Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit has possibly the biggest irony of all missed in yesterday’s Democrat pep rally for government-run health disguised as a funeral for Ted “The Swimmer” Kennedy.
Our Lord and Savior Barack Hussein Obama gave a eulogy for The Swimmer. One of Obama’s best friends, domestic terrorist Bill Ayers mentions The Messiah by name in a book he wrote in 1997 (Obama penned a positive review of that book) and also dedicated the 1960s communist manifesto Prairie Fire to Sirhan Sirhan, the murderer of The Swimmer’s brother, Robert F. Kennedy.
Think about that. One of Obama’s best friends, a domestic terrorist who’s killed people in his own right, dedicates a hate booklet to the assassin of RFK. Obama himself, directly tied to the murderous domestic terrorist, gives the eulogy at RFK’s brother’s funeral.
The Left cannot fathom the concept of the United States undertaking military action to safeguard the freeflow of oil at market prices, but clearly it has no problem with the release of a jihadist who murdered 270 innocent people in order to facilitate an oil deal between Great Britain and Libya.
The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.
Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards.
The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi’s release.
The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.
With little official criticism from the United States, other than the predictable expressions of disappointment, it’s apparent that the lives of those 270 people lost in the bombing of Pan-Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988 were worth the British securing an oil deal with Libya.
The decision to release Megrahi was made in London, not in Scotland.
Despicable appeasing cowards. Just as bad are the Americans, from the President of the United States on down who refuse to condemn this cowardly action.
This is an even bigger insult to the families of those who died than the hero’s welcome this animal received in Libya or allowing Libyan strongman Moammar Khadaffy-Duck to pitch a tent in New Jersey and share a table with the POTUS.
It’s brutal watching the Chicago street thugs in the administration set out to destroy the CIA, which has done an excellent job in keeping Americans safe since Sept. 11, 2001.
It’s worse than even the Church Committee witch hunts of the 1970s. Why? This time, the CIA may not recover. And if that happens, we’re all a lot less safe.
The politicization of Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to empower a special prosecutor to investigate the treatment of jihadists at Club Gitmo served two functions. First, it was a diversion from the crash-and-burn of ObamaCare ChappaquiddiCare. Second, it was the keeping of a promise Our Lord and Savior Barack Hussein Obama made during the campaign to the MorOn.org/Kos Kiddie moonbat Left.
Watching the process the White House is using to destroy the CIA is, well, almost torture itself, writes S. E. Cupp in the New York Daily News.
Poor Leon Panetta. It’s hard not to feel bad for the guy. If the Obama administration is like one big, elaborate stage production of “Chicago,” Panetta is playing invisible Amos Hart – “Mr. Cellophane” – to sheer, translucent, forgettable perfection.
In less than a year, Panetta’s CIA has been reduced to irrelevance and Panetta himself has either been ignored or emasculated by the very folks who were supposed to be his biggest supporters. For taking on a thankless job that typically only gets attention when there’s a massive failure, this is the thanks he gets?
Cupp cites the Bela Pelosi fiasco, in which the House Speaker claimed she was never briefed about the extreme interrogation tactics being used at Club Gitmo. Panetta calmly produced documented evidence that showed that the Speaker was, well, lying. Panetta was then pressured by a less-than-professional letter from Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.) to change the documented evidence to match Pelosi’s false recollection.
Then she described how The Anointed One stripped the CIA of its oversight of the interrogation of the Club Gitmo jihadists and turned it over to the FBI, signaling two things: (1) that the White House viewed the war as a criminal/law enforcement matter rather than a military one and (2) making sure those overseeing it were directly accountable to The Messiah.
Finally, the latest shoe to drop was the politically charged and motivated Holder investigation.
On TV the other night, ABC News investigative reporter Brian Ross discussed Panetta’s unenviable job: “He has positioned himself, I think correctly, as a defender of the CIA. He feels it’s very important that the people of the CIA be defended so that officers at the CIA who are doing their job continue to do their job.”
But why would they? The intelligence community has been slammed for eight years by liberals, in recent months by Democrats and now by the Obama administration itself, which is prepared to punish the good guys for roughing up the bad guys.
All the while, Panetta’s clearly been knee-capped. Who could blame him if, as rumors suggest, he resigns in protest? No one wants to be publicly emasculated by the President of the United States.
Clearly, the efforts to cripple the CIA have been very effective. The Washington Compost reports on the sagging morale at the CIA.
