Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Ron Paul's lack of Fiscal Transparency

Ain't this interesting. Whenever the subject of the Federal Reserve is brought up to Ron Paul, one of the things he makes hay about is the institution's secrecy; it's hiding something very big. It's one of the things he points to right before he demands that the Fed be audited.

However, it seems Dr. Paul has something about which he should be open to showing others. In particular, on several occasions, the congressman from Texas was allegedly reimbursed twice for various flights. The worst part? He allegedly knew about it.

Via Big Government:
Rep. Paul, through his offices, has repeatedly refused to cooperate by providing access to the Congressman and pertinent staff members. As an elected member of government, it would look better if Paul set an example for the same type of transparency in his professional financial dealings, as he has long advocated for with regard to other branches of government.
I have a suggestion for Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke the next time he is testifying before a congressional committee.

He should say the following before he issues his opening statement.

"I hereby call for an audit of Congressman Ron Paul's plane ticket reimbursements."

More at Roll Call. 

Video: Media Matters Founder Refuses to Answer simple Question

Founder of the George Soros-funded Media Matters, David Brock, was approached about recent reports that the strategy for his organization in 2012 included hiring private investigators to look into the private lives of Fox News employees. As someone who is supposed to be in the media business, one might think Brock would be willing to emphatically deny any such claims.

Instead, he ran inside.

Via Daily Caller:

Video: U.S. General Apologizes for Burning Qur'ans

Where on earth were these apologies when the U.S. Military burned Bibles at the same Bagram military base in 2009? The best part? General John R. Allen referred to the offended party as being the "noble people of Afghanistan." Are these the same "noble people" that proceeded to act like undignified savages after it was learned that the Qur'ans had been burned?

Via NPR:
In a video that underscores how seriously the U.S. military and NATO are taking something that profoundly offends Muslims, the commander of international forces in Afghanistan today apologizes four times for what he says was the improper disposal — burning, apparently — of Qurans and other Islamic religious materials at Bagram Air Field north of Kabul.

Word of what U.S. Gen. John Allen says was the unintentional actions of some International Security Assistance Force troops on the base led to a protest today by more than 2,000 angry Afghans outside the air field, The Associated Press reports. The wire service says that some protesters shouted "die, die foreigners!" and fired shots into the air.

During his 90-second video message, which the BBC says has been played repeatedly on Afghan TV today, Allen says:

— An investigation has begun.

— Such actions have been stopped.

— He has ordered "this does not ever happen again."

— "I assure you ... I promise you ... this was not intentional in any way."

And he apologizes to the president of Afghanistan, the government of Afghanistan and "most importantly ... to the noble people of Afghanistan."
Here's General John R. Allen. I don't know who's responsible for this position of the military but it has become quite embarrassing and it's long past being tiresome.

Can you imagine General Patton or MacArthur doing this? If so, please let me know how you're able to do it because I'm having trouble.

CNS News has more.

h/t GWP

Video: Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman on Arming Syrian Rebels

File this one in the "Someone at the top is making some sense," category. General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN's Fareed Zakaria that the United States should not rush into a decision to arm the Syrian rebels. Though such a position might cause John McCain to get red in the face and Lindsey Graham to stomp and stammer, it's an extremely wise position.

Via CNN:
The United States is not interested in providing weapons to opposition forces in Syria until it has a better picture of what those forces are, the top U.S. military officer said in an interview aired Sunday.

"I think it's premature to take a decision to arm the opposition movement in Syria, because I would challenge anyone to clearly identify for me the opposition movement in Syria at this point," Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS."

More than 50 prominent U.S. conservatives signed an open letter last week urging the Obama administration to "take immediate action" against the Syrian regime, including "self-defense aid" to an armed opposition led by defected government troops. Among the signatories were some of the leading voices in support of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, as well as the former head of the U.S.-led occupation government there. 
And Sen. Joe Lieberman told CNN last week that a "coalition of the willing" should assist Syria's opposition forces since Syrian allies Russia and China vetoed action at the United Nations. Lieberman, a Democrat-turned-independent who was also a leading Iraq hawk, said the United States and its allies could provide the rebels with medical aid, communications and ultimately, weapons.
It is simply AMAZING that supposedly intelligent people are so completely oblivious to what is going on with the Muslim Brotherhood. McCain, Graham, and Lieberman cannot possibly be this clueless, can they? In every instance so far where there has been the removal of a dictator during the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood is filling the void. Why on earth would these people advocate for such a scenario in Syria? Perhaps it's because muruna is working.

h/t Hot Air

New Low for Romney: Robo-Calls of Santorum Endorsing him... in 2008!

This really is despicable and I hope it hurts Romney more than it helps him. In 2008, when he was not running for president, Rick Santorum appeared on the Laura Ingraham show and endorsed Mitt Romney's candidacy over John McCain. In perhaps the sleeziest tactic yet, Romney's Super PAC sent out robo-calls in Michigan that featured Santorum's endorsement from that interview.

Via the Detroit Free Press:
Some Michiganders — this reporter included — got what may have been a surprising call over the weekend: Romney’s chief rival Rick Santorum endorsing Mitt Romney.

The endorsement was in 2008, when Romney was running for president (and Santorum wasn’t). In an interview about the endorsement at the time, Santorum said he hesitated about who to endorse but decided on Romney as the best alternative to John McCain. The robocall was presumably paid for by either the campaign or the Super PAC supporting Romney.

After a short introduction in the automated call to Michigan voters, Santorum says: “If you’re a conservative, there really is only one place to go right now. I would even argue farther than that. If you’re a Republican, if you’re a Republican in the broadest sense, there is only one place to go right now, and that’s Mitt Romney.”
That's so pathetic, I'll bet even Obama cringed when he heard about it. It also shows how desperate Romney's campaign is to win Michigan. If he loses there, he's toast. It'd be nice to see this despicable attempt to save his candidacy actually sink it.

Here's the audio from the 2008 interview:

h/t Free Republic

Video: Santorum Aid calls Obama's Policies "Radical(ly) Islamic"

Frankly, I think it's a mistake to walk this one back. The key moment comes just after the 1:20 mark. Rick Santorum's spokesperson Alice Stewart was on MSNBC with Andrea Mitchell to defend her candidate's comments about Obama's theology. It's clear that Stewart didn't intend to say "(Obama's) radical Islamic policies" but it was definitely something that has a ring of truth to it, not because of Obama's theology but because of how his policies ARE benefiting radical Islamists.

Frankly, this is an opportunity that Santorum's camp could use to its advantage. First of all, there is a significant portion of his base that actually believes Obama has Islamic sympathies and what would make meat redder than a presidential candidate's spokesperson echoing the sentiment? Second, has anyone noticed that no one has benefited better from Obama's policies than the very radical Muslim Brotherhood? Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Maurutania, Morocco, and now Syria all seem to be falling into the hands of the Brotherhood.

Santorum could easily go on offense here instead of walking this freudian slip back by saying, well, yeah, Obama's policies are both radical and pro-Islamic.

h/t GWP

Of course, if Santorum's campaign decides against doubling down and standing by Stewart's comments, the best response would be the dredging up of Obama's interview with George Stephanoplous in 2008 when then-candidate Obama referred to his "Muslim faith" before Steph helped him correct it on the spot. Santorum's camp could tell the media that if it chooses to go after his campaign for a misstep, Obama's misstep in the same respect in 2008 should be fair game.

Remember this?

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive