Category Archives: Eric Holder

Dep. of Injustice issues dictate to schools

by Bullright

Eric Holder Just Sent This Threatening Letter To All Public Schools

by B. Christopher Agee — May 8, 2014 | Western Journalism

Along with the Department of Education, Eric Holder’s Justice Department is reminding public schools in no uncertain terms that they are obligated to provide all children with an education regardless of their immigration status.

In an apparent attempt to clarify existing guidelines, the federal government sent a letter to schools indicating the agencies are “aware of student enrollment practices that may chill or discourage the participation, or lead to the exclusion, of students.”

The letter emphasizes how loose the restrictions are regarding what type of documentation schools are required to accept, basically meaning there is no excuse for questioning why a child obviously in the country illegally is receiving taxpayer-funded schooling and/or child care.

“We want to be sure every school leader understand the legal requirements under the Constitution and federal laws,” the letter states, “and it is our hope that this update will address some of the misperceptions out there.”

One is hard pressed, however, to find any mention of the government’s responsibility to provide free education to criminal inhabitants within the structure of the U.S. Constitution. In any case, the letter goes on to spell out requirements in no uncertain terms.

“The message here is clear,” it read, “let all children who live in your district enroll in your public schools.”

Parents of children with only a foreign birth certificate are given ample leeway in providing alternative ‘documentation,’ including an entry in a family Bible, for instance.

Holder and other leftist leaders are determined to integrate illegals completely into society to the extent that actually holding them accountable for their crimes would not only be nearly impossible, but in itself an illegality.

Ensuring the next generation of criminals is indoctrinated within the public school system is one vital step in achieving that goal.

Photo Credit: Facebook/Remove the Idiot Eric Holder from Office!

 

(CBS 5)”We want to be sure every school leader understands the legal requirements under the Constitution and federal laws, and it is our hope that this update will address some of the misperceptions out there,” said Secretary Arne Duncan in a statement. “The message here is clear: let all children who live in your district enroll in your public schools.”

Attorney General Eric Holder pledged to “vigilantly enforce the law to ensure the schoolhouse door remains open to all.” Any actions to put up barriers to student enrollment, “not only harm innocent children, they also markedly weaken our nation…by leaving young people unprepared and ill-equipped to succeed,” he said.

Related: Object to book content and you could get ‘booked’

Photo Credit: Facebook/Remove the Idiot Eric Holder from Office!

Gonzales’ racist treatment from Senate

by Bullright

[See previous post]
Now this isn’t ancient history. But for Holder to act as if he was the only person scrutinized with tough questions by an agitated Congress, doesn’t even pass the smell test.

“Once the government shows the disregard for the independence of the justice system and the rule of law, it’s very hard to restore the people’s faith.” — Senator Leahy to AG Gonzales.

 

Pat Leahy said in 2007:

“The dep of Justice is experiencing a crisis in leadership perhaps unrivaled in its history. Unfortunately, the crisis is not abated. Until there is independence, transparency, and accountability, the crisis will continue.

The attorney General’s lost the confidence of Congress and the American people. Through oversight we hope to restore balance and accountability to the Executive branch. The Dep of Justice must be restored to being worthy of its name. It should not be reduced to another political arm of the White House, it was never intended to be that. Trust and confidence of the American people in Federal law enforcement must be restored.”

“Investigation into the firing for partisan purposes of United States Attorneys who’ve been appointed by this president, along with an ever-growing series of controversies and scandals, have [revealed] an administration driven by a vision of an all-powerful Executive over our Constitutional system of checks and balances, one that values loyalty over judgment, secrecy over openness, and ideology over competence. The accumulated and essentially uncontroverted evidence is that the political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least 9 Unites States attorneys last year.

The stonewalling by the White House raises the question: what is it that the White House is so desperate to hide?

The justice dep has been reduced to the role of enabler of this administration. What we need instead is genuine accountability and real independence.

His[Gonzales’] lack of independence and tendency to act as if he were the president’s lawyer, rather than the attorney general of the United States, makes that doubtful.”…

“Once the government shows the disregard for the independence of the justice system and the rule of law, its very hard to restore the people’s faith.”

And those are only Leahy’s opening remarks. Leahy told Gonzales “I don’t trust you.”

