IRS leader visited Obama 157 times, but they never discussed targeting Conservatives? Sure.

Yeah, it is only 157 times more than the previous Commissioner visited with President Bush in his last 4 years.  And of course Obama learned about the targeting from the media.

Seriously, if you don’t see the problem then you are part of the problem.  Even if this was the only scandal in the Obama administration it would be worthy of impeachment.

But again, remember that the biggest issues we should emphasize here aren’t Obama’s incompetence, maliciousness, lying and law-breaking.  The issues to emphasize are the dangers of expecting government to solve all of our problems and trusting it to be better than the free market to choose winners and losers.  Point to the doctrine of original sin and how giving unchecked power to anyone is a bad idea.

Via Politics: Former IRS head visited Obama White House a staggering 157 times.

Even though we know at least two Senators pushed the IRS to target the left’s political enemies, and despite the fact that White House council knew about it weeks – maybe months – before it appeared in the papers, the official line is that Obama learned of the IRS scandal only when it appeared in the media.  He’s a busy guy and, since the agents involved were just “low-level rogues,” it was impossible for the President to hear about the targeted auditing of Tea Party groups.

It’s not like he’s being directly briefed by the head of the IRS on a regular basis.  He has no time for that.

Except, for some reason, former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman was spending a staggering amount of time at the White House. According to a Daily Caller analysis of public records, he visited at least a whopping 157 times.

To put that in perspective, he enjoyed more White House visits that Secretaries of State Clinton and Kerry combined.  He was there three times as often as Kathleen Sebelius, the HHS secretary who’s been instrumental in the Obamacare fiasco.  Heck, it’s more than twice the number of appearances made by our resident gun-runner, Eric Holder.

 

Former IRS head visited Obama White House a staggering 157 times

The error of broad-brushing economic statistics

Putting all the blame or credit on one leader is incorrect. You have to look at what specific policies they drove and actually implemented and what the effects were.

Should Clinton get all the credit for the 90′s? Absolutely not. Clinton should send thank-you’s to the 90′s Republicans who prevented him from implementing many of his policies. He should also thank the PC business / Internet boom which drove the phenomenal growth of the decade. He benefited from the Internet bubble and the massive productivity gains and business growth, while Bush was impacted negatively by the bursting of the Internet bubble. Clinton didn’t create the technology boom and Bush didn’t burst the bubble, but the stats of both are impacted by them.

And the problems at the end of Bush’s term were largely from the race-baiting housing bubble driven by Democrats — the very thing they are doing again!.  Sadly, they were able to exploit people’s ignorance on the matter, with the help of the Democrats and their media allies who ignored or lied about the root causes.  That not only led to us getting Obama, but they pretended that a President couldn’t make real changes in one term.  Ugh.

When did the Left turn into war hawks?

The hypocrisy is astounding.  The party that opposes capital punishment for convicted killers who survive 10+ years of appeals cheers the killing of a U.S. citizen without a trial.

Now Hillary Clinton mocks the death of Gadhafi, laughing and saying, “We came, we saw, he died”  (See the link for the video.)

Gadhafi was a bad man, but what makes Obama & Co. so sure that the replacement government will be an improvement?  How is this better than President Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” moment?

This is pure “might makes right” reasoning from the Left.  I realize that consistency isn’t their strong suit, but this is getting bizarre.

Peace Prize

TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons) via Peace Prize? | RedState.

More hypocrisy: Obama raised more money from rich bankers than any Republican candidate.  Not just in the 2008 election, but this year!  Shhhhh . . . don’t tell the Occupiers!

Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.

. . .

As a result, Obama has brought in more money from employees of banks, hedge funds and other financial service companies than all the other GOP candidates combined, according to a Washington

Guess which candidate got 20% of his record funding from Wall Street?

You guessed right!  Seems kinda hypocritical to me for the President to bash Wall Street now.  Have your preferred media sources told you this?

See Obama attacks banks while raking in Wall Street dough:

Despite his rhetorical attacks on Wall Street, a study by the Sunlight Foundation’s Influence Project shows that President Barack Obama has received more money from Wall Street than any other politician over the past 20 years, including former President George W. Bush.

In 2008, Wall Street’s largesse accounted for 20 percent of Obama’s total take, according to Reuters.

When asked by The Daily Caller to comment about President Obama’s credibility when it comes to criticizing Wall Street, the White House declined to reply.

