Former Bush #41 Official: 'This Is By Far The Most Dysfunctional Relationship' Of Any U.S. POTUS/Israeli PM Ever

David Aaron Miller appeared on Andrea Mitchell's program on MSNBC Thursday to comment on the latest flare up of Middle East tensions arising from the anonymous statement by a senior Obama Administration official calling Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu a "chickenshit." Miller, who has been involved in U.S.- Israel relations since the Carter Administration. said, "This is by far the most dysfunctional relationship," of any U.S. President/Israeli Prime Minister ever.

Miller should know; when he was a key player in the Bush #41 Administration the relationship got so bad that his boss, Secretary of State James Baker declared he didn't care about how the Jewish vote would punish the President for his Middle East policy. Baker said, "F**k the Jews, they won't vote for us anyway!" As bad as the relationship was during the Bush #41 administration, Miller told Mitchell that this administration's relationship is worse:

The reality is, and I made this point to you before Andrea, is that unlike Lehman Brothers, the U.S.-Israeli relationship driven as it is by common values, even though there are interests that are not mutually held on everything, also driven by common interests and a region that is melting down, unlike Lehman Brothers, it’s too big to fail. That said, let’s be clear, and I’ve watched quite a few American presidents and Israeli Prime Ministers deal with one another. This is by far the most dysfunctional relationship.

There've been tensions before, Shamir and Bush 41, Carter and Began, even Clinton and Netanyahu and his first incarnation and I am not able to use the Clinton line although I quoted in my last book after he had his first meeting with Netanyahu ["Who's the f---- superpower here"]. But the reality is this is tension without purpose and without production. There are purposeful fights and tensions with the Israelis and there are unproductive ones. This is frankly more soap opera than serious policy.

Read More

U.S. Govt. Paid Almost $300,000 In Drugs Benefits To Dead People (Study Examined Only 0.5% of All Part D Drugs)

A study of Medicare Part D disbursements for 2012 HIV patients revealed that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) paid nearly $292,381 for drugs for dead people, according to a new inspector general report. Since HIV patients account for only 0.5% of all Medicare Part D drugs finding a way to fix that problem would result in significant cost savings for the for taxpayers.

The Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that like most of the rest of the federal government, drugs purchased through Medicare Part D are subject to waste, fraud, and abuse since CMS allows for a 32-day window for purchases of prescription drugs after a person’s death. Drugs for HIV patients were chosen for study because of their very high costs. For example, one common HIV drug costs about $1,700 for a month’s supply. Although the report focuses on HIV drugs, the issues raised are relevant to all Part D drugs because controls to prevent payments after death are not specific to HIV drugs.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) has had ongoing concerns about Medicare paying for drugs and services after a beneficiary has died" according to the IG study which is embedded below. Medicare paid for HIV drugs for 158  deceased beneficiaries. CMS’s current practices allowed most of these payments to occur. Specifically, CMS has edits (i.e., systems processes) in place that reject PDE records for drugs with dates of service more than 32 days after death. CMS’s practices allow payment for drugs that do not meet Medicare Part D coverage requirements. Most of these drugs were dispensed by retail pharmacies.

A similar report done for FY 2011, showed CMS issued $21 million in Medicare Part C and D payments for dead people. An even earlier OIG report found that CMS paid $3.6 million for deceased beneficiaries in 2006 and 2007.

Another OIG report of HIV drug recipients found that there may be other forms of over or mis- payments. The report found that..

..nearly 1,600 Part D beneficiaries had questionable utilization patterns for HIV drugs in 2012.18 In total, Medicare paid $32 million for HIV drugs for these beneficiaries. These beneficiaries had no indication of HIV in their Medicare histories, received an excessive dose or supply of HIV drugs, received HIV drugs from a high number of pharmacies or prescribers, or received contraindicated drugs. These questionable patterns indicate that beneficiaries may be receiving inappropriate or unnecessary drugs. It may also indicate that a pharmacy is billing for drugs that a beneficiary never received, or that a beneficiary’s identification number has been stolen.

As a result of the study, the OIG recommended the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services change its practice of paying for drugs that have a date of service within 32 days after the beneficiary’s death.

CMS should eliminate or—if necessary for administrative processing issues—shorten the window in which it accepts PDE records after a beneficiary’s death. Having no window or a short window would prevent inappropriate payments for drugs for deceased beneficiaries and lead to cost savings for the program and for taxpayers.

Granted, today is Halloween but that doesn't mean our government should be paying money to real ghosts.

The full study is embedded below:

Read More

'War on Women' The GOP Fights Back (Video)

A big part or the Democratic Party's closing argument is that the GOP hates women. Even worse even the GOP women like Joni Ernst hates women.  To fight back against this ridiculous charge the RNC released the web video below which presents some of the misogynistic statements made this campaign season by Democratic Party candidates, such as the SC Democrat who called his opponent, Governor Nikki Haley a whore, or the NY Congressional Candidate who said his Republican opponent Elise Stefanik wasn't qualified for office because she never did manual labor, and others.

Read More

Abbas' 'Day of Rage' A Dud- Kerry: No Jewish Prayer Atop The Temple Mount

Maybe PA TV heard President Abbas wrong, perhaps he didn't call for a day of rage but a day of rain because the "day of rage called for by the Abbas-led Fatah Party thankfully turned out to be a dud.

During prayers, young Arabs rioted and set off fireworks on Old City rooftops close to the entrance to the Temple Mount, but no out-of-control clashes were reported. A group of Palestinian youths had tried unsuccessfully to break through a police cordon blocking entrance to the Mount in the same area earlier Friday.

Israel opened the Temple Mount site for Muslim prayers amid tight security Friday morning, bracing for violent riots after clashes the previous day between Palestinians and Israeli riot police ratcheted up already heightened tensions in the city.

But thankfully most of the predicted violence never happened. But in related news U.S. Secretary of State Kerry released a statement which reiterated his demand that Jews should not be allowed to pray at their holiest site:

I am extremely concerned by escalating tensions across Jerusalem and particularly surrounding the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount. It is absolutely critical that all sides exercise restraint, refrain from provocative actions and rhetoric, and preserve the historic status quo on the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount – in word and in practice. The continued commitment by Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians to preserve the historic status quo at this holy site is critical; any decisions or actions to change it would be both provocative and dangerous. The Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount must be re-opened to Muslim worshipers and I support the long-standing practices regarding non-Muslim visitors to the site, consistent with respect for the status quo arrangements governing religious observance there.

Read More

Newsbusted: TSA Chief Resigns, Wants To Spend More Time Groping His Family's Junk

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) chief John Pistole announced last week that he will resign at the end of the year, ending his run as the longest-serving administrator of the government agency entrusted with keeping terrorists off planes, trains and other means of transport. Pistole, 58, gave an exclusive interview to Newsbusted Anchor Jodie Miller (see video below) and told Miller the reason for his resignation was he wanted to spend more time groping his family's junk.

Other news items covered in the latest installment of Newsbusted the twice- weekly faux news feature from Newsbusters.org (embedded below) include;the Hunter Biden cocaine scandal; Al Franken's campaign strategy; falling gas prices; and much, much more.

Please make sure you watch the video below because something bad always happens to the people who don't. Last week DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Shultz forgot to press play and it looks like her party is going to be a big loser in the Midterms. So if you do not want want to be a loser like DWS, you better press play.

Oh and if you cannot see the video player below please click here

Read More

Holy Cow! Sen.Mary Landrieu (D-LA) Calls Louisiana Voters Racist Misogynists

One of the first rules that both politicians and Salespeople learn is never insult the people you are trying to convince---never! But Mary Landrieu (D-LA) never learned that lesson. Tonight she told Chuck Todd why she is in danger of losing her Senate Seat to Republican Bill Cassidy, Louisiana voters are racist misogynists:

I'll be very, very honest with you. The South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans,” Landrieu told NBC News in an interview. “It's been a difficult time for the president to present himself in a very positive light as a leader.

There are no words to add to this fail.

Read More

NARAL Colorado Chief Karen Middleton Earns A Giant Condom For Anti-Cory Gardner Ad

In what may be the most absurdly false ad of the 2014 campaign season, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) branch in Colorado launched TV and radio ads warning voters if Cory Gardner becomes the next senator, he will ban birth control and there will be a massive condom shortage as a result.

NARAL Colorado, run by executive Director Karen Middleton is ignoring that Gardner's stance on birth control is the exact opposite of NARAL's claims. His position is that "the pill" should be available over-the-counter, as he wrote in this "Dallas Post" op-ed in June":

It's time we changed that and adopt modern policies that make sense instead of using women's medical issues as an election-year power play. One of the most rational ways for Washington to break this gridlock is to approve oral contraception for over-the-counter purchases by adults.

Since "the pill" was first approved 44 years ago, it's been one of the most proven and tested pharmaceuticals of our time. It is safe, reliable, effective, and presents very few risks or complications for the more than 10 million women who use it. When other drugs have that kind of track record, we approve them for purchase without a prescription; the Food and Drug Administration has already reclassified over 100 different treatments. Name-brand drugs like Advil, Pepcid, Claritin, Prilosec and many others were once sold by prescription only, but moved to over-the-counter sale (OTC) once they'd been proven safe and unlikely to be abused.

When treatments go over-the-counter, two things happen: they get dramatically cheaper and consumers save time and hassle by avoiding unnecessary doctors' appointments just to get the pharmaceuticals they already know they need.

Fewer unneeded doctors' appointments mean fewer missed workdays and child-care expenses, more productivity and more time with family. This is particularly true for rural families like mine where doctors are not always nearby.

A fifteen-second TV commercial produced by NARAL shows a man's hand searching the top of the table next to his bed looking for a package of condoms, but they are all empty. The voiceover is saying, "Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys, if Cory Gardner gets his way, you better stock up on condoms." The visual switches to a picture of Cory Gardner with the words, "Gardner: Ban Birth Control" "in block letters.

There is also a radio version which features a conversation between a man reporting to his significant other that his trip to purchase condoms was unsuccessful.

Woman: Did you try the corner market?
Man: Of course.
Woman: Grocery store?
Man: Sold out?
Woman: Drug store?
Man: Come on.
Woman: So everyone’s sold out of condoms? Hmm. How did this happen?
Man: Cory Gardner banned birth control. And now, it’s all on us guys. And you can’t find a condom anywhere. And the pill was just the start. Pell grants my little brother was counting on for college? Cory cut them. Climate change that everyone knows is weirding our weather, Cory flat-out denies it. Sweet Pea, Cory denies science.
Woman: Come on!
Man: This guy has no idea what’s going on in the real world.

So for producing a running a campaign which is so false, and so Idiotic, NARAL Colorado Chief Karen Middleton earns a giant condom from this fact-checker.  We suggest that she place it over her head..after all if she is going to direct her organization to act like dicks, she might as well look like one also.

Congrats Ms. Middleton your "prize" will look something like the below.

Read More

Abbas' Fatah Party Calls For Palestinian Fighters To Launch DAY OF RAGE Friday (To Protect Temple Mount From Jews)

Fatah the Palestinian organization run by the supposedly moderate Mahmoud Abbas Friday October 31st a “day of rage” and called on the Palestinian “fighters” to defend Al-Aqsa (what Muslims call the Temple Mount). Recently President Abbas has been calling for Palestinians to defend the Temple Mount "by any means" which possibly incited the shooting of Rabbi Yehuda Glick on Wednesday.

The following announcement by Fatah was reported by the official PA news agency on Thursday October 30th (H/T Palwatch):

Fatah calls to its fighters and to the masses of the Palestinian people to aid the Al-Aqsa Mosque and occupied Jerusalem.

In an announcement that was published by the Fatah Mobilization and Organization Commission today, the movement called to set tomorrow as a day of rage throughout the homeland and in countries which are home to refugees, to express the Palestinian people’s opposition to any attack on the holy places and foremost among them the Al-Aqsa Mosque... And to consider desecration of Al-Aqsa as a declaration of a religious war against the Palestinian people and the Arab Islamic nations.

Last week the official Palestinian Authority TV channel aired at least nineteen times video of "moderate" President Mahmoud Abbas calling for Palestinians to prevent "in any way" Jews from going to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. On Wednesday evening a Palestinian terrorist shot American-born Rabbi Yehuda Glick, who was fighting for Jews to have the right to pray on the Temple Mount (presently only Muslims are allowed to pray atop mount Moriah).

Deputy Speaker of the Knesset Moshe Feiglin was with the Rabbi when he was shot. He wrote an account of the shooting on his Facebook page:

Here is what happened earlier: The Temple Mount movement held a conference tonight at the Begin Center in Jerusalem. I had spoken and left the Begin Center about half an hour before Yehudah was shot. At the end of the event, Yehudah, accompanied by Manhigut Yehudit General Director Shai Malka, walked outside to his car. There was a motorcyclist with his helmet on standing there. He turned to Yehuda in a thick Arabic accent and said, "Yehuda, I am angry at you," and then shot him three times point blank.

Rabbi Glick's attacker, Moataz Hejazi was shot and killed in a gunfight with Israeli police on Thursday morning. Hejazi had served time in jail in Israel and was released in 2012, he was a member of the Islamic Jihad terrorist group.

Glick remains in serious but stable condition.

Israeli police said closed the Temple Mount to everybody on Thursday "to prevent disturbances" in wake of the shooting of Rabbi Glick. Palestinian President Abbas' spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh told the press that “closing the Al Aqsa Mosque by Israel is a declaration of war by Israel against the Palestinian people and its holy places. This is also a declaration of war against the Arab and Muslim nations.”

Rabbi Yehuda Glick

As a concession to "keep the peace" non-Muslims are prohibited from praying atop the Temple Mount, even dipping one's head and appearing as if prayer is intended will cause Israeli police to escort someone of Judaism's holiest site. Because he campaigns to allow others to pray at the site (and because he is a easily recognizable-tall and red headed) Rabbi Glick has become a target of the Abbas incited violence.

Interestingly very few of the international media stories about the shooting mentioned that Glick was a Rabbi, but at the same time many of them including the NY Times,Economist, and France 24 called him a right-wing activist. Strangely if it was a cleric of any other faith being stopped from praying at his religion's holiest site those three media outlets and their countries (U.S., Britain, and France) would be fighting to help that cleric get the right to pray as a liberal cause. Apparently to the governments of those three nations freedom of religion does not apply to Jews.

Also noteworthy is that none of those media sources (or according to a Google search) nor any others mentioned the incitement by 'moderate' Palestinians such as President Mahmoud Abbas in the video above as an incitement for the shooting.

Read More

It Was Obama Who Called Netanyahu 'Chickenshit'

During Wednesday's White House press briefing Fox New's Ed Henry made a noble attempt to find out why the Obama Administration wasn't trying to discover which secret "senior official" was behind the now-famous leak to Jeffrey Goldberg calling Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu "chickenshit."

My question going back to the Israel story is, why then are you kind of sloughing off this idea that you kind don’t care who leaked that story that insulted of the prime minister of Israel? You have gone after reporters again and again in this administration to find out who leaked information to them. And then when it comes to insulting the prime minister, you don’t seem to care who leaked it.

Press Secretary Josh Earnest danced around the question.

Mr. Henry should know the answer.  The reason the Administration isn't looking for the leaker is they know exactly where it came from, President Obama. It may not have passed from the President's mouth to Goldberg's ears but Barack Obama was the puppeteer whose strings controlled the mouth that spoke to Goldberg.

Make no mistake, the Goldberg story was meant as a message to Netanyahu. The White House may have walked it back a tad, but only because the message wasn't meant for the U.S. public or the mainstream media----it was meant for Israel.

You see, Barack Obama does not like Benjamin Netanyahu and it's personal. Our thin-skinned President doesn't like anyone who disagrees with him. Bibi not only disagreed with him but he proved Obama wrong from the very beginning.

Obama doesn't understand why Administration pressure isn't working for him as it had with other Presidents. When Yitzhak Shamir fought with George H.W Bush his government fell and he was voted out of office. The same thing happened during Bibi's first term as Premier.  When he didn't give Bill Clinton the concessions he wanted Netanyahu's coalition failed and he was booted from office.  Obama is angry that he couldn't to the same with this Netanyahu government.

But Obama doesn't understand what happened to Israel since US Presidents helped to force those PMs out of office. Those government changes brought the failed Oslo peace efforts which brought the second intifada, the withdrawal from Lebanon that brought the war with Hezbollah, and eventually under Sharon years later the withdrawal from Gaza which brought three wars with Hamas. 

Obama misjudged Israelis from day one. What the President and his advisers perceived as a minor concession, a settlement freeze, was not perceived by Israel as a minor concession. This was a major error by the administration.

As part of his early settlement demand Obama informed the Israeli government that written assurances given to it by the Bush Administration about U.S. policy, given in response to prior Israeli concessions, were no longer in effect. One of those assurances was that Israel could expand existing settlements in Judea and Samaria and could build new ones in Jerusalem. The settlement demand was a lesson from Obama that assurances from American governments have a very short expiration date. Their insistence for a freeze and the constant public berating of the Jewish State has turned the Israeli population against Obama at the beginning of his administration, especially the Israeli "left" who a U.S. President would look to for support.

Then came the Obama Cairo speech in 2009. There Obama spoke of the Holocaust as a reason for the Jewish State, echoing the anti-Israel narrative that Jews had no historic right to the land, but were only given a state because of European guilt. He repeated that claim when he visited Buchenwald on his way back home from Cairo, "The aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted," he said, "in a tragic history" that culminated in the Shoah."

It also didn't go unnoticed that Obama went from Cairo to Germany and purposely avoided Israel.

There were other early actions that alienated the Israeli public,  during his first week of office  he sat down with Al-Arabiya Arab TV, Ignored Palestinian Terror and indicated that the Israeli government had no desire for peace. During the second month of his first term his Secretary of State  Hilary Clinton demanded that Israel open border crossings to terrorists.

Each one of the above early actions generated more support for Netanyahu and mistrust for Obama from the Israeli public. Each one of those early actions convinced the Israeli public that their country should stand up to the American President and each time Israel stood up to Obama, the POTUS got angrier that his will wasn't being obeyed and angrier Israeli voters weren't abandoning their Prime Minister.

This cycle, Obama throwing Israel and Netanyahu under the bus generating more Israeli support for Bibi instead of damaging his coalition continues through today just look at Israel's objections Obama's negotiations with Iran, and his criticism of Operation Protective Edge where Israel and Egypt blocked the U.S. from leading the ceasefire negotiations.

In his Atlantic article Jeff Goldberg wrote that Netanyahu has “written off” the Obama Administration. He is only partly correct.  The majority of Israeli citizens have “written off” the Obama Administration, and with good reason.

On the third day of his administration, Obama met with congressional leaders to discuss the proposed stimulus plan. When Eric Cantor raised objections to some of the items the President said, "I won. So I think on that one, I trump you." It was a warning to the GOP that he did not want to negotiate he expected to be obeyed.  And because they didn't obey, ever since he's been orating against them to the American people and the world

The same thing happened with Israel. At the beginning of his administration Obama actions were a signal that he must be obeyed. But the Prime Minister wouldn't kneel down to his demands and the Israeli people wouldn't oust the Premier. This thin-skinned President does not react well to being disobeyed.  That more than anything caused the anger driving Obama to "call" Netanyahu "chickenshit."

Read More

Listen Tonight 10/29 The Humpday News Report @10PM EDT-W/Guest Kerry Picket of Breitbart News

Our guest tonight will be Breitbart News’ investigative reporter Kerry Picket

Click Here To Listen to the Show live or listen to the podcast any time after the show ends.

Kerry Picket is a Washington D.C. based Capitol Hill reporter.

Currently an investigative reporter at Breitbart.com, Picket previously reported for The Washington Times Opinion Page.

Before that, she produced news content for Robin Quivers of “The Howard Stern Show” on Sirius satellite radio, wrote entertainment news for MTV Radio and worked as a production assistant at MTV.com.
Picket has regularly appeared as a guest commentator in dozens of cable television news programs including: Fox News, Fox Business Network, CNN, and the Christian Broadcast Network.

Additionally, she can be heard regularly on Sirius XM’s Patriot Channel’s David Webb’s Show and on The Sean Hannity Radio Show.

Picket has been interviewing political news makers and has followed campaigns and elections in the field for almost 15 years

Follow Kerry on Twitter at @KerryPicket, Tami at @tamij and me @yidwithlid, interact/ask questions on Twitter by tweeting the show @humpdayNR or hastag #HDNR

Read More

Josh Earnest Tries To Turn "Chickenshit" Into Chicken Salad

It had to happen, the very first question at today's White House press briefing was about the the "chickenshit" comment made about Bibi Netanyahu by a senior White House official published in the Atlantic by Jeff Goldberg.

Notice in the video below that the White House Press Secretary doesn't deny the smear was made. Notice the hard time Earnest has with his own words, as if he didn't believe them himself.

Darlene Superville, Associated Press: Is it appropriate for a senior administration official to refer to the Israeli Prime Minister as chicken**** and does that description represent the view of the administration at large up to and including the president?

Earnest: Well, Darlene, as a general matter, not related to that story, I will tell you that my job often involves taken the product you just described and turning it into chicken salad. So, I will do my best to answer your question in a straightforward way.

The fact is that comments like that do not reflect the administration's view and we do believe that they are counterproductive. The prime minister and the president have forged an effective partnership. They consult closely and frequently and did so as recently as this month here at the White House in the Oval Office...

Superville: Speaker Boehner just issued a pretty strong statement where he says that the president is the one who sets the tone for administration and that an administration official who would say something like this should basically be shown the door. So, does the president know who said that? Will there be any sorts of consequences for that person?

It's a pretty interesting observation by the Speaker of the House who you all know has a penchant for using some pretty salty language himself. So it is a little rich to have a lecture about profanity from the Speaker of the House.

Reporter (off camera): Has he ever said that about the prime minister or the president?

Earnest: I don't know, you would have to ask him.

Reporter: You're making a direct comparison.

Earnest: He has reportedly said that about the Majority Leader of the United States Senate. As long as we are talking about respect, I think that is notable. I will say that as a general matter that I am not aware of who made those comments to Mr.[Jeffery] Goldberg. I do not know if the president knows who made those comments. I would be surprised if he did.

Read More

Newsbusted: Obama-Even Though Canadian Shooter Was Muslim, It Doesn't Mean He Was Islamic

President Obama was quick to send condolences to our friends in Canada when a Muslim shot and killed Cpl. Nathan Cirillo at the Canadian War memorial and tried to attack the country's parliament.  As explained by Newsbusted Anchor Jodie Miller (see video below) one part of the President's comments weren't reported by the mainstream media.  Echoing his comments about ISIS the POTUS made sure to say that even though the Canadian shooter was a Muslim with connections to terrorists, it didn't mean he was Islamic.

Other news items covered in the latest installment of Newsbusted the twice- weekly faux news feature from Newsbusters.org (embedded below) include; Candy Crowley's Halloween Special; Kathryn Ruemmler takes herself out of AG consideration; Obama's low popularity ; and much, much more.

Please make sure you watch the video below because something bad always happens to the people who don't. Last week Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu forgot to press play and now President Obama calls him a "chickenshit." So if you do not want the leader of the free world to call you a "chickenshit" you better press play.

Oh and if you cannot see the video player below please click here

Read More

Obama's War On Israel And The 'Chickenshit' Democrats

On Tuesday the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg wrote an essay called, The Crisis in U.S.-Israel Relations Is Officially Here, that began:

The other day I was talking to a senior Obama administration official about the foreign leader who seems to frustrate the White House and the State Department the most. “The thing about Bibi is, he’s a chickenshit,” this official said, referring to the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, by his nickname.

