Official Democratic Party Twitter Account Commemorates Memorial Day with Pic of Obama Eating Ice Cream
Happy Memorial Day weekend, everyone! pic.twitter.com/TMBSu187Pb
— The Democrats (@TheDemocrats) May 22, 2015
Here are a couple of responses:
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 23, 2015
Your party commemorates Memorial Day with a guy who never served eating ice cream? What the hell is wrong with you? https://t.co/GYARQQ7Woo
— jon gabriel (@exjon) May 23, 2015
Top aides to former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton fretted over how she would be portrayed after the 2012 Benghazi attacks that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, emails released on Friday showed.
The emails also showed Clinton received information on her personal email account about the Benghazi attacks that was classified “secret” by the FBI just prior to their release.
OK, it was her staff expressing concern in the emails, but after two decades of watching this woman in action, I think it is probably safe to infer that they were reflecting the boss’s angst.
The excuses du jour for the classified items are that it was “only a couple of sentences” and it wasn’t classified at the time, neither of which mean anything. The point is that she shouldn’t have been using a private server anyway.
The Clintons are so practiced at not getting caught when violating the law (think Al Capone with a better accountant) that I have no doubt that anything remotely incriminating was long ago removed from the emails by Mrs. Bill’s little “fixers”.
The best hope for the future of the Republic is that the press gets angry enough at being shut out that Team Hillary will give her a little more face time with the public, which rarely works out well for the Missus.
Trial campaign slogan: “Why Not?”
Former New York Governor George Pataki indicated on Wednesday that he would announce his campaign for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination next week in New Hampshire.
Last week, Pataki said he would be in Exeter, the New Hampshire town known as the birthplace of the Republican Party, on May 28 to announce whether he would be a candidate. In an interview on CNN on Wednesday he joked about his trip to the state, which plays a key role in determining presidential nominees.
“There are some things going on in New Hampshire,” he said. “I think it’s called a primary, something like that, first in the nation.”
While stopping short of announcing plans to run, Pataki said he thought conditions had gotten worse globally. “If you have an ability to lead and you sit it out, shame on you.”
As a long time political activist and observer, the “no-shot” candidates who enter big presidential primary fields have always amused me. These candidacies are usually propelled by a big ego and one or two long-time supporters who have deep pockets with some gambling money.
Many believe most fringe candidates are jockeying for Cabinet positions should their side win the White House. That seems plausible if Pataki does run. After all, it’s been almost a decade since he was last in office and he needs to refresh some memories.
Lindsey Graham, on the other hand, is simply a lunatic who thinks he can win.
One of the authors of a recent study which claimed that short conversations with gay people could change minds on same-sex marriage has retracted it.
The retraction this week of the popular article published in a December issue of the Science academic journal follows revelations that his co-author allegedly faked data for the study, “When contact changes minds: An experiment on transmission of support of gay marriage.”
According to academic watchdog Retraction Watch, Columbia University political science professor Donald Green published a retraction of the paper on Tuesday after confronting co-author Michael LaCour, a graduate assistant at UCLA.
The study received widespread media coverage from The New York Times, Vox, The Huffington Post, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and others, when it was released in December.
The news here isn’t that study data was fabricated to fit the pre-determined narrative’s conclusion, it’s that they were caught and are retracting it.
Progressives in academia don’t dismiss opposing points of view merely because they are generally intolerant people(they most definitely are), they also can’t believe any other conclusion but their own to be true. This is a condition that has gotten worse in recent years as the progressive hijacking of academia has taken firmer hold.
It would be at all surprising to me if younger academic wannabes make the “square peg/round hole” approach more commonplace and begin “adjusting” facts whenever they believe they can get away with it. Perhaps they already are and this story is an anomaly.
Maybe we should give them a “safe space” to talk about the abandonment of ethics.
With Hillary Clinton rapidly approaching a month since she answered a question from a reporter, her allies are working to push back on the idea that she is ducking the press.
“PUTTING THE VOTERS FIRST, HILLARY ASKS THE QUESTIONS THAT REALLY MATTER,” read the subject line of an e-mail — ALL CAPS in the original! — that arrived in my inbox this morning courtesy of Correct The Record, a pro-Clinton super PAC directly coordinating with the presidential campaign on rapid response.
The missive lays out the facts aimed at putting lie to the “she won’t answer questions” narrative.
First, Correct The Record notes that Clinton has answered 20 questions from “everyday Americans”: seven during her first trip to Iowa (she’s back in the state today), five during her New Hampshire excursion and a whopping eight when she visited Nevada.
