Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Monday, March 10, 2025
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 894)

Jerusalem_synagogue_terror_attack

Israeli police outside the Kehilat Yaakov synagogue in Jerusalem after a terror attack there on November 18, 2014. The bodies of two terrorists covered with plastic are seen on the ground. (Photo: Yonatan Sindler/FLASH9)

DEVELOPING: Three Americans were among the four worshipers killed by Palestinians wielding meat cleavers and a gun in a Jerusalem synagogue Tuesday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised to “respond harshly” to the attack perpetrated by a pair of Islamic radicals shouting “Allahu Akbar.”

“We are viewing this as a terrorist attack,” said police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld. He also said eight other worshippers were injured, including two police officers, four of whom were reported in serious condition. He said police were searching the area for other suspects.

Officials have identified the Americans as Aryeh Kupinsky, Kalmen Levin and Moshe Twersky. All were killed along with a fourth person when the Islamic assailants, who Palestinian media identified as cousins Ghassan and Udai Abu Jamal, stormed the building and began attacking people.

Police identified one of the victims as Rabbi Moshe Twersky, who taught at a Jerusalem seminary. Twersky hailed from a Hassidic rabbinical dynasty and was a grandson of Joseph Soloveitchik, the renowned Boston rabbi who died in 1993.

Israeli police spokeswoman Luba Samri confirmed the attackers were cousins from east Jerusalem, an area of that has seen frequent clashes between Israeli police and Palestinian protesters in recent months. Samri also confirmed the assailants identities, and said both Ghassan and Oday Abu Jamal were from the Jabal Mukaber neighborhood.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of inciting violence in Jerusalem. In order to say in power in early this year, Abbas formed an alliance with elected members of the Parliament that belong to Hamas’ political wing.

“We will respond with a heavy hand to the brutal murder of Jews who came to pray and were killed by lowly murderers,” Netanyahu said. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who said he spoke to Netanyahu after the attack, denounced it as an “act of pure terror and senseless brutality and violence.”

While Kerry was blaming the attack on Palestinian calls for “days of rage” and urging Palestinian leaders to condemn the attack “in the most powerful terms,” Palestinian radio described the attackers as “martyrs.”

The Palestinian leader has denied the charges, as usual. Hamas, the terrorist group that runs the Gaza Strip, outwardly praised the attack that it said was retaliation for what it claimed was the murder of a Palestinian bus driver. However, the man was found hanged in his vehicle late Sunday and Israeli police — citing the official autopsy results — classified the man’s death as a suicide. Hamas and the man’s family, however, have not accepted those results.

“The presidency condemns the attack on Jewish worshippers in one of their places of prayer in West Jerusalem and condemns the killing of civilians no matter who is doing it,” Abbas said in a statement. But, then he also called for an end to Israeli “provocations” surrounding the sacred site where Palestinian gunman shot eight people in a religious seminary school back in 2008.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine claimed credit for the attack, which it called a “heroic operation,” and a Hamas spokesman actually called for more attacks in the future.

“Hamas calls for the continuation of revenge operations and stresses that the Israeli occupation bears responsibility for tension in Jerusalem,” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said.

Meanwhile, out outside the Abu Jamals’ home, clashes broke out between protestors and police. Residents threw stones at police who responded using riot dispersal weapons and 14 members of the Abu Jamal family were arrested.

Mohammed Zahaikeh, a social activist in Jabal Mukaber, said one of the relatives of the cousins, Jamal Abu Jamal, was released in a 2011 prisoner swap and re-arrested recently by Israeli police. He did not say why.

A rash of violence has broken out across Jerusalem with attacks by Palestinians against Israelis, most of which have involved cars being driven into pedestrians, increasing in recent weeks. At least six people had been killed in Jerusalem, the West Bank and Tel Aviv prior to Tuesday.

Tensions appeared to be subdued somewhat last week following a meeting between Netanyahu, Kerry and Jordan’s King Abdullah II that took place in Jordan. The goal of the meeting was to restore calm and ended with Israel and the Palestinians agreeing they would take steps to reduce tensions.

The Jerusalem holy site is referred to by Jews as the Temple Mount because of the Jewish temples that stood there in biblical times. It is the most sacred place in Judaism; Muslims refer to it as the Noble Sanctuary, and it is their third holiest site, after Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.

