This is really a simple fix for Stuart Smalley. Stop apologizing and come out as transgender. All Franken needs do is say he is a Lesbian trapped in a man’s body. Who would tell him how he should identify? Franken should understand that simply being a Progressive is not enough any more. That used to be a protected class that could get away with acting badly. No more! what Franken needs is to set himself in a new protected class, and transgender is such a class. Those who “identify” as something other than what they are? PROTECTED!
Divide, divide, divide. Is there anything the Left does not try to divide us over? Is there anything, any cause they will not hijack and weaponize to tear down America? The answer, is easy, no, there is not! The Left has hijacked every noble cause, civil rights, equality for women, and now, they are coming for dating, flirting, and yes, due process! They intend to use sexual harassment as another wedge, issue in their war on America.
What started with Harvey Weinstein’s use of his position to, well, what powerful men have used positions of power for since there were positions of power, has now blown up. Seemingly every actress, and some actors have been victimized, harassed. Now women on Capitol Hill are accusing politicians like Al Franken of improper behavior. It seems that everyone in America has been harassed, or propositioned, or victimized, and all of these claims are leading to some very murky waters.
Sexual harassment is not good, not at all. Of course we agree on that, don’t we? Sure! Now if we could just agree on what is and is not harassment. Not everyone agrees because we are all different. Some people see simple flirting as harassment. of course, we can not even agree on what flirting is either. I had a girlfriend, that I worked with, who used to accuse me of flirting every time I talked to another woman at work. So, to her a man smiling to a female coworker, was flirting. Yes, she was a very jealous person, which is why our relationship lasted a very short time. But, her view of what was flirting was very real.
The view of what is and is not harassment is very subjective. I used to work with a female bartender who was constantly smacking me on the ass. She was attractive, but she also smacked servers, of both genders (yes, there are only two genders) on the butts too. Occasionally I and others responded in kind. None of that was harassment, or was it? What if that woman runs for office one day and the media or some bloggers start digging into her past? Could she be painted as a serial harasser? Would her campaign be destroyed by Ass Smacking Gate? Maybe not, but what if she were a man? What if the same type of behavior, consensual behavior, went on in his past?
Now, anyone who has worked in the restaurant business knows is that touching happens a lot. The kitchen area where the food is run from is usually tight. And there is a lot of close physical contact. Is that harassment too? Some people would not be comfortable with such working conditions, and would go to a different job. But, is being uncomfortable that same as being harassed? To me, no, to some maybe so? You can see how messy this can get can’t you?
But the debate over workplace harassment is being turned into a wedge issue right now. Take Roy Moore, who I have never been the biggest fan of, and Al Franken, who I think is a disgrace to the Senate. They are both accused of “inappropriate behavior”. Do I know what these men did? Well, Franken tried to kiss Leeann Tweeden years ago, and took a picture pretending to fondle her breasts while she slept during a USO tour. Franken has also been accused of other incidents or groping and many are saying he must resign.
Apparently Moore dated 17 to 19-year-old women when he was 30-32. That was not all that uncommon forty years ago. Now the accusations that Moore sexually assaulted a 14-year-old are obviously very serious, but so are the accusations that this is simply a smear campaign. So, we have is a he said she said situation. The Left, however is pushing the notion that idea that we must believe the woman, because women “never lie” about such things. Anyone who does not wish to destroy due process or throw out the American principle of innocent proven guilty is now defending sexual assault or “blaming the victim”. Mike McDaniel writes about this and the inevitable consequences
Now, we discover–apart from being privileged, supreme and manfully toxic–the mere accusation of a clumsy pass decades old is sufficient to destroy male reputations, careers, and potentially, to deny a legitimately won seat in the Congress. All such accusations have become “serious,” defining, and condemnatory, because all women must be believed. Some have gone so far as to suggest women never lie about something as grave as rape, a belief that has caused Rolling Stone Magazineno end of anxiety. It also causes much sardonic laughter among honest, dedicated police officers, but they’re mostly extra-toxic males, so who listens to them? Having been one of them, and still carrying the baggage, I can attest that women do most certainly lie about rape, and pretty much everything else about which human beings can lie, but that’s just me being male again. Now I’m a teacher, which is similar to being a police officer in that everyone lies to you, but that’s a topic for another article. Women must be believed, even when they’re unbelievable–especially when they’re unbelievable, and double especially when they’re wearing pussy hats or dressed as vulva. What could bestow greater credibility than that?