Cillizza (with whom I often don’t agree) then proceeds to expose just how awfully lame this little story by Team Mrs. Bill is. A sampling:
It makes zero difference how many questions Clinton has asked average Americans. Like, none. If those people were running for president, then I would be super-interested to know how they responded to some (or maybe all) of Clinton’s 117 questions. But, they aren’t. She is. Citing the number of questions Clinton has asked of people to rebut the idea that she isn’t taking enough (or any) questions from reporters is sort of like saying you aced a job interview because you answered every question asked of you with another question. That wouldn’t make sense, would it?
It may not be anything that Hillary Clinton does that derails her inevitability parade, but what she doesn’t do. The same media types who are completely incurious about her various legally questionable activities are also upset that Grandma isn’t giving them any cookies.
This makes two things very clear:
1) Her staff knows she’s horrible when interacting with people and are keeping her distant and in controlled situations.
2) The Clintons haven’t entirely grasped the overwhelming changes in media since the 1990s or even since 2008.
When Hillary’s meal ticket was POTUS, the media were at the beginning of their evolutionary leap from journalists to ego-centric personalities. Yes, they are all leftists willing to play along for the agenda but the emotional little dears simply will not be ignored.
There is a growing feeling that the MSM is along for the ride because this is the only train running right now but they can’t wait for the next Barack Obama to show up out of practically nowhere so they can ditch the imperious Mrs. C. for someone who doesn’t scare the crap out of them.
Meanwhile, the Granny probably thinks she can get away with this for another year and a half.
What I meant by the headline is that this latest incident isn’t really anomalous for Rep. Sanchez, she’s just kind of like this. In the apology video here, the Sacramento CBS affiliate speculates that Sanchez not only nuked her Senate bid, but may have jeopardized her House seat as well.
She may not have come directly from a Democratic administration into a “news” job, but she came from the loins of someone in a Democratic administration, which is the second easiest way to get a media job. She should be careful — her entire career is built upon a lack of judgment by her employers.
Bobby Jindal announced Monday that he’s forming a presidential exploratory committee for a potential run for the 2016 Republican nomination, a major step toward launching a bid.
The Louisiana governor, a fierce social conservative who has been active in the early nominating states, will make a decision after the state’s legislative session ends on June 11.
Oddly, Jindal has probably been a likely 2016 candidate longer than almost anyone not named “Bush” but is getting what could be considered a later start.
What strikes me most about the GOP field (declared and undeclared) is that even without identity politics as its guide, it is putting together a rather diverse group. The Democrats, obsessed with identity politics and chasing the youth vote, have managed to cough up two white grandparents. Were the situation reversed, the media would be pointing this out 24/7 (the New York Times recently managed to focus on “aging” Republicans in an article about the youngest GOP candidate running).
So point this out I will. Over and over.
Another day, another misquote.
I hate to get into a public disagreement with a colleague here, but the outrage du jour seems to be based on a translation that may or may not be deliberately wrong. As the BBC and the Associated Press are at the root of it, I’m leaning towards the former.
A BBC reporter in the room claimed that Pope Francis said “you are an angel of peace” while presenting a gift (which is Vatican tradition) to Abbas.
The Vatican reporter for the Italian newspaper La Stampa has it differently:
As is tradition with heads of State or of government, Francis presented presented a gift to the Palestinian leader, commenting: “May the angel of peace destroy the evil spirit of war. I thought of you: may you be an angel of peace.”
Calling someone something and exhorting him to be that something are two entirely different things.
What has befuddled me and several of my conservative friends who are also devout Roman Catholics is the willingness of our conservative friends to take news about this pope at face value from MSM outlets that aren’t trusted for anything else.
I can tell you this: MSM reporting on the Vatican, the Church or whomever is pope at the time almost always needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The media has an obsession with Francis because they’ve convinced themselves that he’s the pope who will make the Church become a gay marriage, abortion loving free-for-all. This, even though barely six months into his tenure, Francis excommunicated a priest for supporting women priests and gay marriage.
As with any political agenda supported by the MSM, it is willing to bend facts to shoehorn stories into the narrative.
The Little Commie Network That Couldn’t hit a ten year low on Wednesday, to the chagrin of almost no one outside of New York, or Washington, D.C.
Desperate for any kind of attention now, its hosts are violating the Prime Directive about protecting Mrs. Bill from any unsavory interaction with the commoners and/or the media.
While other news organizations were busy deflecting from Hillary’s disdain for answering questions, Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd both hit the airwaves in desperate attempts to get Grandma’s attention. Here are the videos:
Here is some video of the press conference (complete with a classic Obama snippy reply to a reporter).