It’s clear that was a blatant racist slur toward Gonzales because he’s Hispanic. Who can deny that? Did anyone say “you just “don’t trust” him because he’s a Hispanic”, that it was racism? I never heard it. Think about how this administration “deals with” any criticism or those kinds of remarks.

When asked about a “Senate trial for contempt,” Leahy told a reporter that there have been subpoenas etc, “but if they don’t respond there will be contempt citations”. And again, clearly because of racism.

Schumer: “Sir, how can you say that you should stay on as attorney general when we go through these exercises like this where you’re bobbing and weaving and ducking to avoid admitting that you deceived the committee.”

“Stay on”??? Sure, try to force the Hispanic out. “Bobbing and weaving and ducking??” I never heard such racist tripe.

Feingold: “When you look at all these statements together, it’s hard to see anything but a pattern of intentionally misleading Congress again and again. Shouldn’t the attorney general of the United States meet a higher standard??”

“Higher standard?” More racist rhetoric, we know what those “dog whistle”-words mean.

And that’s all besides what they said about Gonzales and Bush on the Sunday talk shows or media blurbs. It’s clear the Dems see racism everywhere they want to see it. Great excuse.

Unfortunately, Gonzales didn’t think of calling it racism because he was a Hispanic.
It wouldn’t have mattered anyway.

RightRing | Bullright

Holder: what AG got treatment like that?

by Bullright

First, what initiated Holder’s comments was the exchange with (Tx)Rep. Louie Gohmert:

“I realize that contempt is not a big deal to our attorney general, but it is important that we have proper oversight,” Gohmert said. He was referring to the House of Representatives holding Holder in contempt of Congress in 2012 for refusing to release documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal.

“You don’t want to go there, buddy! You don’t want to go there, okay,” said an angry Holder.

“I don’t want to go there?” Gohmert responded.

“You should not assume that that is not a big deal to me,” Holder said.

 

So Holder went right out to publicly protest it. Here is Holder pleading his, and Obama’s, unprecedented victim status to Al Sharptons’ National Action Network.

Holder on Gohmert exchange: ‘What attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?’ — Daily Caller

“I’m pleased to note that the last five years have been defined by significant strides and by lasting reforms,” said Holder at the conference of black activists, before improvising “even in the face, even in the face, of unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly, and divisive adversity.”

“If you don’t believe that, if you look at the way, forget about me, forget about me, if you look at the way the attorney general of the United States was treated yesterday by a House Committee, it had nothing to do with me, forget that, what attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”

He added, “What president has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”

Sure you’re the ONLY one…and its just because you’re black. (do I have a bridge for you)
Hey Eric, how about Gonzales or John Ashcroft, and Bush just for starters? Gonzales was practically burned at the stake. The difference is Republicans went after Gonzales too.

Now Holder complains about unprecedented treatment to the same groups on the Left that railed against Gonzales for firing US attorneys, calling for his resignation & impeachment.

All you have to do is research the Gonzales firing of the federal prosecutors and you’ll find the hearings, and press coverage.

Dems didn’t get up and walk out in protest of the treatment Gonzales received, and neither did Republicans. Dems piled on and, more importantly, the Republicans didn’t protest. Instead, some Repubs joined Schumer and those on the left calling for his resignation.

That isn’t ancient history. For Holder to act as if he was the only guy to get this “treatment” from congress is alternative reality.
 

Open Congress .org / Schumer:

    Calls for A.G. Gonzales to step down
    In March 2007, Sen. Schumer called for the resignation of Attorney General Gonzales. Among his reasons that he cited were lack a respect for the “the rule of law and the Constitution”, specifically, the Bush administration U.S. attorney firings controversy, and the recent scandals surrounding “FBI’s illegal snooping into people’s private lives”

How about Keith Ellison on impeaching white Cheney:

“It is beneath his dignity in order for him to answer any questions from the citizens of the United States. That is the very definition of totalitarianism, authoritarianism and dictatorship.”

“If Libby gets pardoned,” Ellison said, “then he should not have the cover of the Fifth Amendment. He’s going to have to come clean and tell the truth. Now, he could get Gonzales-itis, you know, with 71 lapses of memory within a two-hour period.”

“Gonsales-itis”….sounds pretty racist.

But Ellison also compared Bush to Adolf Hitler in one rant, following Dick Durbin’s lead.

Ellison also compared Bush and 9/11 to how the Reichstag fire was used “as pretext to impose police powers” – presumably with his trusty Attorney General spreading the fire.

