Holder on the Hot Seat, Obama Dazed, Confused and Busted on National Security Leaks Show Notes: The Teri O’Brien Show, 6/10/12

On this morning’s “State of the Union” on CNN, anchor Candy Crowley, CNN’s Dana Bash and Michael Shear of the Liberal Death Star (the New York Times for newbies), expressed surprised that Sen. John McCain was unwilling to forcefully assert that Barack Obama could not possibly have been involved in the recent series of dangerous national security leaks that have members of Congress outraged. There are at least three reasons that it’s not outside the realm of possibility that the One at a minimum was not upset by these disgusting leaks, including his nondenial denial during last Friday’s pointless presser. Do we trust Eric Holder to investigate this issue? Which was a bigger threat to our national security, these leaks or the supposed revelations about Joe Wilson and his desk jockey wife Valerie Plame?

Holder Directs U.S. Attorneys to Track Down Paths of Leaks – NYTimes.com

Candy also tried to get sleazy Obama apparatchik David Axelrod to answer a simple yes or no question: does he agree with his boss that “the private sector is doing fine?” As you suspect, she failed.

SL Mensa weighed in about the al Qaeda leader’s offer of camels and chickens for “idiot Obama” and “old woman Hillary Clinton,” and wondered what Mrs. Clinton would do with “ten cocks.” Rimshot, please.

CPAC straw poll chooses Marco Rubio as GOP VP nominee, but is he eligible? Is he an Article II “natural born citizen?” I think not, but I know that my opinion is a minority one.

Both Obama and Axelrod wring their hands over the loss of teacher jobs, as if they really care about the teachers and their families, when the fact is that the only thing they care about is the money from the teachers’ union dues that eventually end up in the democrats’ campaign coffers. SL Ron from St. Charles agrees.

Another Friday night document dump, this time revealing that, for all the talk about transparency and the demonization of lobbyists, Obama and his minions were making backroom deals with big Pharma to pass his takeover of the health care system.

First time listener and caller Ken from Texas suggests that Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) might be Romney’s choice for VP. Teri is skeptical, but appreciates the call.

The Critiquelator on fire about Obama’s ill-advised, cringe-inducing oral sex joke before an audience of militant gay activists, a subject of a blog post at teriobrien.com earlier this week. Did his staff and his TelePrompTer blindside him?

Obama’s Joke Part of a Larger Strategy – Yahoo! News

2nd Amendment Update: Featuring Attorney General Eric Holder

Confronted by members of Congress with written evidence that senior members of his Justice Department knew about the deadly and disgraceful Operation Fast and Furious, Eric Holder at first disputes what’s in black and white, then claims “superior knowledge.” Query: why does a public official who is telling the truth need help with “messaging” from the White House? Who is lying: Axelrod who claims to have been “scrupulous” about avoiding politicizing the Department of Justice, or Eric Holder, who admits that he help from the White House about “messaging” regarding Fast and Furious? MMM … if you’re telling the truth, why do you need help with “messaging?” Is Eric Holder really a victim, as he suggested during questioning from Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)?

Holder admits Axelrod, White House helped Justice Dept craft Fast and Furious public relations strategy – Yahoo! News

From Nicolas Kristof in the Liberal Death Star:

Obama was forceful in demanding that President George W. Bush stand up to Sudan during the slaughter in Darfur, so it’s painful to see him so passive on Sudan today. When governments turn to mass murder, we may have no easy solutions, but we should at least be crystal clear about which side we’re on. That’s not too much to expect of a Nobel Peace Prize winner.

 

Maybe not from someone who actually earned the silly Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Kristof, but we’re talking about an affirmative-action assisted empty suit celebutard, remember?

 

Best Response of the Evening: Newt Busts LSM on Protecting Obama on Infanticide

This morning on CSPAN, feminist hag Eleanor Smeal denied that Barack Obama supported denying medical care to infants lucky enough to survive attempts to kill them. That was a lie. Please see today’s Post of the Day, Jill Stanek’s great Illinois Review post from 2008, Top Ten Reasons Barack Obama Voted Against The Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which I plan to leave up a little longer.

Tonight during the CNN AZ GOP debate, Newt called out the LSM on their failure to ask the One about his support for infanticide:

Newt Gingrich deflected a question about Obama’s recent decision mandating that employers’ insurance plans cover contraception by pointing out that Obama voted in favor of a law that protected abortion providers during his term as state senator of Illinois

“You did not once during the 2008 campaign ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide,” Gingrich said. “If we’re going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies.”

