Hat tip: Instapundit
The Clinton’s, B.J. and Mrs., believe rules are for the other people:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton is facing a new set of questions about ethics and transparency – the sort that have dogged her and husband Bill for decades.
The latest disclosure, that Clinton used a personal email account while serving as secretary of state, comes on the cusp of her likely second bid for president. Combined with recent news about her family foundation raising money from foreign governments while she was at the State Department, it added fresh fuel Tuesday to the longstanding charge the Clintons play by their own rules.
Problems dog the Clinton’s the same way fire hydrants dog dogs, they seek them out.
Describing the email account Mrs. Clinton used to conduct official business as Secretary of State misses much of the point. Mrs. Clinton did not merely use her existing private email account. Rather she created a domain for the purpose, from Washington Post:
Examining the registry information for “clintonemail.com” reveals that the domain was first created on Jan. 13, 2009 — one week before President Obama was sworn into office, and the same day that Clinton’s confirmation hearings began before the Senate.
Reax, Neo-Neocon:
There are two newish problems for Clinton, both related to her tenure at State.
The first is the fact that the Clinton Foundation accepted foreign contributions while Hillary was Secretary. The second is that during the time she held that office she never used government email to transact her official business, instead relying on a private email account.
The revelations may be new. The problems are old. The Clinton’s use public office to amass personal wealth and view themselves exempt from the law.
I said some time ago as regards the Palestinians that they have never kept their promises, as regards peace talks. Not once. Since the Palestinians are on the controlled end of the leash, and the leash is being handled by the Iranians, how can the Iranians be any different?
The answer, of course, is that they can’t. And that’s precisely the message that Benjamin Netanyahu delivered today. And rightly so. At the link, you will find both a transcript and the video. Well worth your time.apple inc com are you will find both a transcript and the video. Well worth your time.
Addendum: DavidL
The Full Bibi, video:
Memo to the Dim Won: If you want to be known as the Leader of the Free World, you have to stand for freedom. Bibi does. You do not.
The regime’s national security adviser brought down the house at AIPAC, video:
One suspects her boss will not be happy.
Hat tip, Nice Deb.
Delayed maybe by the speed restriction on Obama Net, the Snark of the Day, from Haile Selassie I, Emperor of Ethiopia, 1936:
I have heard it asserted that the inadequate sanctions already applied have not achieved their object. At no time, and under no circumstances could sanctions that were intentionally inadequate, intentionally badly applied, stop an aggressor. This is not a case of the impossibility of stopping an aggressor but of the refusal to stop an aggressor.
Hat tip and BSWK to Clarice Feldman, American Thinker:
So, now, according to The Hill, John Boehner has promised to stop these new internet regulations that Obama has forced on the American people.
The answer to your question, is no, I don’t believe him. Not for a split second. He simply doesn’t have the track record of someone who actually follows through on such promises.
I have long since been out of patience, and the American people are running out of time. These results on our freedoms must stop, and John Boehner is not the one to solve the problem. In truth he needs to be replaced. Immediately.
Glenn Reynolds, today, has a fairly decent compilation of lamestream attacks on Scott Walker, all of which turned out to be outright falsehoods.
Yes, I believe I’ve said before, anybody that sets the left off this badly, deserves serious consideration from any voter happens to be to the right of, say, Fidel Castro.
As Plato, Abraham Lincoln, Will Rodgers Woody Allen once quipped: “Ninety percent of like is just showing up.”
Any good team can win at home. In order to be great, a team has to win on the road. For a Scott Walker, or Ted Cruz, playing CPAC is a home game. For Jeb Bush, it is a road game. Bush went to CPAC, and what he said matters less than the fact that he went, from Jason Russell, Washington Examiner:
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, trying to tamp down conservative criticism over his support for Common Core, told thousands of activists on Friday that he opposes the federal government pushing any kind of educational standards on states, as President Obama’s Department of Education has been doing.
[…]
Fox News host Sean Hannity noted during the question and answer session that Bush instituted the first statewide voucher program. Hannity then asked Bush to address the issue of Common Core. Bush defended his support of Common Core by saying it was part of comprehensive education reform.
Jeb showed, and defended Common Core. Will Mrs. Clinton ever defend Benghazi?
Addendum: I am not sure what to make of this. For what is worth the WaPo seemed, or at least pretended, to like Bush’s appearance, from Washington Post:
Good luck, smart organization and a solid performance in the face of adversity is what successful presidential campaigns are built on. Bush and his team knew they were going into a tough crowd and he (and they) did everything they could to mitigate those issues. Does that mean Bush won a bunch of converts in a room packed with an amalgam of libertarians, social conservatives and young people just there to have a good time? Probably not. But he didn’t — and doesn’t — need to in order to be the nominee. What he has to do is convince those folks that he’s not nearly as different from them as they might think.
Very interesting.
I see David has already addressed this here, and it seems to me somehow inappropriate to put an addendum on his tribute. So instead I’ll write something here.
I said over at Billys that sometimes it’s the combination of the actor and the role. It’s that combination and how the actor handles things that makes the character special.
Nimoy, in my view was not a spectacular actor, at least in terms of being able to handle any role they were thrust into. I can’t think of any other role that he played over the years that came to be as well known or dearly loved as his portrayal of Spock.
