Posts Tagged ‘Hillary Clinton’
Who looks foolish now?
When United States Senator Ron Johnson elicited the “what difference at this point does it make,” from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, he was lambasted and belittled by liberals in the media. They claimed Johnson was “smacked down,” “agonizingly ignorant,” “schooled,” and dabbling in “conspiracy theories.”
But as a series of Benghazi whistleblowers prepare to testify in Congress, the American public is expected to hear a number of new bombshells that detail lies, politics, a cover-up, and cowardice that reach the highest levels of power.
Read more by Colin Roth at RightWisconsin.com
An old-time trial lawyer once said, “When your case is weak, shout louder!”
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton shouted louder when asked about the Obama administration’s story last fall that the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. ambassador’s quarters in Benghazi, Libya, was due to an anti-Islamic video that someone in the United States had put on the Internet, and thereby provoked a protest that escalated into violence.
Read more by Thomas Sowell at IBD
Every nation-state has a body of laws woven into the fabric of society. As Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto has commented on extensively, the stronger the rule of law, the stronger the economy.
And by “stronger” laws, I mean laws that are impervious to tampering for personal or political gains. The connection between a sound judiciary and economic health is readily comprehensible, except maybe to a politician… businesses and individuals are far more likely to invest capital in a country with understandable laws that are impartially and universally enforced than if the opposite condition exists.
That’s because the lack of a consistent body of law breeds uncertainty and adds a huge element of risk for entrepreneurs. That is the case here in Argentina, where hardly a week goes by without La Presidenta and her meddlesome comrades cooking up some new hurdle for businesses to overcome.
Which brings me back to the matter at hand – American justice on a slippery slope.
Read more by David Galland at CaseyResearch.com
Every White House sooner or later succumbs to the temptation to cover up an embarrassment.
‘I do not think,” Nixon campaign aide Jeb Magruder told the Senate Watergate committee in the spring of 1973, “there was ever any discussion that there would not be a coverup.” Mr. Magruder’s lament aptly described the bureaucratic impulse to hide inconvenient facts that seizes every modern White House at some point. His testimony was brought to mind by the growing number of high-profile Republicans accusing the Obama White House of engaging in a coverup in the Benghazi case.
Much remains unknown about the terrorist attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans on Sept. 11. To fill in those gaps, three separate probes—by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the State Department’s Accountability Review Board, and various congressional committees—are now under way. But in our warp-speed information age, enough evidence has already accrued to the record to lead even dispassionate observers to ponder whether the term “coverup” applies.
Read more by JAMES ROSEN at Wall Street Journal
With a little help from the moderator, the president returns to his “energetic” pandering and deceptions.
–SNIP– Perhaps Hillary should sue him under the Lilly Ledbetter Act. She is making unequal pay and taking unequal blame for equal incompetence.
Pandering to single women remains Obama’s chief strategy, judging by this debate. His vision of America is that of the “Life of Julia,” a cradle-to-grave existence of radical individualism bankrolled by a paternalistic federal government. How that form of patriarchy represents an advance for “liberated” women is a matter he never bothers to explain. “Women are increasingly the breadwinners in the family,” he proudly announced, with his administration as the substitute husband, to whom they can turn for “free contraceptives,” food stamps, and college grants. His grandmother hailed from a heartier generation of women, he inadvertently acknowledged (a generation “that didn’t complain,” he said), while suggesting that the Sandra Flukes stand taller and stronger than them. Obama’s “empowerment” of women consists of turning them into wards of the state.
Read more by George Neumayr at American Spectator
The Washington Post trod over some familiar territory this past weekend with a 7,000-word retrospective on the Obama administration’s Middle East peace process misadventures. The account strives to put President Obama in a favorable light. But even the most sympathetic narrative of this period must come to grips with the president’s blundering, most of which was rooted in his determination to distance the United States from Israel in a vain attempt to score points with the Arab world. For the first three years of his presidency, Washington was focused on pressuring Israel, a policy that alienated the Jewish state but did nothing to nudge the Palestinians to make peace.
Read more by Jonathan S. Tobin at Commentary
Panic is setting in among the people who ran the Democratic Party prior to the miraculous arrival on the scene of Barack Hussein Obama and the perfect storm of events that propelled him into the White House.
