Democrat Alex Sink, Candidate for Florida 13th Congressional District Says Iimmigration Reform Important … Where Else Will We “Get People to Work to Clean our Hotel Rooms or do our Landscaping?”
SHE SAID WHAT … A MOMENT OF HONESTY FROM A DEMOCRAT AND WHAT THEY REALLY THINK OF ILLEGALS!!!
Florida Democratic congressional candidate Alex Sink said immigration reform was important during a Tuesday debate with Republican David Jolly and Libertarian Lucas Overby. Sink says immigration reform is important because, without it, how else would Florida employers to find people to clean hotel rooms and do landscaping. YIKES! Take a good look Hispanics what Democrats think of you and where your place is in their caste system. Could Sink have possibly been more demeaning? This is what you are voting for Hispanics, people who want you to get them their towels, make their beds and mow their lawn.
” … where are you going to get people to work to clean our hotel rooms or do our landscaping?”
Alex Sink is running in a special election for Florida’s 13th congressional seat, that is confined to Pinellas County and stretches from Dunedin to the southern end the county, excluding parts of St. Petersburg, that was vacated last year with the death of Bill Young.
Hot Air asks a great question, can some Republican make the exact same comment so that the MSM can rail against them and call them hateful bigots? What do you think the reaction would be if a Republican made such a comment?
“Immigration reform is important in our country,” she said. “We have a lot of employers over on the beaches that rely upon workers and especially in this high-growth environment, where are you going to get people to work to clean our hotel rooms or do our landscaping? We don’t need to put those employers in a position of hiring undocumented and illegal workers.
Posted February 26, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
Amnesty, Democrats, Double Standard, Economy, House of Representatives, Illegal Immigration, Jobs, Latinos/Hispanic, Liberals, Media, Media Bias, Mexico, Minorities, Obamanation, Open Borders - Border Security, Progressives, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 2 comments
“Piers Morgan Live” Soon to be Piers Morgan Canceled … CNN Gives Low Ratings Show the Axe … Get Ready for his Kicking & Screaming
CNN is giving ‘Piers Morgan Live’ given the boot … Piers Morgan, Not-So Live.
As reported at The Politico, CNN is canceling Piers Morgan’s low rated 9pm show. The 3 year experience to replace Larry King Live has crashed and burned badly with a prime time show that got consistently low ratings. CNN stated that the show could end as early as next month. It probably could not happen soon enough as “Piers Morgan Live” is simply unwatchable. So who will be next up for CNN to take on Megyn Kelly on Fox News and Rachel Maddow at MSNBC at 9PM? Some seem to think Bill Weir. All we know for now is that Piers Morgan is out … good riddance to bad rubbish!
The below video is exhibit 1 of the reason why Piers Morgan’s show has been canceled. Guests Dana Loesch and Scottie Hughes own Morgan in the gun debate so much so at the very end the CNN host winds up in a snit … “It makes me sick”. Actually Piers, your show made many more sick and the reason why no one watched it0 One last thing … Bu-bye!!!
CNN President Jeff Zucker has decided to bring an end to Piers Morgan’s low-rated primetime show, network sources told POLITICO on Sunday. “Piers Morgan Live” could end as early as next month, though Morgan may stay with the network in another role.
Morgan, a former British tabloid editor, replaced Larry King in the 9 p.m. hour three years ago, prior to Zucker’s tenure as president. His show earned consistently low ratings, registering as few as 50,000 viewers in the 25-to-54 year-old demographic earlier this week.
“CNN confirms that Piers Morgan Live is ending,” Allison Gollust, head of CNN communications, told POLITICO on Sunday after an earlier version of this post was published. “The date of the final program is still to be determined.”
Earlier on Sunday, Morgan told The New York Times that the show had “run its course” and that he and Zucker “have been talking for some time about different ways of using me.” Sources who spoke to POLITICO said the decision to end the show was Zucker’s.
Check out the unbelievable, consistent low ratings of Piers Morgan. It is hard to believe they stuck with him this long. The funny part is I have watched more shows of American Greed on CNBC than Piers.
As The Other McCain opines, this is the “first smart move that network has made in years.” I could not agree more. The money line comes from The Guardian that emphasize the following comments from the New York Times article that Morgan was a square peg in a round hole. Really, after all this time CNN finally figured out that a liberal Brit going against the United States Constitution and the First Amendment was a bad thing? God figure.