Here is a tweet from a reporter quoting him if you don’t want to watch the video:
— Joyce Karam (@Joyce_Karam) May 14, 2015
It’s not just me who finds this odd, noted Right Wing Nutjob organization the United Nations says that, yes, chlorine kinda always has been a chemical weapon.
The modern use of chemical weapons began with World War I, when both sides to the conflict used poisonous gas to inflict agonizing suffering and to cause significant battlefield casualties. Such weapons basically consisted of well known commercial chemicals put into standard munitions such as grenades and artillery shells. Chlorine, phosgene (a choking agent) and mustard gas (which inflicts painful burns on the skin) were among the chemicals used. The results were indiscriminate and often devastating. Nearly 100,000 deaths resulted.
Since World War I, chemical weapons have caused more than one million casualties globally.
It’s more than likely that everyone around him is buying into his arbitrary classification. Remember, this is the guy who makes up job numbers and thinks the economy is booming along and doesn’t get asked a lot about any of it.
What I’m wondering here is if he has any plans in the near future to redefine what “nuclear weapon” means.
Just days after kissing goodbye to the Lib Dem coalition and forming the first all-Tory government since 1992, David Cameron will today announce controversial plans to fast-track new powers to tackle radicalisation that were blocked by Nick Clegg’s party in the last government.
The Prime Minister is expected to set out his intention to include a new counter-extremism bill in his Queen’s Speech later this month as he chairs the first meeting of the National Security Council (NSC) since the Tories’ election victory.
Planned measures include introducing new orders to ban extremist organisations and restrict people who seek to radicalise youngsters.
The proposals will aim to crack down on preachers like Abu Hamza, as well as the sort of radicalisation which led Mohammed Emwazi (AKA ‘JIhadi John’) to join the Islamic State militant group, as well as the murder of Lee Rigby.
American conservatives may need a moment here, after all, we aren’t used to conservatives who have just had decisive electoral victories acting like it when they return to work. This is so fantastical for us that this story is almost like reading a Tolkien novel.
This is very good news because the UK has had a bad case of Creeping Sharia for years now (even worse than we do here). As the post mentions, Cameron’s efforts to push back have been-SHOCKER!-blocked by liberals. Little pockets of “tolerance” have allowed Sharia to usurp the law of the land. No more.
Providing a model that will hopefully one day be adopted here, Cameron is moving quickly while he has momentum.
This Government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach. As the party of one nation, we will govern as one nation, and bring our country together.
Now if someone could please give Mitch McConnell’s phone number to the prime minister.
Republican Jeb Bush appears to have unintentionally announced his candidacy for president in 2016 in a conversation with reporters on Wednesday that was caught on video.
Speaking in Nevada, the former Florida governor seemed to acknowledge he was a candidate but right afterward indicated he had not made up his mind.
“I’m running for president in 2016, and the focus is going to be about how we, if I run, how do you create high sustained economic growth,” Jeb Bush said in the video posted on the NBC News website.
Bush announced in December that he would “actively explore” a run for the White House, but he has yet to formally declare he is running.
The difference between considering a run and actually jumping into the race affects what he can and cannot do under the law with regard to fundraising. Once candidates formally enter the presidential race they face tighter restrictions on raising money.
The republic, and the world, for that matter, don’t need entitled legacy candidates for the most powerful job on Earth. Since the Democrats are determined to unleash their version on us, the only way to make sure we don’t turn into England Lite is to not counter with the same.
Pollsters who keep coming up with Bush-favorable results must only be calling every octogenarian Republican in America, because I certainly haven’t met anyone who isn’t on a Hoveround who supports him.
Via the Philadelphia Inquirer:
Investigators of Tuesday’s deadly Amtrak derailment say they are focusing on reports that the train was traveling more than twice the 50-mile-an-hour speed limit when it entered a sharp curve in Frankford.
An automatic train control system designed to prevent speeding was not in place where Amtrak Train 188 crashed, killing seven people and injuring more than 200.
The train’s engineer, who has not been identified, declined to give a statement to police investigators and left the East Detectives Division with an attorney, police commissioner Charles H. Ramsey said Wednesday.
The fact that the engineer left with his attorneys may simply be a union precaution but the reports about the egregious speeding certainly make it seem otherwise.
In news that may or may not be related, a Philadelphia commuter train was struck by a projectile about twenty minutes before the Amtrak derailment and fairly close by.
Despite the presence of a declared candidate for the 2016 presidential race who isn’t taking questions, Politico really wants its readers to know that Scott Walker isn’t talking to them this week.
