Two Cops Shot In #Ferguson – Because Of Barack Obama And Eric Holder

Blood on their hands. Eric Holder and Barack Obama have the blood of two police officers on their hands.

Two Ferguson police officers have been seriously shot (one in the face) and wounded. The 41 and 32 year old officers were standing together outside the police department headquarters. Beyond doubt the cops were targeted for assassination as revenge for the death of a thug.

A huge thug bully by the name of Michael Brown was justifiably shot by a police officer on August 9, 2014. That police officer, Darren Wilson, was vilified by Big Media and was so persecuted he was forced to resign from his job. Barack Obama and Eric Holder stoked hatred against the police officer. Barack Obama and Eric Holder beatified the thug.

Public officials, many in the Congressional Black Caucus, took up the phony cry of the thug’s defenders and exclaimed the lie “hands up, don’t shoot.” It was all a lie. It was all a phony race-baiting lie. Barack Obama and Eric Holder helped perpetuate the lie.

All across America idiots took up the thug’s banner. The Grammy Awards further propagandized the phony “hands up, don’t shoot” lie. Football players at football games turned the thug bully Michael Brown into a black community hero. But Michael Brown was a thug and a bully and a criminal.

For months after the justified death of thug Michael Brown, Barack Obama and Eric Holder continued to race-bait. The Department of Justice under Eric Holder investigated the police officers who protected the community. The thugs and criminals were aided and abetted by Barack Obama and Eric Holder. Finally the whole stinking Obama/Holder lie was exposed as even the investigators of the Department of Justice came to the obvious conclusions:

The encounter between Wilson and Brown took place over an approximately two-minute period of time at about noon on August 9, 2014. Wilson was on duty and driving his department-issued Chevy Tahoe SUV westbound on Canfield Drive in Ferguson, Missouri when he saw Brown and his friend, Witness 101, walking eastbound in the middle of the street. Brown and Witness 101 had just come from Ferguson Market and Liquor (“Ferguson Market”), a nearby convenience store, where, at approximately 11:53 a.m., Brown stole several packages of cigarillos. As captured on the store’s surveillance video, when the store clerk tried to stop Brown, Brown used his physical size to stand over him and forcefully shove him away. As a result, an FPD dispatch call went out over the police radio for a “stealing in progress.” The dispatch recordings and Wilson’s radio transmissions establish that Wilson was aware of the theft and had a description of the suspects as he encountered Brown and Witness 101.

As Wilson drove toward Brown and Witness 101, he told the two men to walk on the sidewalk. According to Wilson’s statement to prosecutors and investigators, he suspected that Brown and Witness 101 were involved in the incident at Ferguson Market based on the descriptions he heard on the radio and the cigarillos in Brown’s hands. Wilson then called for backup, stating, “Put me on Canfield with two and send me another car.” Wilson backed up his SUV and parked at an angle, blocking most of both lanes of traffic, and stopping Brown and Witness 101 from walking any further. Wilson attempted to open the driver’s door of the SUV to exit his vehicle, but as he swung it open, the door came into contact with Brown’s body and either rebounded closed or Brown pushed it closed.

Wilson and other witnesses stated that Brown then reached into the SUV through the open driver’s window and punched and grabbed Wilson. This is corroborated by bruising on Wilson’s jaw and scratches on his neck, the presence of Brown’s DNA on Wilson’s collar, shirt, and pants, and Wilson’s DNA on Brown’s palm. While there are other individuals who stated that Wilson reached out of the SUV and grabbed Brown by the neck, prosecutors could not credit their accounts because they were inconsistent with physical and forensic evidence, as detailed throughout this report.

Wilson told prosecutors and investigators that he responded to Brown reaching into the SUV and punching him by withdrawing his gun because he could not access less lethal weapons while seated inside the SUV. Brown then grabbed the weapon and struggled with Wilson to gain control of it. Wilson fired, striking Brown in the hand. Autopsy results and bullet trajectory, skin from Brown’s palm on the outside of the SUV door as well as Brown’s DNA on the inside of the driver’s door corroborate Wilson’s account that during the struggle, Brown used his right hand to grab and attempt to control Wilson’s gun. According to three autopsies, Brown sustained a close range gunshot wound to the fleshy portion of his right hand at the base of his right thumb. Soot from the muzzle of the gun found embedded in the tissue of this wound coupled with indicia of thermal change from the heat of the muzzle indicate that Brown’s hand was within inches of the muzzle of Wilson’s gun when it was fired. The location of the recovered bullet in the side panel of the driver’s door, just above Wilson’s lap, also corroborates Wilson’s account of the struggle over the gun and when the gun was fired, as do witness accounts that Wilson fired at least one shot from inside the SUV.

Although no eyewitnesses directly corroborate Wilson’s account of Brown’s attempt to gain control of the gun, there is no credible evidence to disprove Wilson’s account of what occurred inside the SUV. Some witnesses claim that Brown’s arms were never inside the SUV. However, as discussed later in this report, those witness accounts could not be relied upon in a prosecution because credible witness accounts and physical and forensic evidence, i.e. Brown’s DNA inside the SUV and on Wilson’s shirt collar and the bullet trajectory and close-range gunshot wound to Brown’s hand, establish that Brown’s arms and/or torso were inside the SUV.

After the initial shooting in side the SUV, the evidence establishes that Brown ran eastbound on Canfield Drive and Wilson chased after him. The autopsy results confirm that Wilson did not shoot Brown in the back as he was running away because there were no entrance wounds to Brown’s back. The autopsy results alone do not indicate the direction Brown was facing when he received two wounds to his right arm, given the mobility of the arm. However, as detailed later in this report, there are no witness accounts that could be relied upon in a prosecution to prove that Wilson shot at Brown as he was running away. Witnesses who say so cannot be relied upon in a prosecution because they have given accounts that are inconsistent with the physical and forensic evidence or are significantly inconsistent with their own prior statements made throughout the investigation.

Brown ran at least 180 feet away from the SUV, as verified by the location of bloodstains on the roadway, which DNA analysis confirms was Brown’s blood. Brown then turned around and came back toward Wilson, falling to his death approximately 21.6 feet west of the blood in the roadway. Those witness accounts stating that Brown never moved back toward Wilson could not be relied upon in a prosecution because their accounts cannot be reconciled with the DNA bloodstain evidence and other credible witness accounts.

As detailed throughout this report, several witnesses stated that Brown appeared to pose a physical threat to Wilson as he moved toward Wilson. According to these witnesses, who are corroborated by blood evidence in the roadway, as Brown continued to move toward Wilson, Wilson fired at Brown in what appeared to be self-defense and stopped firing once Brown fell to the ground. Wilson stated that he feared Brown would again assault him because of Brown’s conduct at the SUV and because as Brown moved toward him, Wilson saw Brown reach his right hand under his t-shirt into what appeared to be his waistband. There is no evidence upon which prosecutors can rely to disprove Wilson’s stated subjective belief that he feared for his safety.

Ballistics analysis indicates that Wilson fired a total of 12 shots, two from the SUV and ten on the roadway. Witness accounts and an audio recording indicate that when Wilson and Brown were on the roadway, Wilson fired three gunshot volleys, pausing in between each one. According to the autopsy results, Wilson shot and hit Brown as few as six or as many as eight times, including the gunshot to Brown’s hand. Brown fell to the ground dead as a result of a gunshot to the apex of his head. With the exception of the first shot to Brown’s hand, all of the shots that struck Brown were fired from a distance of more than two feet. As documented by crime scene photographs, Brown fell to the ground with his left, uninjured hand balled up by his waistband, and his right, injured hand palm up by his side. Witness accounts and cellular phone video prove that Wilson did not touch Brown’s body after he fired the final shot and Brown fell to the ground.

Although there are several individuals who have stated that Brown held his hands up in an unambiguous sign of surrender prior to Wilson shooting him dead, their accounts do not support a prosecution of Wilson. As detailed throughout this report, some of those accounts are inaccurate because they are inconsistent with the physical and forensic evidence; some of those accounts are materially inconsistent with that witness’s own prior statements with no explanation, credible for otherwise, as to why those accounts changed over time. Certain other witnesses who originally stated Brown had his hands up in surrender recanted their original accounts, admitting that they did not witness the shooting or parts of it, despite what they initially reported either to federal or local law enforcement or to the media. Prosecutors did not rely on those accounts when making a prosecutive decision.

While credible witnesses gave varying accounts of exactly what Brown was doing with his hands as he moved toward Wilson – i.e., balling them, holding them out, or pulling up his pants up – and varying accounts of how he was moving – i.e., “charging,” moving in “slowmotion,” or “running” – they all establish that Brown was moving toward Wilson when Wilson shot him. Although some witnesses state that Brown held his hands up at shoulder level with his palms facing outward for a brief moment, these same witnesses describe Brown then dropping his hands and “charging” at Wilson.

Even after this report, prepared by the Department of Justice, was published, Eric Holder persisted with his race-baiting. From the beginning when Obama sent him to Ferguson the goal of Eric Holder was to persecute the police of Ferguson. As publication date for the report that cleared beyond any doubt police officer Darren Wilson, Eric Holder charged the entire police department of Ferguson as “racist”.

It wasn’t individuals that Holder called “racist” it was an entire department. The evidence consisted of emails with jokes such as “President Obama would not be president for very long because “what black man holds a steady job for four years.” The joke of that joke is that it reads as if it was sent and read by Obama supporters and donors from Hollywood.

After the emails were uncovered, the Ferguson Police Department either fired or began investigations of the officers who sent and received the offending emails. The police chief of the department resigned as well as five others including one judge who simply thought it was not worth all the threats to his life to continue to do his job.

The other rationale for the race-baiting report damning an entire department for “racism” is certain “data”. But is it racism or is is rationality?:

Sorry: The Justice report doesn’t prove disparate treatment, let alone discrimination.

In fact, it looks more like something ginned up to distract from the embarrassing fact that Justice (in another report released the same day) wound up fully validating the findings of the Ferguson grand jury.

Racism is serious, and those engaging in it should be shamed — but we should have real evidence before accusing others of it. And every one of the Justice report’s main claims of evidence of discrimination falls short.

Starting with the primary numerical claim. The report notes on Page 4: “Ferguson’s law-enforcement practices overwhelmingly impact African-Americans.

“Data collected by the Ferguson Police Department from 2012 to 2014 shows that African-Americans account for 85 percent of vehicle stops, 90 percent of citations, and 93 percent of arrests made by FPD officers, despite comprising only 67 percent of Ferguson’s population.”

Those statistics don’t prove racism, because blacks don’t commit traffic offenses at the same rate as other population groups.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ 2011 Police-Public Contact Survey indicates that, nationwide, blacks were 31 percent more likely than whites to be pulled over for a traffic stop.

Ferguson is a black-majority town. If its blacks were pulled over at the same rate as blacks nationally, they’d account for 87.5 percent of traffic stops.

In other words, the numbers actually suggest that Ferguson police may be slightly less likely to pull over black drivers than are their national counterparts. They certainly don’t show that Ferguson is a hotbed of racism.

Critics may assert that that “31 percent more likely” figure simply shows that racism is endemic to police forces nationwide.

Hmm: The survey also reveals that men are 42 percent more likely than women to be pulled over for traffic stops. Should we conclude that police are biased against men, or that men drive more recklessly?

In fact, blacks die in car accidents at a rate about twice their share of car owners.

A 2006 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study found that black drivers who were killed in accidents have the highest rate of past convictions for speeding and for other moving violations. This suggests that there are a lot of unsafe black drivers, not racism.

The Justice report on Ferguson continues, “African-Americans are at least 50 percent more likely to have their cases lead to an arrest warrant, and accounted for 92 percent of cases in which an arrest warrant was issued by the Ferguson Municipal Court in 2013.”

Again, this pretends that a mere difference is evidence of discrimination.

But the report’s statistic doesn’t even look at whether people pay their fine or appear in court — something that makes a big difference in whether to issue a warrant.

Could it be that blacks are more likely to face particularly serious charges?

Since Justice has gone through the case files, it could easily have answered the questions. Perhaps it didn’t like the answers. (Unfortunately, no national data are available for comparison.)

Another major complaint in the Justice report: “Most strikingly, the court issues municipal arrest warrants not on the basis of public-safety needs, but rather as a routine response to missed court appearances and required fine payments.”

If you think that this is unique to Ferguson, try not paying your next speeding ticket.

As for the anecdotal evidence Justice offers to bring home this complaint, well, here’s an anecdote from Washington, DC — a town with a black mayor and black-majority city council.

Megan Johnson, a black DC woman, recently failed to pay 10 parking tickets within the allotted 30 days. The city doubled her fines from $500 to $1,000, then booted, towed and sold her car — and charged her $700 for towing and impounding it.

DC sold the car at auction for $500 and won’t even credit that amount to what she owes. It’s now attaching her tax refunds.

Justice’s Ferguson anecdotes no more prove racism than Megan Johnson’s experience proves the DC government is racist.

Finally, for “direct evidence of racial bias,” the report describes seven emails from Ferguson police officers from 2008 to 2011 that Justice describes as offensive to blacks, women, Muslims, President Obama and his wife, and possibly people of mixed race.

But this begs some big questions: Did only one or two of the 53 officers send the emails? Did the objectionable emails end in 2011 because those officers no longer worked for the department or were told to stop?

The Justice Department’s report reads as a prosecutor’s brief, not an unbiased attempt to get at the truth, with evidence carefully selected and portrayed in the strongest possible light.

Differences don’t necessarily imply racism, but the Obama Justice Department doesn’t seem to care.

As anyone watching the elections in Chicago knows, Rahm Emmanuel is in great trouble due to the many red light cameras Emmanuel has installed on city streets. Is Chicago and the Chicago Democratic Party a hotbed of racism as is the District of Columbia if we look at the crime statistics and those trapped by red light cameras? Are red light cameras “racist”?:

Also last week, the Justice Department, with much fanfare, announced that the Ferguson police department for which Darren Wilson used to work is guilty of racist policing and, indeed, is extracting money from African-American through its law enforcement practices. Relying on this claim, Eric Holder attempted to defend the violent and lawless response of Ferguson residents to the justified shooting of Michael Brown, characterizing it as an understandable reaction to the “highly toxic environment” created by the Ferguson police over the years.

For leftists like Holder, violence and lawlessness by African-Americans are never the fault of the perpetrators.

But what about the merits of the DOJ’s report condemning the Ferguson PD? [snip]

The Justice Department finds that Blacks make up 67 percent of the population of Ferguson, but 76 percent of those with outstanding arrest warrants. Most outstanding arrest warrants stem from (a) a violation such as speeding or a parking ticket and (b) a failure to appear in court and/or pay the ticket.

There is no basis for inferring racism from the disparity between African-American representation in the general population compared to African-American representation in the population of those with outstanding arrest warrants. The disparity might be explained by Black over-representation among (a) violators of traffic and parking laws and/or (b) those who fail to appear in court or pay their fines.

With respect to speeding, DOJ found that Blacks in Ferguson represent 72 percent of those detected speeding through radar or laser verification methods. Thus, it appears that Blacks are, in fact, more likely than Whites to speed in Ferguson.

Are radars or red light cameras racist? We doubt it even as we don’t doubt that some police officers might be racist. Eric Holder and the Department of Justice certainly had the resources to produce a well researched report that produced facts and conclusions from those facts that could not be disputed. Instead Holder served up a report of innuendo by the use of statistical non sequiturs.

Eric Holder and Barack Obama have produced a culture of justification for thugs to feel justified in their thuggery. Thugs become heroes. Real heroes are vilified.

For Eric Holder and Barack Obama “Black Lives Matter” if they can be utilized for race-baiting and hate propaganda against White people:

“The illegal alien dreamer that murdered my son only served four months of an eight month sentence for assault with a deadly weapon and battery on a police officer,” Shaw said. “He was released from the county jail the day before he executed my son. Why was this violent illegal alien allowed to walk the streets of America instead of being deported?”

Do black lives really matter or does it matter only if you are shot by a white person or a white policeman?” he added, before alluding to the ‘hands up, don’t shoot’ saying that became popular following the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo. “My son was shot in the head by an illegal alien gang banger while he lay on his back with his hands up. he still shot him through his hand into his head and killed him.

Because of Barack Obama and Eric Holder the police officers who protect the community are shot, as in Ferguson, and sometimes killed as in New York City.

Barack Obama and Eric Holder have blood on their hands.

Share

149 thoughts on “Two Cops Shot In #Ferguson – Because Of Barack Obama And Eric Holder

  1. Rock solid analysis. US would be in a much better situation if media reported fairly, logically. Thanks many times over, admin, for the respite from ObamaLand.