“It’s been a painful period and lately we have taken a bath in the ratings,” Morgan told the New York Times, which first broke news of the CNN decision on Sunday.
“Look, I am a British guy debating American cultural issues, including guns, which has been very polarizing, and there is no doubt that there are many in the audience who are tired of me banging on about it.”
LOL, remember when Piers Morgan told CBS News during his book tour that, “I will be taken out of CNN kicking and screaming. I absolutely love it. It’s a fantastic network. It’s a great news place to be.”
They Have No Shame … Susan Rice Says She Has No Regrets Over Initial Benghazi Interviews, ‘Patently False’ That I Misled American People (VIDEO)
Doubling Down … Softball interview with NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ … National Security Adviser Susan Rice says she has no regrets on Benghazi interview following the death of four Americans.
Oh what tangled webs we weave when we practice to deceive. The Obama administration is simply incapable of telling the truth. National Security Adviser Susan Rice, when asked this Sunday on ‘Meet the Press,’ said that she had no regrets with what she said on five Sunday network talk shows in misleading the America public is saying the Benghazi attack was based on a video tape rather than a terror attack. Rice claims that it is “settled science” that the Obama administration had done nothing wrong. Rice stated some of the information turned out not to be correct, “but the notion that somehow I or anybody else in the administration misled the American people is patently false. And I think that that’s been amply demonstrated.” HA, this from the Obama administration that said, if you liked your insurance plan, you can keep your insurance plan, PERIOD! I am sensing a pattern.
No regrets, really? The reason why she is not Secretary of State Rice and is only the National Security Adviser is because of those lies. Of course an all too in the tank bias media was no where to be found as David Gregory asked no follow up questions to contradict her “Alinky” comments.
Yeah, not a smidgen of corruption whatsoever.
National Security Adviser Susan Rice said Sunday she has no regrets about her now-infamous round of TV interviews in 2012 about the the attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
Rice, appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said that nobody in the Obama administration intended to mislead the American people when she appeared on Fox, ABC, CNN, NBC and CBS in 2012 shortly after the attacks.
Asked by host David Gregory if she had any regrets about the interviews, Rice replied: “No.”
“Because what I said to you that morning, and what I did every day since, was to share the best information that we had at the time,” Rice said. “The information I provided, which I explained to you, was what we had at the moment. It could change. I commented that this was based on what we knew on that morning, was provided to me and my colleagues and, indeed, to Congress, by the intelligence community. And that’s been well validated in many different ways since.”
“That information turned out, in some respects, not to be 100 percent correct,” she acknowledged. “But the notion that somehow I or anybody else in the administration misled the American people is patently false. And I think that that’s been amply demonstrated.”
Freedom of the Press? Not in an Obama World … The FCC Wants to Grill Reporters, Editors & News Station Owners About How They Decide Which Stories to Run
WHEN WILL THE TYRANNY STOP WITH THIS OUT OF CONTROL IMPERIALISTIC PRESIDENT?
It would appear that Barack Obama wants to put government FCC monitors in America’s news rooms to determine why media outlets cover certain stories. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! So now we are going to have government lackeys in news rooms to monitor and make sure that the media is covering the stories they want them to? Could Barack Obama and the Obama administration possible trample on the United States Constitution and Freedom of Speech any more?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
As reported at Mediaite, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal bringing people’s attention to this study, saying “the government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.” And while participation is technically voluntary, ignoring them would not be a wise decision for any news outlet that wants an FCC license. We all know that the MSM is bias and pretty much in lockstep leans to the left, but it is not the governments job to interfere with what they report or how they report . “Participation is voluntary—in theory,” supposedly; however, the FCC’s questions, queries and interrogations may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore as it is this very government agency that could put a media outlet out of business if they spitefully withhold an FCC license. But of course the Obama administration has never gone after or targeted a specific group of people who opposed him, have they … IRS-GATE!
AMERICA, THIS IS WHAT TYRANNY LOOKS LIKE! LET’S JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT … THIS IS ANTI-AMERICAN. WELCOME TO OBAMA’S USS
An Obama administration plan that would get researchers into newsrooms across the country is sparking concern among congressional Republicans and conservative groups.
The purpose of the proposed Federal Communications Commission study is to “identify and understand the critical information needs of the American public, with special emphasis on vulnerable-disadvantaged populations,” according to the agency.
