This is a War on Women Update!

As of Today January 28th 2014 it is day 569 since Boston Democrat Representative Carlos Henriquez was arrested & charged with Domestic Assault & Domestic Kidnapping.

As of Today it day 14 since Boston Democrat Representative was convicted of Assaulting and sentenced to six months in jail.

Carlos Henriquez remains a Democrat Representative in the Massachusetts General Court (The State Legislature)

Perhaps if Senator Rand Paul or Governor Mike Huckabee critiqued Representative Henriquez his name this Democrat combatant in the war on women might be as newsworthy to the national media as a mayor of a city in another country.

Maybe Dem Rep Carlos Henriquez is planning on using the “she kinda asked for it defense” that is apparently a feminist MSNBC & Washington Post approved defense of Bill Clinton

Anyone who reads this blog knows that other than the Grandfather speech (which I STILL think should be memorized and repeated by every GOP candidate, particularly Tea Party ones everywhere) Chris Christie is not my guy for 2016 although of course the choice of him or Clinton et/al of the left supporting him would be very easy in 2016.

However I would be remiss if I didn’t point out the seemingly huge difference between the standards that Chris Christie is being held to vs Barack Obama.

——————————

Yesterday Chris Christie spent 107 minutes answering every possible question that every journalist who had a question wanted to ask to the point where .

Can anyone imagine Barack Obama doing this on Benghazi, or the IRS, or Fast & Furious?

———————————

Yesterday you actually had reporters complaining about the number of questions Chris Christie was answering it was noted both on the right

and on the left

Can you imagine the media complaining about too much access to Barack Obama?

—————————–

Yesterday (and this morning) members of the press were going on about what this scandal says about the “atmosphere” in Trenton where aides thought such behavior was OK.

Nobody in the media thinks IRS, Benghazi or Fast & Furious say anything about the atmosphere at the white house.

—————————-

People are (legitimately) asking if the principles in this case acted alone to wit:

Yet ask the same person if they think Lois Lerner acted alone and the response is….interesting.

and

Being Sicilian “You’ve got nothing has a particular meaning”

As I recall Capone was never convicted of bootlegging or murder.

————————————

In terms of coverage this WAS the news yesterday:

The Big Three networks, in a frenzy over New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s traffic headache dubbed “Bridgegate,” have devoted a whopping 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage to the affair in just the last 24 hours.

Meanwhile on the IRS scandal

As a comparison over the last six months, NBC featured a scant five seconds on updating the IRS story. CBS responded with a minute and 41 seconds. ABC produced a meager 22 seconds.

Although the media downplayed the IRS controversy from July through December (it first broke in May), it’s not as though there wasn’t much happening. As the Media Research Center documented, many potential story leads developed.

In December, House investigator Darrell Issa announced that the FBI and IRS chief counsel is stonewalling the investigation. In October, newly obtained e-mails showed that the scandal-plagued Lois Lerner, the woman at the center of the controversy, illegally gave Tea Party tax info to the FEC. That same month, it came out that an IRS official may have given confidential information to the White House.

I could go on and on but there is in fact one thing that both the Chris Christie Bridge Gate and the Obama IRS scandal have in common

Chris Christie is being investigated on bridgegate by a Democrat Donor:

Paul J. Fishman, the U.S. attorney tasked with looking into New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s bridge controversy, has donated to several Democratic politicians and organizations, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Barack Obama is being investigated by a Democrat donor too.

The Justice Department selected an avowed political supporter of President Obama to lead the criminal probe into the IRS targeting of tea party groups, according to top Republicans who said Wednesday that the move has ruined the entire investigation.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell E. Issa, California Republican, and regulatory affairs subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan, Ohio Republican, said they have discovered that the head of the investigation is Barbara Kay Bosserman, a trial lawyer in the Justice Department who donated more than $6,000 to Mr. Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns, as well as several hundred dollars to the national Democratic Party.

Robert Stacy McCain put it well

Could you imagine the outcry if Christie appointed one of his own to dig into this?

————————————

And as the first the 24 hours of “Bridgegate” ends there is still a lot to learn. We don’t know how this is going to end, if it will destroy Chris Christie’s presidential ambitions, if there will be smoking guns found, we don’t know what will be proved as time goes on. There is however one thing that these 24 hours have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt.

It doesn’t matter if you are the most popular, reasonable or bi-partisan republican in the world, you are going to be treated differently and given more scrutiny than any democrat by the Media.

The Obama administration has known & understood this for years and acts accordingly.

I have no idea if Chris Christie knew this before yesterday, but if he didn’t know it before, he knows it now and should act accordingly

Update: The Lonely Conservative notices and Hotair says this:

Really? The DoJ doesn’t see any potential conflict of interest in assigning a checkbook partisan of that magnitude to an investigation into whether partisans in another executive-branch agency may have targeted political opponents of her preferred side? That’s absurd, but hardly surprising from a DoJ that investigated itself in Fast and Furious, and an administration that investigated itself in the NSA scandal, and issued itself clean bills of health in both cases.

How about with political appointees? That rule wouldn’t apply, no? Then why is a campaign donor to Democrats heading the Bridgegate investigation?

Given the pass this administration has been given I don’t see why they would act in any other way.

Update 2: via Newsbusters:

Can I get a Bazinga!

***********************************************

Olimometer 2.52

It’s Friday and we are a full $217 shy of making this week’s paycheck & payroll.

With last week’s shortfall 2014 is starting on a pretty sour note

The only person who can change this is you, please help us start the year strong by hitting DaTipJar below

Remember if we can get those 58 1/4 subscribers @ at $20 a month the bills will be paid every week. Help make sure this blog can fight without fear all year long.




 

Read more:

Leonard: I was a perfectly happy, geeky, little lonely guy, and you ruined me!

Penny: Are you drunk?

Leonard: Come on. We’re gonna have sex, and it’s not gonna mean a thing!

Penny: Are you out of your mind?!

Leonard: I’m really starting to think there’s a double standard here.

The Big Bang Theory The Lunar Excitation 2010

via Hot Air headlines I see that David Axelrod has decided he’s all Weinered out:

David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Obama, said Sunday that former Rep. Anthony Weiner is “delusional” and should drop out of the race for New York City mayor.

 

“I think it’s time for him to go away and let New York have its mayor’s race,” Axelrod said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

I’m rather curious by this declaration.  Was not David Axelrod a democrat in 1998?  I don’t seem to recall him calling for the resignation of Bill Clinton.
Unlike Weiner whose actions were online.  Bill Clinton was receiving actual oral sex from a White House intern at the time and lied about it even under oath.  In fact I seem to recall every democrat in the Senate and all but 5 democrats in the house voting against impeachment and/removal from office of President Clinton for the actions and an event on the lawn led by Al Gore with a bunch of Democrats behind him supporting the president at the time.
In fact I recall Nina Burleigh famously declaring during the Lewinsky scandal she would break out her presidential kneepads to thank Bill Clinton support for Abortion.  Here is the quote:

“I would be happy to give him [Clinton] a blow job just to thank him for keeping abortion legal. I think American women should be lining up with their presidential kneepads on to show their gratitude for keeping the theocracy off our backs.”

Isn’t Anthony Weiner pro-abortion too?
So my question is this:
Can someone explain to me why Anthony Weiner’s behavior is beyond the pale to run for NYC Mayor but Bill Clinton’s behavior was acceptable to serve as president? 
Just asking….

Ben Franklin: Mr. Dickinson I’m surprised at you, a rebellion is always legal in the first person, such as “our rebellion.” It is only in the third person – “their rebellion” – that it becomes illegal.

1776 1972

We’ve been hearing all about how it’s necessary to get dangerous weapons away from fringe extremists. Every day MSNBC has been pummeling the 4 million members of the NRA and Morning “565k viewers” Joe has calling them fringe extremists.

I can certainly understand their worry. If you take a group of political extremists who fanatically believe in their cause and the evil of their enemies it doesn’t take much for them to device to try to slaughter recently re-elected executive who they consider a tyrant.

If the NRA isn’t stopped I’m sure it’s only a matter of time until we see stories like this on MSNBC:

The man, Kvon R. Smith, had reportedly used Facebook to threaten to do harm at the Capitol. Law enforcement was ready for him and arrested him as he attempted to enter the building. Smith then reportedly claimed to have a Molotov cocktail in his backpack. Police evacuated portions of the capitol building and a bomb squad reportedly arrived and handled the backpack. Police did not say whether or not the backpack contained the explosive device the man allegedly claimed it did.

And then discover that such a fellow has been on twitter talking politics .

Why I wouldn’t be surprised if such a guy even made videos showing his Molotov cocktails on facebook.

And when it happens we’ll demand strong statements from the right, like this:

Political violence is terrible and we must vigorously condemn it where ever we even suspect it; thus is the rule for all those violent-minded Tea Partiers. We must make it clear to them that political violence is unacceptable. And those who don’t make that clear — opinion leaders on the right, for example, who don’t condemn the idea of political violence upon command — are aiding and abetting the violence, encouraging it through their silence, their tacit approval.

The public can be sure that the good folks at MSNBC in general and Morning Joe in particular will lead with the story, decry those who promote such political violence and vigorously question those who might be the political allies to make sure they feel the heat for supporting and encouraging such unstable people ready to commit murder for a cause.

Unless of course like Tuesday the person is an occupied, his target is Republican Scott Walker and his political persuasion is support of the left and Barack Obama.

If that’s the case then MSNBC and Morning Joe will react thus:

Oh just a note. Morning Joe started 54 minutes ago.   Not a word about this yet…

…nothing to see here, move along.

Our friends on the left and particularly in the media, are very loud and proud about declaring their opposition to guns. That is until it hits home:

If you want to know why James O’Keefe is so hated by the left, it’s simple, he shows them for what they are.

If you have a right to know who has a gun doesn’t that automatically mean you have a right to know who doesn’t?

There was, and still is a misunderstanding concerning what indulgences in the Catholic Church are. The best example I can give Civil vs criminal. The forgiveness of Christ means no criminal charges, an indulgence means no civil charges either.

There is however apparently a new indulgence now being offered today, an indulgence that is more impressive and more powerful in our modern society than any Plenary indulgence that prayer and fasting can bring. It’s an indulgence that can turn violence into legit protest, racism into innocent remarks and even overrides the famous words: “If it bleeds it leads”.

It’s the letter “D” and the liberal belief it represents

When one gives lip service to liberalism one is granted the ultimate indulgence

With that letter D next to your name, remarks that would disqualify you from office that would tar you as a racist become innocent.

With the letter D next to your name, you can skip the NAACP convention without judgement.

With the letter D next to your name sexual harassment suits become unnewsworthy and scandals that slay secret service agents and hundreds of innocents can be ignored.

With the letter D next to your name gas prices, unemployment and particularly black unemployment won’t will have no political consequences nor will the media find it worthy of note.

With the letter D you can vote for a tax one session then declare just as it is coming into effect that it’s a job killer that should be stopped yet you won’t be questioned.

And if you service the causes supported by the Letter D the power is even greater.

With the D before your name You can keep the poor in poverty in the cities yet you are considered their defender.

With the D upon you, shootings can take place within the minority community and nobody will march on your town.

With the D no amount of damage from a Hurricane nor tardiness of aid or bureaucratic problems can place blame upon you.

If you serve the D your violent movement and your motives are washed clean, no matter how many incidents of violence you commit.

With that Mystic Letter D, you can beat people on camera, call Black Men “Nigger” and destroy their business property and the media will say they had it coming, assuming they say anything at all.

You can even allow a successful attack on 9/11 and the death of American and with the letter D before your name no blame will fall upon you.

All from the power of the letter D and the indulgences granted by the media who are rewarded from above with fame, status and when high enough on the chain a well funded and a comfortable time for the rest you their days…

…but unlike the true indulgences of the church which come into play at that very time, after that, you’re on your own.

Legal Insurrection doesn’t get it:

The mainstream media is silent about the union violence in general because it does not fit their narrative, and the racist conduct of the union members is off limits. “Progressives” are spreading conspiracy theories that this all was staged.

This is covered by the indulgence, nothing to see here.

Lee Stranahan doesn’t get it either interview not withstanding:

Stacy Misses it too:

NBC/Universal, CBS/Viacom, ABC/Disney, CNN/Time-Warner — the highly profitable conglomerates that run Big Media are seldom called out by the lefties that rant deliriously against “Wall Street.” And whatever the idealism of their employees, there is something quaintly naive in the notion that the goal of Viacom is to tell the truth.

It has nothing to do with profit they support the left thus they are covered by the media indulgence.

Today Stacy McCain notes an odd narrative.

After yesterday’s incident in which labor union activists tore down an Americans for Prosperity tent in Lansing and sucker-punched Stephen Crowder, this headline zoomed up the Memorandum aggregation:

Breitbart Folks Appear to Fake Violence in Lansing

Huh? This was a decidedly odd piece of blogging.

Not so odd when you consider the goal involved is as he put it the “perversion of the narrative” Stacy continues:

Crowder is being smashed “through a plate glass window,” so to speak. If conservative New Media and citizen-journalists call attention to such an incident, that very fact — the involvement of conservatives, and their interest in the incident as news — will be leveraged by liberals as part of the counter-narrative to discredit and de-legitimize the story.

So it doesn’t matter to Marcy Wheeler at “Emptywheel” whether her bizarre version of what happened in Lansing is true or even rationally plausible. She has no interest in truth.

She only cares about “winning.”

In this case, “winning” means providing reporters with some flimsy pretext for ignoring what actually happened yesterday: Union thugs physically attacked their opponents in broad daylight.

Is she winning? Let’s take a quick screen shot of the Memeorandum link today:

Note that both conservative and liberal sites are below the link, now lets look at a wider shot:

Note what is missing from the conservative primary links, any link from a liberal site or primary news site other than FOX.

Marcy Wheeler’s purpose is clear, to create a sheltered narrative for the crowd, as Stacy McCain suggests to give media an excuse to ignore facts already in evidence and as you can see some of the strongest and best funded sites of the left are flocking to it.

Deny Deny Deny!

While as we see that effort has met with some success on Memeorandum the Deny Deny Deny strategy has not been uniformly successful as evidenced by this clip from MSNBC’s Morning Joe.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This suggests Wheeler’s efforts have failed to some degree as this was showed TWICE on MSNBC this morning and I give the entire Morning Joe crew a lot of credit the hosts were united in condemning the Union violence while disagreeing with the merits of the bill. They get full marks for bucking the trend.

Stacy McCain question is however still relevant.

If the basic facts of the story check out, then does this not also prove that Marcy Wheeler at “Emptywheel” is a contemptible liar?

And, strange to say, when I did a Google search just now, it led me directly to a Pastebin file by . . . Ron Brynaert.

Maybe this is just a coincidence. Or maybe not.

I don’t think it is coincidence because that same search led me to this post at Patterico where he wrote about this woman years ago at the start of the Acron business saying

OK, now on to Marcy Wheeler. Her post is titled NYT Thinks TeaBugger James O’Keefe Entitled to Own Set of Facts. And she says . . . wait. What is that term? “Teabugger”? Oh, I get it. It’s like “tea bagger” — only the word “bugger” is substituted . . . a reference to O’Keefe’s “bugging,” which it’s now clear he did not do. So it’s a joke name based on a lie. Which tells you all you need to know about Marcy Wheeler.

Anyway, Wheeler sez:

Brad Friedman lays out an entire exchange that, first, one of their readers, and then Brad Friedman himself had with the NYT, attempting to get them to either correct or back up the claim that O’Keefe dressed as a pimp.

Except that, again, the paper never made that claim in the way (at least in the way that Wheeler means, if you read her post).

Also, all three bloggers repeatedly refer to a supposedly “independent” report by a guy paid by ACORN, which makes various findings totally at odds with the unedited audio that the report (and all three bloggers) refuse to acknowledge even exists. (Did you know there is unedited audio? In all the whining about the lack of unedited video, did anyone ever bother to tell you that you can listen to the full unedited audio of these visits? It’s true! Click the link if you don’t believe me.)

In short, these three are pathetic hacks.

So two years ago we have Marcy Wheeler apparently coordinating with Eric Boehlert and Brad Friedman to create a false narrative out of a true narrative that hurts liberalism in order to suppress it and today she again tries to create a false narrative and is embraced by the names of the left and MSNBC.

That brings to mind a basic question Qui Bono? Who benefits? Well it benefits the Teamsters, MSNBC, Think Progress and Media Matters if they can seeming be not the point of origin for that narrative, but it also begs the question that was asked and repeated on last week’s DaTechGuy on DaRadio show on the Brett Kimberlin crowd. Who is financing and paying for this?

I think that question is at the heart of the Kimberlin crowd because thanks to Stacy’s post of today and Patterico’s post of 2010 we know the purpose of those like Marcy Wheeler, we just don’t know who is paying for it.

Wouldn’t it be fun to find out?

Pre-Post Update:

Via Jammie Wearing Fool and the Toledo Blade:

Actual News Report From Lansing: ‘The protests were mostly peaceful’

What a coincidence, the description of “mostly peaceful” would be an accurate description of those who attended the play “Our American Cousin” at Ford’s Theater on April 15th 1965

deny Deny DENY!