Want to know what Scott Walker thinks about the Obama administration’s preliminary deal with Iran on its nuclear program? Or the composition of Israel’s new government? This week, you’re out of luck.
The Wisconsin governor, the current Republican front-runner in some early voting state polls, is in Israel until Thursday, but he isn’t taking questions. Stung by his own past gaffes and those of other Republican presidential hopefuls abroad, Walker has locked the media out of his Israel trip, moving to burnish his foreign policy credentials without actually talking about foreign policy.
Oh good, a “gaffes” mention too!
The reason Mrs. Bill doesn’t take a lot of questions is because she’s so gaffetastic that she should be relegated to a YouTube channel rather than running for president of the United States again. Also, it’s sexist #WarOnWomen bullying to point out that she can’t campaign and chew gum at the same time or that she’s an imperious shrew who is disdainful of the very same media that constantly goes to bat for her.
But that Walker guy who isn’t even a candidate yet? HOW DARE HE?!?!?
Scott Walker scares the Democrats, hence the devotion to his lack of press interaction replete with digs at his foreign policy experience.
You know who else the MSM hardly ever says anything negative about?
John Ellis Bush.
Sen. Marco Rubio now has another billionaire in his corner: Oracle founder Larry Ellison.
Ellison will host a fundraiser for the Florida Republican’s White House bid at his mansion in Woodside, Calif., on June 9, according to an invitation obtained by POLITICO.
A VIP reception and photo opportunity with Rubio will cost attendees $2,700 per person. The fundraiser will also include a host committee dinner for couples who have raised $27,000.
This is some nice early money for Rubio. Ellison has been a Republican donor in the past and is a major Silicon Valley get for the campaign given that Rand Paul has been the most open about going after donor dollars there.
This will also give the Rubio campaign extra time for their candidate to prepare for an appearance on Mark Halperin’s “How Cuban Are You?” show.
Here’s Politico editor Blake Hounshell’s tweet that he posted even before mentioning the casualties:
Amtrak crash comes on the eve of … markup session to cut Amtrak budget http://t.co/aWta0t8tx1
— Blake Hounshell (@blakehounshell) May 13, 2015
This is why it’s difficult to see the political landscape getting any better in America any time soon, if ever. The agenda and the narrative trump all for liberals.
Fatalities in a tragedy?
“Yeah, yeah, we’ll get to those in a minute, gotta remind everyone that the Republicans want to cut the budget first.”
There is no discussion with people who think it’s appropriate to launch into an infrastructure spending tirade even as first responders are just arriving on the scene of a tragedy. They truly believe this happened because evil Republicans kept just the magic amount of money away from Amtrak to make it safe.
They are all from the Krugman school of thought that says any federal spending that didn’t do the trick failed simply because enough wasn’t spent.
And then you’re on an infinity loop of tax dollar demands that isn’t even slowed down by the presence of dead bodies.
Tomorrow morning, in what marks a tectonic shift in the publishing industry, the New York Times is expected to officially begin a long-awaited partnership with Facebook to publish articles directly to the social media giant, a source with direct knowledge of the talks told me. According to people familiar with the negotiations, the Times will begin publishing select articles directly into Facebook’s news feed. Buzzfeed, NBC News and NatGeo are said to be also joining the roll out, among others.
The deal raises all sorts of knotty questions for the Times. How many articles will Facebook get to publish per day? What is the revenue sharing breakdown? How does the Times protect the independence of its journalism, say, if the paper runs a hard-hitting investigation on Facebook? And what happens when the Times allows Facebook to insert itself between its journalism and its readers?
Not surprisingly, the prospect of a Facebook partnership is generating palpable anxiety inside the Times newsroom, with some Times journalists casting it as an end-of-the-Times-as-we-know-it inflection point. When rumors of a deal surfaced last October, the Times’ late media columnist David Carr articulated this view, writing “the wholesale transfer of content sends a cold, dark chill down the collective spine of publishers, both traditional and digital insurgents alike.”
Many will say that this is the final nail in the coffin of what we used to call journalism. Just as many will probably posit that leftist bias buried it so long ago the coffin has already begun rotting.
Whatever the actual case may be, one thing is for certain, that air of exclusivity and swagger is gone now. Every displaced New Yorker’s favorite Sunday affection in Los Angeles is now slumming it alongside BuzzFeed and sponsored ads for a Mr. Clean Magic Eraser. It’s just now adopting a distribution channel that drunk college girls made famous ten years ago.
While this may very well breathe new financial life into the Times, it certainly can’t be a good sign for newspapers or journalism in general. What was once a news destination is now arm-wrestling NatGeo for the attention of people who just want to see if they’re missing any friends’ birthdays.
