Has Turkeys Govt been helping AQ working in and out of Syria, it looks like it, int’l shitstorm brewing.

  • moononpluto

    Police and gendarmerie units carried out raids in six provinces across Turkey in which they detained alleged senior members of al-Qaeda. The raids appear to be part of a major operation against the global network.

    Tight security measures were taken during the raids carried out in the provinces of Van, İstanbul, Adana, Kilis, Gaziantep and Kayseri. Sikorsky-type military helicopters were readied as a measure to prevent the escape of suspects. Despite these measures, however, a number of suspects reportedly managed to escape.

    News reports said two senior al-Qaeda operatives — İbrahim Şen, who is allegedly a top al-Qaeda leader in the Middle East, and Halis Bayancuk, who is said to be in charge of the al-Qaeda network in Turkey — were among the people detained in the operation.

    An employee of the charity group Humanitarian Aid Foundation (İHH) was also among the detained. The İHH confirmed that its storage facility near the Syrian border in Kilis was searched and an employee detained. However, the organization rejected any ties to al-Qaeda and denounced the police raid as an attempt to discredit it. The operation and the way it was conducted clearly shows that there is an effort to link al-Qaeda and the aid organization, according to İHH officials.

    “This is a deliberate attack on the İHH,” said Yaşar Kutluay, the secretary-general of İHH at a press conference in İstanbul. He blamed the operation on “pro-Israeli entities” without naming them. He and Uğur Yıldırım, a lawyer for the İHH, said the police searched the İHH storage facility in Kilis while looking for a detained İHH employee, complaining that his residence, not workplace, should have been raided. “His house was not raided even though its address was known,” said Kutluay.

    Yıldırım also said they filed a complaint against the police officers who conducted the search in the Kilis office and that the Ministry of Justice is aware of the development.

    The İHH owned a Gaza-bound aid ship raided by Israeli commandos in international waters in May 2010. Eight Turks and a Turkish-American were killed during the raid, creating a crisis in Turkish-Israeli ties. The group has also played an important role in providing aid to Syrians, sending trucks across the border to Syria to deliver aid. A mysterious truck, stopped en route to Syria early this month on suspicion of carrying arms to Syria, was initially reported to belong to the İHH. But the İHH denied it and the government later said the truck, escorted by the National Intelligence Organization (MİT), was carrying supplies to Turkmens in Syria.

    In addition to the İHH employee detained in Kilis, three people were detained in İstanbul and another in Kayseri. The private Doğan news agency said another 18 people were detained in Van, where the operation was centered.
    Kilis police chief reassigned after raid

    Amid the controversy, a senior police officer in Kilis was reassigned to another post just hours after the police operation he oversaw earlier in the day. Devlet Çıngı, head of the counterterrorism unit, was reassigned to a post in the juvenile unit.
    Accusations of transfer of fighters to Syria

    Suspects detained on Tuesday are allegedly involved in a transfer of foreign fighters into Syria and in facilitating the entry of al-Qaeda fighters from countries such as Pakistan and Afghanistan into Syrian territory. They are also suspected of collecting donations from locals in Turkey and transferring them to al-Qaeda fighters in Syria.

    Şen, who was detained and taken to Guantanamo Bay by US authorities in 2006, was handed over to Turkish officials in 2008. He was later sentenced to six years and three months by a Turkish court on terrorism charges, news reports said. However, the case has yet to be finalized by the Supreme Court of Appeals.

    Bayancuk has allegedly been in charge of the al-Qaeda network since former leader Habip Akdaş was killed in a US air strike in Iraq. Akdaş was the chief of the al-Qaeda unit that carried out the deadly 2003 attacks on the British Consulate, HSBC headquarters and two synagogues in İstanbul.

    http://www.todayszaman.com/news-336617-suspected-al-qaeda-members-nabbed-in-police-operation.html

    ………………………………………..

    There must be serious concern of what has transpired in Turkey in the last weeks, The US govt, UN and EU must be left with the impression that Erdogans Govt cannot be trusted. They seem to be helping out rogue Govts and agencies and someone is going to have to step in soon.

  • Leanora

    This Won’t End Well

    Presented with little comment aside to ask (rhetorically of course) how much longer the crushed consumer can subsist on a diet of increasingly saturated credit and dwindled-savings before retail sales revert to reality…

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-14/wont-end-well

  • Mormaer

    What is wrong with Hillary keeping a shit list? Anyone with brains keeps at least a mental list of those who you can trust, those you cannot, those who have done you a grave disservice, anyone who has stabbed you in the back, liars, sneaks, ingrates, etc. All of my life it has been referred to as the “shit list” and you wanted to stay off of it if you were smart. Grandma, the school principal, business partners, neighbors, your pastor, or your sister could put you on their shit list for retribution. It is self preservation and idiots who do not understand cause and effect should not be in politics.

  • freespirit

    Mormaer
    January 15, 2014 at 7:25 am
    What is wrong with Hillary keeping a shit list? Anyone with brains keeps at least a mental list of those who you can trust, those you cannot, those who have done you a grave disservice, anyone who has stabbed you in the back, liars, sneaks, ingrates, etc. All of my life it has been referred to as the “shit list” and you wanted to stay off of it if you were smart. Grandma, the school principal, business partners, neighbors, your pastor, or your sister could put you on their shit list for retribution. It is self preservation and idiots who do not understand cause and effect should not be in politics.
    ____________

    That’s what I’m screamin’ Mormaer!

    After 2008, I think many of us Hillary supporters tried to explain our opposition to Obama, MSM, and DNC in terms of ” righting a wrong”" or “holding them accountable”. I know I attempted to sugar coat my motives. Finally, I had to be honest with myself. Yes, there was a need for justice and accountability, but a big part of my opposition was just plain old REVENGE! I want the culprits to experience payback in the truest sense of the word. Still want it as much today as I did 5years ago.

    Not high minded, I’ll admit, but honest.

