Thursday, March 27, 2014

Hillary Uses Gender To Win
Published on

Throughout her political career, Hillary Clinton has used her gender and the still novel concept of a woman running for president to cloak her advances and shield her from losses. It is never about her. Her own merits, qualifications, defects, failures or shortcomings are never the issue. The question is always: How are we to treat women in politics?

Now that she is on the verge of running again for president, a Gallup poll shows that about one Clinton voter in five cites her gender as the leading reason to vote for her. Coming in second, mentioned by only half as many respondents, were her qualifications.

Clinton's use of her gender as cover was evident when she conceded her battle for the Democratic Party's nomination in 2008. Her line was that her candidacy had made "18 million cracks in the hardest and highest glass ceiling," despite the prize of the presidency eluding her. It was not Barack Obama who beat her, nor her own limitations. She was defeated by the "glass ceiling," and her campaign was a common effort of all feminists to crack it.

From the start of her entry into politics, she has always used her gender to advance politically and to deflect negatives.

When she compared her focus on a career to women who "stayed home and baked cookies and had teas," she did not admit that her comments were elitest and offensive to stay-at-home moms. Instead she said that she was under attack because she "had been turned into a symbol for women of my generation" and the "fundamental change in the way women functioned in our society."

Criticized for doing legal work for the state of Arkansas while her husband was governor, she said: "This is the sort of thing that happens to women who have their own careers and their own lives. And I think it's a shame but I guess it's something we're going to have to live with. Those of us who have tried to make a career, tried to have an independent life and make a difference and certainly like myself who has children but other issues, you know I've done the best I can to lead my life." Nobody was attacking her for having her own life. The attacks concerned the fact that the wife of the governor was being paid from tax money to do legal work for the state.

Clinton approaches her political career as if it were a class action lawsuit on behalf of all women, rather than an effort by one woman to get elected.

As my wife, Eileen McGann, and I wrote in our book Rewriting History: "When Hillary is attacked, she frequently parries the charges by arguing that it is all women who are under attack rather than just one in particular. ... Criticized for her business dealings as a lawyer, she treats it as an attack on all professional women. Knocked for tolerating her husband's adultery in her bid to hold on to political power, she gathers around her all women who want to protect their privacy. Slammed with allegations of insider trading in the commodities market, she cloaks herself in the garb of every woman seeking financial security for her family."

Now, as she again floats the trial balloon of her candidacy, she gains a key advantage by making her ambition the generic goal of all women -- to elect one of their own as president.

But it is this woman, not all women, who is about to run. It was this secretary of State who neglected the security of her Benghazi outpost. It was this person who naively called for a reset with Russia. She was the one who initially advocated healthcare reform legislation, which served as the foundation of the ill-fated ObamaCare. It was Clinton, as secretary of State, who had to have known about and approved NSA wiretaps on foreign leaders.

Not all women. Just her.

You only have 5 to 7 days or maybe 30 days to comply with the law and this time they mean it.

Kind of.

And once again Obama has shown us that his basic problem is not one of governance but one of math.

After sternly vowing there would be no more delays for Obamacare, Obama and company sternly vowed to delay, and delay, and delay until every man woman and child in America is sick to death of Obama's signature legislation.

"According to a Health and Human Services official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity about decisions that have not been made public,” wrote the Washington Post in what counts as news these days, “an exact time frame for this extension has not been set, and depends in part on how many people request it. Nor have officials decided precisely how long people will have to select a health plan after they get the extra time."

Gee, it sounds like they’re talking about a budget. An Obama budget. That can take years in extension.

I'm guessing the administration figures that if they're sick enough hearing about it, they’ll go get coverage.

Don't get me wrong: Obama still has a problem of governance, but you can't work on basic shapes and colors until you get your numbers right.

And no matter how hard he tries, Obama can't get his numbers right.

On anything.

Here's what's driving this fiasco: the whole premise of Obamacare has been that younger people will sign up en masse, allowing older people – – you know the ones who vote? – – to keep this party rolling.

