Judge Jeanine Pirro RIPS the Obama administration in another fantastic monologue..
Americans Fear Obama More Than Terrorists
Those of us who pay attention, who are not doing the zombie shuffle through life, take polling results with more than a grain of salt. But, I found the results of a couple of post-Boston bombing, small-sample polls conducted by Fox News and the Washington Post to be interesting for what they say about our perception of the federal government.
According to a pair of recent polls, for the first time since the 9/11 terrorist hijackings, Americans are more fearful their government will abuse constitutional liberties than fail to keep its citizens safe.
Even in the wake of the April 15 Boston Marathon bombing – in which a pair of Islamic radicals are accused of planting explosives that took the lives of 3 and wounded over 280 – the polls suggest Americans are hesitant to give up any further freedoms in exchange for increased “security.”
A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found despite the tragic event, those interviewed responded very differently than following 9/11.
For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”
Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.
In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.
But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percent agreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.
He goes on to report similar findings in the Washington Post poll.
Even though both polls represent a very small sample of the American people, I am convinced by all I have seen and read that many more Americans today do indeed fear the federal government, and I believe they have very good cause to do so. Despite the despicable “mainstream” media’s desperate attempts to give cover to, and lie for, the most lawless administration in American history, plenty of us, using other information sources, are able to see through the detestable media’s putrid smokescreens.
We can see that Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) and the anti-American radicals in his administration and Congress have boundless contempt for the constitutional limits on their power. It is clear to many of us that we are watching a federal government that is systematically working to tear down this nation, its freedoms and foundations.
So, is the federal government scarier than Muslim terrorism? I say it most certainly is. While Islamic jihad is a danger to our nation, we can still stop it if our authorities are willing, but in the federal government, which is run by power-mad people, we are dealing with a nearly unstoppable entity that has the power to rain destruction on the entire nation, not just spot locations.
Further, Islamists and the communists running the federal government (Senator McCarthy was right, by the way) share the same hatred of America and its freedoms and the same hatred of Jesus Christ and His followers. How can I say that Obama and his fellow-traveling buddies in the administration and Congress hate America and its freedoms? By their actions, their inactions and their words.
In their words, these people routinely lie about their motives, about the evil goals of their legislation, about their political opposition and even the American people who oppose them, who they falsely label as “racists” or “right wing extremists.” In his words, Obama regularly trash-talks America, apologizing for what needs no apologies.
In their actions, we see their ceaseless attempts to impose a socialist form of government on our nation, in contradiction to our Constitution’s design for a representative republic. They are destroying our military in every way, including forcing it to accept open homosexuals and women in front-line combat.
We see their vile attempts to squash our God-given right to self-defense under the guise of “public safety.” We see the war they have waged on our God-given rights to freedom of religion with their hell-born “Obamacare” abortion coverage mandate and their push for sodomy “rights” and fake marriage that would subvert our freedom of religion, association and ultimately, speech.
In their inactions, we see their treasonous refusal to secure our nations borders and deport the criminal aliens among us. We see their stonewalling of investigations into their other criminal actions like the Fast and Furious Mexican gun running scandal and the Muslim murders of our Ambassador and others in Benghazi, Libya – murders aided by this administration.
These are just the tip of an America-hating iceberg of lawlessness perpetrated by these people currently in power, not that other administrations and congresses have not abused their power, but we’ve never seen anything like the current administration. There is no conclusion that I can draw other than the people running our federal government are enemies of America. Our nation has been overthrown by enemies within.
These people are on the side of the Islamists. Again, their actions show this – their support for the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East, and the outrageous purging of military and intelligence agencies of proper Muslim training materials at the demand of Islamist groups and Islamist “advisors” within the federal government. That says volumes about where this administration’s loyalties lie. They do everything they can to avoid even saying “Muslim terrorism.”
Since our “mainstream” media will never speak the truth about the Islamist infiltration of our nation and government, it took an Egyptian publication to report that the Obama administration has Muslim Brotherhood operatives at the highest levels.
America is in big trouble. I see the Lord’s judgment falling and the terrible storm gathering. The collective sins of our nation are coming home to roost. No nation can butcher pre-born – and even just-born – babies by the millions and not to expect awful consequences. No nation can hope to avoid God’s judgment while it embraces and even “glorifies” homosexuality and its various manifestations, along with its militant assault on the freedoms of those who oppose it.
