(Carl) House majority leader Eric Cantor (R-Va) blasted anti-Semitic remarks made about Jewish Republicans by minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca) in an interview over the weekend, calling them 'patronizing' and 'insulting.'Ah... Pelosi... another fine example of feminism. Think I will add her to the Gertrude Stein collection. She's old enough to of conspired with the Vichy.
“It is both patronizing and deeply insulting for Nancy Pelosi to suggest any Jew is 'exploited' for their political beliefs or that support for Israel is somehow an 'excuse' for anything," Cantor (R-Va.) said in a statement.Let me guess: No one can find any record of him having been here as a Senator. Just like Occidental and Columbia....
During the TV interview, Pelosi agreed with the interviewer that Republican Jewish supporters are very politically active and that Jewish voters are intelligent enough to understand the situation.
"Well, that’s how they’re being exploited,” she said. “And they’re smart people. They follow these issues. But they have to know the facts. And the fact is that President Obama has been the strongest person in terms of sanctions on Iran, which is important to Israel.”
Pelosi also is facing criticism that she implied Obama as president has been to Israel "over and over again."
President Obama has not been to Israel since taking office. He did travel to the country during his 2008 presidential campaign and reportedly went twice as a senator.
Showing posts with label Eric Cantor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eric Cantor. Show all posts
Cantor blasts Pelosi's anti-Semitic remarks
Think Progress Distorts the words of Eric Cantor
Look how the left uses an honest analysis on hate by a Republican. Eric is honest and right, but his words have been distorted. There is a lot more hate in Obama's camp then in Eric's, but look how Obama's people use his integrity against him. Talk about desperation going on with Obama. Think Progress should be ashamed. Take care of your own. Recognize that Jews should be allowed to live where they want and stop ethnically cleansing Jews in the middle east like Obama is in Judea and Samaria before you point out the freak in the Republican party who got how many electoral votes in the last primary? No... really... how many electoral votes did Ron Paul really get?Man charged for phone threats against Rep. Eric Cantor's family

By Daniel Straus (The Hill) The FBI charged a man on Thursday for allegedly threatening House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).The FBI said that Glendon Swift was charged for leaving threatening messages on Cantor's work voicemail in Richmond, Va. According to the FBI, Swift threatened to assault or murder a member of Cantor's family.
"Threatening to harm the family of a public official is a very serious charge, and we are grateful to the FBI and their law enforcement partners for their quick action in this case," U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Neil H. MacBride said in a statement.
The profanity-laced messages, according to the FBI, included threats of rape and murder on Cantor's immediate family.
Swift was linked to the phone number from which the calls were made. He faces up to 10 years in prison if he's found guilty.
Asked by The Hill about the threat, Cantor declined to comment.
"I'm really not going to comment on that. It’s up to the law enforcement. I just want to thank the law enforcement for all they do everyday," he said.
Eric Cantor fights the TAX HIKE
![]() |
Washington Post so called blog sez that:Eric Cantor pulled out of the debt ceiling talks this morning, |
Both Greg Sargent at this WashPo "blog" and Jennifer Steinhauer at a NY Liberal Times "blog" lack this rudimentary courtesy.image from H Ken of International Business Times
YouTube death threat against Rep. Eric Cantor nets two-year prison term
![]() |
| Apparently he was stalking the Jewish Internet Defense Force before he went postal on Youtube... |
Guess Laboon's background!

Tomorrow Never Comes: Piss Christ's Andres Serrano Photos Karl Rove
| Piss Christ via en.wikipedia.or |
Photographing Rove
A source points out that the photographer credited with New York Magazine's not-terribly-flattering portrait of Karl Rove is one Andres Serrano.
And if that name sounds vaguely familiar to political types, it's because his most notorious work is "Piss Christ," which helped trigger a major flap around the National Endowment for the Arts in the late 1980s.
via politico.com
![]() |
via nytimes.com VIA KARL ROVE |
Jonathan Alter wrote a book about Barack Obama’s first year in office called “The Promise.” That’s a great title because it works on so many levels. For example, over the past four years, Obama’s career has been marked by a constant promise: He has continually said he is on the verge of doing something serious abut the national debt. He started making the promise back when he was in the Senate. In “The Audacity of Hope,” published in 2006, he expressed alarm at the “mountain of debt” caused by $300 billion annual budget deficits. (They’re now $1.6 trillion.) During the presidential campaign, he pledged to put away childish things and tackle the tough budget issues.
During the transition, he said the time to act on the debt is now. “What we have done is kicked the can down the road,” he told The Washington Post. “We are now at the end of the road and are not in a position to kick it any further.” He said he would start a budget initiative in February 2009.
After the stimulus package passed, he and his aides said it would soon be time to turn to deficit issues. The same promise was made after health care reform. He made the pledge yet again at a press conference this week. Right now is not the time, the president always says, but tomorrow we will get serious.
But tomorrow never comes.
The biggest tease came last year when the president’s debt commission announced its report. That report produced a series of great conversations. But, yet again, words do not translate into action. The message of the president’s 2012 budget is: Not yet. We’ll get serious tomorrow.
The budget has some fine features. I’ll soon be writing a column about how many of its provisions are better than anything the Republican Party is proposing. But it is laughably inadequate compared with the fiscal problems before us.
In 2012, the only year this budget controls, the president would actually increase the deficit with more spending. Roughly two-thirds of the alleged savings would nominally kick in after 2016. The budget imagines that $328 billion in financing for transportation projects will magically appear. While ignoring tax reform, it lards up the tax code with another layer of special preferences. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculates that $780 billion of the proposed deficit cuts are politically dubious.
The budget gets a lot of little things right, but it squanders the opening created by the debt commission. It fails to touch the big programs or ask for any shared sacrifice from the American people.
Two explanations are commonly offered to explain why the White House decided to kick the can down the road. Some analysts say the Democrats are trying for a repeat of 1995: Do nothing on the deficit; goad the Republicans into announcing entitlement cutbacks and then savage them on the campaign trail for cutting off granny.
I don’t believe this is in the president’s head. It would be morally reprehensible to bankrupt the nation for the sake of a campaign theme. Obama is not that sort of person.
The other explanation is that Obama is following the model of the 1983 Social Security deal. Be patient, the president argued at his press conference this week. If I lead from the front my proposal will get stymied in the partisan circus. Better to lead from the back and have negotiations in private with Republican leaders. Then when the time is ripe, we’ll cut a deal outside the glare of the scream machine.
The president and his aides may really believe in this strategy, but it is wrong. This is not like fixing Social Security in the early 1980s. The current debt problem is of an entirely different scale. It requires a rewrite of the social contract, a new way to think about how the government pays for social insurance.
The president has enormous faith in getting smart people around the table and initiating technocratic reform. But you can’t renegotiate the social contract in private. You have to have public buy-in. You have to spend years out in public educating voters about the size of the problem and what will be required. You have to show voters what a solution looks like.
The New Deal wasn’t passed by a president who led quietly from the back. Neither was the Great Society or the Reagan Revolution. President Obama’s softly, softly approach is a rationalization, not a coherent strategy. It’s the latest version of Obama’s eternal promise: I’ll do it tomorrow.
So the mantle of leadership has passed to Capitol Hill. While Obama asked for patience yet again, Eric Cantor announced that Republicans will put entitlements on the table. It may be politically risky, but it looks more like leadership to me.
During the transition, he said the time to act on the debt is now. “What we have done is kicked the can down the road,” he told The Washington Post. “We are now at the end of the road and are not in a position to kick it any further.” He said he would start a budget initiative in February 2009.
After the stimulus package passed, he and his aides said it would soon be time to turn to deficit issues. The same promise was made after health care reform. He made the pledge yet again at a press conference this week. Right now is not the time, the president always says, but tomorrow we will get serious.
But tomorrow never comes.
The biggest tease came last year when the president’s debt commission announced its report. That report produced a series of great conversations. But, yet again, words do not translate into action. The message of the president’s 2012 budget is: Not yet. We’ll get serious tomorrow.
The budget has some fine features. I’ll soon be writing a column about how many of its provisions are better than anything the Republican Party is proposing. But it is laughably inadequate compared with the fiscal problems before us.
In 2012, the only year this budget controls, the president would actually increase the deficit with more spending. Roughly two-thirds of the alleged savings would nominally kick in after 2016. The budget imagines that $328 billion in financing for transportation projects will magically appear. While ignoring tax reform, it lards up the tax code with another layer of special preferences. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculates that $780 billion of the proposed deficit cuts are politically dubious.
The budget gets a lot of little things right, but it squanders the opening created by the debt commission. It fails to touch the big programs or ask for any shared sacrifice from the American people.
Two explanations are commonly offered to explain why the White House decided to kick the can down the road. Some analysts say the Democrats are trying for a repeat of 1995: Do nothing on the deficit; goad the Republicans into announcing entitlement cutbacks and then savage them on the campaign trail for cutting off granny.
I don’t believe this is in the president’s head. It would be morally reprehensible to bankrupt the nation for the sake of a campaign theme. Obama is not that sort of person.
The other explanation is that Obama is following the model of the 1983 Social Security deal. Be patient, the president argued at his press conference this week. If I lead from the front my proposal will get stymied in the partisan circus. Better to lead from the back and have negotiations in private with Republican leaders. Then when the time is ripe, we’ll cut a deal outside the glare of the scream machine.
The president and his aides may really believe in this strategy, but it is wrong. This is not like fixing Social Security in the early 1980s. The current debt problem is of an entirely different scale. It requires a rewrite of the social contract, a new way to think about how the government pays for social insurance.
The president has enormous faith in getting smart people around the table and initiating technocratic reform. But you can’t renegotiate the social contract in private. You have to have public buy-in. You have to spend years out in public educating voters about the size of the problem and what will be required. You have to show voters what a solution looks like.
The New Deal wasn’t passed by a president who led quietly from the back. Neither was the Great Society or the Reagan Revolution. President Obama’s softly, softly approach is a rationalization, not a coherent strategy. It’s the latest version of Obama’s eternal promise: I’ll do it tomorrow.
So the mantle of leadership has passed to Capitol Hill. While Obama asked for patience yet again, Eric Cantor announced that Republicans will put entitlements on the table. It may be politically risky, but it looks more like leadership to me.
GOP to force vote on NPR defunding
House Republicans announced Wednesday they plan to force a floor vote on defunding NPR in response to the firing of analyst Juan Williams last month.
House GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) and Rep. Doug Lamborn (Colo.) said that cutting funds to the publicly subsidized news organization was the winner of the conference's weekly "YouCut" contest, in which the public votes online on spending items they want eliminated.
via thehill.com
image via iill.net
Andrew Sullivan claims Cantor commits treason lol.... but not Nancy Pelosi?
so get this... It is treasonous according to Andrew Sullivan for a politician to do the will of the majority of Americans who are against Obama's foreign policy, but it is just fine for the Democrats and Pelosi to undermine the Republicans by talking to Syria when Bush was president. Undermining Bush was fine,,, but undermining Obama is treason. You would have to be pretty liberal thinking to oblige that conclusion... so liberal that suicide could be an optionAIPAC differs with Cantor on Israel aid?

Eric Cantor's suggestion that aid to Israel be removed from the foreign aid budget, driven by broader Republican opposition to much foreign operations spending, is drawing a rare, if gentle, rebuke from the high-powered pro-Israel group AIPAC.
via politico.com
Nita Lowey (D-NY)
“For decades, annual U.S. foreign assistance to Israel has been one of the most tangible expressions of American support for Israel and our country’s national security interests. A robust foreign aid budget is a strong signal of U.S. leadership around the globe," said AIPAC spokesman Darren Mackoff. “Congressman Cantor has always been, and continues to be a strong leader on the vital issues surrounding the United States and Israel, as well as an ardent supporter of U.S. foreign aid."
AIPAC has traditionally been a major force in lobbying for aid to Israel, Egypt, and for foreign aid in general.
Carl:Lowey disparaged the idea Monday as "reckless" and "outrageous."
“Minority Whip Cantor’s proposal is as transparent as it is reckless," Lowey said in a statement. "Manipulating aid to Israel in this way would dangerously threaten continued bipartisan agreement on national security policy and programs other than direct assistance to Israel that aid in its security."
What's more, Lowey said, the foreign ops bill Cantor said the GOP may vote against "funds U.S. diplomatic efforts at the State Department, including diplomacy related to peace in the Middle East. It aids other countries in the region to help defeat al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations and includes non-proliferation initiatives," she said. "Because it is inextricably linked with broader U.S. national security goals, separating assistance for Israel in order to make it easier for Republican members to vote against the foreign aid bill would be counterproductive.
“Too much is at stake to give Republicans in Congress a license to vote against the foreign aid budget, and it is clear that Eric Cantor’s outrageous proposal is based purely on political motives, not what is best for U.S. or global security," she concluded.
The idea of cutting the State Department's budget or cutting aid to the 'Palestinians' or Lebanon or Egypt by forcing them to be voted upon separately from aid to Israel is actually appealing. My concern is what happens when there is a different Congress, a different President and maybe even a different Foreign Appropriations Committee chair. My concern is the JW Fulbright scenario.
But I'm still reserving judgment.
AIPAC is an interested party here. If what Cantor is proposing goes through, it would likely have much less to say about aid to recipients other than Israel. But what this proposal reminds me of more than anything else is the line-item veto - what every President wants regarding the budget generally and what no Congress is likely to give him. (A line item veto would allow the President to veto individual spending items in the budget). The 112th Congress would be most unlikely to give this President a line-item veto in general. Why give him one with respect to Israel?
