Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    2016 Election Tag

    Expect former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to quickly be turned from hero of the Democratic Party for being a Republican willing to work for Barack Obama, into just more trailer trash because of his tell-all book about that service which reinforces an accurate meme about Hillary Clinton: She has no core, and will say anything to win. From Chris Cillizza at WaPo, How Bob Gates’s memoir could haunt Hillary in 2016:
    In a new memoir of his time as secretary of defense in the Obama administration, Gates writes: “Hillary told the president that her opposition to the [2007] surge in Iraq had been political because she was facing him in the Iowa primary. . . . The president conceded vaguely that opposition to the Iraq surge had been political. To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me, was as surprising as it was dismaying.” Oomph. Just to jog your memory, Clinton announced that she opposed the Iraq surge being pushed by President George W. Bush in the days leading up to the announcement of her presidential bid. She instead proposed a freeze in troop levels in the country and advocated for a troop increase in Afghanistan.... At one level, Gates's allegation is not at all surprising. Politicians factor in politics when making decisions? Gasp! .... But, remember this is Hillary Clinton we are talking about. And, the criticism that has always haunted her is that everything she does is infused with politics -- that there is no core set of beliefs within her but rather just political calculation massed upon political calculation. Remember that she began slipping in the 2008 Democratic primary when her opponents seized on an overly political answer on giving drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants during a debate in late 2007.

    The NY Times published a lengthy account of the Benghazi attack that is being hyped as exonerating the Obama administration (and of course, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton), but in fact the report does nothing of the sort. The main thrust of the spin is that it was the video after all, a claim long since abandoned by almost everyone. There never was a doubt that the video inspired a generalize hostility, but that is a far cry from saying that the actual attackers who executed by contemporaneous internal administration accounts were motivated by the video. The reporting does not support that the video was what motivated the "several dozen" armed attackers, even if it created a general atmosphere of hostility. The NYT also plays a linguistic slight of hand, distinguishing between international al-Qaeda (NYT says no connection) and local al-Qaeda wannabees to try to prove that this was not an "al-Qaeda" attack. But local, independently operation al-Qaeda groups have been the motus operandi for years. That there was no phone call from Pakistan to the local group in Benghazi does not mean that this was not a planned Islamic extremist attack and instead some spontaneous reaction to a video:

    You better at least get ready. There's a buzz being fed. Warren gave a speech to the AFL-CIO today, and the "draft Warren" talk is starting. There is no bigger or better demagogue in American politics. No one is as keyed into the politics of...

    for President in 2016. He's our best, and maybe only, hope.  At a minimum he will generate numerous quotables regarding his likely opponent, Hillary.  If by some miracle he's the nominee, it will be a big f-ing deal when it comes to our chances of winning the White...

    NBC is preparing a Hillary Mini-Series. While we don't know the content, it's predicted that it will be favorable to her. The RNC is protesting, sending a letter (embedded below) to NBC threatening no cooperation with NBC as to 2016 presidential debates:
    I'm writing to you to express my deep disappointment in your company's decision to air a miniseries promoting former Secretary Hillary Clinton ahead of her likely candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016. As an American company, you have every right to air programming of your choice. But as American citizens, certainly you recognize why many are astounded at your actions, which appear to be a major network's thinly-veiled attempt at putting a thumb on the scales of the 2016 presidential election.... There's ample cause for concern. Executives and employees of Com cast, NBC's parent company have been generous supporters of Democrats and Secretary Clinton. David Cohen, Comcast's EVP, raised over $1.4 million for President Obama's reelection efforts and hosted a fundraiser for the president. Comcast Corp. employees have donated $522,996 to the president and donated $161,640 to Secretary Clinton's previous campaigns.... Out of a sense of fairness and decency and in the interest of the political process and your company's reputation, I call on you to cancel this political ad masquerading as an unbiased production. If you have not agreed to pull this programming prior to the start of the RNC's Summer Meeting on August 14, I will seek a binding vote of the RNC stating that the committee will neither partner with you in 2016 primary debates nor sanction primary debates which you sponsor.
    According to, a similar letter was sent to CNN.  (Letter added below, h/t Andrew Kaczynski) The RNC also has started a petition drive aimed at liberal media pro-Hillary bias:

    RNC Website re Pro Hillary Media

    Already the "waaahs" have started:

    Sure, let's start the speculation about 2016.  It helps take our minds off of Tuesday. And we need to plan ahead for the race against Hillary.  (It will be Hillary, don't you know.  Bill didn't do all that for Obama.) As longtime readers know, we were Perry-curious...