 

I love the way the LSM characterizes Obama’s disgraceful record while an Illinois state senator. “[P]rotected abortion providers?” That’s one way to put it. It’s not what I would have said. I would have said that he voted against providing medical care to the most innocent and helpless people in society, knowing that they would be left to die alone, and possibly in pain, in a dirty closet.

A home run. Nicely played, Mr. Speaker.

CNN Jacksonville Debate Post-Mortem-It Pays to Get a Debate Coach

As you know, I watch so you don’t have to, but some of you did join me in the live chat last night. That was lots of fun. Thanks for being there! 

My overall bottom line: As I tweeted last night, Newt did not land the desired, and anticipated, knock out punch. Rick Santorum did very well, particularly when he went after Romney on Romneycare, but I don’t think he beat Newt or Romney, as in being in a position to win the Florida primary.

Last night’s Romney was a new Romney. I guess it helps to hire a debate coach, even one who worked with John McCain.He was much more focused, much less defensive about his success and much more assertive. Prepared, sharp and to the point. Do you think he has ever in his life before last night told anyone to his face that a statement that person made is “repulsive?” Clearly Mr. O’Donnell is having an impact.

Bizarre, but not unwelcome, moment: When the opened the debate with National Anthem performed by the University of North Florida Chamber Singers. Wait, isn’t this CNN?

Most Unfortunate Moment:”We have many qualified, Hispanic leaders. Which of our Hispanic leaders would you consider to serve in your cabinet?” Is it really necessary for the GOP to engage in this sort of identity politics? Have they thoroughly abandoned the idea that they are a party of ideas, not interest groups?

Dumbest Question:”why would your wife make the best first lady?” Really Wolf? Did you ask this because you are laboring under the bizarre delusion that Michelle Obama is some sort of national hero?

Best Romney moments:

  • The whole exchange in which he got Newt to admit that, despite his going after Mitt on his investments, he also owned mutual funds that invest in Fannie and Freddie
  • “Speaker, you’ve indicated that somehow I don’t earn that money. I have earned the money that I have. I didn’t inherit it.
  • I take risks. I make investments. Those investments lead to jobs being created in America.”

Worst Romney moments:

  • When he had to admit, after saying he hadn’t seen the ad, that ad accusing Newt of calling Spanish “the language of the ghetto,” was in fact his ad.
  • Runner up: “I’m proud of the taxes I pay.” Why should someone be proud of obeying the law?

Best Newt Moment: In response the question of why he was the best person to beat Obama. “And I believe, if we have a big election with truly historic big choices, that we can defeat Barack Obama by a huge margin. But it won’t be by running just as a Republican. It will be an American campaign open to every American who prefers a paycheck to food stamps, who prefers the Declaration of Independence to Saul Alinsky and who prefers a strong national security to trying to appease our enemies.” Do we think that any other candidate will educate the voters about the fact that this election is not a traditional Democrat v. Republican contest, but rather a choice between two warring visions of the future of our country?

Best Santorum moments:

  • When criticized the Obama’s administration’s “abysmal” record regarding Central and South America, citing Honduras, and when talking about Cuba even using the “M” word, “Marxism”
  • When he echoed Paul, suggesting that the back-and-forth about who earned what from Fannie and Freddie is a distracting waste of time

Best Paul moments:

  • When he responded to the question about whether Romney and Newt should give back the money they made from Fannie and Freddie with “that subject really doesn’t interest me a whole lot,” and went on to talk about the Community Redevelopment Act.
  • When he suggested that we should send some politicians to the moon

Debate transcript here. What say you?

The Myth of Romney’s Electability, and The Reason Newt Can Win: Today on the Teri O’Brien Show

On this 39th anniversary of Dred Scott 2.0 aka Roe v. Wade, we’ll unpack the results of yesterday’s South Carolina primary, focusing on Newt Gingrich’s landslide pounding of establishment fave Mitt Romney.

Governor Romney’s strength is supposedly that he can win, but as our guest John Hawkins, founder and publisher of Right Wing News pointed out in a recent piece, Mitt’s alleged “electability” may be like Barack Obama’s reputation for being brilliant; that is, there’s no evidence to support it, and in fact, a great deal of evidence to the contrary.

We’ll also answer these questions.

  • Why is Rick Santorum performing so poorly? The answer is obvious to all but the dunderheads in the Lame Stream Media.
  • What is Newt Gingrich’s Ace in the Hole? He understands, and can articulate the one crucial difference between our side and theirs.
  • Does Newt’s checkered personal life make him box office poison, especially with female voters? Is Calista the real problem?
  • Are the same bunch that gave us the slow-motion train wreck that was John McCain’s 2008 campaign determined to repeat that disaster by foisting a moderate candidate on a Republican base that wants none of it?
  • Does Barack Obama really think he can con the voters again by running an even more deceitful campaign than his last one? His first campaign ad suggests that he does.
  • Will Barack Obama finally be forced to confront the issue of whether he is Constitutionally eligible to be president? A recent court decision suggests that he will.

Join us today for the rest of the story.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks to all of you who voted for the Teri O’Brien Show as Talk Show of the Year on Red State Talk Radio. We won! We really appreciate your encouragement and support!

Politics, Pop Culture, the Hottest Issues of the Day, and Your calls. The Teri O’Brien Show, featuring America’s Original Conservative Warrior Princess, Live and in color, Sundays 4-6 pm Central time  at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Teri-OBrien. Daring to Commit Common Sense, Fearlessly, and More Important, Cheerfully, in the Age of Obama.

Make My Day: Text “FAN TOBCWP” to 32665

Can’t listen live? Download it from iTunes and listen on demand. 

As one listener wrote “one of the most insightful and entertaining pundits in America. Also, her voice is magical.”

Serious Ideas, Irresistible Entertainment. Warning: listeners may become hopelessly addicted.


The One Profound Statement from Last Night’s Debate that No One Else Has Noticed

Thanks to those of you who joined the live chat during last night’s CNN Debate. Where were the rest of you? No worries. I watch so you don’t have to.

As most of you know, I have been very unfair to Rep. Paul by pointing out that he sounds like a 9-11 truther, that his insistence that treating terrorists like criminals is naîve, ridiculous and dangerous, and that his head-in-the-sand approach to problems in the rest of the world would cause the very wars he claims to want to avoid. I want to give him his props, though, for this answer on the issue of abortion. After Mitt and Newt went back and forth on whether Romneycare provided for tax-paid abortions, and some of the Paulistas in the audience shouted their demand that he be allowed to comment, Rep. Paul said:

 No, I do want to make a couple comments, because I can remember the very early years studying obstetrics, and I was told — and it was before the age of abortion, and I was told taking care of a woman that’s pregnant, you have two patients. And I think that — that solves a lot of the problem about, you know, when life begins and all. (Applause.)

And I also experienced a time later on in my training, in the 1960s, when the culture was changing. The Vietnam War was going on, the drugs were there, and pornography came in, and abortion became prevalent even though it was illegal.

So the morality of the country changed, but then the law followed up. When the morality changed, it will — reflects on the laws. The law is very important. We should have these laws. But law will not correct the basic problem, and that’s the morality of the people that we must do. (Cheers, applause.)

I haven’t heard much comment on this answer from Rep. Paul, but I want to shine a light on what I think is an extremely wise and important statement, one that should be repeated at every opportunity. How many times have we heard some low-information dolt, who clearly thinks that he is delivering some profound truth, try to justify defining deviancy down with the cliché “you can’t legislate morality?” My answer to the pinheads who recite this banality is, “Of course you can’t, and we’ve never tried!” What these ignoramuses are missing is that the law reflects our values. It doesn’t impose any obligation to be moral, something that is impossible, especially in a free society. Only a fool would suggest that conduct that is legal is necessarily moral. The law states a bare minimum standard of conduct for a civilized society, the very least one can do without being considered a threat to the continuation of that society. It represents a line that must not be crossed, not the aspiration of moral individuals.

When the collective morality of a democratic republic degenerates, the people will change the law to reflect that degeneration. That is what Rep. Paul was saying, and he is absolutely correct when he notes the depressing slouch to Gomorra we’ve experience over the last 40 years.

Of course, Newt had some real crowd pleasing moments last night, for more on those,  and Romney had one, too. (An aside: do we really think Mitt would shove anything own Obama’s throat?) Please check out the links here:

Newt Smacks Media re Open Marriage Questions

Newt Smacks Media about Protecting Obama

Newt Promises to Get Your Kids Out of the Basement

Newt Smacks Obama on His Inability to Talk off the PrompTer

Romney Smacks Obama on Crony Capitalism, Admits Any GOP Candidate Would be Better Than the One, Defends Profit


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks to all of you who voted for the Teri O’Brien Show as Talk Show of the Year on Red State Talk Radio. We won! We really appreciate your encouragement and support!

Politics, Pop Culture, the Hottest Issues of the Day, and Your calls. The Teri O’Brien Show, featuring America’s Original Conservative Warrior Princess, Live and in color, Sundays 4-6 pm Central time  at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Teri-OBrien. Daring to Commit Common Sense, Fearlessly, and More Important, Cheerfully, in the Age of Obama.

Make My Day: Text “FAN TOBCWP” to 32665

Can’t listen live? Download it from iTunes and listen on demand. 

As one listener wrote “one of the most insightful and entertaining pundits in America. Also, her voice is magical.”

Serious Ideas, Irresistible Entertainment. Warning: listeners may become hopelessly addicted.


Like Clowns Jumping Out of That Tiny Car, Yet Another Reason Ron Paul is Not Qualified to Be President

As I said on yesterday’s show, there are two Ron Pauls. There’s the man devoted to limited government in the way the Founders understood it, fealty to the U.S. Constitution, and most of all, liberty. I think we all admire that Ron Paul and wish that other members of Congress shared his desire to reduce the bloated federal government and return it to its legitimate and limited role in our lives. Sadly, there’s that other Ron Paul, the alleged 9/11 truther who doesn’t seem to understand how dangerous a nuclear Iran would be. Of course, I’ll be bold and predict that Con. Paul will not win the GOP nomination, but I’ll continue to pay along since he’s not going away any time soon. That happy day will come when some kind GOP elders take him by the elbow, lead him aside and tell him that his time on the stage is over, adding if the GOP loses the 2012 presidential election due to his antics, Sen. Rand Paul can kiss his career in Republican politics goodbye.

Good Ron Paul wouldn’t be able to do the things we like because of that pesky Congress. Being a Constitutionalist, he can’t take a page from Hugo Chavez wannabe, Barack Obama’s book and simply decide to impose his will by fiat. So, there goes all that reduction in the national debt, slashing of the federal budget, and elimination of annoying and unnecessary federal departments. Contrastingly, as president, Bad Ron Paul would be in a position to do a lot of damage by implementing his foreign policy agenda. That’s your classic lose-lose, which is apropos, since that’s what Con. Paul is in the process of doing. Like those clowns who keep jumping out of that clown car that Chris Matthews and Matthew Dowd like to evoke when discussing the GOP field, just when you think you’ve heard the last reason that Con. Paul is not qualified to be president, another jumps out. Surprise!

Saturday’s ABC/Yahoo New Hampshire Debate, “moderated” by democrat operative/ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos and an especially unctuous Diane Sawyer, featured a bizarre exchange, in which the objective seeker of truth, Mr. S, took the opportunity to ask Gov. Mitt Romney a question about one of the most serious issues facing our nation. No, not the still-limping economy, the threats by Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz, or even whether Tim Tebow is the most polarizing figure in sports. No, the burning question on the mind of every serious person in America, surprisingly, is whether states are Constitutionally able to ban contraception, and George seemed absolutely determined to hector Romney to the grave until he got an answer. His doggedness was understandable, since no state legislature is seeking to outlaw contraceptives, and given the trivial nature of those other issues previously mentioned, what better time for a law school hypothetical?

Remember the Stephanopoulos-Romney exchanged involved the Warren Court’s sudden discovery of a “right of privacy” in the U.S. Constitution in its 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision. After Gov. Romney said that he thought Roe v. Wade should be overturned, Ron Paul weighed in with his two cents:

 PAUL: I didn’t know whether I got time when it was favorable or not. But thank you. No, I think the Fourth Amendment is very clear. It is explicit in our privacy. You can’t go into anybody’s house and look at what they have or their papers or any private things without a search warrant.

This is why the Patriot Act is wrong, because you have a right of privacy by the Fourth Amendment. As far as selling contraceptives, the Interstate Commerce Clause protects this because the Interstate Commerce Clause was originally written not to impede trade between the states, but it was written to facilitate trade between the states. So if it’s not illegal to import birth control pills from one state to the next, it would be legal to sell birth control pills in that state.