(...)The relationship between these two administrations— dual guarantors of the putatively “unbreakable” bond between the U.S. and Israel—is now the worst it's ever been, and it stands to get significantly worse after the November midterm elections. By next year, the Obama administration may actually withdraw diplomatic cover for Israel at the United Nations, but even before that, both sides are expecting a showdown over Iran, should an agreement be reached about the future of its nuclear program.

Washington insiders understand that this was no rogue senior Obama official; it was a direct intended message/threat from the President which was leaked to Mr. Goldberg on purpose. The official went on to say that Netanyahu's threats about possibly attacking Iran weren't real because Bibi, who served in Israel's special forces on the front lines in two wars, was a coward.

Without knowing Goldberg's column was coming later in the day Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal pointed out on Tuesday:

Since coming to office in 2009, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has agreed, against his own inclination and over the objections of his political base, to (1)recognize a Palestinian state; (2) enforce an unprecedented 10-month settlement freeze; (3) release scores of Palestinian prisoners held on murder charges; (4) embark on an ill-starred effort to reach a final peace deal with the Palestinians; (5) refrain from taking overt military steps against Iran; and (6) agree to every possible cease-fire during the summer’s war with Hamas.

Goldberg's article instantly went viral. Less than twelve hours after it was posted a Google brought up 9,490 references when Netanyahu+Chickenshit was searched.

As the Atlantic piece began to filter through Washington, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus issued a statement that said in part:

  “ISIS is on a rampage through the Middle East, slaughtering innocents and committing mass murder while plotting to kill more Americans. The priority of the Obama administration should be defeating our enemies; instead they are once again insulting our allies. It’s inexplicable and dangerous.

This administration consistently gets it wrong on foreign policy. Instead of taking the ISIS threat seriously, President Obama called them the “JV" team. Now, instead of working with our allies in the region to protect democracy and innocent lives, the administration is hurling expletives at Prime Minister Netanyahu."

From the DNC there was nothing! It could be understood that the party itself would be silent, but there was nothing from individual Democratic party members of congress who claim to be pro-Israel.

Actually this is nothing new, it has been true ever since this President came into office and began his anti-Israel polices, those so-called supporters of Israel in the Democratic Party have been silent. As the Obama/Hillary team threw out an agreement between Israel and the United States they were silent. When Obama left Netanyahu to sit and stew in a White House conference room for hours they said nothing. When this President said that negotiations should start with Israel going back to the 1949 armistice lines rather than making it a negotiation point their heads were in the sand.

When the DNC on Obama's direction removed four pro-Israel provisions from their 2012 platform and only one was put back all you could hear was crickets. (The four removed items were: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, not negotiating with Hamas till they renounce terror, refugees should be repatriated into Palestinian territories not Israel; and the need for adjustments to the 1949 armistice lines. The only one put back was the plank on Jerusalem). When Obama used Hamas-provided numbers to unfairly criticized Israel for civilian casualties during Operation Protective Edge no one, not one of these Democratic Party supporters of Israel stood up before the cameras and said, this is wrong! There are plenty other examples of Obama's mistreatment of this close ally.

Republicans spoke out--- Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Peter Roskam, Eric Cantor, John Boehner, Ted Cruz, and many, many more stood up and criticized Obama for his unfair treatment of the only Democracy in the Middle East.

Debbie Wasserman Shultz Chairman of the DNC, who went around the country in 2012 proclaiming that Obama was a friend of Israel never offered criticism. Chuck Schumer who never met a TV camera he didn't live cameras or Israel enough to speak out. Jerrold Nadler who shows up to speak at every pro-Israel rally he can find never showed up when it counted. Even Steve Israel chairman of the DCCC  another supposed friend of the Jewish State who seems to be on TV every day bashing member of the Tea Party hasn't once spoken out bashing Obama's anti-Israel policies.

Despite the fact that many of them claim to support Israel, none, not one of the 240+ Democratic Party members of the House or Senate has had the guts to speak out.  Not one has said, I agree with most of Obama's policies but on Israel he is wrong. A true friend, a true supporter would stand up against Obama's unfair attacks and policy on Israel, but Democrats can't even generate the courage to speak in an election year when their party isn't doing well.

If anyone is "chickenshit" it is those silent Congressional Democrats who claim to be friends of Israel.

Read More

Fox News Obtains Obama Admin Memo Recommending Bringing Non-Americans To US For Ebola Treatment

On Tuesday evening's Fox Special Report, Mike Emanuel reported he's obtained an internal State Department memo indicating that the Obama Administration is considering bringing non-Americans suffering from Ebola into the country for treatment. Based on the memo it is clear the State Department is recommending the action.  It is also evident that this administration is totally out of touch with the American people.

UPDATE: Adam Housley added more on the Greta program (second video below) the memo contains a detailed plan that has been seen by high levels of State Dept. people.

The video and transcript of the report follows

Emanuel: Sources indicate it is an internal memo marked sensitive but unclassified written by a State Department official. Some key points are as follows:

Purpose: come to an agreed State Department position on the extent to which non-U.S. Citizens will be admitted the United States for treatment of Ebola virus disease.

Recommendations: That State and DHS Homeland Security device a system for expeditious parole of Ebola-infected of non-citizens into the U.S. as long as they are otherwise eligible for evacuation from the Ebola-infected countries and for entry into the United States.

Issue: The United States needs to show leadership and act, as we are asking others to act by admitting certain non-citizens into the country for medical treatment for Ebola virus disease during the Ebola crisis.

One week ago House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson asking if either department is formulating a plan to allow non-U.S. citizens with Ebola to come to the U.S. for medical treatment. Today White House Press Secretary Josh Ernest was asked about it.

Earnest: That hasn't happen sod far, I don't know of any plans to do that, but we'll look at the letter. It sounds like he [Goodlatte] sent the letter to DHS and the State Department, so you might see if they have a response to the letter.

Emanuel: I reached out to several State Department officials for guidance and so far they have not responded.

Adam Housley: This State Department memo has seen by Nancy Powell, the ambassador to India. She is leading Ebola coalition for the Department of State. Also seen potentially by Pat Kennedy Undersecretary for Management you might remember the name from some of the Benghazi decision that were made. It’s basically been cleared by the highest levels of the State Department. So when we hear in briefings that there has been no plan as far as the State Department knows they may not be telling the truth or may not be communicating with each other. This apparently has been seen at some of the highest levels.

More on the video below:

Read More

IRS Seizes Innocent Grandma's Bank Account : Other's Money Also (Fourth Amendment Doesn't Apply)

Carol Hinders accepts only cash at her small Mexican restaurant; she has always deposited the days receipt's at the bank branch a block away-until last year. Two IRS agents knocked on her door and informed her they had seized her checking account, taking almost $33,000. The IRS agents didn't accuse Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes, and to this date she has not been charged with any crime. The IRS took her money only because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report.

The Sunday New York Times reported the Hinder case and others similar to it in which the Internal Revenue Service has drained people's bank accounts without even charging them with a crime-and it is all legal:

 Using a law designed to catch drug traffickers, racketeers and terrorists by tracking their cash, the government has gone after run-of-the-mill business owners and wage earners without so much as an allegation that they have committed serious crimes. The government can take the money without ever filing a criminal complaint, and the owners are left to prove they are innocent. Many give up.

“They’re going after people who are really not criminals,” said David Smith, a former federal prosecutor who is now a forfeiture expert and lawyer in Virginia. “They’re middle-class citizens who have never had any trouble with the law.”

On Thursday, in response to questions from The New York Times, the I.R.S. announced that it would curtail the practice, focusing instead on cases where the money is believed to have been acquired illegally or seizure is deemed justified by “exceptional circumstances.”

Richard Weber, the chief of Criminal Investigation at the I.R.S., said in a written statement, “This policy update will ensure that C.I. continues to focus our limited investigative resources on identifying and investigating violations within our jurisdiction that closely align with C.I.’s mission and key priorities.” He added that making deposits under $10,000 to evade reporting requirements, called structuring, is still a crime whether the money is from legal or illegal sources. The new policy will not apply to past seizures.

