Tag Archives: president Obama

A House Divided – Part 3 of 3

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s some old news with continued relevance.  According to a March 25, 2007 Chicago Tribune Article: The not-so-simple story of Barack Obama’s youth, by Tribune Correspondents Kirstan Scharnberg and Kim Barker; and reporter Ray Gibson,

 “…one word Obama learned quickly in his new home [Indonesia] was curang, which means “cheater.”

“When kids teased him, Obama yelled back, ‘Curang, curang!’ When a friend gave him shrimp paste instead of chocolate, he yelled, ‘Curang, curang!’”

It appears that very little has changed since those days.   How many speeches have we heard in which Obama blames Republicans for failures in foreign and domestic policy, immigration, gun control, climate change and probably for dirty restrooms in the Capitol Building!  Remember his first year as President and the constant repetition of complaints regarding the mess “I inherited”  from George Bush?  Remember his reports on alleged U.S. abuses  to the United Nations  Human Rights Council?

Our memory doesn’t have to be that good, because he’s still doing it!  As reported by Joel B. Pollak of Breitbart, on May 11, 2015, the Obama Administration has once again reported so-called U.S. Human Rights violations to the United Nations including:

  • “Police brutality, including the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri
  • Discrimination against Muslims who want to build or expand mosques
  • Voter identification laws in Texas and elsewhere
  • Predatory lending in home mortgages
  • Suspension of black children in schools
  • Women earning ‘78 cents on the dollar’”

Was this his “Cheater” list for the year?  Close your eyes.  Can you just picture this guy running down the street, looking over his shoulder and shouting at Republicans: Curang, Curang?

Here’s some older ones.  In his book OBAMA:Promise of Power, David Mendell says

“…white people from the better neighborhoods nearby walk their dogs down our block to let the animals shit on our curbs.” 

Was that a simple observation, a misperception, bias?  What do you think?

Curang, Curang – those damn white people again!!!

In the same book, he also made these comments:

“…Security guards tailing me as I shop in Department stores…”

“…white couples who toss me their car keys as I stand outside a restaurant waiting for the valet…” 

See something familiar in Michelle’s Tuskegee speech?

In what alternate universe does Barack Obama present himself as a person who would either provoke security to follow him, or restaurant patrons to throw keys at him?

Curang, Curang, America!!!

How many times has Obama suggested that police are racists?   In bringing a negative spotlight on police and fostering racial tension between communities and the police who serve  them, Obama’s is once again worthy of the title “Agitator.”‘

I guess it’s a matter of Curang, curang police!!!

At an April, 2010, speech at the Ottumwa, Iowa Town Hall, Obama managed to incorporate  his view of police into the discussion of a proposed Arizona State Statute aimed at immigration enforcement.

“If you are a Hispanic American in Arizona – your great-grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state.  But now, suddenly, if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed.  That’s something that could potentially happen.”

Curang, Curang Arizona – Curang, Curang again Police!!!

And of the Republicans stressing the need for border security, President Obama declared:

“Those aren’t the kind of folks who represent our core American values.”

Curang, Curang Republicans!!!  Curang, Curang Senator McCain

Sadly, if we are indeed a “House Divided,” President and Mrs. Obama seem, to be without a strategy, or inclination to repair what they have so quickly and enthusiastically destroyed.

President Obama has had possibly,  the greatest opportunity of any Chief Executive who has ever occupied the White House to make a positive and profound difference in the black community and by extension, in America at large.

He could have worked to reduce black on black crime.  He could  have  championed  the right of black children to attend schools of their choice.   Instead, for those in Washington, DC at least, he killed their best shot: the voucher program.  He could have lobbied for programs to strengthen the traditional family unit.  He could have encouraged and supported initiatives to help people climb out of poverty and re-integrate with the larger community.  He could have increased job opportunities for African-Americans.  He could have lead the black community in turning the page from an inter-generational sense of victimization, to new levels of economic self sufficiency and achievement.

He could have done all of these things and divided nobody.  Instead, he did none of these things and divided everyone..

Perhaps it should really be:  Curang, Curang Mr. Obama – Curang, Curang.

###

A House Divided – Part 2 of 3

Posted on by
Reply

….Recently, Mrs. Obama gave the commencement speech for the 2015 graduating class of Tuskegee University.  She warned the young graduates about the world they would soon encounter, saying in part:

“…They  [presumably White Americans]  will make assumptions about who they think you are based on their limited notion of the world.  And my husband and I know how frustrating that experience can be.  We’ve both felt the sting of those daily slights throughout our entire lives — the folks who crossed the street in fear of their safety; the clerks who kept a close eye on us in all those department stores; the people at formal events who assumed we were the “help” — and those who have questioned our intelligence, our honesty, even our love of this country. 

“And I know that these little indignities are obviously nothing compared to what folks across the country are dealing with every single day — those nagging worries that you’re going to get stopped or pulled over [by the police] for absolutely no reason; the fear that your job application will be overlooked because of the way your name sounds; the agony of sending your kids to schools that may no longer be separate, but are far from equal; the realization that no matter how far you rise in life, how hard you work to be a good person, a good parent, a good citizen — for some folks, it will never be enough.  (Applause.)”