After all Eric Holder has done to subvert justice, he is the last person who can claim victim status. He’s like the school bully crying that he’s being bullied. He claims to be “advancing the cause of justice”. And by any relative comparison, he is a whining, elitist radical.

More next post…
RightRing | Bullright

Lois Lerner, IRS and the Hatch Act

by Bullright

 

Hatch Act and Political Activities

The Hatch Act limits certain political activities of Federal employees both on and off duty. (Members of the Senior Executive Service, are subject to further restrictions and should contact the General Counsel’s office for additional guidance.) Violations of the Hatch Act may result in disciplinary action, up to and including removal.The term “political activity” means doing something in active support of or opposition to a political party, a candidate for partisan political office (e.g., President, senator, representative, state or local legislature or office), or a partisan political group (e.g., “Historians for Smith”). Examples of political activity that would violate the Hatch Act if done while on duty or using Government property include: circulating a candidate’s nominating petition within your office; using the PC in your office after work to produce a brochure in support of a candidate’s campaign; sending e-mail invitations to campaign events to friends within the agency; and using National Archives’ Internet connections to forward e-mail messages received from a partisan campaign or someone supporting a partisan candidate. Permissible political activity under the Hatch Act would include voting for the candidates of your choice; expressing opinions about candidates and issues; assisting in voter registration drives.

For a more comprehensive view of what the Hatch Act allows and disallows, please review the list of Hatch Act Do’s and Don’ts shown below. Questions concerning the Hatch Act may be directed to Christopher Runkel, Office of General Counsel.

Here is a list of don’ts :

· Engage in political activity while on duty
· Engage in political activity while wearing an official Government uniform or identifying National Archives insignia
· Engage in political activity while using a Government vehicle
· Engage in political activity in any Government office
· Engage in political activity while using Government property, including computers, printers, copiers, fax machines, and telephones
· Wear political buttons while on duty
· Display items (e.g., posters, signs, stickers) at work that indicate support of or opposition to a political party or a candidate in a partisan election
· Run as a candidate for public office in any partisan election, except in jurisdictions specified by OPM
· Solicit, accept, or receive political contributions (except in limited circumstances involving certain Federal labor or employee organizations)
· Solicit, accept, or receive political contributions from a subordinate employee
· Allow your official title to be used in connection with fund raising activities
· Host a fund raiser at your home
· Use your official authority or influence to interfere with an election
· Knowingly solicit or discourage the political activity of any person who has business before the National Archives

 

I haven’t heard anyone mention it. From the beginning, conservative groups were targeted — now we know systematically.
 

GOP says IRS’ Lois Lerner targeted Crossroads

By RACHAEL BADE | 4/9/14 | Politico

House Republicans on Wednesday accused former IRS official Lois Lerner of breaking agency rules by aggressively urging denial of tax-exempt status to Crossroads GPS, the giant political nonprofit founded by Karl Rove.

The House Ways and Means Committee released emails showing the former chief of the tax-exempt unit took a special interest in Crossroads GPS in early 2013 — inquiring with IRS officials why they hadn’t been audited. Around the same time an email suggested she might be applying for a job with a pro-President Barack Obama group, Organizing For Action, though it is unclear if she was joking.

Democrats decried the release, calling it an election year gimmick to win over the party’s political base. One campaign finance group came to the defense of Lerner, who has denied any wrongdoing, calling the probe a partisan witch hunt.

The Republican committee letter calls her actions an “aggressive and improper pursuit of Crossroads… but no evidence [that] she directed review of similarly situated left-leaning groups.”

The documents were released after a rare, closed-door Ways and Means markup, where the panel voted 23-14 along party lines to send a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, requesting he take the former head of the IRS tax-exempt division to court — though the department already has an ongoing investigation….

More http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/republicans-seek-criminal-probe-of-irs-official-105531.html

When did it become the cool thing to ruin America?

by Bullright

In the election of 2008 it became the faddish, cool thing to do to support Obama. Then in 2012, once again it was the fashionable “cool thing” to support Obama.

Well, they had supported him the first time so it would be hard to turn away, midstream, basically admitting they were snookered the first time. So they repeated the mistake partly to cover the original error. So does it make you think a little about original sin?