These people, starting with Bill Clinton, the master Democratic politician of our era, can read the tea leaves, and the following factors alarm them:
1. Obama has energized his opposition.
Read more By Thomas Lifson at American Thinker
–SNIP– Behind the scenes, Democrats have been busy faking petition signatures, forging ballots and enlisting medical professionals to authorize fraudulent doctors’ notes for liberal teachers-union operatives protesting Republican opponents. It’s no laughing matter.
This week, four Democratic officials in Indiana were hit with felony charges related to petition fraud in the state’s 2008 primary. The prosecutions are a result of the local South Bend Tribune newspaper’s investigation last fall into “hundreds of county residents’ signatures” forged on petitions used to put Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the Democratic primary ballot. At least two whistle-blowing government officials came forward to expose the forgery racket, which court documents say was formulated by Democratic Party officials inside local party headquarters.
A veteran county Democratic Party chair, Butch Morgan, resigned in October over the scandal; three employees in the St. Joseph County voter registration office reportedly helped Morgan execute the scheme. Among the hundreds of unsuspecting residents whose names were illegally signed to the petitions: the prosecuting attorney in the case and a former Democratic governor of the state!
That’s the audacity of ACORN-style hoaxes.
Read more by Michelle Malkin
Former Gov. Joe Kernan says a signature on a petition to place Barack Obama’s name on Indiana’s 2008 primary ballot isn’t his, putting him among dozens of dubious signatures found in a newspaper’s investigation.
Kernan, a Democrat who campaigned for Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primary, told the South Bend Tribune that he didn’t sign the Obama document.
“No, not at all,” the former South Bend mayor said when asked whether the signature next to his name on the Obama petition looked like his own. “Nor does the printing look like mine.”
The Tribune reported Wednesday that it has talked with more than 40 people who say they didn’t sign ballot petitions submitted in St. Joseph County for Obama or Clinton, despite their names appearing on the documents.
Read more by the Associated Press at Chicago Tribune
Sarah Palin did not announce whether she would enter the 2012 presidential contest in a fiery and substantive speech in Iowa on Saturday, but she did make three more significant announcements that, in the long run, will potentially be more important than a potential future announcement date.
First, as part of a five point plan to revive America’s economy, Palin called for the elimination of the federal corporate income tax as a way to “break the back of crony capitalism.” Her reasons for eliminating the federal corporate income tax, though, were more important than the actual proposal because it was a way in which she drew a line to differentiate herself from not only President Barack Obama, but nearly every other GOP presidential candidate, most notably Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
Second, on the three year anniversary of her vice presidential acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in 2008 when Palin, a reform minded governor who had record approval ratings, invigorated the flailing McCain campaign, Palin cast herself squarely as the anti-McCain. Palin said that she could not understand why some people referred to Tea Partiers as “hobbits,” a clear reference to McCain’s remarks that denigrated a political movement his critics claim he shamelessly, like a typical politician, used to get re-elected only to turn his back on it once he got back to his familiar Washington trappings. Palin has written on her Facebook page that America needs a “do-over” in 2012, and her speech gave more fuel to the thought that she believes America should get a 2008 rematch against President Obama with her name on top of the Republican ticket.
Read more by Tony Lee at Human Events
It’s a chilling moment when the light goes out in someone’s eyes. A once-radiant child hardens from abuse. A woman’s heart shrinks after her husband’s abandonment.
The person looks the same, maybe acts the same. But something is gone, and what’s lost is irretrievable. It’s like when a person dies: in a heartbeat, the soul vanishes.
I see this phenomenon every day: a light dimming. The friendly shopkeeper snaps at me. My cheerful neighbor seems flattened.
And you hear it in the news: people acting strangely, going off the deep end. The most bizarre behavior becoming the new normal.
A thug bites off a finger. Sarah Palin’s church is torched. Black Panthers intimidate voters.
An esteemed Columbia University black architecture professor punches a white female coworker in the eye for not doing more about white privilege. He has no history of violence. Why now?
Meanwhile, liberal leaders, such as Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden, incite attacks on political opponents by using incendiary language, such as “barbarians,” “Nazis,” “tea-baggers.” Perhaps not coincidentally, flash mobs of blacks attack innocent whites all over the country; black youths injure or even kill non-whites in “knock out” assaults. Then there is the online game where players kill Tea Party “zombies.”
Read more by Robin of Berkeley at American Thinker