I wonder if the history books will reflect that children from low income neighborhoods didn’t have to attend those separate but unequal schools.  They were sentenced to those schools by an Obama Administration that almost immediately after Inauguration Day, got rid of school vouchers in Washington, DC. (U.S. News & World Report online, Obama Wrong on D.C. School Vouchers and Hypocritical, Just Like Congress, by Peter Roff, located at:  http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2009/04/22/obama-wrong-on-dc-school-vouchers-and-hypocritical-just-like-congress) 

I wonder how the disenfranchised children of Washington, DC and the Tuskegee graduates will perceive and react to life’s inevitable challenges and setbacks?  Will they ignore race, see things objectively, accept them with grace, continue to compete and climb the ladders of success; or, will they cling to the words of the First Lady, seeing a bigot behind every adverse event and passing  those perceptions of prejudice and hatred to still another generation?  Sadly, or luckily – I don’t know – we cannot look 20 years into the future to see what those not so small seeds of hatred will have produced over time.

As discussed in Part 1 of 3 last Friday, as a white man, I experienced the same type of  traffic stop in the 60s, that former Attorney General Holder claims to have experienced as a college student.  I couldn’t claim it was race-based. But, I can tell you that my so-called “white privilege” didn’t help one iota!

Does the First Lady really expect us to believe that she and Barack were mistaken for being “the help” at “formal events?”  Does the President really expect us to believe that white restaurant patrons throw keys at him, while he is waiting for the valet?  Well, according to guidelines published at University of California, under University President Janet Napolitano (you remember – Obama’s first Director of Homeland Security!), if we were students or faculty members at University of California, we’d have to believe it, because  “Denying the experiences of students by questioning the credibility/validity of their stories” is a “microaggression.”  I suppose that questioning a story told by the First Lady would then qualify as a MACROAGGRESSION.  …just sayin’

Other so-called “microaggressions” in the UC world now include saying that:

  • “America is the land of Opportunity”
  • “There is only one race: the human race”
  • “I believe the most qualified person should get the job”
  • “Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough”
  • “California professors instructed not to say ‘America is the land of opportunity’” by JOSH HEDTKE – UCLA JUNE 10, 2015 http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22839/

And, so  the drumbeat of divisiveness, painting pictures of hopelessness and a disdain for all things American doesn’t stop at the edge of the Tuskegee University campus, or the 10 University of California Campuses.

 

To be Continued…

A House Divided – Part 1 of 3

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve heard some pundits call Obama “Divisive.”  Why would they think so?   Well, let’s start with a  statement reportedly given  to Ryan Lizza of the New Republic, by Mike Kruglik, an early Obama mentor

“He [Obama] was a natural, the undisputed master of agitation….”   

O.k., but what does that have to do with divisiveness?

Saul Alinsky – author of Rules for Radicals and father of the school of Community Organizing practiced by Barack Obama – described the Agitator’s job as

“…first to bring folks to the ‘realization’ that they are indeed miserable, that their misery is the fault of unresponsive governments or greedy corporations, then help them to bond together to demand what they deserve.”

And what better way to evoke misery and divisiveness than by resurrecting  a historical tragedy that has long since passed its proper burial date.  As the Reichstag fire proved in 1933 Germany, creating a common enemy is a potent tool for consolidating political support and power – and is never intended to benefit the people whose lives will most likely be shattered by its effect.  Today’s common enemy is White?  Black?  Latin?  Police? How do you think President Obama answers that question?

Do you Remember when Obama said  that  the Cambridge Police Department acted stupidly and then followed that comment by saying

“…what I think we know separate and apart from this incident (Cambridge Police) is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.  That’s just a fact.”  

A  fact?  And the credible source is…

While visiting Ferguson, MO during the Michael Brown protests, with riots, looting  and for the innocents – fear – filling the hours of darkness, Attorney General Eric Holder took advantage of the opportunity to address an audience of local college students regarding his own alleged experience with police officers.  According to an L.A. Times article posted August 20, 2014, Holder told students:

“I am the attorney general of the United States. But I am also a black man. I can remember being stopped on the New Jersey Turnpike on two occasions and accused of speeding. Pulled over…. ‘Let me search your car.’ … Go through the trunk of my car, look under the seats and all this kind of stuff….” 

As police officers and members of the National Guard were putting their lives on the line to protect people and property – while cars and buildings were burning – while looters were gutting businesses that others spent their lives building – was this really the time and place for Mr. Holder to be giving this type of speech – to this kind of audience?  And, if someone died, or had their business destroyed because of that speech, who would hold him accountable?  Would people call for his indictment, or demand he be fired?  Probably not, because his actions would have merely set things in motion for another citizen/police confrontation and perhaps another shooting, indictment, riot – but nothing that would attach to Holder or to others who gain power and notoriety by fanning the flames of racism.

I had an experience similar to Mr. Holder’s – mine in Louisiana while serving in the U.S. Navy in the 60’s.  I was not speeding, but I was reminded that I was in a city that operated under French law and he [the officer] could put me in the jail and throw away the key – nobody would ever find me.  Perhaps, a little scarier than searching my trunk.  Like Holder, I was stopped by a white police officer.  Unlike Holder though, I happen to be white.

You may also remember when Obama  said that if he had a son, he would look like Trayvon.  Then, on Dec. 5, 2014, the President gave an interview to Jeff Johnson of the Black Entertainment Network, in which he further personalized the events in Ferguson and around the Country.