Life is like that, we repeat mistakes, sometimes unwittingly and sometimes intentionally, because the alternatives are too humiliating to face. Rather than fess up to our blunder, we look for a way to avoid revealing it. Often the coverup is more trouble than admitting the error. And once you start, it is harder to stop the longer it goes. The Nixon years taught us the power, or folly, of the coverup. Now we could label it the coverup syndrome.

Ruining America involves a little of that, and a few other ingredients. What one would basically do is deny or break the connection with the roots, or fundamental foundations of the country. That’s why the phrase to fundamentally transform the country was so important. We understood the significance of that, while on the left they acted as if there was no significance behind it. But then why would he make a point of saying it? We knew what he meant. The left would pretend it was harmless, which by then had become second nature.

Then, having cut off those things, the next thing on the to do list would be cut anything that tied to it. The major thing would be founding documents or the Constitution. They’ve been hacking away at that and breaking those ties. When revision runs its course on both, it tosses them in limbo as far as intelligentsia or academia is concerned. Then, whatever you wanted to do, someone could always make a case for it.

Then just continue undeterred with some a multitude of tests. “Probe with bayonets…”

SO you want to invade another country by ignoring Congress? Okay. You want to run up a huge tab on the debt? Okay. You want to have lots of scandals? Okay. You want to usurp more power? Okay. You want your signature legislative issue to be based on one principle then change it midstream, even in front of the Supreme Court while trying to defend it? Okay. You want to lie about events of national security? Okay. You want to deny multiple scandals are scandals? Okay. You want to deploy our military to overthrow a dictator without Congress? Okay.

You want to claim yours is the most transparent administration while hunkering down and obstructing any oversight?Okay again. You want to tell people, if the Congress doesn’t provide legislation you demand, you will do it with usurped “executive power”? Okay. You want to tell departments in your administration to just write law then force them on the people no matter what the consequences? Okay You want to create a few more czars? Okay. You want to have the IRS do your political work and ride shotgun for your reelection campaign? Okay.

obama photo: OBAMA OBAMA obama.jpgYou want to have your justice department stonewall the Congress for documents about a scam program it was running which undermined our laws? Okay You want to propose your administration investigate its own scandals? Okay. You want to have your own loyal cronies and political operatives promise to fix problems? Okay.

You want to lie about a terrorist attack on a US facility? You want to not answer questions on the decisions that caused the lies? Okay. You want to drag out the release of information for months or indefinitely, then dismiss the dead Americans as old news? Okay.

Want to say you will get to the bottom of a “phony scandals” while your administration conveniently does whatever they can to prevent it? Have at it.

You want to wall off and seal personal background information about you, while using any means to uncover any records on your political opponents? O–kay! You want to say you will pick and choose which laws you will follow and enforce? Okay. You want to pick winners and losers in the private sector and economy? Okay.

You want to have members in the Senate run interference by keeping a budget from being approved for your entire first term? Okay. You want to keep people in your administration working despite being involved in bad conduct? Okay. Do you want to ignore the Constitution as the rule of law of government? Well, have it your way.

obama photo: Ball Light - Fly my little devils Obama-Flymylittledevilsfly1.jpgThis message brought to you by BO victory campaign

Nixon— “Communist leaders believe in Lenin’s precept: Probe with bayonets. If you encounter mush, proceed; if you encounter steel, withdraw.”
paradise photo

West Wing plays Holder-Folder

by Bullright

[Thanks to Dave]

NYT: White House Wants Holder to Resign

Newsmax – 6/2/13

Presidential aides are privately admitting to a growing frustration inside the White House with Attorney General Eric Holder’s political ineptness in the press leak investigations and are hoping the embattled appointee will resign from office, The New York Times reports.

“The White House is apoplectic about him, and has been for a long time,” said an anonymous Democrat source, identified only as a former government employee who acknowledged the White House staffers in question are his friends.

President Barack Obama’s advisers are frustrated with Holder’s inability to foresee problems arising from his approval of a subpoena naming a Fox News reporter as a co-conspirator in an espionage investigation. Now Congress is looking at whether Holder lied under oath when he testified last month that he knew nothing about the incident.

Additionally, Holder has become a lightening rod for criticism for pulling the phone records of 100 Associated Press reporters in another polarizing investigation.

“How hard would it be to anticipate that the AP would be unhappy?” the former official said. “And then they haven’t defended their position.”

