Basically, this racist says that Obama has gotten love from the media, and if he thinks he's gotten "antipathy" from the media, he's "crazy."

He seems to be implying that a black man is just making stuff up, or seeing "antipathy" where none exists. Denying a black man's truth. This, as you know, is racist.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:07 AM | Comments (147)
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

This will not end well for freedom. (Via Jeff Emanuel)

To monitor compliance with these rules, the IRS and HHS are now building the largest personal information database the government has ever attempted. Known as the Federal Data Services Hub, the project is taking the IRS's own records (for income and employment status) and centralizing them with information from Social Security (identity), Homeland Security (citizenship), Justice (criminal history), HHS (enrollment in entitlement programs and certain medical claims data) and state governments (residency).

The data hub will be used as the verification system for ObamaCare's complex subsidy formula. All insurers, self-insured businesses and government health programs must submit reports to the IRS about the individuals they cover, which the IRS will cross-check against tax returns.

Good luck in advance to anyone who gets caught in this system's gears, assuming it even works. Centralizing so much personal information in one place is another invitation for the IRS wigglers in some regional office—or maybe higher up—to make political decisions about enforcement.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin, "Those who would trade privacy for health insurance will get neither".

One of the cobs was dumbfounded that advocates for big government use the excuse that Obama can't be held responsible for this outbreak of scandals because the government is too big to run.

My reaction:

Because they don't view abuses by big government as a problem. It's a small price to pay for the glories of state control. Though they really don't see it as a price at all. The Vanguard of the Party is never affected by this stuff and if the Proletariat is, well, eggs and omelets.

At this point it's just ruining lives in an emotional and economic way. Eventually (like when ObamaCare hits) it will literally start killing people.

This is what happens when leftists win. Every time, everywhere.

It's amazing how much damage to this country Obama and a Democratic Congress were able to do in two years.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:48 AM | Comments (161)
Post contains 354 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm surprised it took this long but it's come to this (via Ben Smith)

In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.

Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.

Yes, why in the world would a State Department official who is on record several times as pleading for more security turn down an offer from AfricaCom Commander Carter Ham of just that very thing?

I don't know, maybe because that was official State Department policy?

During the hearing, the top regional security officer in Libya over the summer, Eric Nordstrom, and Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, a Utah National Guardsman who was leading a security team in Libya until August, placed the blame squarely on [Charlene] Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary of state for international programs, whom they said was the official who denied those requests.

"All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources," Nordstrom testified, adding that Lamb had directly told him over the phone not to make the requests, but that Cretz decided to do it anyway.

"In those conversations, I was specifically told [by Lamb] ‘You cannot request an SST extension.' I determined I was told that because there would be too much political cost. We went ahead and requested it anyway," Nordstrom said.

So it was official State Department policy in July that they would not be requesting any more help from the Department of Defense for security in Libya but it's Stevens fault for not accepting that same help in August?

Come on. Not everyone who works in government is a rogue, low level employee. Stevens was simply following the orders he received from DC. He and his staff were in an ongoing battle with those officials to get them to change their minds but he didn't disobey them and go running to another agency.

It's tough to say Stevens should have disobeyed those orders and accepted Ham's offer but State still could have the deployment quashed. I think it's too much to expect a mid-level guy like Stevens to buck not just his bosses but his entire agency.

The McClatchy story covers this down at the bottom but after giving "two government officials" lots of play and starting the wider conversation about Stevens possible culpability. It's almost as if someone is trying to deflect blame away from other parties.

Hillary Clinton was responsible for the tone and priorities of the State Department at this time. The buck and the blood stops with her.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:14 AM | Comments (138)
Post contains 570 words, total size 4 kb.

This isn't going to be too technical, but first, a warning: I'm going to link to some IRS.gov pages. If your computer name is "TeaPartyRawks" or your domain is "ilurvespatriots.net", you might want to read this post on a disposable cell phone you bought with cash from a resident alien Chechen jihadist. There's not a chance that guy's being tracked.

So let's get on with this quick little primer that was prompted by Ace's spending a good bit of yesterday afternoon arguing with an idiot on Twitter about whether "Media Matters" was a 501(c)(3) or a 501(c)(4). As Ace made clear, the answer is, "it depends".