“When they described their own personal experiences of having been stopped for no reason, or having generated suspicion because they were in a community that supposedly they didn’t belong, my mind went back to what it was like for me when I was 17, 18, 20…”

He went on to say “It used to be, folks would say, “Well, maybe blacks are exaggerating, maybe some of these situations aren’t what they described.” What we’ve now seen on television, for everybody to see, gives us an opportunity, I think, to finally have the kind of conversation that’s been a long time coming.”(Emphasis added)

We should and must hold police officers to a very high standard and we should expect the best judgment, based on state-of-the-art psychological screening and the best training available.  Should we also hold politicians, judges and attorneys responsible?  Do teachers, social workers and parents also bear  responsibility for what ultimately explodes on our streets?  Should we also assign just a touch of responsibility to the criminals  themselves and to others whose behavior, while not criminal,  initiates the scenes we so often see played out with negative consequences.  Those who have read President Obama’s two books are aware of his provocative behaviors as a young man – behaviors that could easily have resulted in unfortunate confrontations.  Does his mind also go back to his own behavior and the potential consequences when he “…was 17, 18, 20…”?

Police officers are the uniformed representatives of government.  When police officers abuse their powers, or exercise poor judgment, citizens begin to distrust their government.  But, it also works in reverse.  When government is ineffective, corrupt, or abusive, the frustration and distrust of citizens is likely to find voice on the streets and in their attitudes and conduct towards police.  When President Obama and others talk about the need to improve relationships between police and the communities they serve, they should first also look to the actions of government and the relationship of those actions to the prosperity, freedom and satisfaction of the citizens they too are sworn to serve.

Recently, Mrs. Obama gave the commencement speech for the 2015 graduating class of Tuskegee University.  She warned the young graduates about the world they would soon face, saying in part:

To Be Continued…

Business as Usual at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Posted on by
1

President Obama was back on the golf course Saturday – obviously, deeply concerned about the people still suffering in New York and New Jersey.  That bit of sarcasm would seem harsh and out of touch to most Democrats, but given Obama’s handling of Benghazi and the deaths of four Americans, it seems a more than fair appraisal of what moves the needle on this  president’s “urgency meter.”

Still, President Obama has ticked off a few of his “To Do’s” since last Tuesday’s election.  He admitted, for example, that one of our unmanned, unarmed drones had been attacked by Iranian jets on November 1st.  For those that pay attention to such trivia, that would be five days before the election.  One can only wonder why it took so long for that news to find daylight.  In still another in the long line of fortuitous coincidences that have guided Obama’s career, General David Petraeus, Director of the CIA, has stepped down.  Conveniently, his resignation, based on an alleged extramarital affair, came days after (with no hint before) the election and days before hearings on Benghazi.  The affair was reportedly part of an FBI investigation  – Strangely, and apparently in violation of established protocol, not reported prior to the election, to members of the congressional intelligence committees.

As they say, “Timing is Everything.”

Then there was Obama’s speech on Friday, in which he noted in part, that

“…the American people voted for action, not politics as usual.  You elected us to focus on your jobs – not ours.  And in that spirit, I’ve invited leaders of both parties to the White House next week so we can start to build consensus around the challenges that we can only solve together – and I also intend to bring in business and labor and civic leaders from all across the country, here, to Washington to get their ideas and input as well.  You know, at a time when our economy is still recovering from a great recession, our top priority has to be jobs and growth.  That’s the focus of the plan that I talked about during the campaign.  It’s a plan that rewards small businesses and manufacturers that create jobs here – not overseas.  It’s a plan to give people the chance to get the education and training that businesses are looking for right now.  It’s a plan to make sure that this country is a global leader in research, in technology and clean energy, which will attract new companies and high wage jobs to America.  It’s a plan to put folks back to work – including our veterans – rebuilding our roads and our bridges and other infrastructure.  And, it’s a plan to reduce our deficit in a balanced and responsible way.  Our work is made that much more urgent because at the end of this year we face a series of  deadlines that requires us to make major decisions about how to pay our deficit down – decisions that will have a major impact on the economy and on the middle class, both now and in the future.  Last year, I worked with Democrats and Republicans to cut a trillion dollars worth of spending that we just couldn’t afford.  I intend to work with both parties to do more and that includes making reforms that will bring down the cost of health care, so we can strengthen programs like Medicaid and Medicare for the long haul.  But, as I’ve said before, we just can’t cut our way to prosperity.  If we’re serious about reducing the deficit, we have to combine spending cuts with revenue…and that means asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more in taxes.  That’s how we did it in the 1990’s when Bill Clinton was president.  That’s how we can reduce the deficit while still making the investments we need to build a strong middle class and a strong economy.  That’s the only way we can still afford to train our workers, or help our kids pay for college, or make sure that good jobs, or clean energy, or high tech manufacturing don’t end up in countries like China.  Now, already I’ve put forth a detailed plan that allows us to make these investments while reducing our deficit by four trillion dollars over the next decade.  I want to be clear.  I’m not wedded to every detail of my plan.  I’m open to compromise.  I’m open to new ideas.  I’m committed to solving our fiscal challenge.  BUT, I refuse to accept any approach that isn’t balanced…”

I was once taught by a Psychologist friend that the word “BUT” cancels everything said up to that point.  You think?

