BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI!

So today the House Benghazi committee released its report on all of the things that President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did to murder those four brave Americans.

At least that is what it sounds like over on the Right Wing crazy pages.

What did we actually learn after this ninth investigation?

Well let's see.

Courtesy of the New York Times: 

Ending one of the longest, costliest and most bitterly partisan congressional investigations in history, the House Select Committee on Benghazi issued its final report on Tuesday, finding no new evidence of culpability or wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton in the 2012 attacks in Libya that left four Americans dead. 

The 800-page report, however, included some new details about the night of the attacks, and the context in which it occurred, and it delivered a broad rebuke of government agencies like the Defense Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department — and the officials who led them — for failing to grasp the acute security risks in the Libyan city, and especially for maintaining outposts in Benghazi that they could not protect.

So what we learned is that there were flaws in the intelligence and that the security situation in Benghazi was deteriorating.

Wait, didn't the other investigations already tell us that?

Yes, they did.

So was there anything else?

Courtesy of NPR: 

The 800-page report found that despite President Obama and then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's "clear orders," the military failed to immediately send a force to Benghazi and that nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed — almost eight hours after the attacks began. 

The report says none of the relevant military forces met their deployment timelines to respond to the attack and that a "Fleet Anti-terrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times."

Oh, so the military screwed up?

Is this the same military that has been all but deified by the conservatives in this country?

(Update: By the way just to clarify, by all reports even if this military response HAD happened immediately they still would not have arrived in time to save Ambassador Stevens and his men.) 

Well come on, let's cut to the REAL reason that this investigation was launched in the first place.

What did report find about what Hillary Clinton did after the attacks which proves she is unfit to seek the Oval Office?

The report had harsh findings about the military but little new about the role of Hillary Clinton, whose response as secretary of state had been thrust into the spotlight by the committee's investigation.

So ultimately Hillary remains unscathed by the findings of this partisan investigation whose sole purpose was to discredit her. I see.

Remember the words of Republican House Majority leader Kevin McCarthy?

“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.” 

Yeah well today her numbers are back on the rise, and this feeble attempt to damage them further is clearly an abject failure. 

Sure the conservative media will make huge mountains out of the Benghazi report molehills and scream at the top of their lungs that this proves Hillary is unfit to take up residence in the White House.

But it is the same old song we have all heard before.

It was an empty melody back then, and it is an empty melody today.

Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy admits that there was no way the military could have arrived in time to save Ambassador Stevens. Oops.

Courtesy of Salon: 

“Whether or not they [the military] could have gotten there in time – I don’t think there’s any issue with respect to that. They couldn’t,” Gowdy said. But, in an effort to justify his committee’s continued efforts, he argued that important context had been omitted from Chipman’s remarks. “The next question,” Gowdy explained, “is why could you [the military] not? Why were you not positioned to do it?” That’s the critical question, Gowdy insisted: why the military wasn’t prepared to respond to a Benghazi-like attack. 

Well, guess what? That question has been asked and answered already.

Salon then goes on to explain that previous investigations had already determined that there was inadequate security, and the President himself admitted this in 2014 and said that changes needed to be made to better protect our diplomats in the future.

It has also already been determined that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the Obama administration, military, or CIA concerning their response to the attacks in Benghazi.

By the way Secretary Clinton was part of the Obama administration at the time.

So if everybody has already been exonerated, and Gowdy himself admits that the military could not have arrived in time to save the day, what exactly is the point?

Well of course the point is the same one behind this ridiculous "Clinton Cash" movie, Donald Trump referring to her as "Crooked Hillary Clinton," and every other Right Wing attack on the internet.

It is to do damage to Hillary and hopefully prevent her from winning this next election.

And toward that end Donald Trump, the House Republicans, internet trolls, The Drudge Report, Fox News, and now the Bernie Sanders campaign are working as one.

Is it really any wonder that Hillary Clinton's favorability numbers are falling? 

I think my new favorite thing is watching Fox News bitch that Hillary Clinton will not talk to them.

Courtesy of Politicususa: 

This was not the first time that Wallace has whined on the air about being frozen out. In May of 2015, Wallace unleashed a pouty barrage on the air and admitted that President Obama won’t let people from the White House go on Fox News Sunday. 

President Obama and former Sec. of State Clinton have been subjected to relentless attacks by Fox News. There is no way that Clinton is going to give Fox or any of its shows the time of day unless it is on her terms. The message that the Clinton campaign is sending is that Fox News is going to pay for their years of lies about the former Sec. of State.

How unreasonable of Hillary Clinton not to grant an interview with the cable news outlet that has been attacking her, and her husband, non-stop since the day they first went on the air. 

I hope that after she wins the election she NEVER goes on Fox and they just shrivel up with jealousy that every other news outlet gets access except for them.

To his credit President Obama has agreed to interviews on Fox and they have been incredibly disrespectful hack jobs that in a REAL news agency would see the interviewers fired immediately.

So fuck Fox News.

Hillary Clinton survives first attack from the Right and comes back even stronger.

Nice try.

Courtesy of the New York Times:  

Hillary Rodham Clinton appears to have initially weathered a barrage of news about her use of a private email account when she was secretary of state and the practices of her family’s foundation, an indication that she is starting her second presidential bid with an unusual durability among Democratic voters. 

Americans now view Mrs. Clinton more favorably and more see her as a strong leader than they did earlier in the year, despite weeks of scrutiny about her ethics, a New York Times/CBS News poll has found. And nearly nine in 10 Democrats say the nation is ready to elect a woman president. 

Mrs. Clinton remains a polarizing figure — nearly the same percentage of Americans view her positively as negatively — but her favorability rating has improved by nine percentage points since the disclosure in late March that she did not use a government email account as secretary of state. 

And the number of Americans who think Mrs. Clinton has strong qualities of leadership has risen by eight percentage points, to 65 percent from 57 percent, in that period. Still, Mrs. Clinton begins this campaign with fewer voters saying she possesses such qualities than did in July 2007, near the outset of her first presidential bid.

I think that last number will change significantly before November 2016, and in Clinton's favor. 

The facts are that the attacks coming from the conservatives will only convince people who were never going to vote for her in the first place that they are right not to do so, and convince those who were always going to vote for her that she is the one that the Republicans fear the most.

I think the real challenge for Hillary comes not from the right, but from the left in the form of Bernie Sanders.

However I think she will weather that as well, and in the end it will make her a stronger and better candidate.

Think Progress gets their hands on a copy of anti-Hillary book. Essentially finds that not only is there no "smoking gun" but the book is shooting blanks.

So I mentioned yesterday there is this new book coming out May 5th, that has given the Right Wing media a semi in anticipation.

Apparently the good folks over at Think Progress managed to get their hands on an  advanced copy and it is safe to say that they are less than impressed: 

Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton’s speaking fees with actions by the State Department. 

Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. “Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don’t know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do,” he writes. Later, he concludes, “We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates.”

Schweizer makes all kinds of allegations with very little to back them up, and seems to be hoping that the media will do his work for him and chase each one of them down.

However Think Progress also points out that one of his allegations has ALREADY been proved false:

Schweizer also fingers Bill Clinton’s speaking fees, a favorite target in conservative circles, as a potential avenue to influence Hillary. He links the timing of the State Department’s generally positive report on the Keystone XL Pipeline with a slew of Clinton speeches paid for by TD Bank, a major shareholder in the project. As proof of how crucial Clinton’s support for the pipeline was to the bank, Schweizer quotes a press release that claimed TD Bank would “begin selling its $1.6 billion worth of shares in the massive but potentially still-born Keystone XL crude pipeline project” after Clinton left office. The press release was quickly revealed to be fake in 2013. Yet Schweizer, apparently unaware of the hoax, remarks, “Too bad for TD Bank. But the Clintons got paid regardless.”

That one's just well known bullshit and yet Schwiezer, did not even bother to Google it to find that out.

Ultimately this will all be, to borrow from Shakespeare, "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

However the Clintons being the Clintons they are not about to stand by idly and wait for the barrage of attacks from the conservative media.

So they issued a memo:   

“The book was backed by a Koch Brothers-linked organization and a billionaire family that is bankrolling Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign,” writes national press secretary Brian Fallon in the memo, which was forwarded to POLITICO by one of its recipients. In the three-page note Fallon also writes that Schweizer has coordinated with Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, another presidential candidate and frequent Clinton critic. 