What it depends on is which "Media Matters" you're talking about. Media Matters for America ("MMFA" in Ace's tweet) - the parent organization - is a 501(c)(3). Its demon spawn offshoot Media Matters Action Network (MMAN) is a 501(c)(4).

"What difference, at this point, does it make," you ask in a shrill, exasperated voice?

Well, the MMAN 501(c)(4) is a tax-exempt social welfare organization, which, as the IRS helpfully notes, "may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity." Now, if you think more than 50% of the activity MMAN engages in isn't political, you're not paying close attention. But there's at least room for debate that the activities they engage in could possibly just skirt the line enough for them to remain tax exempt.

And, importantly, while MMAN's business activities aren't subject to the corporate income tax, a donor does not get a tax deduction for donations made to MMAN.

MMFA, however, is exempt under Section 501(c)(3) (see this pdf of its Form 990 tax return). Here's the exemption criteria:

The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.

What don't you see on that list?

That's right, political activity. Because a 501(c)(3) generally can't engage in political activity (please try to stifle your laughter at this point). More from our friends at the IRS:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention. (emphasis added)

So when Jan Crawford picks up on this activity by "Media Matters" ...

... does she mean "Media Matters" MMFA or "Media Matters" MMAN? Because MMFA clearly can't participate in such a partisan activity which indirectly supports Democrat political candidates, while MMAN conceivably can. Nice racket, eh?

But, you know, I'm not sure Media Matters, is even concerned with form over substance bullshit like this. Let's go back to that MMFA Form 990:

Part I, Question 1. Briefly describe the organization's mission or most significant activities: MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA IS A WEB-BASED NOT-FOR-PROFIT PROGRESSIVE RESEARCH AND INFORMATION CENTER

Part III, Question 1. Briefly describe the organization's mission: DEDICATED TO COMPREHENSIVELY MONITORING, ANALYZING, AND CORRECTING CONSERVATIVE MISINFORMATION IN THE U.S. MEDIA.

Part III, Question 4. Describe the exempt purpose achievements for each of the organization's three largest program services by expenses. ...: MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA WORKS TO NOTIFY ACTIVISTS , JOURNALISTS, PUNDITS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC ABOUT INSTANCES OF MISINFORMATION, PROVIDING THEM WITH THE RESOURCES TO REBUT FALSE CLAIMS AND TAKE DIRECT ACTION AGAINST OFFENDING MEDIA INSTITUTIONS BY WHICH WE MEAN FOX NEWS CHANNEL AND RUSH LIMBAUGH. (emphasis added)

OK, I may have made a little of that last one up. But we all know that really is what they mean.

MMFA directly states in its 990 that it engages in prohibited partisan political activity, and those dedicated public servants at the IRS haven't lifted a finger to stop it. Surprising, huh?

Oh, and as you might have guessed, MMFA's well-heeled leftist donors get a nice, fat tax deduction for donations made to the 501(c)(3).

Related: The Nine Lies of Lois Lerner

Posted by: andy at 08:15 AM | Comments (128)
Post contains 1000 words, total size 8 kb.

FBI Investigating

Let's not jump to conclusions here. This could have just been a group of friends, all out walking by the picturesque waterside.

After midnight. While trespassing.

The seven individuals currently live in Amherst, Cambridge, Sunderland, Northampton and New York City.

From miles away...ok, this looks bad.

But do try to keep an open mind.

Just try.

State Police say the five men and two women are from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Singapore, and “cited their education and career interests” for being in the area. The men told police they were chemical engineers and recent college graduates.

Oh.
Never mind.
Yes, jihadi terror cells are here, and they are keen to find more places and ways to kill us. I believe that is the unstated subtext of that article, because if the folks were ordinary local MIT types out goofing around, we wouldn't be reading a list of their national origins.

Kudos to the police for their vigilance, and to the FBI, good hunting.

H/T BenK's morning link dump from yesterday.

Posted by: LauraW at 06:38 AM | Comments (197)
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.

Towards the end of his often contentious testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee Eric Holder went where no grown man shouldÂ…whining about a lack of respect.

"This isn't always a pleasant experience," he says, referring to Hill testimony. "I don't feel like I've always been treated with respect. It's not a personal thing... but I'm the attorney general...

A couple of things about this.