I often find myself asking if it has occurred to others that this entire political conversation is a game that insults the intelligence of Americans.  On the one hand, we have conservatives saying that raising taxes on those making over $250,000 is raising taxes on small business and on investors who make small business possible.  I entirely agree with this premise insofar as those being targeted for tax increases are small business owners, or are investing in small businesses.  President Obama, on the other hand, seems to completely discount the argument and wants to increase taxes on everyone over that threshold income.  And as he does, he still claims that he will increase the number of jobs and attract new businesses.  This is counterintuitive and, I believe, totally false.  Additionally, it has been shown on several occasions that even if we taxed all of this target group at 100%, it would provide only enough revenue to run the country for a few weeks.  At the same time, it would necessarily eliminate business investment.

What seems to elude Harvard educated politicians, but easily passes the commonsense test, is that if this were a fiscal, rather than an ideological argument, they need only determine who, making more than $250,000 is actually engaged in a small business, who is employing others, and who is investing in the small businesses of others.  Extend the tax cuts for all of them and raise taxes, if you must, on the rest.  Make sense?

The truth, as any breathing person should realize by now, is that tax increases will make no positive difference on the deficit, or debt.  Whatever additional funds are brought into the treasury will be “invested” by Obama before they even arrive.  They will not be used to reduce the deficit, or the debt.  We should not forget that this president hasn’t even been able to pass a budget in his first term.  By definition, this means that there is no plan, because plans are funded and executed through the budget process.  He has increased the National Debt by more than five trillion dollars in less than four years – the most outrageous increase in the history of America.

If Barack Obama was a financial consultant, rather than president  – If he had the same record in his business finances as he has had in Washington – If the financial rating of his company had fallen as that of America has – If you knew he had been operating his company for the past four years, without so much as a budget – if his company was deeply in debt and still borrowing to stay afloat – And if you were searching for someone to handle your hard earned retirement savings – would you put your entire financial future in his hands?

We have.

 

 

“Fast and Furious” – The Lies Keep on Coming!!!

Posted on by
1

It’s in Your Hands!

Can we Stop the Damage?

In his recent interview with Hispanic journalists from Univision in Miami, President Obama was asked about the “Fast and Furious” gun walking operation.  Specifically, they asked if he thought he should fire Attorney General Eric Holder.  As he began his verbal defense of Holder – the first Attorney General in the history of the U.S. to be held in Contempt of Congress – Obama did the unthinkable for a president.  He lied.  He lied with impunity.

President Obama told the interviewer that “Fast and Furious” was a field initiated operation started under President George Bush.  When Attorney General Holder learned of the operation, he said, Holder shut it down.  This was a blatant lie – not even a close approximation of the truth – just more evidence that Obama considers Americans ignorant, gullible and yes…stupid.  The Bush era gun walking operation was known as Operation “Wide Receiver,” was worked in cooperation with the Mexican government, was considered successful and was terminated in 2007 – two years before Obama (or Holder) took office.

Will you Help?

While Obama and his people lie at every turn, spinning stories with no relationship to the facts, or even to commonsense, his favorable ratings continue to climb.  I remember speaking to a lady who loves Obama and plans to vote for him in November.  I asked, “Which of his policies are most important to you?”  Her response was immediate and without apology.  “I don’t know about that stuff.  I just love him.”

You may say I don’t get out much, but the truth is that I’ve yet to speak with one Obama supporter who has read both his books.  Perhaps, you heard the 2008 tapes of people supporting Obama and believing that his running mate was Sarah Palin!  Do you know somebody like this?  Can we just stand by and watch these people destroy the country through ignorance?  Or, can we engage and talk to them while there’s still a chance to change their mind?

As I write on the Home Page, this is clearly the most important election of  our lifetime.  When a president lies to Americans in such an open and reckless manner; when he fails to protect the lives of  U.S. personnel serving abroad; when he apologizes for America; when he opts for fundraising events over security briefings; when he forgets awarding a Congressional Medal of Honor; when he has time to call the owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, but not the mother of a dead soldier – there is a problem.

When debt spirals out of control, when over 8% of Americans are out of work; when more men than at any other time in history have left the workforce, no longer looking for work – there is a problem.  Would people vote for him if they knew these things; if they heard what he’s said about Americans?  I’m praying they would not.

What if you could help reverse the damage by learning all of the facts in a quick, easy read and then just sharing that information with your friends in everyday, informal conversation.  Here’s your chance if you don’t want the Obama lies, hate and divisiveness to continue.

Effective Monday, September 24, I’m reducing the price of my Kindle book, 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama, from $4.99 to to 99 cents – so that every responsible American voter can get  it and share its factual – easy to read content – with all of their friends.  99 cents is  the lowest allowable kindle book price on Amazon.  You can order at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0080JOAUE.   The paperback version of 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama is now available for $11.77.  Use the discount code AYW7MDA4 when ordering from www.createspace.com/3838729 and receive $2 off that already low price.

I am speaking to you from the heart as a fellow American – not as somebody trying to sell books!  If you believe as I do, that Obama’s policies are responsible for divisiveness, job losses, increased danger in the world, a weakening of America and potentially irreversible damage to our economy, please get, read and share 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama.  100% of all royalties remaining after these discounts will be donated to Wounded Warrior Project.  My gain will be the same as yours:  To know that together, we did our very best to stop the damage and return our nation to responsible leadership.

Is There a Political Conscience?

Posted on by
Reply

It’s Up to You!

