IRS + Benghazi + AP Phone Records = Abuse of Power

English: Barack Obama delivers a speech at the...

Having worked in the press corps and associated with so many fellow reporters it gives me no pleasure at all to tell you that many of them are not the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree.

I start my blog with this, somewhat obvious, statement because for all the hullabaloo surrounding the White House lately and their evident abuse of power the one question I’m waiting to have answered has not even been asked yet. And that fact alone should convince any reasonable person to be concerned for the intelligence of our fourth estate. Who originated the idea of blaming an anti-Islamic YouTube video for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya last September 11? To me the fact that eight months have passed without that question being asked, let alone answered points to a complicity at the highest levels of the Obama Administration.

Here’s what we know now about Benghazi.

1) The President, Secretary of State Clinton, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney,

English: Jay Carney giving a press briefing.

Jay Carney

and UN Ambassador Susan Rice lied, repeatedly, about the nature of the attack for up to two weeks after its occurrence.

Official portrait of Secretary of State Hillar...

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

2) We know the President, Carney and Hillary lied about the reason for the lie. Blaming talking points they said were crafted by officials of the intelligence community. We now know that State Department and White House “leadership” were instrumental in shaping the ultimate talking-points that proved to be a lie.

3) We know the State Department, headed by Clinton, ignored repeated requests for better security at the Benghazi consulate.

4) We know four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the pre-planned attack which had nothing to do with any video.

5) We know President Obama was involved in a tight re-election bid and that his campaigns over-riding theme was that Bin Laden was dead and Al Qaeda was on the run (only they weren’t). And we know Mitt Romney’s failure to press Obama on the Benghazi issue made him look weak and allowed Obama the high ground; especially after CNN’s Candy Crowley’s

CNN Senior Political Correspondent Candy Crowl...

CNN Sr Political Correspondent Candy Crowley at Obama Rally in Houston, Texas

unprecedented intrusion into their Presidential debate in favor of Obama in a statement that ultimately proved untrue.

6) And we know that State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland wrote in a private email that “building leadership” (State Department building) was not satisfied with the talking points on Benghazi. Who was the building’s “leadership”? That would be Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State. Who was Nuland’s immediate boss? Uh..huh…

What we don’t know is who originally fabricated the lie that in large part rescued Obama’s campaign and went a long way toward assuring his re-election. But connecting the dots doesn’t make it difficult to draw a line straight to Hillary Clinton, and then from her straight to Obama himself. Perhaps someone will connect the dots now that increased scrutiny is being focused on the apparent abuse of power by the Obama Administration.

The revelation last week that the powerful IRS focused much tougher scrutiny on Conservative or Tea Party groups seeking non-profit status only confirms what individuals in this group have been saying for more than two years. According to an article in USA Today yesterday a Tea Party group had its application approved 90 days from submission in February 2010 and that no other Tea Party group would get their tax-exempt status approved for 27 months.

Early reports of this story following IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner said the abuse of the Conservative groups was limited to 2012 and was limited to lower level employees in a IRS field office in Cincinnati, Ohio (Yes…THAT Ohio. The state that singlehandedly decided the 2004 Presidential election and the state that was expected to again be a deciding swing state in the 2012 campaign). Only what Lerner and media reports didn’t tell us was that the blocking of Conservative groups tax-exempt status began in 2010 and that the Cincinnati IRS office was the sole location where such applications were directed from all across the country. In other words, there was a nationwide abuse of power over right-leaning organizations that seriously hampered their fund-raising capabilities through two elections. Or do you not believe that individuals and corporations are more likely to give money to an organization if it’s a registered non-profit and such donation is tax deductible? The answer is obvious. And money wins elections. And through this conspiracy money-raising efforts by those who would oppose Obama and Democratic ideals were seriously hampered.

But the abuse of power doesn’t stop there. In another unprecedented act of power, or abuse thereof, the Obama Justice Department subpoenaed the phone records from 20 different phone lines used by Associated Press reporters in April and May of 2012. AP President and CEO Gary Pruit said,  “There can be no possible justification for such an over broad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know,”. Democrats please note: this is not some right-wing GOP operative slamming the Obama DOJ. THIS IS THE ASSOCIATED PRESS!

Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday that he had recused himself from the subpoena process in the AP case. He then revealed in testimony Wednesday before a House committee that no such recusal exists, at least, not in writing. This is the head law-enforcement officer in the country admitting he didn’t keep a written record of his involvement in a leak investigation that he called the worst he’d been witness to in his career. Really? So it’s a big case with big unprecedented decisions being made and our Attorney General felt no need to have record of his recusal. Am I alone in finding no credibility in this statement?

We’ve seen this all before. Forty years ago a second-rate burglary, initially ignored by all the national press, grew into a story of abuse of power by a President and his Administration that was wide-spread and involved many different angles, stories, and victims. When the White House finally released about 100 pages of emails over the Benghazi matter yesterday it was only a small gesture. Because there are more, a lot more. Anyway…it reminded me of Nixon releasing SOME of the tapes.

English: President Barack Obama walks with Sec...

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Who Is Mitt Romney’s Running Mate Going To Be « Election 2012 Coverage

Condelezza Rice

Condelezza Rice

I am really in the corner for Condelezza Rice. I think she’s brilliant, and comes from a perspective that everyone can respect. She would be ready to take over the White House if ever needed to do so. And she helps with the electorate bringing over some black voters, women and independent moderates.

Who Is Mitt Romney’s Running Mate Going To Be « Election 2012 Coverage.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Obama Can’t Win Healthcare Test

U.S. Supreme Court building.

U.S. Supreme Court building.

Note: This blog was originally written at the time of oral arguments before the Supreme Court in March. It’s still timely. 

Today the U.S. Supreme Court takes up legal arguments for and against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The plaintiffs are 25 Attorney’s General, including Washington State gubernatorial candidate Rob McKenna.

Rob McKenna

Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna

The defendants, technically, are the U.S. Government. For an unprecedented three days lawyers for either side will try to convince the nine justices of the Robert’s Court that Obamacare should continue to be the law of the land, which it is currently; or that several aspects of the 27-hundred page law are un-Constitutional and ought to be overturned and disallowed.

By the time The Court hears the arguments and issues their decision it will be Summer, probably June. At that time we almost certainly will have chosen a Republican Presidential candidate and it almost certainly will be Mitt Romney. And the Presidential, Senate and Congressional election campaigns will be gearing up for the fall vote. And while the Court’s ruling on the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act will have serious legal, judicial, legislative, and personal impacts all across this country; another aspect of impact that is undeniable is the political impact. And the good news on that front is Republicans can’t lose. The GOP will get a huge boost this Summer no matter if the Court rules for or against Obamacare.

If you are one of the 70% of Americans who don’t like Obamacare and feel it should be struck down or repealed how are you going to feel about The Court telling you, “tough”. You are going to feel angry and you are going to feel charged up. With an affirmative vote from the court upholding Obamacare the last, best hope of actually removing this albatross from around the necks of the American people and American business will be to win the November elections for Congress and The White House. Failure to do either will undoubtedly mean Obamacare will NEVER be repealed. Even winning the White House and retaining the House of Representatives will not be enough for the GOP, because the Senate has proven to be a place where good ideas go to die. Filibustering is used as a method to block legislation far more than was intended by James Madison and the other authors of our Constitution when they penned it for consideration 225 years ago. So winning in November becomes an all-or-nothing proposition.

Sarah Palin at the Americans for Prosperity-ru...

Sarah Palin at the Americans for Prosperity-run Wisconsin 2011 Tax Day Tea Party Rally.

As was demonstrated by the Tea Party movement in 2010 Americans will respond when pushed to the brink. If Obamacare is upheld, the Democrats will face a desperate GOP that can’t help but win.

If, as I expect, the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare, saying the Individual Mandate represents an extreme over-reach by Congress, an example of government tyranny our Founding Fathers fought to get rid of, then you will have a President facing re-election with egg all over his face. More significantly you will have a President asking to be re-elected after having accomplished near nothing in his four plus years in office. (That fact remains true even if Obamacare is upheld since the bill was not written by Obama or any of his administration).

Barack Obama signing the Patient Protection an...

Barack Obama signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act at the White House Español: Barack Obama firmando la Ley de Protección al Paciente y Cuidado de Salud Asequible en la Casa Blanca (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A President Obama with no healthcare legislation to hang his hat on has only a weak economy, high unemployment, high gas prices, a more dangerous world, and an ardent promise to raise taxes in which to campaign-on. That is a formula for disaster from a Democrats standpoint.