The site is so holy that Jews have traditionally refrained from going there, instead praying at the adjacent Western Wall. Israel’s chief rabbis have urged people not to ascend to the area, but in recent years, a small but growing number of Jews, including ultranationalist lawmakers, have begun regularly visiting the site.

DEVELOPING: Three Americans were among the four

Muhammad_Ali_vs_Joe_Frazier

One of the greatest boxers in the world was “Smokin” Joe Frazier. Frazier was truly one of the greatest fighters ever to set foot in the ring, but there was a lot more to the man than his 37-4-1 record belied.

His true greatness came not from the boxing ring, but in how he handled adversity and his own destiny.

Frazier’s story is intertwined with another great boxer, Muhammad Ali, and his fights with “The Greatest” are some of the most memorable in history. The “Thrilla in Manila” bout with Ali in 1971 is still largely considered one of the greatest heavyweight fights in history, and it was Frazier who was the first man to ever knock Ali off his feet.

The question, of course, is what made that fight and Ali and Frazier so great?

Before his death a few years ago, Frazier often talked about how the game of boxing had changed, and he was interviewed several times on the subject of boxing and greatness. In one interview with Neil Cavuto of FOX News, he discussed the issue at length and described the actual changes to the sport as being part of the problem. He refused to accept that fighters could no longer go 15 rounds, and in making fights shorter and safer, they reduced the value of the fighter and inherently weakened the sport.

Yah, but 15 rounds, man, we were better men for it in our day. We were stronger, we were smarter, and we were better men. Why cut them down and make them look like they can’t do the job?” Joe Frazier said on the Neil Cavuto Show.

While the risk of punch drunk and other concussion injuries plaguing aging athletes has been reduced, so has the greatness of sports. Not because we love to see athletes injured, but because the power of a sport is seeing a human being push himself to the limits of physical endurance and pain, not the bloodlust and carnage of the brawling or the carnage of the vicious impact.

It is because of this great risk that athletic competition is so great, not in spite of it. The consequence of grievous injury is risk that becomes necessary if a sport itself is to achieve greatness. If something is easy and anyone can do it, then it is no great feat.

Only through consequence can an individual or a sport achieve greatness. Without these consequences, this is no greatness. I consider that an axiom.

Greatness cannot exist without cause or consequence. When governments and laws remove the risk, danger, and yes, the excitement of a sport, they effectively neuter the greatness of the sport and reduce the combatants to mere automatons and replaceable figureheads of a castrated competition.

This is the stated goal of leftism — to equalize everything and generate fairness. This is why government touts safety. Not for the inherent benevolence of protecting sports, but to negate the greatness of a sport and thereby negate the greatness of America.

Government is doing it today not only in football, but other contact sports such as boxing and hockey. Quarterbacks are treated as glass cannons and kickoffs have been reduced to the 20 yard line dash, with little opportunity for the men that compete to really come into their own.

Worse, it puts a question mark at the end of every sentence when comparing statistics. Would Vick be as great a quarterback without the opened secondary and softer sacking rules of yesteryear? Babe Ruth hit over 700 home runs. How many would he have hit in an age of a live ball?

By not allowing the men to compete on open and even ground with their historical counterparts, we will never know.

The heart of any competitive endeavor relies on the difficulty of the accomplishment. Our society is moving more and more every day into the safety corner of the classroom rather than the battlefield of athletic competition among adults. A trophy has no value if it is given to everyone, instead of the winner.

Society protects the weak and innocent, but by extending that protection to the healthy and strong we are converting our people from men and women into cattle and sheep.

Joe Frazier knew this. The great ones always do.

Thomas Purcell is nationally syndicated columnist, author of the book “Shotgun Republic” and is host of the Liberty Never Sleeps podcast. More of his work can be found at LibertyNeverSleeps.com.

[mybooktable book=”shotgun-republic” display=”summary”]

Efforts to push fairness and safety in

gov-jay-nixon-ferguson-missouri

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon (C) stands during a press conference held to discuss security concerns when the grand jury’s decision in the Michael Brown case is announced on November 11, 2014 in Weldon Springs, Missouri (AFP Photo/Scott Olson)

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency and activated the National Guard Monday in anticipation of a grand jury decision in the case of Michael Brown. The grand jury will decide whether Darren Wilson, a white police officer with an impeccable record, will be charged in the fatal shooting of the black 18-year-old in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, Missouri.

“Quite simply, we must and will be fully prepared,” Nixon said at a news conference on Tuesday. “In the days immediately following Michael Brown’s death, peaceful protests were marred by senseless acts of violence and destruction.”

Nixon also said the National Guard would assist state and local police in the event there is violence and other instances of civil unrest when the grand jury’s decision is announced.

There was no indication that any announcement of a decision is imminent, but there is also no specific date the St. Louis County prosecutor has said that he expects the grand jury to reach a decision in mid-to-late November.

Meanwhile, police officials in Ferguson and other cities across America were bracing Monday for possible violence that mirrored the destruction that took place after the shooting on August 9.

In Los Angeles, a city that saw its share of riots in 1992, which broke out after the acquittal of police officers in the beating of Rodney King, police officials are also gearing up for a decision. They say they’ve been in touch with their counterparts in Missouri, as well as community leaders.

“Naturally, we always pay attention,” said Commander Andrew Smith, a police spokesman. “We saw what happened when there were protests over there and how oftentimes protests spill from one part of the country to another.”

“It’s definitely on our radar,” said Lt. Michael McCarthy, a police spokesman in Boston, where police leaders met privately Wednesday to discuss an appropriate response. “Common sense tells you the timeline is getting close. We’re just trying to prepare in case something does step off, so we are ready to go with it.”

McCarthy said the city’s 2,200 police officers have dealt with the range of public actions, from sports fans spontaneously streaming into the streets following championship victories to protest movements such as the so-called Occupy movement.

“The good thing is that our relationships here with the community are much better than they are around the world,” he said. “People look to us as a model. Boston is not Ferguson.”

Back in Ferguson, Sunday marked the 100th day of demonstrations and they were peaceful. That sadly hasn’t always been the case, however. On October 20, Ferguson protesters outside the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis clashed with fans after the Rams game against the Seattle Seahawks. In the St. Louis Post-Dispatch video posted on PPD, a black female is heard yelling a slew of racially charged expletives at both the police and fans.

“F*** all you white m*****f*****rs,” the woman was heard saying.

She was arrested for assaulting a white man and woman.

Still, residents and officials in the region fear another wave of rioting if the grand jury decides not to indict Wilson.

“This is America. People have a right to express their views and grievances, but they do not have the right to put their fellow citizens or their property at risk,” Nixon said.

Nixon, himself, found himself at the center of criticism during the onset of the violence, first for using the National Guard and militarized police forces and, second, for making comments that inappropriately called for justice for Michael Brown without mentioning Officer Darren Wilson before the facts of the case were heard.

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon declared a state

FCC newsroom

Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group that investigates corruption and overreach, announced that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the FCC. The FOIA suit, which was filed on October 16, 2014, requested “any and all records” relating to the supposedly suspended and controversial FCC newsroom survey, or the “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs” (CIN) pilot study.

In May 2013, the Federal Communications Commission announced the nationwide CIN study, which was allegedly designed “to provide a comprehensive analysis of access/barriers to CINs in diverse American communities … with special emphasis on vulnerable/disadvantaged populations.”

However, despite the guise of promoting diversity, it was widely viewed by many on both sides of the aisle as an obvious effort to stifle the free speech of citizen journalists, bloggers and conservative media outlets. The National Association of Broadcasters called the plan “constitutionally questionable” in a letter to the agency, and FCC commissioner Ajit Pai said the study would “thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country” in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.

In February, only after considerable blowback, the Energy and Commerce Committee released a statement claiming the FCC was “scrapping its Critical Information Needs (CIN) study that would have included interviewing journalists and other news professionals about their decision-making processes.” According to an FCC document, some of the questions FCC agents and agency contractors were set to ask private news outlets included:

  • What is the news philosophy of the station?
  • Who decides which stories are covered?
  • How much does community input influence news coverage decisions?
  • What are the demographics of the news management staff?
  • What are the demographics of the news production staff?