Shocking!

Fleischer continued by saying that President Obama and Democrats, such as New York Sen. Charles Schumer, who has received approximately $8.7 million from Wall Street since 1989, should stop taking campaign donations from Wall Street banks if they are so offended by their actions.

“They can’t say we hate Wall Street, but we love their money,” Fleischer said.

 

. . . the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog group that tracks lobbyist spending and influence in both parties, found that President Obama has received more money from Bank of America than any other candidate dating back to 1991.

 

Hey, I agree with the President!

It was bound to happen sometime.  I’m always looking for common ground.

This is going to leave a mark.  From July 3, 2008:

The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.  (Via Obama Admits He Is More Unpatriotic Than Bush!.)

So if adding $4 trillion in 8 years is really, really bad (and I think it was — Bush spent way too much!), and Obama has added $4 trillion in less than three years, then . . . ouch.

And it gets worse: Remember that Bush spent less than Democrats wanted and Obama would have run the debt even higher if not for those “evil” Tea Partiers stopping him.

I have a feeling you may be seeing this video in commercials.  Of course, the President will blame Bush, and bad luck, and ATMs, and Bush.

Update: Here’s a little collection of failed promises.  He must be very tired, because he insists he won’t rest until he solves the jobs problem.

Who’s to blame?

 

Who did President Bush blame for 9/11, the dot-com meltdown, etc.?  No one.

Who has President Obama blamed for the country’s problems?

  1. Bush
  2. Tea Partiers
  3. Bush
  4. ATMs
  5. Decades of politicians (probably Republicans, of course — see below)
  6. Bad luck
  7. Bush

The above list has zero exaggerations.

He pretends to be taking accountability below, but read it carefully and see how it is just another dodge.

I recommend electing an adult in 2012.  See Obama To CNN: “The Buck Stops With Me” : Stop The ACLU:

“The mess has been bigger than a lot of people anticipated at the time,” Obama said in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer from Peosta, Iowa. “We have made steady progress on these fronts but we’re not making progress fast enough. What I continue to believe is that ultimately the buck stops with me. I’m going to be accountable.”

Notice he did not say “I’m accountable.” What Mr. Obama was actually saying was that he’s not actually accountable for any of the issues that at the least, made no better, at worst, made a right big mess, but, that voters will hold him accountable. He trotted out the old Harry Truman line, and spun it around. Really

Throughout the interview, whether asked about the economy or next year’s campaign, the president struck a realist tone — conceding the scale of problems facing the country while insisting his administration is working diligently to fix them.

Obama said that even though Americans understand that the economy’s problems are “decades in the making,” voters are “impatient” to see more progress on the economy.

So, he just blamed everyone else for the financial decisions over the past few decades. He tended to also Blame Republicans and Bush throughout the rest of the interview, as well.

Obama has been criticized during his three-day Midwestern bus tour this week for not including new proposals to address the country’s unemployment problem. But in the CNN interview, he defended his administration’s work to coax Congress to act on infrastructure investments, free trade deals with South Korea and Panama, and payroll tax breaks for workers.

“The truth is everything we’ve done has been related to jobs, starting back with the Recovery Act,” Obama said.

True. They are related to jobs, mostly destroying them. What little progress was made created short term jobs (which is what “infrastructure investments” would do) at absurd costs to create.

Waterboarding = really, really bad. Shooting unarmed man in the face = really, really good.

At least that’s what Liberal-speak would have you believe.

To make matters worse, the only reason they were able to find the unarmed man to shoot him in the face was because of waterboarding.  They don’t seem bothered by that ethical dilemma, nor do they seem inclined to give credit to President Bush, whose policies were what led to this.

If you Ever Wondered How The Taking Out Of Osama Would Have Been Viewed By The Self Appointed American “Conscious” If Bush Were In Office?, then click the link and wonder no more. 

P.S. I don’t object to the shooting, given the circumstances.  I just don’t see why President Obama is running around like he was the SEAL who did the hard work.  And I really don’t understand the hypocrisy of his fans.

P.S.S. Aside from his “gutsy call,” why on earth did the administration divulge that they had found information on Bin Laden’s computers?  That disclosure had to be one of the most childish, bone-headed moves ever.  It may have made them look good for a day, but the information would have been much more valuable if we had kept it a secret.