Cruz and Lucifer critique haunts Ted

At a speech at Standford, John Boehner was asked what he thought of Ted Cruz.
Might as well teed that up on a par one for him.

“Lucifer in the flesh,” Boehner said. “I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life.”

“I never worked with John Boehner. Truth is, I don’t know him that well,” Cruz said in his revocation of John Boehner standing next to his new running mate, Carly Fiorina.

Cruz never worked with him. Ted was his lawyer back in the 90’s. Cruz even won a case getting Boehner a million dollars for legal fees. Ted must have a selective memory.

Boehner is actually surprised

Who’d have thunk…but he shouldn’t be shocked.

To the latest utterance from Boehner that he is surprised by “‘the boldness of the Iranians’ in exerting their influence”, Alan Keyes takes him to task on his ignorance.

Willfully or not, John Boehner studiously ignored the background and implications of Obama’s coherent, consistent “foreign policy”. (I hedge that phrase to suggest its use in a different sense, one that refers to policies dictated by goals and allegiances foreign to America’s principles and hostile to our material and moral good.) Sadly, I am not surprised to find that Mr. Boehner’s belated recognition of “the boldness of the Iranians” is not accompanied by an honest acknowledgment of the boldness of Obama’s treasonous betrayals of the constitutional self-government of the American people. — Dr Alan Keyes

Read more at http://barbwire.com/2015/04/08/1000-boehners-surprise-is-just-incredible/

It is worth a read, though it is no surprise Keyes has been calling for an impeachment-of-last-resort for Obama. Of course the current realities and laws of probability of that happening, or Boehner bringing it up in his quest for normalcy, are at about zero. The main reason being it is not politically palatable. But I wonder how politically palatable it is to be surprised by Iran’s bold actions or statements? (see Casablanca) Is Boehner living in some alternative reality?

In the event of impeachment, all the dastardly deeds of Obama and his administration would spill out and flood the public conscience. Boehner can’t have that. In his brain, it would not be good for politics either. So basically whatever Obama cares to do, and whatever he brings upon the country, he knows he has carte blanche for whatever he wants. The wicked irony is that all options are on the table in Obama’s scheming world. But Boehner must accept some accountability for those results.

Please note: impeachment has been taken off the table due to lack of public demand.

Please don’t Judas me

Speaker Boehner made a weekly press release tied to the “destructive” comments from Obama’s adviser, the notorious Susan Rice.

“The president’s national security advisor says it’s destructive for the prime minister of Israel to address the United States Congress. I couldn’t disagree more,” Boehner said.

“The American people and both parties in Congress have always stood with Israel and nothing, and no one, could get in the way.” – Jerusalem Post

Well, that is no One but Obama and until now! Nothing but nothing will get in Obama’s way of talking with Iran though — even if it is destructive to everything else, and all other relationships. They are almost possessed by that.

Several Democrats have said they will skip the speech. Some said, like Obama, that it is inappropriate for Netanyahu to address the US Congress just two weeks before Israeli elections. Others said they do not want a foreign leader weighing in on US foreign affairs. – More> Jerusalem Post

Another one in the breach for the GOP House

Cantor sabotages conservatives in quest for speakership

FEE! Fie! Foe! Fum! I smell the blood of a speaker.

04/08/2014 | The Daily Caller

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is intentionally sidelining one of his own Republican committee chairmen — and the chairman’s attempts to pass conservative reforms — in order to better secure his own path to the speakership.

Informed sources in the House, Senate and outside groups tell The Daily Caller that a shift in leadership is going to come sooner than expected, and Cantor is fighting hard for the new spot.

Speaker of the House John Boehner will likely step down if the Republicans fail to take the Senate in 2014; and even if Republicans do win, the rumor is Boehner isn’t interested in sticking around in the unpopular gig for too long anyway. This leaves his top deputy, Cantor, in a strong position to succeed Boehner at the helm in the next two years, and Cantor’s aspirations for the speakership are obvious.

Cantor’s alleged target, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Rep. Jeb Hensarling, poses a rare threat to Cantor’s rise: He has strong conservative bona fides, once heading the conservative Republican Study Committee and often fighting for conservative reforms. He has also been around long enough – including serving as chairman of the House Republican Conference – to earn the respect of more moderate, “establishment” Republicans.