The Times‘ management wants to keep its digital subscriber base and somehow thinks it will protect the content that lures them all the while throwing Facebook enough “news” to keep Zuckerberg and company happy.
Good luck with that.
This is too rich. The house monkey shared by George Soros and David Brock isn’t known for his intellectual prowess, but now he’s gone full Alex Jones with the conspiracy stuff. If you happen to find someone outside of the MMFA offices who believes the MSM is doing the bidding of the Republicans, get them to neurologist immediately.
GOP theme this week: HIllary won’t talk to press DC media theme this week: HIllary won’t talk to press. #coincidence
— Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) May 12, 2015
A University of Virginia associate dean of students filed a multi-million dollar defamation lawsuit against Rolling Stone on Tuesday, alleging that the magazine portrayed her as callous and indifferent to allegations of sexual assault on campus and made her the university’s “chief villain” in a now-debunked story about a fraternity gang rape.
Nicole Eramo is seeking more than $7.5 million in damages from Rolling Stone, its parent company Wenner Media and Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the investigative journalist who wrote the explosive account of sexual assault on the campus in Charlottesville, Va. The magazine retracted the story after news organizations and the Columbia University journalism school found serious flaws in it.
Yes, WaPo, there usually are “serious flaws” in a hoax, but kudos to you for keeping the false narrative limping along well after it’s been blown out of the water.
There is quite a laundry list of people who should be suing the magazine (those still exist?) over this deliberate targeting of innocent people. Let’s hope they all get their day in court.
Via the Boston Globe:
Motherhood is a cultural invention. It reflects a belief adopted by society that is passed down from one generation to the next. In US culture, we hold to the idea that young children are better off when cared for exclusively by their mothers. Mothers are bombarded by this message in the media, especially in programming directed to them. Only after five seasons does Claire Dunphy, the iconic mother of “Modern Family,” return to the workplace.
I could respond with single mother/career mother roles from media to counter Ms. McCartney’s critical “Modern Family” example, but I’m writing a blog post, not a book.
Part of this is rooted in the leftist pitch to get your kids into daycare as early as possible for the beginning of the indoctrination that will make them believe things like “motherhood is a cultural invention” without questioning.
Most of it is rooted in the fact that radical feminists are insane.
They are, however, well placed in academia.
That is why the author can write things like “Our cultural construction of motherhood is rooted in a particularly strong American bias toward personal responsibility, reflected across our social policies” (if only that were true!) and “Mother’s Day is a good day to double down on the work required to reconstruct our conception of motherhood” and remain in charge of an institution that charges more than $60,000 a year to “teach” young minds.
Feminists want to play fast and loose with gender roles and societal norms as needed but still be able to say all men are rapists waiting to happen. They have no middle ground here — it’s all fluid or rigid, which makes most (I’m being generous) of their claims childish and easy to dismiss.
“Motherhood” and “child-rearing responsibilities” are different concepts that are being conflated here for the purpose of this whimsically illogical thought journey of Ms. McCartney’s. I take that back, motherhood is actually being reduced to a set of chores here, completely exorcising the gestation period that, according my latest level of understanding, is still done by human females.
My intention here isn’t to spend time picking apart what Ms. McCartney is writing, her intellectual bubble (and bubble head) status is pretty clear. It’s just important to keep pointing out just how badly radicalized the upper levels of academia are.
And hopefully to inspire people to start doing something about it.
The off-field hits just keep on coming for America’s most ethically troubled sports league.
The Patriots will begin their Super Bowl title defense without the services of the franchise’s greatest all-time player.
The NFL announced Monday that Tom Brady has been suspended without pay for four games for violating the NFL policy on the integrity of the game. This news comes less than a week after independent investigator Ted Wells found that it was “more probable than not” that Brady was “at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities” regarding the deflation of Patriots game balls used in the AFC Championship Game against the Colts.
The team will also be fined $1 million and will forfeit a 2016 first rounder and 2017 fourth-round selection in the NFL Draft.
Brady has played the wide-eyed innocent throughout all of this, but the reality is that nothing happens to the game balls in the NFL without the starting quarterback’s knowledge and approval.
The 2013 NFL season began under the cloud of Aaron Hernandez’s murder arrest. In 2014, the Ray Rice domestic abuse fiasco was just unraveling at the beginning of the season. Now America’s favorite sports league (still) will begin this year with the franchise quarterback for the defending Super Bowl champs suspended for cheating.
It remains to be seen whether these constant problems will eventually have an effect, or if fans are just really good at compartmentalization.