The New York Times article highlighted a rare glimpse of the interworking of the White House social circle, stating that Holder’s “saving grace through years of controversies has been the friendship of two women close to Mr. Obama” – First Lady Michelle Obama, who is good friends with Holder’s wife, and Valerie Jarrett, the president’s senior adviser.

In addition to the press leak scandals, Holder has come under attack for his agency’s participation in the botched gun-trafficking investigation “Fast and Furious,” for which Holder was found in contempt of Congress.

Read more … http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Holder-Obama-New-York-Times-resign/2013/06/02/id/507546?s=al&promo_code=13B16-1#ixzz2VA5inMZW

Hat tip to Dave for the article.

My comments: So is a circular firing squad forming? But no one told Holder’s mobile defense team. Schumer has come out saying there is no grounds for him to resign.  Mixed signals? — Why certainly!

Or is the regime trying to be on both sides of the issue, once again? Trying to pacify their both critics and base?  And why the leak about it? Holder better investigate that.

It is hard to forget an entire caucus in congress staging a walkout and calling it racism to hold Eric Holder accountable — then over Fast and Furious investigations. Still he was held in contempt for his failure to allow congress to do its job. He seemed to be provoking a Constitutional crisis then.

After all the radical times and “racism” accusations, hard to believe they have a problem with Holder now. I thought he was perfect. I kind of enjoy watching Schumer and company try to defend the indefensible. Is it a trial balloon… or just more theater? Maybe their bluff face needs work.

I will await the next story how Eric Holder, and Obama by extension, are being victimized, picked on, harassed, and railroaded. (precisely the tactics used on anyone who gets in their way) Then I will know how serious it all is.

Last week he failed to bond with the media on having an “off-the-record” session with media. Apparently there was no food and refreshments… few takers.  

“The Amazing O’Reilly”: factor out

by Bullright

On Wednesday, apparently O’Reilly put on his Nostradamus hat. He made a great prediction that Eric Holder would have to step down and resign. Someone really should get a note to that guy to ease up on the pomegranate juice,  it must be fermenting.

Johnny Carson had a bit where he made predictions as Carnac the Magnificent. It was funny anyway. More than I can say for the seriously typecast Bill O.

Hasn’t he realized Holder is Obama’s biggest right hand guy, who knows almost as much as Valerie Jarrett? Did he not realize how dependent Obama is on him?  I wrote somewhere that Holder is the one guy who could not get tossed under the bus, he knows too much. Holder is Obama’s “red line.” That’s more believable. But O’Reilly gets in his prediction mode, as if that makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And didn’t he notice how Holder personally attacked Issa at the hearing? Yea, that looked like a guy on the verge of resigning, didn’t it?  He would single-handedly make government use every resource it has, including impeachment, to get him out. He is there to the bitter end, whatever that is.

Maybe O’Reilly should ease up on the books, it really is  going to his head. Bill, take a break, and take some deep breaths.

I wonder if he can predict the end of the O’Reilly Factor? Inquiring minds want to know.

A government of know nothings

by Bullright

I always knew it would finally come to this. Having a Leviathan so large and massive that really no one knows anything. No one even knows what they are doing, or why.

As for President Know Nothing, how could he know even most of what this behemoth government is doing? Does he even care? Sure he has people for that, but they do not know anything either.

So when we have an investigation, just ask the people, and they will tell you no one outside the department influenced their policy or actions. And they don’t know how or why it happened. (sounds like an old Laugh-In bit) Nope, then it is clear, there was no outside [political] influence on the IRS – so you can take that to the bank. (sorry bad pun)

The investigators can say there was no influence, but if no one knows anything, how can employees state with any certainty that there was no outside influence? Then how are we to believe that when we don’t know for sure? And how can the IG state with any surety there was no outside influence. He surely does not know either. No one does.

And that is the great thing about this huge out of control government. At least there is one thing they can all agree on: that no one could possibly know because of its size. Even David Axelrod states with surety that the government is so breathtakingly huge that Obama could not know what is going on. That’s a far cry from transparency and the accountable government we were sold.

“Part of being president is there’s so much beneath you that you can’t know because the government is so vast”, Axelrod said. (see video)

So if you want an excuse for no accountability from government, there it is.

Government “of, by and for the people” is now of, by and for Government. And when it is wrong or errors, don’t worry it will investigate itself. You can trust its integrity. It’s always good for its tab too. (another bad analogy, I know)

Steven Miller

Sarah Ingram

Barack Obama

Eric Holder

Douglas Shulman

Lois Lerner

Hillary Clinton

Just to name a few of the prominent Know Nothings

Lists? What lists?

