Ivanka Trump claims that she was not expecting "this level of viciousness." New York Times editor reminds her who her father is, calls her "a filthy liar."

"There is a level of viciousness that I was not expecting...but this isn't supposed to be easy." -@IvankaTrump pic.twitter.com/viiMQ2ij1d

— FOX & friends (@foxandfriends) June 12, 2017

Courtesy of CNN: 

Asked whether it was hard to get things done in light of the ongoing Russia investigation, Trump admitted she was "a little blindsided" by distractions she attributed to media "ferocity." 

"It is hard. And there is a level of viciousness that I was not expecting. I was not expecting the intensity of this experience, but this isn't supposed to be easy. My father and this administration intends to be transformative, and we want to do big, bold things and we're looking to change the status quo. So I didn't expect it to be easy. I think some of the distractions and some of the ferocity was — I was a little blindsided by on a personal level," she said.

"But for me, I'm trying to keep my head down, not listen to the noise and just work really hard to make a positive impact in the lives of many people. At the end of the day, if you want to think about difficult, it's the factory worker who's been laid off. Difficult is the mother who lost a child to opioid abuse. So these are the real challenges and I think that does put it in perspective."

Okay can hypocrisy almost make you throw up in your a little? Because I think that just happened to me.

Somebody else who had a little trouble with his gag reflex was New York Times Commentary Editor John Podhoretz.

Her father said Ben Carson was a psychopath and Ted Cruz's father killed JFK and she wasn't expecting viciousness. She's a filthy liar. https://t.co/8srNXVNTyA

— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) June 12, 2017

Well I bet he can expect an angry Trump tweet later on today.

Not that he's wrong of course, because he's not. 

A provision of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) may or may not have a small impact on the parents of special needs children. But that is more than enough for You-know-who.

"Hah you thought I'd forget. I forget nothing!"

Courtesy of Arizona's own Snarling Sun Devil: 

We haven't forgotten Obama's mocking of the Special Olympics a few years ago on Leno's show. And now we see how his signature legislation hurts parents of special needs children. I guess it's easier to mock our kids than respect them and level the playing field for their productive lives, eh, Mr. President?

 - Sarah Palin

Now the article that Palin links to is from the Daily Caller. I will not do them any favors by encouraging you to provide them with traffic, so here is the pertinent point:

More than 30 million Americans place money into a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account (FSA) through their employers to help save emergency funds to pay for their families’ medical costs. Obamacare institutes a brand new $2,500 cap for FSAs, which will make more money taxable and could raise $13 billion in taxes for the federal government over the next decade.

“Before Obamacare passed, there was no limit to how much money you could put into your FSA at work,” Ryan Ellis, tax policy director at Americans for Tax Reform, told The Daily Caller. Ellis was inspired to perform research on the issue after hearing the complaints of a friend with a special-needs child. 

“Most people don’t, but the one group that does put a lot of money into their FSAs is parents of kids with Down Syndrome, and parents of kids with physical disabilities,” Ellis said.

Yes most people don't put a lot of money into their FSA accounts, and if they do put TOO much in, and do not use it all before the end of the fiscal year, they would forfeit the left over amount, most often to their employer. This is called the "use it or lose it" rule and the administration actually wanted to do away with it, but so far there has been no change. However with the limit of $2,500 that will no longer be such a constantly occurring problem.

This new rule seems to affect a very small number of people using the FSA system and as for this new cap having such a detrimental effect on the parents of special needs children I am not at all sure that is such a problem either.

This from the Society for Human Resource Management:

The $2,500 limit applies only to salary reduction contributions under a health care FSA and does not limit the amount permitted for reimbursement under an FSA for dependent care assistance or adoption care assistance. Nor does it apply to salary reduction or any other contributions to a health savings account (HSA) or to amounts made available by an employer under a health reimbursement arrangement (HRA).

Now I am no expert but that sounds as if there is a work around for parents attempting to save money for their children's medical needs.

It seems to me that this is the very definition of the proverbial "making a mountain out of a molehill."

Gee you would think that with all of the highly paid "good" advisers working for her that Palin would pick her battles with a little more care, and have better information on her side.

The President was reached for comment, but this was his only response.

Cartoon of the day.

Well I certainly HOPE that President Obama has learned his lesson this time.

Because it is beyond clear that the GOP remains the same rabies infected slavering cur that they were the last four years.

Thin skinned Sarah Palin reveals her vicious side to reporters.

"Hey Tawd, you better remember who wears the pants in this family. Got it buster?"

Now as you read this REMEMBER it comes from uber-right wing blog, the American Spectator:

What happened was that Alex Pappas of The Daily Caller, one of the rising stars among political scribes and a meticulously careful and wonderfully polite, fair-minded young man (an aside: I've known him since he was in junior high school), wrote a perfectly fine story about Palin's current stances vis-a-vis the presidential race. In it, one of the things she said was that if Mitt Romney is the nominee, well, of course she would endorse him over Barack Obama.

Fox Nation picked up the story and, in its own headline (not Pappas', not the Daily Caller's, but its own headline completely apart from anything Pappas ever wrote) played up the "Romney endorse" angle in a way that apparently did not make it clear that the endorsement might be in the general election, rather than the primary campaign. (The headline is no longer available at Fox Nation, so I can't say exactly what the wording was.)

Anyway, the Palin team pounced. Specifically inviting over reporter Kasie Hunt from Politico so she could hear the exchange, Palin called Pappas' cell phone and began berating him in a very scolding manner for writing a headline suggesting she supports Romney.

Courtesy of Politico:

"So you’re saying that I said that I support Mitt Romney?" she said to the reporter. "And what’s your headline? You need to be clear, otherwise people really lose faith in the state of journalists today and that is, I said ‘ABO’—anybody but Obama. And I would support the candidate who surfaces to take on Barack Obama. But no, your headline leads readers to believe that I’m supporting Mitt Romney at this time in this process, and no that’s not accurate." Pappas didn't even know what she was talking about. When he tried to say that neither he nor his editors had written such a headline, she said she didn't have time for this, that she needed to go back to the "real people" at the State Fair, and hung up on him.

Later, when it became clear that Fox Nation, not Pappas or The Daily Caller, had written the semi-offending headline, a Palin press aide called Pappas back not to apologize but to say that they now realized it was Fox and that the headline had been taken down.

"No," Pappas said, far more bemused than angry or upset, "he didn't come close to apologizing." 

Now see THIS is the Sarah Palin that Alaskans have come to know and loathe. The "attack first and get the facts later" Palin that once chased me out into a parking lot. The same woman who tried to destroy the career of an ex-brother-in-law, as well as her Public Safety Commissioner when he refused to help with that endeavor. The same woman who once penned a poorly crafted screed to the ADN after confusing a reference to Lisa Murkowski's father to one aimed at her own dad. (By the way if you have never read that letter, do yourself a favor and look it over.  It is one of the few authentic examples of Palin's writing that you will find on the internet.)

You see the reason I have never really been terribly concerned that Palin was ever going to win the White House, or even win the GOP nomination, is that no matter how hard people work to groom the pitbull to look like an inside house poodle, sooner or later it will rip your throat out.

And eventually even the MOST supportive conservative cable news networks and right wing blogs were going to have no choice but to call her out on that kind of behavior.  As evidenced by the last line from the American Spectator article:
 
If Palin wants to get rid of the image of being a difficult diva with a rude streak, she needs to stop acting like a difficult diva with a rude streak.

In other words folks, the next time you are looking for Sarah Palin in a crowd, just look for the giant fork sticking out of her.