Thursday, January 9, 2014

Current Events - January 9, 2014

Covert cronies? Obama’s attorney general appoints Obama donor to investigate Obama’s IRS

By Neil Munro
President Barack Obama’s deputies have picked one of his political donors to investigate the IRS’ attack on independent political groups during the 2012 election, according to California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House investigations committee.
“We request you immediately remove Ms. [Barbara] Bosserman from the ongoing investigation,” said a Jan. 8 letter from Issa to Attorney General Eric Holder.
The secret selection of Barbara Bosserman, a lawyer in the Department of Justice’s civil rights division, was revealed by a committee investigation after the DOJ stonewalled the legislators.
Bosserman contributed $6,100 to Obama’s political campaigns from 2008 to 2012.



Guess How Much It Costs to Become a U.S. Ambassador

Obama nominates four bundlers for ambassador posts

 President Obama tapped four major Democratic donors for ambassador positions on Monday, continuing a long tradition of rewarding campaign fundraisers with posh, taxpayer-funded overseas positions.
All four nominees are deep-pocketed donors who spent upwards of $100,000 bankrolling the Democratic Party. The Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan transparency watchdog, compiled a list of the recent nominees:


  • Colleen Bell, a Hollywood soap opera producer whom Obama has tapped to be ambassador to Hungary, has donated more than $293,000. Her husband, fellow “The Bold and the Beautiful” producer Bradley Bell, was an especially enthusiastic funder of the Obama campaign. The couple also hosted a star-studded fundraiser for the president at their home during the last campaign, PT records reveal.


  • Dwight Bush, a DC investment banker who hopes to take over the embassy in Morocco, has, together with his son, Dwight Bush Jr., made more than $140,000 in campaign contributions.With a few strategic exceptions that money went  almost entirely to Democrats.

‘Cataclysmic’: What You Probably Didn’t Know About Germany Getting Its Gold Back From the Federal Reserve

By Erica Ritz
What does Germany requesting the return of its gold from the Federal Reserve have to do with you? Glenn Beck argued on his radio and television programs Wednesday that if what he suspects is true, it could bring about an unprecedented financial crash on a global scale. His radio co-host Pat Gray described it as potentially “cataclysmic.”
“Subprime crisis, do you remember that?” Beck asked. “Imagine that crash on a global scale, and instead of houses it’s gold, which backs all of our money, and gold that is not really owned by anyone. Our money becomes worthless.”
Beck began with some background for those unfamiliar with the esoteric subject, explaining that the world essentially has a system in place similar to a massive safety deposit box. If, for example, you put your wedding ring in a box at the bank — in this case the Federal Reserve — you expect to get that exact ring back, not a roughly equal amount of gold and diamonds.
“When the countries give their gold … to the Federal Reserve – full faith and credit in the United States – they gave it to the Federal Reserve and each of them marked their gold,” Beck said on his radio program. “…And in this case, it says Bundesbank, Germany.”
Germany has had billions of dollars worth of gold in the Federal Reserve for decades, but announced last year that it would like at least a percentage of it returned by 2014, and more in subsequent years. The initial request generated massive international speculation, but the actual return so far has been less publicized.
Beck referenced a report from Zero Hedge indicating the initial gold returned to Germany by the United States “didn’t have the stamp on it.” The Federal Reserve reportedly said it had to melt down the gold for transport.
 But one other explanation, Beck noted, could be that the Federal Reserve has already used or sold Germany’s gold, and is now scrambling to replace it.
Beck noted that details are scarce and virtually impossible to confirm, but speculated: “I think this is your first real indication that there is no gold. There is no gold in Fort Knox. There is no gold in the Federal Reserve.”
“Or,” he added, “there’s … very little gold left.”
Speaking on his television program, Beck said “the world needs to demand accountability from the Federal Reserve.”
“I don’t think it’s going to end well when we do,” he cautioned. “In fact, I think it ends horribly for everyone. But better face the facts right now…”
He warned: “You will be blamed for stealing the world’s treasure. America is the globe’s banker, and it is only a matter of time before all of the world, and the rest of us as well, find out ‘we ain’t got nothing.’ Who does?”

Road Rage


Chris Christie, the George Washington Bridge and the IRS.

 By James Taranto
....One of Obama's worst traits is his unvarnished contempt for his political opponents. The new revelations from Trenton suggest that Christie's administration, if not the man himself, has a similar quality.
Its sheer pettiness is what distinguishes the GWB scandal from the ObamaCare and IRS ones. The ObamaCare fraud was in the service of an ambitious ideological agenda, and as we have argued, the 2012 election was close enough that it is possible the IRS's suppression of opposition was necessary to secure the president a second term. Christie, by contrast, is not much of an ideologue and was cruising to an easy re-election.

In the latter regard, the bridge shenanigans look more like the Watergate burglary--a gratuitous misuse of power. "Reporters will eventually demand to know . . . what Christie knew and when he knew it," observes conservative blogger Sean Davis. "None of the defenses now available to Christie--intentional deceit or intentional ignorance--paint him in a favorable light." That's especially true if voters two years from now are looking for a corrective to the corruption and deception of the Obama years.
By Christopher Bedford
....The obvious answer is Chris Christie did it for Chris Christie. Just like with all of his other stunts. And once we see Christie as he is — a man who would gridlock an entire city of his own constituents for nearly a week because its mayor didn’t join the boatload of Democrats backing his sure victory — his past gallantry for the citizens of New Jersey seems, well, a little less credible.
Like that time Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney gave Christie the national stage to support his candidacy and he spent it telling the country about Chris Christie, then told an angry Romney aide, ”I’m tired of you people! Leave me the fuck alone!”
Like that time he scheduled a separate, special election day so he wouldn’t have to share the ticket with a Republican running against a popular black candidate — ensuring a higher share of the black vote, which his campaign proudly touted as proof that he is a viable national candidate.
Like when he boosted his already swollen numbers with New Jersey Democrats by slamming Washington’s few fiscal conservatives for standing up to a “relief” bill so corrupt, bloated and wasteful that New York City’s own Wall Street Journal called it a “disgrace to the memory of the victims.” 
And like that time he blocked the bridge.

There’s no doubt that Mr. Christie has a record of hard-fought wins against powerful, entrenched interests in a state where they called the shots just five years prior. But so did Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who faced a significantly more hostile foe without threats, bluster or even a raised voice.

Chamber of Commerce throws down the gauntlet to Tea Party

By Rick Moran
Tom Donohue, president and CEO of the US Chamber of Commerce, gave his annual "State of American Business" speech and didn't pull any punches toward the Tea Party.

Claiming he wasn't "attacking" the Tea Party, going so far as claiming that they agree with many Tea Party positions, Donohue nevertheless made it clear which side of the GOP civil war he's on.

The Hill:


"In primaries and in the general election, we will support candidates who want to work within the legislative process to solve the nation's problems and who understand that business is not the problem, business is a big part of the solution," he said during his annual State of American Business address.
...The die is cast, the Rubicon has been crossed - there's no going back now. Supporting incumbents is one thing. But challenging Amash, a Ron/Rand Paulite and Tea Party favorite steps over the line. The Chamber's goal is nothing less than an attempt to marginalize the Tea Party within the Republican party.What do they now expect to happen? They've just energized the very group they want to sideline. Along with Karl Rove's American Crossroads PAC and other outside establishment groups who are getting involved in primaries, the Chamber of Commerce and their allies will now seek to dictate to local people who they should be supporting for federal office. Even if successful, the effort will almost certainly backfire. It ups the possibility that the right will form a third party, while at the very least, force many Tea Party supporters to sit at home on election day.
It's a stupid move and could cost the GOP on election day.

Dems desperately try to blame 'Big Business' for Obamacare rollout woes

By Rick Moran
...From Politico
Facing an onslaught of constituent frustration over problems with online exchanges, several Democrats have started pointing fingers at the companies and senior executives in their home states that have contracts to get the health care websites up and running.
Democrats have made a version of the argument in Washington in recent months, defending the health care law not only from Republican attacks that it's a failure -- but from the line that government itself can't do big things.
Now that rhetoric -- blame the contractors -- is hitting local events.
The bottom line is simple: No one believes them. Democrats have zero credibility. The fact is, the companies can only design a website according to specifications. They didn't come up with those specs, government did.
Blaming the companies is like blaming a contractor for building you an ugly house. It's not their fault that you were dumb enough to rely on an amateur architect.

Change the Name to Change the Game

By Jim Yardley
...[Representative] Sheila Jackson Lee must have brushed up on her Orwell just before the speech because she recommended a change in the term "welfare" to the phrase "a transitional living fund." She also referred to the "emergency" unemployment measure as "a transitional outreach to individuals who are chronically unemployed."
One has to wonder exactly what these individuals are transitioning to? Transitioning back to gainful employment? Transitioning to disability benefits instead of unemployment? Or are they trying to transition to something stable and with which they are able to support their families, like welfare?
One would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the efforts of Progressive Democrats to try rebranding their shopworn products to sell them just one more time.
Perhaps some would view my agreement with the congresswoman's idea of change the name to change the game, but agree with it, I do. Of course, like Hillary, I prefer to revert to a label from an earlier era before "welfare" became the left-wing's label du jour. How about we try using the label "Home Relief" that was such a hit during the Great Depression? Or perhaps go back even further in history and use a label used not only in the United States, or even western Europe, but was found all over the world. The word I have in mind is "Charity". In certain Islamic cultures this might also be called "Alms." Of course that would present a whole new set of problems for Lee and her fellow travelers. How would the change the phrase "entitlement"? I mean, "Charity is an entitlement" doesn't exactly flow easily off the tongue, does it?
I'm sure the creative geniuses of the Democratic Party will find a way, though. They have over a century of experience at it. After all, Joseph Goebbels credits the success of his efforts in subverting the German populace to be compliant with der Führer's policies, whims and idiocies to what he learned while studying how the Wilson administration did it here, by employing Edward Bernays.
Bernays was the author of Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923) and Propaganda (1928) -- both of which were heavily utilized by Adolf Hitler's Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels. Need more be said?
Change the name and change the game.
By Ken Blackwell and Bob Morrison
...Here is something to talk about from today, right now. Noam Scheiber writes for the premier journal of the Left, The New Republic. In the current issue, Scheiber has penned "How Obamacare Actually Paves the Way Toward Single Payer." 
It's a remarkable piece of journalism. Scheiber responds to the complaint of Michael Moore that Obamacare did not go far enough.




I happen to agree with Moore's basic sentiment...And yet I am much more sympathetic to Obamacare  than Moore. He thinks it's awful. I consider it a deceptively sneaky way to get the health care system both of us really want.



Scheiber uses deceptively sneaky not as a conservative might use it. It's not pejorative. He uses the term as a compliment. He likes the fact that it is deceptive and sneaky. He approves of the lie.
...He, they, all of them wanted all along to force Americans into a single payer system, but they didn't have the votes -- in Congress, or in the nation -- to get what they wanted.
So they had to employ a deceptively sneaky ruse. They had to lie about our being able to keep our own insurance if we preferred it. They had to lie about where Obamacare might eventually lead.
This article by Noam Scheiber goes beyond any Republican talking points or any conservative critiques. It is candid, but candid about lies. And about the need to lie.
How can we react except to denounce it? It not just the measure we oppose, although oppose it we must. It is the deceptively sneaky way they went about imposing Obamacare on the nation that we must oppose. From the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase, to the Christmas Eve sooty slide down the Senate chimney, to the absurd Supreme Court ruling that it must be a tax if it looks like a tax -- even if it failed to originate in the House of Representatives as the Constitution plainly commands; all of this we must oppose.
And we must oppose lying as a political practice. If we condone lying as Noam Scheiber condones it, our political life will end. We cannot expect to survive if the consent of the governed is fraudulently obtained. We may someday agree to adopt a single payer system. The British have accepted it. But in their defense (defence), the Socialists in Britain were honest and straightforward about what they wanted to achieve. They never deceived the British people at the polls about what they would do.
This move toward socialism by stealth will always de-legitimize the goals of the Left. Worse, it will de-legitimize government itself, even as it poisons the well of our political life.