 We can only conclude that Con. Paul doesn’t know that this case, and the controversial cases that preceded it, were not about the Fourth Amendment, or any other specific provision of the Constitution. That’s troubling since he is currently running to be the person who appoints federal judges, including Supreme Court Justices, who will decide whether Roe v. Wade is overturned. Apparently, he doesn’t know the difference between an explicit restatement of our God-given rights in the Bill of Rights and a new “right” discovered by activist liberal judges in one of those handy penumbras. And speaking of handy, how about that Commerce Clause?Most of us thought that advocates for expansion of the federal government had exhausted the ingenious ways that they could use this very elastic part of the Constitution to get their fingers in every pie. Now we learn that it also means that what’s legal in one state is legal in all states! Who knew?

“Deciding that question is above my pay grade” would have made more sense. It would have been dishonest and designed to mislead, just as it was when Barack Obama used it, but at least it would have reflected some understanding on the part of Con. Paul that he knew what everyone was talking about, or even what day of the week it is.

It’s been fun, Ron, watching this election cycle’s cult of the personality, the latest to enchant the young and the uninformed, but it’s time for the grownups to get serious. Please exit, stage left, and join your pal Con. Dennis Kucinich.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks to all of you who voted for the Teri O’Brien Show as Talk Show of the Year on Red State Talk Radio. We won! We really appreciate your encouragement and support!

Politics, Pop Culture, the Hottest Issues of the Day, and Your calls. The Teri O’Brien Show, featuring America’s Original Conservative Warrior Princess, Live and in color, Sundays 4-6 pm Central time  at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Teri-OBrien. Daring to Commit Common Sense, Fearlessly, and More Important, Cheerfully, in the Age of Obama.

Make My Day: Text “FAN TOBCWP” to 32665

Can’t listen live? Download it from iTunes and listen on demand. 

As one listener wrote “one of the most insightful and entertaining pundits in America. Also, her voice is magical.”

Serious Ideas, Irresistible Entertainment. Warning: listeners may become hopelessly addicted.


Does Santorum’s Showing in Iowa Guarantee That Romney is the GOP Nominee?

On last Sunday’s show, I told you that Iowa doesn’t pick winners. It picks loses. It eliminates candidates. Last night, Romney beat Santorum by 8 votes, having eliminated both Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich

Im afraid that Rick Santorum is this year’s Huckabee. I like him. I was happy to see him win, but I don’t think it’s possible for him to replicate these results in a national election, and I’m not alone. From Roger Simon inPolitico:

What if the “anti-Romney” vote did coalesce around one candidate? Couldn’t Santorum come charging out of Iowa with a first-place finish and then go on to win New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and Nevada? Wouldn’t that be the end of Mitt?Almost certainly. But now tell me how Santorum pulls that off. His campaign in Iowa has been based on spending a huge amount of time here — a strategy that has failed many previous candidates — and telling Iowans how very special they are.…How many times can you reproduce that on a tight schedule in other states?“Santorum has run here like he was running for governor of Iowa,” a senior Romney aide told me Sunday evening. “He can’t replicate that in other states.”
Iowa is about eliminating Gingrich and Perry without us having to spend a lot of money to do so,” the aide said. “Last time, we spent $2 million just on the [Ames] straw poll, $10 million on television and had over 30 paid staffers. This year we’ve been on TV for only a month and have not spent much on ads, we’ve have five paid staffers and we didn’t do the straw poll.”
So, since he will probably win New Hampshire, it’s looking like Romney is the guy, which is not the result I was looking for. What say you?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Thanks for making the Teri O’Brien Show Red State Talk Radio’s Talk Show of the Year!

Politics, Pop Culture, the Hottest Issues of the Day, and Your calls. The Teri O’Brien Show, featuring America’s Original Conservative Warrior Princess, Live and in color, Sundays 4-6 pm Central time  at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Teri-OBrien. Daring to Commit Common Sense, Fearlessly, and More Important, Cheerfully, in the Age of Obama.

Make My Day: Text “FAN TOBCWP” to 32665

Can’t listen live? Download it from iTunes and listen on demand. 

As one listener wrote “one of the most insightful and entertaining pundits in America. Also, her voice is magical.”

Serious Ideas, Irresistible Entertainment. Warning: listeners may become hopelessly addicted.