  2. I got wind of this cop shooting, also within last 24 hrs, as I watched news early this morning. Believe cop was performing as security for a demonstration which had been peaceful and was winding down. BUT THAT PART HAS already been deleted from the accounts showing up now. I was watching both CBS and NBC from NYC. Know I saw an interview of a black kid who described bullets whizzing past his head. Anyway, this is what’s left:

    Cop shot on Long Island. 3/12/15
    A man is under arrest in Suffolk County in connection with the shooting of a police officer in Huntington Station.
    Police were responding to a 911 call about the shooting just before midnight on Thursday when they found Officer Mark Collins with gunshot wounds to the neck and hip.
    Collins was in an unmarked car when the driver of another vehicle confronted him during a traffic stop, said police.
    Collins was shot twice.
    He was airlifted to Stony Brook University Hospital where he was listed in serious but stable condition.
    The gunman was found about one block from the traffic stop. Charged had not yet been filed.
    http://www.myfoxny.com/story/28402681/cop-shot-on-long-island

  3. I wouldn’t blame the entire police force from resigning, Holder and Obama have effectively declared open season on the police, not only in Ferguson, but all over the USA.
    God, help them, and us.

  4. Meanwhile, Obama is flying down to Los Angeles to tie up traffic and piss off drivers so that he can be at the Jimmy Kimmel show.

  5. Someone else sees the undeniable conclusion and speaks out, altho he’s categorized prominently as merely as a ‘talker’ 🙂
    Fox News talker: Ferguson mob ‘incited’ by Holder
    Bob Massi, a legal analyst for Fox News, made a morning broadcast appearance to discuss the shootings of two police officers in Ferguson, laying the blame for the recent violence squarely at the feet of the Obama administration and Attorney General Eric Holder snip . … When you say you’re going to dismantle a police department if they don’t fix it, it incites race relations. It incites riots. snip
    Massi said Holder could have instead used calmer tones and less inflammatory language that would have given the protest movement some comfort, without inciting violent rallies snip
    As Massi commented on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday: “Where’s Al Sharpton about the two police officers who just got shot? … It is something that just seems like every week, the acrimony grows.”
    http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/03/fox-news-talker-ferguson-mob-incited-by-holder/

  6. Of two black on black cop murders in Philly, Moses Walker 2012 and Robert Wilson last week, the mother of Walker said they’ve held vigils and parades and they’re not enough; so we have to do more.

    Obvious she is under no delusion that Obama/Holder will lift a finger for them. And DNC will be there later this year for convention. But I think the convention is large enough that the elite will not have to trample near the dirt of the city. Will DC hire outside security for their celebrations?
    The mother’s remarks may not be included at this link. http://6abc.com/news/reaction-to-fatal-shooting-of-ofc-robert-wilson-iii/548155/

  7. Where are all our armed citizens? I would love to see masses of American’s with loaded shotguns, standing shoulder to shoulder around Police stations in racist neighborhoods, with a big sign in front of them saying:

    “You shoot one of our cops in the face, we shoot your fucking head off!”

    “You want a war, bring it on!”

  8. Foxy

    Deporting him? He needs to be in prison first, say 30 years, then deport him…he’ll just go join ISIS and murder innocent people.

  9. Deporting him? He needs to be in prison first, say 30 years, then deport him…he’ll just go join ISIS and murder innocent people.
    ———–
    Who is “he”?

    Obama?

    or Sharpton??

    or Holder???

    or All of the Above????

    Please be specific

    These day, you need a scorecard to keep the rogues gallery straight.

  10. Bill deBlasio deserves a mention too.

    Today he is off to Riker’s Island instructing them on how not to riot. [rolling eyeballs]. I tried to include a link picturing him in his official baseball type jacket that has “Mayor Bill de Blasio” embroidered on it. Gave up when it was not quickly located. He is not worth my time. Hope you do get to see it sometime tho. He’s so big and ungamely – does not need a sign. Pretty funny seeing him seated in a pew alongside Dinkins, Giuliani, Bloomberg at Cardinal Egan funeral mass the other day. Unmistakable even tho he was furthest from camera.

    The star players in this Bloody Hands debacle sure are misfits.

  11. http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2015/03/12/michelle-celebrates-iranian-holiday-white-house/

    This is not how you do it. This is not how you deal with the Iranians.

    Wednesday, Mrs. Obama celebrated at the White House something called Nowruz, the Iranian festival of spring that marks the beginning of the Persian new year.

    There are somewhere between half a million and a million Iranian Americans in the United States, about the same as the number of Lithuanian Americans. Where’s the White House Lithuanian American holiday celebration?

    No, this is not about Nowruz. This is a clear attempt to appease the Iran government, and it is exactly what is wrong with President Obama’s approach to Iran and the rest of the world. It explains why Iran has been able to extract a deal that will allow the centrifuges to keep spinning and, ultimately, a bomb to be built.

    What is it with the Left in the West that the default switch is set to appeasement? Reminds me of when Chamberlain returned from Munich talking about “Herr Hitler” – Mister Hitler. Yes sir, thank you for agreeing not to hurt us.

  12. Eric and Barry really should get a patent/trademark thingy on that special haterade that they dole out by the semi hauling truckload.

  13. Some light enters the head of uber-liberal uber-Obamaite NYTimesman Nicholas Kristof:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/opinion/when-liberals-blew-it.html?_r=0

    When Liberals Blew It

    Fifty years ago this month, Democrats made a historic mistake.

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan, at the time a federal official, wrote a famous report in March 1965 on family breakdown among African-Americans. He argued presciently and powerfully that the rise of single-parent households would make poverty more intractable.

    The fundamental problem,” Moynihan wrote, is family breakdown. In a follow-up, he explained: “From the wild Irish slums of the 19th-century Eastern seaboard, to the riot-torn suburbs of Los Angeles, there is one unmistakable lesson in American history: a community that allows large numbers of young men to grow up in broken families … never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos.”

    Liberals brutally denounced Moynihan as a racist. He himself had grown up in a single-mother household and worked as a shoeshine boy at the corner of Broadway and 43rd Street in Manhattan, yet he was accused of being aloof and patronizing, and of “blaming the victim.”

    “My major criticism of the report is that it assumes that middle-class American values are the correct values for everyone in America,” protested Floyd McKissick, then a prominent African-American civil rights leader. [snip]

    The taboo on careful research on family structure and poverty was broken by William Julius Wilson, an eminent black sociologist. He has praised Moynihan’s report as “a prophetic document,” for evidence is now overwhelming that family structure matters a great deal for low-income children of any color.

    In 2013, 71 percent of black children in America were born to an unwed mother, as were 53 percent of Hispanic children and 36 percent of white children.

    Indeed, a single parent is the new norm. [snip]

    Yet Moynihan was absolutely right to emphasize the consequences for low-income children of changing family structure. Partly because there is often only one income coming into a single-parent household, children of unmarried moms are roughly five times as likely to live in poverty as children of married couples.

    If you are rich and well educated you can afford to flout all the rules and you will be rewarded with more fame and money. Hollywood celebrities flout the rules and then some poor idiot with no money thinks he/she can do the same. But for the poor and middle class there are consequences.

    There are consequences to protesting the death of a thug and hating the cop who killed the thug and thereby protected the community. The consequences: chaos. Ferguson citizens are not standing up for order and law enforcement against thugs. It’s true that many of the Ferguson protestors are outsiders that seek to exploit the misfortunes of the people of Ferguson. But that community has to stand up for their protectors and against the thugs. Like the movie, it’s “High Noon” in Ferguson and the black community nationwide.

    If the black community does not stand up for order against black thugs “that community asks for and gets chaos.”

  14. The more I hear about this email witchhunt, the more i see people rolling their eyes, seeing this as a GOP attempt to sink Hillary for 2016 and people wondering why the hell the GOP seems to have time for all witchhunt rather than actually doing something like, oh i dont know, pass a few laws on the economy, deal with other shit…..

    Note to GOP……the people actually don’t give a shit about this at all especially when all our emails are being read by the NSA anyway…..

  15. MoonOnPluto, you raise an interesting point that at some point will work itself into the courts. If the NSA is reading, or at least gathering, all our emails, why not just subpoena the NSA to get emails?

    If the government has all our emails, when a prosecutor asks for an email, just do what is legally permissible – tell the government where to get the emails. Tell the government “the NSA has my emails, get the emails from the NSA.”

  16. This is primarily a reason why you do not email as a politician, NONE of them do it.

    Anything of note is not sent by email, its by encrypted message or by person or phone…….

    It just isn’t done, the sort of thing you get in an email account is protocol procedures…..all the juicy never is on email….so that is why all of this is complete and utter bullcrap of the first order.

    What are they looking for, an email that says “screw those guys, we really had to go out for dinner on the night of Benghazi..oops”

    Any idiot who falls for this witchhunt is a moron.

  17. Also, do you think you’d be able to recover anything from a specialised server, its designed to write over and over and shred the data deleted to make it unrecoverable….thats the whole point of them. Also anything sent to a Gov’t facility will be logged on the receivers system anyway.

    The kabuki theatre is so thin. The public can’t be assed with it.

  18. admin
    March 12, 2015 at 6:30 pm

    MoonOnPluto, you raise an interesting point that at some point will work itself into the courts. If the NSA is reading, or at least gathering, all our emails, why not just subpoena the NSA to get emails?

    —–
    This might be why they are so pist at the Clinton’s. They couldn’t get the emails from the NSA because the Clinton’s have a secure server that the government couldn’t backdoor.

    The Clinton’s are very, very wise.

  19. Time Magazine never published a cover photo of Obama with “The Chicago Way”. But Time Magazine has a cover photo of Hillary in silhouette with the title “The Clinton Way”.

    As an added bonus, Time Magazine puts devil’s horns on Hillary in the silhouette. See for yourself:

    http://weaselzippers.us/216918-time-gives-hillary-horns/

    This is not an accident. If the Clintons are smart, they will wake up to see their enemies are not the Republicans or conservatives (Republicans/conservatives are “competitors” in the opposition party who have the right and should attack the Clintons as much as they please and as viciously as they please – which is usually what hurts them and not the Clintons).

    If Hillary is indeed smart she will realize her enemies are the leftists in the party and Big Media.

  20. It’s the Left Hillary better worry about:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/martin-omalley-email-server-hillary-clinton-116012.html

    Martin O’Malley: ‘Important’ for secretary of state to use official server

    Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley says if he were president, it would be important as commander in chief to have his secretary of state use the official server for business.

    “Well sure, it would be important to me,” he said Thursday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” when asked about Hillary Clinton’s email practices at the State Department. But he said getting the economy working would be more important.

    O’Malley said he didn’t “feel compelled to answer” a follow-up question about Clinton’s actions from Bloomberg Politics’ John Heilemann. “Secretary Clinton is perfectly capable of defending her own service in office,” he said.

    He also addressed his underdog status in the nascent Democratic race for president, saying the “inevitable front-runner is inevitable up until he or she is no longer inevitable.”

    “So I think you’re going to see a robust conversation in the Democratic Party,” he said.

  21. I agree…

    the Repubs are simply rabid…they are going on about criminal felonies, etc…so they are jumping the shark

    but the left, not to be redundant, but outlets particularly like msnbc, and leftist blogs, cnn, etc are doing the constant jabs and the daily cuts to draw blood…

    they want to make her unelectable…foolish dupes

  22. As the presumptive Democratic nominee in an approaching Presidential election, why shouldn’t Hillary Clinton expect heat from Republicans? It would be odd if they weren’t going after her.

    But, that’s the least of her problems. The moonbats on the left HATE her. The left wing media HATES her. It’s a replay of 2008. They’d rather have NO candidate at all than have Clinton.

    The final straw will be when an African American candidate jumps in the race. Then, it will be over for Clinton. Who knows? Maybe Holder. Maybe Duval Patrick. The vacuum will be filled.

  23. The Ferguson cop killing is just heart breaking. IMO, the police should bolt the doors to the station, get in the cars, drive home, and let the people of Ferguson fend for themselves. I suspect there were would be nothing left by dawn.

    Clearly, the people of Ferguson do not want their police dept.

  24. HWC, the left and Big Media is what Hillary has to be worried about in 2016 as it was in 2008. For many that realization came too late back then.

    There are some names that have not yet emerged to challenge Hillary such as this one suggested by a Republican/conservative that is on the right path: http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/415288/you-know-who-could-really-challenge-hillary-jim-geraghty#comment-1903162929

    Right now the candidates suggested to challenge Hillary are not the candidates that will emerge. O’Malley will be used to weaken Hillary. Biden will weaken her further. Then Elizabeth Warren will weaken her further. Then we will see the real candidate come from the shadows. You suggest Holder and Patrick. But for all the denials it might be Michelle Obama.

    As to the left, many in the left are playing their roles. Some on the Left for now defend Hillary until their chosen candidate emerges from the shadows. Some are punching directly or indirectly to prepare the path for the dark horse challenger. David Corn is in full get Hillary mode: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/03/clinton-media-persecution-complex-emails-state-department

    Republicans, Megyn Kelly, Hannity, Gowdy, they are all bit players even though the spotlight is on them. The real action is behind the tapestry that hangs behind Hillary. That’s where the assassins lie in wait.

  25. With Gibbs and Axelrod leading the charge to trash Hillary, it’s pretty obvious that the “Obama White House” either has somebody else in mind or is simply in the Anybody But Clinton camp.

    I’m honestly having a hard time seeing Clinton get in the race. She has got to see where this is headed with Obama’s folk openly attacking her.

  26. Hillary needs to communicate to voters…these are the only people she has a fair chance with…

    …again…we have said it over and over again…if she does not believe the O people will knife her in the back…then she is not as smart as many of us give her credit for…O is poison to her campaign…the WH has already started pushing her under the bus…and the race is on to diminish and erase any achievements she had as SOS instead of it being a major strength…they want to reduce her

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/13/us/politics/in-new-hampshire-hillary-clinton-backers-buckle-up.html?_r=0

    In New Hampshire, Clinton Backers Buckle Up

    By PATRICK HEALY MARCH 12, 2015

    PORTSMOUTH, N.H. — If Hillary Rodham Clinton is dying to roll her eyes at all the questions about her private email server, she has a soul mate in Laura Donohoe, who did just that, in utter disgust, as she defended Mrs. Clinton on Thursday between spoonfuls of clam chowder.

    “Oh God, here we go again — let’s jump into the garbage pit and make Hillary the butt of everyone’s hatred, because Hillary must be the very worst person on the planet,” said Ms. Donohoe, a retired nurse. She said she voted for Barack Obama over Mrs. Clinton in the 2008 New Hampshire primary, but plans to support Mrs. Clinton next year to reward perseverance, if nothing else: “This woman, she’s a survivor.”

    Here at Cafe Espresso, the diner where Mrs. Clinton’s eyes welled up with tears the day before the 2008 primary — a heavily televised scene at a pivotal campaign moment — Ms. Donohoe and other women said they were buckling up for a bumpy ride with Mrs. Clinton into 2016, but certainly not backing away.

    Female voters made the difference in Mrs. Clinton’s come-from-behind victory in New Hampshire, many of them breaking for her at the last minute. Their enthusiasm and money, as well as their votes, would be crucial if Mrs. Clinton comes to have a chance to keep this swing state in the Democratic column, especially if Republicans recaptured states that Mr. Obama carried like Florida and Colorado.

    “What’s not to like? She’s pro-Israel, she’s a strong leader, she’d be the first woman president,” said Tobey Harman, a retired teacher. “The email thing, it’s a Washington and New York thing, meaningless to regular people.”

    The controversy dogging Mrs. Clinton — that she used a personal account for government business, and chose what emails to delete or turn over to the State Department — is too recent to show up in the latest New Hampshire polls. Those show Mrs. Clinton as a runaway front-runner in the New Hampshire Democratic primary; she also leads Jeb Bush and Rand Paul by roughly 10 percentage points each in hypothetical general-election matchups in the most recent WMUR Granite State Poll.

    But analysts and pollsters said the imbroglio could grow into a problem with voters, including some women, if Mrs. Clinton comes to be seen as unduly secretive or imperious in the months ahead.

    “The Clintons have drawn sympathy and loyalty from New Hampshire voters in the past, but I don’t think women, or men, will look sympathetically on her if they see her as having a problem with secrecy and management,” said Andrew Smith, a political scientist and director of the Survey Center at the University of New Hampshire. “This is a legal process issue, not a personality attack on her that you can easily finesse.”

    But Democrats and others here have a way of rallying to the Clintons in times of crisis. At a low point in Bill Clinton’s 1992 run, voters responded enthusiastically to an appeal he made in Dover just before the primary: “I’ll never forget who gave me a second chance and I’ll be there for you until the last dog dies.” And in January 2008, Mrs. Clinton came to Cafe Espresso to face a group of undecided voters on a day when her own campaign’s polls predicted that she would lose the primary. After one woman asked how she was holding up, Mrs. Clinton began to reply in a low, halting voice, far different from the confident energy that typically infused her public remarks.

    “It’s not easy, it’s not easy,” Mrs. Clinton said. “I couldn’t do it if I did not passionately believe it was the right thing to do.”

    A moment later, her eyes watery, her voice shaking, she added: “This is very personal for me — it’s not just political, it’s not just public. I see what’s happening.”
    She did not cry, but she was plainly vulnerable, and hurting. The moment dominated news coverage here and, according to some voters, prompted them to cast ballots for Mrs. Clinton.