There is nothing illegal about depositing less than $10K cash unless it is done specifically to evade the reporting requirement.

But the Institute for Justice, a Washington-based public interest law firm that is seeking to reform civil forfeiture practices, analyzed structuring data from the I.R.S., which made 639 seizures in 2012, up from 114 in 2005. Only one in five was prosecuted as a criminal structuring case.

Their money was seized under an increasingly controversial area of law known as civil asset forfeiture, which allows law enforcement agents to take property they suspect of being tied to crime even if no criminal charges are filed. Law enforcement agencies get to keep a share of whatever is forfeited.

Critics say this incentive has led to the creation of a law enforcement dragnet, with more than 100 multiagency task forces combing through bank reports, looking for accounts to seize. Under the Bank Secrecy Act, banks and other financial institutions must report cash deposits greater than $10,000. But since many criminals are aware of that requirement, banks also are supposed to report any suspicious transactions, including deposit patterns below $10,000. Last year, banks filed more than 700,000 suspicious activity reports. Owners who are caught up in structuring cases often cannot afford to fight. The median amount seized by the I.R.S. was $34,000, according to the Institute for Justice analysis, while legal costs can easily mount to $20,000 or more.

The Fourth Amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures doesn't seem to apply here.

But often a mere bank statement is enough for investigators to obtain a seizure warrant. In one Long Island case, the police submitted almost a year’s worth of daily deposits by a business, ranging from $5,550 to $9,910. The officer wrote in his warrant affidavit that based on his training and experience, the pattern “is consistent with structuring.” The government seized $447,000 from the business, a cash-intensive candy and cigarette distributor that has been run by one family for 27 years.

There are often legitimate business reasons for keeping deposits below $10,000, said Larry Salzman, a lawyer with the Institute for Justice who is representing Ms. Hinders and the Long Island family pro bono. For example, he said, a grocery store owner in Fraser, Mich., had an insurance policy that covered only up to $10,000 cash. When he neared the limit, he would make a deposit.

Just as in the targeting of conservative 501(C)(3) groups, this is an example of the IRS having too much power.

Read More

HS Football Team On America's Largest Native American Reservation is Named "The Redskins"

Red Mesa (AZ) High School, which sits on the nation’s largest Native American reservation, is proud of its football team, named "The Redskins." The name was adopted by the school when one of its earliest students, Raymond Oldman, proposed it because he was a fan of the Washington Redskins.

A Washington Post reporter attended a recent game and found the team and its supporters do not believe the name is an ethic slur:

The scene at this tiny, remote high school was as boisterous as it was remarkable: Nearly everyone on the field and in the bleachers belongs to the Navajo Nation. Most of the people in Red Mesa not only reject claims that their team’s nickname is a slur, they have emerged as a potent symbol in the heated debate over the name of the more widely known Redskins — Washington’s NFL team. More than half the school’s 220 students eagerly accepted free tickets from the team for an Oct. 12 game near Phoenix, where they confronted Native American protesters who were there to condemn Washington’s moniker.

The use of the name Redskins name by the Washington D.C. NFL team has become a cause célèbre for some Native American activists, lawmakers, civil rights leaders and sports commentators who have denounced “Redskins” as deeply offensive (a position rejected by team owner Daniel Snyder). One of the country’s most prominent anti-Redskins activists, Amanda Blackhorse, is the lead plaintiff in a legal case that threatens the Washington Redskins’ trademark protection. Blackhorse is a Navajo and lives about an hour’s drive from Red Mesa.

There were 62 high schools in 22 states using the Redskins moniker last year, according to a project published by the University of Maryland’s Capital News Service. In addition to Red Mesa, two others are majority Native American: Wellpinit High School in Washington state and Kingston High School in Oklahoma.

Outgoing Navajo Nation President Ben Shelly generated a firestorm at the Washington-Arizona game by sitting next to Redskin's owner Snyder and wearing a Redskins hat.

“Changing a mascot’s name is not going to produce one job on the Navajo Nation,” said Deswood Tome, Shelly’s special adviser, noting that the unemployment rate on the country’s largest Indian reservation is 60 percent.

Red Mesa students paid little attention to the politics. They loved being at the NFL game, posing with former Redskins players in photos that turned up on pro-Redskins Facebook pages, and getting gift cards for popcorn and pizza.

“I just kept my head down,” said Kelvin Yazzie, a Red Mesa senior lineman who lives with his grandparents. “[The protesters] were calling me a sellout.”

His grandfather, Steven Benally, 55, a candidate for the Navajo Nation Tribal Council, pointed to the jug of water in their kitchen. Because his wife is a gifted-and-talented teacher at Red Mesa, they get to live on campus, but they can’t drink the tap water. It has been contaminated by high levels of arsenic and uranium, and everyone at the school and in nearby homes must drink bottled water. 

According to the Washington Post report, the majority of people in the Navajo Nation believe the name Redskins is a non-issue. Unlike the activists in the "pc police," they are worried about clean water and jobs for their communities.

Read More

Mary Landrieu Refuses To Question About Supporting Harry Reid For Majority Leader

Earlier this year Mary Landrieu told a Poltico she would “absolutely” vote for  Harry Reid to continue as Democrat leader. But last night, during a debate a week before the election, Landrieu did a strange tap dance during a debate– dodging multiple opportunities to say whether she would support Reid for Majority leader.

Landrieu obviously supports Reid (she has given him $10,000), just like she supports President Obama’s agenda 97 percent of the time. But now that she is looking highly unlikely to avoid a runoff (a runoff which it looks as if she would lose)  Landrieu is not sure she would support a majority leader who's energy policy is bad for her state (see video below).

If Democrats suffer a bloodbath in November, their party may seek a change at the top — but right now, there’s little appetite for a leadership fight even in difficult political times. ‘Absolutely,’ Sen. Mary Landrieu, a vulnerable Louisiana Democrat facing voters this fall, said when asked if she would back Reid as leader no matter the outcome of the November elections. ( Politico, 4/3/14)

Are we really to believe that Landrieu wont rush to vote for Reid if re-elected? As Judge Judy would say, "Don't Pee on my leg and tell me it's raining!"

Read More

USA Today’s Susan Page: Obama “More Dangerous” To Press Than Any Admin In History

Unnoticed in this environment where most of the mainstream media has their heads up the collective arses of the White House are the contrary voices still liberal but complaining that the Obama administration is least transparent, and most unfriendly to the press than any administration they have ever covered.  AP Washington Bureau Chief Sally Buzbee recently presented eight specific examples of how the Obama administration blocks information to the public via the press warning, "The fight for access to public information has never been harder."​ Similar comments have come from New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson, who said, “It is the most secretive White House that I have ever been involved in covering, and of course Sharyl Attkisson whose new book reveals this administration not only bugged her computer but planted evidence on it so they could arrest her or one of her sources at a later date.

Eric Wemple of the "Washington Post" is reporting that This past Saturday "USA Today" Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page added her name to the list of press malcontents.  Speaking at a White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) seminar, Page called the Obama White House not only “more restrictive” but also “more dangerous” to the press than any other in history, a clear reference to the Obama administration’s leak investigations and its naming of Fox News’s James Rosen as a possible “co-conspirator” in a violation of the Espionage Act.

The WHCA convened the event both to strategize over how to open up the byways of the self-proclaimed most transparent administration in history, as well as to compare war stories on the many ways in which it is not. Peter Baker, the veteran Washington reporter from the New York Times, provided perhaps the best instance of White House-administered madness. In covering a breaking story recently, Baker received a note from a White House handler indicating that President Obama had been briefed on the matter in question.

That information came to Baker “on background.” The gist: Not from me — a meeting has occurred..