Where does it end? There ain’t no end folks, as McDaniel explains
The whole thing is getting more and Moore confusing. Take the case of Roy Moore. He’s accused, by several women, of malicious dating, perhaps even a bit of–eeeuuuuw!–kissing. Where, gentle readers, do we draw the line on Congressional membership? If we knew the sexual urges, thoughts, and practices of our members of Congress, would we pretty much clean house (and Senate)? What is sufficiently disqualifying? Accusations of toe licking? Foot fetishes? A bit of light, consensual BDSM? Are breast men acceptable–not that any man is acceptable these days–but not butt or leg men? How about men that tell dopey jokes about women? And what do we do with men that enjoy viewing the naked female body? If the latter is the standard, whew! There goes masculinity, except on the coasts, on university campuses and in Congress, of course.
Ah yes, we must believe the women OR ELSE! And hey, even if the women are lying and even if a few men, even a left-wing US Senator get hurt in the process, oh well, right?
See? Let the war on men, flirting, etc. commence because SOCIAL JUSTICE! Lindin, and other leftists are very eager to sacrifice others to advance their twisted ideology! All that matters to the Left is the end goal, the means used to reach that goal? It is all good to them. And if, one day men are afraid to even look at a woman, talk to a woman, much less be attracted to her or ask her out, oh well, just remember it is all for the common good
Senator Markey has announced his support for the Iran deal that will let the terrorist regime inspect its own Parchin nuclear weapons research site, conduct uranium enrichment, build advanced centrifuges, buy ballistic missiles, fund terrorism and have a near zero breakout time to a nuclear bomb.
There was no surprise there.
Markey had topped the list of candidates supported by the Iran Lobby. And the Iranian American Political Action Committee (IAPAC) had maxed out its contributions to his campaign.
After more fake suspense, Al Franken, another IAPAC backed politician who also benefited from Iran Lobby money, came out for the nuke sellout.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the Iran Lobby’s third Dem senator, didn’t bother playing coy like her colleagues. She came out for the deal a while back even though she only got half the IAPAC cash that Franken and Markey received.
As did Senator Gillibrand, who had benefited from IAPAC money back when she first ran for senator and whose position on the deal should have come as no surprise.
The Iran Lobby had even tried, and failed, to turn Arizona Republican Jeff Flake. Iran Lobby cash had made the White House count on him as the Republican who would flip, but Flake came out against the deal. The Iran Lobby invested a good deal of time and money into Schumer, but that effort also failed.
Still these donations were only the tip of the Iran Lobby iceberg.
Gillibrand had also picked up money from the Iran Lobby’s Hassan Nemazee. Namazee was Hillary’s national campaign finance director who had raised a fortune for both her and Kerry before pleading guilty to a fraud scheme encompassing hundreds of millions of dollars. Nemazee had been an IAPAC trustee and had helped set up the organization.
Bill Clinton had nominated Hassan Nemazee as the US ambassador to Argentina when he had only been a citizen for two years. A spoilsport Senate didn’t allow Clinton to make a member of the Iran Lobby into a US ambassador, but Nemazee remained a steady presence on the Dem fundraising circuit.
Nemazee had donated to Gillibrand and had also kicked in money to help the Franken Recount Fund scour all the cemeteries for freshly dead votes, as well as to Barbara Boxer, who also came out for the Iran nuke deal. Boxer had also received money more directly from IAPAC.
In the House, the Democratic recipients of IAPAC money came out for the deal. Mike Honda, one of the biggest beneficiaries of the Iran Lobby backed the nuke sellout. As did Andre Carson, Gerry Connolly, Donna Edwards and Jackie Speier. The Iran Lobby was certainly getting its money’s worth.
But the Iran Lobby’s biggest wins weren’t Markey or Shaheen. The real victory had come long before when two of their biggest politicians, Joe Biden and John Kerry, had moved into prime positions in the administration. Not only IAPAC, but key Iran Lobby figures had been major donors to both men.
That list includes Housang Amirahmadi, the founder of the American Iranian Council, who had spoken of a campaign to “conquer Obama’s heart and mind” and had described himself as “the Iranian lobby in the United States.” It includes the Iranian Muslim Association of North America (IMAN) board members who had fundraised for Biden. And it includes the aforementioned Hassan Nemazee.
A member of Iran’s opposition had accused Biden’s campaigns of being “financed by Islamic charities of the Iranian regime based in California and by the Silicon Iran network.” Biden’s affinity for the terrorist regime in Tehran was so extreme that after 9/11 he had suggested, “Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran”.
Appeasement inflation has since raised that $200 million to at least $50 billion. But there are still no strings worth mentioning attached to the big check.