No, we should not be surprised to see the sorry state of the soul of America when the leaders in our government, schools, entertainment industry, and institutions all across the land have spit on the Lord and have shunned His wisdom, knowledge and commands for living our lives. We now have the federal government we have earned while we slept and allowed God to be outlawed as sin was made mandatory.
We are not surprised to see that the federal government is now a monster that is scarier than the Muslim terrorists among us.
What a pair of balls!
Host Chris Wallace reminds Pfeiffer that Obama didn’t really talk with Secretary Clinton, Secretary Panetta, or Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that night. “He was talking to his national security staff,” Pfeiffer insists.
Asked about whether the president entered the Situation Room, Pfeiffer says, “I don’t remember what room the president was in on that night, and that’s a largely irrelevant fact.”
Pfeiffer then argues that Wallace’s questions about the president’s handling of the Benghazi terror attack are “offensive.”
UPDATE: Here’s a full rush transcript of the exchange:
Chris Matthews sours on Obama
Yes, you read that right: The MSNBC host who in 2008 felt a “thrill going up my leg” after hearing Obama speak has grown disenchanted. Tonight’s episode of Hardball saw Matthews delivering a rare, unforgiving grilling of the president as severe as anything that might appear on Fox News.
“What part of the presidency does Obama like? He doesn’t like dealing with other politicians — that means his own cabinet, that means members of the congress, either party. He doesn’t particularly like the press…. He likes to write the speeches, likes to rewrite what Favreau and the others wrote for the first draft,” Matthews said.
“So what part does he like? He likes going on the road, campaigning, visiting businesses like he does every couple days somewhere in Ohio or somewhere,” Matthews continued. “But what part does he like? He doesn’t like lobbying for the bills he cares about. He doesn’t like selling to the press. He doesn’t like giving orders or giving somebody the power to give orders. He doesn’t seem to like being an executive.”
On Tuesday’s program, Matthews similarly called Obama “a ship with the engine off.”
Another Obama lie?…Ousted IRS chief claims in email that he’s leaving because ‘my acting assignment ends in early June’…
Obama fires acting IRS commissioner as pressure grows surrounding political targeting of conservative groups that sought tax-exempt status
- Steven Miller is ousted but writes face-saving email announcing departure when his ‘assignment ends in early June.’
- Obama: IRS ‘misconduct’ is ‘inexcusable and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it.’
- Jacob Lew, Obama’s trusted Treasury Secretary and former chief of staff, gave Miller his walking papers
- IRS reportedly targeted 300 right-wing groups while letting left-wing organizations slide through with far less scrutiny
- President Barack Obama has thrown his acting IRS commissioner overboard, making Steven Miller the highest-ranking political casualty thus far in a series of scandals that have swept his administration in recent weeks.
In a hastily called press conference in the East Room of the White House, Obama told reporters that he had asked Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew to find out who was responsible for a program that targeted tea party groups and other conservative organizations for a special level of intrusive questioning after they applied for tax-exempt charitable statuses.
‘Lew took the first step by requesting and accepting the resignation of the acting director of the IRS,’ Obama said.
‘It’s important,’ he added, ‘to institute new leadership that can help restore confidence going forward.’
But in an email to IRS employees, Miller claimed he would only be leaving next month because his assignment would be over.
“Pay no attention to those voices that warn you of tyranny in government”.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325223/Obama-fires-acting-IRS-commissioner-pressure-grows-surrounding-political-targeting-conservative-groups-sought-tax-exempt-status.html#ixzz2TQSEkWcj
DC & Media turn on Obama..
Republicans have waited five years for the moment to put the screws to Obama – and they have one-third of all congressional committees on the case now. Establishment Democrats, never big fans of this president to begin with, are starting to speak out. And reporters are tripping over themselves to condemn lies, bullying and shadiness in the Obama administration.
Buy-in from all three D.C. stakeholders is an essential ingredient for a good old fashioned Washington pile-on — so get ready for bad stories and public scolding to pile-up.
Vernon Jordan, a close adviser to President Bill Clinton through his darkest days, told us: “It’s never all right if you’re the president. There is no smooth sailing. So now he has the turbulence, and this is the ultimate test of his leadership.” Jordan says Obama needs to do something dramatic on the IRS, and quick: “He needs to fire somebody. He needs action, not conversation.”
