Rep. Anthony Weiner had a rather notorious meltdown over the past week. Faced with accusations of sending lewd pics to women, he held a rather surreal, bizarre, and most definitely deceptive series of “interviews”.
First question that needs to be asked before I go any further:
I know hindsight’s 20/20. I know a lot of people will answer that they never did believe him now, when they probably did before. But, the bottom line was his “interviews” were so amazingly evasize and contrived that no one really believed him.
So, imagine everyone’s surprise last night when, faced with evidence from multiple, sometimes antagonistic sources, Weiner caved and confessed to doing it with at least six women.
There is one woman on Earth who still defends him tho.
I really have to quote her to make sure people realize the profoundness of Walters’ statement:
First of all, I have my own theory about why he took that picture, if indeed he did take that picture,” Walters said. “This is my theory – this doesn’t mean that it is right. He is married to this beautiful woman, whom I know, who a lot of us know, who the chief of staff to Hillary Clinton and she travels a lot. And it may be that he took that picture and sent it to his wife to say this is how much I miss you. That’s possible.”
Man, does she really believe that? Do you think she actually does?
According to Breitbart, there’s a lot more, much worse, to this story. I don’t doubt for one second Breitbart will hold back on him. Maybe Barbara Walters does for some bizarro reason. Most likely, due to her friendship with the Weiners, she’s in classic full-blown denial. I mean think about it Babs, even Nancy Pelosi is now demanding an ethics probe. For Nancy to diss on a Democrat, they had to be toast already.
My take, the guy’s your typical internet stalker getting his jollies on the side via digital gratifcation. The six women so far are just the tip of the iceberg. This is gonna get real ugly before it goes away. Rather than doing the honorable thing like Chris Lee did and resign, Weiner has already announced he’s not resigning and intends to fight this, and embarrass his district mercilessly until he’s gone.
Where it will get real ugly, real fast, IMO, is IF he hangs around, it’s gonna make that Obama “CHANGE you can believe in” campaign slogan seem like a really embarrassing farce. And if Obama’s peeps do what they truly need to do, I really do see another Blago moment occurring. This guy just doesn’t strike me as being discreet in any shape or fashion.
But, through it all, the one thing he can count on is Barbara Walters propping him up I suppose.
( Surreal moment #2 of this whole thing, Joy Behar defending Sarah Palin. Gag me with a flipping spoon! )
No sooner than I point out that in order for broadcast journalism to return to the days of the Cronkites and Reasoners, the companies supporting the industry would have to set their standards higher, MSNBC does just that.
Good-bye Keith Olbermann!
The Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee is hammering Andy Barr in Kentucky about as hard as you can:
You can’t trust Andy Barr for anything because he’s a criminal. Simple message. According to Bluegrass Politics it’s true too:
The ruling: True.
The facts: In 1993, as a 19-year-old college student vacationing in Key West, Fla., Barr was charged by police with possession of a fake Mississippi driver’s license. He pleaded guilty and was ordered to provide eight hours of community service, according to court records.
Their justification of why it’s true is that when he applied for state jobs he didn’t list that conviction. He felt it was “minor”. DCCC argues otherwise.
I think this is deceptive by Ben Chandler and the DCCC. What do you think?
[polldaddy poll="3944156"]
OK, so the lady who has vehemently opposed Bush’s tax cuts for the last eight years now supports most of those cuts as long as you don’t give any credit to Bush. Right? Or, does she truly think people will forget the tax cuts were implemented before Obama was President? Or, for that matter, the fact the tax cuts have been in place since before Obama was even a Senator? From the time he was elected to the Senate, and then to the Presidency, Obama ignored the fact that the tax cuts applied to pretty much everyone. The wealthy actually paid a heavier burden. So, what he’s been arguing for the last four years is simply a lie. Pelosi’s taking that lie to the next level. Obama’s never made a tax cut. Ever. He offered a one time bonus of $250, but that was an incentive, not a tax cut, and it’s a thing of the past. There is no “extension” here regarding Obama. None. “Middle-income tax cuts” is a beauty as well. By not INCREASING your taxes, she’s saying it’s a tax cut. They’re not cutting your taxes, not by a LONG SHOT.
If something’s the same as it ever was, it’s not a “cut”.
Second bottom line, here, Nancy sucks at Orwellian politics. She needs to get her facts straight. It’s going to confuse the hell out of historians who will now forever try to figure out how Obama passed tax cuts for everyone years before he was ever elected to anything and then spent the next eight years complaining about his tax cuts.
Someone should have yelled “Liar” at her. The BS coming from this administration is mind boggling at times.
Still waiting for her to drain the swamp.
7/22/2010: “Now that the heavy lifting is over, we can go out and make our case,”, Joe Biden. The legislative season is over. The big stuff is all done. No more contentious votes for a fwe months. Nancy Pelosi even went so far as to completely skip the funding process because of the increbible issue that this is an election year. Congress is now expedient.
7/29/2010: Ethics charges stemming back to 2007 are filed against Charlie Rangel. Obama refers to him in the past tense.
8/2/2010: Maxine Waters faces ethics charges regarding her making sure her husband’s bank received special considerations by investigators. Obama hasn’t referred to her in the past tense yet.
Nancy Pelosi, vowing to keep on keeping on cleansing the Democrat culture of corruption, added these strong words:
Just call it a hunch.
It’s now come to light that apparently felons in Minnesota gave us Al Franken. Imagine that.
Nancy Pelosi has promised us that she will do everything in her power to diligently uphold the highest ethical standards in Congress that she possibly can and not allow HER Congress to return to the moral and ethical abyss that it was when she was in charge of it under a previous administration by dutifully doing nothing in regards to this information that a fellow member of her own party was possibly improperly elected.
When awoken with the news, Franken had no comment. MSNBC, CBS, and CNN have rushed to assure none of their peeps comment either.
Pete Stark did his best in his effort to win the honor of most unhinged Representative. It’s damn good too. Hank Johnson going into obsessive detail over his concern of Guam tipping over ranks right up there as well. Nancy Pelosi confidently assuring us that once we pass health care reform we’ll find out what’s in it is a personal favorite of mine, but didn’t seem to get much traction with the public. Harry Reid confidently assuring us that losing 36,000 jobs could have been much, much, worse was pretty good as well.
Now, Ciro Rodriguez has jumped into the fray with his latest town hall chat:
Clue, perhaps?
H/T: Big Governmant and Dave the Sage at ConstitutionClub.
16
Jan
Transparency is a word that wasn’t used a whole lot up until a couple of years ago. Convinced Bush and his cronies were making all the important decisions behind closed doors, Obama started preaching about the need for transparency. A lot of people took it to mean that if elected, Obama would open his doors to anyone so that they could see how honest and forthright he truly was. Very quickly Obama assured people that’s not what he had in mind. The culmination of that was Joe Biden having a meeting on transparency. That meeting of course, was closed to the media. People immediately started saying things to the effect of “WTF”. How can you possibly have a closed door meeting on transparency. It’s simple. Let’s go back to what Obama actually said about transparency:
I do not believe that government should stand in the way of innovation, or turn back the clock to an older era of regulation. But I do believe that government has a role to play in advancing our common prosperity: by providing stable macroeconomic and financial conditions for sustained growth; by demanding transparency; and by ensuring fair competition in the marketplace.
No guarantees he would be transparent there.
We must investigate rating agencies and potential conflicts of interest with the people they are rating. And transparency requirements must demand full disclosure by financial institutions to shareholders and counterparties.
No guarantees he would be transparent there.
I fought in the Senate for the most extensive ethics reform since Watergate. I have refused contributions from federal lobbyists and PACs. And I have laid out far-reaching plans that I intend to sign into law as President to bring transparency to government, and to end the revolving door between industries and the federal agencies that oversee them.
He doesn’t say WHICH government he expects to be transparent now does he?
In the more than two centuries since then, we have struggled to balance the same forces that confronted Hamilton and Jefferson – self-interest and community; markets and democracy; the concentration of wealth and power, and the necessity of transparency and opportunity for each and every citizen.
He clearly states that he expects YOU to be transparent as a citizen. However, as Clinton clearly demonstrated, Presidents are not citizens.
So, there you have it. Obama said he expected business to be transparent, citizens to be transparent, some agencies to be transparent, and some government to be transparent. He never stated HE would be transparent, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t be either. So, having closed door meetings to discuss transparency makes all the sense in the world. If anyone infers otherwise, Obama supporters will think of clever insults to taunt you.
New Jersey’s having all kinds of fun over the last week or so. Here’s some of their local headlines:
And from the New York Post:
CNN ran it as a headline:
No party affiliations mentioned.
Wolf Blitzer?
“Dozens of public figures, including mayors, are caught in a stunning corruption sweep. They belong to both major parties.”
Deborah Feyerick?
“nearly 30 politicians and public officials, Democrats and Republicans, were rounded up in what prosecutors called the largest sweep of its kind.”
ABC, CBS, and NBC all ran stories during their evening broadcasts, not one mention of party affiliation. So, sounds like a bipartisan affair doesn’t it? By my best guess, this bipartisan affair now includes 42 Democrats and 4 Republicans including people working for the Democrat governor. Among the usual charges of taking bribes and the like, a rabbi is charged along with one of them as well as one pandering human organs.
“An ethical cloud hangs over the Capitol, … This culture of corruption must stop. … The American people deserve better.” – Nancy Pelosi. Maybe it will stop when media starts reporting ethically.
Nancy Pelosi is sure of two things:
- No Democrat has ever done anything deceptive or the least bit beyond reproach. Ever.
- All Republicans and the CIA have lied to her. A lot.
Which leads to the obvious conclusion one has to come to when they see headlines like this:
Shortly after seeing a headline like this:
That maybe it’s not the CIA agents “misleading” Pelosi, but rather someone who looks an awful lot like this guy:
One Democrat is a confessed liar, the other one is the one I’m talking about. Ya think Nancy would ever admit that?
Nah, she’ll just claim Leon Panetta has another big lie he’s been telling her for a decade. He’s really Republican.