Now in Paperback
$2 off with Code AYW7MDA4
Click on Book Cover to order

“Obama, Obama, We are all Osama!”

Listening to Susan Rice, Jay Carney and the mainstream media regarding this year’s 9/11 attacks,  should have the head of every American spinning like Linda Blair’s in the Exorcist.

Since this year’s 9/11 attacks on our Embassy in Cairo and our Consulate in Benghazi, the Obama administration has done its very best to circle the wagons.  The Administration’s political spin is that these attacks, along with violent protests in more than 20 Countries around the world, including Australia and the president’s former home of Djakarta, were triggered solely by an obscure film reportedly produced by California real estate developer Sam Bacile.  “Innocence of Muslims,” released  on YouTube in July,  “depicts the Prophet Mohammed as a womanizer, pedophile, and homosexual,”.[1]  Bacile, reportedly also known as Nakoula Basseley, allegedly has an arrest history for drugs and bank fraud.[2]

U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice told Fox Sunday host Chris Wallace that none of the protests have had anything to do with the policies of the Obama Administration.  Her conclusion – and she was adamant – was that the 9/11 attacks and those since, are the direct result of the Bacile film.[3]  White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has said the same.  Both ignore claims that the 9/11 attacks in Egypt and Libya were well orchestrated, sophisticated acts of terrorism.  Both seem to be telling us that there was no reason to have beefed up security at the Cairo and Benghazi facilities on 9/11.  Both also seem to ignore chanting in these protests that dates back to the May 2012 Tunisian riots, when Obama was called an “ape,” and members of the mob chanted:  “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama.” [4]  These are similar to the chants more recently heard in Lebanon, where the mob chanted “Listen, Listen Obama, We are all Osama,”.[5]

And, as with nearly everything else that Obama and his administration announce, his claim that “The film did it”  has been picked up by the media and reiterated by nearly every mainstream reporter and commentator.  The result is that the film has been elevated to a position of prominence across the globe.  If it was not the source of violence on 9/11, it most certainly has become a source in the days following the tragic murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his staff members.  Arguably, the Administration’s position has increased, rather than ameliorated violence in the region and in the world.  YouTube is now flooded with uploads of the movie and trailer.  All of this begs a nagging question of to what extent will a community organizer, agitator and politician go, in order to deflect blame?

Perhaps there should be a few FAQs – Let’s pretend these are:

Did we need additional security on 9/11?  I would expect that given the authority, most rookie agents, police officers, or military E-1s would have made the call to add Marine guards on the anniversary of 9/11.  Both countries are in transition and the area is known by all, to be thoroughly unstable.  Imagine that we can put a billion dollars in the hands of a country our President says is not an ally – but, we can’t make the expenditure to move a group of Marines to protect our Embassies and Diplomatic personnel on a symbolic date in a volatile region.

Is the “Innocence of Muslims” responsible for the riots and for the murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his staff members?  How about Obama “spiking the football” on the shooting of Osama Bin Laden – how about Biden taking up the widely repeated gratuitous and macho slogan “Osama bin Laden is dead, and General Motors is alive.”  One might logically think that this possibility is supported by demonstrators chanting “…we are all Osama.”

Why are Afghan “Friendlies” killing our soldiers? When Obama issued apologies for the burning of the Korans used by Al Qaeda prisoners to transmit intelligence messages, “friendly” Afghan partners turned their guns on our troops, killing a total of six and wounding several others in three separate incidents.  Since this year’s 9/11 attacks and the repeated media references to the Bacile film, another eight American soldiers have been killed in the same manner – also in three separate incidents.

Did Obama tell the truth about not approving the Cairo Embassy’s statement/apology before the attack on 9/ll?  Let’s look at the wording of the statement.

“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”[6]

Notice the words “…to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims –“  This has significance.  Remember, we are talking about a president who wanted “Empathetic” Supreme Court Justices.  We’re talking about a President who called it his:

 “responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”[7]

We’re talking about a president, whose first priority for NASA was to:

“ find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.”[8]

Then there is the small matter of protocols for the release of statements on American policy in the international arena.  Would the Embassy have dared to make that release without his approval?

If Obama did not approve this statement, it certainly matched to near perfection, both the tone and content of “feelings” he has expressed in the past.

Republican candidate Mitt Romney responded to the Embassy statement,  saying:

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Minutes before Romney’s statement, the Obama administration disavowed the Embassy statement.   Since then, Romney has been the subject of attacks for his response.  In the meantime however, Obama and all of his minions have since returned, in all of their actions and sound bites, if not to the letter, certainly to the spirit of that original statement.

Is the relationship between the Obama administration and Israel “Unprecedented” in its closeness?  President Obama has made it clear from Day One, that he supports the Muslim faith – an interesting and dangerous position for a U.S. President.  Traditionally, our President addresses nations, not religions.  President Obama however, has consistently spoken of Muslims as a monolithic entity, despite the fact that they are spread among some 57 diverse countries.  Regrettably, we may say now, that he has done a great deal to unify them, while apparently working very hard to divide America.