In truth, Spock was as much part of Leonard Nimoy as Leonard Nimoy was of Spock. By that I mean to say that Leonard Nimoy brought the character of Spock and indeed of the entire mythical race of Volcans himself. He helped define both his character and other characters who would come along behind him in the many iterations of Star Trek that would follow. When he took on the task, the role was far from clearly defined. In short, he ended up writing that definition. Story editors and script writers forever have the character has he portrayed it in mind. Zachary Quinto, for example, has his work cut out for him playing into that klegacy.
I cannot imagine that the series would have been nearly as popular as it turned out to be both the original and those that came after, absent what he brought to that role.
I for one, would be most interested in hearing what Brent Spiner had to say on these points, since he found himself in a similar situation ..having to define the role on the fly.
Thrusters on full.
The final beam-up, Leonard Nimoy dead at age 83, from Hollywood Reporter:
Leonard Nimoy, the Hollywood renaissance man who fashioned a long and prosperous career as the supremely logical and cerebral science officer Mr. Spock from Star Trek, has died, his wife, Susan Bay Nimoy, told The New York Times. He was 83.
Live long and prosper.
Two for one Friday. The Snarks of the Day, from Carly Fiorina via Ashe Schow, Washington Examiner:
“[Mrs. Clinton] tweets about women’s rights in this country and takes money from governments that deny women the most basic human rights.”
Bonus quip:
“She tweets about equal pay for women but won’t answer basic questions about her own offices’ pay standards.”
Yes Carly faces an uphill fight to get the republican nomination. However, her accomplishments are her own, and not her husband’s.
It’s starting to look like Scott Walker is gaining some serious momentum. Apparently, he wowed the CPAC crowd. And here is a clue, Jeb Bush didn’t even bother showing up.
Walker in general has very positive numbers amongst GOP rank and file, but not among the GOP elite. In other words, the Rockefeller crowd. Which is probably why he scores so well amongst the rank and file. I’ll tell you the truth. It is my feeling, and my prediction, that nobody that the Rockefeller crowd approves of who will win in the general election. It’s just not going to happen.
And as a personal note I figure that anybody that sets mega-ditz Cher Bono off as easily as Scott Walker does, deserves serious consideration.
Addendum: DavidL:
A story this good deserves a picture.
I kinda think, the blog’s media library could use a picture, or two of Walker.
Addendum Eric
Apparently I spoke too soon. He just hasn’t spoken yet. Of course, the word is that there are a large number of people who are planning on leaving when he does show up.
The late Fred Phelps was a vile and petty man, who claimed, I say falsely, to be able to read the mind of God, from Hill:
Fred Phelps, founder of he staunchly anti-gay Westboro Baptist Church, had a long and contentious relationship with the FBI, according to the late pastor’s newly released 250-page bureau file.
Phelps, who died in March 2014 at age 84, was known best for leading protests at funerals to highlight the church’s crusade against homosexuality
Why the Federal Bureau of Investigation saw fit to probe the affairs of a preacher from Kansas was not made clear. The primary thrust of of investigations appears to have been threat against the Westboro Baptist Church. I wonder if the F.B.I. would have been equally tolerant to threat to such leftward institutions as say the National Association for the Advancement of [Liberal] Colored People or the domestic terror operation known as the Southern Poverty Law Association? I think not. Unlike the late liberal icon, Teddy “Senator Oldsmobile” Kennedy, Phelps was never suspected of killing anybody.
Yet for what ever reason, Hill seems more concerned about attempting to muddy Phelps’ name than dealing with any real problems.
Irony missed, one M.L. Nestel, does Full Phelps in an attempt to bash the late reverend, from Daily Beast:
God Hates Cowards
Cop-Bashing, Gay-Hating Westboro Church Begged Feds for Protection
Fred Phelps, the world’s loathsome preacher, loved to talk smack about cops—until he needed them to keep him safe.
He was dubbed the “Hater-In-Chief” for creating one of the most reviled religious institutions in the world.
The late Reverend Phelps had no ability to know who or what God hates or not. Than made Phelps an ignorant bigot. Likewise, Nestel has no more ability than Phelps to know who or what God hates, That also makes Nestel an ignorant bigot.
With all of the money and spend the whole being spent to defeat the Keystone oil pipeline, from Enviro zealots who apparently want us to move back to the 14th century, I’ve noticed a trend in the arguments. The complaint that seems to be prevailing here is that the oil coming from the tar sands is extraordinarily dirty, and will therefore make the pollution problem is that much the worse because of the origin.
This, of course, is where actual thought enters the process. Hold on to your keyboard.
Has the EPA altered standards to allow additional pollution because of the type of oil involved? Or is it going to have to be refined to meet the still existing EPA standards? In other words, there is no any additional pollution risk regardless of where the oil comes from. Regardless of its makeup.
Regardless of any other factor.
The argument against the pipeline is pure fallacy
If you love something, you do not try to fundamentally change it.
From the City Journal…
Patient, Heal Thyself
Treatments from our own cells could cure many diseases—if Washington will only allow it to happen.
Yes, well, remember the quote I posted the other day from Ace?
The true damage of regulation is not what we can see…it is what we will never have.
This would be an excellent case in point.