“It is sad, but not surprising, that [the Clintons’] philanthropic work has become the subject of false, right-wing attacks,” Fallon writes in the note, which carries the subject line, “What We Already Know About ‘Clinton Cash’: Book and Author Attacking Hillary Clinton Widely Discredited.”

“These types of books are standard fare in political campaigns now, and this one is clearly part of a coordinated Republican strategy. But this is not the first work of partisan-fueled fiction about Hillary Clinton’s record, and we know it will not be the last,” he adds.

And remember folks it is only April of 2015. We still have a year and a half of this garbage still before us. 

Anti-Obamacare ads may have helped to increase enrollment in blue states. Oops!

Courtesy of the Indy Channel:  

Congressional candidates opposed to the Affordable Care Act have spent $450 million on commercials attacking the controversial health care plan, but the effort seems to be backfiring in blue states. 

Anti-Obamacare advertisements in some liberally inclined states are actually helping health care exchange enrollments, according to a new Brookings Institution analysis. 

The study, done by Brookings fellow Niam Yaraghi, compared ACA enrollment data released by the Department of Health and Human Services in May to a map by Kantar Media CMAG that tracks anti-Obamacare ads across the United States. 

Yaraghi calculated a ratio based on the number of Obamacare enrollees divided by the number of people who potentially could have enrolled, and concluded that negative ads kept a lid on enrollment in red states and had the opposite effect in blue states.

The study  goes on to suggest that the ads led to increased awareness about the existence of a governmentally subsidized service and its benefits for the uninsured.

Or to summarize:

In other words, the commercials effectively acted as a PSA for the ACA.

Not only that but for those conservative Republicans who DID sign up for the program, despite advertisements warning them not to, the vast majority of them are quite happy they did: 

The survey, from the Commonwealth Fund, a research group, a research group, came to similar conclusions as other surveys about the expansion of health insurance. It found that about 15 percent of adults younger than 65 now lack health insurance, down from 20 percent before the Affordable Care Act rolled out in January. 

What was more surprising is that people who got the new coverage were generally happy with the product. Overall, 73 percent of people who bought health plans and 87 percent of those who signed up for Medicaid said they were somewhat or very satisfied with their new health insurance. Seventy-four percent of newly insured Republicans liked their plans. Even 77 percent of people who had insurance before – including members of the much-publicized group whose plans got canceled last year – were happy with their new coverage.

Overall I would say that the Republicans got their asses handed to them.

And not only that, but I would think that they lost a whole lot of potential voters who do not appreciate the fact that they were lied to about Obamacare, or have Republican governors who have not expanded Medicaid in their state, leaving them disillusioned with their party and with few options to receive the kind of coverage that they see other people enjoying in states with more reasonable administrations.

Suspect in Benghazi attack captured. Or as Fox News puts it, "Obama captures Benghazi suspect in order to distract from destabilization of Iraq, which was to distract from the VA crisis, which of course was meant to distract from Benghazi."

Courtesy of NBC News:

American special forces seized the suspected mastermind of the deadly Benghazi consulate attack in a weekend raid in Libya, a U.S. administration official said Tuesday. 

Ahmed Abu Khattala has been wanted in the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack. His capture marks the first apprehension of one of the alleged perpetrators in the attack. 

Khattala was grabbed Sunday "in an extremely tightly held SOF (Special Operations Forces) operation," a U.S. official told NBC News. 

According to one senior official, "There may be other shoes to drop."

I know what you're thinking, "Oh thank goodness, now with the capture of this guy the Right Wing can stop beating the Benghazi conspiracy drums and move on to something else.  

Yeah well if you actually were thinking that then you may not be intelligent enough to be here and I would respectfully ask that you step away from the blog.

This is only going to open up a whole new can of stale Benghazi worms, and the Righties are going to pick it apart like vultures pecking away at a rotting corpse.

In fact they already are:

A Fox News anchor suggested that President Obama captured one of the alleged architects of the September 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi to boost Hillary Clinton’s presidential prospects. 

Speaking on Fox News’ Outnumbered just moments after news broke that the United States had captured Ahmed Abu Khattala, Kennedy mused, “you have a former Secretary of State who is in the middle of a high profile book tour, I think this is convenient for her to shift the talking points to some of the things she has been discussing.” 

The sentiment — that Obama timed Khattala’s capture for political benefit — was quickly echoed by other conservatives. Rory Cooper, an aide to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, tweeted, “While it’s great to see they caught the Benghazi suspect, it’s important to remember, he wasn’t really hiding.”

There is more here.

Damn! That didn't take long!

But remember these are the same people who found EVERYTHING wrong about the rescue of a POW held by the Taliban in Afghanistan. So could we expect nothing less?

RNC decides the best way to go after Hillary Clinton is to unleash the squirrel. That's right, the squirrel.

Courtesy of the Washington Post: 

The Republican National Committee is pushing back against all the 2016 buzz Hillary Clinton is getting, courtesy of her book tour with their own campaign. It involves a giant squirrel costume. The squirrel was first spotted — like its friend the fox — near the National Mall, wandering around outside a Hillary Clinton event at George Washington University. It was handing out "Another Clinton in the White House is NUTS" bumper stickers.

Long line to get into HRC's book tour event at GWU. Lots of students, Ready For Hillary and.... The GOP squirrel pic.twitter.com/G3vMKxUYAp
— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) June 13, 2014

Okay so to be clear, the RNC is suggesting that voting for Hillary is a nutty thing to do.

And to drive home the point as to which party is the most mentally stable, they hire a guy to dress up as a giant squirrel and hand out bumper stickers?

You know maybe just to save time the Republicans could just concede the 2016 presidential election now.

Referring to the release of Sgt. Bergdahl former Bush administration official says any other president in office, including his old boss, would have done the same thing.

Courtesy of Think Progress:

 A former Bush administration official broke with Republicans on Tuesday to defend President Obama’s prisoner exchange, arguing that since “the war in Afghanistan is winding down,” the United States would be required to return prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay back to Afghanistan. 

“I don’t see how these particular Taliban officials could ever have been tried in the southern district of New York,” John Bellinger, who served as an adviser to President George W. Bush explained during an appearance on Fox News Tuesday. “They’re certainly some Al Qaeda detainees who committed actual terrorist acts against Americans who perhaps could have been tried in a federal court because they committed federal crimes, but these particular Taliban detainees I think could never have been tried in federal court.”

In other words, and I have heard this from various sources, the government will HAVE to release these prisoners once the war in Afghanistan is officially over. 

So using prisoners, that will soon be released anyway, to secure the release of one of our own seems like a win win to me.

Asked about the circumstances of this capture Bellinger had this to say: 

Asked about reports that Bergdahl deserted his unit, Bellinger added that the former hostage “will have to face justice, military justice.” “We don’t leave soldiers on the battlefield under any circumstance unless they have actually joined the enemy army,” he said. “He was a young 20-year-old. Young 20-year-olds make stupid decisions. I don’t think we’ll say if you make a stupid decision we’ll leave you in the hands of the Taliban.”

Exactly!

“I’m not saying this is clearly an easy choice but frankly I think a Republican, a president of either party, Republican or Democratic confronted with this opportunity to get back Sgt. Bergdahl, who is apparently in failing health, would have taken this opportunity to do this,” he added. “I think we would have made the same decision in the Bush administration.”

And there you have it. If this had been ANY other President this would have been seen as a positive, and in fact there would have likely been kudos aplenty.

But not this President. In the eyes of the conservatives, he simply cannot do ANYTHING right.

Karl Rove receives blow back for suggesting that Hillary Clinton may have brain damage.

Courtesy of MSNBC:

 Republican strategist Karl Rove has denied a report that he said Hillary Clinton may have suffered brain damage, claiming he “never used that phrase.” 

“I didn’t say she had brain damage; she had a serious health episode,” he said Tuesday on FOX News. According to The New York Post, at a conference last week, the former George W. Bush adviser brought up the topic of Clinton’s health after she was hospitalized in December 2012 for a blood clot. 

“Thirty days in the hospital?” Rove reportedly told the conference, according to the Post. “And when she reappears, she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury? We need to know what’s up with that.”  (The glasses were actually to correct a temporary case of double vision.)