However, one agency commissioner, Ajit Pai, said in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece Wednesday that the May 2013 proposal would allow researchers to “grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.”
He also said he feared the study might stifle the freedom of the press.
Who is Obama kidding?
This is just heinous as Obama uses the death of Daniel Pearl to make it appear that he is for Freedom of the Press
“Reminded us of how valuable a free press is.”
“reminded us that there are those who would go to any leangth in order to silence journalists …”
“A well informed citizenry that is able to make choices and hold governments accountable …”
Obama says, “Clear out the press so that we can take some questions”
Questions that the FCC poses in the study to news managers and staffers, including the following. Honestly, what business is it of the federal government?
- What is the news philosophy of the station?
- How do you define critical information that the community needs?
- Who decides which stories are covered?
- Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?
#You Lie … New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo Says He Was Misunderstood when He Said Conservatives “Have No Place in the State of New York”
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo should try out for the men’s US Olympic gymnastic team with the back-bending, back-flips and contortions he went through trying to spin what he originally said, in that Conservatives have no place in the state of New York.
New York Gov. Cuomo is now saying he was misunderstood. Of course you were governor, because some how you are the victim here. Now Cuomo is back-peddling off his initial comments on WCNY and trying to say, I wasn’t telling anyone to leave … “My position is the exact opposite, right? We have all sorts of opinions in this state. We have people all along the spectrum, and it’s one of the things that makes New York special.” Yeah, that’s the ticket. And if you like your health insurance and doctor, you can keep your health insurance, Period! Cuomo said specifically, that there was “no place” in New York state for “extreme” conservatives who are pro-life and support the Second Amendment.
New York and America got a peak into what Go. Andrew Cuomo truly thinks and believes when it comes to anyone who does not agree with his liberal view point and agenda. Because liberals are oh so tolerant. Just curious, where was the MSM with the reporting of this political intolerance? Imagine if a Republican had said the same?
Watch and listen to the VIDEO below of what Cuomo said and decide for yourself.
People misunderstood New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo when he said conservatives “have no place in the state of New York,” the Democratic governor explained Wednesday.
“I was not saying anyone should leave the state, right? And anyone who heard the comments knows that’s not what I was saying,” Cuomo said when asked about his comments at a press conference. “To the extent people want to have a political dialogue, that’s what it is.”
“I wasn’t saying anyone should leave the state,” Cuomo explained Wednesday. “My position is the exact opposite, right? We have all sorts of opinions in this state. We have people all along the spectrum, and it’s one of the things that makes New York special.”
Cuomo is up for reelection this year.
Why can’t politicians just admit they made a mistake instead of just further showing that they are lying sacks of bovine scatology?
Posted February 14, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
2014 Elections, 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, America - United States, Civil Rights, Conservatives, Democrats, Double Standard, Ethics, Government, Governors, Gun Control, Gutter Politics, Hypocrisy, Liberals, Media Bias, Misleader, Misrepresentation, Moonbats, Progressives, Progressives, Radicals, US Constitution, We the People, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 3 comments
Liberal & Obama Supporter Attorney Jonathan Turley Says Expansion of Barack Obama’s Presidential Powers Threatens Liberty
WOW, IF THIS DOES NOT WAKE PEOPLE UP, NOTHING WILL … LIB ATTY AND OBAMA SUPPORTER BLASTS OBAMA’S ACTIONS
Last night on ‘The Kelly Files,’ Jonathan Turley, a liberal Constitutional attorney and Obama supporter said a mouthful last night with regards to the imperial president, Barack Obama’s “unilateral” and Unconstitutional actions. Turley stated, “I’m afraid this is beginning to border on a cult of personality for people on the left” and Well, you know, a system in which a single individual is allowed to rewrite legislation or ignore legislation is a system that borders on authoritarianism.”
This is a must watch interview and remember, this is coming from a lib. Turley is basically describing … “TYRANNY”.
KELLY: Let me ask you about this because in that soundbite we played before we went to commercial, you said the framers would be horrified because everything they did was to create balance between the branches of government and we’ve lost that.
TURLEY: Well, I’m afraid it’s quite serious because the framers created a system that was designed to avoid one principle thing, the concentration of power in any one branch. Because that balancing between these branches in this fixed orbit is what not only gives stability to our system but it protects us against authoritarian power, it protects civil liberties from abuse.
And what we’ve been seeing is the shift of gravity within that system in a very dangerous way that makes it unstable, and I think that’s what the president is doing. I think that we’ve become a nation of enablers. We are turning a blind eye to a fundamental change in our system. I think many people will come to loathe that they remained silent during this period.
KELLY: We heard a lot of objections when President Bush expanded the powers of the presidency from the left and from the media. They haven’t been raising the same objections now that we have a Democrat in The White House. And you say they do so at their own peril.
TURLEY: I’m afraid this is beginning to border on a cult of personality for people on the left. I happen to agree with many of President Obama’s policies, but in our system it is often as important how you do something as what you do.
And I think that many people will look back at this period in history and see nothing but confusion as to why people remained so silent when the president asserted these types of unilateral actions. You have a president who is claiming the right to basically rewrite or ignore or negate federal laws. That is a dangerous thing. It has nothing to do with the policies; it has to do with politics.
KELLY: Why is it so dangerous? What’ so bad that will come of this?
TURLEY: Well, you know, a system in which a single individual is allowed to rewrite legislation or ignore legislation is a system that borders on authoritarianism. I don’t believe that we are that system yet. But we cannot ignore that we’re beginning to ignore a system that is a pretense of democracy if a president is allowed to take a law and just simply say, ‘I’m going to ignore this,’ or, ‘I’m going to shift funds that weren’t appropriated by Congress into this area.’
The president’s State of the Union indicated this type of unilateralism that he has adopted as a policy. Now, many people view that as somehow empowering. In my view, it’s dangerous, that is what he is suggesting is to essentially put our system off line. This is not the first time that convenience has become the enemy of principle. But we’ve never seen it to this extent.
KELLY: What is supposed to be done about it? You know, I know in your testimony before Congress you cited Ben Franklin who believed that the other branches would work in their own self interest to try to reign in a president who got drunk on his own power, or however you want to put it. You know, Congress doesn’t have — they can withdrawal money, they can move to impeach, they can file lawsuits –which they’ve done — I mean, what are they supposed to do?
TURLEY: Part of the problem really rests with the federal courts. For the last two decades, federal courts have been engaged in a policy of avoidance. They are not getting involved when the executive branch exceeds its powers, they’re just leaving it up to the branches. And often they say Congress has the power of the purse, Congress can simply restrict funds.
But one of the complaints against President Obama is that very clearly dedicated funds in areas like healthcare, have been just shifted by the White House unilaterally to different areas. And the courts have adopted this avoidance policy.
I am astonished by the degree of passivity in Congress, particularly by Democrats. You know, I first came to Congress when I was a young page and there were people that fiercely believed in the institution. It didn’t matter what party held the White House. But what we’re seeing now is the usurpation of authority that’s unprecedented in this country.
What was the #1 story leading up to the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic Games, other than a possible terrorist attack? It was Russia’s views and laws that were anti-discriminatory against Gays.
So then why did NBC edit out the one part of the IOC’s statement during the opening ceremony that was commenting about Russia’s anti-discrimination” policies? As Buzz Feed reports, IOC president Thomas Bach made a strong statement against “any form of discrimination” and in favor of tolerance; however, no one in America watching the games saw or heard them because NBC conveniently edited them out. But of course NBC is no stranger to editing out important parts of the news are they (George Zimmerman 911 call). Hmm, why edit something that spoke so directly to what was considered an important part of the games? Please, and I do not want to hear about it being edited for time. There was much more of his speak that could have found it’s way onto the editing room floor.
What would the Peacock say?
More from Deadspin more on the edits and both VIDEO’s, one edited, the other not.
Good evening, dear Athletes. Mr president of the Russian Federation, Mr Secretary General of the United Nations, Good evening Olympic friends and fans around the world! Welcome to the 22nd Olympic Winter Games! Tonight, we are writing a new page in Olympic history.
What has been achieved in seven years is a remarkable achievement. I would like it thank, in again, the president of the Russian Federation and his Government. The Sochi organizing committee. The Russian Olympic committee. And the IOC members in Russia.
Thank you to all the workers for your great contribution under sometimes difficult circumstances. Thank you to all the people of Sochi and the Krasnodar region. Thank you for your patience, thank you for your understanding during these years of transformation.
Now you are living in an Olympic Region. I am sure you will enjoy the benefits for many, many years to come. Thousands of volunteers have welcomed us with the well-known warm Russian hospitality. Many thanks to all the wonderful volunteers. Bolshoi spasiba, valantyoram! Thank you very much to everyone. Russia and the Russians have set the stage for you, the best winter athletes on our planet. From this moment on you are not only the best athletes, you are Olympic Athletes. You will inspire us with your outstanding sports performances. You have come here for sports. You have come here with your Olympic dream. The International Olympic Committee wants your Olympic Dream to come true. This is why we are investing almost all of our revenues in the development of sports. The universal Olympic rules apply to each and every athlete- no matter where you come from or what your background is. You are living together in the Olympic Village. You will celebrate victory with dignity and accept defeat with dignity. You are bringing the Olympic Values to life. In this way, the Olympic Games, wherever they take place, set an example for a peaceful society. Olympic Sport unites people. This is the Olympic Message the athletes spread to the host country and to the whole world. Yes, it is possible to strive even for the greatest victory with respect for the dignity of your competitors. Yes, Yes, it is possible – even as competitors – to live together under one roof in harmony, with tolerance and without any form of discrimination for whatever reason. Yes, it is possible – even as competitors – to listen, to understand and to give an example for a peaceful society.
Olympic Games are always about building bridges to bring people together. Olympic Games are never about erecting walls to keep people apart. Olympic Games are a sports festival embracing human diversity in great unity. Therefore, I say to the political leaders of the world – thank you for supporting your athletes. They are the best ambassadors of your country. Please respect their Olympic Message of goodwill, of tolerance, of excellence and of peace. Have the courage to address your disagreements in a peaceful, direct political dialogue and not on the backs of the athletes.
To all sports officials and sports fans I say – join and support our fight for fair play, the athletes deserve it. To you – my fellow Olympic Athletes – I say, respect the rules, play fair, be clean, respect your fellow athletes in and out of competition.
We all wish you joy in your Olympic effort and a wonderful Olympic experience. To all of you – Athletes, Officials, Fans and Spectators around our globe – I say, enjoy the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games! And now I have the honour of inviting the president of the Russian Federation, Mister Vladimir Putin, to declare open the 22nd Olympic Winter Games.
UPDATE I: An NBC spokesperson stated “The IOC President’s comments were edited for time, as were other speeches, but his message got across very clearly to viewers.
Barack Obama – Bill O’Reilly Contentious Pre-Super Bowl Interview Discusses Obamacare Failed Promises, Benghazi, IRS-Gate … “Not Even a Smidgen of Corruption” … “These Kinds of Things Keep on Surfacing, Because Folks Like You Will Promote Them.”
THE THIN SKINNED PRESIDENTIAL INTERVIEW …
President Barack Obama and FOX News’ Bill O’Reilly went back and forth in a contentious pre-Super Bowl interview in which the president provided few answers. Instead of answering the tough question that not only Americans want to hear, but are entitled to, Obama played the blame game, ducked and dodged, and allowed his thin skin to dictate the non-responsive interview. Obama’s attempt to try and put all his administrations scandals behind him, most likely only made matters worse. When being asked questions, Obama actually blamed FOX News for daring to bring up and question such scandals like Benghazi, IRS-gate, Obamacare and the rest of the all too numerous scandals of the Obama presidency. Obama actually thinks the media is supposed to be his propaganda arm. In the end Obama stated that there was no corruption, “not even a smidgen.”
Obama addressed concerns over Benghazi, the launch of HealthCare.gov and the IRS, during the interview Sunday before the Super Bowl. He adamantly rejected the suggestion that the IRS was used for political purposes by singling out Tea Party groups seeking tax exemption.
“That’s not what happened,” he said. Rather, he said, IRS officials were confused about how to implement the law governing those kinds of tax-exempt groups.
“There were some bone-headed decisions,” Obama conceded.
But when asked whether corruption, or mass corruption, was at play, he responded: “Not even mass corruption — not even a smidgen of corruption.”
Bill O’Reilly’s Super Bowl interview with President Obama
Picture: Source Fox News screen grab – Click in Pic to watch VIDEO
I have just one question, why did President Barack Obama agree to do this interview if he did not intend to answer any question or offer anything new other than the same old BS and blame game? It would appear that the folks at Hot Air are asking the same.
Seriously, I don’t know why Obama bothered to do this interview at all. The only answer he seemed interested in sharing was that Fox News is a big Meany Channel with Meany Reporters who Keep Asking Questions When I Give The Only Answers I Want To Give.
However, the best question of the interview did not even come from Bill O’Reilly. It came in a letter from Kathy LaMaster of Fresno, California. Kathy asked the fantastic question … “Mr. President, why do you feel it’s necessary to fundamentally transform the nation that has afforded you so much opportunity and success?” BINGO!!! This is why Obama has no credibility anymore. Obama tried to say that, “I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation” … even though he is the one who said we had to, see video below. Some how the US was fine for Obama to be afforded the opportunity of the first black man being elected president, but he has to fundamentally change it for others. Hmm?
Here is what Candidate Obama wanted for our country when he was running for President of the United States of America. He said that “we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
O’REILLY: OK. I got a letter from Kathy LaMaster (ph), Fresno, California. I said I would read one letter from the folks, all right?
O’REILLY: “Mr. President, why do you feel it’s necessary to fundamentally transform the nation that has afforded you so much opportunity and success?”
OBAMA: I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation…
O’REILLY: But those are your words.
Snippets from interview:
With regards to the disastrous roll-out of Obamacare, President Obama claims everybody will be held accountable. REALLY? No one has been held accountable by this president with anything from Obamacare to Benghazi, from Fast & Furious to IRS-gate. Who is he kidding?
O’REILLY: And I’m paying Kathleen Sebelius’ salary and she screwed up.
O’REILLY: And you’re not holding her accountable.
OBAMA: Yes, well, I — I promise you that we hold everybody up and down the line accountable. But when we’re…
O’REILLY: But she’s still there.
Obama and O’Reilly spar on Benghazi. The president incredibly is sticking to the story that he called the Benghazi attack a terror attack, even though non-Kool Aid drinking folks know it is a lie. Obama could not answer in a “yes” or “no” manner whether he was told it was a terrorist attack.
O’REILLY: Did he tell you, Secretary Panetta, it was a terrorist attack?
OBAMA: You know what he told me was that there was an attack on our compound…
O’REILLY: He didn’t tell you…
OBAMA: — (INAUDIBLE)…
O’REILLY: – he didn’t use the word “terror?”
Really Mr. President, you did not say it was a terror attack in the ’60 Minutes’ interview, when you discussed it with Joy Behar or to the United Nations.
Bill O’Reilly’s Super Bowl interview with President Obama
O’REILLY: It’s more than that because if Susan Rice goes out and tells the world that it was a spontaneous demonstration…
O’REILLY: — off a videotape but your…
O’REILLY: — your commanders and the secretary of Defense know it’s a terror attack…
OBAMA: Now, Bill…
OBAMA: — Bill…
O’REILLY: — as an American…
OBAMA: — Bill — Bill…
O’REILLY: — I’m just confused.
OBAMA: And I’m — and I’m trying to explain it to, if you want to listen. The fact of the matter is is that people understood, at the time, something very dangerous was happening, that we were focused on making sure that we did everything we can — could — to protect them. In the aftermath, what became clear was that the security was lax, that not all the precautions and — that needed to be taken were taken and both myself and Secretary Clinton and others indicated as much.
Obama blames the FOX News blame game, good grief, how small of you.
O’REILLY: — but I just want to say that they’re — your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out.
OBAMA: Bill, think about…
O’REILLY: That’s what they believe.
OBAMA: – and they believe it because folks like you are telling them that.
O’REILLY: No, I’m not telling them that.
O’REILLY: I’m asking you whether you were told…
OBAMA: But — and what I’m saying is…
O’REILLY: — it was a terror attack and you…
OBAMA: — and what I’m saying is that is inaccurate.
On the IRS scandal where conservative and Tea Party groups were specifically targeted by the IRS, Obama says there was no corruption, not even a smidgeon of corruption.
O’REILLY: — so you’re saying there was no…
OBAMA: — if you are involved…
O’REILLY: — no corruption there at all, none?
OBAMA: That’s not what I’m saying.
OBAMA: That’s actually…
O’REILLY: No, no, but I want to know what…
OBAMA: — (INAUDIBLE)…
O’REILLY: — you’re saying. You’re the leader of the country.
O’REILLY: You’re saying no corruption?
OBAMA: There were some — there were some bone-headed decisions…
O’REILLY: Bone-headed decisions…
OBAMA: — out of — out of a local office…
O’REILLY: But no mass corruption?
OBAMA: Not even mass corruption, not even a smidgeon of corruption, I would say.
BTW, how about you wear a tie! Good grief, if you can’t act presidential, could you at least look presidential?
NBC, MSNBC Sink to Bottom of Who the Public Trusts as FOX News is the Most Trusted Name in News, AGAIN
What a shock, NBC and
BSNBC MSLSD MSNBC have sunk to the bottom of the media outlets that Americans trust most for their news. Wow, really? Who would have thought that the Peacock has turned into a propaganda network for the Obama administration? Imagine that “We the People” do not trust a media outlet like MSNBC that has to consistently apologize for hideous and heinous comments and tweets they make that are bigoted and racist. Oh, and the network that intentionally edited tapes to distort the news to make George Zimmerman a racists and misrepresent what actually happened. And what will make the LEFT howl as FOX News was named #1 by PPP. That would be named the most trusted name in news, AGAIN.
Fox News is the most trusted, with 35% choosing the “Fair and Balanced Network.”
MOST … Again
LEAST … who saw that coming?
NBC News and sister cable network MSNBC rank at the bottom of media outlets Americans trust most for news, with Fox News leading the way, according to a new poll from the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling.
In its fifth trust poll, 35 percent said they trusted Fox news more than any other outlet, followed by PBS at 14 percent, ABC at 11 percent, CNN at 10 percent, CBS at 9 percent, 6 percent for MSNBC and Comedy Central, and just 3 percent for NBC.
The pollster said Fox won because Republicans are devoted to it. “It leads the way because of its continuing near total support among Republicans as the place to go for news- 69 percent of Republicans say it’s their most trusted source with nothing else polling above 7 percent,” said PPP.
PPP’s 5th annual poll about trust in TV news continues to find what it does every year: Fox News is both the most trusted and least trusted name in news.
35% of Americans say they trust Fox News more than any other TV news outlet, followed by 14% for PBS, 11% for ABC, 10% for CNN, 9% for CBS, 6% each for Comedy Central and MSNBC, and 3% for NBC. It leads the way because of its continuing near total support among Republicans as the place to go for news- 69% of Republicans say it’s their most trusted source with nothing else polling above 7%.
NRO says it best, “If Democrats only have MSNBC at 12 percent, what’s the point of their liberal-bias programming? I’m no high-paid television executive, but these polling numbers suggest to me that hiring some true conservatives at CNN and MSNBC might translate into new viewer.”
How could this not be considered a conflict of interest?
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) questioned Attorney General Eric Holder on the impartiality and conflict of interest in the IRS investigation of conservative groups and Tea Party organizations by the IRS. To data no one has been held accountable, even though President Obama and Holder both initially proclaimed their outrage. However, of all the attorneys in the Justice department, he managed to find one to lead the investigation that was a big Obama campaign donor. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! What would happen if a Republican administration did the same? These folks are as corrupt as it gets.
“In the 280 days since that inspector general report, nobody has been indicted,” Cruz said. “Not a single person. In the 280 days since that inspector general report, it’s been publicly reported that no indictments are planned. Today in this hearing, you were unwilling to answer a question whether even a single victim of targeting has been interviewed.”
And, Cruz said, “most astonishingly, it has now been publicly reported that the lead lawyer heading the investigation was, No. 1, appointed from the civil rights division, which has historically been the most politically charged division in the Dept. of Justice. And even more astonishingly, is a major Democratic donor and donor to President Obama.”
Hmm, what does the Obama administration and IRS have to hide … I thought this was supposed to be the most transparent presidency ever? Time to appoint an independent prosecutor. Where is the MSM reporting this abuse of power?
Attorney General Eric Holder had a long day on Wednesday. He clashed with a number of no-nonsense lawmakers during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, including Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas).
Cruz pressed Holder on the Justice Department’s investigation into the IRS targeting scandal, calling the results of the probe “astonishing.”
“In my view, the integrity of the Department of Justice has been severely compromised,” Cruz told Holder. “Predecessors of yours in both parties, Democrat and Republican, when faced with serious charges of abuse of power for partisan gain have made the right decision and appointed special prosecutors.”
“I would call upon you to carry out the tradition of independence that attorneys general have honored that office with for centuries and protect the integrity of the Department of Justice,” he later added. “Given the political sensitivities, given the fact that individual citizens believe they are being persecuted by the federal government for partisan reasons.”
Full VIDEO fron CSPAN can be seen HERE.