Morale has sagged at the CIA following the release of additional portions of an inspector general’s review of the agency’s interrogation program and the announcement that the Justice Department would investigate possible abuses by interrogators, according to former intelligence officials, especially those associated with the program.
A. B. “Buzzy” Krongard, the third-ranking CIA official at the time of the use of harsh interrogation practices, said that although vigorous oversight is crucial, the public airing of once-classified internal assessments and the prospect of further investigation are damaging the agency. “Morale at the agency is down to minus 50,” he said.
Why would the White House want to do this? The United States needs a strong CIA in order to prevent future terrorist attacks. Remember the whining of the moonbats after 9/11? “Bush knew …” or “Bush should have known … “
Remember the infamous Presidential Daily Briefing of Aug. 6, 2001, which indicated that Osama bin Laden was determined to strike inside the U.S.? Well, duhhhhhhh! The PDB contained no specific information to actually prevent the eventual attacks, but that didn’t stop the moonbats from attacking.
The CIA was still reeling from many of the restraints put on it in the wake of the Church Committee investigations of the 1970s. Yet it was expected to prevent a terrorist attack without the benefit of having boots on the ground in hostile countries.
Fact is, no torture took place at Club Gitmo. The CIA has nothing for which to apologize or explain away. It did its job to protect Americans and the EIT methods worked. It prevented terrorist attacks and saved lives.
That’s nothing to be ashamed of. The ones who should be ashamed are the ones assailing the CIA for doing its job.
You could have easily predicted the Democrats to turn The Swimmer’s funeral into a replay of the spectacle from 2002 at the memorial service for Sen. Paul Tombstone.
What was beyond shameful was the Democrats’ using a child as a human shield in an attempt to safeguard against criticism for using the memorial service to advance political propaganda.
Here’s the video:
The child was The Swimmer’s grandson. The political hacks who set this up figured having the child advance the concept of using Ted’s bloated corpse to advance their socialist agenda would leave them immune to attack, because, in their thinking, “Who would attack a child, especially Ted’s grandson?”
I say … let ‘em have it with both barrels.
What sniveling cowards. Hiding behind a child. But then, that’s not the first time the Left has used kids as not just props but rather as human shields in political warfare. No different that the jihadists with whom they sympathize who use civilians and children as human shields. One expectes nothing less from them.
From Michelle Malkin, a reminder of the prop used by Our Lord and Savior Barack Hussein Obama in His recent astroturf town hall. Yes, the child of an Obama political hack allowed to say mean things about the protesters because, once again, no one would dare attack a child.
Exit question: Anyone have any young’uns at home they’d be willing to volunteer to lead prayers at the next big GOP funeral? We might as well make use of the camera time while we have it. “Dear God, please grant us the strength to privatize social security and construct a robust missile defense shield. We pray to the Lord.”
Also, AP notes:
I’ve been informed by liberal amateur theologians that it’s perfectly kosher to pray for universal health care — on TV, in the middle of a national debate, at a funeral service ostensibly devoted to grieving over someone, by exploiting an innocent child — because, um, Jesus would have supported it.
Um, I don’t profess to have a theological degree, but there’s absolutely not one shred of evidence to back that claim up. This falls into the “Jesus was a socialisst” nonsense that the Left, which ordinarily wants the real Messiah banned from public discussion, professes to wheel Him out as a prop to advance their agenda.
Jesus said: “Do to others what you would have them do to you. (Matthew 7:12 NIV). He also gave the sheep-and-goats lecture to the Apostles in Matthew 25 which is frequently twisted to support socialism as well. From Matthew 25:34-40 (NIV):
Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’
Of course, the goats are the ones on His left, who did not do these things and will be sentenced to eternal damnation.
Notice the real Messiah’s words: “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine …” Not the federal government taking from one person and giving to another. Whatever. You. Did.
You. The definition of human compassion. By its very definition, there is nothing compassionate about government confiscation of an individual’s property, possessions and earnings for the purposes of redistribution.
Spare me this “Jesus was a socialist” nonsense. By its very definition, socialism is an atheistic ideology. It has no deity, except for the state itself.
Perhaps the Democrats should rename their health care proposal after the newly deceased Senator Kennedy. I’m beginning to think that is a great idea after all.
They should rename it after Senator Kennedy.
Then they can do the same thing he did with Mary Jo Kopechne….do nothing and watch it die.