Clinton’s health scare hospitalized her for three days – not 30, as Rove reportedly suggested. The incident occurred after Clinton was recuperating from a fall and concussion, forcing the former secretary of state to push back her scheduled congressional testimony over the 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya. 

Though he denied characterizing Clinton’s injuries as “brain damage,” Rove on Tuesday largely stood by his reported comments. He said he brought up the issue to raise questions ahead of the looming 2016 presidential elections. 

“My point was is that Hillary Clinton wants to run for president, but she would not be human if this didn’t enter in as a consideration,” Rove said Tuesday on Fox. “This will be an issue in the 2016 race, whether she likes it or not.” 

“When you go through a health incident like this, any presidential candidate has to ask themselves, ‘Am I willing to do this for eight years of my life?’ ” he continued. “She’s hidden a lot of this.”

I think it is pretty clear that what Rove is doing is attempting to frighten Hillary away from the idea of running in 2016, by demonstrating how ugly things will get for her.

Personally I think that Hillary is well prepared for the Republican smear merchants, as she dealt with plenty back during Bill's presidency and her own Senate career.

However I also believe that incidents like this really speak to the almost overpowering fear that the Republicans feel concerning Hillary, and her chances of taking the White House in 2016.

Perhaps the best smackdown I have seen in response to this attack from Rove, came from our own KatieAnnieOakly.

#Rove sez #Hillary may have #BrainDamage; it didn't bother him when #McCain picked @SarahPalinUSA in 2008... #Coulter pic.twitter.com/6oxertfecI

— KatieAnnieOakly (@KatieAnnieOakly) May 13, 2014

Could not have said it better myself.

Obama uses his weekly Presidential Address to explain the difference between working around an obstructionist Congress and being a dictator.

As many of you know the President made a comment about having a pen and a phone he could implement to create policy if the Congress remained uncooperative, which made the Right Wing lose their shit and declare that he was a "dictator." Which is ridiculous since he has utilized Executive Orders far less than the majority of his predeccessors.

So today his weekly Presidential Address described what he meant by that for the slow folks and the Right Wing. (Assuming there is a difference.)

“I want to work with Congress on this agenda where I can. But in this year of action, whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, I will. I’ve got a pen and a phone – a pen to take executive action, and a phone to rally citizens and business leaders who are eager to create new jobs and new opportunities. And we’ve already begun.” 

In Wisconsin, I ordered an across-the-board reform of our training programs to train folks with the skills employers need, and match them to good jobs that need to be filled right now. 

In Pittsburgh, I directed the Treasury to create “my-RA,” a new way for working Americans, even if you’re not wealthy, to start your own retirement savings. 

In Maryland, I rallied the leaders of some of America’s biggest tech companies to help us make sure all our kids have access to high-speed internet and up-to-date technology to help them learn the skills they need for the new economy. 

And at the White House, I brought together business leaders who’ve committed to helping more unemployed Americans find work, no matter how long they’ve been looking. And I directed the federal government to make hiring decisions the same way – based on whether applicants can do the job, not when they last had a job.

So when you hear me talk about using my pen and my phone to make a difference for middle class Americans and those working to get into the middle class, that’s what I mean.”

What the President is doing is what he has to do to keep the country moving during this time of chronic partisan obstructionism.

For that he should be applauded, not vilified.

(H/T to Politicususa.)

Senator Claire McCaskill slaps the toupee right off Rand Paul's head after he dredged up Monica Lewinsky to attack Hillary.

Courtesy of TPM:

 "I think I can speak for most women to say that I found what he said infuriating. I think most women understand they should not be held accountable for the behavior of their husbands," McCaskill told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell. "You know, frankly, it was a long time ago. Our country did very well under the leadership of Bill Clinton." 

Paul accused former President Clinton on Sunday of engaging in "predatory behavior" with Lewinsky and, pointing to the successful female members of his family, argued that there is no such thing as a "war on women." 

McCaskill swatted down Paul's bit of mansplaining. 

"I think Rand Paul is grasping, trying to show that he can be tough and win the presidential nomination," she said. 