 

[1] Christine Pelisek, (Sep. 13, 2012), The Daily Beast web-site, Anti-Muslim Movie Maker a Meth Cooker, retrieved September 17, 2012 from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/13/mohammed-movie-s-mystery-director.html

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ambassador Susan Rice (September 16, 2012), FoxNews Sunday with Chris Wallace

[4][4] Memri TV Videos, (May 24, 2012), Thousands of Salafis in Tunisia: Obama, We Are All Osama, retrieved September 17, 2012 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TikEcT1DgEU

[5] Jihad Watch, (Sep 14, 2012), Posted by “Robert,” “Listen, listen Obama, we are all Osama” — Lebanon: One killed as Muslims march from mosque, stone police, set fire to KFC, retrieved Sept. 17, 2012 from http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/listen-listen-obama-we-are-all-osama—-lebanon-one-killed-as-muslims-march-from-mosque-stone-police.html

[6] Byron York, (Sept. 11, 2012), Washington Examiner web-site, Beltway Confidential, Romney: Obama administration response to embassy attacks ‘disgraceful’, retrieved Sept. 12, 2012 from http://washingtonexaminer.com/romney-obama-administration-response-to-embassy-attacks-disgraceful/article/2507676#.UFD7ulFSRJY

[7] President Barack Obama, (June 4, 2009) White House web-site, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President on a new Beginning, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt, retrieved December 8, 2011, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-Cairo-University-6-04-09/

[8] Charles Bolden, (2010), in interview with al-Jazeera, quoted by Chief Political Correspondent Byron York, (July 4, 2010), Washington Examiner web-site, Beltway Confidential, Obama’s New Mission for NASA: Reach Out to Muslim World, retrieved December 10, 2011, from http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-s-new-mission-nasa-reach-out-muslim-world

Obama’s Insult to America

Posted on by
Reply

Only 53 Days Remaining!

Now Available in Paperback

As this is being written, violent protests have occurred in more than a dozen Middle East and North African countries.

The wildfire of anti-American protests started on September 11, 2012,  11 years to the day after Islamic radicals brought down the Twin Towers and killed nearly 3,000 Americans.  But, today there is a difference – a very ugly difference.  Today, we face these attacks with an Administration ill suited to the task and seemingly preoccupied with damage control.  In that effort of political self preservation, the Obama administration insults the intellect of the American people and insults the memory of four brave American representatives killed in the Benghazi, Libya assault.

First, we have an apology coming from the U.S. Embassy in Egypt – an apology that actually preceded the assault on the Embassy and the burning of the American flag.  The subject of the apology:  an obscure video released on YouTube in July, 2012, ridiculing the Prophet Mohammed.  Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney quite correctly took issue with Obama’s apology.  But, Obama has apparently been moderately successful in distancing himself from the Embassy’s statement, saying that he did not authorize it – while, at the same time, ridiculing Romney for “shooting before he aims.”

Well, how about that?  Any person who has ever served in a sensitive position in the military, or in the government in general, will tell you that there are protocols for virtually everything – particularly, statements made in the international arena.  The idea that an Embassy would release a statement essentially apologizing , on behalf of the United States, to a large religious block without presidential approval is stunning.  It is particularly odd that a statement amounting to an apology did not come from Obama.  The number of apologies he has made for our Country suggests strongly that somewhere in Washington there is an apology czar combing the wires for stories in any part of the world that could warrant a U.S. apology!

Then there is the obvious – and again I call on those who have served in the military, or in law enforcement.  Given the tensions in the Middle East – given the recent political transitions in Egypt and Libya – how is it even possible that this administration would not have increased security (with U.S. forces) for at least the preceding week and the week following the anniversary of 9/11?  Was this an oversight, or was as it the result of sheer hubris on Obama’s part?  Whatever the reason, four brave men were murdered.  They might have still been alive today, if this very basic step had been taken.

Now, while Romney continues to be the subject of over the top political attacks based on his stand against the initial Embassy apology, the White House is in effect repeating that apology. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney points out that the protesters were not protesting against Obama’s policies, or his administration.  They were protesting against a low budget video released in July, 2012 and amazingly causing people in Egypt and Libya to become sufficiently enraged to burn the American flag and kill four Americans – but, not until September 11 – a day that also “lives in infamy.”  That’s not enough.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had the audacity to repeat this theory in the presence of mourning family members of the four dead Americans.

While President Obama spoke today, during the arrival of our four murdered patriots, it is beyond comprehension that he reportedly first called the mourning families from his plane on the way to a campaign event in Las Vegas, that he has allegedly missed (presumably, by choice) 65% of his security briefings and that he refused a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in favor of an appearance on the David Letterman show. Even now, he continues to campaign – or, is he simply doing his best to avoid calls for a decision – to make this another “Present” vote?

This Administration seems thoroughly convinced that whatever they say to the American people will be believed and embraced without discussion or analysis.  Their behavior is no longer just insulting.  It is dangerous.

If these things are not sufficiently bizarre, former President Jimmy Carter has weighed in, saying that Obama should follow the example he set in handling the Iran hostage situation.  Those who remember can tell you that Jimmy Carter did not handle the Iran hostage situation.  He displayed weakness for the world as Barack Obama does today.  The election of President Reagan was singularly responsible for the release of the hostages, as the timing of their release overwhelmingly proved.  Perhaps, if we are fortunate, the election of Mitt Romney will have the same effect throughout the Middle East.

Democratic National Circus! Part Three

Posted on by
Reply

Only 58 Days Remaining!

Does Obama Think You’re Stupid?

During the Democratic National Circus, you heard Obama say:

                “I’m no longer just a candidate.  I’m the President.”[1]

That statement says so much about Obama.  How many times since this man was elected President has he reminded us that he is the President, that he is the Commander-in-Chief and that “elections have consequences?”