I like and think very highly of Eric Cantor, but I think I'm coming out against this.
via israelmatzav.blogspot.com
Not sure I agree Carl. It is important that America clarifies it's relationship to Israel. For too long it has been shrouded as being normal. It is not normal. It is an intimate special relationship that has complexities that other foreign aid does not have. Israel does not have to worry about standing out. Israel already does stand out and people are paying attention. If a leader really wants to screw over Israel he can find ways. It's amazing how an obsessive bigot can subvert any system. It is best that the system is as clear as possible as to intent. Otherwise Israel's enemies will use opaque government as something they can blame on the Jews.
Not sure I agree Carl. It is important that America clarifies it's relationship to Israel. For too long it has been shrouded as being normal. It is not normal. It is an intimate special relationship that has complexities that other foreign aid does not have. Israel does not have to worry about standing out. Israel already does stand out and people are paying attention. If a leader really wants to screw over Israel he can find ways. It's amazing how an obsessive bigot can subvert any system. It is best that the system is as clear as possible as to intent. Otherwise Israel's enemies will use opaque government as something they can blame on the Jews.
no more money for Obama's Muslim friends if the GOP take Congress says Cantor

U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor, the Republican whip and the only Jewish Republican in the House of Representatives, told JTA that a GOP-led House would seek to defund nations that do not share U.S. interests, even if it meant rejecting the president's foreign operations budget.
via jta.org
Partisan Hacks: When You Assume, It Only Makes an Ass Out of You (Not Me)
the line that this is “the most important election in our lifetime” is kinda like the host of “The Bachelor” constantly saying, “The most dramatic rose ceremony ever.” If that were truly the case, Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan would have the testicles to say, we don’t want Hezbollah/Syria/Arafat/Saudi Arabia-friend Jihad Darrell Issa (who said 9/11 was “simply a plane crash”) as our face–the face of the anti-Obama Republicans. But they don’t. They are ball-less. Sorry. When the Republicans take over the house, the scariest thing will be that Issa will become the very powerful Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. . . unless Republicans who’ve embraced this career criminal Issa (arson, car theft, falsifying military record, insurance fraud, unlicensed weapons, firing employees at gunpoint, patent theft and infringement) finally have some cojones to say “no” to him. And they won’t. They just don’t have it in them because they aren’t the principled people you may think they are. Really, they are just a tiny hair better than liberal Democrats. A tiny hair.
read about Dr. Rob Steele via debbieschlussel.com
If you think I have any loyalties to a political party... you are in for a surprise. Find out who you are voting for or against. The Republican Party is full of people who package the status quo Jihad and Immigration views and hide behind Ron Paul and his buddies. This isn't a problem with a two party system. This is a problem with people who trust packaging when they buy a product.Guess what Leboon's background is?
Philadelphia resident Norman Leboon was arrested Saturday for threatening to kill Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va, in a YouTube video that since has been removed from the site.Huffy po po did 2nd Amendment spin on LeBoon. no one in media as far as I can see mentions he's a Shi'a.
You can still see a cache of Leboon's shiamuslimcantbestop ("Shia Muslim can't be stopped") YouTube channel
via thejidf.org
In November of 2008, we wrote about a massive anti-JIDF campaign on YouTubeand originally featured a video by Leboon who was ranting and raving about the JIDF (as he did in many his videos). After he made another video bragging about being on our site (see below), we decided to remove it.
via thejidf.org
via vodpod.com
“Over the weekend, Congressman Cantor was notified by law enforcement that a threat was made against his life,” Cantor’s Press Secretary Brad Dayspring said in a statement Monday. “Law enforcement officials informed Congressman Cantor that the threat was determined as credible and they were responding accordingly. The Congressman was later notified that an arrest was made and a suspect was in custody.”
The arrest is one of many made in response to a string of violent threats against lawmakers that followed in the wake of the health care reform vote. Although the threat was made after Cantor’s announcement of support for Gov. Bob McDonnell’s Virginia Health Care Freedom Act, officials have not confirmed that Leboon’s threat is in response to Cantor’s rejection of the federal health care legislation.
The FBI is primarily responsible for handling the investigation, said Gene Lepley, public information manager for the Richmond Police Department. Leboon is scheduled to appear in federal district court in Philadelphia Monday and is being held without bail pending an evaluation of his psychiatric well-being.
Richmond police officials believe that an incident last Tuesday in which a stray bullet hit Cantor’s campaign office — which was unoccupied at the time — around 1 a.m. is unrelated to the threats, Lepley added.
“We believe this was a random act of gunfire and a stray bullet as result,” he said. “Someone fired into the air and when it came back down to Earth, it broke through a window of a conference room in a building that houses offices of the congressman.”
Lepley said that the Richmond Police are looking into all possibilities concerning the stray bullet. At this time, there are no suspects.
Leboon still has more than a dozen other videos of himself speaking posted on YouTube under the username “shiamuslimcantbestop.” He refers to himself in his videos as a messiah and prophet and often makes references to Islam.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