"It was a political posturing and, frankly, what Rand Paul doesn't get is that women want birth control. What Rand Paul doesn't get is that women don't want to be marginalized in the workplace, that we are not yet at the point we need to be in terms of our country and around the world."

I think that this will be the response from virtually everybody who is not a card carrying Republican. 

I will admit that I worried about it a little, but after considering it further I think that this will have just about the same impact on Hillary's chances in 2016 that the so-called IRS scandal, Benghazi, and Fast and Furious are going to have.

In other words, none.

The daughters of Wendy Davis have had enough!

After hearing about the absolutely horrendous attacks against their mother, the daughters decided to respond.

This courtesy of NBCDFW:

Open Letter from Dru Davis  

My name is Dru Davis and I am Wendy Davis's daughter. I hate that I feel the need to write this, but I have been reading and hearing so many untrue things about my mom and I want to set the record straight. And sadly I feel the need to be crystal clear on the malicious and false charge of abandonment as nothing could be further from the truth. 

My mom has always shared equally in the care and custody of my sister and me. My mom had my sister at 19 and although she was technically married for a short period of time, she was handling almost everything on her own. She was working 2 jobs regularly and going to school. She met my dad when Amber was still very young. They had an amazing love that I witnessed for many years. Unfortunately, it didn't last, like so many love stories don't. 

I can tell you that my mom was a remarkable mother and continues to be so to this day. She was there on my first day of school and my last, and so many days in between. She never missed a school performance or a parent-teacher conference. Even if that meant she had to miss something else important. My sister and I were always her first priority. She was there when I needed her and even when I thought I didn't. My mom was my Brownie Troop leader. I still remember camping out in the backyard with my troop after our trip was cancelled because of bad weather. She was also my field hockey team mom during my senior year of high school, not to mention that she went with me to every single field hockey camp, tryout, program that I ever had. She helped me sort through college possibilities, helped me with my applications and visited colleges with me. 

I will never forget our drive to Colorado when she was dropping me off as a freshman at Colorado College. I cried the entire way. I am surprised she made it through that one. And after we got there, she stayed for days making sure every detail of my room was perfect until I finally had to tell her to leave. 

My mom has been my sounding board for everything in my life, from resumes and papers to helping me with relationships. She was and is an amazing mother and has been the greatest role model I could imagine. Whatever happened, whatever difficult things she and my dad went through, she was always there. And I knew I was loved by her, regardless. 

Yes, she went to law school after my sister and I were born. We lived with her the first semester, but I had severe asthma and the weather there wasn't good for me. My parents made a decision for my sister and me to stay in Texas while my mom kept going to school. But that doesn't mean she wasn't there for us. She traveled back and forth all the time, missing so many classes so that she could be with us. Her friends were such a big help. Especially her third year, when she would only go to school two weeks out of the month and her friends would share class notes so she could try to keep up while she was home with us in Fort Worth. 

I love that my mom went to law school and was dedicated to both her work and us. Watching her work so hard to achieve something great has been one of the most important lessons in my life. To this day, I watch my mom greeted and hugged by people who love her and are thankful for things she has done for them. I am proud of her for that. Both of my parents made sacrifices to make education happen for all of us, my sister and me included. And both of them have been great role models for what it means to care about people in the world. 

Open Letter from Amber Davis

My name is Amber Davis and I am Wendy Davis’ oldest daughter. I have spent the past few days reading the ludicrous comments that people have shared on social media about my mother and our family. It is a shame that those who don’t know us feel the need to comment on the details of our lives as if they've lived them. I have a hard time understanding how such hate and negativity can result from one person’s false accusations. 

My mother had me when she was very young, a kid herself. And although she was married for a short period of time, parenthood was her sole responsibility. Yes, we lived in a trailer. Does it matter how long? Not to me. Even though some people have tried to question my own memories; I do remember the trailer, as well as the apartments that we lived in during the years that followed. I know that I was my mother’s first priority and that she wanted a better life for me than the one she was living. She worked 2 jobs and went to community college at night. She refused to repeat the life her family struggled in growing up. 

When I was a toddler, she met my step-dad, Jeff. They shared an immediate connection and I started to realize what it was like to have a real family. They married shortly before I turned five. Not long after they married they had my sister, Dru, the biggest baby I have ever seen. My parents had an amazing marriage for many years. They challenged each other and pushed each other to want more out of life. 