    “They see this woman as someone who can stand up for people, and against attacks, just like her husband did,” said Terry Shumaker, a supporter of Mrs. Clinton’s and a chairman of Bill Clinton’s two presidential campaigns in New Hampshire. “I have not had one person ask me about Secretary Clinton’s emails — no ‘Hey, Terry, what’s up with the email?’ Not one person.”

    Unlike seven years ago, though, Mrs. Clinton’s mission in New Hampshire is not only about firing up primary voters; it is about winning over independent or “undeclared” voters and Republicans in a general election.

    And plenty of those voters remain skeptical.

    “I was at the gym watching Hillary talk about her email, and it sounded like
    typical politician spin,” said Ashley Caldwell, a 19-year-old hostess at the diner and an undeclared voter.

    Ms. Donohoe and her husband, Ronan, who voted for Mr. Obama in the 2008 primary, said they believed that Mrs. Clinton’s preparedness to take on economic issues and foreign policy challenges would matter to voters in either party more than how she dealt with her email.

    But she noted that Mrs. Clinton’s long career has regularly been turned against her.

    “When Hillary’s good, people say it’s because she has 25 years of experience, and when she missteps, people say it’s because she hasn’t learned lessons after 25 years of experience,” Ms. Donohoe said. “It’s maddening.”

  27. Catching up on the last two articles, I can only say that the last one about the 47 Senators who wrote their letter to the Iranian leaders was one of the best I’ve ever read.

    Your point is even overkilled with the third-party analyses quoted in your own article. Whoever wrote them deserves credit — It would be nice to know which pundits are doing their job.

    And this Steve Hayes in the video is a top-notch analyst too. What about the interviewer? I don’t know what her name is; but she is a top-notch journalist. I’ve never seen her before… could you give me her name, please?

    I have just one post-mortem suggestion to make about this:

    Admin: “Obama’s initials are not “B.O.” for nothing. Obama stinks. Obama policies stink.”

    admin: You could have driven this home even better with, “Even his children call him ‘stinky’ in front of his wife, who is too kind with him to say that she herself knows he stinks, literally — not just his policies.”

  28. Shadowfax: S, How the heck can you stand to watch MSNBC?

    S March 11, 2015 at 12:40 pm
    I don’t watch it, Shadowfax; but in the a.m., when I am getting ready for work, I will skip through the channels…

    OK, that explains everything. If I had a TV, I’d probably do the same thing.

    Since I don’t have a TV, though, I do my own scouting for headlines by talking with people in cafés and with my restaurant guests; some choice radio programs; reading or even buying a newspaper once in a while; and reading Big Pink. The only videos I ever see are those posted here.

    The result: Only the top headlines get through to me; but usually with enhanced detail because I get people’s various reactions on the ground.

    But I have enough time on my hands to do all those things, and most people don’t. The whole life cycle balance changes when you blow away your TV. That is: The main reason I have time on my hands is precisely because I don’t spend any time watching the fucking TV.

    It’s a virtuous circle that my soulmate has engaged in too. When she first knew me, she was an avid watcher of TV and even tried to force me to watch. She dropped out of Big Brother’s mind control circuit in 2009, though. By now, she has calmed down, has lots of time on her hands; and we are getting along better and better with each other.

    Example: While she was hooked on TV, she was a stark raving Obot and made fun of my unwavering support for Hillary Clinton. Now, without the TV for the last 6 years, she has slowly come around to my view of Obola: buys me books about and by HRC; and even bought a book for herself (translated into French) about the Clintons.

    But as I said, if I had a TV, I would probably do just like you, and maybe moononpluto does it too, with the 5000 channels he receives: Just flip through all the channels and pick out as much bullshit as I can take to get me through the day.

  29. GonzoTx, the problem is not Ms. Donahoe. The problem is the writer of the article S posted.

    Reacquaint yourself with Patrick Healy of the New York Times. Search our archives of articles you will find many references to Patrick Healy.

    Here’s one:

    http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/07/11/bored-of-elections/

    The “bored” routine and blame the voter syndrome is best exemplified at the New York Times by the troubled Patrick Healy. Healy, in Paris (France, not Texas), overcame his exhaustion with Iowans by interviewing Parisians. Healy, still pretends that Americans are bored with this election in general and with Hillary in particular.

    Only rarely does Healy not attack Hillary and when he fails to attack Hillary it is always a surprise. http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/05/29/what-can-they-do-to-me/

    In 2007 Patrick Healy enjoyed to mock Hillary’s “cackle” http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/09/30/the-last-laugh/

    The New York Times is still waging its idiots war against Hillary and attempting an attack on Hillary very much like the attacks on Gore in 2000. Witches and hens cackle and apparently for the New York Times so do women presidential candidates. It’s a laugh riot from the ever bored Patrick Healy.

    This was my first close encounter with Senator Clinton, and with The Cackle. At that moment, the laugh seemed like the equivalent of an eye-roll — she felt she was being nit-picked, so she shamed her inquisitors by chuckling at them (or their queries). [snip]

    And then, less often but more notably, she copes with the pressure by using The Cackle. [snip]

    Last Sunday, meanwhile, she appeared on all five of the major morning talk shows. I don’t know what she had for breakfast, but her laughter was heavily caffeinated at times. Chris Wallace, of Fox News, first pressed Mrs. Clinton about why she was so “hyper-partisan,” and that drew a huge cackle. [snip]

    She giggled, giggled some more, and then couldn’t seem to stop giggling — “Sorry, Bob,” she said — and finally unleashed the full Cackle.

    In that same article we wrote this which is extremely applicable to 2016: http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/09/30/the-last-laugh/

    As we continously write, the danger to Democrats in 2008 comes not from the right wing and their many media outlets – the American public knows of their bias, the danger comes from our supposed own.

    There’s also these: http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/10/01/the-2000-code/

    http://www.hillaryis44.org/2007/10/06/hillary-clinton-in-iowa/

    http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/08/11/internal-memoranda-part-i/

    Big Media will fight for its tool – Barack Obama. To that end Big Media will attack, slime, and smear Obama opponents and protect Obama friends.

    A certain reporter took time out from trolling the internets for sex in order to go “rooting around in other people’s personal lives”. As the gossip gawkers noted How on earth does he have time to trawl gay hookup sites? And why would he leave so many clues as to his real identity when he’s so much in the public eye?

    The target for the pro-Obama smear merchants at the New York Times and MSNBC was none other than Bill Clinton.

    A particulary filthy article by Patrick Healy in the New York Times smeared Bill Clinton repeatedly. Rubbing his thighs, Chris Matthews pleasured himself by utilizing the article to attack Hillary Clinton.

    Yup, as we proved with links, Patrick Healy took time out from giving blowjobs to anonymous men on the internet in order to attack (at the Obama’s campaign’s request) Bill Clinton for receiving blow jobs.

    Many of the articles are before we knew the entire story of behind the scenes treachery from Ted Kennedy and his fellow swimmers in filth.

    Our extensive archives from 2008 are going to be very useful in 2016.

  30. foxyladi14 March 12, 2015 at 3:45 pm

    Yes, she said that. [emoticon denoting bewilderment]

    foxyladi: First of all, I don’t know what you mean by “that”. Having viewed the video, I have an inkling idea of why you were bewildered, but not what “that” is.

    Secondly, I think I know why you were bewildered: It’s because MO’s presentation is comparable to a Clinton-style Class Act. Let me explain:

    In 319 seconds at the podium, MO spent the entire first 228 seconds giving credit to other people and the work they’ve done, without mentioning her own role or what she’s done — anywhere throughout the whole video, in fact, even when she starts in with “I hope…” at 4:40.

    In the meantime, starting at 3:44, she starts in again with the credits, asking for a hands-up by anyone who contributed financially to the festivities, then thanking the special Chef and WH chefs who cooked the goodies, ending at 4:00, i.e. another 16 seconds of credits; but this line of credits is followed up with another round of appreciation for the Entertainers, up until 4:40 — so, another 40 seconds of credits, with genuine hollers and applause from the crowd.

    At 4:40, she slips in a few I’s, but it is only to say, “I hope you guys will enjoy” all this stuff “we” have prepared for you and are doing for you, and that you get the most out of the holiday. She “hopes” this and that for the crowd until…

    … at about 5:09, someone asks “What about you?” So, there’s another “I” and “me” phase in the act: “I’m gonna be roundabout, listening [not directing]… They keep me busy around here…” The listener wonders, “Who keeps the First Lady busy? Her husband?” The only answer an attentive listener can infer is, “The party organizers have planned it all, and MO is just at their service.”

    That is, she spends a total of 183 seconds out of 319 expressing hope that everyone will enjoy, and giving credit to everybody but herself for managing the event, going as far a to imply she is at the party organizers’ service.

    This leaves 319 — 183 = 136 seconds for the meat of the talk about the holiday; and in all those 136 seconds, she never says “I”, but “we” a few times: She talks about the long, deep roots of the holiday, to mark the renewal of the earth at the beginning of Spring, the forward look toward Summer, and goes into a very good explanation of the traditions whose values “we” are trying to enhance.

    This all reflects the self-effacing posture of a true Monarch, who always expresses herself publicly in the plural, i.e., “we”, “our”, “ours” and “us”, to others as “you” (it used to be “thou” in the singular). But MO is not a Queen, she knows it, and her public knows it.

    Such self-effacement is possible in a democracy/Republic, but the only politicians who express themselves naturally this way, to my knowledge, are Women. It’s far more difficult for men, because their ego usually gets in their way, and ego is a problem typical of almost all men in politics. WJC is a notable exception to this rule, among Men.

    Hillary Clinton’s speeches are riddled with references to “you” and to “us”, sometimes with “we want”. When she’s in campaign mode, or negotiating, she may slip in an “I want”, and when she’s accused of something, she may say “I did” or “I didn’t”. But these are not slip-ups; they’re necessary, if only for emphasis, and everyone but Hillary haters knows HRC is not an ego-maniac. The haters, on the other hand, call her a “bitch”, which means “ego-maniacal woman”.

    Nobody calls MO a bitch, though. So, in a sense, MO has done a better Class Act than HRC has through her entire career.

    Difference: MO has little experience in politics and doesn’t seem to do any homework on any issues of importance. If she does some homework, though, and acquires some experience, I would probably vote for her, because she has Class, and I think she’s very good looking.

  31. You would vote for MO because you think she has class and is good looking…Jesus jez, you must be drunk…what at a tell about you!

  32. In the land of the blind . . . . Actually, from what I can tell, Tom is a man of character, and, a patriot. With the exception of Ted Cruz and Mike Lee and Jeff Session and Jim Jordan, the specie know as patriot, is DEAD in Washington. Deader than a thousand midnights in a Cypress Swamp–to quote that memorable line from a negro sermon. Oh . . . but to be a lobbyist, or a black racist . . . that is heaven. It is to be the governing faction. Sharpton is bad, but name me one member of the Congressional Black Caucus (other than Tim Scott), or all the blacks in the Obama Administration who, despite their Ivy League credentials, are not similar if not identical to him, and to his sort of demagoguery. I can think of no better reason why we are failing as a nation. Affirmative action run riot.

    ——-

    Tom Cotton: The Most Powerful Man in Washington
    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | March 13th, 2015 at 04:30 AM | 31

    RESIZE: AAA
    Share on Facebook 2K 2K SHARES

    Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR)82% (R-AR) is the junior senator from Arkansas. In fact, Cotton has only been in the Senate for two months. He spent one term in the House of Representatives before making the leap to the upper house. Prior to his stint in elected politics, Cotton was a soldier in the Iraq War. He is now the most powerful man in Washington.

    Cotton rounded up forty-six other Republican senators in Washington to sign a letter to Iran. That letter announced that no deal between President Obama and Iran would ever make it through the United States Senate. The constitution requires a two-thirds vote for any treaty to be ratified. An Iranian deal would not get a majority vote, let alone a two-thirds vote.

    The outrage from Democrats was immediately. On twitter, the hashtag “#47traitors” exploded. More than 100,000 people signed a petition demanding the forty-seven senators be arrested for treason. Chris Matthews, the Walter Winchel of MSNBC, yelled at his viewers accusing the senators of violating the Logan Act. The soundbite got picked up and parroted by talking heads who needed a point and had none of their own.

    The Logan Act is a law enacted in 1799 by President John Adams. It prohibits citizens from engaging foreign powers in contravention of the United States. Not a single person has ever been convicted of violating the Logan Act. Only one person, in 1803, was ever indicted under the Logan Act. The government is exempt from the law, obviously, and the State Department determined in 1975 that Congress, as a branch of government, was exempt from the Logan Act.

    The rhetoric of the left has been farcical. The late Senator Ted Kennedy directly collaborated with the Soviet Union to undermine President Reagan’s foreign policy. We only learned about that as a nation when the Soviet Union collapsed and old KGB archives were uncovered.

    In 2002, Congressmen John Bonior and Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA)15% flew to Iraq to stand shoulder to shoulder with Saddam Hussein against George W. Bush. Former Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)11% went to Syria to stand with Bassar Al Assad against George W. Bush. But the most similar action to Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR)82%’ letter happened in 1984.

    That year, then Democratic Leader Jim Wright, who would go on to be Speaker of the House, penned a letter to communist leader Daniel Ortega. The letter, signed by multiple Democrats in the Congress, pledged Democratic opposition to Ronald Reagan’s policies and sought to engage in separate diplomatic relations with Ortega than what the Reagan Administration was attempting.

    For Hillary Clinton to claim last week that Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR)82%’s letter was something unique in American history was as big a lie as her claiming she could not put two email accounts on one device. In fact, the Democrats know Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR)82%’s actions are legal. They just do not like his boldness in defiance of a President who increasingly views himself as a dictator.

    Try as they might, the Democrats have not been able to completely undermine the idea of three separate but equal branches of government. Their spittle flew when Speaker Boehner invited the Israeli Prime Minister to speak to Congress. Though they claimed the invitation was some sort of breach of protocol, the Speaker also invited the Pope to speak and the Democrats made no such claims.

    What is really happening is the Democrats were attempting to allow Iranto build up a nuclear program without anyone noticing. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Senator Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR)82% shed light on the Democrats’ plan. The Democrats were left scurrying about like roaches with the light turned on. They do not like it.

    The net result of Senator Cotton’s actions has not been an indictment of forty-seven Republican senators. Instead, Secretary of State Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)0% had to admit President Obama’s negotiations with Iran were non-binding and unenforcible. But for Senator Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR)82%, America would never have gotten that admission. It makes the senator one of the few people in Washington who has been able to throw Barack Obama off his game.

  33. I’m guessing the reason foxy used an “emoticon denoting bewilderment” about MO and her speech was because she didn’t have one denoting the level of disgust, anger, and frustration that most of us feel about her.

    Jes, there’s no need for a follow-up answer to this comment, it’s rhetorical. WTF is wrong with you?

  34. This began as an exercise of self diagnosis on my part–an effort to explain my reaction to a situation which occurred the other day, where, under the influence of demon rum (note: a tortfeasor can take no shelter in his vice), I overreacted. It ended with what I believe is an important insight, in dealing with Obama supporters, Hitler Jugen and the rest of them.

    When an Obama sympathizer makes a brutally stupid comment, in the hope of provoking a reaction, it is best not to engage in an ad hominum attack, but to be more strategic. (Now if I can only remember to do this the next time–maybe writing it down will help, better that than to forgo the unspeakable pleasures of demon rum, including but not limited to the morning after). So here’s what I would say to the bot.)

    That is a provocative statement. I don’t know whether you believe it or are just trying to provoke a reaction. If you believe it then you and I have a fundamentally different world view. I see a great nation with a constitution which has given freedom and prosperity to generations of Americans–a nation which is not perfect, has had problems, but has moved to correct them. I see that entire system of ordered liberty now in peril, and your statement is one of a thousand manifestations.

    You see a nation which is racist, homeophobic, avaricious, which must atone for these sins, at the expense of liberty and prosperity. You either believe that, or you have bought into it inadvertently, or think you select from the parts of this world view those parts that benefit you personally. If you believe that this nation must atone for its sins at the expense of everything else, then you are per se a totalitarian, and lets just stipulate to that. On the other hand, if you do not realize the implications of what you have bought into then you my friend have been bamboozled. And if you think you can use parts of this ideology for your benefit and reject the rest of it, then you need to be wary of making love to a bear, because you do not stop until the bear decides to stop.

    That last point was given to me by the Cuban banker, whose parents bought into the myth of Fidel while they were college students, despite the dire warnings of their uncle who was a legendary cavalryman whose horse drank beer, and after the revolution they rued the day and fled their country.

  35. There is no doubt in my mind that the Clinton’s know that they are still the outsiders with part of the Dim party. Hillary knows about the sexism attacks, and yet, she encourages women all over the world to not be discouraged, work hard, support each other, and pull themselves out of poverty.

    Just because Hillary doesn’t verbalize it publicly, she knows it will be one of the most difficult battles for the job of President that the US has ever seen. By far, it will be the bloodiest of all battles.

    If she is up for the battle, she will win. If she thinks it’s too difficult, she will not run.

    With this, I have no doubt.

  36. This Issue: USCIS admits to processing amnesty applications ahead of foreign spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens

    In a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) admitted that illegal aliens who applied for amnesty under Pres. Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program were given preference over most legal immigrants, including spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.

