VIDEO: OBAMA'S GAFFE DOESN'T EVEN FOOL THE AP

You know it's a bad gaffe when even the Associated Press won't take up for Obama. Then again, merely hinting at even remotely offering the slightest degree of tacit support for any position that declares to lower costs by 3000% is untenable. As Rush pointed out on March 16th, lowering expenses by 100% takes it down to $0. How on earth does one account for the remaining 2900%?

Via the AP:

Buyers, beware: President Barack Obama says his health care overhaul will lower premiums by double digits, but check the fine print.

Premiums are likely to keep going up even if the health care bill passes, experts say. If cost controls work as advertised, annual increases would level off with time. But don't look for a rollback. Instead, the main reason premiums would be more affordable is that new government tax credits would help millions of people who can't afford the cost now.

Maybe Obama meant to say premiums will go down by MINUS 3000%. Let's not split hairs.

In any event, watch how clueless the crowd behind Obama is. They actually cheer at having their costs cut by 3000%.

Look, I apologize in advance, but these people are literally morons.



h/t to Gateway Pundit

VIDEO: NANCY PELOSI SAYS SHE NEVER STOPS WHIPPING

It's too easy to for the mind to wander after watching this and wherever it wanders ends up at a very unpleasant destination. Not only is the visual unappealing but watching her say it isn't any better. Then she had to pile on by declaring her entire life is a "whip operation". It doesn't help things to see far left socialist Jan Schakowsky standing behind Nancy.

You know you can't resist, though.

ROBERT GIBBS QUESTIONED ON JOBSGATE A SIXTH TIME

This is really starting to shape up to be a potentially very dangerous scandal for the Obama administration. Prior to March 16th, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was questioned five different times about Pennsylvania Democratic Senate candidate Joe Sestak's claim that the White House offered him a job to drop out of his primary race with Arlen Specter. In all five instances - February 23rd, March 1st, March 9th, March 11th, and March 12th - Gibbs said he had no information and wouldn't comment further, saying only that he would "get back" to the questioners.

Interestingly, on the sixth attempt by various members of the White House press corps. to pry an answer out of Gibbs, they got more than they had to that point. Interestingly, the man who received the longest answer yet from Gibbs was none other than progressive talk show host Bill Press.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the March 16th press briefing:

Q Robert, perhaps a sore point, but Congressman Darrell Issa has accused you, Robert Gibbs, of being part of a cover-up because you will not say whether the White House offered Joe Sestak a job for not running against Arlen Specter. Guilty or not guilty?

MR. GIBBS: Look, I’ve talked to several people in the White House; I’ve talked to people that have talked to others in the White House. I’m told that whatever conversations have been had are not problematic. I think Congressman Sestak has discussed that this is -- whatever happened is in the past, and he’s focused on his primary election.

Stephen.

Q Did the White House Counsel’s Office look into whether this was a crime --

MR. GIBBS: I’d refer you to my previous lines.

Q Sestak says he was offered something.

MR. GIBBS: I’ll refer you to what I just said a minute ago.

Note the key points here. First, Gibbs did not deny that Sestak was offered a job. Second, Gibbs claimed there was no wrongdoing relative to the matter, which could ultimately implicate Gibbs personally if he knows the opposite to be true. Lastly, note that tactic used by Gibbs. Although he doesn't say it explicitly, he insinuates quite clearly that the White House's stance is that whatever happened is old news and that Sestak wants to focus on the primary with Specter.

The problem with this should be obvious. Even though it's not even close to being old news based on the fact that it's still in the news and growing daily, if one were to assume that it were old news, Gibbs would be the one most responsible for it becoming old news because he never got back to anybody after being asked about the matter five times, starting in late February.

Gibbs' responses seemed to indicate that he was hoping the questions would fizzle out, allowing the White House to render it "old news" as the campaign office of another person of interest in this scandal, Andrew Romanoff was quoted as saying when asked by KHOW radio host Peter Boyles to go on record to refute similar claims he was offered a job to drop out of Colorado Senate race with Michael Bennet.

More at CNSNews