Yet, despite the agency’s claim they would no longer concern themselves with how media outlets make editorial decisions on the stories they cover, Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. Federal Communications Commission (No. 1:14-cv-01728)) after the FCC failed to respond to a previous FOIA request dated February 12, 2014.

“The FCC now says it has killed the study but we are skeptical, especially since we now have had to sue in federal court to get information about this issue,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the study is simply the latest version of the ‘Fairness Doctrine,’ a FCC regulatory scheme ended during the Reagan administration that was used to regulate political speech on radio and television.”

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) were also concerned that the study would lead to a revival of the Fairness Doctrine, a policy thought to be abolished under the Reagan administration in 1987, which President Obama is on record opposing. In August 2011, the FCC announced it was eliminating the Fairness Doctrine from the Code of Federal Regulations.

“The Fairness Doctrine is a relic of an earlier era when government officials thought they knew best what news and information the American people wanted and needed,” said Reps. Upton and Walden. “The rules are outdated and needlessly endanger our sacred freedoms of speech and the press.”

Nevertheless, it would appear neither the agency nor the administration in general have been completely honest about the use of the Fairness Doctrine. Further, the policy joins a long list of others suggesting an administration that is all too often willing to pull the levers of government to punish or suppress their political opponents, revelations the president only seems to become aware of when watching the news, himself.

PPD learned in March that the FCC newsroom survey originated from known Democrats at the FCC and was intentionally withheld from the commission’s two Republican members until it was already in motion.

“This FCC scandal also echoes the Obama IRS abuse, which illegally targeted groups and individuals based upon their political philosophy,” Fitton added. “The FCC, which is charged with making sure regulated media companies obey the law, refuses to obey the Freedom of Information Act and tell the American people why it wanted to interrogate newsmen and monitor the blogs of everyday citizens.”

The commission’s left-leaning members enlisted the help of liberal scholars from two known liberal journalism schools, including the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism and the University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for Communication and Democracy.

Presented to the commission in July of 2012, the research listed five authors: Ernest J. Wilson III, Carola Weil, Katherine Ognyanova from USC, Lewis Friedland from Wisconsin, and Philip Napoli from Fordham University (Weil is now with American University). Among the liberal panel of professors, a whopping 4 of the 5 were donors to President Obama, and — not or — other Democratic campaigns.

According to Federal Election Commission records, USC professor Ernest J. Wilson III gave $3,300 to the Obama presidential campaign in 2007 and again in 2008. Fordham University Philip Napoli donated $500 to Obama in 2008, while then-USC and now-American University professor Carola Weil gave $250 in 2012. Wisconsin professor Lewis Friedland, whose fellow is none other than Karen Kay Kirst-Ashman, whom we previously investigated for writing propaganda in textbooks, gave $200 in 2012.

There were no contributions that we were able to find from Katherine Ognyanova of USC, who as a post-doctoral fellow led a team of graduate student researchers on the project.

It was this group of liberally-bias academics who presented suggestions about how to determine the “critical information needs” to the FCC, and would have government monitors “crawling” the Internet sites of newspapers, local governments, blogs, non-profits, and citizen journalists.

“Once again we see the heavy hand of the Obama administration hovering over the First Amendment’s freedom of the press,” Fitton said. “It’s little wonder that Reporters Without Borders’ recent survey of world press freedom ranked the United States forty-sixth, below even that of Botswana and Romania – and only one position above Haiti.”

The FCC did not respond to a request for comment on either the original February FOIA request, or this most-recent lawsuit. Considering the past successes of Judicial Watch, mainly on Benghazi and the IRS, it is safe to assume they will have to respond to a federal judge in the future.

In response to the agency ignoring previous

actavis_allergan_botox

Photo: REUTERS

Actavis said Monday it would acquire Allergan for a stock and cash deal totaling about $66 billion, or $219 per share, creating a top 10 global pharma giant.

Actavis (NYSE:ACT) is up $8.33, or around 3.5 percent on the heels of the news, while Allergan (NYSE:AGN) is up 13.20, or around 6.6 percent.

Actavis (NYSE:ACT) is up $8.33, or around

empire state manufacturing index

Readings from the Empire State manufacturing index reported by the New York Fed monthly.

The closely-watched New York manufacturing activity gauge rose to 10.16 in November, slightly below an expectations of 11, but up from an October reading of 6.17.