  • gonzotx

    Wbb,

    I understand Hillary couldn’t come outright with the truth about Benghazi, but I don’t buy that she had to support the film line. She could have found a middle ground, a we need to wait till all the evidence is obtained direction.It was embarrassing and dishonest to hear her repeat the WH theme.
    There are lots of unanswered questions about that day, not the least of, why would they even be there on 9/11, especially with minimal security? Did a gun deal really need to be made on that day of all days? Why were the security pleas never answered? Why did we refuse to save our own?

  • Leanora

    Rep. Jim Moran won’t seek reelection
    By Jessica Taylor

    Northern Virginia Rep. Jim Moran (D) will not seek another term in Congress.

    “After 35 years as a public servant, as Mayor of Alexandria, and for the past 23 as a member of the House of Representatives, it’s time to close this chapter of my life and move on to the next challenge. It’s been an honor to represent Northern Virginia,” Moran said in a statement Wednesday morning. “I couldn’t be more fortunate to have spent my career working with such wonderful people trying to make this one of the best places in the world to live, work and raise a family.

    The 12-term congressman represents the heavily Democratic Washington, D.C., suburbs of Arlington and Alexandria, and his seat is sure to remain in Democratic hands.

    A key appropriator, Moran was the ranking member on the House Appropriations Interior Subcommittee and sat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee in the district that holds the Pentagon and other critical military outposts.

    The Virginia congressman is the third Democrat to head for the exits this week, following Rep. George Miller’s (D-Calif.) announcement on Monday and Rep. Bill Owens’s (D-N.Y.) decision Tuesday. Moran is the 15th House member to announce they won’t run again in 2014, a list which now includes six Democrats and nine Republicans.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/195494-moran-wont-seek-re-election

  • Shame some more old fossils
    in congress doesn’t do this,

    :(

  • freespirit

    gonzotx
    January 15, 2014 at 9:07 am

    Wbb,

    I understand Hillary couldn’t come outright with the truth about Benghazi, but I don’t buy that she had to support the film line. She could have found a middle ground, a we need to wait till all the evidence is obtained direction.It was embarrassing and dishonest to hear her repeat the WH theme.
    There are lots of unanswered questions about that day, not the least of, why would they even be there on 9/11, especially with minimal security? Did a gun deal really need to be made on that day of all days? Why were the security pleas never answered? Why did we refuse to save our own?
    _______________

    Did she really “support the film line”? Her initial response as far as I know was a “possible terrorist act”. I know that when she, O and others met with some of the victims’ families, one of the fathers said that Hillary claimed it was possibly related to the film, but I’m not aware of her making this claim on other occasions. I’m not saying that she did not, but the WH was in charge of that lie. It originated with the Administration, and they were the ones who promoted it. It did not originate at State Dept.

    Given the circumstances, in meeting with survivors of victims, if Obama and his people from WH were offering the film protest as the accepted motive of the moment to the victims families, I don’t see how Hillary could be expected to show up and offer a contradictory explanation from that being espoused by her boss. I wonder why the father of the victim singled Hillary out. That can’t have been his first knowledge of the film protest explanation. Additionally the WH – not Hillary – clearly had been more vocal in pressing this point.

    Regardless, knowing what we think we know now, this was a very complex situation with more than one department of government involved – as well as the WH. That meeting with survivors hardly would have been the appropriate place to start debating why the attack occurred and/or who was responsible. I think it was clear that Hillary was trying to comfort the man by assuring him that the responsible parties would be found and held accountable. It didn’t sound as if her motive at the meeting with victims’ families was to perpetrate the so-called cover up, especially when she was not responsible for the screw up in the first place.

    We can’t know what she was told to do or say by her boss. She did not lie to congress or to any official. According to this survivor, she was not honest with him in the circumstances described above. While it may not have been entirely honest, she may have felt that at time and place, it would create less stress for the victims not to have multiple, differing theories presented.

    As I said, I may not be fully aware of the extent to which Hillary promoted the film protest theory. Others may have heard her make this claim multiple times. I think, however, it was more likely that MSM repeatedly reported that she did so. I damn well know FOX did. The Conservative radio hosts did, and still are repeating it. I heard of Hillary blaming the film and its protest that one time – in the meeting mentioned. I heard her also say that there had been some speculation the this was the motive, but that a full investigation would have to be conducted. She repeatedly called for media and the public to wait for the investigation – wait for the facts to come out.

  • gonzotx

    Freespirit

    Sorry, not giving her a free pass on Benghazi.I expected better from her, that’s why I supported her. She clearly voiced the film meme multiple times, they all did.

  • wbboei

    gonzotx

    January 15, 2014 at 9:07 am

    Wbb,

    I understand Hillary couldn’t come outright with the truth about Benghazi, but I don’t buy that she had to support the film line. She could have found a middle ground, a we need to wait till all the evidence is obtained direction.It was embarrassing and dishonest to hear her repeat the WH theme.
    There are lots of unanswered questions about that day, not the least of, why would they even be there on 9/11, especially with minimal security? Did a gun deal really need to be made on that day of all days? Why were the security pleas never answered? Why did we refuse to save our own?
    ——————–
    Gonzo:

    My initial reaction was the same as yours. You think Benghazi is important. So do I. But in thinking about it further, I began to recognize the complexity of the situation, the large number of moving parts, the fact that she refused to go on national television like Rice did and the high praise for her leadership by Gates.

    At that point, I was able to ask myself what I believe to be the right question, which I now commend to you, as a friend:

    Can you balance the misgivings you have about her role in Benghazi, as we have been given to understand it, against the good work she did in concert with Gates to save the Afghan mission, fight the petulant Obama and his cast of incompetent staffies, and to save lives in the region?

    The Republicans will try to make this the litmus test of her leadership, but the truth is one piece of a much larger resume, which overall reflects courage and a willingness to speak truth to power.

  • wbboei

    courage, COMPETENCE, and a willingness to speak truth to power.