Hey Eric, which part of “co-equal branch” don’t you get? Members of Congress don’t owe you any respect, personally or for your office. You’re a political appointee heading an executive department that was created by Congress and they can do away with it if they collectively want to.

Unlike the people you are complaining about you were not elected by the highest authority in this country, We The People. In fact, your position isn't even a constitutionally mandated one.

Why exactly should anyone in the House treat you with respect? Are you forgetting that little matter of being held in “Contempt of Congress”? They hold you personally in contempt Eric. A lack of respect is implied.

And let us not forget that lack of respect is a two way street Holder knows all about. From February of last year.

I have to tell you that for me to really be affected by what happened, I’d have to have respect for the people who voted in that way,” Holder told ABC News when asked about the historic contempt vote. “And I didn’t, so it didn’t have that huge an impact on me.

And while weÂ’re on lack of respect, letÂ’s look at what Holder said to Congressman Darrell Issa shortly before whinging about respect.

Holder said Issa’s questioning at the hearing was “too consistent with the way in which you conduct yourself as a member of the Congress. It’s unacceptable, and it’s shameful.”

It is not up to Eric Holder, in his capacity as Attorney General, to comment on how a member of Congress performs their duty. In fact, itÂ’s quite the opposite. Issa was there to perform his duty to represent the citizens he represents and provide a check on Executive authority. How he goes about doing that is not for a member of the executive branch to comment upon.

It’s not just Eric Holder who has delusions of grandeur about how he must be treated. Remember Mrs. Boxer’s instruction to a General to call her Senator instead of the perfectly respectful “ma’am”?

We need to get beyond this imperial government we've created and back to a small “r” republican form where people who temporarily hold office don’t consider themselves a distinct and separate class above the real power in this country…the citizens.

As always in cases of honor and respect one should look to George Washington for direction. This is how he began his first inaugural address to CongressÂ…

”Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:“

Citizens first, people who simply were members of Congress second. (The value of citizenship is one reason IÂ’m so opposed to giving it to people whose first act in this country was to break our laws but thatÂ’s another story)

You know who gets this? Senator Ron Johnson. You might recall I had the chance to talk to him a few weeks ago about his “Victims of Government Project” (check it out if you haven’t). His staffer who set it up took my number and said I get a call at the agreed upon time (or close enough for government work). When I saw the DC area code I figured it was the staffer saying, “hold on for the Senator”. What I got was, “Hi, this is Ron Johnson…..”. But by not demanding or assuming the status so many public “servants” seem to feel entitled to, he immediately proved worthy of just that kind of respect.

ItÂ’s an example more office holders, including Eric Holder should learn from.

Below the fold...video of Holder demanding respect. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 05:43 AM | Comments (251)
Post contains 677 words, total size 5 kb.

Today's scandal prediction: the press begins aggressively moving into "nothing to see here, move along" mode.

Update: The Internet was abuzz last night with CA Rep. Devin Nunes' accusation that the DOJ "essentially wiretapped the House of Representatives cloak room".

But if you pay close attention, he explains that "... when they went after the AP reporters, right? Went after all of their phone records, they went after the phone records, including right up here in the House Gallery, right up from where IÂ’m sitting right now."

This has been known since the story broke.

The records obtained by the Justice Department listed outgoing calls for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters, for general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn., and for the main number for the AP in the House of Representatives press gallery, according to attorneys for the AP.

As you might imagine, the cloak room and the press gallery are two different things.

I hope we haven't reached the point of Scandalpalooza where people on our side try to gild the lily and in doing so toss the left a shiny object that they can focus on instead of the real abuses of power of their boyfriend's administration.

Posted by: andy at 03:03 AM | Comments (317)
Post contains 216 words, total size 2 kb.

The foreign press is all over this...drawn like moths to a flame. The problem is/was nationwide, not just Cincinnati.

When Charlie Rangel, the nation's premier practitioner of brazening out scandals says you need to come clean, maybe you really need to come clean. He's a pro. He got mad scandal skilz that have stood the test of time.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 11:00 PM | Comments (49)
Post contains 127 words, total size 2 kb.

This supposed I.R.S. controversy being discussed in some shadowy ultra-conservative circles has raised some important questions about the obsession of right-wingers to distrust their benevolent and benign government. I'll let The New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin explain, since his unique skill with the written word far exceeds my ability to accurately digest and convey his eloquent points.

