The Book On Hillary Is 44

We’re still disgusted. We began the month at Peak Disgust. We continue to peak.

This past Sunday was our anniversary. On April 19, 2007 we published our first article. We are so disgusted that we just could not post a celebratory article to celebrate our eighth year birthday. It’s almost as if nothing has changed except for much worse.

Today, some sense oozed out of Hillary’s mouth, which made ours smile just a bit. This was the astounding declaration:

She also took issue with economic views expressed by members of her own party, offering a dark assessment of a “stalled out” U.S. recovery, a judgment at odds with President Barack Obama’s brighter view of what the nation has achieved on his watch.

It’s not even piss thinned gruel. The economy is stalled and guess who is responsible for that? Hint: it’s not the Republicans at fault.

Instead of strong denunciations of Obama policies that hurt Americans we get talk about a “stalled out” recovery. That’s sure to have voters run to the polls.

In our last article we cited a report about Bill Daley’s latest remarks about the economy:

The press is beginning to notice the economic recovery is stalling[snip]

Manufacturing is declining, and consumers are not spending despite a huge cash infusion from cheap gas prices,” Politico cautioned. “The housing market remains relatively weak. And while the jobless rate is close to where it was before the financial crisis, middle class incomes are not rising, the size of the labor force remains near a 30-year low and few economists see prospects for much faster growth on the horizon.”

After years in which the popular American press sang Barack Obama’s praises for the economic recovery he engineered, the news media is finally beginning to notice that not everyone is benefiting from this supposed economic revitalization. Though it strained to express hope in the future, The New York Times was forced to concede in January that the middle class is shrinking at a terrifying rate. That report also noted that social welfare programs like Social Security and Medicare, “originally set up as safety nets to protect seniors from falling into poverty after retirement,” now serve as a backstop against absolute destitution for millions of Americans. [snip]

“Hillary Clinton’s challenge is going to be to come up with different plans,” Daley said after being prodded to respond to the economic failures of the Obama era. “She can’t run for the third term of Barack Obama economically.”

Today’s weak statement from Hillary in New Hampshire is not enough. Sooner or later Hillary will have to draw a line between herself and Obama on the economy. Sooner or later Hillary will have to denounce the Obama economy. It better be sooner or it will be too late.

In the 2008 election cycle we repeatedly suggested the Hillary Clinton campaign take Obama on directly. What we got was one single solitary mention of Rezko by the candidate herself. That was it.

Only after disaster struck in Iowa, the Ted Kennedy treachery exploded on the front pages and rallies for Obama, did the Hillary Clinton campaign awaken from slumber. After it became clear that the establishment and the left were out to get rid of Hillary and Bill and bury them forever did the country at large see the Hillary that so many respect.

But it was too late.

Also for a long time now we have been writing that the left will try to destroy Hillary. The left will never allow their Obama revolution to fade into a Clinton restoration. For the left the battle is about control of the party not necessarily winning an election. All the left needs is a chump to take Hillary on and wound her sufficiently that she loses either the nomination or the general election.

The left would like to take the nomination from Hillary even if they have to run one candidate to weaken her then the real candidate comes in to finish her off. It’s the 1968 scenario we’ve previously discussed.

The left might have found their chump if you believe this report: De Blasio wants to be drafted into an anti-Hillary presidential campaign:

It is hard to underestimate de Blasio’s capacity for self-delusion, but I might have done just that. According to The New York Post’s well-connected reporter Fredric Dicker, de Blasio is hoping to spark a draft movement that would lead his fellow progressives to draw him into a presidential race against Clinton.

“De Blasio’s hope, the operative said, is a ‘Draft de Blasio’ movement will develop among progressive activists over the next several months that will lead to the mayor being able to defeat Clinton in the primary elections next year in much the same way leftist Sen. George McGovern successfully challenged the initially front-running establishment Democratic candidate, Sen. Edmund Muskie, more than 40 years ago,” Dicker reported.

That’s a dubious precedent to cite. McGovern rode a wave of anti-war sentiment and the belief that he had been robbed of the nomination in 1968 to win his party’s nomination in 1972. Finally his party’s nominee, McGovern proceeded to lose 49 states to Richard Nixon. From de Blasio’s perspective, however, this is a perfect parallel. His campaign would be aimed at sending a message to the country rather than winning any tangible gains.

According to Dicker’s reporting, de Blasio’s will deploy all the tools that allowed him to overtake Democratic favorite and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn in the 2013 mayoral primary and apply them to the race in Iowa against Clinton.

The draft effort explains why de Blasio was accompanied last week on his “progressive” speech-making trip to Iowa by John Del Cecato, one of the nation’s most important Democratic communications strategists and the man responsible for the popular “Dante” TV spot that helped get de Blasio elected mayor, said the operative.

“Why would your ad maker be traveling with you in a non-campaign year? Why was he there with de Blasio in Iowa unless you’re trying for something bigger?’’ asked the operative.

For Del Cecato, an expert in Iowa politics and a longtime campaign adviser to President Obama, helping develop a draft effort for de Blasio may also be personal.

Whether the strategy is from 1968 or 1972 it’s still the same: destroy Hillary. And for those that think this is all so much rubbish, for leftists like De Blasio and the union funded Working Families Party who back De Blasio and earlier urged Elizabeth Warren to run, it all depends on the definition of “win”.

De Blasio is a loon. When Hillary and Bill attended the De Blasio inaugural we deemed that another mistake:

At first the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration made sense. After all why not throw the DailyKooks a bone and appear with DeBlasio? At first the idea of being seen with DeBlasio as a Kook sedative and lead them to at least accept the idea of Hillary Clinton 2016 and not fight it seems sensible. But they are not DailyKooks for nothing. At some point the DailyKooks and allies will agitate and then attack to “force Hillary to the left”. The DailyKooks and other assorted nuts have already begun pounding the drums in the deep which will eventually lead to all out attacks against Hillary.

Once the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration is fully considered however it was not a smart thing to do.

We were on target, again.

Another of our critiques over the year is the loathsome bias of Big Media and the lack of a comprehensive strategy by Hillary Clinton 2008/2016 to defeat Big Media. We can mock the ineffective wackadoodle tactics of Rand Paul’s attacks against Big Media but at least Rand Paul understands that the his enemy and the Republicans’ enemy is Big Media.

Big Media is also Hillary’s enemy. As we recently wrote in an attempt to stop an early announcement by Hillary, Big Media now openly declares it will do the job of the activist left:

Who will push Clinton into shape? The deadness of the Democratic contest has led to a situation in which the political world is trying to create an artificial rival for the former Secretary of State. The New York Times, for example, has declared the press to be Clinton’s stand-in opponent.

With no other powerful Democrats likely to run against her, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s toughest adversary for her party’s presidential nomination in 2016 has now become clear,” the paper wrote last week. “The news media,” the paper concluded, is Clinton’s only real opponent.

Anyone surprised then at today’s news?:

New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News strike deals for anti-Clinton research

The New York Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have made exclusive agreements with a conservative author for early access to his opposition research on Hillary Clinton, a move that has confounded members of the Clinton campaign and some reporters, the On Media blog has confirmed.

“Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” will debut on May 5. But the Times, the Post and Fox have already made arrangements with author Peter Schweizer to pursue some of the material included in his book, which seeks to draw connections between Clinton Foundation donations and speaking fees and Hillary Clinton’s actions as secretary of state. [snip]

In an article about the book on Monday, the Times said “Clinton Cash” was “potentially more unsettling” than other conservative books about Clinton “both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations including The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book.”

We suppose that these are the “Hillary Clinton revelations” that will “shock people” Rand Paul has been touting. The only people that will be shocked is People Magazine.

We regularly mock Rand Paul. This is one of the reasons why. A few paragraphs above we praised Rand Paul’s recognition that Big Media is his enemy. But that is not enough. Big Media is the enemy of everyone in the political process – especially the voters. The smart strategy for Rand Paul and all the Republican candidates for president, as well as for Hillary Clinton is to realize that Big Media is the enemy of all of them.

Rand Paul cannot expect to attack Big Media then chortle when Big Media does his bidding. Rand Paul is setting himself up to fail.

As to the new Hillary Clinton book, we are sure it will be the end of Hillary and Bill Clinton. “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” is sure to be a destructive bomb. We’re going to place the book on our bookshelves with the other books that destroyed Bill and Hillary Clinton.

On May 23, 2007 we wrote about the latest book that would destroy Hillary Clinton:

Big Media, Hillary Haters and campaign opponents are all atwitter about 2 books about to be published. They hope that these books will demolish the Hillary for President campaign.

We recall years ago when Tucker Carlson stated he would eat his shoe if Hillary’s upcoming autobiography Living History sold 1 million copies. Soon thereafter he was seen salting his booties at the dinner table. A few weeks ago the noise was about 2 other books about to be published that would sink the Hillary campaign. Did you know they have already been published? [snip]

In 2005 there were at least 3 books attempting to derail Hillary’s senate campaign. This year we have 2 books published already and another 2 books emerging in June. [snip]

We checked Amazon to see how many books have been published about Hillary. Here is a short list of some books about Hillary Clinton. [snip]

Here is a short list of some of the Hillary books we found:

Living History; A Woman In Charge: The Life Of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton and America’s Demise; The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy’s Dossier On Hillary Clinton; The Case for Hillary Clinton; The Case Against Hillary Clinton; The First Partner: Hillary Rodham Clinton; The Seduction of Hillary Rodham; Hillary’s Scheme: Inside the Next Clinton’s Ruthless Agenda To Take The White House; It Takes a Village; American Evita: Hillary Clinton’s Path To Power; Dear Socks, Dear Buddy: Kids’ Letters To the First Pets; The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She’ll Go To Become President; The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton; The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign To Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton; Historia Viva; Hillary Clinton: The Inside Story: Revised and Updated; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; Hillary Rodham Clinton: Polarizing First Lady (Modern First Ladies); I’ve Always Been a Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton In Her Own Words; State of a Union: Inside the Complex Marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton; The Hillary Clinton Voodoo Kit: Stick It to Her, Before She Sticks It to You; Can She Be Stopped?: Hillary Clinton Will Be the Next President of the United States Unless…; Hell To Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton, The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party; Hillary Rodham Clinton: What Every American Should know; The Empress Project; Target: In the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton; Clinton Websites: Five Official Archived White House Websites from 1993 through 2001; Ron Brown’s Body: How One Man’s Death Saved the Clinton Presidency and Hillary’s Future; Why The Clintons Belong in Prison; Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Big Sister Is Watching You: Hillary Clinton and the White House Feminists Who Now Control America — And Tell The President What To Do; God and Hillary Clinton: A Spiritual Life; Time Magazine August 28, 2006 – Hillary Clinton; The Unique Voice of Hillary Rodham Clinton: A Portrait In Her Own Words; Hillary Clinton (People In the News); Hillary – America’s First Dictator; 21st Century Guide To the Public Career of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton – Public Papers, Speeches, Work in Congress, Work as First Lady Hillary Clinton In the Clinton Administration, Senate Roll Call Votes (Core Federal Information Series); Clinton Confidential: The Climb To Power: The Unauthorized Biography of Bill and Hillary Clinton; The Rhetoric of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton: Crisis Management Discourse (Praeger Series In Political Communication); Hillary Clinton; Why Not Hillary?; Hillary Clinton’s Pen Pal: A guide to Life and Lingo in Federal Prison; Unshredded Files of Hillary Clinton; Senator Hillary Clinton Addresses AIPAC; Remarks and commentary by First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton — Vital Voices 1997-1999; Pareja de Damas (Hillary Clinton Y Ana Botella, estilos diferentes); Hillary’s Scheme: Hillary Clinton; Mrs. Clintons Czarist Past; Women Need To Be Very Smart About Their Image; Galeria; Biography – Clinton; Como Hillary Clinton; Die First Ladies Der USA Von Martha Washington bis Hillary Clinton; Warning Signs, Hillary Clinton Attempts To Rewrite History; Hillary Clinton – The Inside Story; Sunday Show Wrap-Up Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton Und Die Macht Der Frauen; Remarks and Commentary by First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Music Advocate; Honorable Hillary Clinton: Where is Village, Who is Child?; Hillary’s Secret War: Hillary Clinton; Hillary Clinton, die Machtigste Frau der Welt; La Double Vie de Hillary Clinton; Hillary Clinton and the Radical Left; Whitewash: What the Media Won’t Tell You About Hillary Clinton, But Conservatives Will; The Hillary Trap: Looking for Power in all the Wrong Places; Rating The First Ladies: The Women Who Influenced the Presidency; Civiliser La Democratie; The Girls In the Van: Covering Hillary; Liberal Fascism: the Totalitarian Temptation from Mussolini to Hillary Clinton; Hillary’s Turn: Inside Her Improbable, Victorious Senate Campaign; What Every American Should Know; Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter’s Story; An Invitation to the White House: At Home With History; Condi vs. Hillary: the Next Great Presidential Race; Everyday Matters: A Love Story; The Person Who Changed My Life: Prominent Americans Recall Their Mentors; Hillary In a Box; The International Human Rights of Women: Instruments of Change; The Clinton Wars; The First Lady: A Comprehensive View of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Breaking Barriers); Hillary’s Choice; Hillary Rodham Clinton: Profile of a Leading Democrat; Hillary Rodham Clinton: A First Lady For Our Time; Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton (A Yearling Biography); Hillarious: The Wacky Wit, Wisdom and Wonderment of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary’s Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Women of Achievement); Hillary Rodham Clinton: Activist First Lady; The Importance of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Women In Politics); Public Opinion, the First Ladyship, and Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton: First Lady and Senator; Hillary Rodham Clinton: A New Kind Of First Lady; A Woman In the White House: The Remarkable Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Leading Ladies); Final Report of the Independent Counsel; Meet Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary!: How America’s First Woman President Won The White House; We will end this list with that positive and prescient title.