After graduating at the top of her class at TCU, she went on to Harvard law school. Dru and I lived with her the first semester but our parents soon realized that it would be better if we stayed in our childhood home in Texas, be around extended family and attend our regular schools. This was a decision made by both parents. I have recently heard the phrase "abandoned" quite often in the past week. That our mother "left us to be raised by our father" while she went on to pursue her education. Not only is this ridiculously unfair; it's completely untrue. Dru and I have always been her number one priority. Always. And every decision our parents made was with our best interests at heart. We had an amazing support system while she was at Harvard and she was constantly traveling back and forth from school to be with us. I’m proud that my parents were able to make this arrangement work. People should be less concerned about who paid for what and pay more attention to the fact that she was accepted to Harvard law school, a dream she believed was unachievable. 

People have come to know Wendy Davis the politician. But I want people to relate to Wendy Davis, my mother. I have a bond with my mother that is unlike any other. Even as a 31 year old adult, I will forever be referred to as her “Punky Brewster.” She is my best friend - the one I can confide in without judgment. I look up to her and rely on her for guidance and support, even to this very day. She is my rock and has always been a role model in my life. 

My mother has achieved so much despite the odds. Her strength and desire to further her career is an inspiration and a quality I admire most about her. She has always had my full support and I am so proud of her accomplishments. She is a remarkable mother. I don't think she gives herself enough credit sometimes. 

Our family has gone through difficult times just like many others. That’s not news. That's life. I'm sure many people can agree that divorce is certainly not an easy thing to experience. At that time, I was a young adult in college and Dru was in high school and to be clear, no one “lost or gave up custody” of either one of us. But no matter how difficult it was, both of our parents were there for us. And no matter what happened within our family, our mother always made it known that we were and remain the most important thing in her life.

Damn!

I am going to go out on a limb here and say, though they may have had a little editorial help, that these letters were not ghostwritten for these two impressive young women.

Perhaps somebody should tell Bristol Palin that THIS is how it is done. 

I think this sums up how successful the Republican attacks are doing against Obama nicely.

New evidence proves that Darrell Issa purposefully narrowed focus of IRS probe on Tea Party applicants in order to politicize the hearings.

"Well this blows."

Courtesy of the Rockford Register Star:  

The Treasury inspector general (IG) whose report helped drive the IRS targeting controversy says it limited its examination to conservative groups because of a request from House Republicans. 

A spokesman for Russell George, Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, said they were asked by House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) “to narrowly focus on Tea Party organizations.” 

The inspector general’s audit found that groups seeking tax-exempt status with “Tea Party” and “patriots” in their name did receive extra attention from the IRS, with some facing years of delay and inappropriate questions from the agency. 

But top congressional Democrats have wielded new information from the IRS this week that liberal groups were also flagged for extra attention on the sorts of “be on the lookout” lists (BOLOs) that also tripped up conservative groups. 

The spokesman for the Treasury inspector general noted their audit acknowledged there were other watch lists. But the spokesman added: “We did not review the use, disposition, purpose or content of the other BOLOs. That was outside the scope of our audit.” 

The admission from the inspector general comes as Democrats have sharpened their criticism of George, with Rep. Sandy Levin (D-Mich.) dubbing the audit fundamentally flawed on Monday. 

Levin, the top Democrat on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, stressed to The Hill on Tuesday that the inspector general did not say the audit was limited to Tea Party groups when it was released in mid-May. 

The Michigan Democrat also maintained that the audit’s shortcoming had emboldened Republicans to try to link the targeting of Tea Party groups to the White House. 

“You need to get at the facts. And those facts weren’t given to us, even when asked,” Levin said. “The Republicans used the failure of the IG to spell out what they knew as an opportunity to totally politicize this.”

Issa knew at the get go that there was no scandal, so he purposefully tried to create one, JUST like he did with Fast and Furious, and just like he did with the Benghazi investigation.

The man is a putrid piece of shit and he needs to be impeached NOW! (Okay I got a little carried away and forgot that Senators cannot be impeached. So with that in mind I think the only reasonable alternative is to have Issa face a firing squad after being found guilty of treason. How does that sound?)