Questions about donations from the Iran Lobby had haunted Kerry’s campaign. Back then Kerry had been accused of supporting an agreement favorable to Iran. The parameters of that controversial proposal however were less generous than the one that Obama and Kerry are trying to sell now.
The hypothetical debates over the influence of the Iran Lobby have come to a very real conclusion.
Both of Obama’s secretaries of state were involved in Iran Lobby cash controversies, as was his vice president and his former secretary of defense. Obama was also the beneficiary of sizable donations from the Iran Lobby. Akbar Ghahary, the former co-founder of IAPAC, had donated and raised some $50,000 for Obama.
It’s an unprecedented track record that has received very little notice. While the so-called “Israel Lobby” is constantly scrutinized, the fact that key foreign policy positions under Obama are controlled by political figures with troubling ties to an enemy of this country has gone mostly unreported by the mainstream media.
This culture of silence allowed the Iran Lobby to get away with taking out a full-page ad in the New York Times before the Netanyahu speech asking, “Will Congress side with our President or a Foreign Leader?”
Iran’s stooges had taken a break from lobbying for ballistic missiles to play American patriots.
Obama and his allies, Iranian and domestic, have accused opponents of his dirty Iran deal of making “common cause” with that same terror regime and of treason. The ugly truth is that he and his political accomplices were the traitors all along.
Democrats in favor of a deal that will let a terrorist regime go nuclear have taken money from lobbies for that regime. They have broken their oath by taking bribes from a regime whose leaders chant, “Death to America”. Their pretense of examining the deal is nothing more than a hollow charade.
This deal has come down from Iran Lobby influenced politicians like Kerry and is being waved through by members of Congress who have taken money from the Iran Lobby. That is treason plain and simple.
Despite what we are told about its “moderate” leaders, Iran considers itself to be in a state of war with us. Iran and its agents have repeatedly carried out attacks against American soldiers, abducted and tortured to death American officials and have even engaged in attacks on American naval vessels.
Aiding an enemy state in developing nuclear weapons is the worst form of treason imaginable. Helping put weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists is the gravest of crimes.
The Democrats who have approved this deal are turning their party into a party of atom bomb spies.
Those politicians who have taken money from the Iran Lobby and are signing off on a deal that will let Iran go nuclear have engaged in the worst form of treason and committed the gravest of crimes. They must know that they will be held accountable. That when Iran detonates its first bomb, their names will be on it.
On Monday the Center for Competitive Politics filed a complaint with the Senate Select Committee on Ethics against nine U.S. senators: for interfering with IRS tax proceedings; for misusing official resources for campaign purposes; and for improper conduct that reflects poorly upon the Senate. Attempting to use the IRS to advance a partisan, electoral agenda is a fundamental assault on good government. We believe these elected officials have staged such an assault.
The complaint documents how the senators improperly interfered with IRS adjudications to further their party’s electoral prospects. They pressured the IRS to undertake income-tax investigations of specific organizations, to find that specific organizations were in violation of the law, to reach predetermined results pertaining to pending applications by individual organizations for nonprofit status, and to adopt specific regulatory interpretations and policies to further their campaign goals.
A year ago in May it became public knowledge that the IRS had improperly targeted conservative organizations. Republicans have since attempted to find a “smoking gun” directly linking the scandal to the White House. That likely does not exist, because that’s not the way these things are done. Meanwhile, their quest has helped enable the press to ignore obvious abuses of power emanating from the Senate.
After the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision on Jan. 21, 2010, Democrats adopted a campaign strategy of attempting to squelch the speech of conservative groups. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) – named in our complaint – introduced the so-called Disclose Act, saying on Feb. 11 that it would make targeted speakers “think twice” before speaking out. “The deterrent effect should not be underestimated,” he added.
At campaign fundraisers in the summer of 2010, President Obama repeatedly denounced conservative organizations for “running millions of dollars of attack ads against Democratic candidates,” identifying Americans for Prosperity by name. On Aug. 27 the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee filed a complaint with the IRS against Americans for Prosperity.
Senate Democrats twice failed, on straight party-line votes, to end a filibuster of the Disclose Act. Mr. Obama told Democratic donors that they had “tried to fix” the problem but failed.
The attempt to silence opponents through legislation may be ugly, but such hardball politics are not a violation of Senate ethics rules. After failing to pass Disclose, however, the senators in our complaint began a pattern of improper conduct aimed at pressuring the IRS to harass and investigate their political opponents.
Senators may inquire about agency practices and operations. But they cross an ethical line when they interfere in pending tax exemption applications or pressure an agency to investigate or prosecute specific organizations.