You see, because it's a numbers-based system, where supposedly more money is supposed to come in than go out…


That's the problem Obama has. Don't ask. It's a liberal thing.

So hey youth of America, this is what hope and change looks like.

And get used to it until you're very, very old.

Because according to the US debt, our debt per citizen is $193,163 and our debt per family is $757,716.

And that's before we even start paying for Obamacare.

And that's before we even start paying rising interest rates.

And that's before you start paying your student loan, your car, your house, and any of the other happy crap the federal government now decides that you have to purchase from them. Did someone just order a GPS monitor for that Tea Party non-profit?

Let's just hope they don't ask us to buy everything online.

"Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services,” says the New York Times, “has said repeatedly that the federal website has been repaired and is ready to handle a surge of applications expected just before the deadline. But White House officials and some technology experts working on the exchange began to worry that the website might freeze up if the demand exceeded expectations."

On the other hand, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid contends people are too stupid to know how to use the Internet, and that's why Obamacare failed to hit the deadline.

Amazon, Ebay, Priceline, Facebook, all figured it out.

Even GEICO (Government Employee Insurance CO) made it so easy a caveman can do it.

That's because they trained federal employees, like Harry Reid, first.

Yet somehow they want us to believe that the youth of America lacks the technical skills to fill out an online application, and press the submit button.

This is a generation of youth who knew how to press the enter key before their grandparents did.

This is a generation of youth who believe that "all thumbs" is a sign of physical fitness.

And here's a question for you: if the IRS can design a system to collect taxes online, why can't they design a system to purchase insurance online?

Yeah, I know.

You see, because it's a numbers-based system, where supposedly more money is supposed to come in than go out…

I've been thrown off my health insurance -- THANKS, OBAMACARE! -- and have spent hours and hours over the past month trying to figure out my options now that the Democrats have made my old plan, which I liked, "illegal." (I prefer to think of my plan as "undocumented.")

Whom do I bill for the hours of work Obamacare forced me to perform? How about you, Mickey? You're the smartest living liberal (faint praise), and you assured us that Obamacare was going to be fantastic.
By now, Obama has issued "waivers" from Obamacare to about 99 percent of the country. (Perhaps you've heard, there's a big midterm election this year.) As one of the few Americans not granted a waiver, I'm here to tell you: You have no idea what's coming, America.

I thought I had figured out the best plan for me a month ago after having doctors and hospital administrators look at the packets of material I was sent by my old insurance company -- the same mailing that informed me my old plan was "illegal" under Obamacare.

But when I checked online recently, I discovered the premier plan -- the "platinum," low-deductible, astronomically expensive plan that might be accepted by an English-speaking doctor who didn't attend medical school in a Hawaiian shirt and board shorts -- does not include treatment at any decent hospitals.

That's sort of unfortunate because THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I WANT INSURANCE! That's the only reason any sane homo sapiens wants health insurance: to cover health care costs in the event of some catastrophic illness or accident -- not to pay for Mickey Kaus' allergy appointments. But my only options under the blue-chip plan were hospitals that also do shoe repair.

I called Blue Cross directly to ask if its most expensive insurance plan covered the only hospital I'd ever go to in an emergency. Since that's all I wanted to know, that's what I asked. (I like to get to the point that way.)

But -- as happens whenever you try to ascertain the most basic information about insurance under Obamacare -- the Blue Cross representative began hammering me with a battery of questions about myself.

First my name. (Does that make a difference to what hospitals its plans cover?) Then my phone number. By the time he got to my address, I said, CAN YOU PLEASE JUST TELL ME IF ANY OF YOUR PLANS COVER XYZ HOSPITAL? I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I WANT TO SIGN UP WITH YOU!

Finally, he admitted that Blue Cross' most expensive individual insurance plan does not cover treatment at the hospitals I named. Their doctors are "out of network" (and the person who designed this plan is "out of his mind").

This was the rest of the conversation, verbatim:

ME: None of your plans cover out-of-network doctors?
ME: Why is it called "Premier Guided Access WITH OUT-OF-NETWORK PLAN"?
BLUE CROSS: Where did you see that?
ME: On Blue Cross' own material describing its plans.
BLUE CROSS: Oh. I don't know why it's called that.
ME: None of your plans cover (the good hospital)?
ME: I don't know who you are, but I have a very specific set of skills that will help me find you. And when I find you, I am going to kill you. (Click.)
True conversation. Except the last sentence. That was my fantasy.

Lawmakers told IRS probe will take years

By: Stephen Dinan / The Washington Times

The Internal Revenue Service’s tea party targeting program is still withholding approval of 19 organizations’ nonprofit status, nearly a year after the scandal was revealed, the agency’s commissioner testified Wednesday to Congress — where he faced fierce criticism from lawmakers who said he is stonewalling.

John Koskinen, the man President Obama tapped to clean up the embattled agency, also said it will take years to respond to all of the document requests from Congress. He told Congress that even complying with a subpoena for emails from just a handful of key employees couldn’t be done before the end of this year because it takes time to have attorneys delete protected taxpayer information.

Republicans signaled that they are moving ahead with plans to hold former IRS employee Lois G. Lerner in contempt of Congress. They released a memo from the House counsel saying the committee made her aware that it expected her to answer questions at a hearing earlier this month, and that she endangered her legal standing by again refusing to testify

“The American people believe the IRS is now a politicized agency, because the IRS is a politicized agency,” said Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California Republican and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The IRS continues to face scrutiny after an internal audit by its inspector general last year found the agency had improperly singled out conservative and tea party nonprofit applications for special scrutiny and had delayed many of those applications — in some cases for three years.

Nearly a year after the targeting and delays were revealed, however, some groups are still awaiting approval.

Mr. Koskinen said of 145 cases that were part of their “priority backlog,” which meant they had been waiting for at least 120 days as of May, they have closed 126. Most were approved, including 43 that took advantage of a deal the IRS offered in which the groups could agree to keep political activity to less than 40 percent.

Three applications were formally denied, and 25 others dropped their applications or had them canceled when petitioners didn’t respond to IRS questions.

“The 19 cases still open generally fall into one of two categories: either the taxpayer has asked for and received additional time to respond to our questions, or the case is being litigated,” Mr. Koskinen said in his prepared testimony to the committee. “None of these 19 organizations opted to accept the self-certification procedure used by 43 organizations to obtain prompt approval of their applications.”

The IRS didn’t respond to questions seeking the identities of the groups involved. The agency generally argues that it isn’t allowed to share information on specific taxpayers because of privacy rules.

Indeed, those rules are part of the reason the agency says it’s taking so long to provide documents the oversight committee has been seeking.

“What they want is something that’s going to take years to produce,” Mr. Koskinen told lawmakers.
Mr. Koskinen said his agency was preparing to turn over another 20,000 pages of documents later Wednesday, but he warned that orders from Congress could derail those plans.

Just to produce all of the emails from Ms. Lerner could end up going into next year, he said.

That didn’t sit well with Republicans and some Democrats.

“We don’t want the excuses anymore. Prioritize them. Put more lawyers on the job,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican who has helped spearhead the committee’s investigation into IRS targeting.

Ms. Lerner, who used to run the IRS division that processed nonprofit applications, has been a key subject of the investigation given emails and other information the committee discovered that, members said, suggested she let her political leanings dictate her official actions.

In a 22-page memo released by Mr. Issa on Wednesday, the House counsel said Ms. Lerner remains subject to contempt of Congress charges after refusing to testify at two hearings, citing her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

The oversight committee has ruled that because she made a long statement proclaiming her innocence before asserting her rights, she effectively waived them. The question, however, is whether Mr. Issa properly warned her that by refusing to testify she risked being held in contempt.

The House counsel said she was aware of her obligations, and therefore remains in legal jeopardy.

But Democrats on the committee released a packet of memos and quotes from more than two dozen legal specialists challenging that.