    In response to the Committee’s inquiry asking which visa programs had resources diverted to help process DACA applications more quickly, USCIS wrote “considering the need to provide special emphasis to certain form types, USCIS is able to make initial risk-based resource allocation decisions so that all USCIS customers are given the attention and service they deserve.” The agency said it prioritized the following visa types:
    •Employers asking for temporary workers (with or without paying the premium processing fee);
    •Applicants for advance parole (a travel document only needed by illegal aliens with temporary status);
    •Refugees needing a travel document;
    •Employers sponsoring immigrant workers;
    •U.S. parents adopting children from overseas;
    •Applicants for work permits (DACA applicants, other illegal aliens, and temporary visitors)
    •Military naturalization applicants

    Missing from the list was any mention of spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents. Since the DACA program started in 2012, the wait times for spouses of U.S. citizens has tripled from the agency goal of 5 months to as long as 15 months in some parts of the country. Judging by its actions, the Obama administration has no problem with keeping U.S. citizens from their foreign-born spouses for more than a year, but does all it can to prevent the splitting up of illegal-alien families.

    In comparison, a typical DACA applicant would receive his/her work permit within two to four months from time of application with a significantly less vigorous vetting process. In fact, during a massive nationwide sweep by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents last week, targeting the most dangerous criminal aliens, 15 DACA recipients were arrested — 14 had been convicted of a crime, including one who has received a DACA renewal since being convicted for a drug crime. It’s still unknown whether any of the other 13 had convictions prior to receiving amnesty under the DACA program.

    With few fraud detection measures and effective background checks in place, it’s no surprise that ICE arrested over a dozen DACA recipients last week, most of whom had already been convicted of a crime. I and other members of the House Judiciary Committee have expressed concern about this for years.

    — House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte

  37. freespirit
    March 13, 2015 at 11:52 am

    I’m guessing the reason foxy used an “emoticon denoting bewilderment” about MO and her speech was because she didn’t have one denoting the level of disgust, anger, and frustration that most of us feel about her.
    _________________
    Nailed it Free!!! 🙂

  38. freespirit
    March 13, 2015 at 11:52 am
    —————

    Maybe Jes just needs a software update and reboot.

  39. Shadowfax
    March 13, 2015 at 2:21 pm
    Her lights go out, wishful thinking Wbb. 😉
    ——
    Better hers than ours.

    It gets back to what I said above, which I think is borderline profound, whereas most of what I write I cannot stand to read five minutes later. The initial cut, i.e. those who believe this is a great nation which should lead the world (center to right group) vs. those who believe it is a deeply flawed nation and must be reformed even if it kills it, i.e. (left wing environmentalist, public unions, academics, and black racists like Obama). The second cut is those who believe (totalitarians), those who do not understand (bamboozled) and those who fail to realize that this is one hotel where it is easy to check in, but impossible to check out (the trapped opportunist). Frankly, and I am sure this paradigm will never see the light of day, but this is a useful way to separate the wheat from the chaff, and to convince the unwary that they are being sucked into a tunnel which promises love but delivers tyranny and oppression. The problem, then, is to find leaders who not only talk the talk but walk the walk. No RINO under the sun can possibly do that. And no democrat, as the party is presently constituted can do that either. They play only to the dumbed down low information voter, and their contributors. They really are the enemy of the American People, and anyone who doubts that is not paying attention.

  40. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2992687/Michelle-Obama-got-fired-Disgraced-Univision-host-claims-Lady-s-office-intervened-heard-racist-Planet-Apes-remark.html

    Michelle Obama got me fired‘: Disgraced Univision host claims First Lady’s office intervened when she heard him make racist remark that she ‘looks like she’s part of the Planet of the Apes cast’

    Rodner Figueroa made the racially insensitive remark on the entertainment news show El Gordo Y La Flaca on Wednesday
    He was discussing the work of a make-up artist who had transformed himself into Michelle Obama
    By late Wednesday evening the network had removed his photo from their website and on Thursday they confirmed that he had been fired
    Figueroa has issued an apology in which he denies being a racist and states that his father is Afro-Latino
    Also accused Univision of trying to destroy his career ‘in an unfair manner’
    At the Daytime Emmy Awards last June Figueroa had won the Outstanding Daytime Talent in the Spanish category

    Univision host Rodner Figueroa who was fired after making a racially insensitive remark about Michelle Obama now claims that the first lady’s office may have played a deciding role in his dismissal.

    According to Figueroa’s representatives, no one from the network complained when on Wednesday he compared a makeup artist who transformed himself into Michelle Obama to a cast member of The Planet of the Apes franchise.

    But later that night, hours after Figueroa’s entertainment news show El Gordo Y La Flacaa aired, a Univision executive reportedly contacted the TV presenter and informed him that the first lady’s office had made a complaint about the remark.

    The revelation implicating the First Lady’s team in the firing, first reported by TMZ, comes after a seemingly contrite Figueroa penned an open letter to Mrs Obama apologizing for his outburst.

    In the missive, the sacked TV host wrote that as a bi-racial, openly gay man, he is no stranger to discrimination and has long been fighting for minorities.

    He also stated: ‘I voted openly twice for your husband, Barack Obama.’ [snip]

    Venezuelan-born Figueroa, an Emmy-Award winning host at the Spanish-language network Univision, made the Planet of the Apes remark in a segment discussing the work of make-up artist Paolo Ballesteros who posts photos of himself transformed into female celebrities.

    Figueroa, 42, was talking about how Ballesteros had transformed himself into the First Lady when said: ‘Well, watch out, you know that Michelle Obama looks like she’s from the cast of Planet Of The Apes, the movie.

    When hostess Lili Estefan countered with ‘What are you saying?’ and host Raul de Molina said Obama was very attractive, Figueroa defended his remark, saying ‘but it is true.’

    The show aired live on the East Coast, but his remarks were edited out of the version broadcast for the West Coast, reports Latino Voices.

    Later Figueroa co-hosted the evening gossip show Sal Y Pimienta, but by Wednesday night his photo had already been removed from the network’s website.

    In a statement on Thursday, Univision called Figueroa’s comments ‘completely reprehensible’ and said they ‘in no way reflect the values or opinions of Univision.’ [snip]

    ‘I can’t accept that I am being called a racist and being fired for that reason and being humiliated by Univision after working there for 17 years,’ he said.

    ‘I come from a bi-racial Latin family, with family members, like my father, who is Afro-Latino. I am the first presenter on Hispanic TV that is openly gay and I am an activist for causes that favor minorities, that have been discriminated against just like me.’

    Figueroa had won the award for Outstanding Daytime Talent in the Spanish category at the Daytime Emmy Awards last June.

    He’s an idiot for voting for Obama.

  41. Also, Wbb…as the minorities are let in illegally across the border, the benefits they suck up will further make the divide between the working class and the lazy, hand held outs like the Obamas.

    Once most of us boomers are too old to keep that hamster wheel turning out tax dollars, things are going to go to fer shitten.

  42. Moonbat finally makes something sensible.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-primaries-jerry-brown-116066.html#ixzz3UIbFMIfM

    Jerry Brown: Leave Hillary Clinton alone

    California governor urges fellow Democrats not to run against Clinton in the primaries.

    Jerry Brown ran against Bill Clinton in the 1992 Democratic primaries. Now he doesn’t think anyone should run against Hillary Clinton when she seeks the nomination next year.

    “I can’t think of anything I’d rather have less if I were running for president than to have a competitor in the primary,” the California governor said, speaking to reporters at the White House on Friday afternoon following a series of meetings with staff about climate change.

    Brown said he didn’t see the need for an internal party fight. What he wants, he said, is Clinton knocking the GOP field on immigration reform, Obamacare, climate change and other differences.

    “The primaries get into all the little nuances and small differences of candidates of the same party,” Brown said. “What Hillary needs is a good debate drawing the distinctions between where she stands and where all these Republicans, these wannabes running around.”

    He took particular aim at the lawsuit from many Republican governors and attorneys general challenging President Barack Obama’s immigration executive actions, calling their position “at best troglodyte, and at worst, un-Christian.”

    All the more reason, Brown said, to focus on the fight with the other party, and not within his own.

    “There’s some big differences, and they’re more with the Republicans. So let’s have the debate and let’s see where America wants to be,” Brown said. “I don’t think running some couple of Democrats would illuminate the process.”

    Brown didn’t meet with Obama, who was in Los Angeles on Friday, or with Vice President Joe Biden, who’s vacationing in the Virgin Islands.

  43. Personally, I would enjoy seeing Hillary kick Featherhead’s & Joe’s asses in the debates.

    Without anyone running against her in the primary, the Kooks and crackpots will go nuts.

  44. Shadow you know what would happen in those debates…the same that happened in 2008…..

    Hillary : what do you think of the destabalisation of the middle east?

    now

    Miss Warren : Would you like a pillow?

  45. Tried to watch the news tonight. CNN had a fairly balanced news program on varied subjects with little Hillary bashing. On the other hand, Bill O’Reilly’s show with guest host Eric what’s his name from THE FIVE had almost continual Hillary hate and bashing. I kept flipping between the two and every time I’d go to FOX News there was some guest like Ann Coulter attacking Hillary. We laughed heartily when Eric signed off with “THE SPIN STOPS HERE”.

    Now the silly Megan Kelly is off on Hillary again on her propaganda program. MERCY! Some said Megan was pretty. I’m not sure what difference that makes but after her hateful ranting the past week, she is becoming down right ugly to me. My grandma always said, “Pretty is as pretty does.”

    Okay, okay, FOX News…we get it. You absolutely HATE the Clintons with a deep, dark passion. I suppose FOX must think that there is some poor soul who lives in a cave in fly over country who has not heard about the Rep/FOX spin on the Clintons??

  46. Anne Colter would say ANYTHING to keep her face in front of a Camera or sell one of those mass produced kindergarten level so-called books she ‘writes” . Her vileness is surpassed by leftie and Obama-nut Donna Brazille.

    Megyn Kelly is truly an obnoxious, short-sighted, attention seeker, who like all of the other FOX Females had to submit the FOX Blonde Chick Rule, whereby every token-ass female employed as on-air “talent” by FOX must agree to consistently maintain their hair color within a color range of Clairol color # 07 – Silly Sunny Bitch and # 10 Baby Shit Yellow. It’s a bit demeaning, but Hey – strong, smart women must always find a way to be pleasing, or at least non-threatening to the guys.

  47. Shadowfax

    March 13, 2015 at 6:49 pm

    Personally, I would enjoy seeing Hillary kick Featherhead’s & Joe’s asses in the debates.

    Without anyone running against her in the primary, the Kooks and crackpots will go nuts.

    moononpluto

    March 13, 2015 at 6:56 pm

    Shadow you know what would happen in those debates…the same that happened in 2008…..

    Hillary : what do you think of the destabalisation of the middle east?

    now

    Miss Warren : Would you like a pillow?

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

    my concern is in the debates…and in general campaign/discussions…the media boxes Hillary into a corner so she has to support O and his policies…otherwise she will suffer their collective pack rath and the media spin even more…

    ie…they will continue to put her on the spot so that she cannot, in effect, distinguish herself from O…without becoming a ‘traitor’

    first the media weakens and reduces her and then they make it almost impossible for her to be Hillary…they are not going to play fair with her

    Hillary needs to take the page that says go around the media and straight to the people…and yes, use Bill to every advantage she can…

    the media is out to brainwash the people to hate Hillary and Bill…

    same old song…

  48. Admin: the plan is to take the non binding resolution with Iran, and do an end run around congress (and the American People) to the UN Security Council who will ratify it, in which case, it will acquire the status of a treaty superior to the Constitution. When Jolt’n John Roberts sees that he will do his usual Scarlett Ohara, turn around in his hoop skirt and say well fiddle dee dee—nothing I can do here. Corker, than silly baboon will say nothing I can do here either except let big media show the right side of my face–they say I have the profile of John Barrymore and the mind of Curley Howard of three stooges fame. Far be it from me to argue the point.
    ——————
    An executive agreement surely cannot outlast the term of a president any more than an agreement with Putin can outlive Putin. When the Democrats accuse the Republicans of “treason” for pointing out the basic fact that the other branches must sign on to a binding deal, one might ask: treason toward whom? Obama or treason against the Constitution? Or maybe they are one and the same now.

    Jack Goldsmith, a law professor at Harvard, argues that Obama can fill this inconvenient power deficit by getting a grant of authority from the United Nations Security Council. That way all Obama has to do is getting his fellow kings on the Council to go along with the deal. Then Journolist can be sent forth to cry “hear ye! hear ye!”

    It is now clear that any deal with Iran will by its terms be a non-binding agreement. That means the United States will have no international law obligation to comply with the agreement, considered in isolation, and that only diplomatic and political considerations – which might not be trivial – will stand in the way of the next President backing out of the deal and reimposing U.S. sanctions. This is why I concluded yesterday that “in comparison with a binding executive agreement under international law, a non-binding agreement with Iran is easier to make (because the President can clearly do it on his own) and easier to break (because there is no domestic or international legal obstacle to breaking it).”

    However, in my post with Marty Lederman, I also noted that “an entirely different set of arguments and concerns might come into play if the parties were to sign a non-binding agreement that becomes the basis for a legally binding Security Council Resolution.” Recall that Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said the following in his statement about the Republicans’ letter: “if the current negotiation with P5+1 result [sic] in a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it will not be a bilateral agreement between Iran and the US, but rather one that will be concluded with the participation of five other countries, including all permanent members of the Security Council, and will also be endorsed by a Security Council resolution.” The P5 are the Permanent Five members of the U.N. Security Council – i.e. the ones with the veto. (The “+1” is Germany.) Any deal that all five accept would thus also be a deal that could receive U.N. Security Council approval to eliminate U.N. sanctions on Iran. Indeed, though not emphasized in the United States, this appears to be the plan. The negotiations are in large part over lifting current U.N. sanctions; that is why the P5 are involved. Thus there is every reason to think that “a nuclear agreement between Iran the major powers would include the removal of all sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council,” as former Iranian nuclear negotiator Sirous Nasseri said yesterday in the Tehran Times. (By contrast, when asked about a Security Council resolution endorsement of the nonbinding agreement, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki said on Tuesday: “I’m just not going to get ahead of how this would be implemented at this point in time.”)

    They are clearly thinking about doing through the UN what they cannot accomplish through the Congress.

    The American founding fathers were well acquainted with the world of kings and rejected it, feeling that a mighty nation founded on boring public consensus led by ordinary men would fare better than under a monarch; not perfectly, but better. The modern American elite has rejected this wisdom. They envy the kings of the world. Even the greatest servants of the American Republic are paupers by comparison to foreign autocrats. CNN Money has a chart comparing the richest American politicians to their Chinese counterparts. It is easy to see how the American political elite can be dazzled, not only by their wealth, but their unfettered raw power.

    Poor by comparison

    One Canadian liberal leader put the case starkly.

    “There’s a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime,” [Justin] Trudeau said, according to reports on the event. “I mean there is a flexibility that I know Stephen Harper must dream about, of having a dictatorship that he can do everything he wanted, that I find quite interesting.”

    Give me the power and I will make the trains run on time. Make me Queen and I shall give you bread. Truly great men can resist the temptation to turn themselves into autocrats. King George III asked his American painter, Benjamin West, what George Washington would do after winning independence. “West replied, ‘They say he will return to his farm.’ ‘If he does that,” the incredulous monarch said, ‘he will be the greatest man in the world.’” But we live in a lesser age. And modern pygmies would rather be gimcrack kings than be remembered as a president of the United States of America. Should anyone succeed at “Caesarism” there might be personal glory in it a spell. But Caesar would still live under the Hollow Crown and such a system would bring lasting instability to the magnificent — and regrettably ordinary — Republic.

    Read more: http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2015/03/12/the-men-who-would-be-kings/#ixzz3UKPmMYj2

  49. Southern Born

    I was the one that said I would give it to her that Megan is pretty, but I find nothing good about the woman’s opinions nor ‘reporting’…this conclusion I came to the night of the 2012 elections and she was one of the people that turned me off to FoxNews.

    She isn’t pretty inside, she is a Fox Barbie

  50. Megyn Kelly is hardly a Barbi. She was a practicing attorney (Jones Day) for 9 years before getting into the TV news biz with the DC Fox affiliate.

    If you are looking for pro-Clinton pieces, I wouldn’t recommend Fox News. I don’t think they are going to be a likely source of Dem fluffing in an election year! NBC should be a safe bet.

    In fairness to FOX, I think the legitimate questions about Clinton’s years as SecState is fair game. From the reset button with Putin to Benghazi, it’s not exactly a record of accomplishment. US foreign policy is pretty much an unmitigated disaster under the Obama admin. Hillary can’t duck the blame for that.

  51. I’m not even looking for Hillary fluffing if there has ever been such a thing, however, fair game would be a welcomed relief. FOX News has turned into rabid, Hillary bashers not legitimate questioners at this time. Megan Kelly has been a huge disappointment. We shall see
    if she treats the Rep candidates with the same vitriol she does the Clintons and then we can decide if she is into fairness or career advancement at FOX.