The latest book on Hillary is not going to destroy Hillary. Only Barack Obama can do that.


177 thoughts on “The Book On Hillary Is 44

  1. “The latest book on Hillary is not going to destroy Hillary. Only Barack Obama can do that.”

    Only If Hillary allows it to happen and continues to ignore your advice, Admin.

  2. The scariest thing about the Crazy Left is their willingness to nominate someone who has a snow ball’s chance in hell of winning the GE – just to be able to defeat Hillary – as Admin said. Their push for One Drop to run was a pretty big clue to that. No way she could have won the presidency, and the progs knew it – still know it. They knew it about Warren. They know it about Bill De Blasio.

    They hold tightly to their same old text-book ideology, and believe anyone who disagrees with it to be just too stupid to get it. They’re smug. They’re cheap – as in no class, no real substance. They believe that any means necessary (ethical or not; legal or not) to accomplish their idealized, narrow minded, outdated end are more than justified.

    You can’t appeal to the sense of decency and patriotism – never mind common sense – of these nut jobs. They have none of these qualities. Hillary could adopt each and every view, belief, policy, – whatever – of Obama and these assholes would still stab her in the back, then throw her under the bus. I hope someone who is working on her campaign gets it.

    There needs to be an organized effort among her supports now, to begin to blast away at Bill De B , media, and anyone else who tries to get in the way of Hillary’s nomination. Those damn wimpy-ass progs may be tricky and sneaky, but they can be no where near as mad and determined as we Hillary supporters.

  3. deBlasio will never be able to hide that he would be Obama III, socialism on steroids. I don’t know how he got elected, because as I hear it, most New Yorkers can’t stand him. And since he got rid of Guiliani’s crime fighting tactics, NY is getting as bad as Chicago, especially with murders. He doesn’t have a chance.

  4. deBlasio has less chance of winning the Primary than his pal, Feather4Brains. The Kooks are just looking for another puppet that sings the far left Marxist blues on a tin harmonica.

    For deBlasio to ‘win’ by damaging Hillary would mean that he is not only taken seriously, but is an honorable man. (Only a handful of American’s believe that, and they are all family member)s.

    Admin -That list of books written about Hillary that you posted above, is astounding!

  5. Today’s weak statement from Hillary in New Hampshire is not enough. Sooner or later Hillary will have to draw a line between herself and Obama on the economy. Sooner or later Hillary will have to denounce the Obama economy. It better be sooner or it will be too late.
    This is why many of us here wanted her to distance herself from Obama long ago. By failing to heed that advice, she has unwittingly ceded that advantage to the Republican candidates, they now own the issue. And unless there is a terrorist attack within the United States the economy will be the central issue of the 2016 general election.

  6. The latest book on Hillary is not going to destroy Hillary. Only Barack Obama can do that.
    Only CLINGING to Obama can do that.

    His power is fading into pale irony, as his legacy is torn to tatters.

    He is a god that failed.

  7. For those in need of lots of laughs you need to go to DailyKooks. If you think you can’t watch Fox News because you don’t like their Hillary coverage go to DailyKooks and you’ll prefer Fox News.

    Here’s the outline of the story thus far: A Hillary supporter called Alegre posted a diary praising men who praise Hillary. Other Hillary supporters (such as Jen the Michigander who occasionally comments here) chimed in. The now with a 2 Campskunk, who valiantly defended Hillary against attacks in 2008, joined in the fun. Campskunk2 still knows how to goad the Kooks like a latter day Groucho Marx. Other Hillary supporters who fled the toxic swamp of the DailyKooks in 2008 apparently are ending the “strike” and slowly dipping their toes back into DailyKooksLand.

    Then the Hillary Haters join in the fun. The Hillary Hater squads of DailyKooks at first try to just be insulting. The Hillary defenders poke fun at them like we have, reminding the Hillary Haters that now they are Hillary fans after calling Hillary and Hillary supporters “racist” and “warmonger”. The entire article becomes an internet Marx Brothers film.

    If you need a lot of laughs check out the DailyKooks in their sulfurous site.

    You also get a sense of the mess the DailyKooks are in with this comment:

    I have no idea why Alegre (through you) posted this picture today, because it’s not going to do anything but inflame the ’07-’08 primary wars again.

    Nobody wants that. Things are screwed up enough on Dkos right now as it is. Like anyone needs to throw another goddamned log on the fire.

    You should really hold off on the fucking grudges from 5 years ago. Old enemies could potentially be your allies now, you don’t even know.

    (Well, not me. I generally despise Hillary Clinton but, ya know, other people.)

    And there is this attack on the returned exile Alegre (and presumably all other Hillary supporters):

    Yeah, strolling back in with arrogance after leaving because they got their feelings hurt because they were called on their racist bullshit. They are ones that turned myDD into a racist cesspool and we are supposed to be happy they are back? Hell, no. I am more than willing to let bygones be bygones on most blog wars but they went way too far when they engaged in and egged on the racists in 2007-08.

    By “egged on the racists” we presume this Kook means Bill and Hillary.

    This all is followed by complaints that the 2008 wars are back as some write that they never left. Others vow never to vote for Hillary.

    Don’t miss Campskunk2 turn the tables on the Hillary Haters by comparing their diary rating system to the KKKlan. There are threats of summary execution for returned Hillary supporter Linfar2 by the odious Hillary Hater Bob Johnson.

    Amidst all the fun we are sad to report that there are repeated references to good ol’ Big Pink. There’s even a link to our “ObamaRoids” article.

    There’s also a link to our Hall of Fame article from 2007 which was used to attack Hillary supporters. The attack came from none other than Nate Silver when he published under the name Poblano. That’s how biased Nate Silver’s “analysis” was in 2008. Because he was such a Hillary Hater the New York Times hired Silver and now he has a website under the auspices of ESPN, where Hillary Hater Keith Olbermann also works.

  8. Wbboei, you mention a possible terrorist attack or the economy as potential central issues in 2016.

    With Iranian and American warships circling each other in the middle east, Putin threatening nuclear war and moving in on the Baltics and the Balkans, and the problem of immigration in South Africa, Italy, and here, there are other issues that might become the central issue. If we make it to 2016 without getting blown up anything can happen and will.

  9. admin
    April 21, 2015 at 3:47 am

    From one of the comments on Big Orange Mess website: “My sister has a friend who was a foreign policy advisor to the Obama campaign, eight years ago, and from speaking to her (in retrospect) she may have been reading that site, recently. She’s worried about the impact to her career from having advised Obama if Hillary wins.”

    Are they really this stupid and clueless? Who in their right mind would hire Obama advisers on foreign policy? Or anything else for that matter. And I read in the WaPo that the DC real estate/housing market is going flat as the Obama-bots rush to leave town a year and a half before Obama.

  10. imho…seems to me it is obvious that Hillary is playing it safe for now…

    she is saying as little as possible re: anything O and just watching to see how the winds blow…

    she seems to not want to start any ‘headlines’ and wait out to see where O ends up in the polls as time goes by…

    she is in an awkward spot…she has the left and right media striving to take her down…

    she has @ 19 GOP ‘hopeful’ male Prez candidates essentially attacking her and avoiding attacking each other

    imo…these GOP hopefuls currently ARE her primary opponents all 19 of them

    ..she has the left planning another sabotage to take her out

    …she knows O and his crew will look for any opportunity to throw her under the bus

    …so what’s a girl to do?

    for now…she is going to the people…directly

    I watched some of her roundtables in NH yesterday on c-span…while some of it is dry…and not very exciting…I think she is achieving…for now…what she is setting out to do….

    she comes across interested…personable…approachable…concerned…

    she looks good…she smiles…she is engaged…

    …hardly the person all the “noise” is trying to define her as…

    …for now…

  11. I agree S that Hillary is laying low for the media, but is busy planning her attacks, building her infrastructure, army and future plans to fix the mess we are in after the tsunami that is left from the left and their BerryCakes.

    The few that are screaming to the cameras right now, are the folks that need and love the attention and have no real plans to fix anything.

  12. I watched some of her roundtables in NH yesterday on c-span…while some of it is dry…and not very exciting…I think she is achieving…for now…what she is setting out to do….
    she comes across interested…personable…approachable…concerned…
    she looks good…she smiles…she is engaged…

    Here’s the clip Drudge posted:

    The Dems better find somebody else. Hillary has become a YouTube meme.

  13. hwc…what is your point?

    Do you have another dem candidate you want to suggest to run instead of or against Hillary?

    what I would like to suggest is that the media and the dims start focusing on oppo research and exploitation re: the people Hillary will be running against…

    Why is the criticism a one way street only against Hillary…what about everyone else…are they perfect with no issues…

    if the dims think Warren or DeBlasio have a chance in hell of winning a GE they are more delusional that they obviously appear…

    or do they want the repubs running all three branches of govt with no power at all…

  14. Why is the criticism a one way street only against Hillary…what about everyone else…are they perfect with no issues…

    She’s running unopposed. Who else on the Dem side is supposed to be attacked? The Republicans would have to be brain dead not to define her early. That’s what Obama did with his 1984 ad.

    She’s getting “defined”.

  15. Hillary has been ‘defined’ since the Big Dawg was President. (“Two for one, she has no business working for the President, she should be decorating the White House or baking cookies.”)

    The Dims can run a pack of dogs and squaws, but Hillary will just mop the floor with them, so for comic relief…run everyone and anyone they want.

  16. Here’s the clip Drudge posted:

    —– Nothing like a clip with some substance Drudge, what are the American voters saying?

    Just making fun of Hillary for decades.

  17. How is the media supposed to respond to these staged photo-ops? Obama got away with them, but the media loved him. They hate Hillary.

  18. Hillary quote:

    “We will be subjected to all kinds of distractions and attacks,” she told reporters during a stop in the liberal bastion of Keene. “I’m ready for that. I know that that comes, unfortunately, with the territory.”

    In her early campaign stops, Clinton has cast herself as above the political back-and-forth, vowing to change the harsh partisan tone in Washington. “I am tired of the mean-spiritedness in politics,” she told voters who gathered in a supporter’s living room in Claremont. “Enough with the attacks and the anger, let’s find answers together and figure out what we’re going to do.”

  19. She’s not looney enough for the Dim party – they want a full-fledged communist authoritarian. I wouldn’t be surprised if she *doesn’t* get the nomination. Dims could run some moonbat who makes a surprisingly good primary showing, then the ball starts rolling downhill, others get encouraged to jump in and Big Media pummels her all along the way.

  20. Blow

    One thing that Hillary has going for her are most of the 18 million voters that voted for her in 2008…(she won the popular vote, fair and square).

    Thankfully all the moonbats do not represent the majority of center and liberal voters.

  21. …let’s put it this way…Hillary may be getting “defined”…however so far, the people…the majority of Dems…are not buying the definition…

    (imo…the definers are doing more damage to themselves and ironically defining themselves as a gang of whiners going after one person…cowardly and shrill)

    bmObama…you are so right…she’s not looney enough for the looney left that wants to control the Dem party…they would rather cut off their nose and spite their face and let repubs have all the power…rather than allow Hillary the opportunity to do anything worthwhile for our country…


    btw…’friends of Hillary and Bill’ need to start countering this “foreign money” story with examples of all the good the CF has done and examples of people they have helped…

    …and then ask…what have any of these people attacking her done for anyone else…perhaps Rand Paul identifies with the work the Clinton Foundation has done since he likes to brag about helping people with eye problems in “foreign countries”


    Economists have discovered how bad the economy really is

    Unemployment is almost back to normal, but the economy isn’t.

    That isn’t because the unemployment rate is a conspiracy to make things look better than they really are. It’s because even though the unemployment rate tells us the most about the labor market, it doesn’t tell us the full story. All it does is show us how many people who are actively looking for work can’t find it. But that leaves out the “shadow unemployed” who want full-time jobs but have either given up looking for them or can only find part-time ones. That usually doesn’t make that big a difference, but it does now, because, even six years after the crisis has ended, there still isn’t much that’s usual about this economy.

    Now if you add it all up, this shadow unemployment means our jobs hole is more than three times as big as it looks. That, at least, is what economists Danny Blanchflower and Andrew Levin found when they looked at how low the unemployment rate is versus how low we think it could go, how high the participation rate is versus how high we think it could go, and how many people can only find part-time jobs. [snip]

    The result, as you can see above, is that instead of being a million full-time jobs short, like the unemployment rate says we are, we’re about 3.5 million short.