Just days after the final defeat of the Disclose Act in October 2010, Sen. Richard Durbin (D., Ill.) – another senator in our complaint – wrote to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman on his official letterhead to demand that the IRS “quickly examine the tax status of Crossroads GPS,” a major conservative nonprofit.
Mr. Durbin accused Crossroads GPS of breaking the law. He later admitted to Chris Wallace on Fox News that he sought the investigation because “they were boastful about how much money they were going to raise and beat Democrats with.”
Pressure on the IRS increased after the 2010 midterm Republican landslide. Mr. Schumer stated in one speech, “It’s clear we’re not going to pass anything legislatively,” due to “Republican control” of the House. “But there are many things that can be done by the IRS… and we have to redouble our efforts. We have not worked hard enough on this.” In a letter to the IRS on March 12, 2012, Mr. Schumer urged the service to investigate various groups identified through reference to news articles.
Michigan Sen. Carl Levin wrote at least seven letters to the IRS, and demanded that it investigate specific nonprofits. The IRS’s failure to launch these investigations, he wrote in one, was “unacceptable.” Mr. Levin also sought confidential nonprofit tax return information from the IRS, even after being warned, repeatedly, by IRS Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement Steven T. Miller, that such information could not be legally divulged.
These are just a few examples of abuse of power for electoral gain. The other six senators named in the complaint are Michael Bennet (D., Colo.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.), Al Franken (D., Minn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.) and Tom Udall (D., N.M.). Under the Senate Ethics Committee rules, when such a complaint is received – including by private individuals – “The Committee shall promptly commence a preliminary inquiry… of such duration and scope as is necessary” to find whether ethics rules were violated.
There is ample evidence that these efforts affected IRS policy, but the senators’ behavior is improper even if it did not. Senate rules require that the Ethics Committee take action. And we as citizens must make sure that the IRS is not abused by Democrats or Republicans for partisan electoral gain.
Such an obvious question about 16 Democrat Senators that are asking for the delay of an Obamcare tax on medical devices
Sixteen Democratic senators who voted for the Affordable Care Act are asking that one of its fundraising mechanisms, a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices scheduled to take effect January 1, be delayed. Echoing arguments made by Republicans against Obamacare, the Democratic senators say the levy will cost jobs — in a statement Monday, Sen. Al Franken called it a “job-killing tax” — and also impair American competitiveness in the medical device field.
The senators, who made the request in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, are Franken, Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer, Patty Murray, John Kerry, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Joseph Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Robert Casey, Debbie Stabenow, Barbara Mikulski, Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Jeanne Shaheen, and Richard Blumenthal. All voted for Obamacare.
Two other Democrats, senators-elect Joe Donnelly and Elizabeth Warren, also signed the letter. Donnelly voted for Obamacare as a member of the House. Warren was not in Congress at the time.
“The medical technology industry directly employs over 400,000 people in the United States and is responsible for a total of two million skilled manufacturing jobs,” the senators wrote in a December 4 letter to Reid. “We must do all we can to ensure that our country maintains its global leadership position in the medical technology industry and keeps good jobs here at home.”
Could such rank stupidity come from anywhere else but our government?
As he tries to explain here
- My post Friday afternoon, published 17 hours after HuffPo claimed there was a meeting Thursday on Capitol Hill, was astrenuous denial that any such meeting ever took place; anyone who thought it was something else clearly has reading comprehension problems.
- I provided a list of conservative writers — or, as Al Franken called them, “Lying Liars Who Lie” — who obviously can’t be trusted, if they were to claim that any such meeting took place.
- I specifically disclaimed having been in attendance at The Meeting That Never Happened, contrary to what any of those Lying Liars Who Lie might (hypothetically) claim.
- Why do liberals at HuffPo and BuzzFeed think they can trust Lying Liars Who Lie to tell them the truth about a meeting that (a) was off-the-record, and (b) never actually happened?
Vice President Joe Biden described former Saturday Night Live comedian, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., as a “leading legal scholar,” presumably in the Senate, today.
“He has been one of the leading legal scholars,” Biden said of Franken today, according to the pool report. He also said that Franken “is deadly serious” as a senator. He made the comments while recalling concerns that then-candidate Franken could not be taken seriously as a Senate candidate given his SNL work.
Franken’s comedic spirit got him in trouble on Washington. “This isn’t ‘Saturday Night Live,’ Al,” Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had to remind the freshman senator after Franken made faces while McConnell spoke during the Supreme Court nomination process for Elena Kagan.
Kagan is now regarded as an able defender of Obamacare, which could be struck after oral arguments last month seemed to indicate that five of the nine justices regard it as unconstitutional.