It’s not certain Hensarling even wants to be speaker, with sources close to him playing coy, but it’s clear to conservatives that Cantor sees his colleague as a threat to his rise.

“Hensarling appeals to conservatives, with maybe a slight apprehension that he’s not fire breathing anymore, but still a principled, trustworthy conservative,” a leading conservative Republican, who worked closely with Hensarling, told TheDC. “He also appeals to moderates, and is reasonable in how he runs his committee — he reaches across the aisle.”

Cantor’s strategy to sideline Hensarling begins with killing his policy initiatives, and robbing him of political successes. When Hensarling suggested reforms to flood insurance, Republican leadership bypassed him. His attempts to abolish Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also been ignored — despite overwhelming outside support from conservative juggernauts like Heritage Action and Club for Growth.

“This is all 100 percent coming from Cantor,” one ranking Senate source with ties to the situation told TheDC, “and this is all angling for Boehner’s job. The case Cantor’s going to make is ‘I’m next in line.’ Hensarling may [otherwise] say ‘You’re next in line, but who’s doing all the work? Who’s the one passing all the bills? Who do you want to lead you, a conservative doing reform or a guy with wishy-washy bills?’”

Cantor, sources say, can and is neutering his career threat – especially the “passing all the bills” bit.

“That’s how I see it, personally,” the Hill officer who previously worked with Hensarling told TheDC. “That’s how a lot of folks in the Hensarling office see it.”

More The Daily Caller

Almost too sickening to read the play by play. There’s an ongoing battle. Cantor would not be happy if he is not the golden anointed one — if Boehner goes. And it looks natural that Boehner is going, one way or another. Not if but how soon?

Boehner calls vote for Select Committee

Boehner Announces Establishment of Select Committee on Benghazi

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
May 2, 2014 2:05 pm

House Speaker John Boehner (R.-Ohio) announced on Friday that the House will vote to establish a select committee to investigate the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

“Americans learned this week that the Obama Administration is so intent on obstructing the truth about Benghazi that it is even willing to defy subpoenas issued by the standing committees of the People’s House,” said Boehner in a statement. “These revelations compel the House to take every possible action to ensure the American people have the truth about the terrorist attack on our consulate that killed four of our countrymen.”

Majority leader Eric Cantor (R.-Va.) echoed the sentiments of Boehner in a separate statement on the establishment of the Benghazi committee.

“The Obama Administration’s continued obstruction has made clear that it is time for a House Select Committee to force the Administration to end its stonewalling and come clean to congressional investigators, an inquiring media, and the American public.” said Cantor.

“Four Americans died at the hands of terrorists nearly 20 months ago, and we are still missing answers, accountability, and justice. It’s time that change,” added Boehner.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/boehner-announces-establishment-of-select-committee-on-benghazi/

What took you so long. Eric Cantor has the same question to answer. What a difference an email makes, uh? Now they both have the same question to answer: why did this email make you finally call for the Select Committee? Was it the White House answers after or the emails themselves, or is it that you finally think its ready(ripe) for a real investigation?

Maybe you should all explain that for us. Inquiring minds would like to know. You could have already had the committee in place. And now the Left will say it’s just political posturing for the election. Never mind that an election, and politics, were the chief motives behind the scandal. While we can be happy you finally took the step, your motives are just as suspect about why you waited this long. And why did you have to be coerced into it?

Benghazi black hole

Not much has changed since these clips.

Oh, “the kind of insanity we’re dealing with.”


The outrage goes on. Boehner, complicit or just complacent?

Did CIA’s Mike Morell Lie Under Oath About Changing the Benghazi Talking Points?

April 2, 2014

After former acting CIA Director Mike Morell testified to the House Intelligence Committee that he is the one who changed the Benghazi talking points, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) renewed her call for a select committee to investigate the attack. She suggested that Morell either lied to senators shortly after the attack, or lied during his testimony today.

4 Dead in Benghazi
“Should have been done long ago.”
“How can you run when you know?”

What will it take?
 

Benghazi attack could have been prevented if US hadn’t ‘switched sides in the War on Terror’ and allowed $500 MILLION of weapons to reach al-Qaeda militants, reveals damning report

Citizens Committee on Benghazi claims the US government allowed arms to flow to al-Qaeda-linked militants who opposed Muammar Gaddafi
Their rise to power, the group says, led to the Benghazi attack in 2012
The group claims the strongman Gaddafi offered to abdicate his presidency, but the US refused to broker his peaceful exit
The commission, part of the center-right Accuracy In Media group, concluded that the Benghazi attack was a failed kidnapping plot
US Ambassador Chris Stevens was to be captured and traded for ‘blind sheikh’ Omar Abdel-Rahman, who hatched the 1993 WTC bombing plot

By David Martosko, U.s. Political Editor

Published: 15:09 EST, 22 April 201 | Daily Mail UK

The Citizens Commission on Benghazi, a self-selected group of former top military officers, CIA insiders and think-tankers, declared Tuesday in Washington that a seven-month review of the deadly 2012 terrorist attack has determined that it could have been prevented – if the U.S. hadn’t been helping to arm al-Qaeda militias throughout Libya a year earlier.

‘The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,’ Clare Lopez, a member of the commission and a former CIA officer, told MailOnline.

She blamed the Obama administration for failing to stop half of a $1 billion United Arab Emirates arms shipment from reaching al-Qaeda-linked militants.

‘Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea,’ Lopez claimed. ‘They were permitted to come in. … [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed..

‘The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.’

The weapons were intended for Gaddafi but allowed by the U.S. to flow to his Islamist opposition.

More: Dailymail.co.UK
 

Hillary Clinton Cancels Appearance Where Benghazi Victim’s Mom, Protestors Await

April 4, 2014

Hillary Clinton was the planned keynote speaker at the 17th Annual Western Healthcare Leadership Academy in San Diego on April 11 – but she’s cancelled her visit in the midst of planned protests from San Diego locals and military families.

Protestors organized by “The Difference Matters” do not want the former U.S. Secretary of State to come because of Clinton’s role in the Benghazi scandal.

What difference, at this point, does it make?”
How can you run when you know?

Can We Talk ?

Some things need to be said but the right people are not always listening.

I was commenting on Necessary and Proper Gov’t and saw things that inspired this. The subject there was the shape conservatives are in, and where it’s going. And Jeff suggested a David Horowitz article. It’s fairly long but if you check it out, you won’t be disappointed. Horowitz always brings a good perspective few others do.

David says it is time for a different dialogue. I agree. Some on the right mean well in zealously arguing for conservative ideas. That’s fine, but is it enough? I don’t think so, not even close. Here’s a hint, I know many conservatives get in the trenches and actually read articles. But Progressives do things different. Talking points are spoon fed to the left, from the top,  so Libs don’t have to read or decide.

We are up against a talking point battle. The public often only hears soundbites. It’s not their fault that is the way politics are on the left. Like Horowitz said: we hear about the war on women, on the poor, racism etc. It doesn’t matter that it is not true, people hear those soundbites  and Democrats  repeat them like parrots. Sure we are tired of hearing them. If you hear it, then other people hear it too. You have to know your enemy.

Long arguments are nice but don’t win the war. They have no impact on the Left.  No one except maybe loyal conservatives reads them. And this battle is a political campaign not a dissertation. I’m convinced we must boil concepts down to simple terms. Also, as Horowitz says, our tactics must change.

Who is going to take the time to read arguments, the liberals we are trying to convince? That ain’t going to happen. Liberals try not to read conservatives. On Townhall, they bash away without even reading it, or maybe a few lines just to aim their talking points at. We give them too much credit thinking logic and reason will work on them. What does work are political campaign soundbites.  That someone will convince them is an overrated goal. They do hear soundbites because that’s what everyone hears.

The problem, as Horowitz states it, is conservatives talk in business language. My idea is to use some biz-lingo on our leaders. Tell Boehner and McConnell to ‘listen up’:

We decided your services are no longer needed. Nothing personal… no, actually it is personal. Your job has been eliminated. The decision is final. That is the job as you define it, doing your own thing doesn’t cut it. You fashion yourselves as deal-makers but guess what, fellas? In case you hadn’t noticed, there is no one out there to make deals with. Do you see anyone? Progressives don’t deal. If they want to they know where to find us.