UPDATE: HALPERIN SORT OF APOLOGIZES
Many were upset after Mark Halperin plumbed the depths of hack partisan journalism while interviewing Ted Cruz.
It turns out he was so awful that even Think Progress couldn’t stomach it.
Here’s the headline:
The Prize For The Most Racist Interview Of A 2016 Candidate Goes To Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin
Ouch. It’s gotta hurt when someone like Halperin, who is so deep in the tank for leftists he long ago grew gills, gets called the “R” word.
Does this mean there are going to be some new ground rules for covering minority candidates who are Republican? Probably not. It’s more likely that Halperin is so awful that he’s going to get eaten by his own. Imagine Chris Hayes with even less personality or on-camera skill and you’ve got Halperin.
It was a strange couple of days, however, as Salon posted something sort of sensible about Islam, free speech and how the Left doesn’t get it.
Maybe the Apocalypse really is upon us.
OK, so it was about golf. Let’s just say the timing was awful. Also, maybe if Obama had 1/1000th of Eisenhower’s pre-presidency accomplishments conservatives would be more forgiving of his golf outings. I break with most of my right-wing brethren on this: I love it when he golfs because it distracts him from executive orders and other ways to screw up the country.
The FBI has ordered more U.S. terror suspects be put under 24/7 surveillance in the wake of the Garland, Texas shooting and a renewed emphasis by ISIS and other terror groups for potential American recruits to launch attacks at home, according to three FBI officials.
The officials told ABC News that agents have been ordered to review the cases of so-called “marginal” or “borderline” suspects, terms that had been applied to one of the gunmen in the Texas attack, Elton Simpson of Phoenix. FBI agents were familiar with Simpson and the views he espoused, but he was not put under 24/7 surveillance. He was viewed as being “more talk than action,” one agent said.
“We do not want to risk another marginal, homegrown extremist who was viewed as dangerous going active,” said one of the FBI officials. All three FBI officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly.
It would seem rather pathetic that this kind of thing is happening in our post-9/11 world. Once you consider the nature of the Ft. Hood and Boston Marathon attacks, however, it becomes unconscionable.
Given that they believe there is a “renewed” and not “ongoing” emphasis by terror groups to attack here it would appear that the FBI has adopted the leftist “Oh, they’re not so bad…” midnset. When the infantile liberal narrative creeps into law enforcement it becomes dangerous and life-threatening.
The fact that those charged with protecting us are still not taking it ALL seriously is disturbing enough, but the tale gets much worse (emphasis mine):
Today FBI Director James Comey and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson held a video conference call with “federal, state and local law enforcement partners” to discuss the Texas attack and the “current threat environment,” a spokesperson for the FBI said. The spokesperson said such conference calls were “commonplace and assist in the timely and comprehensive information sharing needed to address the persistent and pervasive threats fueled by social media.”
But the officials who spoke to ABC News described a “panic” and “crisis” inside the FBI because the agency and the rest of the nation’s homeland security infrastructure are not built to deal with the non-stop flow of homegrown extremists and possible threats that mark the current environment within the U.S. Another FBI spokesperson did not respond to request for comment on the broader concerns at the Bureau.
Twelve and a half years after its establishment, George W. Bush’s bureaucratic boondoggle of a security agency is just another bloated, inefficient drain on American taxpayers.
While they’re ignoring the Tsarnaevs of the world, DHS is busy making sure that my daughter is getting extra scrutiny before a flight and taking away her souvenir snow globe. All this for the bargain price of $60 billion a year!
We should give credit where credit is due: as of this writing, there have been no terrorist shampoo bottle attacks on U.S. soil.
Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has champagne tastes on a public budget.
The Garden State boss and potential presidential hopeful burned through $85,000 in taxpayer cash on entertainment in luxury boxes at sports arenas between 2010 and 2012, the Associated Press reported.
“The money came from an account, worth $95,000 a year, that Christie can use to pay for official entertainment or other expenses associated with his job,” according to the report, based on documents the AP obtained via the Garden State’s open records law.
There are all kinds of things that discerning people can fault Chris Christie for but taking advantage of money earmarked for a specific purpose isn’t one of them. It’s perfectly legitimate to think the existence of the fund is unnecessary, but the headline and first line of the article are implying that Christie has been caught in some sort of “Gotcha!” wrongdoing.
Public officials spend taxpayer money for entertainment all the time. It would be nice if the taxpayers would stop electing people who allow this to be so.
(VIDEO) State Dept. Spokesman Flails While Being Grilled About Not Investigating Clinton Allegations
Like the Clintons, the State Department keeps repeating the “not aware” mantra. Here, the AP’s Matt Lee points out that they’re not aware because they haven’t bothered to look. Even the MSM is starting to smell the faintest hint of blood in the water.