Collectively, these phrases serve far better, as reminders of his unbridled arrogance and perhaps, if we’re honest, of his insecurity in a role he occupies through mere rhetoric rather than accomplishments of any kind.

To check myself, I searched the White House web-site, finding 43,300 results for “Commander-in-Chief,” only one for “Elections have consequences,” (although it produced 486,000 results on Google), and 30,800 results on White House.gov for the corresponding phrase, “I Won.”  Perhaps that makes up for what now seems a modest 174 results for “I am President.”

The constant repetition of these self-serving, condescending and arrogant reminders of power go well with Valerie Jarrett’s one time statement that:

                 “He [Obama] is prepared to really take power and begin to rule Day One.”[2]

Now, having said all these things about the number one person in his life and his assessment of his own power as president, Obama surely must realize that being president is a serious matter.  He has the ability to order young men and women into combat and he now presides over an American economy with a workforce at its lowest point in 31 years – its lowest point in history for men.  As he stood on the podium, accepting the nomination of his Party for president – giving still another in a long line of teleprompter lead speeches – approximately 12.5 million Americans remained unemployed;”[3]  millions more only marginally attached to the workforce, or underemployed.   As he stood on that podium, bragging about 29 straight months of job growth, the new unemployment level was at 8.1%, three tenths of a percent higher than when he took office.  The National Debt was above $16 trillion and salaries for the average middle-class family had dropped by $4,000.  As he has incessantly campaigned, calling jobs his number one priority, he has failed to meet with his Jobs Council even once since January, 2012.  Joe Biden ridiculed a Mitt Romney suggestion for a Territorial Tax, apparently not even realizing that the president’s own Jobs Council had made the same unheeded recommendation.

So what did this very serious, able and thoughtful President say to the American people at the Democratic National Circus???

                “Have a surplus?  Try a tax cut.  Deficit too high?  Try another.  Feel a cold coming on?  Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations and call us in the morning.”[4]     

Are these the words of a man holding one of the most powerful offices in the world?  Do they make you a better informed citizen?  Do they factually explain our problems in an adult fashion and offer solutions for your evaluation?  Or are these the words of someone who views his followers as morons eager to laugh at his jokes while their families starve?  You decide.

Decide quick – only 58 days to decide the future of America.

TO BE CONTINUED…

———————————————————

[1] President Barack Obama, (Sept. 6, 2012), White House web-site, Briefing Room, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President at the Democratic National Convention, retrieved Sept. 9, 2012 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/07/remarks-president-democratic-national-convention 

[2] Valerie Jarrett, quoted in WND article (Nov. 10, 2008), WND web-site, Obama will be ready to ‘rule’ on Day 1, retrieved Sept. 9, 2012 from http://www.wnd.com/2008/11/80645/ 

[3] BLS News Release (Sept. 7, 2012), Bureau of Labor Statistics web-site, THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION —AUGUST 2012, retrieved Sept. 9, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

[4] President Barack Obama, (Sept. 6, 2012), White House web-site, Briefing Room, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President at the Democratic National Convention, retrieved Sept. 9, 2012 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/07/remarks-president-democratic-national-convention

Democratic National Circus! Part Two

Posted on by
Reply

Only 59 Days Remaining!

Another Proud Moment for the Left

Yesterday, our conversation centered on omissions from the Democratic Presidential Platform, of “God” and of the affirmation that Jerusalem is and will always be the capital of Israel.  The narrative also described the inexplicable difficulty in returning both of these omissions to the Platform.  In all, three votes were required and still failed to produce the level of consensus required for approval of their return.  That did not stop the Chairman of the Convention, Antonio Villaraigosa, from dutifully reading his pre-scripted teleprompter and announcing that the Aye’s had achieved a 2/3 majority and the measure was passed.

There can be no question that this incident involved conscious decisions, lies and very nearly an open declaration of hostility towards Israel from Democratic Party Delegates.

But, this was not the only “ground ball” for finding lies among the Democrat hierarchy.  Earlier in the Circus, DNC Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) was questioned about a statement she had attributed to Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren:

   “what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel,”[1]

Ambassador Oren quickly responded to the alleged quote, stating that:

“I categorically deny that I ever characterized Republican policies as harmful to Israel. Bipartisan support is a paramount national interest for Israel, and we have great friends on both sides of the aisle.”[2]

When Wasserman-Schultz was asked about the quote and subsequent denial by the Ambassador, her response was not only that she had been misquoted, but that she had been deliberately misquoted. Her precise response – of a type becoming more and more typical of the Democratic Party:

“’I didn’t say he [Ambassador Oren] said that,’ Wasserman Schultz insisted. ‘And unfortunately, that comment was reported by a conservative newspaper. It’s not surprising they would deliberately misquote me.’”[3]

Examiner Senior Editorial Writer Philip Klein, who made the initial report, then produced the audio proving that Wasserman-Schultz had made exactly the statement he quoted in his previous column. [4]  When later asked if she intended to offer Mr. Klein an apology, Wasserman-Schultz allegedly answered “with a slight laugh,”  “No, I definitely will not.”[5] 

Another “Class” moment for the Obama camp – another moment that marginalizes and ridicules their own base.