  52. As I live and breathe.
    6 AM hour today. CBSNewYork employed Class A journalism in reporting on 1) Hillary’s team looking for office space in the city
    2) Giuliani’s statement that Obama is responsible for Ferguson and others.

    Seems Rudy first delivered that statement on March 12. Hmmm.
    ————–
    Have seen other signs tv’s beginning to clean up its act. So Obama-like to take it way past reasonable, then reel it back til the complaining dies down. Having admitted nothing.

  53. Happy PI day today! Today’s date 3-14-15 starts the same as the number PI or 3.1415 , happens once every 100 years and is also Albert Einstein’s birthday.

  54. Have seen other signs tv’s beginning to clean up its act. So Obama-like to take it way past reasonable, then reel it back til the complaining dies down. Having admitted nothing.
    ———
    There’s no statute of limitations on murder. In this case it was their systemic and coodinated murder of the truth. There is no safe harbor from that. No jack in the beanstock ladder with which to climb out of the sewer and reputation for harlotry about them that now fixates the public mind and will for the forseeable future. Where their disgraced repuation is concerned they are stuck with it. In that sense it does not matter what they say, what they do, it is simply not credible. The old say falso in uno falso in omnibus means false in one thing false in everything–it is the classic closing statement line when your opponents case hinges on the testimony of a single witness who has been caught in a single lie. Where big media is concerned the latin would read falso in omnibus, and only a sucker would take at face value what they say. They are corrupt in every sense of the word, and they lead this nation down a perverse path from which it is not likely to return, and he difference between those who get it and those who do not is knowledge.

  55. If they spend any more time looking to anything related to Hillary, Bill – what they did, who they killed, what they stole, where they hid it, or who they screwed -they might as well just take a month – call it Reinvestigating Those F8#king Clintons Month – dedicated exclusively to investigating the Clintons. Involve every media outlet, all members of congress, everyone at the WH, Pentagon, a group of heavy hitters from several foreign governments, the CIA, FBI, and all of the other alphabet agencies, the military – everyone in the world who has an axe to grind with the Clintons.

    When we’re done with the Clintons. Lets turn the same attention to Barack, Holder, Jarrett – all of ’em in the WH, and everyone in Senate and House of Reps. Who is likely going to have fewer skeletons in their closets and secret sins? The Clintons. Who will media feature as the most scandalous? The Clintons.

    Hating them is a phenomenon that has a life of its own – whether rooted in fact or fairy tale, hating the Clintons seems to be the primary preoccupation of a nasty contingent of both conservatives and super-libs. Go figure.

    Going after them is such an easy cheap shot. I don’t consider any journalist who spends day after day after day droning on about the Clintons to be anything other than lazy, biased, unimaginative, dull and spiteful.

  56. ADMIN: A FASCINATING ARTICLE WHICH TIES MUSLIM EXTREMISM TO OBAMA AND HIS ILK.

    IN A NUTSHELL, IT POSITS THATPROGRESSIVES, LIKE OBAMA, ARE HANDING RADICAL MUSLIMS THE KEY TO THE CITY—AND NO LESS THE DESTRUCTION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, THROUGH ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, THE REFUSAL TO ACKNOWLEDGE MUSLIM TERRORISM AS MUSLIM (A PEACE LOVING RELIGION) OR TERRORISM (WORKPLACE VIOLENCE OR JUNIOR VARSITY), THE SPECIAL PROTECTION OF MUSLIMS IN THIS COUNTRY, THE DENIGRATION OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE FAILURE TO LIFT A FINGER TO PROTECT CHRISTIANS FROM SLAUGHTER, THE VILIFICATION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, THE ATTACK ON AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM AND A CHEERLEADING BIG MEDIA WHO IS AIDING AND ABETTING THIS SPAWN OF SATAN AND ARE IN FOR AN INCH AND IN FOR A MILE.
    —————-

    Let Us Count the Gulags

    Why utopian dreams inevitably become totalitarian nightmares.

    There are many threats to the continuity of the modern world, of which Islam in its manifold guises — international terrorism, the razia of unfettered immigration, Iranian nuclear ambitions — is the most prominent. But the Islamic agenda would not be what it is without the “progressivist” mentality and attendant policy making that are handing the barbarians the keys to the city. Islam and progressivism, to cite Jamie Glazov, are United in Hate. Indeed, as Executive Director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism Stephen Schwartz remarks in First Things, the deep complicity between Islam and the left goes a long way back, to the writings of the chief Communist impresarios, Marx and Lenin, as well as to lesser lights like Bolshevik intellectual Karl Radek. America’s far-left, pro-Muslim president has merely continued the dismal tradition.

    Thus, we need to consider the broader canvas to which the camel in the room directs our attention. The obsession with multiculturalism that is destroying our civilizational patrimony is a sign of the feverish intoxication with the humanly improbable that characterizes leftist thinking: that we are all born equal (true with respect to rights, but not with respect to talent, intelligence or personal qualities); that sociopolitical changes can eradicate the flaws and blemishes of our nature (demonstrably wrong); that competition is a social evil that must be eliminated for the general advantage (pure fairyland); that education should be politically motivated to promote what is absurdly termed “social justice” (the death knell of critical thought); that tolerance for the “Other,” however defined, trumps due process in the courts (the erosion of equity); that ancient guilts require present expiation (rank unfairness); and, the great canard of our time, that all cultures are on an existential par, none being “better,” more ethical or more advanced than any other (manifestly false).

    Hence the dogma of cultural and moral equivalence to which the liberal/left adheres, as practiced most conspicuously by the jerk in the White House and by the majority of our political, community and institutional leadership. No culture, religion or civilization, apparently, is superior to any other, an axiom derived, as I observed in a 2011 PJM article, “The Origins of Postmodernitis,” from the early anthropologist Franz Boas. Boas laid it down in his seminal The Mind of Primitive Man that all cultures should be regarded with sympathy, that we should hold the conviction that all “races” — today we would say “ethnicities” — have “contributed to cultural progress in one way or another” and that they are equally capable of “advancing the interests of mankind.” Unfortunately, as I conclude there, what started out as a methodological discipline in the field of anthropology has mutated into an intellectual sickness that regards our own culture as nothing more than a provisional adaptation. We are all, it appears, moral and cultural isomorphs.
    The utopian malady runs deep in the leftist psychodrama. Consider the irony of the Charlie Hebdo attack. As Clash Daily contributor William Spencer-Hale points out, “The employees, artists, writers and editors of Charlie Hebdo were all true to life followers of the Church of Leftism. They…eagerly embraced all the tenets of liberalism. They, like so many of their fellow countrymen, voted to implement those policies that are the hallmark of the modern leftist. Among them being gun control and unfettered immigration.” The fantasy world continues to impinge upon the real one, regardless of deadly consequences.

    There is a lesson to be learned from contemplating the lasting damage that such torpid maunderings and emotional convulsions can inflict. Of course, one should try to be circumspect and impartial in one’s judgments. I recall in this connection James Madison’s summation in Federalist #55: “As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust, so there are other qualities in human nature which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence.” In other words, both facets of human nature need to be taken into account in forming our view of life, arriving at a mature conception of morality and determining the substance of our political commitments. A strong element of human sympathy leavens Madison’s skepticism. But he had already recognized in Federalist #37 just where choice and temptation tend to lead, making him — like the Founders in general — a reliable authority on the follies and perils of uninstructed human nature and their political implications. The “brighter aspects” of our nature, he wrote, “serve only as exceptions to…darken the gloom of the adverse prospects to which they are contrasted.” Madison is referring chiefly to narcissism, self-righteousness and bickering self-interest leading to political faction.

    Such vices are inherent in the utopian prepossession, issuing inevitably in the assumption of infallibility and the application of ruthless force. Utopianism envisages a world in which the concepts of merit, achievement, genuine novelty and civic responsibility have been retired in favor of the misguided and banausic program of affirmative action, mandated mediocrity and cultural self-abasement. And, according to its promoters, it is a world that must be imposed, whether through violence or legislation. As such it cannot be separated from what Madison in #37 calls the “infirmities of human character,” or what we might call the tyranny of results. As Milan Kundera memorably puts it in The Book of Laughter and Forgetting: “Once the dream of paradise starts to turn into reality…people begin to crop up who stand in its way. And so the rulers of paradise must build a little gulag on the side of Eden. In the course of time this gulag grows ever bigger…while the adjoining paradise gets even smaller and poorer.”

    Gulags come in many shapes and forms. The physical hell the Soviets built. The moral and intellectual quicksand of leftist ideology. The prison-house of thought built by the mainstream media. And the fetid oubliette of the contemporary Academy to the legal and verbal constraints, aka political correctness, we ourselves impose upon our freedom to serve the purposes of those who would limit it. The conviction that Islam is a “religion of peace,” despite its millennium and a half of conquest, massacre, looting, slavery, punitive cruelty and cultural desecration, and that something called Islamism is merely a violent deformation of its central tenets, is a mental gulag that its deluded captives actually relish. Some gulags, it appears, are readily mistaken for idyllic acreage. They may not be discernible as gulags, but each is a cordon sanitaire of intellectual besottedness. The gulag from which one rarely escapes is a species of enchantment, namely, the shuttered enclosure of Edenic infatuations that inevitably brings and prolongs human suffering — the wages of cognitive imbecility. Living inside a stockade of groundless and uninhibited raptures does not represent a viable political future.
    Whether we believe in the discredited canard of global warming, or the easily dispelled myth of Palestinian stewardship in the Holy Land, or the utterly transparent falsehood of Israeli apartheid, or the facile notion that anything but the Koran is the “root cause” of Islamic terror, or the lethal illusion that unbridled multiculturalism is a social blessing, or that big government stimulates rather than stifles economic vigor, or that gender is a social construct, or that we live in a rape culture or that being a white male is an unwarranted privilege — or any of a virtual calendar of such idols and figments, we are living in a gulag of our own gratuitous making. We are no longer self-reliant and independent human beings capable of responsible thought or of embarking on a free-ranging journey toward the truth of things.

    Indeed, we have done more than surrender to the “infirmities” of our nature; we have consciously revalued them as ornaments of the moral life and embellishments of character. This is perhaps an even greater plummet than Madison envisaged, the cultural diagnosis of a crippling malady as a form of robust health. With this sordid declension in mind, one’s redemptive ambitions — assuming a modicum of sanity and prudence — should be oriented toward reality and not anchored in childish illusions, quixotic fictions and mellifluous fables. The world is a damn serious place and the romantic infantilisms, along with the venal calculations, of our elites must somehow be checked. Nor are ordinary people exempt from such rainbow apparitions. As Victor Davis Hanson writes in a comprehensive sweep of the political cretinism and cultural stupefaction afflicting the West today, “either the chaos grows and civilization wanes and tribalism follows, or the iron hand of the radical authoritarian Left or Right correction is just as scary, or a few good people in democratic fashion convince the mob to let them stop the madness and rebuild civilization. I hope for option three. I fear option one is more likely at home. And I assume that option two will be, as it always is, the choice abroad.”

    All sensible people hope for option three. Only in this way is minimal progress at least conceivable — or at best, illimitable harm partially avoidable. We must not give up the effort to reclaim what we are in danger of losing. But reality compels us to recognize that options one and two are the more likely alternatives. German philosopher Johann Christian Friedrich Schiller was probably right when he declared, Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens: Against stupidity the gods themselves struggle in vain. This is the self-imposed gulag from which even the Lord despairs of freeing us.

    The bleakness of our condition, as Madison recognized, is only partly relieved by the thoughtful exceptions among us. Let us thank the Lord that they exist. But it is, I suspect, only when the gulag becomes unsustainable, when it collapses upon itself, that a few fortunate inmates may glimpse their salvation.

    Read more: http://pjmedia.com/blog/let-us-count-the-gulags/#ixzz3UNHuPMAE

  57. freespirit
    March 14, 2015 at 10:54 am

    Absofrickin’lutely Free!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The media fluffing the Clinton’s, that’s a laugh.

  58. Bibi says, “”There is a huge international effort, with major money, that is partnering up with leftist organizations here and also with media figures in order to bring down the Likud government that I head,” Netanyahu told Channel 2 television on Saturday.

    Speaking from his formal residence, Netanyahu said the forces he saw arrayed against him “know one thing – that when Bougie (Herzog) and Tzipi come in here, they won’t stand firm even for a minute. They will fold on every position right away.”

    “Whether legal or not, it certainly is not legitimate for foreign governments and all kinds of donors to meddle here.”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/14/us-israel-election-idUSKBN0MA0IT20150314
    —-
    I wouldn’t doubt that Obama and his Kooks might also be turning over some greenbacks to get rid of Bibi. Reminds me of all the money that went to Obama 2008 that wasn’t from American’s and was swept under the rug.

  59. I wouldn’t doubt that Obama and his Kooks might also be turning over some greenbacks to get rid of Bibi. Reminds me of all the money that went to Obama 2008 that wasn’t from American’s and was swept under the rug.

    __________

    Nailed it, Shadow – if you can believe this “source” from FOX.

    Source: Senate panel probing ‎possible Obama administration ties to anti-Netanyahu effort.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/14/senate-committee-probes-whether-obama-administration-funded-effort-to-oust/

  60. Note…written by Edward Klien

    http://nypost.com/2015/03/14/obama-adviser-behind-leak-of-hillary-clintons-e-mail-scandal/

    Obama adviser behind leak of Hillary Clinton’s email scandal

    By Edward Klein

    It’s the vast left-wing conspiracy.

    Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett leaked to the press details of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail address during her time as secretary of state, sources tell me.

    But she did so through people outside the ­administration, so the story couldn’t be traced to her or the White House.

    In addition, at Jarrett’s behest, the State Department was ordered to launch a series of investigations into Hillary’s conduct at Foggy Bottom, including the use of her expense account, the disbursement of funds, her contact with foreign leaders and her possible collusion with the Clinton Foundation.

    Six separate probes into Hillary’s performance have been ­going on at the State Department. I’m told that the e-mail scandal was timed to come out just as Hillary was on the verge of formally announcing that she was running for president — and that there’s more to come.

    Members of Bill Clinton’s camp say the former president suspects the White House is the source of the leak and is furious.

    “My contacts and friends in newspapers and TV tell me that they’ve been contacted by the White House and offered all kinds of negative stories about us,” one of Bill’s friends quotes him as saying. “The Obamas are behind the e-mail story, and they’re spreading rumors that I’ve been with women, that Hillary promoted people at the State Department who’d done favors for our foundation, that John Kerry had to clean up diplomatic messes Hillary left behind.”

    Then, according to this source, Bill added: “The Obamas are out to get us any way they can.”

    The sabotage is part of an ­ongoing feud between the two Democrat powerhouses.

    Last fall, during the run-up to the 2014 midterm elections, Jarrett was heard to complain bitterly that the Clintons were turning congressmen, senators, governors
    and grass-root party members against Obama by portraying him as an unpopular president who was an albatross around the neck of the party.

    Jarrett was said to be livid that most Democrats running for election refused to be seen campaigning with the president. She blamed the Clintons for marginalizing the president and for trying to wrestle control of the Democratic Party away from Obama.

    And she vowed payback.

    My sources say Jarrett saw an opportunity to hit back hard when Monica Lewinsky suddenly resurfaced after years of living in obscurity. Jarrett discreetly put out word to some friendly members of the press that the White House would look with favor if they gave Monica some ink and airtime.

    Relations have gotten even frostier in the past few months.

    After the Democrats took a shellacking in the midterms, the White House scheduled a meeting with Hillary Clinton. When she showed up in the Oval Office, she was greeted by three people — the president, Jarrett and Michelle Obama.

    With his wife and Jarrett looking on, Obama made it clear that he intended to stay neutral in the presidential primary process — a clear signal that he wouldn’t mind if
    someone challenged Hillary for the nomination.

    “Obama and Valerie Jarrett will go to any lengths to prevent Hillary from becoming president,” a source close to the White House told me. “They believe that Hillary, like her husband, is left of center, not a true-blue liberal.”

    If she gets into the White House, they believe she will compromise with the Republicans in Congress and undo Obama’s legacy.

    “With Obama’s approval,” this source continued, “Valerie has been holding secret meetings with Martin O’Malley [the former Democratic governor of Maryland] and [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren. She’s promised O’Malley and Warren the full support of the White House if they will challenge Hillary for the presidential nomination.”

    Edward Klein’s most recent book is “Blood Feud: The Clintons vs. the Obamas” (Regnery).

  61. Many moons ago, the inestimable Thomas Crown wrote

    Should the entire American Left fall over dead tomorrow, I would rejoice, and order pizza to celebrate.

    They are not my countrymen;

    they are animals who happen to walk upright and make noises that approximate speech.

    They are below human. I look forward to seeing each and every one in Hell.

    That is my philosophy moving forward from today.

  62. We all know Jarret and her ilk are behind, frankly the Clinton need to let loose the dogs and eat her alive. No mercy.

  63. Klein’s smear on the three headed snake is a good one. Not only do they look craven and crazy blaming the Clintons’ for their disastrous loss in November, it reminds everyone that the Democratic candidates wouldn’t touch them with a ten foot pole and why. Very professional and I approve. Nice touch with the Persian Princess digging in the State Department’s garbage.

