VIDEO: O'KEEFE GOES AFTER THE CENSUS

From the guy who took down ACORN - James O'Keefe - we see courtesy of another one of his video expose's that the U.S. Census is more concerned with pleasing those in its employ than it is in paying for an honest day's work. O'Keefe, who got a job with the U.S. Census discovered that his bosses were much more frivolous with taxpayer dollars than private sector business owners would be with their own.

Welcome to the inherent problems of socialism. The upside for the Census workers is that they think their bosses are "cool". The downside for taxpayers is that they're getting ripped off. Not only is O'Keefe informed that he is to fill out his time sheet before his work is completed but he is dismissed early without having to correct his time sheet. He then complains, as a conscientious worker, only to find several levels of management all too eager to tell him to sweep his concerns under the rug.

Via Big Government:



Subsequent to the above video being released, O'Keefe and Breitbart appeared on ABC's Good Morning America. Watch as George Stephanopolous refers to O'Keefe as an "activist" instead of as a "journalist". Don't tell anyone but the mainstream media is like the wicked witch of the west and doesn't know it's drenched with water.



h/t to Big Gov't

VIDEO: INGRAHAM ON STEPHANOPOLOUS

John Podesta and Laura Ingraham on the same panel? Interesting to say the least. The former runs Media Matters and is president of the Center for American Progress (CAP). That would be the same CAP that hired Van Jones back after he resigned from his job as Green Jobs czar. Not only that but Mark Lloyd (FCC Diversity czar) was a senior fellow at CAP as well.

It was obvious that Podesta wanted to play nice. He hasn't a leg to stand on when it comes to ACORN, considering that he was on-hand for their recent 40 year anniversary celebration. Moreover, Media Matters recently defended ACORN's story that James O'Keefe was thrown out of the Philadelphia office when the recently released video shows that is a lie.

Best part of this clip though, comes at about the 2:30 mark when Ingraham singles out Charlie Gibson for not knowing anything about the Acorn scandal. Stephanopolous actually defends Gibson by pointing to how many years he's been in the business.

Uh, George, that's the problem. May I refer you to Dan Rather?

Ingraham does well.



h/t to BREITBART

VIDEO: OBAMA HAS A JOE THE PLUMBER MOMENT

I had to watch the part in question twice just to make sure I got it right. The money lines come toward the end when Obama dismisses Merriam-Webster's definition of a word that he apparently thinks means something else - that word is, "tax". But start paying close attention at the 1:00 mark.

The underlying theme of this exchange is what I found interesting. George Stephanopoulos' question is about whether or not mandating that every person get health insurance would be a tax. In "Obama-speak", a tax is something you do but rarely admit to, which may be why he expresses disagreement with Merriam-Webster when he's calling for one.

In defense of his insistence that everyone should have health insurance, Obama says,

"We're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you."

Uh, whatever happened to,

"When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody"?

It would seem a bit inconsistent until you peel back enough layers. Obama told Joe the Plumber he wanted income redistribution. What he told Stephanopoulous is that he doesn't want income re-distribution while advocating a mandate that says everyone will have to pay into the system. The only thing missing there is the distribution part.

Obviously, he's learning that the majority of the American public sides with the fundamental belief expressed by JTP last year. Instead of heeding that advice, he appears to be trying to leverage it in order to impose the individual mandate (tax) while championing individual accountability.

On its face, Obama's analogy using car insurance is valid (everyone is required to have auto insurance so everyone should be required to have health insurance). However, two facts render it invalid.

One: he's saying that if you can't afford health insurance, you won't be penalized because it would be "piling on". As that relates to his auto insurance analogy, people who can't afford to insure their vehicle would still be allowed to drive.

Two: At least for now, the auto insurance industry is a private sector animal. You either buy insurance and drive or you don't. To use that industry in a comparison when you're arguring for a government option is apples and oranges.

The implication here is that everyone needs to be accountable not to themselves but to the government.

Be sure to watch all the way to the end as Obama gives Merriam-Webster the big smackdown. Oh, and if you run the Merriam-Webster website, don't be surprised if you get a call about the verbiage you use in your definitions.



h/t to GATEWAY PUNDIT

VIDEO: OBAMA DIDN'T KNOW ACORN GETTING FUNDS

This may be the most egregious lie yet from Barack Obama. The money quotes come shortly after the 4:00 mark. Stephanopoulos asks Obama about ACORN getting its funding cut off. His response is obviously deliberate ignorance but plausible deniability is more than just a stretch. When asked about the de-funding of Acorn Obama says,

"Frankly, it's not something I've followed closely. I didn't even know that Acorn was getting a whole lot of federal money."

Shortly after that, he makes reference to seeing one of the videos that exposed Acorn, saying it was "certainly inappropriate".

Considering Obama's extensive ties to Acorn, it is simply not believable that he hasn't been following it very closely. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt, he should be following it closely based on what he saw on the "video" considering his extensive ties to Acorn.

Next, he expects us to believe that he didn't know Acorn was getting "a whole lot of federal money". Not only is that COMPLETELY unbelievable but if we were to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one, why on earth would he sign a bill that grants Acorn billions of dollars without knowing that's in the bill?

Taken further, if he is so willing to sign a bill that grants an organization like Acorn billions of dollars (unbeknownst to him), why on EARTH should he be trusted when he says he will not sign a health care bill that adds to the deficit.

To quote Joe Wilson, "YOU LIE".



Here's the entry on STEPHANOPOULOS' BLOG