Update 2: And lets not forget that the use of the word “Nigger” as a pejorative and the destruction of a black man’s business is not uncalled for or even a reason for critique if said person is perceived as opposing the position of a democrat constituency

I suspect this Memeorandum Thread will not contain a lot of left leaning sites

Beating people, destroying black business, calling black people Nigger, all forgiven if done against the right people by the right people. Apparently voting correctly is the ultimate indulgence as far as the MSM and left is concerned.

Update 3: Jim Treacher asks the question concerning Clint:

Now, I do hope somebody will explain to me how this isn’t racist. An overwhelmingly white crowd goes after a black man who’s just trying to make a living. Defend yourselves, racists.

Easy, their actions are protected under the Obama/Liberal version of the Bill of Rights

Update 4: Union thugs destroy Black Man’s business one day, 600+ people online pay to replace it the next

Today I saw a tweet from Michael Graham about becoming an Honorary Girl

I clicked on it, and saw his post which referred to a story lat the Boston Globe:

The chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, rallying state delegates before the Democratic National Convention, today said that Senator Scott Brown tried to portray himself as “an honorary girl” by folding laundry in a TV commercial targeting women voters.

Chairman John Walsh made the comment in a blistering opening statement at the delegation’s first breakfast meeting before the convention kicks off Tuesday. Brown is facing a stern reelection challenge from Democrat Elizabeth Warren, who will address the convention on Wednesday night.

Mind you this was not a single congressman speaking in an interview. This was the Massachusetts Democrat Party Chairman speaking at a DNC breakfast to the Massachusetts delegation.

The Globe Story continues:

Asked about his “honorary girl” comment afterward, the chairman told the Globe that he was being “fresh.”

Michael Graham snarks over it

Hey, John—I fold laundry. I do dishes, too. And I love to cook. So am I an “honorary girl,” too?

That’s funny but not the point. How did the delegation react? Did they clap, did they boo? How was he not shouted down? Where are the members of the delegation denouncing the comment on camera? These are remarks made by a Democrat Party State Charmian at the Democrat Party’s National Convention, a convention featuring Sandra Fluke and nobody’s talking? Where is Debbie Wasserman Schultz calling for his resignation? Where is Stephanie Cutter demanding he apologize? Where is Barack Obama or even former Obama Administration official Elizabeth Warren distancing herself from this chairman?

And where on earth is the MSM?, I saw this on Twitter TWITTER! How is it that the media that was all Todd Akin all the time not doing wall to wall coverage on this remark? They aren’t just excusing this remark, they are SILENT.

If you didn’t understand that the “War on Women” business was as phony as a $3 bill before, you sure ought to now.

Sheldon:  Is the Whip App contextually appropriate here?

Leonard:  Yes, but I think you waited too long for it to be funny

(Sheldon runs Whip app all laugh

Leonard:  I was wrong it’s still funny

Big Bang Theory 2012

For the last several days on Facebook on twitter and during at least one segment on Morning Joe there has been unrestrained laughter concerning the president and his youthful culinary choices all those years ago.

We’ve seen posts, tweets on Obama dog recipes , a vast array of Photoshops, the return of the puppy blender meme and cartoons like this one:

and a return of the puppy blender meme , we’ve had dogs against Obama and the amusing spectacle of “Dogs against Romney” blogger insisting that eating your dog is no big dealI’m the dish of the day, can I interest you in parts of my body?”

Odd that I don’t see any comments questioning his defense of the president, you would think he is not allowing contrary opinions or something?

We’ve also seen some serious questions too; Why didn’t media who rushed to pick up his book Dreams of my Father know this (I think they did but team Obama counted on their silence) , How does this damage the president long term “the one thing everybody will remember is Obama ate a dog”, What does it mean for leftist comedians , and of course the media double standard:

See, when Romney puts a dog on a car roof, it’s a job for Diane Sawyer. When Obama eats one*, it’s a goofy Jeanne Moos story. And isn’t it interesting that an incident from 1983 couldn’t be more current, but quoting one of Obama’s books is “dredging” it up? Guess it all depends on which party is embarrassed about it.

which is why the MSM wants to let sleeping dogs lie (their words not mine).

All of these questions are interesting, but they are missing the only real question that matters:

Are Obama eating dog jokes still funny?

After seeing this tweet from John McCain and the outraged twitter reaction of the left to it:

Yep still funny.

Heh HEH!