10 Questions The Media Won't Ask Obama

 
There are many questions that the president ought to answer which he is unlikely to face.

10. In 2008 you promised not to "do an end-run around Congress" with signing statements. Yet you have used signing statements and you have taken executive actions to circumvent Congress on immigration and other issues. Recently, you decided the employer mandate will not be enforced on October 1. Yet that date is stipulated by law. Doesn't the Obamacare delay violate your powers under the Constitution?

9. Last week we learned that dozens of CIA personnel were in Benghazi at the time of the attack, and that there may be ongoing efforts to suppress information about what actually happened. In October 2012, you said that you issued three directives when you learned of the attack, yet these have never been seen. What did you actually do during the Benghazi attack, and why weren't you more actively involved?

8. Last month, IRS officials testified to Congress that IRS Chief Counsel William J. Wilkins, whom you appointed, was directly involved in reviewing applications for non-profit status by Tea Party groups. He also met with you in April 2012, prior to issuing new "Be on the Lookout" (BOLO) criteria for evaluating such applications. What was your personal knowledge of the IRS scrutiny of conservative groups?

7. Recently your administration launched a new round of peace negotiations between Israel and Palestinian leaders. Israel had repeatedly said that it would negotiate without preconditions, but Palestinian leaders would not. Your administration, through Secretary of State John Kerry, pressed Israel to release 104 terrorists from Israeli jails. Was there a single new concession you demanded from Palestinians?

6. You have publicly dressed down the U.S. military on the issue of sexual assault. In the 2012 campaign, you were very involved in specific controversies, even calling Sandra Fluke, for example. Yet you have refused to say anything about the conduct of a fellow Democrat, Mayor Bob Filner of San Diego, who refuses to resign. Aren't you setting a bad example on sexual assault, as commander-in-chief, in the Filner case?

5. Edward Snowden has continued to reveal new information about the National Security Agency's abilities to gather information about Americans' private communications. Leaving aside the question of whether the government should have that power, or whether you have broken past promises on civil liberties, the fact that these leaks happened at all is striking. Why is Gen. Keith Alexander still the head of the NSA?

4. Recently you announced that you were canceling a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, over the Snowden issue and gay rights. Yet last month, even after Putin indicated he might offer Snowden asylum, you were still offering drastic cuts in America's nuclear arsenal. It looks like the "reset" with Russia is a failure, after so many concessions. Isn't it time to stop offering new cuts to U.S. nuclear weapons?

3. You are backing the Senate immigration bill, which passed because Democrats agreed to include border security measures. Regardless of whether those measures are sufficient, they depend on a commitment to enforce the law as written. Yet you have refused to enforce existing immigration laws, even imposing a so-called "Dream Act" by fiat. Why should Americans trust you to enforce a new immigration law?

2. You campaigned on the promise to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. Yet you have helped the Taliban open a new office in Qatar, complicating relations with President Hamid Karzai, and recently suggested that there could be a "zero option" in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, as the U.S. withdraws, Al Qaeda is on the offensive across the region, and might return. Are we not repeating the mistakes of the past in Afghanistan?

1. You are about to head into a new round of budget negotiations. Some Republicans leaders have suggested that they are willing to offer concessions on the budget sequester if you commit to entitlement reform. You have spoken in theory about making some cuts but have never presented a plan, on paper, and have rejected all suggestions, even the Simpson-Bowles commission. Where is your plan to reform entitlements?

Read More Here: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/08/09/Top-10-Questions-Journalists-Won-t-Ask-at-President-Obama-Presser?goback=%2Egde_4785287_member_264626176





Sean Hannity Not Being Fired From Fox News


Rumors and speculation about Sean Hannity being fired by Fox News when Megan Kelly returns are completely false.  Following the announcement that Megan Kelly will be moved to the 9 PM slot on Fox News currently held by Hannity many speculated that Sean was being fired. According to FNC CEO Roger Ailes the rumor is not true.

Roger Ailes, while giving Hannity a ringing endorsement said:
“All of our stars will be back,” adding the network has “new deals with Hannity and Greta and Shep.”


  FNC said in its statement:
“We will neither confirm nor deny any programming schedule changes” in response to a report Megyn Kelly is getting Sean Hannity’s  9 PM timeslot. “As previously stated, the network has signed long-term deals with Megyn Kelly, Bret Baier, Shepard Smith, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Greta Van Susteren”. 



So there you have it folks, straight from the horses mouth.

Read More Here: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/08/08/megyn-kelly-reportedly-taking-over-pm-slot-in-fox-news-primetime-lineup/






  








White House Press Corp Afraid to Criticize Obama, White House



An article appearing on Salon.com entitled White House reporters afraid to criticize the White House  outlines the very point we conservatives have been making for some time now about the main stream news media and the Obama administration.

National political reporters are furious over various White House practices involving transparency and information control, but are unwilling  to say so for attribution due to fear of “retaliation”.  Isn’t that a rather serious problem:  that the White House press corps is afraid to criticize the President and the White House for fear of losing access and suffering other forms of retribution?  What does that say about their “journalism”?
Of course this is no surprise to those of us who have suspected this for years now.  A piece appearing in Politico in April of 2010, echoes the same sentiments.



“I don’t think they need to be nice to reporters, but the White House seems to imagine that releasing information is like a tap that can be turned on and off at their whim,” Packer said.



Most of the criticism is off the record out of fear of retaliation. But these views were voiced by a cross section of television, newspaper and magazine journalists who cover the White House.


“These are people who came in with every reporter giving them the benefit of the doubt,” said another reporter who regularly covers the White House. “They’ve lost all that goodwill.”