And do you think Mitt Romney might benefit from having the Obamacare discussion removed from the table? Since much of Obamacare was written, based on the Health Care Law in Massachusetts which Mitt Romney signed into law Romney is likely to dance a jig when the John Robert’s led Supreme Court returns their ruling. He won’t have to continually defend a law that’s very unpopular, or be faced with the comparisons with a law that no longer exists. Instead he can do the right thing and campaign on really fixing the healthcare system in this country.

I can’t imagine how President Obama successfully campaigns in the fall. As expected I believe he will only have negative, slime to throw at Mitt Romney. He won’t be able to run a positive campaign. This is another reason Romney is the best candidate for the GOP. He has led such a squeaky clean life his worst foibles aren’t all that bad. In fact, his worst foibles amount to not always being Conservative enough. And President Obama can’t win that argument either.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Please Share this blog if you find it interesting.

Republicans are Stepping into Obama’s Bear Trap!

George Stephanopoulos

George Stephanopoulos

When George Stephanopoulos quizzically asked Mitt Romney whether state’s could ban contraception during an ABC News televised Republican Presidential Debate in January we were witnessing the first bear trap laid in the woods by the Obama administration in their hopes of having GOP Presidential candidates decisively put their foot in it. On that night Romney didn’t, in spite of Stephanopoulos’s dogged effort to get him to do so. He was clearly stunned by the question and saw no relevance in it.

Mitt Romney at one of his presidential campaig...

GOP front-runner Mitt Romney

He adeptly avoided committing himself to a dangerous anti-contraception, anti-woman position from which Obama would string him from a tree like a hunting prize.

Unfortunately since that time Republicans have repeatedly put their foot squarely in the steel jaws of Obama’s Machiavellian plot. Once again Obama has proven himself to be one of the most thoroughly cut-throat politicians ever to occupy the White House. Chicago trained him well.

Shortly after Stephanopoulos’ covert opening volley, Obama announced the H-H-S plan to have church owned organizations, specifically the Catholic church,

St. Peter's Basilica at Early Morning

St. Peter's Basilica

supply contraception and the morning-after pill to their workers free of charge. AND THEN he quickly amended the policy to make it so the church’s insurance company’s paid for the contraception. In doing so Obama revealed his political motivation. He wanted to introduce the more extreme position as a track official would want to fire his starting gun to signal that runners should begin running. He wanted the debate, the fight. Again, he put politics ahead of country, dividing our country and creating controversy where none existed. He tailored his argument, and coached his Democratic minions to make the argument about a woman’s right to have contraception.

Should the Catholic church have contraception prohibited from the insurance coverage of all its employees in their churches, hospitals, colleges and universities no woman would be denied contraception. Those church employees could still get contraception on their own; they could still buy their own private insurance policies; they could choose to work for some company or organization that has beliefs and policies in line with their values and that does provide contraception coverage; and as shocking as this suggestion may be they could choose to refrain from sex until such time as they are ready to have a child. (I’m not advocating any of these options. I’m just correctly pointing out that choices do exist. The fact that the choices for the individual may be less desirable than being given something for free is immaterial.)

U.S. Senate Republicans introduced a bill that would exempt churches AND private businesses from providing contraception or other medical procedures in their employees insurance coverage if the leader or leaders of the business have a religious or moral objection. The measure was narrowly defeated 51-49; for which I am grateful. The legislation was a tremendous over-reach by Republicans too distracted by a big steel clamp around their ankles. A trap engraved with Barrack Obama‘s signature.

English: Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh

Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was also encumbered by the bear trap when he referred to a Georgetown University Law Student as a “slut” and a “prostitute”. The woman’s testimony before a Democratic Senate panel advocating free contraception WAS laughable. But in trying to laugh and make others laugh Limbaugh went too far and too crude, as he so often does. And he again turned the discussion back to a woman’s right to birth control rather than religious freedom.

It’s all so pathetic. I hope Romney continues to avoid the subject.

Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012

And all other Republicans should wise up and refuse to discuss the matter further. The media is Obama’s tool to manipulate and Republicans can’t win for losing. Any discussion of the matter will be turned by Democrats AND by the media into a false debate over birth control an argument Republicans will always lose. Let the Catholic church defend itself. It can. And it will. The Catholic church is the largest church in America and the richest church in the world. They are more than capable of winning a judicial fight over Obama’s CLEAR violation of the Bill of Right’s 1st Amendment.