In the New York Federal Reserve’s Empire State index, readings above 0 point to expansions, while those below indicate contraction.

The closely-watched New York manufacturing activity gauge

doctor with Ebola Martin Salia dies

In this April 2014 photo provided by the United Methodist News Service, Dr. Martin Salia poses for a photo at the United Methodist Church’s Kissy Hospital outside Freetown, Sierra Leone. (Photo: Mike DuBose/United Methodist News Service/AP)

The doctor with Ebola died Monday shortly after 4 AM at a Nebraska hospital where he was transported for treatment, spokesman Taylor Wilson said in a statement.

The statement released Monday by the Nebraska Medical Center said Dr. Martin Salia, a surgeon who contracted the virus while working in Sierra Leone “has passed away as a result of the advanced symptoms of the disease.”

Dr. Salia, 44, was being treated in the medical center’s biocontainment unit, which he had just arrived at Saturday by plane from West Africa. He was transported by ambulance for treatment at the hospital upon landing, where two other Ebola patients had previously been successfully treated.

Officials early on said Salia might be more ill than the first two Ebola patients and on Sunday officials described his condition as “an hour-by-hour situation.”

“Dr. Salia was extremely critical when he arrived here, and unfortunately, despite our best efforts, we weren’t able to save him,” said Dr. Phil Smith, medical director of the biocontainment unit.

Salia had been working as a general surgeon at Kissy United Methodist Hospital in the Sierra Leone capital of Freetown. However, it is not yet clear whether he was involved in the care of Ebola patients, because Kissy is not an Ebola treatment unit and officials aren’t giving PPD straight answers. But Salia did work in at least three other facilities, according to United Methodist News, who was citing health ministry sources.

Salia, a Sierra Leone citizen-turned-permanent U.S. resident lived in Maryland. He first showed Ebola symptoms on Nov. 6, but actually tested negative for the virus during the first round of tests. He only tested positive on Monday.

The U.S. State Department said that — even though it helped facilitate the transfer of Salia — the U.S. Embassy in Freetown said he actually paid for the expensive evacuation.

Salia and his wife, Isatu Salia, have two children, ages 12 and 20. Isatu said in a telephone interview that she spoke to her husband early Friday and his voice sounded weak and shaky. But she did say that he was able to tell her “I love you” in a somewhat normal voice.

Ebola has killed more than 5,000 people in West Africa, mostly in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. However, concern in the U.S. over Ebola has steadily risen since the first case — Thomas Duncan — became known. Not only do the American people overwhelmingly want a travel ban, but it now ranks among the top three health concerns.

While rising healthcare costs (19 percent) and access (18 percent) continue to rank among the leading issues Americans cite when Gallup recently asked what they consider to be the country’s “most urgent health problem,” a close 17 percent mentioned Ebola.

A doctor with Ebola died Monday shortly

Republican-ObamaCare-Alternative

The president’s signature health care law has never enjoyed majority support among the American people, but it now stands at its lowest level of support ever measured by Gallup. The survey conducted by Gallup from Nov. 6-9, 2014, is particularly noteworthy due to Gallup’s better-than-average results juxtaposed to the PPD average of ObamaCare approval polls.

With the second open enrollment period beginning, just 37 percent of Americans say they approve of the law, which is one percentage lower than the previous low in January. Meanwhile, 56 percent disapprove, also a new high by one point.

Gallup_ObamaCare_Approval_trend

Gallup conducted one of the two polls to ever show more people approved of the law than not, the other was an ABC/WaPo Poll conducted during the first open enrollment period. In the trend line above, we can see Gallup’s results were released around the time the president won reelection and, even though it was alone in its findings, it wasn’t such a clear outlier as was the case with the other pollster’s survey.

“Americans have never been overly positive toward the ACA, at best showing a roughly equal division between approval and disapproval early on in the law’s implementation,” said Justin McCarthy of Gallup. “The percentage of Americans who approve of the law represents a new numerical low, which could indicate a loss of faith in the law amid the aftermath of the 2014 midterms.”

Or, another interpretation, could be that the results are in response to the latest string of videos catching MIT economist and ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber saying Democrats relied upon “a lack of transparency” and “the stupidity of the American voter” to pass the bill. In the initial video, as well as others that followed, Gruber basically provides a window into the liberal Ivory Tower mindset, which is that they know what’s best for the American people, not the American people, themselves.