Besides, if it does come to a hearing where they are accused of keeping information from Congress, they can do like Eric Holder and criticize the messenger.

“No, that’s what you typically do…. That is inappropriate and is too consistent with the way in which you conduct yourself as a member of Congress. It’s unacceptable and it’s shameful.” — Holder told Issa.

He can always revert back to the primary “I don’t know” answer that always works. And when he gets accused of hiding information or lying, he can always play the racism card. (that one never gets old)

Pelosi takes a stab at “problems”

by Bullright

Pelosi lied and Democrats cried

Obama meetings couldn’t have prevented gridlock, Pelosi says

Posted by
CNN’s Gregory Wallace

(CNN) – The stalemate in Washington is not because President Barack Obama has held himself above meeting with Republicans, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday.

In an exclusive interview on CNN’s “State of the Union,” the chamber’s top Democrat said Obama respects congressional Republicans and called “just really not reality” the idea that Obama could have prevented gridlock by meeting with the GOP sooner.

“It is not why we haven’t had progress before. We haven’t had progress before because the Republicans were committed to blocking the initiatives of President Barack Obama,” she said.

Pelosi spoke shortly after Obama took a dozen Senate Republicans out for dinner, sat down with the 2012 Republican vice presidential candidate and has plans to meet with senators and representatives from both parties on Capitol Hill next week. Washington has just over two weeks to pass a measure averting a government shutdown, which neither party wants.

Continue: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/10/obama-meetings-couldnt-have-prevented-gridlock-pelosi-says/

Here are Pelosi’s words:

“CROWLEY: A lot of talk about the president reaching out to Republicans. Do you think that this in, any way, undercuts leadership?

PELOSI: No. No. Absolutely not. The president has always been very respectful of the views of the Republicans and the Congress, their leadership and their membership. He has always tried to accommodate them. This idea that, but for that we would have gotten all these other things done is just really not reality.
/…
PELOSI: … He’s been very bipartisan in his approach.

I think it is, let’s get some things done together to make elections less important. … That’s far more important than what happens in an election.

Getting lectured about election politics from Pelosi… now that’s rich!

Here’s Exhibit A in Democrats’ negotiatiing, working with Republicans:(Free Beacon)

  •  DNC chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) calls the Ryan Medicare plan ‘literally a death trap’ in April 2011
  •  Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D., Texas) on “Hurricane Ryan” in April 2011
  •  Health and Human Services Sec. Kathleen Sebelius offers ‘die sooner’ as an option under Ryan’s Medicare plan in May 2011
  •  Wasserman Schultz compares Ryan plan to a tornado in March 2012
  •  Democratic strategist and fundraiser Karen Finney says Obama campaign’s “Julia” would be dead by 30 under Ryan’s plan in May 2012

    And Alan Grayson saying Republicans want the sick to “die quickly”.

    And lets see, their own fuhrer-in-chief attacked Ryan’s plan as un-American, labeling it a Trojan Horse calling it a “radical vision” of ” social Darwinism”. That’s rich considering OBamaCare.  

    He’s really working on that respect, isn’t he? Note his words to the News Editors:

    “It’s a Trojan horse. Disguised as deficit reduction plan, it’s really an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country. It’s nothing but thinly veiled social Darwinism,” Obama said at a luncheon during the annual meeting of the American Society of News Editors.

    How’s that for showing great “respect” in listening to their ideas? You really got us there, Nan.

    And when he criticized Ryan and the Supreme Court while seated in front of him from the national podium. Respect? Then there was candidate Obama calling Bush unpatriotic for spending.

    You think Obama heard echoes of Pelosi’s previous warning about inflammatory language? Of course that was the reason he said it, to be inflammatory, just like the SOTUS. It is the very reason he does it. “Respect”, Nancy tells us.

    Here was Pelosi trembling in fear over Tea Parties:

    “I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw … I saw this myself in the late ’70s in San Francisco,” Pelosi said, choking up and with tears forming in her eyes. “This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening and it created a climate in which we, violence took place and … I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made.”