Rural Alaska is well known for its wolves, bears, and moose, but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set its sights on a considerably smaller creature: the bed bug. The EPA is prepared to award a grant of up to $100,000 to help Alaska Native Village communities to right bed bug infestations by “break[ing] down barriers to effective bed bug management.”
Religious and world leaders have long noted that humanity won’t truly be able to begin healing and evolve until the barriers to effective bug management are broken down.
The sad tale of the EPA is that, for the briefest of times in history, it was a regulatory agency that worked. It was sticking to its mandate then, however. Now it’s a night stick wielded by the president (especially the current one) to create cash flow for certain interest groups or, in this case, to simply throw money away.
You can also almost be assured that in these hard-to-satirize times there’s someone in D.C. screaming that $100,000 for rural Alaskan bedbugs isn’t enough.
Congress’ failure to even debate U.S. military action against Islamic State nine months after air strikes began is scandalous and disrespectful to Americans fighting an undeclared war, U.S. Senator Tim Kaine said on Thursday.
Kaine, a Democratic member of the Foreign Relations Committee, has been an unrelenting critic of Congress’ failure to authorize military force against Islamic State militants in Syria and Iraq, even as a U.S.-led bombing campaign has been in effect since Aug. 8.
In media interviews before a Senate speech on Thursday, Kaine outlined reasons for the delay, including congressional reluctance to take up the matter before elections last November.
“American service members have lost their lives, we’ve spent over $2 billion, 3,300 bombing runs and Congress hasn’t even been willing to talk about this or authorize the military action,” Kaine said on CNN. “This is a big scandal in my view.”
The hinges really have flown off of the world if I find that much common sense in something Tim Kaine says. The “let’s sort of fight but hey let’s not call it a war” approach epitomizes congressional timidity. They’re will to ask some to risk all even as they make sure they’re covering their rear ends. Why have a vote on a war come back to haunt you when you can get by with a wink and no discussion?
It is Kaine’s fellow Democrats who want keep avoiding calling it a war. They play semantics while American troops are fighting.
Now that ISIS has admitted to attacking on U.S. soil in Garland, TX it would be nice if they took this more seriously. Sadly, the Democrats insist that Pamela Geller is the enemy, not ISIS.
LAPD Chief Charlie Beck on Wednesday addressed the death of an unarmed homeless man fatally shot by an officer following a confrontation near the historic Venice sign, saying the shooting concerned him and an investigation was underway.
Brendon Glenn, 29, was the individual killed by police late Tuesday night, according to a man who runs the Teen Project’s drop-in center for homeless youth in Venice.
Beck said in a Wednesday afternoon news conference that he had reviewed video of the shooting and he did not see evidence that indicated extreme circumstances that could prompt an officer to open fire.
“Any time an unarmed person is shot by a Los Angeles police officer, it takes extraordinary circumstances to justify that, and I have not seen those extraordinary circumstances at this point,” Beck said.
The reason this hasn’t blown up in the news yet is because both the officer and the deceased are black, so it only fits Joan Walsh’s narrative at this point.
What Beck is thinking here is beyond comprehension. In the wake of Baltimore, and just a few days after an officer in New York was murdered, why would he make a statement like this? There are well -established police procedures which may very well find fault with the officer, but allow them to proceed. Why stir up anti-cop sentiment when you’re the head cop?
It’s just plain irresponsible for Beck to not have chosen his words more carefully at a time when lives are at risk in large (liberal) cities.
Then again, Beck is a liberal darling on matters of immigration, so he’s probably just doing his part to keep the lefty narrative alive.
Former President Bill Clinton acknowledged on Wednesday that an anti-crime crackdown he pushed in 1994 went too far, and said he now supports his wife Hillary’s plans to reverse some of those justice policies.
Bill Clinton signed into law a crime bill that imposed tougher sentences, put thousands of more police on the streets and helped fund the building of extra prisons.
But the era of mass incarceration is now being questioned because of the continuing high proportion of Americans – especially black males – who are in prison.
The anti-crime legislation was known for its federal “three strikes” provision that sent violent offenders to prison for life. The bill was backed by congressional Republicans and hailed at the time as a success for Clinton.
But the former president told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that it was imperfect.
With Bernie Sanders in the race and Martin O’Malley likely to jump in, Mrs. Bill will be forced to make sure she’s a progressive champion, at least until she is nominated or one of these scandals causes her concussion symptoms to come back and forces her to drop out. As most of her husband’s successes were things he did in concert with, or stole from, Republicans, she is going to find herself at odds with much of his legacy.