Washington’s scandal machinery, rusty from recent disuse, is cranking back up to speed due to the alleged targeting of conservative groups by the Internal Revenue Service. Darrell Issa, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said, “It’s the kind of thing that scares the American people to their core. When Americans are being targeted for audits based on their political beliefs, that needs to change.” Senator Susan Collins, of Maine, called on the President to apologize. George Will said President Obama could be impeached. Obama himself is taking the path of contrition. At a news conference Monday, the President said, “If in fact I.R.S. personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that’s outrageous. And there’s no place for it.” More hearings, with more outrage, are planned.

In light of this, it might be useful to ask: Did the I.R.S. actually do anything wrong?

Here we sit on the precipice of a grand realignment of history, society and culture in the image of the new order of common sense government that seeks to cast aside the trappings of backwards for-profit midsets and yet again we are forced to endure the incoherent ramblings of the simple-minded who seek to derail this overdue progression.

Instead of thoughtful policy discussions, we will now be treated to an endless parade of government boogeymen and convoluted conspiracies brought on only in an effort to discredit an honorable and trustworthy administration, run by a renowned Constitutional law professor and respected Nobel Prize winner.

Let us dispense with trivial formalities. The slack-jawed logic of the perpetually offended will never seek to understand the internal flaws inherent to the human soul. The alleged failure of the I.R.S. to consistently apply their fair standards was nothing more than the failure of a system designed by men. The government is made up of men, and therefore is subject to the same defects. This is not an indictment of government itself; this is an indictment of those who fail to recognize the collective good of advancing a streamlined and progressive government.

So, who is ultimately to blame? Perhaps if you're honest with yourself, you'll look deeper into the depths of your heart and you will recognize the brutal truth.

This is your fault. For shame.

Posted by: JohnE. at 05:00 AM | Comments (178)
Post contains 470 words, total size 3 kb.

Still a bit sick but feeling better.

Thank You Jenny McCarthy I:  Baby Dies of Whooping Cough In Orange County

"This is the first whooping cough death the county has seen in decades. . . . Officials said the family chose not to vaccinate their child. Some parents are choosing not to fully vaccinate their children because they worry there is a link between the vaccinations and autism."

Thank You Jenny McCarthy II: Measles Epidemic in Wales Has Roots in Antivax Movement

More than 800 people have been diagnosed with measles in Swansea in this recent outbreak. People are lining up to get their vaccinations, and a campaign has been started to get more people vaccinated, which is a good thing; I just hope it's in time. But with so many people contracting the illness, serious repercussions are almost inevitable.

Wales has had low Measles/Mumps/Rubella (MMR) vaccination rates for some time . since about 1998, in fact, when Andrew Wakefield published his bogus study in the Lancet falsely linking the MMR vaccine to autism.

And no thanks to Jenny McCarthy - an anti-vaccine mom finally changes her mind:

And yet I still wondered about that list of things that I would now, I suppose, have to surrender to and immunise my child against. Polio, for one -- a couple of my parents' pensioner friends still carry the limp left by their childhood polio, but none of my friends do, because it isn't around any more. And diphtheria -- what was that, even? I knew it had killed one of Queen Victoria's daughters, but that wasn't our reality.

The reason it wasn't our reality was, of course, due to a continuous programme of immunisation. Duh. Diphtheria is a disease that still kills one in five infants it meets, even if they get treatment, their necks swelling up until they can no longer breathe. I have now seen a picture of a child whose neck was ravaged by diphtheria, bloated like a foie gras goose about to burst. I wish I could unsee it.

Well mostly changes her mind - she had to rely on her mother to actually get the vaccinations done:

When it came to it, my mother still had to take my daughter for the injections, as I was too squeamish. The fact is, I still have a hunch that puts me off vaccinations, a hunch that I can't explain. I just feel funny about them. But I feel even funnier about the thought of mine or anyone else's kid dying of measles in this country in 2013, like Roald Dahl's daughter Olivia did in 1962. "Got to hospital," he wrote in his diary. "Walked in. Two doctors advanced on me from waiting room. How is she? I'm afraid it's too late."

In 1986 Roald Dahl wrote a public letter asking parents to vaccinate their children against measles - an option he never had.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:21 PM | Comments (620)
Post contains 1151 words, total size 14 kb.