TO BE CONTINUED…


[1] Douglas Bloomfield, (Sep. 6, 2012), The Jewish Weekly web-site, The Jewish Week/Political Insider, Debbie Does Damage,” retrieved Sep. 9, 2012 from http://www.thejewishweek.com/blogs/political-insider/debbie-does-damage

[2] Ibid.

[3] Philip Klein, Senior Editorial Writer, (Sep. 4, 2012), The Examiner web-site, Politics, Beltway Confidential, DWS Attacks Examiner for ‘Deliberately’ Misquoting her, but here’s the Audio, retrieved Sep. 9, 2012 from http://washingtonexaminer.com/dws-attacks-examiner-for-deliberately-misquoting-her-but-heres-the-audio/article/2506980#.UEuST6OO6So

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ken Shepherd, (Sep. 5, 2012), Newsbusters web-site, Debbie Wasserman Schultz Refuses to Apologize to Reporter She Falsely Charged with Misquoting Her, retrieved Sep. 9, 2012 from http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2012/09/05/debbie-wasserman-schultz-refuses-apologize-reporter-she-falsely-charge

 

Democratic National Circus! Part One

Posted on by
Reply

Only 60 Days Remaining!

Obama and Israel – Really???

For the past two weeks, voters have been treated to the rare opportunity to observe a microcosm of the ideologies that drive both the Republican and Democratic Parties today – ideologies that affect the lives of all Americans.

Predictably, the first of the two national conventions was “conservative” (no pun intended).  Speakers cited the reasons for supporting Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and they were not shy about enumerating the policy failures of the past four years.  The emphasis however, was not on the past, but on the future and on what a Romney presidency would mean to the country and to our economic recovery.  Noticeably absent from the narrative was an “Obama bash fest.”  With the exception of an imaginative skit by actor Clint Eastwood, references to the president were largely measured and respectful, albeit critical of his policies.

By comparison, last week was an entertaining, but disturbing circus.  Much like the Obama presidency itself, the Democratic National Convention  was a spectacle of questionable decisions, illusions and insults to the intellect of American voters.  Here, over the next few days, are just a few of what I sincerely hope most readers will see as additional “Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama.”  The future of our country depends on it.

Issue #1

Midway through the Convention, it was discovered that Obama had omitted “GOD” from the Party Platform.  It was also discovered that he had omitted any reference to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  These were not just absent from the Platform.  They were removed from the Party’s previous presidential Platform.  It was a conscious decision.  This was first exposed in an interview by FoxNews Anchor Bret Baier with Senator Dick Durban (D-IL).  When asked to explain the basis for these omissions, Durbin became visibly agitated and defensive, suggesting that Fox and Baier were attempting to paint the Democrats as “Godless.”  But, despite Durbin’s reaction, we soon saw  Convention Chair Antonio Villaraigosa calling for a voice vote from delegates, in order to return God and Jerusalem to the Platform.  Most Americans, I think, would suspect that such a voice vote would be a mere formality.

Not so.

The first call for “Yea” or “Nay” produced an indiscernable difference in shouting volume between the two camps.  A noticeably confused Villaraigosa called for a second vote – same result.  Villaraigosa, as if searching for advice, stopped and looked to staff members – one of whom told him

“You’ve got to rule, and then you’ve got to let them do what they’re gonna do.”[1]

He again repeated the process.  Results?  Still the same.

Then, with amazing finality, Chairman Villaraigosa looked straight into the camera, announcing that:

                 “In the opinion of the chair, two-thirds have voted in the affirmative.”[2]

The truth is that the difference between “Yea” and “Nay” votes was barely discernable, if at all.  The suggestion that either side won by a 2/3 majority is sheer fantasy.   As we later discovered, Chairman Villaraigosa’s “Opinion” had already been posted to his teleprompter.  He could have no other opinion.  The “Party” had spoken – he was just the face.  We have to wonder if this is the process that Obama has followed in his alleged efforts to reach compromise and bipartisan solutions in Washington.  No wonder Republican Governors want voter I.D.!!!

The bigger, far more troubling part of this saga however, is that rank and file members of the Democratic Party, in large numbers, voted against returning “God” and Jerusalem to the Party Platform.

At the close of the convention when Cardinal Dolan gave the Benediction, the “Amens” were plentiful and loud – as loud as the “Yea’s” and “Nays” of the earlier votes.  We can only surmise from this, that the controversial issue for rank and file Democrats was not “God,” but the idea of Jerusalem being the capital of Israel.  This of course, begs the question of 1) whether or not the Democratic Party has, under Obama, become hostile to Israel; and 2) Who, in the Democratic Party was “testing the waters,” by removing “God” from the Platform.  While all of his minions were racing around to certify that the omissions were made without Obama’s knowledge and that he was proactive and adamant in having them re-inserted in the Platform, the fact remains that it was Obama’s Platform.  Were its writers using accepted boilerplate language, both items would have been included, because they had been there in 2008.  It is far more likely that these omissions represented a conscious decision executed with Obama’s personal approval – or even more likely – at his direction.

In the opinion of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), DNC Chairperson, none of this amounted to more than a “Technical Correction.”

TO BE CONTINUED…

[1] LA Times, (September 6, 2012), La Times web-site, Awkward moments for Villaraigosa during God, Israel vote at DNC, retrieved Sept. 7, 2012 from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/09/mayor-antonio-villaraigosa-dnc-vote.html

[2] Ibid.