On Wednesday, before he addressed a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon, Reid joined the chamber’s board members for a meet-’n'-greet and a photo. One of the last in line was the Review-Journal’s director of advertising, Bob Brown, a hard-working Nevadan who toils every day on behalf of advertisers. He has nothing to do with news coverage or the opinion pages of the Review-Journal.
Yet, as Bob shook hands with our senior U.S. senator in what should have been nothing but a gracious business setting, Reid said: “I hope you go out of business.”
Later, in his public speech, Reid said he wanted to let everyone know that he wants the Review-Journal to continue selling advertising because the Las Vegas Sun is delivered inside the Review-Journal.
Such behavior cannot go unchallenged.
Just who does Dingy Harry think he is? Bugsy Siegel? Meyer Lansky?
Keep giving him hell. Dingy Harry’s re-elect numbers are in the mid-30s. He’s trailing every potential Republican opponent by sizeable numbers, none of which have actually announced a run next year. Those are not good signs.
Frederick nails it here:
But to fully capture the magnitude of Reid’s remark (and to stop him from doing the same thing to others) it must be called what it was — a full-on threat perpetrated by a bully who has forgotten that he was elected to office to protect Nevadans, not sound like he’s shaking them down.
That’s the problem. Many of the congresscritters in Washington have forgotten they work for us, not the other way around. When that happens, it’s time to send them back to live in the real world, as opposed to Fantasy Island inside the Beltway.
So far, Dingy Harry has been able to survive his crooked land deals because the state-run media hasn’t held him to the same standard as it would , say, a Republican caught in a motel room with a woman who wasn’t his wife.
See here and here for more information on those crooked land deals.
We’ve grown to accept the blatant double standards of the state-run media for Democrats and Republicans, even though it sickens us.
But arrogance to tell a newspaper he hopes it goes out of business because its editorial pages dares to criticize him shows him to be completely out of touch.
We’ll update this as we get them, but right now this may be the funniest line of the day from the funeral service for The Swimmer, delivered by Our Lord and Savior Himself delivered with a straight face:
Ted Kennedy’s life’s work was not to champion those with wealth or power or special connections.
Except for himself.
And once again, Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.
One reason the public so distrusts the health care plan being considered by Congress is that so many troublesome details keep bubbling out of the massive legislation.
The latest example is the $10 billion taxpayers will be asked to shell out to prop up the United Auto Workers’ retiree health insurance program.
That provision is tucked deep into the bill passed by the House.
In effect, it would ask every taxpayer, regardless of whether they’ll have health insurance coverage themselves after they retire — and most won’t — to chip in to maintain the UAW’s coverage, which even after the union’s givebacks is still better than what the average American worker receives.
That’s in addition to not forcing the UAW workers and retirees into the government “option,” which as we all know is not an option for most Americans. Same with the rest of Big Labor which has purchased this Congress and this President.
The Detroit Free Press confirms the insertion into the bill.
WASHINGTON — Antilabor forces say it’s welfare for the UAW and Democrats’ union allies. Labor supporters say it falls short of what’s needed as tens of thousands of union members are pushed into early retirement as employers cut back health care coverage.
They’re both talking about a $10-billion provision tucked deep inside thousands of pages of health care overhaul bills that could help the UAW’s retiree health-care plan and other union-backed plans.
It would see the government — at least temporarily — pay 80 cents on the dollar to corporate and union insurance plans for claims between $15,000 and $90,000 for retirees age 55 to 64.
A side note: I love the media bias shown in the very first word of the story … antilabor. So opposing this piece of pork somehow means you oppose workers. I don’t. I opposed Big Labor.
This guy nails it:
Greg Mourad of the National Right to Work Committee called it “a shameless case of political payback,” saying Democrats and President Barack Obama are trying “to force the rest of us to pay billions to cover those unions’ health care.”
Of course, the Pit Yorkie, former Rep. David Bonior, claims more than $10 million is needed.
Union health plans will be exempt from the limitations of ObamaCare, allowing unions to operate as insurers while forcing everyone else into government-approved plans in “exchanges”. Instead of having the union pay for their own plans, taxpayers will subsidize them, while getting less themselves.
We’ll get rationed care, long waits, minimal services, eventually the blue pill to put us out of our misery … while UAW fatcats continue to live high off the hog.
One of the key reasons the auto industry went belly-up is the retiree pensions negotiated by the UAW and agreed to by the automakers. It’s about time those pensions get put into some sort of reality financially.
Here’s your first clue: sell the resort, sell the golf course, and fund your own health care rather than expect the rest of us to fund it.
