Wasserman Schultz released the following statement:
“It is with great disappointment that I call on Representative Anthony Weiner to resign. The behavior he has exhibited is indefensible and Representative Weiner’s continued service in Congress is untenable. This sordid affair has become an unacceptable distraction for Representative Weiner, his family, his constituents and the House – and for the good of all, he should step aside and address those things that should be most important – his and his family’s well-being.”
Well, I’d say his days are numbered. And personally, I hate to see him out of office. I think he’d be a real gift to the Republicans for the next 18 months. Pelosi will be the next one to issue a statement and by Sunday night, he’ll have resigned – or at least I’m betting so.
And more at Mediaite.com from Andrew Breitbart on Fox and Friends today. I just don’t see how he can make it through the weekend … or through his marriage, for that matter.
Seriously, even democrats have to agree that trolling the internet for underage girls is unacceptable and illegal.
This story is moving faster than my fingers can keep up. Pelosi has issued her statement within minutes of that fugly DNC chairwoman. Others have also.
That fanatic attachment to power, even at the price of seeing his dignity shredded in the media day after day, is one of the creepiest parts of this story.
When Clinton’s popularity was waning and he was wracked with sex scandals, we went to war in Bosnia. It was a poorly veiled attempt to shift the focus from one unpleasant thing to something the nation could rally around.
Now, we have another liberal (Marxist) president who refuses to call a terrorist a terrorist or a war a war. In Orwellian fashion, we have newspeak like overseas contingency operations in place of war and man-made disasters in place of homocide bombers.
I’ve noticed that Obama’s honeymoon with the media is coming to an end, albeit slower than with any other president in my memory. These tv guys are asking almost difficult questions of the press secretary and the president, himself. As we all know, there’s dissension in the ranks on Capitol Hill with the democrats being displeased with the president’s actions and decisions, of late. Obamacare is less popular this year than last, states are suing in federal courts and his poll numbers aren’t stellar enough any longer.
So what did he do?
He went to war – the third front in the Middle East.
But this is the just war. The good war. Just as Afghanistan is and Iraq was not – according to Obama and his flock. We’re doing the righteous thing by protecting and aiding the “rebels,” whoever they are (and it’s still being debated just who they are) while we leave Gadhafi alive and in power. We’ll leave him alive so that he can terrorize and brutalize his people on another day.
And at the same time, in Clinton-esque fashion, we are being distracted from Obama’s negatives.
However, after 2 years I think most of us have learned now to keep an eye on what the other hand is doing.
~~~ooOoo~~~
You know that in Obama’s recent budget, he wants to double our aide to Libya from $900,000 to $1.7million? I wonder how much influence his friends Wright and Farrakhan had on him about that?
Democrat pollster Mark Penn appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball and said that President Clinton reconnected with his speech after the Oklahoma City bombings, and Obama needs a similar situation to do the same.
Penn’s statement is appalling and should offend everyone, but Chris Matthews carries. Let me remind Matthews and Penn that Obama had his “moment” and this is how he handled it:
[F[or many more people in line at the polls in Miami Gardens, fears of a possible Senator Rubio were guiding their decisions. Voters said they waited nearly an hour to cast their ballots because they wanted to stand up against Mr. Rubio’s support for an Arizona-style immigration law, his stated goal of changing Social Security and his association with the Tea Party, which struck many as a mask for ignoring the needs of black Floridians and the less fortunate.
“When I hear Rubio speak, it’s just frightening,” said Stephanie Moore, 49, a freelance consultant who said she would vote for Mr. Crist. “That whole Tea Party movement — it’s going to set black folks back by 40 years.”
I don’t understand this kind of thinking, at all. Setting black folks back? What is she basing that on? These folks seem to forget which party voted against civil rights of the ’60s.
Democrats have caused the slums in Detroit (and cities all over this country) with over 50 years of control. How many more years do you have to keep giving the power to the them before you figure out that they aren’t working FOR your betterment?
And on another related topic: Rubio has scared the besjesus out of the democrats. Prime example is this Meeks/Crist/Clinton/Obama stand off. Who asked who to quit the race, when did they ask, and why?
I think they are more afraid of Rubio than they are of Michele Bachmann. Rubio is the face of a president and they know it. Rubio is the greatest hope of many Republicans and not just in Florida. If he were running today, he’d have my vote. He is the inheritor of the great communicator.
And on just one more topic:
In Connecticut today, and as I’ve seen at all democrat rallies this year, there are signs with the Obama brand on them. He says this election is not about him but his symbol is everywhere at these rallies. It’s a loser and yet, they still flash it around. What I really think is that this is for him, this is the start of the ’12 race. We are going to see him do – for the next 2 years – what he does best: campaign. He can’t govern but he sure can campaign.
The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis has run simulations using their Individual Income Tax Model comparing current law with President Obama’s most recent budget proposal which includes: 1) higher taxes on individuals earning more than $200,000 and couples earning more than $250,000; 2) higher taxes on capital gains; 3) higher taxes on dividends; and 4) the return of the death tax. The CDA found that the Obama tax hikes would:
Destroy an average of 693,000 jobs every year.
Drain $726 billion from disposal income, $38 billion from personal savings, and $33 billion from business investments.
Raise taxes on the 55% of all joint filers earning more than $250,000 who run small businesses that employ others.
Cost the average non-farm small-business owner $3,500 more in taxes.
Cost the 49% of all seniors with income below $250,000 $525 in additional dividend taxes.
Cost the 25% all seniors with income below $250,000 $742 in higher taxes.
The bottom line is clear: All Americans would suffer economic harm under the Obama tax hikes. There simply is no justification for raising taxes when the unemployment rate is already near 10%. The American people already know this, which is why the same independents who voted for President Obama by a 52% to 44% margin also oppose the Obama tax hikes. After polling these same independents, Independent Women’s Voice CEO Heather Higgins and former President Bill Clinton pollster Doug Schoen describe what these independents really want: “Decrease the size and scope of government, cut spending and taxes, balance the budget, reduce the federal debt, reduce the power of special interests and unions, repeal and replace the health-care legislation, and decrease partisanship.”
From the Heritage Foundation
This president will never do any of the things that Higgins and Schoen described. He is anti all those things and pro all of them. “Decrease the size of government?” In whose dreams? “Reduce the power of unions?” I don’t think so. “Repeal health care legislation?” HA! what color is the sky on your planet?
Rush is making a chunk of change off of his NY penthouse. I think I read that it’s selling for just under $11million. Good for him! He’s signed a few paychecks over his career. He’s running a company, or should I say, an empire and he’s been instrumental in providing a few jobs, here and there, unlike our president.
The probable Clinton estate
The Clintons claim to millions – and an estate reminiscent of the Kennedy compound sans the beach and a few dozen or so kids and grandkids- is thanks to a couple of likely ghost-written books and well placed connections.
(By the way, I’ve read none of their books and plan not to. Autobiographies are written only to glorify the auto part of the story. Usually, biographies are more fair to the party in question.)
I found these 2 stories on Drudge today to be really interesting and very juxtaposed in position.
Podesta served on the staff of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) from 1981 to 1988. Leahy was an early advocate of circumventing the U.S. Constitution by gaining control over federal courts. Podesta assisted Leahy in pioneering the indiscriminate smearing and filibustering of any and all Republican judicial nominees — a practice previously unknown in Washington.
In 1988 Podesta teamed up with his brother Anthony to form the Washington lobbying firm Podesta Associates. One of their first clients was Michael Dukakis. John Podesta served as opposition research director — commonly dubbed a “dirt digger” — for Dukakis’ 1988 presidential campaign.
It really doesn’t sound all that far-fetched after you read the opinion piece from The Daily Beast:
Last week, ABC News reported: “Lawyers for President Obama have been working behind the scenes to prepare for the possibility of one, and maybe two Supreme Court vacancies this spring. Court watchers believe two of the more liberal members of the court, Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, could decide to step aside for reasons of age and health. That would give the president his second and third chance to shape his legacy on the Supreme Court.”
…
Some have suggested Hillary play musical chairs with Joe Biden in a second term. Biden actually wanted to be secretary of State more than he wanted to be vice president. So, he’d probably be game. The problem with this scenario is that in terms of power and influence, the veep slot would be step down for Hillary. And Team Obama never liked the idea of giving Bill Clinton entrée to meddle around the familiar old 18 acres. On the other hand, the surest route to a party nomination is to launch your candidacy from the cat bird’s seat of the vice presidency.
…
But if in the end if it’s about what is realistic, and how Hillary could have the greatest impact on society, most would agree she could have the greatest political influence by hanging around for a couple of decades casting votes and writing opinions on the Supreme Court.
… why would Obama consider her?
One possibility: legacy. As popular as Obama is, and as many votes as he received in 2008, he still stepped over Clinton to get to the throne. And a lot of woman haven’t forgotten or forgiven. In one stroke, he would eliminate any remaining bad feelings and would become a Hillaryland hero.
Stripping away the drama, the politics and psychobabble, she’d be a great choice for Obama and the Democrats. She’s as smart and as qualified as any prospect her party could nominate.
It was his failure to understand the difference between an act of war and a crime [1993 World Trade Center bombing] that undermined President Clinton’s administration’s anti-terror efforts and led directly to 9-11. It would appear that President Obama is going down the same road of denial and minimization of political harm. There may be casualties at Ft. Hood, but Obama is determined that his popularity will not be among them.
I said it a while ago: The shadowy Marxists are resurrecting a “vast right wing conspiracy” when it’s actually the left with the covert ops going on. Read David Horowitz and his websites (discoverthenetworks.org), watch Glenn Beck, read Inside the Revolution by Joel Rosenberg or watch kindergarteners sing praises to TheOne. Then tell us who’s got a conspiracy of thought going on.
Tides Foundation, ACORN, SEIU, the evil Rathke brothers and there’s no conspiracy? John Podesta launching a smear campaign on Soros’ blog sites against Giles, O’Keefe and Breitbart, not to mention ridiculous lawsuits, and they have no secret operations going on? Scouring the web for anything (like nudie pictures of Hannah) for any dirt they can get on these patriots and there’s a “right wing conspiracy”? The party that’s all for women’s rights is digging the internet for information to defame a 20 year old girl? How much more hypocritical can you get?
These people continue to flaunt their hypocrisy as though it’s a virtue. And they are more powerful than Rush Limbaugh in his wildest dreams, although they want to portray themselves as the downtrodden and the oppressed. There is one person bankrolling this entire Marxist movement. Not so the for the Republicans or conservatives. There is nothing grassroots about what the Soros army of Marxists is doing.
The dichotomy of the left is they have no self restraint but they want to control everyone else. Right now they are drunk on the power, on the WIN, on the control, but give them enough rope and they hang themselves. The ACORN sting is the best example of that: lies, corruption and immorality. They will bring themselves down with very little help from their enemies.
“Brace yourselves, because the war with Muslims has just begun,” 31-year-old Faisal Shahzad told a federal judge. “Consider me the first droplet of the blood that will follow.”
Stop Sharia in America
click image
Obamas Wisdom and Terror in the Street
"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever...we absorbed it and we are stronger."
Diary of a Mad Conservative 