Or, it could be a combination of both. But the American people aren’t as stupid as some D.C. pols would like to believe. A PPD investigation recently concluded that the president — among many others — were, in fact, in “the know” over the tactics Gruber identified to pass the bill. Unsurprisingly, the American people had already expressed their belief that he did in recent PPD tracking surveys.

With Obama’s veto power certain to be exercised, repeal is unlikely during the president’s final two years in office. However, not only can and will the newly elected Republican majority continue to chop away at the law in spending bills, the law is far from safe.

In July, the powerful D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated ObamaCare subsidies for health insurance obtained through the federally-run HealthCare.gov. The ruling was a major blow to the president’s signature health care law, and it teed-up the second time the constitutionality of the law would once again be decided in the U.S. Supreme Court.

On Nov. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the legal challenge to ObamaCare and, now, more voters than not say it is a good idea to delay ObamaCare until the high court has a chance to rule.

A new survey conducted by Rasmussen Reports found a plurality wants to delay implementation of ObamaCare until all legal challenges are exhausted, which may not be likely to happen, either, but demonstrates the law is in for a hard road ahead after fours years.

Gallup tracking of ObamaCare approval ratings show

alcaldes iguala_murdered_mexican_students

José Luis Abarca and his wife María de los Angeles Pineda Villa.

Officials have confirmed that former Iguala Mayor Jose Luis Abarca Velazquez, now linked to the execution of 43 education students in September, will face a criminal trial.

Velazquez will remain in custody until such time a federal criminal court in Toluca, which is a city in Mexico, will try Abarca for organized crime, kidnapping and murder charges. The Federal Judiciary Council, or CJF, said the court issued the order as part of proceedings initiated by a court in Matamoros, a border city in the northeastern state of Tamaulipas.

While Mexico is known for extreme corruption, the ruling came amid widespread and growing protests demanding a response to the grim crime.

Abarca is being held at the Altiplano federal penitentiary in Mexico state, which surrounds the Federal District and forms part of the Mexico City metropolitan area. He and his wife, Maria de los Angeles Pineda Villa, were arrested by the Federal Police on Nov. 4 in Mexico City.

Pineda is being held in preventive detention so prosecutors can gather more evidence in the case.

The Mexico mayor served in a city in the southern state of Guerrero, but he and his wife fled from their house on Sept. 30, four days after Iguala municipal police officers opened fire on students from a rural teachers college.

Six people died, 25 were wounded and 43 students disappeared in the incident.

The 43 students, the majority of them between the ages 18 to 21, were detained by police and handed over to the Guerreros Unidos drug cartel, which executed them and burned the bodies to eliminate all traces of the victims.

Officials confirmed Mexico Mayor Jose Luis Abarca

On Face The Nation Sunday, left-leaning host Bob Schieffer said he was “dumbstruck” by the comments made by MIT economist and ObamaCare architect, Jonathan Gruber. The comments were caught on video and surfaced last week, which were also followed with a series of others that trickled out via taped video footage.

“I was dumbstruck when I heard the comments that are surfacing from an economist named Jonathan Gruber, who was paid four hundred thousand dollars to help shape the president’s health care plan,” said Schieffer. “First, he allowed his health plan passed only because of a lack of transparency and this is a direct quote, ‘the stupidity of the American people.’ Then Friday our Nancy Cordes found a couple of other things he said going back to 2011.”

Schieffer went on to play comments made by Gruber in another video, during which he says the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) — whom he called a “very smart senator” — found a way to “rip off the feds” by getting them to pay for the Massachusetts health care overhaul.

“I’ll be honest, while I favor health insurance, I am not wild about the new plan and how it became law either,” Schieffer added. “But here is my question for Mister Gruber. If all this was as bad as you say, why did you take the money you earned as an advisor, nor is it too late to give it back? What we have here is another example of the sorry state of American politics where people take money for things in which they don’t believe and whether it’s good for the American people is not even a question. As for the President he may want to consider that old politician’s prayer, Lord, I can take care of my enemies; just protect me from my friends.”

On Face The Nation Sunday, left-leaning host

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial