Fuzzy Shorts: Islam, Terrorism, and Leftist Useful Idiocy

So I’m looking at what is happening, and I’m a bit speechless.  Obama is clearly aiding and abetting ISIS.  American authority does nothing.

We. Are. Screwed.

Leftists cannot be intelligent or knowledgeable: that must be wiped out. Now.

In the hazy wake of the dust-up between crazed lunatic Ben Affleck (definitely on my “no buy list” no matter what he does; I will never ever spend one penny to support this lunatic who has made it clear that he hates me and everything that I believe in and stand for) and equally-crazed lunatic Bill Maher (he doesn’t do anything that I’d need to pay for, but if he did . . . not happening), I scratch my head.  What seems to have happened is that Affleck whined and wiggled about how anyone who opposes Islamists like ISIS is Islamophobic — good, Useful Idiot, Ben, good boy!!!, and Bill Maher, very briefly, was honest about Islam and the jihadi threat but is now walking that back because he doesn’t want to be called a Right Wing Nutjob.

And there, in that little blip of irrelevance, you see exactly what is wrong not only with the blinkered loony left but with the unblinkered loony left.  The blinkered loonies will quell, quash, quiet the unblinkered left in the name of political correctness.  Maher doesn’t defend his accurate assessment of Islamists; he worries that he’s being tarred with the right wing nutjob brush.  He’s concerned but not so concerned that he’s willing to take an actual stand. After all, the TEA Party thinks the same thing, so he can’t be right. He must be a crazy, tea bagging Nazi lunatic.  He knows he’s not, of course, but he’s not secure in that knowledge.  Everything for these types is about what other people think.  Maher backs down, backpeddles, whimpers in a corner.

There is no way that the vacant look on Affleck’s face was an affect; he is clueless, stumped, and foot-stompy mad about . . . you know, um, injustice.  Somehow.  He’s an embarrassment to all thinking peoples, but he wins because there is no room on the left for an actual “old school” democrat like Maher, believe in American exceptionalism?  RAAAACIST!  Believe in America at all on any level?  RAAACIST IMPERIAAAALIST ISLAMAPHOBE!!!  Believe what the terrorists themselves are saying about destroying Israel, Europe, and America?  Believe them when they say their goal is a global caliphate?  CLUELESS IMPERIALIST ISLAMAPHOBE SOMETHING ELSE REALLY REALLY BAD!!!

When a religious war is a religious war only to one side

ISIS is referring to American forces as the “crusaders.”

So let’s see . . . a group calling themselves the “Islamic States” and promising to fly the flag of Islam over the White House is referring to their enemies as the “crusaders”  is not engaged in a religious war.

Hmmm . . .

Does anyone know the truth about the Crusades? When and why Christians finally mobilized against the Muslim hordes?  If you don’t know, find out.  They know.  And they want another go at it.

They are doing it.  Now.  Get it?

Leftists Warn Against Moral Equivalence (Um, You Know, Unless the TEA Party, Christians, and/or Conservatives are involved)

So I’m watching some show on Fox News last night, and this crazy leftist shrew (Leslie something, maybe) was trying to explain how we can’t paint all of Islam with one brush.  This, coming from a lunatic who frequently and happily, paints all Christians, all conservatives, all anyone who disagrees with Obama as RAAAAACISTS who hate America . . . um, yeah, gonna buy that crap.

The nuanced worldview of the leftie loons typically fails to apply to any but their own protected groups.  ALL TEA Partiers are the same, ALL conservatives are the same, ALL Christians are the same, ALL anyone who is not a lockstep leftist loon is the same.

They only see nuance where none exists: in Islam.

Leftist blindness to hate among their special groups

The lesbian couple who are upset that they received black sperm is a good place to start here.  These white lesbians couldn’t be in the least bit racist, according to leftists, because they are already in a protected group.  When they whine about how they can’t cope with the nappy hair of their new child, they’re good parents . . . or something.  White people who knowingly adopt black children--those are the racists.  You know.  Somehow.

Gay people can’t be racist.  Black and Latino people can’t be against gay marriage.  Oh, just ignore the votes they cast!  Those don’t matter!  Against Prop 8?  Those Latinos?  Well, they don’t know any better; it’s not like they actually understand what homosexuality is, after all.  Stupid Latinos.