If an opportunity did come up, there are others capable of making a deal. You have become obsolete. We’re going in a different direction and your particular services are not part of that paradigm. Now if you want to stay on in some reduced capacity, then you will have to get with the program. The old way of operating is  over, do you understand? Form follows function now. This movement is much bigger than you guys and your silos.

This  is inevitable in business. Do you want to be a team player or freelance? Your choice. But if it’s doing your own thing… there’s the door. If you think you can handle being on the team, then its going to be a lot different than you are used to. This is not a top down thing. You guys aren’t our boss, quite the opposite. Your positions, as you know them, have been eliminated. Got it? And we’re not going back to that “business as usual” model. This is only the beginning, we’ll keep you informed if you stay on. “

Here’s what else will change: Mitch, you said we are going to crush the Tea Party:

“I think we are going to crush them everywhere,” … “I don’t think they are going to have a single nominee anywhere in the country.”

What’s the “we” stuff?  See, it is just the opposite, there’s a new crew in town — just in case you and Boehner missed the last few elections. I know you were both busy doing your own things. And the guys that stepped up are those Tea Party people. They’re already here.  You don’t talk to the other side that way. We have to “crush” Liberals not the Tea Party, except I don’t hear that spirited passion toward progressives. No one is bigger than everyone else.

If power and self-survival were your motives, bury it now.  Your power is limited by the people, like the rest of the Federal Government.  We stand for unlimited individual opportunity. They are the Party of unlimited government. Our “enemy”, the enemy of the country,  is the other side. And that’s exactly how we’re going to treat them. Progs are the antithesis of freedom and individual opportunity. Are we all clear?

By the way, Mitchster, the reason we are taking such a personal  interest in you is because that is where most of the problems are.

Reference:

Why Republicans Need the Tea Party

The movement provides an answer to the Left.

Teaser:

“You might ask yourself this question: What would have happened if the Republican party and the Tea Party and the big PACs run by Rove and Koch had funded a $30 million campaign to put the blame on Obama and Reid, where it belonged? There was no such campaign. All the parties on our side failed to take the fight to the enemy camp. The finger-pointing that followed is just another example of the circular firing squad that we on the right are so good at and that continually sets us back.”

I endorse attacks and defining progressives for what they are. But Rove or Gingrich frown on “harsh tone” as a ticket to loss. What do they base that on? No one will pay attention to subtle, half-hearted, apologetic critiques just to avoid a harsh tone. The Left is begging to be branded, so give them what they want.

Newt told CPAC:

“If we spend the next three years being primarily anti-Hillary, we will virtually guarantee her election … “ Gingrich said. “To make sure that doesn’t happen, we must stop being the opposition movement, and we must become the alternative government movement that will help make the life of Americans better so that they understand what we would be doing that is right, not just what the left is doing that is wrong.”

We must define the Left. Horowitz knows that as an intellectual. All the right “ideas” don’t get the job done. Amazing, Newt lectured CPAC and the Tea Party on that.

RightRing | Bullright

The return of Obamastein: the cliffhanger sequel

 

Obama’s thought process: I think I’ll attack Republicans like I dd the Supreme Court and call them names… just before I mention my sterling bipartisan record.

WSJ: Obama Threatened Boehner With Using Inauguration, SOTU Address To Blame GOP

 

By Philip Klein

President Obama has threatened House Speaker John Boehner that if no deal is struck on the “fiscal cliff,” he will use his Inaugural address and State of the Union speech next month to blame Republicans, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Excerpt From The Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Obama repeatedly lost patience with the speaker as negotiations faltered. In an Oval Office meeting last week, he told Mr. Boehner that if the sides didn’t reach agreement, he would use his inaugural address and his State of the Union speech to tell the country the Republicans were at fault.

At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, “I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?”

“You get nothing,” the president said. “I get that for free.”

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/obama/2012/12/22/wsj-obama-threatened-boehner-using-inauguration-sotu-address-blame-gop#ixzz2FwBbs83w
 

 
What better place to plot it than in Hawaii? It will be the first attack on Capitol Hill from Hawaii — he’s so full of firsts.