  64. Here comes the over-reach…..watch this backfire spectacularly.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-house-launch-investigation-hillary-clintons-email-practices_887476.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

    Jonathan Karl of ABC News reported this morning that Speaker of the House John Boehner will announce an “investigation next week into Hillary Clinton’s email practices as secretary of state.”

    “Hillary Clinton may have hoped that she put the email controversy behind her with that press conference, but the investigations are now about to begin,” said Karl.

    “Top House Republicans tell ABC News they expect Speaker John Boehner to announce a new House investigation next week into Hillary Clinton’s email practices as secretary of state, including her admitted destruction of some 30,000 emails that she determined to be purely personal.

    ………….

    They are never going to leave her alone.

    They are co-ordinating this all together.

    The public is wondering why the hell they are not getting on with the business of running the country.

  65. BREAKING: US Secretary of State Kerry says he’d be willing to negotiate with Syrian President Bashar Assad:

    ……..

    It comes full circle, now they have to save face.

  66. Seems like a lot of your tax dollars went here. 😡
    ________________

    WASHINGTON — In the spring of 2010, Afghan officials struck a deal to free an Afghan diplomat held hostage by Al Qaeda. But the price was steep — $5 million — and senior security officials were scrambling to come up with the money.

    They first turned to a secret fund that the Central Intelligence Agency bankrolled with monthly cash deliveries to the presidential palace in Kabul, according to several Afghan officials involved in the episode.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/world/asia/cia-funds-found-their-way-into-al-qaeda-coffers.html?emc=edit_na_20150314&nlid=60114213&_r=1

  67. Barry is good at doing this stuff. Remember his message to Putin? 👿

    __________——

    According to Pajamas Media columnist Michael Ledeen, in 2008, a Democratic senator sent a personal emissary to Tehran encouraging the mullahs not to sign an agreement with the outgoing Bush Administration as negotiations would take on a much friendlier tone following President Bush’s departure from office.

    http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/03/11/senator-obamas-2008-message-to-iran-undermine-condemnation-of-gop-letter/

  68. So BO is attacking Hillary because he is fearful for his Legacy?

    What F’n Legacy? ISIS, Foodstamps and the murder of Law Enforcement Officers?

    His attack on her is the best recommendation she could get.

    July. Wait for July, Hillary.

  69. Think this is going nationwide (WashPo has picked it up and major PA TV station aired special within last hour). Here is best coverage I know of in attempt to cover up that this was a heinous black on black cop crime.
    Slain Phila. Officer Robert Wilson III promoted during final farewell
    [Two days of formally saying good bye including carriage bearing coffin drawn by horse thru city streets followed by hundreds of police marching behind coming from CT too. Was a great guy. A hero -walked in not knowing of imminent armed robbery and did what cops are supposed to do. Died at scene.]
    Yet fact that perps are black is being obliterated perhaps even nationwide. To protect Obama/Holder from truth.U can see picture of those charged here. It is plain as day. They are brothers with different last names. Same poor situations known to exist as admin said in comment above.
    6 March 2015. Suspects ID’d, charged in murder of Philadelphia police officer
    Brothers Ramone Williams, 24, and Carlton Hipps, 29, are both charged with 1st degree murder, conspiracy, and attempted murder.
    http://6abc.com/news/suspects-idd-charged-in-murder-of-philly-police-officer/546390/

    And there was the one in NYC area same night getting no coverage. He survived, but hurt quite badly. Is white. Just trying to get salient facts. Think this is going to be on all news tonight. Hope I’m wrong.

  70. typo sb
    Think this is going to be on all news tonight AS PUFF PIECE FOR on behalf of Obama.
    Hope I’m wrong.

  71. A plague on all their houses, fuck them all……

    If you decide not to bother Hillary, just sink every damn last one of them, scorch them all, burn all their houses down.

    She should let it be known, if they take her down, she is taking them all down with her.

  72. Then, according to this source, Bill added: “The Obamas are out to get us any way they can.”
    __________

    We’ve known all along that Obama and his operatives were moving against Hillary on a number of fronts, thanks in large part to Admin’s insight and astuteness. I have no doubt that Jarrett was involved with the dirty work.

    The above statement, however, strikes me as odd. A friend of Bill’s said “The Obamas …”, meaning MO and BO or referring to Obama and peeps in WH and Dim Party. It strikes me as more than odd that the Clintons would have ever expected anything other than a stab in the back from Team Obama. If we’re not surprised that the WH was behind the so-called email scandal, why would Bill and friends be in the least surprised.

    There are just a number of remarks within this article that don’t quite stand to reason. JMHO

  73. If she gets into the White House, they believe she will compromise with the Republicans in Congress and undo Obama’s legacy.

    “With Obama’s approval,” this source continued, “Valerie has been holding secret meetings with Martin O’Malley [the former Democratic governor of Maryland] and [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren. She’s promised O’Malley and Warren the full support of the White House if they will challenge Hillary for the presidential nomination.”
    ——-
    For all the hoopla about the indominable Clinton machine, they have been proven pretty goddamned inept in dealing with the Chicago thugs. There is a way to deal with those thugs—but they do not allow their mind to go there. Ditto with the depraved RINO. There can be no peace with Obama and his ilk. No compromise. None. It is literally a kill or be killed situation. They need to realize that big media–as a whole—is joined to the hip with these thugs. In the legal sense of the term, they are stone cold co-conspirators. They need to think about that when the get up in the morning, all through the day, and when they go to bed at night. No remedy is possible without attacking both flanks of the Obama machine—something they will not do. The other problem is the Republicans are a failed party, their own people refer to them as the party of stupid, and like every stupid person they are more obsessed with fighting the last war than wages a new one. They are running on empty. Now they are trying to rally the conservatives they twice betrayed by this nomination over that skank Lynch. In the balance, it would be better that those efforts fail, even though she is a corrupt racist, but because their breach of this promise may be a tipping point. How can a party such as this go to its base and say vote for us. When they run Jebediah, perhaps he can campaign for votes, not here but in Mexico. He looks like Pugsley on the Adams family if you happened to see that photo of him and his father and brother on the cover of that Newsweek rag. What a family—to the manner borne.

  74. moononpluto
    March 15, 2015 at 7:31 am

    We all know Jarret and her ilk are behind, frankly the Clinton need to let loose the dogs and eat her alive. No mercy.

    ——–
    Right on!

    There’s no reason to hold ANYTHING back now.

    And it is reasonable to assume Jarrett has created many enemies who would love to stick the knife in her ribs.

    It is a live by the sword die by the sword scenario.

    And now, all the forces are in play.

    It is damned near Shakespearan.

    Just keep that fucking Boehner and McConnell out of it.

    Because, trust me, they are so stupid for two reasons:

    First, they will save Obama.

    Second, they will find a new way to screw their base.

    I note in passing that Judicial Watch has done more than any of these Republican led congressional committees

    To get to the bottom of these Obama scandals

  75. A good question, now that I think about it, would be this:

    To McConnell, Boehner, Corker (McCain redux):

    Dear Sir ( a subservient name from from the surly days of old Serbia where certain serfs too ignorant to remember their lords name and too servile to blasphemy them circumvented the situation by inventing the word sir. . . . shades of plebe summer ’68).

    Are you capable of anything more than betraying your constituents and saving Obama?

    Your base (and the country) would really like to know.

    Frankly, and with good and sufficient, we doubt it.

  76. The chattering class is so full of shit.

    The claim this letter to Iran is a breach of the separation of powers.

    If so then Obama is guilty of the same.

    But they forget that.

    I do not believe the Constitution is operative any more.

    And the last thing we need is a new one.

    The letter in question has increased bargaining leverage, put Iran on notice and forced a concession from Obama.

    When Republicans like Cruz or Cotton stand up to that fucking Obama, his yellow streak comes out.

    He prefers drones–in war and politics, where he can just push a button and head to the White House.

    What a terrible example he is for children.

    No values, no work ethic, just a case of arrested development.

  77. wbboei
    March 15, 2015 at 1:09 pm

    moononpluto
    March 15, 2015 at 7:31 am

    ———–
    The Clinton’s know where the Obama bodies are buried.

    Jarret the Iranian princess and her puppet had better be very careful.

    Hillary might not want to take potshots at her party nor a laying pResident, but Jarret and crew are skating on very thin ice.

    Hillary’s supporters know some of it, but not all the behind the scenes Washington corruption that the Clinton’s know about.

  78. In The Conduct of War, British general, writer and military historian recounts the diary of a German officer killed in the early stage of Operation Barbarossa– the invasion of Russia. At the time, the German Army rolled over Russian terrain with its sites on Moscow, and their success was the toast of Berlin. This was long before the siege of Stalingrad where the tide of war turned– irrevocably.

    With the smell of victory in the air, and Ukrainians welcoming them as liberators, it fell upon one SS captain to note that in victory lay the seeds of defeat. When the German Army raised the German flag rather than the Ukranian flag over the Ukraine, he wrote in his diary, all we are fighting for is lost. This is not a tipping point–that came later. It was a sign that they OVERPLAYED THEIR HAND.

    My sense is that Jarrett, and her boss have done the same thing now—OVERPLAYED THEIR HAND, and that guerilla war will be forthcoming. This war must target not only the Obama operatives, but their fellow travelers in big media who covered up for them. Shame on the stupid party if it gets in the way, like Boehner is doing now as we speak. If they do, they will need to go down as well.

    Here is someone who agrees with me. The article is entitled: Valerie Jarret, Hillary May Have The Last Laugh. Here are the relevant provisions:

    ————-
    Whatever one may think of Hillary, she’s plays political hardball with the best of them. And she knows how to survive. While she seems to play blast from the past, 90’s style politics with her current situation, there is no doubt in this authors’s mind, that when emailgate broke, Bill and Hill knew exactly who was behind it.

    With that said, what if Hillary didn’t delete ALL of the 30,000 “personal” emails that she said she did. What if there’s another server hidden somewhere, one that has those Benghazi emails sitting there, sort of as, well, insurance.

    Hillary is in a very tense, critical situation, and if her presidential ambitions become more tarnished by emailgate, another shoe drops, and the donors start walking, then Hillary (and Bill) may be forced to announce she will not run in 2016. Should that happen, Hillary may elect not to go quietly. She will appear a second time before the Select Committee on Benghazi, and with all presidential hopes dashed, and her legacy in tatters, she (and Bill) may just begin doing some leaking of their own, e.g., what the President was really doing the night of 9/11/2012 while four men were murdered, who gave the order to “stand down,” and whoa! some of those “personal” emails are shockingly found after all.

    All these decades that that I’ve followed (the Clintons), I’ve never counted them out. But if they go down, they’re not going alone. What about the Democratic Party? Nope, this is personal. And no one understands personal better than Hillary.

  79. I would liken this assault on Hillary by Jarrett to a Pearl Harbor attack—a day that will live in infamy, and worthy of a withering response.

  80. I would take Klein’s fantasies with a big grain of salt. He’s a fiction writer…

    I certainly wouldn’t be shocked to learn that Jarrett and others in the White House torpedoed Clinton, but all the quotes from Bill Clinton and “sources” are complete fabrications, IMO.

  81. Jonah Goldberg has a hilarious take down of Hillary’s surrogates on the e-mail trail:

    One of my favorite movie clichés is the bit where the old pros — and maybe one eager rookie — get together for one last job. I’m thinking of movies like The Magnificent Seven, or The Return of the Magnificent Seven, or the first five minutes of the under-appreciated Extreme Prejudice. The collection of experts at the beginning of The Andromeda Strain is a great variant of the genre and so is the whole “There’s an Animal in Trouble” theme song from the Wonderpets and the first half of The Blues Brothers. But perhaps more apt would be the hunt for, or reuniting of, veteran grifters for a long con, like in The Sting or the Ocean’s Eleven franchise.

    Anyway, the ChappaDataQuitIt or E-PotDome story (okay, we’re still looking for a better nickname) reminds me of those kinds of movies. The silent whistle has been blown. The sleepers activated. The old timers have been notified. I like to imagine Lanny Davis right in the middle of a meeting with an African dictator when, suddenly, his assistant hands him a note. All it reads is “Cankles Is Down.” Lanny abruptly terminates the meeting, pushes back a briefcase full of krugerrands, and races to some hellish Third World airport, telling his aide, “Let the Redskins know they’re on their own. The Clintons need me.”

    Flash to a canoe on the banks of the bayou. James Carville has just caught a catfish with his bare hands and proceeds to tear apart the wriggling fish, Gollum-like. He eats the entrails first. Then, suddenly, a flare goes off above the tree line. That’s the signal. He throws the bulk of the carcass into the river, where gators churn the water to grab it now that the apex predator has departed. He makes his way to the shoulder of a dirt road where a limousine is waiting to get him to an MSNBC studio as fast as possible. His suit and tie, neatly pressed, are waiting for him along with as many hot towels as he may need to remove the fish viscera.

    David Brock slinks out of his leather onesie and races to his command center, bustling with Dorito-dust frosted 20-somethings at computer terminals. “This is a level-one-alpha scenario. Cancel all leave. Turn off all X-boxes . . .”

    Sidney Blumenthal, consciously dressed like that French guy in The Matrix, leaves his table-for-one, and heads home to sacrifice some creatures to Baal in preparation.

    They’re all coming home.

    Save for one. Poor Geraldo Rivera, locked in a reinforced steel cage deep in the bowels of News Corp, is pacing his cell like a vampire’s familiar ordered to return to his master but unable to. The sounds of his howling, can be heard, ever so faintly, in the background during the O’Reilly Factor. Poor Greg Gutfeld has been tasked with keeping him locked up and is using his cattle prod a bit more than necessary . . .

    And scene.

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415386/its-hillary-all-way-down-jonah-goldberg

  82. hwc
    March 15, 2015 at 11:01 pm
    I would take Klein’s fantasies with a big grain of salt. He’s a fiction writer…
    ——–
    Many people would agree with you.

    “Klein has been criticized for his biography of Hillary Clinton, titled, The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She’ll Go to Become President, which was released on June 21, 2005. Politico criticized the book for “serious factual errors, truncated and distorted quotes and overall themes [that] don’t gibe with any other serious accounts of Clinton’s life.”[6] The book was attacked not only by liberals, but by conservatives as well. John Podhoretz wrote in the New York Post, “Thirty pages into it, I wanted to take a shower. Sixty pages into it, I wanted to be decontaminated. And 200 pages into it, I wanted someone to drive stakes through my eyes so I wouldn’t have to suffer through another word.”[7] In National Review James Geraghty wrote, “Folks, there are plenty of arguments against Hillary Clinton, her policies, her views, her proposals, and her philosophies. This stuff ain’t it. Nobody on the right, left, or center ought to stoop to this level.”[8]

  83. I certainly wouldn’t be shocked to learn that Jarrett and others in the White House torpedoed Clinton, but all the quotes from Bill Clinton and “sources” are complete fabrications, IMO.
    ———
    Then again, others besides Klein are saying the same thing. And, it not only makes sense, but it is perfectly in character. And, lest we forget, even today many people refuse to believe what the Obama campaign did to Bill and Hillary in South Carolina, even after it was documented by Sean Wilentz in this article on Obama entitled Race Man. It gets back to what I said yesterday—ideologues, ignoranti and radical chic people jumped on the Obama bandwagon, and they cannot get off. Rather than admit the truth, they are in a state of abject denial which makes them look more than a little deranged.

  84. I recall hearing right after 2008 primary was stolen that Bill had made the statement to some of Hillary’s supporters that there was much to tell about Team Obama and the Dims, and that he would disclose some of the details in January, 2009.

    I can’t remember on which Hillary blog or forum this was mentioned or which of her supporters posted it. Nor can I recall whether the supporter who posted it heard the statement directly from Bill or if it was sec on or third hand info.

    Does anyone else recall having heard this? My recollection is vague, but the impression was that Bill was pissed and was not going to keep quiet and pretend all was well. Of course, when no further info was forthcoming from Bill as I recall the discussion, there was speculation from the other bloggers that Bill could not fulfill his promise to set the record straight because Hillary had agreed to serve as SOS to the SOB, and Bill had to refrain from stirring things up.

    My guess is that this story was just wishful thinking on all our parts. Just wondered if anyone else remembered this.

  85. I think it’s more than likely that Val-Jar was the architect of the whole e-male issue and others. Regardless of who in O’s WH orchestrated and executed the various attempts to take Hillary out, it originated at the WH or from some of O’s peeps outside the whore house that the WH has become.

    Even if the Pubs were not informed of the issue by WH operatives, and that’s a big IF, MSM would never have agreed to air such a report without first seeking Barack’s permission. No doubt Barack not only gave his permission, he was already aware it would be sought. His hand was guiding media’s reporting of this non-scandal.

    That said. The framing of some of the statements within the Klein report seems suspect. How likely does it seem that Bill’s friend who allegedly leaked the info to Klein would have said “The Obamas”? Is Meechelle that big a player – except in her own mind? In disclosing his concerns to his friend, would Bill have assigned even partial blame to her, as the term “The Obamas” would imply? Just doesn’t seem likely to me.