Islamic governments, not random Islamic extremists, crucify homosexuals?  Naw, that’s not true.  Oh, it is?  Well, if it is true, we have to make allowances . . . they are the stupidest, most backward people on the planet after all.  See!!! We respect the minorities and their ignorance, barbarism, and basic inability to function in civil society.  What do you expect, after all?  These are uneducated barbaric hordes who are swamped by poverty and lack of education.

What?  The majority of jihadi leaders have college educations, many from American and western universities?  Um, well, gaaaah.  That’s different.  Um, they are still mostly, you know, mostly, victims of American imperialism.  Ah, yes, the American imperialism that provided them with world class graduate degrees in engineering, biomedics, and nuclear technology?  Yeah, horrible that we inflict such advanced learning and education upon them.  Usually at tax-payer expense.

Well, that’s different.  It’s not like they can compete with us because of . . . racism and stuff.  Islamophobia!  That’s it!  That’s what’s holding them back.  If only we didn’t hate, we’d have peace and love and something like puppy breath combined with singing birds and dancing flowers.  Islam doesn’t hate women or gay people.  Yeah, sure, they crucify, behead, and stone them to death now, but that’s America’s fault. If we loved and embraced them, they’d be so happy with our degraded culture, our gay marriage, our pornography, and all of our other failing cultural mores that they wouldn’t crucify, behead, and stone us to death.

Really!

All we have to do to show our trust and faith in Islamic goodness is to disarm the American people.  Why would we need or want guns in our homes when all we face are people who are oppressed by America.  Um.  You know.  Or something.

 

ISIS, ISIL . . . Barbarians By Any Other Name

Much seems to be being made of what we call the barbarian hordes who are beheading American and British citizens with the stated goal of instilling terror in the hearts of the British and American people.  Personally, I’m not too bothered.  ISIS.  ISIL.  Gutter scum of hell.  Whatever.  They are Islamic nuts who are hell bent on killing everyone on earth who doesn’t follow their loony toon ideology, an ideology that calls for a global Islamic caliphate, an ideology—let’s not pretend otherwise–that Islam itself calls for, that the so-called “moderate” Muslims believe will occur.

I see the beheadings, and I don’t feel fear.  I am not cowed.  I am not terrorized.  Instead, I feel rage.  I feel outrage.  I feel motivated to stop the animals who commit these barbaric, uncivilized, unconscionable acts.  And most of all, I feel closer than ever to my God, a God who eschews the violent “conversion” of followers; my God neither needs nor wants followers who are coerced at the end of a dull blade into sputtering a false belief.  My God doesn’t need such indignity and would be horrified at such actions by His followers.  For all the anti-Christian crap we’ve heard for years, no Christian has yet held hostage a mall and systematically slaughtered anyone who could not recite the Lord’s Prayer (the equivalent of what these godless Islamic beasts did in India, Kenya, and wherever they spread their homicidal intolerance).

All these grasping lefties who can’t see what is right in front of their face, who refuse to see that we are all under attack, keep talking about Christianity as if we still lived in the 12th Century, as if we were still beating back the Muslim hordes of the Middle Ages Crusades.  Even the idiot man-child Obama has muttered Biblical passages and attempted to make sophomoric arguments about the violence of Christians and Jews.  Gee, look, there is a passage about an eye for eye in the Bible!  Oh my God, that must mean HAAAATE!  Never mind, that under Islamic Sharia law, there is a very very literal “eye for an eye” mandate, that hands and heads are severed, that victims of rape are buried up to their neck and stoned to death.  Never mind what actually happens!  Let’s look at what the Bible says, not what Christ’s followers DO.  Uh huh.

The main problem for these blathering idiots whose blinders are so large, so dark, so narrowing is that Christians haven’t beheaded people in the name of Christ in . . . oh, hundreds of years.  We don’t do that.  Well.  Yet.  Obviously, we’ll be drawn into this war that has been declared on and forced upon us, but when we are, we will not flinch, we will not whine, and we will not take the blame for Muslim aggression as we did in the past.

Enough!

If you haven’t watched one of the ISIS beheading videos, do it.  I’m not kidding.  Watch them conduct their “righteous” “work for Allah”; look at what we are facing.  See it.  I will never forget watching the beheading of Daniel Pearl.  It made me sick to my stomach, it made my heart ache, but it did not make me afraid.  It didn’t instill terror in my heart.

It pissed me off.

Big.

Watch one of those videos and then ask me if I care whether we call the barbarian hordes “al Qaeda” or “ISIS” or “ISIL” . . .   Better yet, ask yourself.

Millenials

According to the admittedly less-than-stable Kanye West, Obama’s lost his “cool”:

“The reason why Obama mention our name is cause we’re most relevant,” West said. “…He’s just saying that trying to be cool. Obama was supposed to be the coolest person on the planet now he gotta say our names to be cool. It’s like a feature, we feature in his interviews right now. They need a feature from us to get relevant.”

Now, I’m not cool, I’ve never been or aspired to be cool, but there’s something about it that you either have or you don’t have.  Or, apparently, that you somehow can make people believe you have. Obama’s empty phoniness somehow struck a chord with scores of millions of Americans in 2007-2008, and this was especially true among young Americans whose shiny, happy faces are indelibly burned into my brain.  That sort of mass . . . what? hypnosis? hysteria? hopeychangey lunacy? . . . is hard to forget (but easy to forgive).

The trouble with cool is that when you lose it, it’s lost.  Pretty much forever.  Ask the Fonz.  And Obama has lost his “cool” with the only group for which that really matters: the millennials.  Now, as someone who works daily with millenials, I’m the last person to bash them or think them the outrageously self-indulgent, solipsistic rabble that many conservatives imagine them to be.  They’re not.  Or at least not any more so than any other generation of America’s young.  They’re idealistic, they’re ill-informed, and they’re full of boundless energy and compassion.  Yes, I really said–and believe–that last part.  Mostly.  I don’t believe that the millenials understand compassion as we do or as most generations before them did, but that said, they are no less compassionate than their counterparts of the ’30’s or ’60’s.  And let’s face it, this administration is more the worst of 1930’s meets the worst of the 1960’s than it is anything else.

Obviously, each generation brings its own identity and spin to all that.  In the twenties, the nation’s young were rebelling against the regressive stranglehold of the Wilson White House and the Great War’s tremendous loss (an entire generation “lost”).  In the thirties, well, there wasn’t much rebelling going on because the regressive FDR government made surviving difficult for so many.  But when it did occur, it occurred in speakeasies and other places where alcohol could be obtained despite the progressives’ ban on it.  In the forties, the nation’s young were called to war again, and again met the challenge with courage and patriotism.  But when they came home, they were done with conflict, done with rebelling, and ready to sink into the most boring, staid existence they could create for themselves.

So in the fifties, the nation’s young were rebelling against a stagnant, docile, detached yet confining, and prosperous culture.  In the sixties, the nation’s young were rebelling against . . . everything good and decent in the world (they’re the ones now running this country . . . into the ground).  In the seventies, the nation’s young were rebelling against all the isms that sprung up in the 60’s, including of course, a deep and abiding hatred for America that began in the ’60’s, and in the eighties, the nation’s young were rebelling against the sex, drugs, and free love excesses of the ’60’s and ’70’s with their own version of excess that tended to be more materialistic, less idealistic, and slightly (only slightly) less amoral than the youth of the previous two decades.

Every generation does its share of rebelling, and in every case, it’s just as self-involved, self-indulgent, and self-centered as this generation’s.  Teens and young adults are always about the self.  Even if they are spouting nonsense about world peace and stopping war and closing Gitmo, it’s always because it will make them feel better and think better about themselves, not for any altruistic purpose beyond that.

This is why we have a seemingly irreconcilable tension on every level of the millenials’ worldview: they “hate hate”; they are “intolerant of intolerance”; they support ever-expanding, ever-stifling big government and then bemoan their loss of privacy and individual liberty to that all-powerful state; they support Islam–the most oppressive, discriminatory, violent “religion” on the planet–but condemn all other religions as oppressive, discriminatory, and violent; they tout equality and lawfulness while cheering the clear lawlessness of this president, a man whose administration has admitted to targeting and silencing political opponents; they support “socialism” and “communism” without really understanding what either is, and when confronted with the reality of what these destructive ideologies are, they turn away because it touches them (to them, in their under- and ill-informed ignorance, they honestly believe that redistribution means taking from others and giving to them, when it turns out that it means taking from them and giving to others, they don’t like so much.); they support the view that every human being should be treated equally, that all people are created equal . . . at least in theory. Because they also support affirmative action, “hate crime” legislation, and a hundred other things that undermine that original concept (is murder more wrong because the victim is gay, female, a minority? Well, arguably, no. Murder is murder, and it’s wrong.  Period.  But not to the millenials; murder’s just dandy if the victim is a white male or a conservative.).