    Hypocrisy is her middle name

    Now here is her concerns about drone targeting on American soil:

    “But this is where the great coming together that our country and our Founders experienced in their own time because they were always under threat, witness the War of 1812, and the challenge to balance freedom and security. I don’t think that the administration has any intention of using drones in the United States against American citizens or otherwise. So I don’t have that fear.”

    Maybe she should have checked with AG Holder before she said that. Oops, his comments and intentions were the very reason for the outrage, I forgot. Pelosi shoots off her mouth and people think its cute. Biden shoots off his mouth — or shotgun off his balcony – and they say: “that’s just Joe. Isn’t he a hoot?” The right says anything and its immediately twisted into a pretzel that supposedly offends most of the country.

    Pelosi got fear fever over Tea Party people but no concerns about government overstepping its authority on we the people.

    Meanwhile, Obama can accuse Republicans of being un-American, practicing social Darwinism, and call their plans a “Trojan Horse”. That’s called “respect”. Democrats rally and cheer him on crying “NO harm, no foul!”- to verbalize their approval. Then Pelosi can come out and lie about it, as if they are victims and taken out of context.

    Early on Obama labeled voters as gun toting, Bible thumping bigots.

    This passes for respectful politics and bipartisanship, and listening or working with the other side? Sure it does, if you are Pelosi.

    Nancy defending earlier claims she had no knowledge about enhanced interrogation:

    Poor Nancy Pelosi, she can never manage to get her talking points quite right without contradicting herself. Here she is fumbling up her words about her knowledge of investigation tactics used. She is in an all out race with Holder on who can muddy up their words more.

Now we know Democrats’ definition redefinition of respect.
R E S P E C T… “find out what it means” – San Fran Nan style

Give me a break!

BP vs. Benghazi

by Bullright

Apparently, no one knows who changed or wrote the talking points Susan Rice blurted on every media channel long after the attack in Benghazi. Picture a bunch of kids in a circle saying “it wasn’t me!”

But this week offered another glaring contradiction into this administration. It was surrounding the BP disaster.

In an ongoing battle and settlement talks, the (in)Justice department fought to hold BP accountable on manslaughter for those killed from the blast that started the Gulf oil spill. Think about that. They claim the catastrophe was due to BP’s misconduct and negligence, and thereby making it responsible for manslaughter that killed 11 crewmembers.

Contrast that with the security, terrorism and murder that killed an ambassador and three Americans. It would even have been worse except for the heroes that responded to the attack after being told to stand down, who saved many lives. And then in the aftermath, Obama and his administration cannot understand why we the people are so outraged over their negligence, and subsequent cover-up, in handling the attack. Or about the many warnings going back for months of security problems. He even goes so far as implying he is a victim, along with Rice Rice, of his critics’s politics.

Yet when it comes to BP, they clearly see a connection with the blame for dead people due to BP’s negligence. And they are willing to fight a court battle to prove it. They even demand BP accept that blame. Both cases come from the same administration.

One would think that the accountability would be even higher in one of its embassies; in a place they are taking credit for liberating. And look at all the different stories we heard from the administration describinbg this serious act of terrorism on 9/11. In BP’s case, the CEO wanted his life back (whoa is me) and in this case Americans want their government back and some accountability. Heck, we can’t get any clear answers to the many questions on Benghazi. They didn’t even want to admit the terrorists who took credit for the attack soon after.

Had it been BP, this administration would be outraged beyond outrage. And they would demand answers immediately – on behalf of the people.

Ref: Headlines about BP are

BP guilty of misconduct, negligence in Gulf oil spill

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-bp-criminal-penalty-gulf-oil-spill-20121115,0,6778555.story

Businessweek.com reports:

“The U.S. also charged two BP well-site managers with involuntary manslaughter and a former executive with obstruction and false statements.”

They will conduct a war on energy but deny the radical terrrorist threats. “Al Qaeda is decimated”…. so the dictator has spoken.

***
Remember the hearing on BP where “Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, R-Louisiana went so far as to suggest McKay try a type of ritual suicide”?

Maybe no one has used the right language to get Obama’s attention yet.

Obama wins….America loses

by Bullright

 
Since the election is over, now I want to get over the silly season engulfing the political discussion. A loss for Romney is just that. It is not a loss for conservative principles.

But it is funny how the liberal-progs want to dominate the conversation. They get to decide what it means for conservatives, and they get to interpret the “win” however they want. They even offer to give Republicans pointers on how to win elections. If that isn’t a real stretch.