    I also question that bit about BO, MO, and Val-Jar calling Hillary in for a meeting to tell her that Barack was remaining neutral. Klein previously reported – at least I think he was the source – that when O first started making public comments, hinting at his withdrawal of support for a 2016 run by Hillary, Bill was livid, went to see Barack, and read him the riot act. The source of this info stated that Bill had agreed to campaign for O in 2012 ONLY if Barack would guarantee he would back Hillary in 2016.

    That report of Bill feeling “betrayed” by O (which He and Hillary had been from the beginning) had a few holes, one being that it seems unlikely that either Bill or Hillary would have actually trusted Barack to keep his word to begin with. I don’t see Bill being at all surprised when Barack’s attitude toward Hillary became much less than positive, especially after he had gotten what he needed from Bill – and had already been reelected. Where’s the motivation for him to keep his word? As I recall, it was at this alleged meeting between Bill and Barack, that, according to Klein’s “source”, as reported by Klein, Barack allegedly said that his own wife might even want to run, and would do a good job. The new chatter about a – god forbid – MO candidacy may seem a real possibility to Barack and Valerie. .

    On second thought, with the increased talk of a MO run, maybe it’s not so surprising that she has figured prominently in some of the statements made in Klein’s reports.

    Who knows if the report of the meeting between Bill and Barack regarding his failure to keep his part of the bargain is true. As I said, I think it came from Klein. But, it doesn’t follow that after Bill though Barack betrayed him after Bill campaigned for him, he would have be at all surprised about the email allegations.

    It just doesn’t all add up, to me. But, I’ve been wrong before.

  86. freespirit
    March 15, 2015 at 11:27 pm

    I remember hearing something similar, not sure about when, and I don’t remember the details now.

    I do know, that the Clinton’s are more aware of what has been going on, more so than any of us do. The question isn’t if they know who is backstabbing them and has been since 2007, but when and how will they leak this information out.\?

    I also know that if Hillary runs and becomes our President, she will have her hands full trying to clean up Baracko’s disastrous pResidency and probably won’t waste much of her time shoveling shit at him.

  87. GOOD MORNING, H44! RISE AND SHINE!

    I just got hold of something that’s going to press this morning thought I would post it here to lighten your day:

    16 MAR 2015 @ 7:35 AM GMT

    — BREAKING NEWS —

    AFP, AP and REUTERS have all just received a Telex from a source that cannot be localized, claiming to be Almighty God.

    Since we cannot second-source the dispatch, we present it verbatim and decline any responsibility for its content. The dispatch reads as follows:

    16 MAR 2015 @ 6:31 AM GMT

    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: STOP

    WE HEREBY DECLARE, ON THE BASIS OF MATURE CONTEMPLATION OF ALL PERTINENT EVENTS ON EARTH STEMMING FROM THE KNOWN SINGULARITY OF 26 OCT 1947, THAT:

    (1) BARRING UNTIMELY DEATH, HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON SHALL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. STOP

    (2) WE CONCLUDE FROM HER GOOD GENERAL STATE OF HEALTH, THEN, THAT THE ONLY HUMAN OR OTHER MATERIAL MEANS OF PREVENTING HER FROM BECOMING PRESIDENT IS: ASSASSINATION STOP

    SIGNED Q.E.D. ETC.,

    IN THE NAME OF THE ALMIGHTY GODS IN HEAVEN INC., MILKY WAY STOP STOP

    In light of the bizarre nature of this terse dispatch; the boldness of its claims; the possibly divine source that in fact could not even be localized, coming “out of the blue”, so to speak, we asked AFP to press the “reply” button and return a set of questions to the sender, in French, to check if the supposedly divine sender was aware of any other human languages.

    These are the questions AFP sent back:

    16 MAR 2015 @ 6:58 AM GMT

    TO THE ATTENTION OF Q.E.D. ETC. @ THE ALMIGHTY GODS IN HEAVEN INC.: STOP

    POUR VALIDER VOTRE DEPECHE D’AUJOURD’HUI @ 6:31 AM GMT, NOUS VOUS PRIONS DE BIEN VOULOIR REPONDRE AUX QUESTIONS SUIVANTES, SVP, AU NOM DE TOUS VOS COLLABORATEURS : STOP
    [Free translation: “Please answer the following questions on behalf of The Almighty Gods in Heaven Inc., to clarify and validate your dispatch.”]

    (1) POURQUOI PENSEZ-VOUS QUE QUELQU’UN IRAIT JUSQU’A ASSASSINER HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (HRC) ?
    [Free translation: “Do you think HRC is actually in danger of assassination? Would anyone go as far as to do that?”]

    (2) COMMENT SAVEZ-VOUS QUE HRC VEUT MEME SE PRESENTER POUR L’INVESTITURE DEMOCRATE, ETANT DONNE QU’ELLE N’A MEME PAS DECLARE SES INTENTIONS JUSQU’ICI ? STOP
    [Free translation: “How the hell do you know that HRC even wants to run for the Democratic nomination, no less President, considering she hasn’t even declared her candidacy yet?”]

    (3) COMMENT SAVEZ-VOUS D’AVANCE QUE HRC VA GAGNER L’INVESTITURE DEMOCRATE ? EN ETES-VOUS SI SUR DE CELA ? STOP
    [Free translation: “How the hell do you know she’ll get the Democratic nomination? Are really so sure of that?”]

    (4) COMMENT POUVEZ-VOUS DECLARER AVEC TANT DE SURETE QU’ HRC VA GAGNER L’ELECTION GENERALE DE NOVEMBRE 2016 ? STOP
    [Free translation: “What gives you the right to predict how the American people are going to vote, a year and a half ahead of time?”]

    (5) SAVEZ-VOUS D’AVANCE QUI SERA LE CHOIX DE HRC POUR LA VICE-PRESIDENCE ? SI OUI, COMMENT LE SAVEZ-VOUS ? ET QUELLE PERSONNE CHOISIRA-T-ELLE ? STOP
    [Free translation: “Do you know who her VP pick will be? If so, how do you know, and who will it be?]

    The above questions were answered in English by this Q.E.D. ETC. character within a minute after the questions were sent out — that is, instantaneously (in terms of normal human response times). This was the reply:

    16 MAR 2015 @ 6:44 AM GMT

    TO OUR DEAR IGNORANTI OF THE RESPECTED AFP, WITH COPY TO AP AND REUTERS: STOP

    THANK YOU FOR ASKING US THESE QUESTIONS STOP THE FOLLOWING ARE OUR DIRECT ANSWERS TO THEM, IN ORDER: STOP

    (1) TO BE FAIR ABOUT THIS QUESTION OF POSSIBLE ASSASSINATION, DEAR AFP, WE APPEAL ONLY TO YOUR ABILITY TO REASON DEDUCTIVELY, IN HEGELIAN FORMAT:

    THESIS: DEATH HAS A PROVEN RECORD FOR STOPPING PEOPLE FROM DOING WHAT THEY WANT STOP AGREED? STOP

    ANTI-THESIS: HRC WANTS TO DO SOMETHING THAT A LOT OF HILLARY HATERS WANT TO PREVENT HER FROM DOING, JUST AS A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTED TO STOP JFK FROM DOING WHAT THEY THOUGHT HE WANTED STOP AGREED? STOP

    SYNTHESIS: HILLARY HATERS HAVE SUFFICIENT MOTIVE FOR ASSASSINATING HRC, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO KNOW THEY CAN’T STOP HER ANY OTHER WAY. STOP Q.E.D. ETC. FULL STOP STOP

    (2) WE PARDON THE AFP FOR ASKING THIS SECOND QUESTION, SINCE COVERAGE OF THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCENE IS NOT ITS MAIN SOURCE OF NEWS OR REVENUE STOP

    HOWEVER, THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT HRC WANTS TO BECOME PRESIDENT AND WILL SEEK THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION SHOULD BE OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WHO IS EVEN SLIGHTLY AWARE OF AMERICAN POLITICS STOP SHAME ON YOU THERE STOP

    TO DEMONSTRATE: EVERYONE KNOWS HRC HAS ALREADY RUN FOR PRESIDENT BEFORE, AND THAT SHE HAS MADE NO EFFORT TO SHUT DOWN THE VARIOUS POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE SPRUNG SPONTANEOUSLY INTO BEING SINCE 2013, WITH THE PURPOSE OF ENCOURAGING HER TO RUN AGAIN, AND WITH THE ULTIMATE INTENTION OF HELPING HER FUTURE CAMPAIGN STOP

    FURTHERMORE, AS TO YOUR IMPLICATION THAT SHE MIGHT SEEK A NOMINATION OTHER THAN THE DEMOCRATIC ONE, WE LEAVE IT TO YOU TO RUMINATE THE SILLINESS OF SUCH A HYPOTHESIS STOP

    IT IS JUST AS SILLY TO HYPOTHESIZE THAT HRC MIGHT RUN AS AN INDEPENDENT OR START A PARTY OF HER OWN. THIS WOULD NOT BE IMPOSSIBLE OR COMPLETELY POINTLESS, TO BE SURE; BUT WHY SHOULD SHE GO TO THE TROUBLE OF DOING THAT, WHEN THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION IS HERS FOR THE ASKING? Q.E.D. ETC., WHICH LEADS TO YOUR THIRD QUESTION FULL STOP

    (3) THE AFP WILL PLEASE PARDON US; BUT WE CANNOT HELP BUT ROLL ON THE FLOOR AND LAUGH OUR DIVINE BUTTOXES OFF AT THIS LUDICROUS QUESTION STOP

    THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION IS HRC’S FOR THE ASKING, FIRSTLY, BECAUSE ALMOST ALL DEMOCRATS OF NOTE ARE ALREADY ASKING HER TO TAKE THE NOMINATION — BEGGING HER, EVEN, BECAUSE SHE IS THEIR ONLY CHANCE OF KEEPING THE WHITE HOUSE AND REGAINING SOME SEATS IN CONGRESS.

    SECONDLY, THERE ARE NO OTHER VIABLE CANDIDATES FOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION STOP

    MIGHT YOU BE THINKING OF WIGWAM WOMAN? STOP : SORRY, BUT FEATHERHEAD LIZ HAS BEEN EFFECTIVELY NEUTRALIZED, BY HER OWN HAND AND BY HRC’S STOP

    THERE ARE JIM WEBB AND GOVERNOR O’MALLEY, YES, BUT THEY CAN SHOW NEXT TO NOTHING IN TERMS OF SUPPORT IN THE PARTY, OR IN NATIONAL NAME RECOGNITION, NOT TO SPEAK OF ANY CAMPAIGN FUNDS STOP

    AND LET’S NOT EVEN MENTION ANDREW CUOMO, WHO HAS ABOUT AS MUCH CHANCE OF GETTING THE NOMINATION AS ELIOT SPITZER WOULD HAVE 6 YEARS AGO STOP

    OF COURSE, THERE’S ALWAYS OLE JOE BIDEN STOP

    EVERYBODY LOVES A CLOWN, SO WHY NOT JOE? STOP

    SO, JOE MIGHT TAKE A CHANCE AND RUN STOP

    HE MIGHT EVEN GET THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION IF HRC GETS HERSELF ASSASSINATED STOP

    BUT IN THAT CASE, JOE WILL SPEND THE DAY AFTER THE 2016 ELECTION WITH JILL BY HIS SIDE, DROWNING HIS BROKEN CLOWN’S HEART IN A TUBFUL OF WHISKEY STOP

    MOST DEMOCRATS KNOW THAT WOULD BE THE FATE OF THEIR CLOWN VP, AND THAT’S WHY ONLY A HANDFUL OF OBOT NUTJOBS AND HILLARY HATERS ARE EVEN THINKING OF SUPPORTING HIM STOP

    EVERY DEMOCRAT WANTS A WIN IN 2016, SO, THE DEMOCRATS’ PICK HAS BEEN HRC SINCE 2013, IF NOT EARLIER, AND HRC’S CHANCES OF NOT GETTING THE NOMINATION ARE AN IMAGINARY SQUARE ROOT OF A NEGATIVE NUMBER Q.E.D. ETC. FULL STOP

    (4) AS TO THE “PREDICTION” OF AN HRC WIN IN NOV 2016, WE UNDERSTAND THE AFP’S DISBELIEF AND ARE NOT ASKING ANYBODY, NO LESS AFP, TO SUSPEND THEIR DISBELIEF; BUT THIS “PREDICTION” IS REALLY NO MORE THAN A STATEMENT OF FACT, REALLY STOP

    IT’S SOMETHING LIKE “PREDICTING” THAT THE SUN WILL RISE THIS MORNING: BARRING THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE SUN HAS EXTINGUISHED ITSELF DURING THE NIGHT, OR HAS DECIDED TO LEAVE US ON OUR OWN AND GO OFF INTO ORBIT AROUND SOME OTHER GALAXY, WE CAN PRETTY MUST ASSUME THAT THE SUN WILL BE RISING IN A FEW MINUTES — AT 7:34 AM GMT, IN FACT, AS WE CALCULATE IT ON THE BASIS OF APPROPRIATE ARITHMETIC APPLIED TO STATISTICS DATING BACK AT LEAST TO 26 OCT 1947 STOP

    SO, SAYING THAT THE SUN WILL RISE THIS MORNING IS NOT MUCH OF A PREDICTION, BUT RATHER A PEDANTIC FORMULATION OF WHAT EVERYBODY ALREADY “KNOWS” — THAT IS, A STATEMENT OF FACT STOP

    THIS STATEMENT IS JUST AS CLEAR TO US AS THE “PREDICTION” OF HRC WINNING THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION STOP

    0WE CAN HEAR YOU SAY, IN YOUR MIND, “BUT HER POTENTIAL ADVERSARYIES WON’T BE THE SAME AS THOSE IN THE DEMOCRATIC CAMP! AND NOBODY KNOWS WHO THEY WILL BE ANYWAY!” STOP

    YOUR OBJECTION RINGS TRUE, BECAUSE WE INDEED CANNOT PREDICT EXACTLY WHO HRC’S ADVERSARIES WILL BE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION STOP

    HOWEVER, THE POTENTIAL ADVERSARIES ON THE REPUBLICAN BENCH HAVE ALREADY BEEN BROUGHT OUT TO BROAD DAYLIGHT, BOTH BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND BY EACH OF THE POTENTIAL CANDIDATES, SOME OF WHOM ARE ALREADY RUNNING STOP

    A DETAILED INVENTORY OF THE DRAWBACKS TO EACH OF THESE CANDIDATES WOULD BE TOO TEDIOUS TO GO INTO IN OUR REPLY TO YOUR QUESTION STOP

    RATHER, WE ASK YOU SIMPLY TO CONSIDER WHAT IT MEANS TO BELONG TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THESE DAYS; AND TO CONSIDER THAT MEMBERSHIP IN THAT PARTY IS ITSELF ENOUGH TO LOSE ANY ELECTION OPPOSING ANY REPUBLICAN TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, WHO WILL BE THE STANDARD-BEARER FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, BARRING, OF COURSE, HER UNLIKELY ASSASSINATION STOP

    THAT IS,

    THESE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES ALL ADHERE TO SOME FORM OF IDEOLOGY REFERENCING KNOWN “CONSERVATIVES” OF YESTERYEAR, THE LATEST AND MOST NOTORIOUS OF WHICH WAS THE PERNICIOUS RONALD RAYGUN STOP

    DESPITE THE VISIBLE HARM THAT RAYGUN BROUGHT UPON CALIFORNIA AND THEN UPON THE COUNTRY, SOME REPUBLICANS STILL BELIEVE THAT RAYGUN’S POLICIES WOULD BE A WELCOME RESPITE FROM OBOLA’S DOWNRIGHT TREASONOUS DEEDS STOP

    WHILE IT MAY BE TRUE THAT RAYGUN WAS LESS DAMAGING TO THE COUNTRY THAN OBOLA, OBOLA WILL DEFINITELY NOT BE ON THE TICKET IN 2016; SO VOTERS WILL NOT BE FORCED TO DECIDE BETWEEN DEVIL AND DEEP BLUE SEA THIS TIME AROUND STOP

    TO MAKE MATTERS WORSE FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, SOME OF ITS COMPONENTS ARE FIGHTING FOR RECOGNITION OF POLICIES PREDATING REAGAN STOP

    NAMELY, THE “TEA PARTY” SEEMS INTENT ON RE-ESTABLISHING THE AMERICA OF THE IMMEDIATE POST-WAR ERA AND, TO BOOT, IMPOSING A “BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT” THAT WOULD HAMSTRING ANY GOVERNMENT EFFORTS TO HONOR ITS OWN FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS STOP

    THEN THERE’S THE “LIBERTARIAN PARTY”, WHICH OPENLY EXPRESSES THE DESIRE TO DOWNSIZE THE US GOVERNMENT AND ITS BUREAUCRACY, AND THEREFORE THE LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT BUREACRACY UPHOLDS, TO THE SIZE OF THE US GOVERNMENT AS IT STOOD AT THE TIME OF GEORGE WASHINGTON — THAT IS, PRACTICALLY NOTHING STOP