These, and a zillion more, ideological tensions will play themselves out. These “kids” will grow up, they will experience life as it is, and they will figure out that they were myopic, prejudiced, judgmental, intolerant, bullying, and unkind.  And they will regret it.  But that’s not for another twenty or so years.  So what happens in the meantime?

For now, at least, millennials who had already lost the shiny-happy, glazed Stepford-stare are starting to realize that big government means a lot more than some utopian existence for all.   They see, in their pocketbooks and wallets, that the Obama economy is destroying not just their health care, but also any chance they may have of “making it,” of living their version of the American Dream.  Their reality, sadly, is that college grads move back home for a few (or ten) years, that welfare and foodstamps are a great way to subsist, that being less than they are is not only okay but actually encouraged.  And some few will not accept that.  Some few will stand up and say “Enough! I am more than this, I can do more than this, I will not accept this.”

That isn’t happening now, so don’t get your hopes up about the polls saying that millenials are fleeing Obama.  They’re disappointed, their Messiah didn’t pan out, but as one millenial wrote over at PuffHo:

With every day spent in the White House, the president’s bright-eyed idealism seemed to shift toward the same old politics of every man who came before him. In turn, my idealism shifted right along with his. Am I disappointed? Of course. Would I vote for him again? Absolutely.

I’m not the only millennial living with this contradiction. Harvard’s new study also showed that 46 percent of millennials surveyed would vote for Obama again. Of course we would — because the alternative is way scarier.

This millennial, I think, speaks for millions, and I highly recommend reading her entire essay.  She’s wrong, of course.  The president’s “bright-eyed idealism” never shifted; she just didn’t understand what his ideals are.  The biggest thing here, though, is that she–and millions of millenials like her– think he and his ilk are “better” than “the alternative.”

The alternative being, of course, any conservative.  Freedom is scary to millenials who have been nurtured and raised to believe that the all-powerful, ever-benevolent government is the answer to all that troubles us.  Someone “hating on” you?  Let’s pass a law!  Someone eating too much, drinking too much soda, using too much styrofoam?  Make a law!  Someone not “getting their fair share”?  Make a law!  The idea that people can make their own decisions is not only alien but truly frightening to these young people.  It won’t be in twenty or thirty years, but for now, they need someone to tell them what to do, what to think, what to believe, and how to be.

In many ways, we have failed them.

The sad part is that they choose a known pathological liar for that role.  Is he as “cool” as he used to be?  Hell to the no.  Not even to them.  But until they realize that they are fully-functioning human beings who don’t need their every move dictated to them, they will continue to cling to him. Not because he’s cool but because he’s (still) (they hope) better than . . . freedom.

 

 

Fuzzy Shorts: Individual Market, Regressive FAIL, Obama’s Latest Lie, and 2016

Not Just the Individual Market. D’oh

Everyone is focused on the current massive (in the tens of millions) cancellations of health insurance policies–that people liked and wanted to keep–in the individual market.  I guess that makes sense as these are the ones that are being sent out . . . now.  But it won’t be long before that Obama delay of the employer mandate kicks in, and pretty much everyone with employer-based insurance will find themselves in the exact same boat.  Or actually, without a boat.  Or a paddle.

I cannot wait to see how the leftists who are currently ridiculing, bullying, and otherwise being their usual holier-than-thou selves will react when it’s they who are hit with losing the plan they like and being forced into the 0care exchanges at not only higher monthly rates but with higher co-pays and deductibles.  That’s mean.  I shouldn’t be eagerly anticipating that . . . ugh.  But I kind of am (bad Fuzzy!).

Of course, as I predicted in 2009, the blame will go to the companies who are doing exactly what the law demands: paying the slight fine rather than subsidizing ridiculously expensive “comprehensive” plans that few want and no one needs.  This is the same scheme built into 0Care that rewards the young and healthy for NOT buying a plan (who wouldn’t pay the comparatively small tax-fine-abomination instead of being hit with insane costs for coverage they neither want nor need?).  The law was designed to fail in this way, and anyone who has employer-based insurance now . . . get a clue, you won’t have it in two years.  Period.  So get over your “but I’m not on the individual market” so I’m not speaking up nonsense.  Soon, they are coming for you.

Regressive’s Whining Introspection Provides Food for Thought for TEA Partiers

This is pretty “old” now, but obviously, I feel it’s worth mentioning.  Absolutely ages and ages ago (in today’s “if it was said yesterday, it doesn’t matter” blog cycle), some regressive blogger I’d never heard of bemoaned the failure of the “progressive blog movement.”  It’s a lot of belly-button gazing, myopic, unintelligent drivel for the most part (gee, we had so much POWER! We were meeting IMPORTANT people! We MATTERED!), but there was one part that really caught my attention:

Unlike the Tea Party, most left wingers don’t really believe their own ideology.  They put partisanship first, or they put the color of a candidate’s skin or the shape of their genitals over the candidate’s policy.  Identity is more important to them than how many brown children that politician is killing.

So progressives have no power, because they have no principles: they cannot be expected to actually vote for the most progressive candidate, to successfully primary candidates, to care about policy first and identity second, to not take scraps from the table and sell out other progressive’s interests.

The Tea Party, say what you will about them, gets a great deal of obeisance from Republicans for one simple reason: they will primary you if they don’t like how you’ve been voting, and they’ll probably win that primary.  They are feared.  Progressives are not feared, because they do not believe enough in their ostensible principles to act on them in an effective fashion.

I, of course, have been saying this for years.  The real legacy of this century’s “new” progressive movement (that would take us back to the 1930’s, not exactly a banner decade for America) will be not only utter failure but loss of any and all credibility (how seriously will ANYONE take regressives when a Republican is elected and he or she chooses to continue Obama’s policy of continuing Bush’s policies?  Not. At. All. They–everyone from the remarkably silent during Obama’s reign Code Pink to the not-quite-as-silent-but-still-complicit at sites like the Daily Kos and Firedoglake–will be laughingstocks and ridiculous jokes to one and all.).

This regressive blogger guy is exactly right: their lack of principles is what failed them, what will always fail them.

The Sorry President and His Sorry Acolytes

Poor old Ron Fournier, devout Obot, worshiper at the Styrofoam columns of a Styrofoam president.  Fournier bemoans the Liar in Chief’s latest lie, and he actually gets some things right:

I’m sorry you couldn’t finesse a single Republican vote for health insurance reform in 2010.

[snip]

I’m sorry you campaigned for reelection on the famous false promise: “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan. Period.”

I’m sorry your aides debated whether to tell the full truth (that people could keep their insurance only if it hadn’t changed and if it met your standards) and decided instead to institutionalize the lie.

I’m sorry that when Americans recognized the deception you tried to reinvent history: “What we said was you can keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law passed.” No, no, no, no, no—that’s not what you guys said.

I’m sorry you didn’t trust Americans with the truth.

Heh. It’s hard not to laugh, isn’t it?  Poor, sad, pathetic Fournier, still pinning his “hope” for “change” in a liar and a charlatan.

Dear Ron: Obama cannot trust Americans with the truth because the truth is not, and will never be, acceptable to us.  Period.  You live in a crazy utopian dream world that has nothing to do with actual American values, and if you think that Obama can stand up and just say, woot!  I wanna be king of the world, and that anyone will do anything but laugh. Long and loud. You are delusional.  But then, we already know you’re delusional because we read your columns.

Brief Note on 2016

I’m pretty much done with the crazy.  I voted for McCain in 2008.  I voted for Romney in 2012.  Neither man I really liked for the job, they were just better than the alternative (well, in McCain’s case, perhaps, not so much).  This time, it looks like we’ll get another nonentity, regressive Obot (Christie seems to be the main one at the moment, and I can’t even begin to tell you how much I loathe the man.).

Next time . . . I’m all for swinging this crazy pendulum far far far right.  We need a frothing-at-the-mouth, rightwing nutjob, and we need him or her now.  Sadly, we don’t really have one, so I’m looking at Ted Cruz . . . and I’m looking at Rand Paul.  I’m not thrilled with Rand because he’s been too cautious lately, too . . . calculating.  I distrust that.  A lot.

And I want someone like Allen West on either ticket because he GETS it with regards to the Islamofascist threat and will know how to undo the immense damage that Obama has done to our military.  If West can’t or won’t run for president or VP, he simply has to be involved in fixing the military mess that Obama and his traitorous horde have created.

Obama’s Illegal War Led To Benghazi Terror Attack

Okay, this is the last straw on Benghazi for me.  Now the Coward in Chief is blaming the CIA for his own failures . . . or were they failures from his perspective? That, to me, is the real question here.