Hillary is not a very savvy campaigner, so she may not even have been aware that she was condemning her husband’s policies when she came down on the side of the rioters in Baltimore. That fact was quickly pointed out all over the place, creating the need for another round of damage control.
The strongest, smartest, most accomplished feminine icon in the world needed her philandering husband to enter the brouhaha and kneecap one of his own successes just so wifey could continue her little hobby.
Trust me, in the end, the only thing about the Bill Clinton era that Hillary Clinton will cling to for campaign purposes is his economic record, which was almost all a product of the Internet dot com boom and had precious little, if anything, to do with his policies.
And Bill will do anything to make sure she has a job that keeps her busy.
The Democratic National Committee announced Tuesday that they will sanction six presidential debates beginning this fall, giving Hillary Clinton’s challengers a limited number of chances to confront the former secretary of state on the debate stage.
“We’ve always believed that we would have a competitive primary process, and that debates would be an important part of that process,” DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a press release.
The mere fact that Wasserman-Schultz is still in charge should give Republicans plenty of hope, no matter how much “inevitable” the press and the GOP establishment tell us Mrs. Bill is.
Team Clinton and those in the press committed to her election (everyone but the New York Times it would seem) have done a lot of work laying the ground rules for what her Divine Madameship can be asked or called. Fourteenth Century kings didn’t have as many dos and don’ts. By the time the DNC’s Kabukifest hits the airwaves the moderators may only be allowed to say, “Thank you for being here, Secretary Clinton.”
The upside to this for both her Democratic challengers and the Republicans is that any prolonged exposure (more than 5 minutes, usually) to a camera in a live setting is usually disastrous for the least likable woman in the world. There is the story of Hillary Clinton, then there is Hillary Clinton herself. One is nice and one frightens children.
Of course, the media entities involved will do all they can to keep these debates as close to round table script readings as possible to provide Hillary some cover. They can’t, however, control that pinched, angry look she flashes whenever the slightest thing in the universe fails to show her deference.
Younger voters who have only heard the story of Hillary Clinton until now will find sleep a bit less forthcoming once they see that.
Companies would no longer have to tell consumers they are recording some cellphone conversations until 20 seconds into the calls under a bill approved Tuesday by a committee in the California legislature.
The bill by freshman assembly member Evan Low, a Democrat from the state’s Silicon Valley tech hub, would remove a provision in state law making it illegal for companies to record all cellphone conversations without the express consent of the consumer if the person has done business with the company or owes it money.
The bill was opposed by numerous advocates for consumers and seniors, including the Consumer Federation of California and the American Civil Liberties Union.
“At a time when consumers are more and more concerned about businesses invading their privacy, it is wrong to be considering rolling back an important privacy law,” said Richard Holober, executive director of the Consumer Federation of California, testifying against the bill on Tuesday.
Low has said his bill simply seeks to clarify the law, which was written before mobile phones were commonly used and forbids the recording of confidential conversations.
That law has been interpreted as allowing the recording of non-confidential conversations on landline phones, but not with regard to mobile phones.
His bill would allow companies to record conversations deemed “non-confidential” on cellphones for the first 20 seconds, something consumer advocates said could allow companies to try to catch consumers in an apparent admission that they owe a debt or understand a pricing scheme.
Call me old-fashioned, but I liked it better when the lefties were distrustful of big government and big business. That this is sponsored by a Silicon Valley guy is indicative of the disconnect between what leftist political money is really about and what most leftists think it’s about. Here’s an idea: how about maybe not recording the call at all?
Wait — even better, just don’t call me.
People who are trying to do good for their families and the planet by living a simple life based on traditional skills are facing yet another assault. Artisanal soap makers say new regulations, proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine), will put them out of business.
The view of Sen. Feinstein and her corporate backers (listed below) is that the Personal Care Products Safety Act (Senate Bill S.1014) will make the world a safer place by scrutinizing “everything from shampoo and hair dye to deodorant and lotion.” She says the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act should be more progressive like laws in Europe rather than antiquated US regulations in effect since the 1930s.
I know that I have hardly been able to worry about Iran getting nukes or yet another round of violent “protests” plaguing America because the horror of artisan soaps has been occupying my every waking moment. These are truly glorious times we live in when a federal regulatory agency can take time out from its busy day to make sure we safe from a harmful sudsing.
If you’re like me, I’m sure you’ll be sleeping better tonight.
At the risk of sounding somewhat cynical after the last six years, I can’t really see the current commander in-chief doing something like this once he’s out of office.