They said Mr. Issa never expressly told Ms. Lerner that the committee rejected her claims of privilege, so she was not properly warned of the consequences of not testifying. They said by adjourning the March hearing without Mr. Issa overruling her claims of privilege, Republicans lost their chance at pursuing contempt charges.

Mr. Jordan at one point accused the IRS of continuing to ask the same kinds of intrusive questions that landed the agency in trouble last year, when an internal audit found it had improperly scrutinized and delayed hundreds of applications.

He offered three examples, including one instance in which the old, objectionable guidance given said the IRS could ask groups to “provide a list of all issues that are important to your organization. Indicate your position regarding such issue.”

In new guidance, the IRS said it could ask applicants to: “Describe how you prepare voter guide(s), including how you determine which issues are addressed in the guide(s).”

Mr. Jordan said the new version sounded too close to the old version, which all sides agreed was too intrusive. “I think the vast majority of people who were harassed over the last three years would agree with my position,” he said.

But Mr. Koskinen said the new questions don’t probe for viewpoints or ask specific positions on issues.

“I’m happy to have this in the record and let the public decide whether or not we’ve responded appropriately,” he said.

New moderate Iran’s Supremo doubts Holocaust as crowd chants, “Death to America! Death to Israel!”

  / Jihad Watch
See video here:

Iranian officials continue to make it abundantly clear to the world that they played Barack Obama and John Kerry for fools, and are now racing full speed ahead with their genocidal agenda. The mainstream media, however, continue to run interference for the fools in question, thereby fostering a fine complacency among Americans that will ultimately spell our doom, unless a sufficient number of people wake up before it is too late.

“Khamenei Expresses Doubts Whether the Holocaust Took Place, ‘Death to America’ Chants by the Crowd,” from MEMRI, March 21:

Following are excerpts from a public address delivered by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, which aired on IRINN TV on March 21, 2014:

Ali Khamenei: The kind of freedom that we have does not exist anywhere else in the world. Nowhere – not even in those countries that purport to have freedom of speech. Even these countries have red lines about which they are very strict. In Europe, nobody dares to talk about the Holocaust. When it comes to the Holocaust… It is not clear whether it is real or not, and if it is real – how it happened.

Expressing an opinion about the Holocaust or doubting the Holocaust is considered one of the greatest crimes. They arrest people, throw them into prison, and place them on trial. Yet these countries purport to have freedom of speech.

Finally, oh Iranian nation, let me toll [sic] you one more thing: You should know that the international community will not make progress according to the intentions and will of America.

Crowd member: Say: “Allah Akbar!”
Crowd: Allah Akbar!
Allah Akbar!
Allah Akbar!
Khamenei is the leader.
Death to those who oppose the Rule of the Jurisprudent.
Death to America.
Death to England.
Death to the hypocrites.
Death to Israel!
Death to America.
Death to America.
Death to America.
Death to America.
Death to America.
Death to America.

Ali Khamenei: The global arrogance (i.e. the U.S.) and the stubborn enemies of Iran wanted to achieve their goals in many areas in the world, but they were unsuccessful and will continue to be unsuccessful, Allah willing. America has failed in Palestine. Their plan for Palestine – a plan for which they exerted much effort – has not been, and Allah willing, will not be successful.

They want to convert the state of Palestine into a Jewish state. In other words, Palestinians – both Muslims and Christians – would not be able to live in Palestine. They would put an end to Palestine.

That is what they are seeking. They have been trying hard in recent years to achieve this, but they have been unsuccessful. America has achieved nothing in Palestine. It has achieved nothing in Syria, and in Iraq, it achieved nothing either. It did not achieve its goals in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We have recently been hearing In Europe that America’s plan has not born fruit.
Putin's strength is Obama's weakness
By: Diane Sori

“I consider it to be my sacred duty to unify the people of Russia, to rally citizens around clear aims and tasks, and to remember every day and every minute that we have one Motherland, one people and one future.” 
- Vladimir Putin writing in his official biography

As Barack HUSSEIN Obama says he fears a nuclear attack on New York City more than he fears Vladimir Putin running amok, once again he's calling for Russia to de-escalate the Ukrainian situation...and in Obama's case that means he's using the NEVER will come to fruition threat of isolationism and more useless sanctions to do so.

Putin must be shaking in his boots...NOT.

You have to give Vladimir Putin credit as he waited patiently for many years for a weakling to become the American president... something he knew George W. Bush was NOT...waited for a man who he had NO respect for to assume the leadership of the world's leading superpower or must I sadly say now former leading superpower...before he pulled this Ukrainian stunt.

And he found that man in the guise of Barack HUSSEIN Obama...the man who dared to call Putin "weak" and to say that Russia is but a "regional power" who takes over other countries by "weakness, not power." This man is a joke...a laughing stock, a spineless, wimp whose agenda is, was, and always will be to bring our beloved America down to the level of a Third World country.

Vladimir Putin...the very man who took over a sovereign nation by shear intimidation alone, has been a driving force in Russian politics for more than 12 years, and is now working to create a nation of warriors. Putin is an ultra-nationalist leader hell bent on restoring the glory days of the old Russian Empire let alone the former Soviet Union. Rising from the ranks of the KGB to become the deputy mayor of St. Petersburg then on to the Russian presidency, Vladimir Putin respects power and force...hence his contempt for Barack HUSSEIN Obama. And after years of economic crisis and self-perceived international humiliation at the hands of the West, Putin wants to reinstate Russian core values and bring back now faltering Russian historical traditions by flexing the muscle of brute other words while Putin wants Russia to be part of the modern world he wants to do so on Russian terms...on his terms.

On his terms for sure, but in certain ways Vladimir Putin and Barack HUSSEIN Obama are one and the same in their narcissism and in their embracing of their own self-importance...their own self-worth. Yet narcissism aside the two men are diametrical opposites in their hopes for their countries as Putin wants Russia to be the world's number one superpower...and through calculated opportunity and military strength he has laid the path towards that goal...while Barack HUSSEIN Obama wants to abandon America's superpower status by restraining and reining in America's strength by cutting and emasculating America's military.

And while Vladimir Putin is NOT a true Communist per se but is a Statist, and with Barack HUSSEIN Obama being a socialist with the heart of a communist...both still believe that the principle of concentrating economic, political, and related controls lies with the state at the cost of individual liberty...resulting in a weak position for the individual or community with regards to the government. This belief serves Putin well in his current endeavor of rebuilding the 'motherland'...while Obama takes that belief a step further into building big government alone...the bigger the better for more control...with individual liberties NOT just weak but hopefully for him in 'We the People' be damned.

Remember, for Vladimir Putin Russian nationalism is all important...all it trumps all else for pride in the 'motherland' is the foundation of his government. Remember also that for Barack HUSSEIN Obama American in pride in American values and something to be ashamed of... something to be relegated to a corner like a child hanging his head in shame over a minor infraction of his parents house rules. Putin has great respect for all things Russian...for Russia's once glorious past...while Obama hates everything ashamed of America's past...and his actions or lack thereof say it all as his great joys in life are apologizing for America or speaking ill of America as a player on the world stage.

And Putin, whether we believe it to be right or wrong, lives in a a world...where to him the ends justify the in a return to Russian greatness starting with the takeover of Crimea... bringing Crimea back into the Russian fold. Obama on the other hand lives in a a self-serving world...where there are NO means just an in the end of America as we know and love her.

Now please do NOT think that I admire Putin in his role as the leader of...for all intents and purposes...Communist Russia. In NO uncertain terms I know full well that he is a bully, a thug, and that his actions regarding Ukraine and Crimea are a breech of international law, but even with that I do somewhat admire Vladimir Putin for his strength of convictions in standing up to and making a mockery of our weak, ineffective, anything but American president and oh so sad excuse of a Commander-in-Chief...a man so full of hot air and proven useless threats that every time he opens his mouth the world's leaders enjoy a good laugh at our beloved America's expense.

And that my friends is the saddest thing of all for America has become a laughing stock because America has a man in sitting in the White House who has NO business being there...NO business at all...period.