Let me see, a guy who had no experience whatsoever has managed to get reelected because so many people like the guy. They are so wrapped in their “hope” that they don’t care about the failures.

Never got a budget passed.

Has politicized every department of the government.

Has more secret plans and lists than Nixon could ever imagine.

ObamaCare and all its problems.

They revised the bios of former presidents by inserting himself into them.

Has had more scandal and secrecy than any recent prez, even the Clintons.

Has abandoned his job to do anything but. He’s even taking off for a trip while the country stares down a debt crisis and another recession.

And that is just the beginning of the list with four dead Americans at his hands and trying to squash the Fast and Furious investigation., and nationalized the auto industry. Yet he still can’t wait to spend more money even while we look down the barrel of a 16 trillion dollar debt in just his first term.

All that as bad as it is, he still thinks he won, without even having a plan. His stimulus purchased the necessary votes. He just pandered and made more promises to people to keep “believing” in him. Now they want to define the right. It’s not enough to win the election they want to interpret it and define conservatives however they choose..

And their talk continues. They claim it means conservatives have to do this and that. When Kerry lost to Bush they did all that bending? I recall all that navel gazing – NOT! It is ludicrous. When Gore lost, they just willingly went along with everything? This is silly season on steroids.

I expected the gloating. (anyone who boasted about killing bin Laden himself the way he did would certainly boast – he thought that sealed his reelection)

Then you have Harry Reid trying to abolish the filibuster. Remember “Fili the filibuster” — the Dems best friend under Bush. Fili has outlived its usefulness. So it seems winning the election abolished sanity.

“This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” And it keeps getting bigger.

One flew into the DoJ

by Bullright

Sometimes things can go bump in the night. Those are often unfounded, false alarms or something that inadvertently can be explained in retrospect. Still they cause your hair to stand up if even for a few seconds.

But then here you go of things that should go bump even in broad daylight but not necessarily do. And that is the daylight within government walls.(DoJ walls) They are pretty much admitted and the fears they raise validated; but to the contrary are often celebrated as moving forward. Well, I don’t know how they’d explain this one if they even could. But that is the point: they haven’t and may not have to explain it. Like many of the things this administration does, it is left for us to deal with the consequences.

So there is a post from Gates of Vienna talking about the absurdity or defiance of the Dep. of Injustice(the dep of justice is now obsolete) worth seeing.  Reading Obama’s program for hiring disabled is like reading something from sci-fi.  Obama issues an executive order based on a Clinton EO, but then cranks it up to light speed. It looks like stupid on steroids.

The Washington Times editorial reported:

EDITORIAL: Holder’s “severe mental deficiency”

Justice Department takes affirmative action to crazy extremes

You don’t have to have a severe intellectual disability to work at the Justice Department. But it helps.

According to a July 31 policy memo titled “Hiring of persons with targeted disabilities,” otherwise problematic mental deficiencies are no barrier to jump-starting a career at Justice. The memo lists a number of “targeted disabilities” that trigger special hiring privileges in compliance with President Obama’s Executive Order 13548. Among them are people with “severe intellectual disability,” “psychiatric disability” or other undefined “current severe physical, intellectual or mental conditions.” Most employers would balk at even minor mental disabilities in hiring a lawyer, let alone severe ones. But the policy states that the Cabinet department run by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. must “achieve a work force from all segments of society,” which includes those who are teetering on the edge of sanity.

[…/ And summarizes it with this]

Affirmative action has gone far astray from its origins as a means of correcting specific acts of unlawful discrimination. The Justice Department’s new policy reveals that special preferences are being used actively to deny opportunities to otherwise well- or better-qualified job seekers in the name of an abstract view of fairness. Ironically under the first black president, the federal hiring process is separate and unequal.

Read more: EDITORIAL: Holder’s “severe mental deficiency” – Washington Times

If you go to the PDF form, it states a series of “targeted” disabilities. The list is on the left of the form. If those aren’t enough, they add under “Other Impairments”: epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability, dwarfism.

Of course, under psychiatric disability you can imagine a plethora of things which presumably might bring one from the psych-ward to a coveted job in the DoJ. Maybe this falls under “the wheels of justice”, which apparently need some help.

Ref:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/08/holder-targets-disabled.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/22/holders-severe-mental-deficiency/
http://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf256.pdf

Tip of hat to Gates of Vienna for reporting it.