Watching the squirming

Okay, call me perverse, but I love to watch MSNBC and Rachel Madcow when the Democrats are squirming about something.  This week has been classic with Bengazi, IRS targeting and AP phones.  So what are the Dems saying?  EJ Dione said that it is all a tempest in a tea party pot. That most people support the President.  He says that Obama won decisively (what? 50.3%?) and  that there will always be a disgruntled 20 or 30 percent that don’t adore the Prez, but ‘we aren’t going to allow them to speak’. Whoa! Does that include the AP? 

 The British magazine, The Economist, often sympathetic to our Democrats, sees Obama as longing for his winning majority of the election.  His very capable campaigners managed to get minorities and youth and single mothers to vote where they usually have poor turnout.  But once the election was over, these folks aren't very political and they disappear.  Hence Obama continues to operate his campaign organization, raising money like it was an election year, trying desperately to keep these people inspired to vote for their local Democrat congressional challenger.  But the low-info voters don't even know who their current congressman is.  So Obama faces a dilemma.

            Hardball Matthews had a leading authority in the form of a cub reporter whose name I missed but he looked all of 22 years old.  Breathlessly he explained that someone had told him that the reason Bengazi had gone bad was that Ambassador Stevens had twice told the guys in Washington he needed no help, thank you.   And so that’s why the military was told to stand down twice.  Matthews celebrated this point with a belief void of any skepticism.  He told the young guy to follow up on this story since it surely would exonerate both Hillary and B. Hussein.  Hmm.  Methinks something is rotten in Denmark since we have Steven’s diary complaining loudly about lack of security.  Moreover, if such would have been the case, doesn’t one think that President Out Of The Loop would have immediately jumped on this explanation from the first day? “It was very sad that the Ambassador refused for us to intervene…”

            Representative Joe Crowley (does he get his debate points from Candy?) defended IRS outgoing head honcho Steve Miller saying that the R’s were making partisan mockery of the hearing in asking Miller a lot of hard questions.  “Same o’, same o’” he insisted.  Did Crowley get the memo that Miller was fired by Obama?

Bett Midler, upon learning that IRS had targeted Tea Party groups, said “thank you! Thank You, IRS!” Alec Baldwin said the IRS scandal is “merely a Rovian pushback.”  (Push em back! Push em back! way back!) Bill Mahrer noted, "The IRS targeted people who want to abolish the IRS? Shocking, like getting pulled over more after U put on the F--- the Police bumpersticker." You know, I’ve never had an 'F--- the Police' bumpersticker let alone put one on.

            Now returning from La-la land, I notice that my plumbing supply house, which has had no political postings in several decades of business, now has a picture taped to their cash register.  It is of Obama’s face photoshopped onto Sargeant Schulz and captioned, “I see not’ing, I hear not’ing.” “Everybody is getting a big kick out of it,” Fred insists.  Maybe he should give his poll results to EJ Dione.

            If the IRS management knew about the targeting in 2011, and had a meeting about it in May 2012, and then allowed it to continue, allowed confidential data about the Tea Parties to be handed over to a leftist PAC which specializes in attack ads, then I have a suggestion for House Republicans.  Simply refuse to allocate any funds for the IRS until a Special Prosecutor is appointed by a panel of federal judges.  Stand by the decision when Obama and the Dems scream about government shut-down.  Then refuse to let IRS administer Obamacare until it is cleared by the Prosecutor.  It’ll get their attention.  But then crazy guys like me suggest such things because we like to watch the Dems squirm.