    So it’s no surprise that workers still aren’t getting raises. Even though it looks unemployment is low enough that they should have more bargaining power, shadow unemployment is high enough that they don’t. Indeed, it’s not often that shadow unemployment is a bigger problem than regular unemployment, but this is one of those times. That’s why it could be awhile—and it’d be a mistake if it isn’t—before the Federal Reserve raises rates from zero. Now they’d been hinting that could come as soon as June, but the past few months of disappointing data have already forced them to backtrack a little. That’s partly, as Greg Ip points out, because just talking about tightening is tightening. In other words, if you say that you’re going to raise rates sooner than people expect, then they’ll react as if you already did—and growth will start to slow down. It’s a paradox where the economy only looks like it’s ready for higher rates as long as you don’t say higher rates are coming.

    But the other part is that those hints were probably premature anyway. Economists can estimate how much shadow unemployment is left, but it’s hard to say much more than that—who knows how many discouraged workers will come back?—which is why it makes sense to keep rates at zero until wages are rising. That’s the market’s way of telling us that there aren’t as many people who want full-time jobs but can’t find them. And besides, it’s hard to imagine inflation taking off before that.

    The recovery still has a long way to go, if we’ll let it.

    To the Washington Post the bad news means they want a continuation of the failed Obama policies. These policies and especially zero interest rates hurt seniors and anyone who saves/saved money.

    To us this means Hillary must distance herself from Obama and Obama policies. That’s the danger to Hillary not a book.

  23. Hillary better distance herself from Obama and Obama policies or else.

    Obama Kept Iran’s Short Breakout Time a Secret

    The Barack Obama administration has estimated for years that Iran was at most three months away from enriching enough nuclear fuel for an atomic bomb. But the administration only declassified this estimate at the beginning of the month, just in time for the White House to make the case for its Iran deal to Congress and the public.

    Speaking to reporters and editors at our Washington bureau on Monday, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz acknowledged that the U.S. has assessed for several years that Iran has been two to three months away from producing enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon. When asked how long the administration has held this assessment, Moniz said: “Oh quite some time.” He added: “They are now, they are right now spinning, I mean enriching with 9,400 centrifuges out of their roughly 19,000. Plus all the . . . . R&D work. If you put that together it’s very, very little time to go forward. That’s the 2-3 months.

    Brian Hale, a spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, confirmed to me Monday that the two-to-three-month estimate for fissile material was declassified on April 1.

    Here is the puzzling thing: When Obama began his second term in 2013, he sang a different tune. He emphasized that Iran was more than a year away from a nuclear bomb, without mentioning that his intelligence community believed it was only two to three months away from making enough fuel for one, long considered the most challenging task in building a weapon. Today Obama emphasizes that Iran is only two to three months away from acquiring enough fuel for a bomb, creating a sense of urgency for his Iran agreement.

    Back in 2013, when Congress was weighing new sanctions on Iran and Obama was pushing for more diplomacy, his interest was in tamping down that sense of urgency. On the eve of a visit to Israel, Obama told Israel’s Channel Two, “Right now, we think it would take over a year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon, but obviously we don’t want to cut it too close.”

    On Oct. 5 of that year, Obama contrasted the U.S. view of an Iranian breakout with that of Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who at the time said Iran was only six months away from nuclear capability. Obama told the Associated Press, “Our assessment continues to be a year or more away. And in fact, actually, our estimate is probably more conservative than the estimates of Israeli intelligence services.”

    Ben Caspit, an Israeli journalist and columnist for Al-Monitor, reported last year that Israel’s breakout estimate was also two to three months away.

    A year ago, after the nuclear talks started, Secretary of State John Kerry dropped the first hint about the still-classified Iran breakout estimate. He told a Senate panel, “I think it is fair to say, I think it is public knowledge today, that we are operating with a time period for a so-called breakout of about two months.”

    David Albright, a former weapons inspector and president of the Institute for Science and International Security, told me administration officials appeared to be intentionally unspecific in 2013, when the talking points used the 12-months-plus timeline. “They weren’t clear at all about what this one-year estimate meant, but people like me who said let’s break it down to the constituent pieces in terms of time to build a bomb were rebuffed,” he said. Albright’s group released its own breakout timetable that focused solely on the production of highly enriched uranium, not the weapon itself. It concluded Iran was potentially less than a month away. [snip]

    In this way, Obama’s new, more alarmist figure of two to three months provides a key selling point for the framework reached this month in Switzerland. When Obama announced the preliminary agreement on April 2, he said one benefit was that if it were finalized, “even if it violated the deal, for the next decade at least, Iran would be a minimum of a year away from acquiring enough material for a bomb.”

    Hence the frustration of Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. “We’ve been researching their claim that a deal would lengthen the breakout time for Iran from two to three months to a year,” he told me of the administration. “We’re just trying to confirm any of their numbers and we can’t confirm or make sense of what they are referencing.”

    Nunes should hurry. The Iranian nuclear deal is scheduled to breakout in less than three months.

    It’s almost as if Obama wanted Iran to acquire atomic bombs all along.

  24. Now if you add it all up, this shadow unemployment means our jobs hole is more than three times as big as it looks.

    Well that shadow casts a gigantic sink hole in California. So many people are out of work with no unemployment checks to claim that even college kids are now working at McDonalds, and fast food places. (Don’t ask me what the illegals are doing for work now.)

    So many restaurants are closed in the Bay Area that it is like finding Waldo when you want to eat out. Shops have closed down from the high rent, and years later, they are still vacant.

    We also have a growing homeless population in most cities. Thanks to the Fraud that can’t be bothered working for the People.


    U.S. offers $5M reward for al Qaeda leader released from Gitmo

    A Guantanamo Bay detainee who was released to Saudi Arabia in 2006 on the condition that he would take part in a “rehabilitation” program now has a $5 million reward on his head by the U.S. government.

    The State Department is offering the cash reward for any information that leads to Ibrahim al-Rubaysh, who has been deemed a “senior leader” of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

  26. Why are the New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News elitist pig propaganda machines attacking a candidate who’s campaigning as the champion of everyday Americans?

  27. Without even reading the rest of the article, the three people bumping heads are all nitwits.

    Barry, FeathersBrains and Tingles……….ugh, what a group.


    President Obama on Tuesday said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and other liberal critics of his trade policies are wrong.

    “When you hear folks make a lot of suggestions about how bad this trade deal is, when you dig into the facts, they are wrong,” he said during an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews.

    Obama said he would not be negotiating new free-trade agreements “if I did not think it would be good for the middle class.”

  28. I looked at the Clinton financial machine years ago when Hillary had her “debt” in 2008. It is quite an impressive machine. Not the crap Obama had with Doodad Pro and mess. It is a well oiled machine that tells no tales. If they say they have something on the Clintons, they are lying and they made it up. Just smears.

  29. Because of her decision to hide her e-mails, Clinton is vulnerable to (and largely defenseless against) the narrative that the Clinton Global Initiative had an influence peddling operation while Clinton was Sec of State.

    While it may be hardball politics, it’s certainly a smart strategy for her political opponents to define her in this way.

    She has the option of transparency (releasing her e-mails) if she has nothing to hide.

  30. Obama Kept Iran’s Short Breakout Time a Secret

    Whatever happened to that Joe Wilson, is he still in congress?

    He could have shouted, “you lie!”, every day for the last six years and been accurate.

  31. Hwc, political opponents of Hillary should attack her early and often. The attacks and tests are part of our political system and all candidates should be scourged (all, no exemptions to anyone in the way Obama was protected). We did not think she should announce this early precisely because she would open herself up to attacks and get caught in a crossfire from right and left (see the O’Malley video we posted). Now the attacks come and we are neither surprised nor upset.

    You might be right that it is “a smart strategy for her political opponents to define her in this way” but we don’t think so. Why? Because it has been tried before and it always fails. The emails, the funding of CGI, are all battles in the battlefield Bill and Hillary have always won on. If Hillary’s political opponents think this time will do the trick then we would refer them to Lucy and the football.

    If Republicans want to win they will follow the strategy that benefits the country and discuss policy and their positions. Republicans who want to win will not do so talking about emails and funding. If Republicans want to savage Hillary and get results then they must attach Hillary to Obama. Anything else is a distraction that is emotionally satisfying but ultimately plays to Hillary’s strengths.

    For Hillary (because the Republicans will eventually figure the needed strategy out after all these wild goose chases) the strategy must be to separate herself from Obama and Obama policies. We wrote about this at length and will write about it again.

  32. As for Hillary revealing “ALL”, I suspect that she could hand over all the emails she has ever sent in her entire life, every tiny scrap of any financial record she or Bill have or ever have had, turn over the Clinton Global Foundation to the Rep National Committee, give all her money to FOX News or an ACORN type organization or just give it all the homeless and go live in a tent in Roger Ailes yard, provide videos of her most intimate moments with Bill and pictures of her taking a shower and it STILL would be no where near enough for FOX NEWS, Rep media and the far left loons who would STILL be complaining and screeching 24/7, “That sneaky, selfish Hillary is “hiding” something and it’s probably illegal. Who does she think she is!”

    And then there would probably be 500 more books and articles written bashing Hillary in that feeding frenzy requiring another forest to be cut down to publish all that vital info and we’d have to hear on TV, incessantly, the hype that one of them will be THE book that is for sure gonna bring the vile Clintons down once and for all.

  33. ’friends of Hillary and Bill’ need to start countering this “foreign money” story with examples of all the good the CF has done and examples of people they have helped…

    When the media first started saying Hillary took money from other countries (they weren’t yet saying countries were buying favors), a coworker who is a republican was upset about it. I told her I don’t understand the upset, because Hillary wasn’t a part of the CGI yet until she stopped being SOS. Also because the group helps people in different countries – if other countries didn’t donate, then it would only be Americans paying to help other countries, and what would be fair about that?

  34. For Hillary (because the Republicans will eventually figure the needed strategy out after all these wild goose chases) the strategy must be to separate herself from Obama and Obama policies.

    She’s doing a pretty good job of tying herself to Obama’s policies. The Repubs may be content to sit back and record soundbytes to use against her in the general. For now, it may make sense to just drive her negatives through the roof, preparing the battlefield, so to speak. Considering that Obama’s goons pretty much destroyed her with the base in 2008, it may not be a Herculean task. She is going to be pretty rusty by the time the first debate with the Republican nominee rolls around.

    She’s in the unenviable position Republicans have found themselves in, having to sound like wackos currying favor with the Chrishun Coalition in the primaries. Just this week, Hillary suggested that we have to target everyone making $250,000 a year (the 1%). Who is the extremist now?

    I heard her express surprise that small business creation in the US has fallen badly. Is she planning to blame Booosh for that?

  35. I would like to hear Hillary come out…sooner than later…with strong “concerns” about the so called ‘deal with Iran’

    I’d like to hear some of her former realistic self talk about not being able to trust Iran…and now with the whole world blowing up in the middle east…this is definitely not the time to lift sanctions and allow Iran to benefit and become wealthy while they are causing and supporting so much of the destruction and violence in their part of the world…I mean, really, are we just plain stupid patsys…this makes no sense…NO!

    for goodness sakes the US is sending aircraft carriers to supposedly block Iran arm shipments to Yemen…O’s crowning glory…

    there was a time when she was direct and unequivocal…that is one of her strengths…


    and on this TPP trade deal…evidently Bill is for it…how can Hillary be out there standing up for the middle class and…

    how can Hillary reconcile saying that NAFTA “hurt alot of American workers” and support O’s bigger trade bill…particularly when most of the Dem Party and Labor is against it?

    I hope she takes a clear stand…imho…and with the understanding I have…

    I find it ridiculous to believe that simultaneously wanting to allow millions and millions of illegals to work in the USA for low wages while also opening up “free trade” to countries that our companies move to and pay worker poor working wages will help bring the middle class “UP” in any way, shape, or form as to how Hillary is describing she wants to work for and champion and strengthen the middle class and as one of the most important reasons for her wanting to be President…

    that would not make any sense…and imo…be just words…

    she needs to lift people out of the fog of O…(cue music: “I can see clearly now”

    I am hoping so much that she is going to be a real champion…and tell it like it is…and be honest…if she does…she will win over the middle class…they will hear her and what she is saying…

  36. Hill should just turn the table on O…as he just did on Warren…O calling Warren wrong on the TPP trade deal…

    Hill should say O is just wrong on this trade deal…and give an example Debbie Stabanov(sp) gave about during Nafta … a small refrigeration company in Michigan left and moved to Mexico…the politicians pleaded with the company not to move but the CEO said…the USA cannot compete with paying workers $1.53 hour in Mexico…

    Hill…”we can’t allow that to happen when we are rebuilding our work force at home, etc”

    in this case…Hill would achieve two positives…she would seperate herself from O and stand with the Dem party, including Warren, for strenghtening the middle class…

  37. Hwc, “For now, it may make sense to just drive her negatives through the roof, preparing the battlefield, so to speak.”

    We view that as wasting ammunition against a hardened fortress.

    It’s not only that the Republicans waste their ammunition on emails and CGI funding chases and other “scandals” but consider the cost. Republicans paint themselves as the same old bunch who just attack and the “drive up negatives” party. The problem for them is they drive up negatives about themselves as well. While they try to “define” Hillary they also define themselves.

    Again, consider the cost. As you point out, Hillary made some policy statements this week that are very useful to Republicans. But what are they talking about? We’re hearing about funding and emails and precious little on policy. Are they preparing the battlefield on economic policy for the general election? No. They’re chasing wild geese.

    Republican strategy should be to use policy to force Hillary closer and closer to Obama and the DailyKooks. Obama goons will not want any deviation from Obama by Hillary. Then Republicans can use this video evidence against Hillary when she is forced to pivot against Obama in the general election.

    Republicans should talk about the policy statements Hillary makes and let the New York Times and Washington Post waste digital ink on emails and funding. The New York Times (read that pig Frank Bruni and garbage scow Dowd) hates Hillary more than any Republican or any conservative. Anyone who does not understand that has no clue about 2016.

    Hillary’s problem is with the Obama left and Big Media. Fox News and Republicans are not her problem. That’s the lesson of 2008 Hillary has not digested nor devised a strategy against other than appeasement of the left. Again, it is why we suggested Hillary wait much much longer to announce, until it was too late for the left to mount a challenge.

  38. S, you point to just some of the problems Hillary faces with this TPP deal and vote. Republicans who support the deal could help themselves mightily by using this deal/vote as a wedge issue against Hillary and the left.

    It would be a win/win for them (Hillary has to side with or against Obama and his legacy item along with Republicans and the Chamber of Commerce or with the Warren DailyKook left) but instead they are trapped in an email/funding fog unable to see the forest due to the smoke from whatever it is they are smoking.

    This is a substantive policy issue that merits thorough discussion. It would not be outrageous or unfair to ask Hillary directly, now that she is a candidate, if she sides with Obama or is against the deal. It’s a beautiful trap that hurts Hillary no matter what she says/does (we advise silence, silence, silence). But what are Republicans talking about?

  39. Politics aside, that Iran shit’s scary. I swear Obama’s motives really need to be scrutinized. Of course that won’t happen, and anyone who does will be accused of being a conspiracy theory nut case. Obama probably has a damn compound over there for him, ValJar, Susan Rice, and probably the people at VOX, maybe Markooks too. Meechelle and the girls will be in Hollywood.

  40. Yes admin, i understand what you mean…

    I agree silence is also safe for now…at some point she will have to respond to the question that asks her – What is your position on TPP, do you support or oppose?

    perhaps she can strategize for the best timing to, in effect, take back the reins of the Democratic Party and lead them in and by opposing TPP…(and by default seperating from O) a definitive, self defining moment for Hillary…

    that could be a monumental turning point…and a time for a good speech…where she lays out some of her vision for protecting and strengthening the middle class…and in the successful and winning Clinton style…gives examples…1…2…3…

    (Warren Smarren…Hillary is her mentor…let’s get real…)

  41. she needs to lift people out of the fog of O…(cue music: “I can see clearly now”

    S, this really sums up what you are saying, and it’s so true!

    I’m so tired of the lies and craziness. We’re fighting with Iran against ISIS here, but against Iran against ISIS there, but wanting to sign a deal with the crazy Iran government, but you can keep your healthcare if you want it, but illegals won’t get healthcare but they will along with licenses and jobs, but we can’t build more offshore oil thingies, but we’ll give money to Brazil to do it for themselves, but criminals are to be sainted, and we’ll support Muslim governments but topple secular ones.

    Obama is sick and crazy, and he’s making our world sick and crazy. We’re all having to live his reality.

    Hillary has to separate herself at some point, and as you said, speak clearly as she used to. Cut the cord, Hillary. To h*ll with the votes of the dwindling Obamaguzzlers. We need clarity, and we need someone to save our country. We need the problem solver she billed herself to be in the 2008 campaign, but she needs clarity again to do that.

  42. heard her express surprise that small business creation in the US has fallen badly. Is she planning to blame Booosh for that?

    Seriously? She seriously didn’t know? That’s scary. She was so knowledgable about the economy before, and she always studies when she’s getting/has just gotten a new job. It’s scary if she doesn’t know, and it’s scary if she does know but doesn’t want to upset the Obama narrative. She has to take a cue from 2008 PUMAs and put country before party. Dump Obama, Hillary!

  43. The American People can have no confidence in the FBI under Obama. They have become a corrupt instrument of this Administration and are waging war against the truth and our security, as evidenced by the following article by Judicial Watch.

    First, they denied there was any ISIS threat on our southern border, despite specific evidence that there was and where it is located This information was based on informed sources within the agency, and the Mexican government.

    Instead of investigating that information, which would mean going to those specific locations and finding out what is there, they hold a secret meeting to figure out who is leaking this information to Judicial Watch. CYA? Shoot the whistleblowers??

    Moreover, DHS does not attend. Plausible deniability? Jeopardizes their position on blanket amnesty??

    And where pray tell is big media on this? Absolutely, positively nowhere.

    Why do they not go in to the very specific locations and do a little what they used to call investigative reporting?

    The story would go to two issues which those self proclaimed speakers of truth to power should be interested in:

    1. corruption in high office

    2. a looming security threat to this nation.

    Why do they abstain? Its very simple really. They went to bed with this administration in the beginning, and every waking moment they serve its purposes, as opposed to those of the nation. They can ill afford for the scales to fall from their eyes. Their own credibility is at stake if this information gets out. Therefore, they are predisposed to suppress it, regardless of the consequences.

    Moral to the story: Faust got lucky. For everyone else, once you sell your soul to the devil it is well nigh impossible to every get it back. That is their fate. Their kismet. It cannot be otherwise. No Mullen report can save them.

    Want proof? Well . . . . here we go:


    Responding to Judicial Watch’s report earlier this week of ISIS activity along the Mexican border, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) supervisors called a “special” meeting at the U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juárez.

    A high-level intelligence source, who must remain anonymous for safety reasons, confirmed that the meeting was convened specifically to address a press strategy to deny Judicial Watch’s accurate reporting and identify who is providing information to JW. FBI supervisory personnel met with Mexican Army officers and Mexican Federal Police officials, according to JW’s intelligence source. The FBI liaison officers regularly assigned to Mexico were not present at the meeting and conspicuously absent were representatives from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It’s not clear why DHS did not participate.

    Publicly, U.S. and Mexico have denied that Islamic terrorists are operating in the southern border region, but the rapid deployment of FBI brass in the aftermath of JW’s report seems to indicate otherwise. A Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector were among the sources that confirmed to JW that ISIS is operating a camp just a few miles from El Paso, Texas. The base is around eight miles from the U.S. border in an area known as “Anapra” situated just west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua.

    Another ISIS cell to the west of Ciudad Juárez, in Puerto Palomas, targets the New Mexico towns of Columbus and Deming for easy access to the United States, the same knowledgeable sources confirm. During the course of a joint operation last week, Mexican Army and federal law enforcement officials discovered documents in Arabic and Urdu, as well as “plans” of Fort Bliss – the sprawling military installation that houses the US Army’s 1st Armored Division. Muslim prayer rugs were recovered with the documents during the operation.

    “Coyotes” engaged in human smuggling – and working for the Juárez Cartel – help move ISIS terrorists through the desert and across the border between Santa Teresa and Sunland Park, New Mexico. To the east of El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, cartel-backed “coyotes” are also smuggling ISIS terrorists through the porous border between Acala and Fort Hancock, Texas. These specific areas were targeted for exploitation by ISIS because of their understaffed municipal and county police forces, and the relative safe-havens the areas provide for the unchecked large-scale drug smuggling that was already ongoing.

    Last August JW reported that ISIS, operating from Ciudad Juárez, was planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED). High-level U.S. federal law enforcement, intelligence and other sources confirmed then that a warning bulletin for an imminent terrorist attack on the border had been issued. Agents across a number of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies were placed on alert and instructed to aggressively work all possible leads and sources concerning the imminent terrorist threat.

    Sign Up for Updates!


    IRS Commissioner John Koskinen has blamed the IRS’s “abysmal” customer service on congressional budget cuts–funding is down $1.2 billion from its 2010 peak–but a new congressional report points the finger back at the IRS. While congressional funding for the IRS remained flat from 2014 to 2015, the IRS diverted $134 million away from customer service to other activities.

    In addition to the $11 billion appropriated by Congress, the IRS takes in more than $400 million in user fees and may allocate that money as it sees fit. In 2014, the IRS allocated $183 million in user fees to its customer service budget, but allocated just $49 million in 2015–a 76 percent cut.

    Commissioner Koskinen will appear before the House Ways and Means Committee this morning, one week after the federal tax filing deadline, and he can expect to be asked why the IRS cut its own customer service budget and continues to spend money on other questionable activities.

    The report notes that Koskinen reinstated bonuses weeks after his appointment, has allowed IRS employees to spend roughly 500,000 work hours on union activities, and failed to collect delinquent taxes owed by federal employees. The tax agency has also been strained by Obamacare. According to the report, the IRS has spent “over $1.2 billion on the President’s health care law to date, with a planned expenditure this year of an additional $500 million.”

  45. lorac

    April 22, 2015 at 2:14 am


    lorac…your juxtaposition of the craziness, contradictions, “hidden in the fog’ of O is right on the money…

    clarity is key to Hillary being perceived as ‘authentic’

  46. …interesting…

    Trade war heating up among Democrats

    Hillary Rodham Clinton and other top Democrats began feuding over President Obama’s trade initiative Tuesday as his bid for a major late-term win began tearing at the party’s unity and threatened to expose old divisions ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

    The tensions broke into public view after Clinton hedged during her first remarks on whether she would support an Obama-backed trade package that is gaining traction in Congress but is opposed by some on the party’s politically potent liberal wing.

    “Any trade deal has to produce jobs and raise wages and increase prosperity and protect our security,” Clinton said during a tour of a community college in Concord, N.H., that focuses on technical skills. “We have to do our part in making sure we have the capabilities and the skills to be competitive.”

    Her remarks, which echoed a noncommittal statement from her presidential campaign late last week, placed her in an uncomfortable spot between the pro-business and pro-labor wings of the party. The trade issue is being closely watched by liberals who would prefer a more adamantly left-leaning candidate to carry the Democratic banner.

    Potential rivals such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), who has said she is not running for the White House, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have denounced Obama’s trade agenda as favoring big business over workers. Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley, another potential Democratic contender who opposes the package, sent out a barbed tweet Tuesday saying that “Americans deserve to know where leaders stand.”

    “The answer is not only no but hell no,” Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said when asked by reporters whether he backs pending legislation to smooth the path for Obama to complete a major trade deal in the Asia-Pacific region. Reid emphasized, however, that he will not filibuster the agreement if it reaches the Senate floor.

    The increasingly vocal opposition from high-profile Democrats forced Obama to open a debate with longtime allies as he scrambled to try to hold ranks. On Tuesday, the president traveled to the Fairfax Chamber of Commerce in Northern Virginia for a roundtable discussion on trade with local business leaders and Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.), who supports the trade deal. The discussion was moderated by liberal MSNBC talk show host Chris Matthews.

    Referring to Warren by name, Obama said she and other critics are “wrong on this” and added that although “some of the information that has been getting thrown out there plays into legitimate fears that Democratic voters have, and progressives have, it’s simply not true. It’s simply not the facts.”

    On the Republican side, most of the declared and prospective candidates hew to GOP orthodoxy in favor of free-trade deals. But the fissures also are widening on that side of the aisle as the fight for the Republican nomination gets underway and candidates give voice to grass-roots conservatives’ frustrations about the economy.

    New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) said Tuesday that the United States needs “to take another look at NAFTA” — the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed in 1993 — while Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) suggested Monday that legal immigration, which could grow under the trade pacts, might need to be reduced with the aim of “protecting American workers and American ­wages.”

    “It is a fundamentally lost issue by many in elected positions today — is what is this doing for American workers looking for jobs? What is this doing to wages? And we need to have that be at the forefront of our discussion going forward,” Walker said.

    But it is Democrats who are wrestling with an existential crisis on trade.

    At the center of the debate is a “fast track” trade bill that would grant the Obama administration the authority to bring the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a 12-nation trade and regulatory pact in the Asia-Pacific region, to Congress for a vote without lawmakers being able to amend the terms. (me – no, no,no!)

    Administration officials have said the fast-track powers are necessary to convince the other nations that Congress won’t change the terms after the fact. But opponents — including organized labor and environmental groups — have said the legislation amounts to a rubber stamp of the TPP before the terms are made public.