    IN VIEW OF THE OBVIOUSLY OUTLANDISH DESIDERATA OF THESE EXTREMIST WINGS OF THEIR PARTY, THE REPUBLICAN “ESTABLISHMENT” HAS CALLED FOR THE SERVICES OF CATCHER’S MITT ROMNEY ONCE AGAIN, OR OF ”SOMBRERO JEB” SHRUB3 STOP

    ABOUT THESE TWO CHARACTERS: ROMNEY HAS APPARENTLY DOFFED THE MITT FOR GOOD; AND WE WONDER IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE STUPID ENOUGH TO SEE ANY ADVANTAGE TO ELECTING “SOMBRERO JEB” TO TAKE OVER FROM “HABIB OBOLA” IN THE HIGHEST OFFICE OF THE LAND STOP

    SO, NO ONE ON THE REPUBLICAN BENCH CAN HOLD A BURNED-OUT CANDLE TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, WHO HAS DONE HER HOMEWORK AND MADE HER JUDGEMENTS ON THE PAST, AND WILL BE PROPOSING SOLUTIONS TO TODAY’S PROBLEMS WITH AN EYE TO THE FUTURE, AS SHE HAS ALWAYS DONE STOP

    NOW, THERE IS NO SURVIVING ICE CUBE FROM HELL THAT CAN TELL US THAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE ANY VIABLE PLANS FOR THE FUTURE THAT THEY CAN FEED INTO SOME SACRIFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE TO GET HIM ELECTED STOP

    WE SAY THIS, BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN FISHING AROUND FOR FIVE YEARS NOW, TRYING TO FIND SOME ALTERNATE NARRATIVE TO OBOLA’S, AND HAVE FAILED MISERABLY EVEN IN THAT SIMPLE TASK STOP

    THOUGH THE TYPICAL AMERICAN VOTER MAY NOT BE A GENIUS, THERE IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT HE IS NOT AN IMBECILE EITHER, TO THE POINT OF CHOOSING SOME VANILLA REPUBLICAN OVER HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON STOP

    SO: HRC WINS IN 2016, Q.E.D. ETC. FULL STOP

    (5) AS TO HRC’S VP PICK, IT’S AN INTERESTING QUESTION BUT WE DON’T KNOW FOR SURE STOP

    HOW CAN WE KNOW THIS? NOT EVEN HRC HERSELF KNOWS FOR SURE! STOP

    WHEN SHE DECIDES, THOUGH, WE WILL BE AMONG THE FIRST TO KNOW BECAUSE TEAM HILLARY WILL BE IN ON IT, AND WE HAVE EARS AND EYES ON TEAM HILLARY’S HEART AND MIND STOP

    BUT WE WON’T TELL ANYONE, INCLUDING YOU, IN ADVANCE OF HER ANNOUNCEMENT, BECAUSE OUR CODE OF ETHICS PREVENTS US FROM DISCLOSING ANY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION STOP

    IN OTHER WORDS, SHE HERSELF WILL MAKE THE ANNOUNCEMENT AND THEN ALL OF YOU WILL KNOW STOP

    WE HOPE WE HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTIONS TO YOUR SATISFACTION STOP

    WE REMAIN FAITHFULLY YOURS,

    SIGNED Q.E.D. ETC. IN THE NAME OF THE ALMIGHTY GODS IN HEAVEN, MILKY WAY STOP FULL STOP

    The above was the entire reply from Q.E.D. ETC.

    AFP reported that the Sun had already risen by 7:34 am GMT, so The Almighty Gods in Heaven Inc. didn’t calculate the sunrise right wrong. The “gods” got it wrong.

    But we are sending out this dispatch at 7:35 am GMT anyway, because AFP attributed this solar scheduling error to the probability that The Almighty Gods in Heaven Inc. is located somewhere outside the GMT zone; and AFP also pointed out that The Almighty Gods had nonetheless accurately predicted that the Sun was going to rise this morning [sic.!]; and so far the prediction has already held true for about half the world already, as of 7:34 am GMT [sic. too: we have checked this with many sources].

    We’ll just have to wait till sunrise in the eastern U.S. to see if this amazing prediction also holds for America. The way things are falling apart in the America with the country barely recognizable any more, we’ll just have to wait and see.

    Until later in the day, then, we repeat that the above declarations and answers to our questions came “out of the blue”, so we cannot confirm their veracity and cannot be held liable for any predictions not fit to print.

  88. In Bibi I trust..Worried obamasoroshamas connections might actually defeat him.
    Freaking can’t stand it

    Can the Hebrew people be that dumb?

  89. hwc

    March 15, 2015 at 11:06 pm

    Jonah Goldberg has a hilarious take down of Hillary’s surrogates on the e-mail trail:
    *****************************************

    silly me…when I read the opening I thought the writer would declare the ‘silent whistle’ would awaken all the press, on all sides, lying in wait for their cue to unite and go after the take down of Hillary Clinton…

    but then, of course, the writer is Jonah Goldberg

    …the irony being that the purpose of the press now is to dare anyone to be fair to Hillary…if anyone dares to try to “see her side” they are shouted down…and dismissed…you have heard of the concept of ‘shaming fat people’ “shame slutting”, etc…
    …well we are now in the era of ‘shame Hillary’…

    the race is on to try to make her a joke and strip her of any of her life’s work and accomplishments…the meme that must be continually reinforced is ‘she is just one secretive, entitled, corrupt liar…’ ‘she must be made a criminal’

    Dowdie and Mika are so hyped up they will need therapy if/when Hillary becomes President…

    …they will not be happy until Hillary is convicted of a crime and behind bars…and with all her money confiscated in fines…

  90. …make that… ‘fat shaming’ ‘slut shaming’… ‘Hillary shaming’

    a concerted effort by both sides…

    that is what is going on as we read and speak…live and breathe…

  91. freespirit
    March 16, 2015 at 12:22 am
    ——-
    Politics is the endless manipulation of perceptions to hide the decline of this nation, as the parasites within and the enemy without slowly kill the host.

    The perception here is that this was a direct attack by Jarrett. Whether that is true in whole or impart does not matter. It is believable and that is all that counts.

    If the Clinton forces turn over the other cheek then they will find themselves in the same position as Obama is in outside the United States, not respected.

    The perception alone is enough to warrant a counter offensive. They say it is best served cold. But not too cold, lest the public forget. The Benghazi interview, or the emails may provide the proper line of attack. For now the public is more concerned about foreign affairs than they have been in a generation, and any proven failure by Obama on that score will be lethal to his legacy, and call into even greater doubt the validity of this sordid business with Iran.

  92. It’s no secret, because I’ve said it several times in the past: Il like Michelle Obama’s looks and general physique.

    Each time I expressed that appreciation, I got cheerful but negative feedback from women bloggers here at H44. Apparently, I’m allowed to be a feminist but I’m not supposed to like anything at all about Michelle Obama.

    A few weeks ago, some H44 blogger (foxyladi14? Dunno) posted a video of Michelle Obama on the Letterman show. My reaction was apparently well received, because it was a negative one:

    “Things I like about Me-Shell Obama:

    (1) She’s not President…
    (2) … and never will be (fingers crossed)….
    (6) … She looks great as long as she has bangs covering her face like on the Letterman Show….”

    Things (1) and (2) were good-faith comments, but comment (6) was not in good faith. It was facetious, meant to get a laugh from women who don’t like anything about Me-Shell, including her looks. Honestly, though, I have always liked her looks.

    Then foxyladi14 posted another video the other day, with MO welcoming people to a WH party to celebrate some time-honored feast.

    That time, I reacted in full honesty and good faith, explaining why I thought MO’s remarks were a class act worthy of a politician of HRC’s caliber, and that all MO would need is a few years in elective office espousing some sensible ideas, for me to consider voting for her. I also repeated for the umpteenth time that I liked MO’s looks.

    Apparently, the women at H44 didn’t see any value in my remarks, and the one man who reacted doesn’t seem to have understood anything because I don’t understand his comment. These are their reactions:

    foxyladi14 March 13, 2015 at 10:38 am

    Jes!! I do not argue with lawyers.
They are far too clever for Idgits like me.

    freespirit March 13, 2015 at 11:52 am

    I’m guessing the reason foxy used an “emoticon denoting bewilderment” about MO and her speech was because she didn’t have one denoting the level of disgust, anger, and frustration that most of us feel about her.

    Jes, there’s no need for a follow-up answer to this comment, it’s rhetorical. WTF is wrong with you?

    Tony Stark March 13, 2015 at 2:59 pm

    freespirit…: Maybe Jes just needs a software update and reboot.

    foxyladi14 March 13, 2015 at 2:44 pm

    freespirit: Nailed it, Free!!! [emoticon denoting smile of joy]

    Concerning foxyladi14’s first reaction (10:38 am), I take it as an enormous compliment that anybody would think I argue like a lawyer. In legalese, “to argue” ⇔ “to reason”, i.e., not “to have a shouting match” in the everyday sense of “argue”.

    Reasoning is indeed what I try to do in every post, and perhaps I succeed more than many others because I’m in the habit of translating legal documents, including the legal arguments that the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ lawyers lay before the judge.

    However, I have never studied the law per se and am not a lawyer. In fact, I’m glad I’m not a lawyer: I find the profession a tad too unethical for my tastes. I’m only a translator. So, foxyladi14, I’m an Idgit (whatever that means…) like you and we can talk reasonably together.

    freespirit takes a stab at why foxyladi14 used an “emoticon denoting bewilderment”, which foxyladi14 herself confirms at 2:44 pm. freespirit’s explanation is that there are no emoticons denoting what foxyladi14 felt, which was “the level of disgust, anger, and frustration that most of us [who’s “us”] feel about [Michelle Obama].”

    Now, despite Tony Stark’s comment that I need a “software update and reboot,” the same emoticons are available on my Safari navigator as there are available on Windows machines and Internet Explorer or Firefox.

    The only reason I don’t use these emoticons at H44 is because, for some reason, they can’t be transferred from Safari to the Comment window at H44. Dunno why, but that’s why I indicated the emoticon by the words “denoting bewilderment” — I couldn’t re-insert the same emoticon even though I have it on Safari.

    No software update is going to change this. Believe me, the Mac OS is a world of its own, and there are actually very few non-Apple programs that can be loaded into it.

    My point is that there are plenty of emoticons denoting “disgust, anger and frustration” on Safari, Internet Explorer or Firefox. Whatever navigator foxyladi14 uses, it has emoticons denoting these emotions and if one is not enough, then she could have used two or three to even greater effect.

    But she didn’t. She used an emoticon denoting bewilderment, and the text “Yes, she said that!” also denotes bewilderment. About what? That’s the mystery.

    So, sorry to say, but from one Idgit to another, foxyladi14’s “Nailed it, Free” is disingenuous.

    I gather that, somewhere, somehow, foxyladi14 understood my analysis of the video was right and was embarrassed to admit it.

    So, at first, foxyladi14 said she didn’t want to argue with someone who talked like a lawyer, to cut the discussion short.

    Then, seeing freespirit’s championship of the standing H44 negativity toward MO, foxyladi14 chimed in with:

    “Yes, you’ve nailed it!” meaning: “I, foxyladi14, am disgusted, angry and frustrated with all the bad things MO stands for. In fact, I was so disgusted, angry and frustrated that I couldn’t find an emoticon to express any of those things, so I chose one that denoted bewilderment.”

    Sorry, Ms Idgit, that line of argument won’t work on me. It shouldn’t work on freespirit either, because freespirit is too honest with herself to let disgust, anger and frustration (anxiety) get her down.

    I think that’s really true about freespirit. And yet, I get from freespirit:

    WTF is wrong with you?

    freespirit (and any others who are asking themselves the same question); I’m well aware there’s something wrong with me, and it tickles me Big Pink to have you ask what it is. That gives me a chance to spill my guts a little:

    But, rather than go through that whole psychoanalytical stuff and prove that the same thing’s been wrong with me since at least age 4, I’d just like to point to a symptom of my disease that should be apparent to anybody who read the first 15 or so lines of my post at 7:09 am this morning, “GOOD MORNING, H44! RISE AND SHINE” etc.

    That entire post was clear evidence of the disease that besets me:

    The disease begins with an arm’s-length view of myself, which is a pretty good thing for anybody to do, because it avoids the needs for psychoanalytical help. You do this yourself, freespirit, and apparently it does you nothing but good.

    But this arm’s-length view has gone way, way out of proportion in my case. In fact, arm’s length is about as close as I ever get to myself, because in fact I don’t care about myself much. That’s visible in my physical appearance:

    When we go out for dinner or something, my soulmate has to spend about 10 minutes coaching me on things like washing my hands and face, rubbing spots and cat’s fur off my clothes, and shaving. I do all these things at her behest —, but mechanically, like a robot, because I don’t want to offend my soulmate or other people.

    That’s still only the beginning of what’s wrong with me. Having no interest in myself, I take a much deeper interest in other people — even fictional characters — and try to see them at closer than arm’s length. In other words, I assume other people’s personalities.

    This should be evident in the post at 7:09 am:

    I start off with two lines written by me the blogger, but as if I were the radio host of “Good Morning Vietnam!” Already, I’m not myself.

    Then, in the gray/pink portions of the post, I pretend I’m a newscaster who doesn’t know what to make of a mysterious dispatch received on the press agency telex.

    In the pink portions of the post, I present myself at the spokesman for The Almighty Gods, named Q.E.D. ETC., that is a god capable of incontrovertible deductive mathematical thought.

    Then, in another pink portion, I assume the role of a press agency that wants to check its sources, which therefore acts as an interviewer interrogating Q.E.D. ETC., only to switch back to the role of Q.E.D. ETC. in order to answer the questions with deadpan — a humor that may have escaped many of the readers, but who could miss the deadpan humor in the “Thesis” here:

    Q:
    “Do you think HRC is actually in danger of assassination? Would anyone go as far as to do that?”

    A:
    Thesis: Death has a proven record of preventing people from doing what they want.

    Antithesis: HRC wants to do something that a lot of Hillary haters want to prevent her from doing.

    Synthesis: Hillary haters therefore have sufficient motive for assassinating HRC — especially those who know they can’t prevent her from getting what she wants any other way. Q.E.D. ETC.

    Now, I’m not the only person in the world who can put themselves in other people’s shoes like this — for the time it takes to write a play, a screenplay, a movie script or novel, or even to paint portraits and other seemingly harmless things like that.

    Where this all gets into the twilight zone circling around the loony bin drain is when I convince myself I’m somebody else.

    For example, you know I’m some kind of whackjob male feminist, right? As such, I actually spend a lot of time, while walking the dog (I don’t like dogs), imagining that I’m a woman with better things to do, than to be out walking somebody else’s dog.

    While I’m living this hermaphrodite existence of this female jes, body parts and all, I’ll cross paths with another resident who recognizes the dog and me and says, “Hello, Sir.”

    I immediately double-take the “Sir” and it takes me a second or more to realize that I’m delirious; and then the other person is gone before I can say “Hello, Sir” or “Hello, Ma’am.” — because the way of addressing an acquaintance on the street is different in French, depending on whether the speaker himself is a man or a woman. So, to make matters worse, I get confused about the other person’s gender.

    Result: Most people take me for someone who is either unfriendly or impolite, because all I say is “Hi…” a second after the person is already out of earshot.

    Now you can see why, depending on the depth of my delirium and the context, I sometimes make statements that other people take to be those of a madman, and why I was hospitalized for psychiatric treatment a half-dozen times between 2001 and 2008.

    That’s WTF is wrong with me.

    (I’ve been contributing at H44 only since 2008, though. The delirium is still there, as you can see from the post at 7:09 am; but it’s under control.)

  93. Kerry mispoke. 😀

    The State Department scrambled Sunday to give assurances that comments by Secretary of State John Kerry did not indicate a shift in the administration’s view of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his future.

    Remarks in a CBS News interview in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt were interpreted by some as signaling a softening of the long expressed stance that, given regime abuses, the huge death toll and humanitarian suffering resulting

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/state-dep-t-kerry-didn-t-say-us-would-sit-down-assad

  94. freespirit March 16, 2015 at 10:35 am

    Jes, I’m speechless – and that’s not a frequent occurrence.

    I know it’s not a frequent occurrence for you; but I hope it doesn’t become a permanent state any time soon, because you’re a nice lady when you’re speechless but I like you even more when you speak out.

    Speechless as you are at this moment, you remind me of both my grandmothers, who are both permanently speechless now, since Death put an end to their dreams of reaching the age of 100, and by the same token rendered them speechless forever, thereby depriving me of the wisdom of the ages.

    When you speak out, you are the sister I never had; the wife I never had; the daughter I never had; and the mother I should have had.

    In my mother’s permanent speechless state, now, her black soul may learn some important lessons in Purgatory, if such a place exists in an alternate virtual universe, and may her soul stay there at least until Death silences me too. Only then may she join my grandmothers at the right hands of The Almighty Gods Inc. in Heaven, where I know they are speaking once again — they speak to me often.

Comments are closed.