So let’s look back, shall we, to why we were even in Libya in the first place.  Remember the time that Obama went to Congress and got the Constitutionally-required approval to take military action in Libya?  Remember how Libya was a clear and direct threat to the United States?  Remember the required roll call votes from both houses of Congress before any such military action can take place? No? Well, that’s because none of that happened.  Obama decided, seemingly on a whim, to take America to war with the UN’s authorization, not that of the United States Congress.  Here’s what he said at the time:

“Today,” Obama said on March 19, “I authorized the Armed Forces of the United States to begin a limited military action in Libya in support of an international effort to protect Libyan civilians. That action has now begun. In this effort, the United States is acting with a broad coalition that is committed to enforcing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which calls for the protection of the Libyan people.” (source link)

Yes, you read that right, Obama unilaterally decided to take America to war with Libya.  He did not, as President Bush did in Iraq, seek and obtain the approval and support of Congress.  Obama’s a “global citizen,” and his authority, he seems to imagine, comes from the world, not the American people.  He truly sees himself as above both the Constitution and Congress, and he started the war in Libya that was so mismanaged, so ill-conceived, so horribly executed that the direct result of his hubris and illegal, unconstitutional action was the horrific rape and slaughter of an American ambassador and the murders of two former SEALs and an embassy aid.

Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty, and Sean Smith died as the direct result not only of Obama’s immensely-misguided illegal war in Libya but also because the Obama administration was desperate not to draw attention to the war and made serious lapses in judgement to cover their tracks.  For months, the Libyan ambassador’s staff, including its security staff, requested more security.  And were denied.  Not only were they denied the additional security they requested, but they also had much of what security they once had removed, against the ambassador’s objections.  This was in August, after the UK saw which way the wind was blowing and withdrew their diplomats and staff from Benghazi in June.  Not Obama.  He insisted that they remain there, effectively unprotected, on the anniversary of 9/11 and in the midst of Islamic terrorists.

We now know that once the attack was launched, the WH and State Department knew within two (2) hours that the attack was a terrorist attack.  We also now know that not one, as originally thought, but two (2) “stand down” orders were issued to any and all nearby American forces that could intervene and protect the ambassador and his staff.  And we further know that only the president can issue “stand down” orders in these instances.  We also know, of course, that both Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, former Navy SEALs who were in a nearby CIA annex, ignored those direct orders and attempted a rescue.  All this talk about how a rescue was impossible, forces too far away, etc. are clearly lies.

After the attack, Obama noted that the deaths of an American ambassador and three other American citizens was “not optimal,” and he insisted that the terrorist attack that he knew full-well was just that was instead the result of a YouTube video.  Imagine!  Both he and Hillary said this with a straight face; indeed, Hillary looked the mothers of the fallen former SEALs in the eye and told them that she would ensure that the video’s creator would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  Let that sink in.  I’m sure the still-imprisoned film-maker thinks of little else than his being a “patsy” who was thrown in prison to protect Obama and Hillary.

[Edited to add] And let’s not get too caught up in the latest lies that Obama didn’t know what was going on in Benghazi.  Remember this photo that came out the next day, on 9/12/12:

Ambassador Stephens_BenghaziAnd remember how we all laughed in disbelief when Obama stated that same day that these people were actually dragging the ambassador to the hospital?  Well, it turns out that he was right, that he did know what he was talking about, because we found out during last week’s Benghazi hearing that Ambassador Stevens was taken–get this–to a hospital run by the very terrorist group that had attacked the embassy.  Gee, I wonder why he “disappeared” for several hours and what horrors he faced if he was still alive at that point.  So on day two, Obama not only knows that the attack was a terror attack but exactly where the missing ambassador’s body was. [end edit]

So what do we have here?  A president who unilaterally and illegally takes our military to war in Libya, removes security from diplomats when other nations are removing their diplomats, issues orders that any and all nearby responding forces to the terrorist attack “stand down,” and then tries to hide the fact it was a terrorist attack at all.  Remember, he knew within two hours that a terror attack took place but for weeks afterwards, including in an address to the UN, he blamed the video.  He even had the temerity to spend American taxpayer money to run ads in the Middle East apologizing for the flipping video!  I have no words.

And now, the Obama White House is so desperate to distract attention from Benghazi that it’s willing to admit that its IRS was targeting, intimidating, and silencing conservative, pro-life, and Christian organizations (I write “was,” but we don’t know that it’s stopped or that it won’t start again when the heat is off).  Remember, we wouldn’t even know about the IRS thuggery if the IRS itself hadn’t said something about it.  What on earth could be so explosive about Benghazi that the president is willing to show his true Chicago-style, thug-like use of the IRS to strong-arm his political opposition in direct violation of both laws and the Constitution?