3 Reasons Why the Radical Anti-Discipline Policies at DOJ Will Outlast the Obama Era

 By J. Christian Adams
....Republicans in Congress have shown minimal skill in stopping these radical racialist programs.  Instead of defunding the components of the DOJ that perpetrate these lawless policies, they continue to vote for spending resolutions and budgets that fuel them.
And even if the GOP takes control of the Justice Department in 2017, it will take an attorney general willing to roll up his or her sleeves and clean out the mess inside the Civil Rights Division that is fueling these nutty and lawless policies.  Only a few GOP figures understand the scope of the problem and have the courage to correct it.  Among them are people like Representatives Louie Gohmert and Trey Gowdy and Senators Jeff Sessions and John Cornyn.
Here are three reasons why even these four would struggle in 2017 to reverse this lawless nuttiness:

1. Imbedded Radicals at DOJ 

Republicans make an enormous mistake to assume that Eric Holder is behind every bad idea and the bad policies end when the GOP takes control. Wrong. PJ Media has reported over the last three years about the radical transformation of the civil service taking place inside the Justice Department. These are career civil servants who cannot be removed from their positions easily, if at all. The radical anti-discipline policies are the concoction of the Educational Opportunities Section at the DOJ Civil Rights Division.

College plays the race card, literally, in anti-whiteness play called ‘The Race Card Project’

 By Robby Soave
A public university hosted a theater productions in which actors lamented their whiteness, whined about “all white spaces” in American society and claimed that striving for colorblindness is tantamount to racism.
That university is the University of Oregon, which hosted an adaptation of “The Race Card Project,” last semester, according to Campus Reform.
The production is based off the work of former NPR host Michele Norris, who runs a website that encourages people to play their own personal race card by coining a six-word sentence about their experiences with race and posting it on her blog.

White House: U.S. is Cold Because Planet is Hot

By Wynton Hall
The White House released a video on Wednesday assuring Americans that the extreme cold freezing the nation does not disprove global warming, that the U.S. is extremely cold because the planet is increasingly hot. 
"If you've been hearing that extreme cold spells, like the one that we're having in the United States now, disprove global warming, don't believe it," warned President Barack Obama's Science and Technology Advisor, Dr. John Holdren. "No single weather episode can either prove or disprove global climate change."
By David Ignatius
Four years ago, al-Qaeda appeared to have been destroyed in Iraq. Last week, fighters from the group captured Fallujah, a city where hundreds of Americans were killed or wounded in the last decade fighting the jihadists. How did this stunning reversal of fortune happen?
Like everything else about Iraq, this is a tragic and confusing story. But two points seem clear: First, the Obama administration, in its rush to leave the country, allowed the sectarian Shiite government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to undo many of the gains made against al-Qaeda. Second, Iran has waged a brilliant covert-action campaign that turned Maliki and Iraq into virtual clients of Tehran — and in the process alienated Sunnis and pushed them toward extremism.
...The sectarian cleavage in Iraq has widened since the United States departed. With Iraqi Shiites pulled toward Iran, Sunnis were drawn back toward the jihadist orbit — especially after Syria lurched into civil war. Al-Qaeda fighters relentlessly moved across the porous border and last year proclaimed themselves the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. This new jihadist magnet has drawn about 10,000 foreign fighters, many with European passports.
Al-Qaeda’s resurgence in Anbar has been chilling. Last week, hundreds of fighters, traveling in about 75 armed trucks, surged into Ramadi and took over police and gas stations there. Ramadi was largely cleared this week, thanks to Sunni tribal fighters. Fallujah will be harder to liberate. Maliki has heeded American advice not to allow the Iraqi army to storm the city, which would alienate the Sunni residents. Meanwhile, the Iraqi parliament has voted to put Sunni tribal fighters back on the payroll . But, tragically, a new war to drive al-Qaeda from the Euphrates Valley is beginning, just a few years after the terrorist group appeared to have been crushed there.

Say good-bye to our Middle East allies

 By Benny Avni
The Saudis just flipped the bird at President Obama. It’s hard to blame them: They’re just looking after their own interests in the increasingly chaotic Middle East. The question is when, if ever, America will get off the fence and start protecting its interests in the region.
In promising $3 billion to Lebanon to bolster its military, Riyadh attached two conditions: 1) that the cash go to the Lebanese army’s stalled drive to disarm the terrorists of Hezbollah, and 2) that Lebanon buy its arms from France.
...Why should we care? First, because Lebanon is only one theater in a widening war between Sunnis and Shiites. Just as in Syria and Iraq, that war’s victors are increasingly the terrorists — Iran’s proxy Hezbollah on the Shiite side, and al Qaeda types on the Sunni side. When either one wins, we may very well be forced back to war.
Yet America, the former go-to world leader, now refuses to help shape the region’s future, or even to cultivate allies among the Arab world’s different tribes. So the Saudis (and Iranians, and jihadis, and Russians and everybody else and his sister) are on the move, seeking their own allies.


The Meaning of Fallujah

By Michael Ledeen
....In the ebb and flow of the global war in which we are so reluctantly engaged, that was a moment to be seized.  Instead, our new leaders judged it was the perfect time to walk away.  They have been walking away ever since.  And they had plenty of support, from deep within American tradition, from that oft-fatal conviction that peace is normal and war is an aberration, when the opposite defines human history.  So we walked away, abandoning those who had staked their future to America’s commitment to freedom, and giving hope and time to our enemies, who regrouped and attacked again.  Thus, Iraq, where the slaughter often exceeds the death toll in Syria.  Thus, Syria itself.  And Lebanon.
Al-Qaeda, and others like them, can now say, “You see, Allah is indeed with us.  We are stronger than ever.  Much stronger.  We used to have bands of terrorists, but today we have armies.  The Americans have run away from Iraq, where our flag now flies, and they are running away from Afghanistan, where the Taliban are preparing to impose God’s will.  The future is clear.  We will win.  Join us, or perish.”
That is the meaning of Fallujah.  And everyone in the Middle East knows it.  These Americans can win some battles, but they do not have the stomach to win the war.
...That’s what happens when you deny reality and insist that you can achieve peace by making nice to your enemies;  you get more war, with even fewer good options than before.  George W. Bush bequeathed Obama a greatly weakened al-Qaeda, a lot of discouraged Islamists, and a cautious Iran.  Five years later, Obama faces rampant Islamic forces, new al-Qaeda armies, and an Iranian regime that believes he will bend to their wishes.
Our enemies expect to keep fighting until they have defeated us, even if they get beaten up along the way.  That’s Fallujah again, a sort of Islamist version of the Brezhnev doctrine:  once they’ve conquered territory, it’s rightfully theirs forever.  They think they’ve proven it.
Fallujah means we can expect things to get worse.  Why shouldn’t our enemies press ahead?  Wouldn’t you, in their boots?  And why should anyone think it’s strategically wise to bond with the new America?  The Egyptian generals will explain to you that the Americans can’t be trusted to support their friends.



Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)