  • S

    http://youtu.be/TU7rwwEUcwQ

    for Hillary’s campaign theme “On Our Way”

  • S

    http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/christinaaguilera/onourway.html

    “On Our Way” Christina Aguilera…song is very upbeat, catchy and makes sense…take a listen when you have a moment…

    Me and you, we’re different
    Don’t always see eye to eye
    You go left, and I go right
    And sometimes we even fight
    That don’t mean that I won’t need a friend, oh
    You and me, we’re in this ’til the end, oh

    I think we’re on our way
    Through all the lows and highs
    I need you by my side, singing
    I think we’re on our way
    To better days, better days, oh
    Let’s say we turn the page
    Move on from all the times
    Should’ve laughed, not cried, feeling
    What is there more to say? (say)
    I think that we’re on our way

    Together, we’ll weather
    Many storms as family
    That bond is forever
    It can take almost anything
    The love I feel for you grows everyday, yeah
    The more we get to learn from our mistakes, yeah yeah

    I think we’re on our way
    Through all the lows and highs
    I need you by my side, singing
    I think we’re on our way
    To better days, better days, oh
    Let’s say we turn the page
    Move on from all the times
    Should’ve laughed, not cried, feeling (ooh)
    What is there more to say? (say, yeah yeah)
    I think that we are on our way

    Someday, soon, I’ll need advice
    Hope you’re there to shed some light
    And maybe one day, you’ll be wanting mine
    And we can (we can) be there for each other

    I think we’re on our way
    I think we’re on our way (ha)
    I think we’re on our way
    Let’s say we turn the page
    Move on from all the times
    Should’ve laughed, not cried
    What is there more to say? (ooh)
    I think that we’re on our way
    I think we’re on our way
    Through all the lows and highs
    I need you by my side, yeah

    I think we’re on our way
    To better days, better days, yeah
    Let’s say we turn the page
    Move on from all the times
    Should’ve laughed, not cried
    What is there more to say? (no more to say)
    I think that we are on our way

    Yeah.
    Ohh.

    No more to say.
    No more to say. Yeah.

    No more to say. Ha.

  • wbboei

    Rep. George Miller’s (D-Calif.
    —————————-
    My world is toppling.

    And so is Poopsie’s–

    After all, he’s the hatchet man.

    For that dottering fool.

    As in let George do it.

    But that raises a question or two

    Like, where will he go?

    What will he do?

    Having no other visible means of support.

    I understand he is open to suggestions.

    If so, then here is mine.

    He looks like a walrus.

    He thinks like one.

    And he barks.

    I vote we send George up to the Aleutians.

    Where he can bark with the other walruses.

    While the Eskimos hunt him down for the blubber.

    Which is mostly between his ears.

    In the meantime, don’t let the door of the Rayburn House Office Building

    Hit you on the way out George

    Even for auld lang syne

  • freespirit

    I like that song, S. Lyrics very appropriate for the purpose.

  • S

    foxyladi14
    January 15, 2014 at 12:30 pm
    Jimmy Kimmel.
    **********************************

    fabulous…right on!

    ************************************

    freespirit…agree…i like that it is so upbeat and hopeful and unifying…it could easily be edited for campaign purposes emphazing the “on our way” “to better days” and “Let’s Say we turn the page” ‘together’

    …and also it is sung pretty darn well (that whole CD – Back to Basics – is stunning)

  • gonzotx

    wbb,

    I was willing to go there wbb, but her actions before the investigating committee was very disappointing and petulant to me. Maybe I had her too high on a pedestal, probably. Unfortunately, most actions and outcomes seemed based on future political ambitions.

    I remain conflicted.

  • freespirit

    gonzotx
    January 15, 2014 at 12:26 pm

    Freespirit

    Sorry, not giving her a free pass on Benghazi.I expected better from her, that’s why I supported her. She clearly voiced the film meme multiple times, they all did.
    ________

    That’s obviously your right. Each must follow dictates of her/his own conscience.
    I think you’ll have a hard time finding someone who handles each and every situation as perfectly as it could be handled – especially in a high pressure environment during major crunch time.

    In my opinion, Hillary is the best candidate to bring some sanity back into the running of this country. Hands down, the best. She is not perfect. She has made and will make mistakes. But if elected she’ll work harder and smarter, and do a better job for this country than any other potential candidate mentioned to date could ever do.

  • moononpluto

    Here is a wonderful gorgeous song i found last year, fits so aptly for the times we are in…




    on screen lyrics.

    Read the lyrics to Louise Hoffsten’s “Only the Dead Fish Follow the Stream”.

    If you don’t fight no one else will
    Give it a try, keep it alive
    To see the view you got to climb the hill
    Give it a try, get to know why

    It’s been a long way coming
    But you got to know why and when

    Only the dead fish follow the stream
    No, nothing is ever what it seems
    You can do whatever if you know when and why
    Only the dead fish follow the stream

    Don’t go and get too comfortable
    You can’t keep it alive
    If you’re not awake
    I keep a smile through success and mistakes
    Come hell or high water
    I’m ready, I’m ready

    It’s been a long way coming

    Only the dead fish follow the stream
    No, nothing is ever what it seems
    You can do whatever if you know when and why
    Only the dead fish follow the stream

  • moononpluto

    Whoops…this could have gone wrong in sooo many ways….

    AP: U.S. Air Force secretary says 37 nuclear missile launch officers are involved in a drug scandal

  • moononpluto

    Nice to know the people in charge of the nukes are off their heads on drugs, yes i feel safer now.

  • Warning!!! BS ahead. :)

    President Barack Obama will make a personnel announcement at the White House on Wednesday afternoon, according to the White House.

    The announcement is scheduled for 3:40 pm ET, or about 4:05 pm AOT (actual Obama time).

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3111945/posts

  • moononpluto

    What is he going to bullshit on about this time…i aint covering it, cannot be assed to listen to that total muppet.

  • moononpluto

    My guess on Michelle staying in Hawaii permanently, she aint coming back.

  • wbboei

    gonzotx

    January 15, 2014 at 2:41 pm

    ————–
    I understand.