Obama didn’t want a 1st Amendment fight. He wants to win an election. He can’t win talking about the economy or his record. So he divided the country and changed the subject. He laid a trap. Republicans stepped in it. And what’s really scary is that it won’t be Obama’s last trap. Let’s hope Republicans avoid the clumsiness they’ve displayed around this one.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

What if Obama Wins!

English: Seal of the President of the United S...

We’re just eight months away from voting for President of the United States. Could it be that we’re just ten months away from having a new President? Or, as much of the broadcast and print media would have you believe, are we only ten months away from President Barrack Obama beginning another four years of serving as our nation’s leader.

Current events in the RepublicanPresidential nominating race would have you believe that Obama is nearer to re-election than he has been in the minds of the electorate in a year or two. Can this be? And if so, what does it mean? Here are just a few things likely to happen if Obama squirms his way into another term.

Barack Obama

Barack Obama

First, and most important, Obamacare will not be repealed and the 70% of Americans who said in a recent Gallop Poll that they oppose it would be left to relying on the Supreme Court to knock it down. While I do think that is likely. I’m not comfortable leaving it up to our Justices. We could all be much more comfortable repealing it and starting from scratch. Were the Supreme Court not to strike down Obamacare, Obama’s recent dictum to religious institutions that they provide free contraception to all their employees represents a fine example of the tyrannical rule the President’s health care program allows for. Call it a drop in the bucket.

English: Barack Obama signing the Patient Prot...

Signing Obamacare.

Most of Obamacare becomes law in 2014. It is then that all company’s in the U.S. with employees of 50 or more will be required to provide healthcare to their employees or pay a fine. It is then that all individuals regardless of age, health, or financial wherewithal will have to buy private health insurance coverage or pay a fine. It is in 2014 that Medicare doctors will lose much of what they are paid for.

Gas prices will continue to rise. Obama wants them to. His plan for moving us to a “greener” society is to make our current way of living cost prohibitive. This isn’t angry Republican theory. He’s said it.

The cost of everything will go up. Obama has been trying like crazy to raise taxes on the upper 5% of income earners since entering the White House. Now he’s likely to get what he craves. Rich people didn’t get rich by being stupid. If they have to pay more taxes than they will raise the price of goods and services which they control in order to make up the difference.

America crawling out of the deep recession is likely to continue at a glacial pace. 3-4-percent growth is a mere pipe dream. As economists have predicted we’ll continue with growth only in the anemic 2% – 2.5% range; which will continue to keep unemployment high and wages low. If the economy is not growing and lots of people are out of work and under-employed employers have zero incentive to raise wages and/or benefits. Besides, having eaten the massive extra costs Obamacare will impose on business America’s workers can kiss any wage or salary increases goodbye for the next several years. Yes, Mr. Obama, elections do have consequences.

Português do Brasil: Brasília, 23/11/09 - O pr...

If Obama wins re-election Iran gets a nuclear weapon and war is likely to spread in the Middle East and will include Israel. Such a scenario might also include the exchange of nuclear weapons.

Worst of all Obama’s stated goal of redistributing wealth will continue to ingrain in the minds of Americans and our youth, our future, that the world owes them something and that they are entitled to it. Such a sick way of looking at the world might assure everyone a roof over there heads and food on their plates. But that’s about it. Our collective mutual poverty is all that’s assured with such a socialist mentality. Striving, reaching for more, enduring hardship…all gone. Instead Obama will teach us that we’re all in this together and we all deserve what each other has.

If Obama wins…we lose our souls, we lose our hope, but we will definitely face change.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

If you find this blog interesting please honor the author by Sharing it. TY.

Economics for the Long Run- Wall Street Journal

Česky: Oficiální portrét amerického prezidenta...

President Ronald Reagan

In this short article by Stanford Economics professor and senior fellow John Taylor it’s correctly pointed out that continuous short-term government intervention in the economy produces more bad than good, no matter the intentions, and no matter what party is in the White House. These policies have been most effectively and dramatically illustrated by Ronald Reagan, and continued with Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204468004577166842399752720.html

Not mentioned in the article is that these hands-off principles originally were put forth a long time ago by 18th Century Economist Adam Smith in his seminal book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, better known as “The Wealth of Nations”.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Please Share this blog if you find it interesting; others may as well.