Other gripes: Correspondents took aim at large-scale “deep background” briefings — attended by up to 40-odd reporters — at which ground rules specify no names for the officials in attendance and no quotations of anything they say. ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl spoke of covering the Boston Marathon bombings. As the story developed, Karl noted that the White House wasn’t giving out any information at all. So he went around it and found out that the feds were sending their high-value interrogation team to Boston. “No way I would have gotten that out of the White House,” said Karl.

Bloomberg White House correspondent Margaret Talev noted how the White House stopped giving details on the fine wines served at state dinners, an opaque measure that she exposed in this story. In pursuing the piece, said Talev, she got the runaround from White House press officials, making her “so mad at them.” Over the course of a few weeks, she had to become, in essence, a wine correspondent.

On Friday, the day before the conference, President Obama had invited Nina Pham, the Texas nurse who had just completed her recovery from Ebola at the National Institutes of Health to the White House.  Prior to the meeting with Ms Pham the White House announced that still photographers would be allowed to document the proceedings. But print reporters and TV cameras would not be allowed. At the White House Daily briefing with Josh Earnest, ABC's Jonathan Karl asked why. Earnest responded that “many of you did have the opportunity to see [Pham] deliver remarks at the NIH upon her departure from the hospital.”

Karl: “That’s not answering the question. Why was this decision made?”

Earnest: “Because reporters did have the opportunity to see her speak already.” Also, the press secretary said that neither President Obama nor Pham planned on making any comments at the event. Taken together, those explanations amount to a lump of nothing.  

Talev said Saturday that it was “ridiculous” the White House didn’t provide full media access to the Pham-Obama meeting. In a Friday afternoon chat with the Erik Wemple Blog, recently retired ABC News White House correspondent Ann Compton struggled to fathom the rationale for restricting access, given that the White House has been aggressive in sending the message that it’s fighting Ebola: “She’s been in government medical care for the last how many days?” notes Compton. “And she walks out unexpectedly looking terrific — why wouldn’t you want the world to see that the U.S. is doing what the White House has said? So today makes no sense to me.”

Of course it should makes sense to Ann Compton.  This is the administration that once had a meeting on transparency, and barred the press from attending.

Most interesting is the fact that many of the reporters complaining about the White House's treatment of the press ignore or misreport stories that could be damaging to the President or his Party.

As Big Daddy says in "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof,"  There ain't nothin' more powerful than the odor of mendacity!

Read More

ABC's Jonathan Karl Presses Josh Earnest- Is Obama Toxic To Senate Democrats?

During today's White House briefing, ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl pressed White House spokesman Josh Earnest on whether President Barack Obama disappeared from the campaign trail this weekend because he is “toxic” to Senate Democrats.

We are eight days out from midterm elections that could be highly consequential for this president. Why is he here without any public schedule at the White House, why did he spend the entire weekend completely outside of public view? How can he is not out campaigning with and for Democratic candidates in these races?

Earnest replied that Obama has “so many stops” scheduled in the coming week that “I have to look up exactly where the president’s traveling.” He read off stops in Maine, Rhode Island, Michigan, Philadelphia, and Connecticut, all in support of Democratic candidates.

Karl pushed back,  “You’re not going to stand there and tell me the president’s been actively campaigning in these midterm elections.”

Earnest said, “I think any examination of the president’s schedule would indicate a serious commitment to supporting democratic candidates on the ballot.”

Karl asked Earnest to name the Senate Democrats with whom the president has campaigned in this cycle. The White House spox cited Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Gary Peters and Minnesota incumbent Al Franken as examples (both candidates in liberal states and who have big leads)

Earnest danced:

What you’ve seen the president do is dedicate his time to doing what he can to support Democratic candidates and he’s spent a lot of time raising money and that reflects, I think, a significant commitment of this president’s time and energy to supporting democratic candidates.

Finally Karl asked what we all knew, "You don’t agree the president’s been considered politically toxic to many of those Democrats running?”

Not wanting to lose his job, Earnest answered,  “I do not agree with that assessment.”

Watch the video below:

Read More

Sharyl Attkisson: Obama Government-Related Entity Bugged My Computer

The long-awaited book by Sharyl Attkisson the investigative reporter who quit her job at CBS news because they tried to stop her from investigating stories that might hurt the Obama administration hits the bookshelves next week on Election Day. Details of are already being released via reviews and news items.

One item in Sharyl Attkisson's book "Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington,"  reveals how the Obama Administration spied on her via a “government-related entity” that also planted classified documents on her computer in an attempt to have one of her sources or Ms Attkisson herself arrested.

The NY Post reveals that her book Ms Attkisson says a source who arranged to have her laptop checked for spyware in 2013 was “shocked” and “flabbergasted” at what the analysis revealed.

“This is outrageous. Worse than anything Nixon ever did. I wouldn’t have believed something like this could happen in the United States of America,” Attkisson quotes the source saying.

She speculates that the motive was to lay the groundwork for possible charges against her or her sources.

Attkisson says the source, who’s “connected to government three-letter agencies,” told her the computer was hacked into by “a sophisticated entity that used commercial, nonattributable spyware that’s proprietary to a government agency: either the CIA, FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency or the National Security Agency.”

The breach was accomplished through an “otherwise innocuous e-mail” that Attkisson says she got in February 2012, then twice “redone” and “refreshed” through a satellite hookup and a Wi-Fi connection at a Ritz-Carlton hotel.

The spyware included programs that Attkisson says monitored her every keystroke and gave the snoops access to all her e-mails and the passwords to her financial accounts.

“The intruders discovered my Skype account handle, stole the password, activated the audio, and made heavy use of it, presumably as a listening tool,” she wrote in “Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington.”

This is outrageous. Worse than anything Nixon ever did.

Attkisson says her source — identified only as “Number One” — told her the spying was most likely not court-authorized because it went on far longer than most legal taps.

The source also reported to Attkisson the government  planted three classified documents that were “buried deep in your operating system. In a place that, unless you’re a some kind of computer whiz specialist, you wouldn’t even know exists.”

“They probably planted them to be able to accuse you of having classified documents if they ever needed to do that at some point,” Number One added.

Next week when the book is officially published look for Sharyl Attkisson to reveal more roadblocks to the truth placed by the mainstream media and the "most transparent" administration in history, the Obama administration

Read More

Michelle Nunn (D-GA) Running Is Away From Harry Reid

Most Democratic Party candidates for Senate are running away from President Obama. Michelle Nunn who is running for the open senate seat in Georgia against Republican David Perdue is running from both President Obama and now Harry Reid.

In a Sunday debate Ms Nunn who has a slight .6% lead in the RCP average, was asked if elected would she support Harry Reid to return as Majority Leader should the Dems keep the senate? She said a lot of things in her two minute answer but not one of them could be considered an answer to the question.

Read More

A Jeb Bush Candidacy May Guarantee A Hillary Clinton Presidency

Yesterday George P. Bush the eldest son of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush told ABC News' Jonathan Karl that his father , will “more than likely” run for president in 2016.

“I think it’s actually, I think it’s more than likely that he’s giving this a serious thought in moving forward,” George P. Bush told Karl aboard his campaign bus in College Station, Texas.

“More than likely that he'll run?” Karl asked.

“That he'll run,” Bush said. “If you had asked me a few years back, I would've said it was less likely.”

While a Bush candidacy might make the establishment Republicans jump for joy, should he get the nomination it would guarantee that the next President will be Hillary Clinton. While Bush may be a formidable candidate his presence at the top of the ticket will cause the conservative wing of the party to 'sit on their hands" and stay home come election day.

A late September Gallup Poll reveals that Tea Party Republicans  (about 18% of U.S.) are the most motivated to vote in the upcoming midterms.

In other words if the GOP wins the Senate in eight days, a big part of that win may be traced to the the motivation of the conservative, Tea Party Republicans.

Three major issues make Jeb Bush a pariah to the Tea Party base of the GOP; his support of the Common Core education system, support of amnesty for illegal aliens, and his support of Tax increases. A candidate may overcome one or maybe two of those issues but it will be almost impossible for him to overcome all three.

I don't see anyway that conservative Republicans will vote for Hillary Clinton, however should Bush get the GOP nomination it will depress the GOP vote as many conservatives will simply stay home, or even worse it may lead to the nomination of a strong conservative third party candidate, splitting the GOP for years to come.

The establishment wing of the GOP is looking for a more moderate candidate, but they need to be careful that any "moderate" they support  unites rather than splits the party.  Jeb Bush will divide the party and give the Democrats the White House for eight more years.

Read More

Audience Boos Democrat Sen.Jeanne Shaheen For Being Rude At NH Candidate's Forum

The collapse of the incumbent Sen.Jeanne Shaheen's campaign continued Sunday morning at a candidate's forum taking place at Reform Synagogue Temple Adath Yeshurun. The heavily liberal crowd (Reform Jews tend to be the most liberal skewing Jews) booed the incumbent and called her rude after she interrupted Republican Scott Brown during his concluding remarks:

She’s voting against small business 100 percent of the time. She’s got a zero rating from the National Federation of Independent Business, I received their endorsement, but not only them but from the Chamber of Commerce because—“Brown was saying when Shaheen cut him off saying: “Koch Brothers funded organization.”

The audience at the forum yelled at Shaheen, saying she was “rude” and booing her for trying to silence Brown. Shaheen had already presented her conclusion during which brown was silent.

Brown took control of the situation “No, I'd like to defer to Sen. Shaheen," he said, calming the boos from the audience.

Shaheen replied., “I think you objected to my saying that. And given the support you’ve gotten from the Koch Brothers, I don’t know why you’d object to my saying that.”

“Well, because I was closing, and I gave you the courtesy to allow you to speak,” Brown retorted to the cheering of the audience.

Shaheen must be getting a bit desperate the race is tightening and she lost the first two debates by a huge margin.



H/T Weekly Standard

Read More

The Dunetz Political Report Analysis: The Republicans Will Take The Senate

Whether you are a Democrat, Republican or simply a political junkie the biggest Election Day question is will the Democratic Party retain control of the Senate or with the Republicans take over.

Based on an analysis of each of the races, plus some national data, if trends continue Republicans will net at the six-senate seats it needs to take control of the Senate. The prediction here is that they will win new seats total, but may lose two seats they currently hold. But that could change on a dime. Most races are so close that they could turn around even as late as next weekend the one immediately prior to the election.

The chart of races above includes 13 total senate races, the top ten are currently held by Democrats, the bottom three are close races for current GOP held seats.  The columns  include the Real Clear politics average followed by the current evaluations for each race from the three big prognosticators Charlie Cook, Stuart Rothenberg, and Larry Sabato. Finally on the Right are the current evaluations by race from yours truly.

In the Senate today Democrats (including independents who caucus with Democrats) have 55 seats. The GOP needs to pick up a net of six seats to take over the Senate. Should they pick up only five, resulting in a 50-50 tie the Senate would remain in Democratic hands because per the Constitution the Vice President casts the deciding vote.

In three Senate seats currently held by Democrats retiring this year the Republicans have impressive leads and lieu of major disasters will flip to the GOP. In Montana Republican Steve Danes leads by 18%, South Dakota shows Republican Mike Rounds with a 10% advantage, and Shelley Moore Capito the Republican in West Virginia’s lead is almost 17%.

It looks like at least five of the remaining seven Democratic Party held seats will switch sides in the coming election:

Alaska: The seat currently held by Democrat Mark Begich will switch back to the GOP. Generally the polls show Republican Dan Sullivan with a small lead of 4-5% that has been increasing over the past six weeks.

The state’s voter base is strongly Republican with a R+12 rating in Charlie Cook’s PVI index (based on the average Democratic or Republican Party's share of the two-party presidential vote in the past two presidential elections vs. the nation's average share of the same). A major reason the Democrat Begich overcame this disadvantage in 2008 was the incumbent Republican Ted Stevens was wrongly convicted of corruption (the charges were over turned after the race and the prosecutors were cited for malfeasance). Despite that Stevens was seen as corrupt Begich won by fewer than 4K votes.

Arkansas: Looks like it will flip to the GOP. Another state with a strong Republican voter base (R+14), which will change parties on Election Day. Democratic incumbent Mark Pryor had a 1% lead on July 1st. However Republican Tom Cotton has run a very impressive campaign and now holds a lead of about 5%. A recent revelation that Pryor's college thesis had argued that the "state had suffered enough" from the federal desegregation efforts in the 1960s may damage the Democrat amongst the state’s African-American voters.

Colorado: Colorado has a D+1 rating meaning the state is a pretty evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. The numbers show the senate race is still very close but based on trends it seems as if Republican Cory Gardner has the momentum over incumbent. He now leads by about 3% in the polls after trailing by the same amount a month ago. However this will be the first Colorado race with mail-in voting and it is not known how that is skewing the polls and the voter models by changing the voter base.

Iowa: Another D+1 state. After being tied most of the summer Republican Joni Earnst has opened up a slight 2-3% lead. Most political observers didn’t believe Ms Earnst would even win the primary, but the Army veteran’s first commercial that jokingly spoke of castrating pigs turned that all around.

In the fifteen polls released by various sources since mid-September Earnst has trailed in only two. The only news Democrat Bruce Braley has had in recent weeks is two campaign appearances by the first lady; on the first she kept getting his name wrong and the second her staff said Braley was running for Governor. Pigs in Iowa should be very worried because the prediction here is that Earnst will win in a very close race.

Louisiana: This state is holding an open primary on November 4th. Which means there can be more than one candidate per party. If no candidate receives more than 50% of the voting total there will be a runoff on December 6th. And that’s precisely what will happen next week. Incumbent Mary Landrieu is trending toward a 4-5% victory in the primary but generates >40% of the vote. Republican Bill Cassidy at 35% is fighting against both Landrieu and fellow Republican Rob Maness who may get around 9% of the vote. Landrieu has been strongly damaged by recent scandals revealing she used federal funds for campaign trips and that she spends a very limited time in he district. Landrieu, who is married with three kids, does not own a house in the state and lists her parent’s house as her primary residence for voting purposes.

The same polls that predict a Landrieu victory in the Nov. 4 primary also show a Bill Cassidy victory in a head to head run off in December. This will be a Republican pickup, but not until December.

In North Carolina incumbents Democrat Kay Hagen has held a slight lead over Republican Thom Tillis during throughout the campaign. Although the race has been tightening primarily because Tillis has a ten point lead amongst independents, the race could flip but as of now the prediction is North Carolina will stay in Democratic hands.

New Hampshire is in a similar situation; the only difference is that this race was supposed to be a blowout by Democratic incumbent Jeanne Shaheen, Republican Scott Brown has the momentum in this race, especially after the Democrat’s awfull performances in recent debates, but it looks like Shaheen has enough to squeak out a victory on Election Day.

The three GOP held seats to keep an eye on are Kentucky, Kansas, and Georgia.

Once a close race, Kentucky voters will reelect incumbent Mitch McConnell over Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes. Based in Ms. Grimes’ recent gaffes including not admitting she voted for President Obama in the last election, McConnell’s lead will continue to widen. Look for a 6-8% McConnell victory.

The Kansas Democratic Party’s move, getting their candidate to drop out making it a two-person race between independent Greg Orman (who despite what he claims will caucus with the Democrats) and Republican incumbent Pat Roberts seemed like a masterstroke. Orman has maintained an ever-shrinking lead over Roberts. An eight-point lead in mid September has shrunk to a lead of less than a percentage point. I wouldn’t be surprised if Roberts overtakes Orman in the last few days of the campaign. I also wouldn’t be surprised if Orman holds on, as there is a huge anti-incumbent sentiment. This race is too close to call.

Georgia may be a Democratic Party pickup, but odds are we wont know which way this race goes until a runoff on Jan. 6th. Republican David Perdue had led most of the way, but since the beginning of October Democrat Michelle Nunn has been rising and now has a tiny lead. Chances are neither candidate will get 50% throwing it into a runoff leading to a highly competitive runoff three days after the new Senate meets. This race is too close to call.

That’s the prediction the GOP will win up to eight new Senate seats, the Democrats may take up to two from the GOP.

For those of you who like to go to sleep early keep your eyes on New Hampshire and North Carolina. If either of those races go to the Republican candidate there is no need to stay awake further, it will be a GOP wave election. On the other hand if the Democrat wins in Kentucky or Arkansas fire up the coffee-maker it's going to be a late night.

Look for one last overview the day before the election.

Read More

WAPOs Glen Kessler: KY Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes Should Be Ashamed of Herself

Washington Post" fact checker Glenn Kessler ripped apart Kentucky's Democratic Senate Candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes for running an ad that not only contained a debunked claim but added another falsehood for good measure. Kessler wrote,"We realize that the game of politics is sometimes played rough in Kentucky, but this ad is beyond the pale. Indeed, it is likely the worst ad of a nasty campaign year. Grimes should be ashamed of herself."

The advertisement in question (embedded above) claims that Grimes' opponent, incumbent Mitch McConnell, took $600K from anti-coal interests, including former NY Mayor Bloomberg, a claim the fact checker already gave his worst "Four Pinocchios" rating. Grimes stated:

I am Alison Lundergan Grimes and this is the Big Sandy power plant in Louisa, Kentucky. They are shutting down half the plant and laying off their workers because Mitch McConnell didn’t fight to get the scrubbers it needs to reduce coal emissions. Instead, Mitch and his wife pocketed $600,000 from enemies of coal, including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. I approve this message because the difference between Mitch and me is I will fight for these jobs and no New York anti-coal billionaire will ever buy me off.

According to the communications director for the company which owns Big Sandy, Mitch McConnell had nothing to do with the scrubber decision. It is true that McConnell voted against the bill which designed to make scrubbers cheaper, but the bill passed anyway and the company decided against retrofitting Big Sandy anyway:

Retrofitting the plant for the new coal regs “was not in the best interests of our customers” because of the potential rate increase, said Melissa McHenry, AEP’s director of external communications. She said there is nothing that McConnell could have done to help the company get the scrubbers, since it is a state regulatory issue. When a company makes a decision like this, it makes a filing that seeks recovery of the costs of investment. “There is no involvement of a senator in that process,” she said.

The Grimes campaign defends this language on the grounds that McConnell voted against budget plans that would have boosted funding for clean coal technology — research that the campaign claims might have made scrubbers less expensive. But, despite McConnell’s negative vote, the spending bills were approved and the investments were made anyway. Most of the votes cited by the Grimes campaign took place after AEP’s decision to close the plant, so there’s really no justification for this statement.

The way Grimes gets to the $600k is truly unique. McConnell's wife, former labor secretary Elaine Chao joined the Bloomberg Philanthropies’ advisory board in 2012 (for which she was paid $9,400/year). The year before Chao joined the board, Bloomberg Philanthropies committed $50 million over four years for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal initiative, which aims to retire one-third of dirty coal plants by 2020.

“The decision to provide funding to Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal initiative took place before Elaine Chao joined the board,” spokeswoman Meghan Womack told The Fact Checker. “Bloomberg Philanthropies’ board members do not vote on individual initiatives or program spends.”

Womack disputed the description of Bloomberg as an anti-coal group. “The organization focuses on five key areas for creating lasting change: public health, environment, education, government innovation and the arts,” she said. “In 2013, Bloomberg Philanthropies distributed $452 million.

”Even if you don't believe Womak, Chao only received $9,400, so how did Grimes get to $600K?
 Apparently Chao was also on the board of directors of Wells Fargo, the megabank. According to the bank's proxy statement for the 3 years she has been on the board, Chao (and all board members) received $685K. Grimes added $685K and $9,400 and got a total of $600K.

Wait a second. Wells Fargo is a bank. Why does Grimes lump it among “enemies of coal”? The Grimes campaign justified this on the grounds that in a 2013 report Wells Fargo said that it had been curtailing its financing of “mountain top removal” (MTR) coal operations.

But Jennifer G. Dunn, a Wells Fargo spokeswoman, said Wells Fargo adopted this policy in 2006 — five years before Chao joined the board. It was just not formally mentioned in a Wells Fargo external document until 2013, she said.

Even worse is Grimes' contention that Wells Fargo is anti-coal, since the bank still finances coal companies. They finance coal companies to such a huge extent that environmental groups have given the bank a "D" rating for financing coal-fired plants.

Kessler ends with words that seem more like condemnation of the Democratic Party candidate than a conclusion:

So let’s review. Grimes first makes a nonsense claim that McConnell should have somehow arranged for scrubbers in a privately-owned plant that would have sent utility rates soaring.

Then, in a desperate effort to somehow cite Bloomberg’s name, she accuses McConnell of being bought off by a $9,000 payment to McConnell’s wife (who is independently wealthy). Citing a $600,000 number from “enemies of coal” is especially silly, as it mostly involves money from a bank that continues to finance coal companies.

Most striking, Grimes puts her own credibility on the line by uttering these recidivist claims herself, rather than relying on an unseen narrator.

We realize that the game of politics is sometimes played rough in Kentucky, but this ad is beyond the pale. Indeed, it is likely the worst ad of a nasty campaign year. Grimes should be ashamed of herself.

Read More

Is Anthony Weiner At It Again? It Looks That Way

Weiner's homepage as it looked earlier today notice the tweet is filed under favorits

“Realistically, my political career is probably over,” Weiner told Politico.com in an interview published Tuesday. “The only job I ever wanted more than Congress was mayor, and I don’t think that either of those two jobs are going to be available.” If his political career wasn't over on Tuesday, it certainly may be on Friday as a picture from an attractive woman was Favorited by the former congressman on his verified twitter account @AnthonyWeiner

Close Up of the Tweet

 

The picture was sent from the account @JoslynSteven whose account home page is captioned "filling in for your wife since 2001"

Tweets such as the one from Ms Stevens are sent intermittently to most twitter accounts as spam, however normally people don't favorite the tweet except if they are legitimate tweets or if people expect to act on them (Note: the tweet was removed from Mr. Weiner's favorites when the pictures were first published on Gawker and Ms Stevens account has since been suspended by Twitter).

Ms Stevens Twitter Homepage

A post on Ms. Stevens' website begins:

I've been receiving emails from many of you looking to have an affair for the first time but who don't know where to start. Stepping out on your partner can be scary especially considering what's at stake if your affair is discovered but don't worry, you can be successful. Millions of men (and women) around the world are rediscovering themselves through affairs and no amount of moral shaming from society is going to change that.

If putting this woman's tweet in his favorites was anything but an "innocent mistake" this would make Mr. Weiner a three-time loser. Even if he did not contact Ms Stevens, with his "twitter" track record, and knowing that people are following his account perhaps it would be best if the former congressman addressed his need for racy pictures in more of a low-tech manner.

Read More

Perhaps Michelle Obama Should Use A Teleprompter-She Screws Up Again

Perhaps its time for Michelle Obama to borrow her husband's teleprompter or if she does use one maybe it's time for an upgrade because yesterday at a campaign appearance for Mark Udall she quoted from the biography of his Republican opponent Corey Gardner.

At a campaign appearance in Denver on Thursday night Mrs. Obama referred to Senator Mark Udall of Colorado who was born in Arizona, as a “fifth-generation Coloradan.” Obviously Udall doesn't fit into the 5th generation category but his opponent does. That  phrase that appears in the online versions of both the congressional and campaign biographies of Representative Cory Gardner.

“As a fifth-generation Coloradan, Mark understands what makes this state special,” Mrs. Obama said. “He understands the values of independence and fairness — all the things here folks believe in.”

Recently the first lady botched the name of Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Bruce Braley throughout a campaign appearance. And during her next Iowa appearance someone in her office sent out the transcript claiming that Braley was running for Governor instead of Senator.

Maybe from now on she can say "Vote for Good Ole Whatshisface" Who is running for "office."

Read More