  • S

    …so where’s the big personal announcement?

    I think I know…the Miami Heat were partying at the WH yesterday…O has decided to leave the WH and join the Miami Heat and hang with LeBron…and the guys…

  • jtjames

    Personnel not personal lol

  • moononpluto

    Interesting….Job done it seems…..

    Christie’s favorability goes from +17 (in Oct) to -3 in NBC polls. His head-to-head with Clinton, from -3 (in Dec) to -13. via NBC.

  • moononpluto

    Where is Bambi’s big announcement then? Even he’s not this late.

  • gonzotx

    Bambino says he can pass whatever
    he wants…end of story

    By the way, Greta on, Chambliss, we knew within hours Al Q was in leadership in attack, Hillary refused to be interviewed, must remember United States Ambassador was killed (tortured first)
    That’s a once every 50 year murder.
    WH Didn’t seem very interested in presenting truth nor pursing terrorist responsible.

  • gonzotx

    Something about 20 threats and small attacks on embassy previous to attack

  • S

    …the real startling thing about the Benghazi report is O…MIA…as usual…the President of the USA is MIA when US Citizens were under attack…

    heard Steve Hayes say that O is barely mentioned at all in whole report…all things going on between all different departments and the Prez is MIA…hardly involved…

    that says it all…just like what Gates is saying…O has no passion for the military or events where he isn’t giving a speech reading his tellie and feigning passion as his eyes continue to dart from left to right so he can read the damn thing…the “age of fake” personified

  • wbboei

    Bambino says he can pass whatever
    he wants…end of story
    ———————
    He would be dead wrong about that. There are limits on the powers of the executive branch. Constitutional limits, which are rooted in the separation of powers. But the biggest limit of all would be a nationwide boycott on compliance with his directives. If he overreaches too far he will have to be impeached. And those in the chain of command will refuse to follow his orders. He is entering dangerous territory for himself, if that is what he believes. A lame duck who thought he was an eagle, will find that his wings get clipped. The nation will not sit still for tyranny. And given his mental make-up, he is riding for a fall. The only one who still believes in him is big media, and that is only because they put him in there twice, and cannot afford to stop believing.

  • wbboei

    The only thing I worry about from him is a Reichstag fire.

  • gonzotx

    wbboei
    January 15, 2014 at 8:07 pm
    Bambino says he can pass whatever
    he wants…end of story
    ———————
    He would be dead wrong about that. There are limits on the powers of the executive branch. Constitutional limits, which are rooted in the separation of powers
    **********************

    Hasn’t stopped him yet!

  • Southern Born

    I’ll bet Chris Christie is thrilled with all the news about Benghazi and putting Hillary on the hot seat and blaming her today. It surely allows his flaming pants to cool down somewhat.

  • wbboei

    gonzo:

    True.

    Diamonds are forever.

    But Obama ain’t.

    He is now seen as a serial liar.

    And the entire world knows it.

    His Iran fiasco is marking him a coward.

    And the world knows it.

    Lastly, he is a lame duck.

    With a bad mid term election staring him in the face.

    And central parts of his agenda in tatters.

    He knows whatever he does from now on will be challenged.

    He knows that members of his own party are backing away for their own survival.

    And he knows he cannot count on big media the way he once could.

    When Nixon said I am not a crook, you knew he was.

    When Christie said I am not a bully, you know he is.

    And when Obama says I can do anything I damned well please, you know that he knows he can’t.

    Those who are confident of their power do not make statements like that.

    If the other party wins the Senate, get ready for him to enter the act out stage of his pathology.

    We have seen glimpses of this already.

    And when he goes into full bloom, he will find that he is the loneliest man alive.

    That is his fate.

  • gonzotx

    wbboei
    January 15, 2014 at 8:44 pm
    *******************

    I want to see obama held for something, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS…

  • wbboei

    I’ll bet Chris Christie is thrilled with all the news about Benghazi and putting Hillary on the hot seat and blaming her today. It surely allows his flaming pants to cool down somewhat.
    —————————–
    I do not think so. I think he is up to his ass in alligators, and he knows that his allies are backing away, his adversaries are proceeding methodically, deliberatively, with the intention of destroying his image, and short term distractions like this will not save him, and the party is not behind him the way the media has reported. Charlie Cook had an article today stating as much. What we are seeing now with Benghazi is an orchestrated attempt by the media, and the Republican Party to force her not to run, because they know this would leave the democrat party with no serious contender. There are ways to beat back this bete noire, and if I can think of them, I am sure her advisors can and will. I am sure she will run. I am sure she will win. But it will be a rough ride. If I thought the Republican Party was capable of nominating a Reagan–or a Ted Cruz who can connect with the American People, my assessment would change. But that is highly unlikely, given the way the Washington elites have sewed up the process.

  • wbboei

    gonzotx

    January 15, 2014 at 8:54 pm

    wbboei
    January 15, 2014 at 8:44 pm
    *******************

    I want to see obama held for something, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS
    ———————–
    The problem with you Gonzo is you believe in justice.

    Well, so do I.

    I think we are beginning to see the great unraveling of Mr. Obama.

    We will know it for sure, when a now nervous big media is overheard saying: he did what???

  • jbstonesfan

    Benghazi is going to hurt Hillary.

  • gonzotx

    Wbb,

    You are right. I am incredibly loyal, but I expect honesty, I believe in honor. There is no honor without honesty.

    Do not mix that up with perfection…not in the conversation, but I can not follow someone that is dishonest. Can’t trust them.

    I think in the end, that’s the core problem in this world. The lack of honesty…

  • Southern Born

    Tonight Megan Kelly has on some who are trashing Hillary with her helpful setups.

  • Southern Born

    Can anyone name a totally 100% honest politician?

  • jbstonesfan

    No, but the way this was handled was either gross negligence or intentional misleading the country regarding the death of 4 Americans.

  • wbboei

    I get a big kick out of people not understanding why Obama would be so derelict in his duty as to allow four brave Americans to die, and go beddy bye, rather than lifting a finger to save them.

    Some will attribute this failure in the moment and lack of remorse thereafter as a classic manifestation of his sociopathic mind. By contrast, I have reason to believe that laughing leon panetta is not laughing, but drowning in remorse over his role in this tragedy, but not Obama.

    So why did he fail to act. You say it is the same pattern we saw on all prior occasions when he was called upon a commander in chief to give the order, where he dithered and had to be forced by others–like our girl to do it, which is what happened when we took out Osama. Why then the pattern.

    Look at this fucking guy. He is a clothes horse. He fixes himself up just so. He obsesses over the theatrics of his speeches. Has a telelpromoter to read his speeches. And a bevy of advisors telling big media that this was the greatest speech ever. The common thread in all this is it is virtual reality. And it is all rehearsed. Nothing is left to chance.

    War on the other hand is the realm of chance. No battle plan survives the first engagement. There is friction in war, unanticipated developments, moral issues, and you are dealing with an enemy that does not sit still and let you do your thing–they thrust, they parry, they block, they envelop etc. War is not a canned speech, it cannot be rehearsed, tragedy waits just over the horizon and you like Gunny Sergeant Highway said you must adapt.

    These moral qualities, those of a successful general as Napoleon defined the term are beyond the ken of a faculty lounge mind like Messiah Obama. For him, it is impossible. So he gives up, goes to bed, and men who could have been saved die. Which gives big media a lot to cover up, but given their commitment to the big lie, they will do it.

  • Southern Born

    Can anyone name many things BO has been honest about during his presidency?

  • wbboei

    I was all over this Benghazi thing initially, when it mattered for the election. I would be now if the target was who it should be namely Obama. He is 100% responsible for what occurred, and that is where all of this angst should be directed. If this were a court of law and all the facts came out, I Hillary would be exonerated. And Obama would be convicted. What we are seeing now, in this belated expose, is more street theater aimed at the wrong party.

  • Southern Born

    Of course Obama should be held responsible and convicted. But since he is not running in 2016 and Hillary possibly is, the Reps will rope and hang her and give the fraud a pass.

    I suspect that soon I’ll have to stop watching FOX News. They are beginning to pivot and start their propaganda about Hillary…even news people who seemed a bit fair in the past. Their true partisan Hannity type Republican leanings are coming out now that it may be Hillary who runs for president.

  • wbboei

    Can anyone name many things BO has been honest about during his presidency?
    ——————–
    Right after he was elected to the Senate, he was asked whether he would run for president in 2008, and he said he was not qualified. Okay, you got me. You asked during his presidency.

    I spoke to a friend yesterday morning who voted for Obama in 2008 (primary and general) and has since come to regret the decision. He now despises Obama for two reasons: NSA spying, and the way Obama controls the press.

    For some reason, Obama’s insistence on producing his own photographs of himself, rather than letting the press do it really gets his gall. The most recent example was this Yellen who is the new head of the fed. I have never seen her myself nor do I care to do so, after hearing what he said. He says is rather large, and has more chins than the Hong Kong phone directory as he put it. Consequently, the White House has produced a photoshopped picture of her which eliminates that feature and makes her look better than she does in real life. I found it interesting that this would bother him, but it is another example of the Obama administration presenting false front and in effect lying.

  • wbboei

    For me, it is simply more evidence of a virtual presidency. It hearkens back to the statement by the former French President when he told Obama we live in the real world sir, not a virtual one.

  • Shadowfax

    Behind on the blog…

    Free
    After 2008, I think many of us Hillary supporters tried to explain our opposition to Obama, MSM, and DNC in terms of ” righting a wrong”” or “holding them accountable”. I know I attempted to sugar coat my motives. Finally, I had to be honest with myself. Yes, there was a need for justice and accountability, but a big part of my opposition was just plain old REVENGE! I want the culprits to experience payback in the truest sense of the word. Still want it as much today as I did 5years ago.

    ———

    I’m with you Free, no turn the other cheek, forgive and forget corruption, NOPE, I wait to see each and every one of them fall on their @ss like Richardson, Nasty, Uncle Ted, and Edwards have already done. The hit list is long, and Hillary an Bill have good memories.

  • gonzotx

    Obama is ultimately responsible. It is where the buck stops, but Hillary and Panette are far from innocent. There are responsibilities to heading a Department. Can’t whitewash this completely.Requests were made,ignored, 4 people including an American Ambassador were murdered.

  • wbboei

    This is bi partisan finding by the senate. I would like to say to the democrat members of that bi partisan group– fuck you. I hope you go down with the rest of your ilk who covered this matter up prior to the 2012 election. You allowed the man ultimately responsible for these deaths to skate for four another term. You knew he was guilty and you put politics before country. You need to step down. Now.

  • admin

    Coven or Duck Dynasty?

  • Shadowfax

    Wbb

    Obama. He is 100% responsible for what occurred, and that is where all of this angst should be directed. If this were a court of law and all the facts came out, I Hillary would be exonerated. And Obama would be convicted. What we are seeing now, in this belated expose, is more street theater aimed at the wrong party.

    —–
    A very strong YUP to that.

  • wbboei

    gonzotx

    January 15, 2014 at 10:10 pm

    Obama is ultimately responsible
    —————
    When you say he was ultimately responsible, that suggest he is not personally responsible, but institutionally responsible because it occurred on his watch and under his chain of command. That is the legal doctrine of respondeat superior which holds the principle responsible for the acts of his agents committed within the scope of employment. If that is all there was, then his responsibility would be by operation of the law.

    I say he is far more guilty than that. I say he is PERSONALLY responsible, for what he did and failed to do. He alone had the power to save those people by giving the order. He was told of the situation, failed to give the order and then lied about it. Therefore, he is personally responsible, and that is a far worse indictment. He ignored their pleas for help. He let them die. That is what he is responsible for.

  • wbboei

    What I object to is the conflating of responsibility here by the press and the Republican Party. Even if you interpret the facts in the worst possible light for Hillary, at the moment they were in peril and begged for help she did not have the authority to give the order to save them. Only Obama had that authority, because it would have required transgressing the air space of other nations. When Colonel Bing West was under secretary of defense, he had to ask President Reagan for that authority, and Reagan gave it to him. Obama on the other hand went to bed.

  • Shadowfax

    Southern

    I suspect that soon I’ll have to stop watching FOX News. They are beginning to pivot and start their propaganda about Hillary…even news people who seemed a bit fair in the past. Their true partisan Hannity type Republican leanings are coming out now that it may be Hillary who runs for president.

    —–
    Fox folks, except Greta and maybe Megan (not sure since I stopped watching Fox at the end of the election), have always used Hillary as a secondary target when Baracko was still running for his second term. Since that very event, Hillary is the primary target as 2016 approaches. Hillary will be drug though the mud, every which way but Sunday, and if they don’t have the proof of any wrong doing, they will make it up.

    I only liked them when they counterbalanced news with the MSM. Greta is the only one I still trust at this point.

  • gonzotx

    I agree wbb, Obama is personally responsible…but there are no innocents here.

    Coven

  • wbboei

    It would be interesting to know whether the Senate democrats who issued this BELATED finding that the massacre in Benghazi was preventable were on the Clinton hit list or were friends with those who were. The fact that they are speaking out only now, when Obama is safe, and Hillary is on the cusp of running, raises a circumstantial inference that they do so not for the good of the country, or for the sake of bi partisanship, but for crass political reasons of the lowest order.

  • wbboei

    gonzotx

    January 15, 2014 at 10:30 pm

    I agree wbb, Obama is personally responsible…but there are no innocents here.

    ————————–
    There are degrees of culpability.

    And if you focus on culpability for the cover-up, big media is the biggest offender of all.

  • gonzotx

    Wbb,

    Not just the cover up, the whole fu*king disaster from start to finish.

  • wbboei

    Another thing we have to stop doing is falling for this:

    i) I accept responsibility as president—this means nothing

    ii) because the buck stops with me—this is to cover-up his personal involvement

    iii) I will not rest until the guilty are punished—this is make sucker believe he do anything more than nothing.

    This is the pattern. And ever time he does it, big media goes gaga. They are insiders in the administration.

  • Southern Born

    Exactly, Wbboei. The one that grates on me the most is the “I will not rest until…” Bet BO has not lost a moments sleep in years unless he was with one of his buddies.

  • wbboei

    Wbb,

    Not just the cover up, the whole fu*king disaster from start to finish.

    —————–
    Yes, but this is where big media really took charge. Prior to the election they buried the story, and they helped Obama lie about it during the debates. FOX used to keep track of how little time their competitors devoted to the story prior to the election. In some networks, it was the inexorable zero. Big media ran the cover-up to ensure the American People would not know the truth about Obama, but they promoted the Osama take down until hell would not have it anymore. I think we must say that big media is an insider in the Obama Administration, and their role in the Benghazi matter was to run the cover-up. The NYT story is merely the most recent example of their treason and treachery. And yet they have the gall to call conservatives dangerous. Only to those like them who are cutting a fat hog at the expense of the American People, namely the elites who live in the five counties surrounding DC. The idea that someone from the hinterland would expose their corruption and rally the people of this country terrifies them.

  • wbboei

    That is at the root of their tea party paranoia.

  • freespirit

    gonzotx
    January 15, 2014 at 8:13 pm

    wbboei
    January 15, 2014 at 8:07 pm
    Bambino says he can pass whatever
    he wants…end of story
    ———————
    He would be dead wrong about that. There are limits on the powers of the executive branch. Constitutional limits, which are rooted in the separation of powers
    **********************

    Hasn’t stopped him yet!
    _____________________

    Sure as hell hasn’t. And, the fact that it hasn’t is a testament to the fact that we no longer have statesmen and stateswomen (never had many women in high places, period). We have fucking politicians. Every move calculated. Honor is as rare as hen’s teeth. It’s all about party, power, and money, money, money, money.

    Anyone who thinks the Republicans have not been politicizing Benghazi from the first moment it happened is sadly mistaken. Their fake righteous indignation. Their oh so sincere talk of their moral responsibility to demand answers, seek justice for the victims, hold people accountable, and so on, and so on, and scoobie, doobie, doobie.

    Had they been motivated by any of the noble imperatives they claimed, they would be focused on Obama – all over Obama, not Hillary. Their primary interest was in doing political damage to her. Sure, they felt bad for the victims families, but they were secretly gleeful about all the political possibilities the tragedy offered. The Republicans just cannot help being pieces of shit – just like the progressives.

    People must do and believe as they see fit. But those who feel they can, need to defend Hillary. She is not the one who deserves this shit.

  • freespirit

    wbboei
    January 15, 2014 at 10:33 pm

    It would be interesting to know whether the Senate democrats who issued this BELATED finding that the massacre in Benghazi was preventable were on the Clinton hit list or were friends with those who were. The fact that they are speaking out only now, when Obama is safe, and Hillary is on the cusp of running, raises a circumstantial inference that they do so not for the good of the country, or for the sake of bi partisanship, but for crass political reasons of the lowest order.
    __________

    Can there be any doubt that they were eager to get at Hillary for either personal or political reasons? None of them can be trusted.

  • admin

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2014/01/15/quote-day-january-16-2014/

    “One thing I did in Hawaii that was really fun was plan my ski vacation.”

    - Michelle Obama

    A note from our attorneys: This is not a real quote

  • gonzotx

    Dianne Feinstein was one of the Dems.

  • freespirit

    I love me some Jimmy Fallon, especially when he does his rock star imitations.
    Have you guys seen him do Neil Young. He sounds more like Neil than Neil, and although done up exactly like him, looks 1,000 times better.

    He and Bruce Springsteen sing about Gov. Christy’s Bridge. It’s great.

    http://xjockalbanyny.wordpress.com/2014/01/15/bruce-springsteen-joins-jimmy-fallon-to-parody-gov-chris-christies-traffic-jam-scandal/

    Don’t know if this will embed. But, there are links all over tonight.