    O is looking for his “legacy”…the ramifications of “his trade deal” will fall into the lap of the next Prez…

    Does Hillary really want to hand over the populist ‘trade’ position to Scott Walker…

    because the bottom line really is…

    we already have millions of americans still out of work and many of those working are working low paying service jobs…

    throw in the ‘shadow unemployment’ that Shadowfax mentioned above…

    …so our ‘puttng people back to work’ has not been solved…

    now throw in the millions of illegals O wants to grant work permits to…and benefits…

    …then pass TPP and risk more of our home grown companies leaving for low wage paying countries…

    AND… in addition…just like that little American toy company and furniture manufacturer Hillary was visiting in NH two days ago…that company has to compete with cheaper products from low paying China, etc…

    …now subject these “trying to make it” smaller ‘Made in America’ American businesses and entrepeneurs to more unfair competition from countries that do not honor their workers with “mandatory health benefits, matching 401K, etc “, minumun wage demands, living wages, respectable work conditions, etc…

    …and what does any honest, independent thinking person, including Hillary, think the result will be for the future of american workers and the middle class…

    …if deeper reflection is necessary…look back at Nafta…as an example, take a look at how the once thriving New England states made good livings and paid for and sent their children to college based on the manufacturing jobs located in the New England states that is now decimated only leaving barren buildings that once employed the middle class and students on summer vacations…

    Clarity…and common sense…is key and desperately needed

  47. admin:

    The only question the media seems to have for the Republican candidates is whether they would attend a gay wedding… 🙂

  48. “we” never had ‘Mika’ she has been a vehement Clinton foe for a long, long time…

    she just covers it during the rare times Bill or Hillary appear somehow on msnbc…whether they are at a rally…or whatever…

    as I have said over and over again…msnbc looks to exploit Hillary…and Bill…in a negative light at every opportunity…they are no friends or supporters of anything Clinton…unless they are boxed in to do so…

  49. btw…

    another problem coming down the road…with so called ‘Ocare”

    O may even succeed in handing the ‘seniors’ to the opposition…


    this admin has done zero for the middle class…just take their hard earned money and waste it…

  50. HWC, regarding that reptile Mika, she’s a Hillary Hater from way back. We’ve seen on some Hillary Hater sites that losing Mika bodes trouble for Hillary. We prefer to think of it as another wake up call for Hillary that her haters continue to hate her.

    You can’t lose what you never owned.

  51. We wonder if Mika pays her taxes:

    “Regressive taxation & tax-avoidance & union crushing & the financial corruption of legislation has fueled inequality more than hard work,” MSNBC host Touré opined on his Twitter account in the winter of last year.

    “Conservatives complain about takers but most red states get more from DC than they give ie [sic] takers,” he later remarked. “Most blue states give more than they get.”

    For all his interest in altruism via tax policy, you would think he might pay his income taxes. Guess again.

    “In September 2013, New York issued a state tax warrant to [Touré] Neblett and his wife, Rita Nakouzi, for $46,862.68. Six months later, the state issued an additional warrant to the couple for $12,849.87,” National Review’s Jillian Kay Melchior reported on Wednesday.

    Touré shouldn’t feel too bad about his outstanding debt to Uncle Sam. It seems quite a few of his fellow liberal agitators on that network have also failed to pay their taxes.

    “Last month, New York filed a $4,948.15 tax warrant against Joy-Ann Reid, who serves as managing editor of and until earlier this year hosted MSNBC’s The Reid Report, and her husband, Jason,” National Review’s report continued. “Reid has called taxes on the wealthy ‘a basic fairness argument,’ also arguing for ‘smart spending and smart tax increases’ to create economic growth.”

    Reid and Neblett were perhaps following weekend host and Wake Forrest University Professor Melissa Harris-Perry’s example. Earlier this year, the IRS slapped Perry and her husband with a $70,000 bill for delinquent taxes from 2013. As Jazz observed, the fact that she was aware that she owed back taxes for over a year did not stop her from mocking Republicans like Sam Brownback for cutting his states personal tax burden and failing to see it result in booming economic growth.

    “Filing my taxes,” Perry lamented in 2010. “Can I just say that with what I owe it is freaking miracle & an act of solidarity that I am still a Democrat?” After apparently being subjected to a whirlwind of anger from her liberal fans, Perry recanted. “Thanks tweeps for the reminders of how many of you are struggling with unemployment or underemployment. Will pay my taxes with a smile.”

    But this is all small time. Politics Nation host Rev. Al Sharpton has refined the art of tax dodging to a science. “So far, every for-profit enterprise started by Al Sharpton and known to National Review Online has been shut down in at least one jurisdiction for failure to pay taxes, a review of public records in New York and Delaware reveals,” National Review reported in February.

  52. Mika represents Hillary’s biggest problem: Democrats hate her. That has always been her biggest obstacle to overcome in a presidential race. I don’t see an good end-game for her. What is going to happen when O’Malley or DeBlazio or Sanders or some other crackpot beats her in the Iowa caucuses?

  53. hwc…you sound like you are projecting your feelings on to Hill…or trying to convince that all is lost and the majority of dems hate hill…

    …don’t think so…

    if any far left candidate were to win the caucus in Iowa…that would indicate that Hillary has not got her “caucus act together”…and that would be a foolish mistake to repeat…

    let’ see a Sanders or O’Malley try winning the majority of VOTES in the big states…that’s wishful dreaming…

  54. Does anyone have Cliff Notes on what this O’trade bill is about that has caused an uproar in the Dims?

  55. Shadow…as usual no one knows yet what is in the deal…and everyone is supposed to trust O because he knows it is the right thing to do…

    from what I can understand…in a nutshell…

    evidently like everything else O does, the details have not been exposed yet…people are speculating that certain protections for the USA are not solid…price fixing, if foreign countries could sue USA firms, etc…however O wants ‘fast track’ so that when O deems he is ready to clue in the Congress they will not be able to make any changes…he will be the supreme decider of the deal…otherwise O might offend foreign countries that think our Congress might change the deal to work on behalf of our citizens…

  56. S

    Thanks S, pretty much anything Oh does is worse for the US, so I didn’t want to scour the Deep internet trying to find out the details.

    When ever a crook doesn’t want to tell you the details, you shouldn’t look for unicorns.

  57. shadow…it is like his MO with his “deal with Iran”…no one is sure of what is in it but he keeps telling everyone…”this is the best deal we can get”

    before deal is even done…yesterday he even said “the iranians might even still walk away”…on the weekend O admin floated they might be willing to lift sanctions so Iran would not bolt… but to O…this is the best deal he can negotiate

    send in Trump to negotiate…O negotiates from a position that gets weaker day by day..

  58. S

    send in Trump to negotiate…O negotiates from a position that gets weaker day by day..

    I agree, Trump, Hillary, Bill…any smart person with a lick of sense would lay their cards on the table and walk away if Iran didn’t agree.

    Oh is too lazy and full of himself to fight for America and Israel. He just wants to sign the paper, get Kudos and back to playing golf.

  59. Iranian Warships Arrive Near Yemen
    Comes just days after U.S. announced it would send its own warships

    Iran wouldn’t play chicken with America if we had a strong President. They know Barry is a coward and they are willing to call his bluff.

    If Iran already had nukes, (who knows they don’t?) this would be to try and knock America off it’s leader perch.

  60. Ha!

    Mr. Sanctimonious gets caught trying too* hard to be too cool…doesn’t he know the law?

    Ray-Ban has asked Sen. Rand Paul’s presidential campaign to quit selling the brand’s Wayfarer sunglasses, which Paul had imprinted with the “Rand” logo.

    The Rand-Ban sunglasses were for sale for $150 on Paul’s website as recently as Tuesday. The website described the product as “the intersection of politics and cool.”

    But the campaign didn’t have Ray-Ban’s consent, and the company didn’t think that was cool.

    “We learned that the Rand Paul campaign had been selling Ray-Ban sunglasses imprinted with the “Rand” logo without our consent,” Jane Lehman, head of corporate communications for Luxottica, that parent company of Ray-Ban, wrote in an email to The Hill.

    “After a formal request from us, they promptly removed the product from their site and agreed to cease any further use of our trademarks,” she wrote.

    Paul’s campaign, which has featured the product on its cyber store, declined to comment for this story.

    One picture on Paul’s website showed President John F. Kennedy wearing the iconic glasses atop his head next to a picture of Paul with a similar pair of glasses.

    “I can hear Senator Bentsen now, ‘I knew Jack Kennedy and you’re no Jack Kennedy,’ ” a caption on the site said. “Well, you and I may not be Jack Kennedy, but Rand likes Raybans and now we can all own Rand branded Raybans.”

    “$150 is more than you might normally pay for sunglasses, but these are Raybans and even more, they are indelibly marked with the Rand Brand … and as always, it’s a contribution to the Rand Paul for President campaign,” the site said.


    very presumptuous…geesh

    Democrats’ trade spat becomes a full-on brawl

    Warren fires back at Obama, and O’Malley takes a shot at Clinton as Hill Dems bicker.

    Democrats have taken the gloves off in their own trade war. In Washington and on the campaign trail, the public sniping over whether Congress should give the White House power to clinch the biggest free-trade deal in history has reached new heights.

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Wednesday escalated her war of words with President Barack Obama, saying in a blog post that he’s the one who is wrong on trade.

    The Massachusetts Democrat said it’s unfair for the White House to show corporations the contents of a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, but to ask Congress to sign off on it, sight unseen.

    “When giant corporations get to see the details and the American people don’t, we all lose. Let’s level the playing field: No vote on fast-tracking trade until the public can read the TPP deal,” Warren wrote in a post titled “You can’t read this” on her campaign website.

    Warren’s missive was just one of the blows in the simmering fight between Obama and his fellow Democrats over a 12-country trade pact that would cover more than 40 percent of global GDP. A number of progressive Democrats fear the deal could undercut U.S. wages and ship jobs overseas.

    Obama said on Tuesday that he loves Warren, “but she’s wrong on this.”

    The fight has also ensnared Hillary Clinton. She is in an awkward position – she has ties to the TPP deal dating back to her time as secretary of state and she risks having to attack her former boss. But she also risks alienating the left wing of her party.

    For the time being, Clinton has threaded the needle, laying out conditions for what she would deem a successful trade deal, but not commenting directly on what is before Congress.

    Sensing Clinton’s vulnerability, fellow Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley has gone on the attack against the front-runner.

    “American workers whose jobs could be on the line right now are owed more than lip service. They deserve to know where leaders stand,” O’Malley said in an email sent Wednesday to supporters.

    O’Malley also took to Twitter. Shortly after Clinton spoke in Concord, NH on Tuesday, he tweeted a short video titled “Bad Trade Deals” and wrote, “When US jobs are on the line, it’s not a hard choice – it’s common sense.”

    And it’s not just the relatively thin Democratic presidential field attacking Clinton. Republican Jeb Bush on Wednesday accused her of a “politically motivated flip flop” in a Medium post.

    He zeroed in on one of the more specific elements of her to-date vague statements — that currency manipulation should be considered in the deal. The White House is opposed to including currency rules, for fear it could cause other countries to balk.

    “These new reservations are conveniently timed. Sec. Clinton wavered on support for trade the last time she ran for President as well,” Bush said in his post. “It sends a terrible signal this late in the negotiations for Sec. Clinton to pull the rug out from under our allies for a short-term political gain.”

    Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is considering his own presidential bid, last week issued a statement calling on all the candidates — but singling out Clinton — to oppose the “job-killing” trade deal.

    The stakes are high around the still-forming trade pact, with Obama wanting to secure a major free trade deal as part of his legacy.

    Trade promotion authority legislation would give the president the power to complete trade deals with only up-or-down votes from Congress. It is seen as integral to both reaching a bilateral agreement with Japan, the linchpin of the TPP. But an indication that the fast track bill doesn’t have enough votes could deal a blow to the negotiations.

    With the lofty ambitions have come low blows.

    Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, talking to reporters this week, said about Obama’s proposal: “I’m not only no. I’m hell no.”

    According to an AP report, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, who is expected to replace Reid when he retires, said on Tuesday, “I’m disappointed in the efforts by President Obama.”

    Obama is not backing down. On Thursday, he plans to make a pitch to his own political arm, Organizing for Action, on the need for this trade deal.

    “The president will say to his loyal supporters that this staple of his campaign stump speech is the reason that he’s pursuing the kind of trade deal that will open up new opportunities for the next generation of middle class workers,” a White House official said Wednesday, previewing the speech.

    It’s not clear to what extent Obama will use the speech to push for the audience to urge their members of Congress to back him.


  62. Shadow, thanks for that trade article…

    imho…if Hillary supports this TPP trade deal she is making a mistake…her “middle class message” will be contradictory and muddled…

    if others have a different opinion please express what you think about this…

    …she is on the record as SOS for calling this TPP “the gold standard in trade agreements”

    she has time…but Hillary needs to really think this out and be clear…if she supports this she is siding with O and essentially the republican party…against the party she hopes to lead…and imho…the middle class…

    Clarity…without clarity, this is where Hillary gets herself into trouble…

  63. Hillary lost the Iowa caucus in 2008 to JOHN EDWARDS. The moonbats in Iowa hate her. I don’t think it’s at all a sure bet that she can win even if she’s unopposed in Iowa.

    Iowa is a nightmare for both parties. Only crazy people participate in the caucuses.

  64. S
    April 22, 2015 at 4:28 pm
    Thanks for the timeline. That really adds clarity.

    What Clinton seems to be saying to me is that the agreements were good but the enforcement was bad. We took hits and did not get our benefits because we did ot enforce them. So maybe the agreements were not crafted so well earlier.

    There is just no way the American people should allow the snake oil salesman to cut the deal without scrutiny.

  65. Hwc, you win the prize for the first attack on the Iowa Caucuses since Hillary announced.

    It’s a well deserved attack against the Iowa Caucuses. Unfortunately we think you are right about Hillary and the Iowa situation. Even though it was by a slim margin Hillary did come in third in 2008. It’s very likely that if you ran a piece of shi… cheese against Hillary in Iowa the cheese would win (none-too-sly reference to Obama).

    Here are some other factors to consider: Hillary campaigned against Joni Ernst and for that lump of deadwood Braley in Iowa in 2014. Ernst won by 8.5%. Ernst is the first woman elected to the House or Senate from Iowa. Ernst split the women vote (49%) with Braley even as Braley ran his campaign on the “war on woman” theme. At some point Ernst will return the favor and campaign against Hillary. It won’t be pretty when Ernst quotes Hillary:

    “I would also add, it’s not enough to be a woman. You have to be committed to expand rights and opportunities for all women,” Hillary Clinton said at a Wednesday campaign event for Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Bruce Braley, Joni Ernst’s opponent in Iowa.

    That quote is going to come back to bite some day. It’s going to exacerbate the single women vs. married women divide to the detriment of Hillary (not to mention it is not exactly a “sisters united” message). It’s one of the reasons we thought it was unwise for Hillary to involve herself in the 2014 elections.

    Then there is the involvement of the Howard Dean organization and Move-on both of which have staff working in Iowa to encourage the Cambridge Cherokee to run by organizing for her. If the Senate Squaw does not run those kooks will turn to O’Malley or any piece of garbage in order to block Hillary.

    O’Malley and the Kooks know that the easiest, cheapest, fastest way to torpedo Hillary is a stunning defeat in Iowa. That’s where they will put all their firepower. Iowa is small enough that after a certain amount is spent by Hillary the rest of her campaign funds will only lead to diminishing returns. This means that for all intents and purposes the playing field in Iowa might be level for Hillary and whatever cracked pot the left pulls out of the kiln.

    The good news for Hillary is that the strategy of the opposition is crystal clear. Forewarned is forearmed.

  66. admin:

    Didn’t you hear? The winter was so bad this year in New England that Elizabeth Warren started calling herself an Eskimo!


    It’s not just Iowa. Well short of a ringing endorsement from the Democrat governor of New Hampshire today:

  67. Boom. When is the stock market going to “adjust”? Right now the FED is playing a game of global chicken with China and Greece. The FED has played all their cards with ZIRP (except for negative interest rates) and here we sit stagnated, dying a slow death. Greece is jacking with the euro and generally behaving badly, potentially causing a problems there. China is playing games with their economy trying to stabilize the biggest debt bomb of all times. The housing market collapsed and the stock market has gone wild.

    Historically we have seen our market adjustment taken with the cycle of the presidential election. It is actually disturbing seeing just how manipulated the market is. The wild card is the Chinese debt bomb. Here are two articles form two sources that outside the MSM hype:

  68. Headlines on Drudge


    Too bad they don’t have the number of Illegals in the US

  69. I can’t seem to find any google news link suggesting that Bruce Braley has endorsed Clinton for President. Thanks for nothing?

  70. Yes. Iowa is the perfect place to torpedo any mainstream frontrunner candidate. Sheesh, even Mike Huckabee has won Iowa. It’s not the end of the world on the Republican side, but can you imagine if Hillary Clinton loses Iowa again? Yikes.

  71. Hey Batman!

    Hillary Clinton needs to start talking honestly from her heart. About life and about NAFTA and about what has happened to our country. She knows and she can help us but she has got to get her message out. It is that INTJ personality. I have the same Briggs-Meyer personality type. It is the most rare, only 1/200 people have it. More rare in women a 1/300 people. It can be problematic for a politician. She announced too early and hopefully she is doing her listening and thinking, but soon she has to start talking.

    Just looking at the evolution of her position on trade, I know she knows. Starting with the best of intentions for world trade, the program was exploited and mismanaged and has been bad for the country. Hillary’s presidency is not just about gaining wealth and power for powers sake, it is about how the achievements of her lifetime will manifest itself and become the legacy of her daughter and her daughters daughter and all the sons of sons. Hillary will fight for the everyday American, just like she says she will. She has to say it. She has to figure out how to say all of it.

  72. Mr. Sanctimonious gets caught trying too* hard to be too cool…doesn’t he know the law?

    He’s just too cool for school. I really can’t stand him. Of all the more visible Pub players, he’s wins the obnoxious award – at least for now.

  73. Megyn Kelly seems to be devoting large segments of her show to attack Hillary. It is going to be a very long and difficult road and I am not going to get trapped thinking it’s a slam dunk again.

  74. Lu4PUMA
    April 22, 2015 at 8:44 pm
    Fuck Obama

    Come on Lu, tell us how your really feel 😉

  75. jbstonesfan

    Hey, if you can stomach watching the Rethugs trash Hillary on some Fox shows…you are pretty tough.

  76. Megan Kelly is turning into a partisan hack trying to make a name for herself on the back of the Clintons like Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity. Very sad.

  77. Are they really this stupid and clueless?

    Of course they are, and the dismal results speak for themselves.

    Who in their right mind would hire Obama advisers on foreign policy?

    Plenty of people, e.g. Putin, the Supreme Leader, ISIS, BokaHaran, the Taliban, The Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, Brookings, Saturday Night Live, the old Mental Hospital at Wards Island in the East River, the Pscyho Ward at Bellevue? I would say their future employment prospects are an embarrassment of riches . . . Strike that their future employment prospects—like the present ones–are major embarrassment to this nation. Let that be their epitaph.

    And I read in the WaPo that the DC real estate/housing market is going flat as the Obama-bots rush to leave town a year and a half before Obama.

    Its a foul wind that does not bring in some good air.

  78. I wonder whether you can short sell real estate.

    If there is a way, I am sure our Wall Street lizards will figure that one out too.

  79. Southern Born
    April 22, 2015 at 10:28 pm
    Megan Kelly is turning into a partisan hack trying to make a name for herself on the back of the Clintons like Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity. Very sad.

    These lightweights should say a prayer of thanks every day for the Clintons. Without them, they would have had next to nothing to talk about. Their obsession with bashing the Clintons just confirms their lack of imagination and their laziness.

  80. free, IMO, Megan is actually very bright and an excellent interviewer. She keeps the interviewee on track and calls them out. When she got this primetime show, she said she is a nonpartisan. She either lied or changed. Her choice to be partisan is a real waste of her intellect and talent.

    Based on how she sometimes acts on the show, I suspect the big fame has gone to her head. She really seems pleased with herself and very aware of her popularity. She’s getting the ratings and perhaps that’s too hard for her to risk losing. Such a shame. She has the talent to be a real investigative journalist/interviewer. The whole country, regardless of political leanings, would benefit from some of those. I guess she’s going to end up a self-impressed bloviator like O’Reilly.

  81. And I read in the WaPo that the DC real estate/housing market is going flat as the Obama-bots rush to leave town a year and a half before Obama.

    Rats leaving the sinking ship. Oh who will Barry have to play with now that all his admirers are leaving. Hire Reggie Love back…

  82. 50 million immigrants in the last 10 years….probably 45 million illegal.

    No wonder no one speaks English anymore. We have to pay big bucks to t translators and services in the hospital’s, not just Spanish, lots of Middle Eastern dialect and African…
    No one feels obligation to learn English, most are being financed by me and you for their living here.
    Regardless what population’s want, government’s allover the world are redistributing populations and people’s money.
    I loved through the “busing” project in this country for schools..they dropped it because it didn’t work..
    This is not working either. You can’t force people to live together..see France, England, Germany…and many little, now, soon to be much bigger enclaves around America.
    Heck, in Austin, the COP took it upon himself to make a speech about Muslims rights, with a large group of Muslims in full garb, behind him. Everyone was like, “and?”…There have been no instances of anti muslin behavior in Austin.Getting real tired of the special treatment.

  83. So Obama the fool on the hill fesses up that in January 2 America’s were killed by friendly fire… had been hostages like for 4 years…nice…must have been coming out…of course, he humbly takes the blame as the NYT say it isn’t so..

  84. The whole country, regardless of political leanings, would benefit from some of those. I guess she’s going to end up a self-impressed bloviator like O’Reilly.


    And Hannity, whose radio show I occasionally hear bits of. Every other sentence describes one of his past “predictions” that has become a reality – using the term loosely – or some other bit of useless, self-serving drivel about him, his beliefs, and on and on. A waste of air time.

    I hear others talk about Kelly as an intelligent individual. It reflects poorly on her that she has such a narrow view of Hillary’s candidacy and such a biased view of Hillary, herself. For conservative media, Clinton bashing is just an easy, cheap shot. The obsession of conservative media with her is absurd, and those who spend air time repeating the same old tired insults, all the while searching frantically for new ones give the impression that they are either emotionally unstable or too lazy and/or dull to seek out the actual news and report on it. If they actually do possess the intellect, it’s hidden by their CDS.

  85. As Admin has said, it’s not Fox news that will bring down Hillary, it’s Obama and the left…she just doesn’t get it.

  86. No argument there gonzotx. That doesn’t make the FOX News Network’s constant stream of Hillary hatred any less unpleasant or unfair. At one time, years age, the venom of the Far Left and the level of CDS afflicting their narrow minds were more surprising that they are today. Now, the vile Hillary-hate is expected from both sides.

  87. Why wouldn’t Megan Kelly and Fox News focus heavily on the Democrat nominee for President? It wouldn’t be “fair and balanced” if they ignored the Dem and just covered the Republican race… 🙂

    Seriously, I wouldn’t expect a lot of positive news stories about he Democrat nominee from Fox. Just like you won’t see positive stories about the Republican candidates from CNN or ABC or NBC.

  88. Breaking: The Senate confirms Loretta Lynch as the next U.S. attorney general with a 56-43 vote:

    McConnell Votes to Confirm Loretta Lynch …


    There has to have been a huge payoff or concession to get that. Wonder where we are going to get shafted……

  89. and if this anything to go by…….Obama redux…..

    After railing against Lynch earlier on Senate floor, Ted Cruz skipped the confirmation vote…..

  90. Why wouldn’t they vote to confirm Lynch? It’s not like Obama is going to nominate someone better…

  91. Its all happening today…..

    U.S. Judge in North Carolina has sentenced former CIA Director David Petraeus to two years of probation and $100,000 fine

  92. I know Hillary is working with younger people to create her graphic designs, but I liked her bumper sticker graphic from 2008 more.

    Good thing I can make my own buttons and bumper stickers on Zazzle, because I wouldn’t put this cheezy one on my car… (See at link)

    I admit, I used her ‘H with the arrow’ for a button and added Hillary’s name on top of it, I think it looks a lot better. I also made a button of ‘Hillary in the Rain’.

  93. moononpluto
    April 23, 2015 at 3:21 pm

    I forget what he was caught and sentenced for…

    Probation and $100k fine…that’s weird.

  94. Sharing info with his bit on the side…..

    Gen. David Petraeus, once a widely celebrated military leader who oversaw operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and was touted as a potential presidential candidate, was sentenced to serve two years on probation and to pay an $100,000 fine on Thursday for sharing classified information with his biographer and lover, Paula Broadwell.

  95. New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick wore an Armenian flag lapel pin for his meet n’ greet with Obama at the White House today.

  96. Shadowfax
    April 22, 2015 at 2:51 pm

    Does anyone have Cliff Notes on what this O’trade bill is about that has caused an uproar in the Dims?

    It is secret. Not one word of it is to be given to Congress. They are just supposed to trust Obama. That dog won’t hunt even for Democrats.

  97. …never watch Ed Shultz on msnbc…however was turning the channel for news when I noticed he had Bernie Sanders on and they were talking about the trade deal…

    so listened in…as many of us recall Ed S was diehard O and anti Hillary in 2008…anyway Ed and Bernie together were blasting O and his secrecy and request that everyone just trust him on this trade deal…they were both making very good points as to why this trade deal will be great for multinational companies, chamber of commerce and big business but bad for american workers, their wages and small american businesses

    then they cut to O who was speaking live about the trade deal…and as usual essentially saying nothing (he is really looking rail thin these days…almost aneroexic)

    …then cut bact to Ed and Bernie…all I can say is Ed blasted…and I mean blasted O…he challenged O to come on his show and debate this issue with him, etc he went on and on about how O is betraying the people who elected him…etc, etc…

    if anyone can find the clip…today’s Ed Shultz show – segment with Bernie Sanders…

    please link it here…then people will get an inkling of how intense this trade issue is with the democrats…how there is a real break with O and how posionous it is for Hillary, especially now with all that is surrounding her…to go side with multinational conglomerates vs the American middle class workers…

  98. Here is the NY Times article (book?) on the questionable uranium dealings that ended up with State Dept approval on a Russian company controlling major percentages of US uranium reserves and the various donations to the Clinton Foundation and $500,000 speaking fee to Bill Clinton that were occurring simultaneously:

    I won’t even try to summarize the article as it’s a long and winding road. There’s a lot of speculation and dot-connecting here that may or may not be warranted. Probably nothing that couldn’t be cleared up by Hillary Clinton’s e-mails. Oh, wait….

    See the problem here? If you are seen as transparent and trustworthy, then things can be explained. If you are perceived as secretive and shady, then “folk” are going to jump to conclusions.


    Hill Dems to Hillary Clinton: Get off the fence on trade

    The 12-nation Pacific trade deal is the first major policy dilemma of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and she’s under pressure to cast aside her own past as a free-trade proponent and buck the current Democratic president in whose Cabinet she served.

    Now, pressure is intensifying from Capitol Hill on the presumed Democratic standard-bearer.

    Democratic lawmakers intent on preventing fast-track authority for the Trans-Pacific Partnership are calling on Clinton to take a more definitive stance on the legislation, hoping that she can tip the scales against President Barack Obama’s position.

    The furthest Clinton has gone is to say that whatever agreement is reached needs to protect American workers and have appropriate safeguards. But Clinton owes it to voters — and to the Democratic Party — to more explicitly spell out her views on such a critical issue, a number of Democrats on Capitol Hill who oppose the fast-track authority and the emerging multination agreement told POLITICO.

    “I think now that she’s officially declared for president, she should share with people how she feels about it,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), laying out a litany of fears over the trade agreement that would be ratified after Congress first approves new fast-track authority. “Certainly these are major concerns — and she should speak to them.”

    Merkley isn’t alone. A number of Democrats say their party’s front-runner should lay out her views and concerns with the so-called trade promotion authority bill that’s now dividing their party. The bill would give Obama the ability to finalize trade deals and Congress an up-or-down vote, essentially preventing lawmakers from making any changes.

    That fast-track bill — which Clinton has yet to weigh in on — is a necessary first step for the administration to complete the largest trade agreement in American history. The TPP is an accord that could affect roughly 40 percent of the world’s gross domestic product. After a 20-6 vote in the Senate Finance Committee Wednesday night, the fast-track bill is expected to be approved by the full Senate within weeks. But the real question is whether enough House Democrats will join with Republicans to pass the measure.

    For that reason, Clinton’s voice could be critical in wooing some wayward Democrats to either support of oppose the fast-track bill.

    “I would be very happy if she said, ‘If it doesn’t increase wages, why are we doing it?’” said Rep. Keith Ellison, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “It will be incredibly difficult to talk about doing anything for income inequality and push these trade bills that basically erode Americans’ wages.”

    Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democratic populist who is leading the charge to kill the measure, said Clinton could help galvanize opposition in Congress.

    “The more prominent Democrats and Republicans speak out against it, the more people in talk radio and Sunday morning pundits, the more economists speak out against it is a good thing,” said Brown, who has spoken with Clinton and her campaign on the issue.

    “It probably would help on the vote,” said Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democratic opponent of the trade deals. “But I don’t know that’s a goal right now for her to influence the legislative process.”

    What complicates matters for Clinton is reconciling her own past support for trade agreements with her effort to strike a populist tone that will help her connect with the progressive wing of her party. In 1993, President Bill Clinton negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement — one of the farthest-reaching trade deals in history — that Hillary Clinton later praised as “proving its worth.” But the deal infuriated labor unions, a key Democratic constituency Clinton wooed when she ran against Obama in the 2008 presidential contest.

    As a senator, Clinton voted for free-trade agreements with Chile, Morocco and Singapore but opposed the Central American Free Trade Agreement, a George W. Bush-era deal. When trying to bolster her support among unions and blue-collar workers in 2008, Clinton slammed potential agreements the U.S. was negotiating with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. But after Obama selected Clinton as secretary of state, she once again expressed support for trade deals, referring to the TPP as a “gold standard in trade agreements.”

    “The Clintons have a mixed record when it comes to trade issues,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, who recalled being wooed to back NAFTA as a House member by Bill Clinton over a round of golf at the Army-Navy Country Club in Arlington, Virginia.

    On Tuesday, Hillary Clinton toed a safe line.

    “Well, any trade deal has to produce jobs and raise wages and increase prosperity and protect our security,” she told reporters in New Hampshire. “We have to do our part in making sure we have the capabilities and the skills to be competitive.”

    Asked about her position on fast-track authority, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said Wednesday that “while this is still being negotiated, she will be watching closely to see what is being done to crack down on currency manipulation, improve labor rights, protect the environment and health, promote transparency and open new opportunities for our small businesses to export overseas.”

    For the Clinton campaign, keeping Democrats in Congress in its good graces seems to be a priority. On Tuesday, campaign chairman John Podesta and national political director Amanda Renteria met with Senate Democrats over lunch to provide an introduction of sorts and give a general overview of the campaign. While trade issues did not come up during that short session, they did briefly during a meet-and-greet event between senior Clinton campaign officials and House Democrats Tuesday at the Capitol Hill home of Rep. Rosa DeLauro ofof Connecticut, one of Congress’ most outspoken critics of the trade deal.

    DeLauro, and some other leading liberal Democrats, appeared willing to give Clinton a pass on the matter — for now.

    “Every presidential candidate should make themselves known on this issue,” DeLauro said. “They will and they will be asked the question. My attention is singularly focused on defeating this in the House.”

    Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.) added: “I have never had a president agree with me on trade policy in my 28 years in Congress. … I’d love to have her come out against it, but it’s not a litmus test.”

    Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) sympathized with the position Clinton is now in, noting that she was a senior Cabinet official under Obama, who badly wants the trade deal.

    “It’s a delicate situation,” Schatz said. “And we understand that.”

    Others appeared wary of crossing Clinton.

    “I’m only commenting on the process before the committee,” said Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), a sharp critic of the deal, when asked about Clinton.

    It’s also sensitive with the Elizabeth Warren wing of the party that Clinton is now trying to court, which rails on income inequality, big banks and trade deals. Warren and Obama have been feuding publicly over trade this week; Obama went so far as to call out the Massachusetts senator as “wrong on this” and Warren responded in kind.

    Warren’s spokeswoman, Lacey Rose, did not respond to multiple inquiries on whether her boss would like Clinton to speak out against the deal.

    Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent liberal firebrand who may run for president, upended the Senate’s Wednesday schedule to voice his displeasure over the trade deal and called on Clinton to step up.

    “I think Secretary Clinton and every Republican candidate — and all candidates — have got to say, ‘Enough is enough, we need new trade policies,” Sanders said in an interview.

    Still, even some Democrats who weren’t critical of Clinton said — eventually — she would have to assert her preference on whether she backs the fast-track bill.

    “This is a major issue, and I think Hillary Clinton will be discussing this at some point in time and giving her view,” said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.

  100. Hillary should have listened to Big Pink and announced in July.

    According to Fox News, Hillary is selling uranium to Iran through the Clinton Foundation.

    Hillary gets very special treatment.

  101. According to Fox News, Hillary is selling uranium to Iran through the Clinton Foundation.

    There’s a seed of truth to that. The Russian uranium company that lined the pockets of Bill Clinton and the Clinton Global Initiative while getting US government approval to purchase the US uranium company is surely supplying Iran’s uranium.

    Allowing the Russians to control the global uranium market (even large US mining rights) is strategically questionable. It’s a fair topic of conversation for a presidential candidate whose husband pocketed a $500,000 speaking fee in Russia for conference with the leaders of the Russian firm while the issue was under consideration at the State Department.

  102. Here’s the way right wing blog Town Hall summarizes (I think accurately) Hillary’s Russian uranium problem:

    The Clinton campaign insists that there’s no direct evidence pointing to corrupt influence peddling, but this entire story reeks to high heaven. The fact that it arises from ‘Clinton Cash’ is additionally problematic for Hillaryworld, given their efforts to dismiss the author as a right-wing hack peddling “distractions” and “conspiracies.” But here we have solid proof that while the Clintons raked in millions from Russian interests for their foundation and themselves personally, a suspect transaction to cede a major stake in US uranium capacity to Vladimir Putin snaked its way into fruition, securing a key national security-related green light from Hillary’s State Department along the way. Meanwhile, vows on transparency and ensuring Russian accountability were ignored and discarded by the Clintons — with Hillary conducting all of her official business on a since-culled and -destroyed private email server (without any oversight) throughout, against every rule in the book. At a bare minimum, this entire imbroglio is a gleaming monument to the “appearance of impropriety.” It very much looks like the Clintons enriched themselves by renting out US foreign policy. To wealthy Russians. On a matter of national security. And Hillary’s campaign is responding by protesting that the Times hasn’t established and connected each dot in the quid pro quo. This story alone could be enough to end a less powerful candidate’s presidential campaign.

  103. HWC,

    “securing a key national security-related green light from Hillary’s State Department along the way.”

    The story is full of holes and they did not connect the dots.

    The give away is the timing before the book is even out.

  104. HWC,

    I saw the Fox stuff. They have shown no data. No documents. No proof she did or had the authority to green light anything. It is puke pumped 24/7 before the facts in the book can be examined.

    If they had a solid time line with documents, they would show it.

    How can you fall for such swill?

  105. The State Dept was absolutely one of the US government agencies that would have to sign off on Russian investment in US uranium mining rights. The Clinton campaign talking points suggest that this was something that would have been handled by underlings. The NYT tracked down a Bush era State Dept official tasked with these sorts of trade/investment issues. He said that something with strategic ramifications like selling US uranium mines to Russia would absolutely be kicked up to the Sec. of State level. Not even a moment’s consideration to handle it at lower levels.

    But, I’m sure Clinton can explain exactly what happened and provide all the e-mails to back it up. Oh, wait… that’s right… e-mails about the Clinton Foundation were “personal” and wiped clean from her personal server. Darn. What rotten luck….

  106. Oh, and Reuters is reporting that the Clinton charities are refiled amended tax returns to correct returns that mistakenly showed no foreign government donations:

    (Reuters) – Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors….

    For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

    Those entries were errors, according to the foundation: several foreign governments continued to give tens of millions of dollars toward the foundation’s work on climate change and economic development through this three-year period. Those governments were identified on the foundation’s annually updated donor list, along with broad indications of how much each had cumulatively given since they began donating.

    There was a heavily reported, but never released, memo of understanding when Clinton became SoS that the Clinton Foundation would not accept foreign government contributions and would make all donors publicly known.

  107. Here’s the Clinton campaign talking points memo:

    1. The essential fact is that Hillary Clinton was not involved in the State Department’s review of the sale to the Russians. While it is true that the State Department sits on the multi-agency, inter-governmental panel that reviews deals like this one, Hillary Clinton herself did not participate in the review or direct the Department to take any position on the sale of Uranium One. This is consistent with past practice; historically, matters pertaining to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (C.F.I.U.S.) do not rise to the Secretary’s level. Rather, it is the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs who serves as the State Department’s principal representative to C.F.I.U.S. The individual who held that post in 2010 was Jose Fernandez, and he has personally attested that then-Secretary Clinton never interfered with him, saying “Mrs. Clinton never intervened with me on any C.F.I.U.S. matter.”

    So, basically, the Clinton Foundation pocketed millions. The Clintons personally pocketed a $500,000 speaking fee. But, there was no quid pro quo. Hillary didn’t help with the approval of the Russian deal.

  108. NYT & Reuters. Damned. Somebody reaalllly doesn’t want her to get the nom. If they Big Media keeps pouring it on at THIS high volume, she may withdraw. Then they can have the totalitarian fake indian princess they want instead. .

  109. OK, lets say that Clinton wasn’t involved. What does it say about the judgement of a Secretary of State who apparently didn’t think it was a bad idea for Vladimir Putin to control the world’s uranium market and a big chunk of US uranium reserves?

  110. NYT & Reuters. Damned. Somebody reaalllly doesn’t want her to get the nom. If they Big Media keeps pouring it on at THIS high volume, she may withdraw. Then they can have the totalitarian fake indian princess they want instead.

    There is a theory emerging that Dems have decided that Hillary will lose and are trying to get her out of the race now.

    Taegan Goddard
    A plugged-in Democrat just told me he’s getting the same sinking feeling he had when John Kerry was the nominee

    If I were a Republican kingmaker, I’d be praying that she stays in the race.

    BTW, if you want my personal opinion? I don’t think the Clintons are any more corrupt than Democrats in general. I think Hillary is just wired like Richard Nixon. She believes everyone is always out to get her and will always behave in ways that make her look shady, even when there is no reason to. Now, she is going be hoisted by the petards of her own e-mail server…

  111. I guess those of us that no longer look at FoxNews as far and balanced, are getting constant reminders of the GOP point of view here on Big Pink.

    Oh well, guess it isn’t any worse than it’s always been, and isn’t as bad as it’s going to get for Hillary until the election is over.

    Maybe ‘Big Pink’ also stands for a big bottle of this:

  112. Frankly, all of that is just a buzzing noise to me. Hillary is still the only adult in a room full of screaming toddlers, and I don’t expect that to change on election day next year whether or not she is a candidate.

  113. blowme0bama
    April 23, 2015 at 9:53 pm

    NYT & Reuters. Damned. Somebody reaalllly doesn’t want her to get the nom. If they Big Media keeps pouring it on at THIS high volume, she may withdraw. Then they can have the totalitarian fake indian princess they want instead. .


    The chattering class is really is going blatto over this.

    Its the Palin problem all over again: she tells them she does not intend to kiss their ass—the way Ruberico and Lap dog Cain do.

    They have taken leave of their senses.

    For without her so that they and their party are holding the deadman’s hand.

    The gay marriage meme has about run its course so they need something else to chatter about.

    They are a living example of the Marine Corps (or as Obama would say corpseman): opinions are like assholes—they all have got them.

  114. Let’s be honest here. This is not journalism, and these people are not journalists. They are pond scum. And what we have here is vendetta masquerading as journalism.

  115. I just think the level of corruption in Democratic/Do-gooder Initiative/Save the World Charities is so deep that it is inescapable. Just look at something like Solyndra and the amount of money funneled to cronies for electric cars. It’s systemic and rotten. So much a part of the culture, they don’t even see it.

  116. This from the same assholes who never once held Obama accountable for anything.

    I’ve seen Republicans surmise that Obama/Jarrett are behind the hatchet job. I’d put some money on that. This is definitely Dem on Dem crime.

    The Dems are really screwed. If it’s Clinton, the meme is set. She is defined. If not Hillary? Who? Gropin’ Joe?

  117. Now that Neimoy has slipped the mortal coyle, those Vulcan ears of his have passed to Marco Rubio. Ever seen those ears? They are from another planet. I think he is like Obama: an interplanetary traveler who has come here to “serve” the American People—-au brochette.

  118. Rubio is going to be great for the Republican party whether he gets the nomination or not. Probably better if he doesn’t.

  119. Obama/Jarrett: the only problem with that is it tends to be the single explanation for everything. First of all, they aint that good and their power is waning. Second, just to be objective for a moment, a lot of this is self inflicted by Hillary herself. The only thing I am sure of here is the lack of honesty, integrity and bona fides of big media. One would think that someone at or near the top of those organizations would be smart enough to realize that is she leaves the race, she will not raise the $2.5 billion, in which case they will lose the vigorish they plan to extort from the 2016 election. In that sense, they are working to defeat their own interests.

  120. Rubio is going to be great for the Republican party
    Not necessarily.

    The base hates his guts for his betrayal of constituents on the immigration issue.

    He should forget about running for president and put on a cheer leaders dress and pom poms.

    Him with those fashionable ears who says one thing in English and another in Spanish.

    Obama III he is.

  121. The Republican base hates everybody for something! As someone who is inclined towards Republicans winning elections these days, I’m glad to see them spread the hate around a little. Harder to define them in some monolithic kookie way. Some of them are “fer” immigration. Some are “agin” it. Some of them are “agin” gay marriage. Some of them are gay. It’s nice to see diversity. The old stereotypes just don’t apply.

    Take a hard-core Republican state like South Carolina. I mean everyone in the media knows how backwards and racist and so forth they are, right? The three top elected officials, all Republican:

    Black male
    Sikh female
    Gay male

  122. Romney transcript:

    “Yeah, I’ve got to tell you, I was stunned by it,” Romney replied. “I mean, it looks like bribery. I mean, there was every appearance that Hillary Clinton was bribed to grease the sale of 20 percent of America’s uranium production to Russia.”

    “And then it was covered up by lying about a meeting in her home with the principals, and by erasing emails,” he continued. “And I presume we might know for sure whether there was or was not bribery if she hadn’t wiped out thousand of emails. But this is a very, very serious series of facts, and it looks like bribery.”

  123. Hwc,

    It looks very bad for Hillary. You can’t be SOS, look the other way when your husband, the ex President is getting $500,000 for speaking engagements in Russia, and, oh by the way…URUranium…no problem…I see nothing, I hear nothing…Sargent Schultz SOS…let me get my emails to prove no wrong doing…oops… anyone to be trusted? These ridiculous decisions…was it all a ride? Who is this person, this couple. ..
    It’s not all conspiracy. ..They keep reinventing Monica and the blue dress.

  124. HWC,

    The case you are trying to make against Clinton on the uranium does not hold water. Innuendo and smears. Particularly offensive considering that the elected official (the POTUS) made no bones about selling us out to the Russians:

    President Obama was caught on a hot mic telling Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Monday that if given “space,” he’ll have more flexibility “after my election” for negotiations on issues like missile defense. “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,” Obama told the Russian leader.

  125. wbboei

    April 23, 2015 at 11:49 pm

    This from the same assholes who never once held Obama accountable for anything.

    Not a *finger* will be pointed in Precious’s direction even though it all happened under his watch. Where were these jackasses when it was happening 2+ years ago?

  126. The Republican base hates everybody for something!
    I see it differently.

    I think the hate Washington politicians, bureaucrats and big media whores who are living large off them.

    They are supportive of men of principle like Cruz and Lee who are smarter than their political counterparts, have distinguished resumes, support the constitution and hold the political class accountable for its crimes against the nation, which are beyond the reach of the criminal law, term limits, and/or the outrage of the voters because of the inherent advantages of incumbency. They know in their gut that power corrupts, and absolute power attracts corrupt people and it corrupts absolutely, as we see with Reid, Pelosi, McConnell and Boehner and most especially the big media beloved messiah. In sum, they would take Shakepeare’s advice to first kill all the lawyers, and apply it to the parasitic political class, and let God sort them out. Suffice it to say, they have a point.

  127. Not a *finger* will be pointed in Precious’s direction even though it all happened under his watch. Where were these jackasses when it was happening 2+ years ago?
    Which is why:

    1. no one should take them seriously, and-

    2. no one should mistake them for journalists.

    They are hard core left wing ideologues who make a market in lies and distortion.

  128. Seriously, I wouldn’t expect a lot of positive news stories about he Democrat nominee from Fox. Just like you won’t see positive stories about the Republican candidates from CNN or ABC or NBC.


    I don’t expect a thing from FOX,CNN, ABC or NBC but bias, half-truths and outright lies.

    I find it hard to believe that Hillary and Bill Clinton didn’t figure on the Russian/Uranium issue being raised to begin with. And, I wouldn’t be too concerned about Hillary dropping out because the Dims have decided not to let her win. My guess is that she knows a lot more than we do about the treachery that the Dims are planning. The Crazy Left Dims tried to destroy her in 2008, and had every major media outlet as an ally. She still whipped Obama’s ass in terms of popular vote in the primary. The only way they and he “beat” her was by stealing her damn votes and rigging the caucuses.

    The Dims with the aid of big media couldn’t legitimately take her down then. I don’t they they have what it takes to take her down now.

  129. The scariest thing about the Crazy Left is their willingness to nominate someone who has a snow ball’s chance in hell of winning the G
    Scary. Yea. But strategic. In order to destroy this nation, and the middle class, they need a platform on which to do so. A national party with offices in ever state which takes its marching orders from their high command is the perfect platform for that. They can afford to lose an election. But they can ill afford to lose the platform which they gained for the first time in their miserable existence which stretches back to the storming of the Bastille. Without a platform for “peaceful change”, they would have to resort to violence. ISIS is a good example of a one trick pony whose response to every issue is the same—off with their heads. Anything less is counter revolution or a blasphemy on the profit. A movement without nuance which survives only on hate and killing eventually burns itself out—until Obama give them nuclear weapons as well. Not that will give it to them per se you understand. He will simply not raise a finger to prevent them from getting it and if our allies object he will give orders to shoot down their planes.

  130. From the Oh No, He Didn’t department:

    Hot Air has the rest of the Romney transcript. Romney has gone all “Harry Reid” on Clinton (remember Reid’s charges that Romney didn’t pay taxes)…

    Wow… Mitt has taken the gloves off:

    HH: Now Governor Romney, Brian Fallon, a spokesperson for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said, “No one has produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as Secretary of State to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation. To suggest the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless.” Is that a sufficient response?

    MR: Well, it’s blah, blah, blah. The story that came from the New York Times is pretty straightforward, which is that millions upon millions of dollars were given to the Clinton Foundation at the same time by a group of people who had uranium assets, and shortly thereafter, these people came to the State Department for approval to be able to sell these assets to Russia for a huge price tag. And those are the facts. And if those things are connected, as they certainly seem to be, it’s a form of bribery. And that’s what it appears to be, and that is of course what’s going to have to be delved into, and I’m afraid this is a, this is bigger than just her presidential campaign. I mean, this is a question about whether or not the United States Secretary of State was bribed to grease the sale of strategic assets to Russia.


  131. Well, how interesting that Mitt didn’t find his balls when he was running against Obama. I guess now that a female is candidate to beat thought he would get tough. How coincidental is it that his religion doesn’t have the best record on its treatment of women? Maybe he was so concerned about being labeled a “RACIST” he never his campaign of 2013 was about as tough and hard as whipped cream. Being called “sexist” is no big deal, should anyone even make such an accusation? Being sexist was apparently no big deal in 2008 – not to media (several of whom exhibited blatant sexism and made vile sexist comments about Hillary and Palin; not to the Dims – well, not until after they had stolen the nomination from Hillary, at which point Screamin Dean pretended to give a bit of a damn, after denying knowing of the sexism previously because he didn’t have a TV or some such bull shit.

    WTG Mitt, you are about as impressive as you were in 2008. In other words, you suck.

  132. sorry about the damn unreadable post. Some of the errors can be blamed on the fact that the autocorrect got me again. The rest, on about 20 damn interruptions.

  133. I don’t think it’s about Hillary being a woman so much as he’s mad as hell he’s not running, that he made serious errors NOT being tough, and he wants to be relevant.

  134. Jonah Goldberg gets it right:

    Still, I suspect that the conclusion that this was all simply about payoffs probably misses the mark. Sure, the Clintons like money. That’s obvious. But the money is incidental to what’s really behind all of this: a mixture of entitlement and machine politics.

    The Clintons are like the Tudors of the Ozarks. They believe they are royalty, but they also understand that even monarchs need friends. The Clinton Foundation is the perfect vehicle for their ambition. Like the medieval Catholic Church, it blurs the lines between ideals and interests. On the one hand, it does yeoman’s work in the Church of Liberal Dogoodery, but it also provides a conduit for business interests, foreign governments, academics, activists, and journalists to gain access to the imperial court-in-waiting.

    Even if Hillary hadn’t conveniently wiped her servers clean, I suspect there wouldn’t be a lot of e-mails about quid-pro-quos. Such transactions aren’t made in the language of the bazaar, but in the lingua franca of loyalty, friendship, and noblesse oblige. Yes, Clinton Inc. needs money, but the money is likely seen more as tribute than bribery, a bit of coin offered up as a sign of loyalty to the coming Ozarkian Restoration — a restoration that may just have to wait for Chelsea.

    It’s endemic to very machine politics core of the Democrat party.

  135. In it’s essence, the Clinton Foundation was just an international lobbying firm. You “donate”, we use our influence with governments and politicians to promote your interests.

  136. Everybody wins. Take the Kazakhstan dictator’s approval of the Canadian businessman’s purchase of Kazakhstan uranium mines.

    The dictator gets Bill Clinton giving a speech touting Kazakhstan’s record on human rights. The Canadian businessman gets the dictator’s approval for his acquisition. Clinton Foundation gets a couple of million in donations from the Canadian businessman and free air travel. And, Clinton gets a $500,000 speaking fee.

    Just a veritable monument to win/win. Quids for everyone. Quos for everyone! All with no direct payments between the parties. Everything laundered through charitable organizations and conferences. It’s really quite brilliant.

  137. gonzotx
    April 24, 2015 at 12:13 pm
    I don’t think it’s about Hillary being a woman so much as he’s mad as hell he’s not running, that he made serious errors NOT being tough, and he wants to be relevant.

    In truth, I don’t think its ALL about Hillary being a woman. But, were Obama a candidate now,, would Mitt be coming on as strong? I seriously doubt it. He would not want to be perceived as racist – which has been and would be the mantra of the crazy left if Mitt would have been tough on O. If a male other than O were in Hillary’s position today – the party front runner – would Mitt’s response been as strong? I don’t doubt he would have been less of a limp noodle than in 2012, but I still do not believe he would have been as hard hitting with another man. Most people aren’t – which is the sneaky, insidious thing about sexism. It does not appear to be blatant, but some people just feel more free – less afraid to slam a female than a man – tho MSM tried to play it off in 2008, as the other way around.

    Obviously, I can’t prove my theory. Others may have differing thoughts on the issue.

  138. Personally, I think men in general find attacking another male more difficult. Some like Mitt, tread lightly because they foresee that the counter attack might shed their own blood.

    Now attacking a woman that tries her best to use her velvet gloves…that is someone that men think they can pick, pick, pick at, until- they push the wrong button.

  139. freespirit
    April 24, 2015 at 3:51 pm

    I’m curious about the answer to that question too, Free…although I think I already know.

  140. hwc, may ask are you for or against Hillary for president?

    The last time I voted for a Democrat was voting for Hillary in the Presidential primary in my state in 2008. I do not anticipate voting for a Democrat in the future, but I have not made any decisions about 2016. I don’t even have a clue who the nominees will be, so it’s a little early to be deciding.

    I do not think that Hillary Clinton will be the Democrat nominee in 2016. If she were the nominee, here’s the problem in a nutshell:

    She has been a 100% all-in supporter of Obama’s policies and she has been a unimaginable failure as Sec. of State. US foreign policy is in shambles. I personally, could not vote for a continuation of Obama policies.

  141. Now, may I ask you a question?

    How does Hillary gracefully walk away from the race? Those discussions have to be taking place. Krauthammer believes she’ll just stonewall and dismiss everything as ol’ news in 2016, but I’ve seen what happens when there is blood in the water in politics.

Comments are closed.