  • Shadowfax

    Anyone who thinks the Republicans have not been politicizing Benghazi from the first moment it happened is sadly mistaken. Their fake righteous indignation. Their oh so sincere talk of their moral responsibility to demand answers, seek justice for the victims, hold people accountable, and so on, and so on, and scoobie, doobie, doobie.
    Had they been motivated by any of the noble imperatives they claimed, they would be focused on Obama – all over Obama, not Hillary

    Yuppers Free!

  • Shadowfax

    So Pinkers, what was the big media message Baracko dumped for his people???

    Divorce in process?
    Extending Moo’s vacations?
    He is quitting?
    Jarrett’s B-day will be declared a national holiday for…anyone that voted for him?
    The OBAMAcare was just a joke. You can keep your insurance if you still have it?

  • jbstonesfan

    And Feinstein’s comment today on a Israel was despicable. With friends like that, who needs enemies. It is amazing how many jewish politicians still carry O’s water despite the irreparable damage he has done to Israel.

  • freespirit

    I don’t know Shadow. Maybe he’s pregnant by Val-Jar. He always wanted to be special. He will always crave attention. That should do it for him. lol

  • wbboei

    I would argue that the entire Benghazi tragedy can be reduced to what happened and what did not happen during that specific time period when the four dead American were under attack and killed. If that phase had been handled properly–by Mr. Obama, then nobody would be talking about whether the outpost was sufficiently protected before the fact, and what was said about the attack including what caused it after the fact.

    It therefore follows that Obama alone, and only Obama is the key player in this tragedy. The other culpable party is Panetta. The before and after do not really interest me. If the media or the Republicans fail to address the key part of this thing– the time period when our troops were under attack, and focus instead on the before and after parts, then I say this entire investigation and finding of preventability lacks any sense of substance and legitimacy.

  • Shadowfax

    Free

    He has a special place alright, front of the line in the Walk of Shame.

  • freespirit

    Exactly, Shadow.

  • gonzotx

    Wbb

    Clearly the fraud is the responsible one after the attack began, but just as clearly, there were decisions made, and not made, which led to the disaster, and others are culpable for that.

  • wbboei

    there were decisions made, and not made, which led to the disaster, and others are culpable for that.
    ——————–
    That part is speculation. It rest on the assumption that if the additional security had been provided that would have either deterred the attack, or prevented it from being successful. We do not know that for sure. The enemy might have simply deployed other tactics, since it had confederates in the troops that were supposed to be protecting us. What we do know for sure is that if the proper order was not given by Obama, then the troops would have been saved. The big media favored lie that they could not have gotten there in time has been disproven. This is his Waterloo, not hers.

  • wbboei

    Gonzo, let me try it another way.

    The failure to take properly secure the outpost was a contributing factor.

    The failure to issue arms to embassy personnell was a factor.

    The reliance on untrustworthy Libyians to help guard the agency was a factor.

    But the “proximate cause” of the death of those 4 Americans was Obamas failure to give the order to save them.

    And fail he did, as proven by the Bing West videdo posted a couple days ago.

    And lie he did, to cover it up.

    But of all the factors that contributed to this tragedy, the proximate cause thereof was Mr. Obama and is gross dereliction of duty. Everything else is secondary.

  • Leanora

    Wow! Mr. West had better watch his back. This regime doesn’t like people who tell the truth.
    ===

    Allen West Goes Nuclear: Obama “Abjectly Despises” Whites, He And Holder “Are The Most Vile And Disgusting Racists”…

    Via Allen West:

    When the concept of doing a website was presented to me, initially I scoffed thinking there wouldn’t be enough critical material daily to comment on ­ boy was I wrong. Every day I am amazed at the insanity I witness in our America and here is another example.

    According to a report in The Hill, Attorney General Eric Holder is at it again with his racial preference policies,

    Attorney General Eric Holder called upon the nation’s school districts Wednesday to rethink “zero tolerance” disciplinary policies that he said disproportionately punish minorities and push too many students into the justice system. Alarming numbers of young people are suspended, expelled or even arrested for relatively minor transgressions like school uniform violations, schoolyard fights or showing ‘disrespect’ by laughing in class,” Holder said during a speech in Baltimore.

    What did his remarks really mean? They accompanied the release of new federal guidance from the departments of Justice and Education encouraging (i.e. threatening) schools to adopt disciplinary policies that are “fair, nondiscriminatory, and effective.” The guidance offers parameters for punishment as governed by federal civil rights protections, alternatives to exclusionary discipline and a comprehensive list of regulations on the books in every state.

    So now the US Department of Justice under Eric Holder will use its power to enforce “civil rights protections” in school disciplinary actions. In fact, the DoJ and DoEd are putting schools on notice that they are prepared to use their authority to investigate the claims of racial disparity in the punishment of students. [...]

    Teachers are already disrespected and attacked, not feared. There were students at Deerfield Beach who steered clear of the lunchroom for fear of being picked on or engaged in a fight. A kid was stabbed while I was on the faculty there.

    Yes, this violence on campus was perpetrated 8 out of 10 times by black students, male and female, but it had nothing to do with racial disparity. It had everything to do with a lack of discipline and control. [...]

    This is my clear and succinct message to white Americans. How long will it be before “you people” realize you have elevated someone to the office of president who abjectly despises you ­ not to mention his henchman Holder. Combined they are the most vile and disgusting racists ­ not you.

    http://weaselzippers.us/allen-west-goes-nuclear-obama-abjectly-despises-whites-he-and-holder-are-the-most-vile-and-disgusting-racists/

  • Leanora

    Bangladesh’s Brutal Jihadists Get Obama’s Backing
    Pam Geller

    Again Obama sides with savages. I have been reporting on the vicious jihad Muslims are waging in Bangladesh (scroll this link). Just last week, Muslims were hacking their Hindu neighbors to death while looting and torching their homes. Just as Obama did in Egypt, Syria, Libya, Iran, Israel, and other hotspots in Africa, he has now added Bangladesh to his global jihad movement. Count Bangladesh in among those secular nations where Obama aided and abetted Islamic supremacist revolutions, violent jihad overthrows.

    The following article is from the notoriously left-wing Daily Beast, so it has a healthy dose of anti-Americanism, of course. But if the Beast is actually reporting it and blasting it ….. then you know it’s worse than that.

    “Bangladesh’s Radical Islamists Get U.S. Backing,” By Kapil Komireddi, The Daily Beast, January 12, 2014

    Read more: http://pamelageller.com/atlas_shrugs/2014/01/bangladeshs-brutal-jihadists-get-obamas-backing.html/#ixzz2qZOY2EGJ

  • moononpluto

    Time going for i dont know what….new front cover.

    https://twitter.com/MichaelLaRosaDC/status/423820860919517185/photo/1

  • moononpluto

    Oprah snubbed by the Oscars….well that made my day.

  • Leanora

    Report: Obama Administration Violated Constitution…of Mexico

    An investigative report by Mexico’s leading newspaper, El Universal, slams the Obama Administration for violating the Mexican Constitution, by permitting U.S. Department of Justice and Drug Enforcement Administration officials to meet and deal with Mexican drug ring leaders without informing the Mexican government.

    In an article entitled “The DEA’s Secret War in Mexico,” El Universal concludes that U.S. actions, including the Fast and Furious operation that helped arm drug traffickers who subsequently turned them against U.S. law enforcement officers, made the drug violence that is gripping the neighboring country even worse.

    The Mexican newspaper obtained documents from U.S. District Court of Chicago proceedings against an alleged Mexican drug cartel leader which reveal DEA tactics for meeting and negotiating with drug cartel leaders. Through these meetings, which were not reported to the Mexican government, U.S. authorities created a network of informers with cooperation agreements that essentially allowed drug trafficking activity to continue.

    The newspaper reports that such DEA meetings and agreements with drug traffickers violate existing bilateral cooperation agreements between the United States and Mexico, as well as the Mexican Constitution. The article cites one of Mexico’s leading attorneys, Juan Velázquez, saying, “Neither bilateral cooperation agreements nor other things are above the Constitution, which is the supreme law. If our authorities permit otherwise, they are acting illegally and are subject to being responsible, but how will they be held accountable if such agreements and the actions of all involved are secret and for that reason nothing is known about them?”

    The article, product of a year-long investigation by El Universal reporter Doris Gómora, cites numerous documents and declarations from an ongoing U.S. criminal process against Vicente Zambada-Niebla, son of one of the leaders of Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel and charged with trafficking more than a billion dollars in cocaine and heroin.

    The latest round of revelations creates new pressure for both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to acknowledge and be held accountable for the full extent of their administration’s stunning failures and violations of the law in prosecuting the war against drugs.

    President Obama is scheduled to travel to Mexico on February 19, to participate in the North American Leaders Summit.

    http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-bannister/report-obama-administration-violated-constitutionof-mexico

  • Leanora

    Great Article by Judge Napolitano
    ==

    The Nuns and the President
    By Andrew P. Napolitano

    When the Framers were putting together the Constitution in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787, they knew the states would not adopt it without written guarantees that the new central government would respect natural rights. The supporters of the Constitution promised political leaders in the states that the written guarantees would soon be added as amendments, and they were. By late 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified and added to the new Constitution.

    The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to assure all in America that their natural rights ­ areas of human choices for which a permission slip from the government cannot be required and in which the government cannot coerce compliance with its wishes ­ would not be impaired by the federal government. Since the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the natural rights protected in the Bill of Rights generally have been insulated from interference by the states, as well.

    All natural rights are of paramount importance to all persons. They are individualized personal gifts from the Creator and have been recognized as such in American law since Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we are endowed with them by Him.

    One of those rights guarantees the free exercise of religion. Indeed, the Free Exercise Clause in the First Amendment was written to ensure that the new government could not coerce persons to behave differently than their religious views informed their consciences or punish them for not conforming to a government-mandated religious orthodoxy. Generally, for almost 230 years, the federal government left us alone to choose freely our religious practices and to worship as we believe. Until now.

    More @ http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/andrew-p-napolitano/obama-mugs-the-little-sisters-of-the-poor/

  • jeswezey

    Politico reports a poll to the effect that HRC has pulled sharply ahead of Christie nationally (50-37%) in the last month though GWBgate has had nothing to do with it. What the?

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/poll-hillary-clinton-chris-christie-2016-presidential-election-102237.html

  • jbstonesfan

    Oprah snubbed by the Oscars….well that made my day.
    =================
    finally some good news!!!!

  • moononpluto

    The job was done on Christie 2 years early, really he is done from this, he would’nt even win New Jersey now. They put the boot in and destroyed him nationally. He’ll forever be known now as that guy who blocked traffic deliberately.

  • And an old woman died because of it. :mad:

  • The Obama administration has set a new deadline of Jan. 28 for Afghan President Hamid Karzai to sign the agreement, which would provide U.S. troops with protections they need in order to stay after 2014.

    But few think the unpredictable Afghan president will sign before he leaves office in April. And military experts say that without an agreement, all U.S. troops will likely be pulled from the country at the end of this year.

    http://feeds.foxnews.com/~r/foxnews/politics/~3/SUjjubH9b7Q/

  • gonzotx

    Wbb,

    I get where you are coming from but we will have to disagree in part.

    Yes, the refusal to take action sealed the Americans fate
    OBAMA is solely responsible for that, but I won’t five a free pass to Hill or Panette for lack of leadership previous to the attack.

  • gonzotx

    Give…phone with swype lol

  • admin

    NEW ARTICLE IS UP.

  • [...] Ariel Sharon’s Finest Leadership Hour: Lessons For Hillary Clinton 2016, Christie, Obama, Gate… »  Home  [...]