Obama’s aloof mien and holier-than-thou rhetoric have left him with little reservoir of good will, even among Democrats. And the press, after years of being accused of being soft on Obama while being berated by West Wing aides on matters big and small, now has every incentive to be as ruthless as can be.
This White House’s instinctive petulance, arrogance and defensiveness have all worked together to isolate Obama at a time when he most needs a support system. “It feel like they don’t know what they’re here to do,” a former senior Obama administration official said. “When there’s no narrative, stuff like this consumes you.”
Republican outrage is predictable, maybe even manageable. Democratic outrage is not.
The dam of solid Democratic solidarity has collapsed, starting with New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd’s weekend scolding of the White House over Benghazi, then gushing with the news the Justice Department had sucked-up an absurdly broad swath of Associated Press phone records.
Democrats are privately befuddled by the White House’s flat-footed handling of this P.R. and legal mess, blaming a combination of bad timing, hubris and communications ineptitude. The most charitable defense offered up on background is that Obama staffers are scandal virgins, unaccustomed to dealing with a rabid press.
WASHPOST: Obama’s claim he called ‘act of terrorism‘ Gives him Four Pinocchios…
Once again, it appears that we must parse a few presidential words. We went through this question at length during the 2012 election, but perhaps a refresher course is in order.
Notably, during a debate with Republican nominee Mitt Romney, President Obama said that he immediately told the American people that the killing of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Libya “was an act of terror.” But now he says he called it “an act of terrorism.”
Some readers may object to this continuing focus on words, but presidential aides spend a lot of time on words. Words have consequences. Is there a difference between “act of terror” and “act of terrorism”?
Immediately after the attack, the president three times used the phrase “act of terror” in public statements:
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”
— Obama, Rose Garden, Sept. 12
“We want to send a message all around the world — anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Las Vegas, Sept. 13
“I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Golden, Colo., Sept. 13
Here’s how we assessed those words back in October:
Note that in all three cases, the language is not as strong as Obama asserted in the debate. Obama declared that he said “that this was an act of terror.” But actually the president spoke in vague terms, usually wrapped in a patriotic fervor. One could presume he was speaking of the incident in Libya, but he did not affirmatively state that the American ambassador died because of an “act of terror.”
Some readers may think we are dancing on the head of pin here. The Fact Checker spent nine years as diplomatic correspondent for The Washington Post, and such nuances of phrasing are often very important. A president does not simply utter virtually the same phrase three times in two days about a major international incident without careful thought about the implications of each word.
The Fact Checker noted last week that this was an attack on what essentially was a secret CIA operation, which included rounding up weapons from the very people who may have attacked the facility.
Perhaps Obama, in his mind, thought this then was really “an act of war,” not a traditional terrorist attack, but he had not wanted to say that publicly. Or perhaps, as Republicans suggest, he did not want to spoil his campaign theme that terror groups such as al-Qaeda were on the run by conceding a terrorist attack had occurred on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Whatever the reason, when given repeated opportunities to forthrightly declare this was an “act of terrorism,” the president ducked the question.
For instance, on Sept. 12, immediately after the Rose Garden statement the day after the attack, Obama sat down with Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes and acknowledged he purposely avoided the using the word “terrorism:”
KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.”
Why Obama released embarrassing IRS bombshell
The Internal Revenue Service under the Obama administration – described by Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., as the “most feared government agency” – admitted Friday it targeted conservative and tea-party groups during last year’s election because of their politics.
Bachmann, a former tax attorney, told WND in an interview the IRS admission means the credibility of the 2012 election is in doubt.
Americans, she said, should be wondering whether Obamacare, which is to be enforced by the IRS, will target conservative voices opposed to President Obama with delays or denials of medical care.
But why would an administration ever confess to such a flagrant misuse of politics and power?
Bachmann, who chairs the House Tea Party caucus, said it’s the Benghazi scandal.
“There’s no doubt this was not a coincidence that they dumped this story today, a Friday dump day,” Bachmann told WND. “This is when they put their negative stories out.”
But she said the looming storm cloud called Benghazi is the “soft underbelly” of the Obama administration and likely will keep Hillary Clinton from fulfilling her dream of occupying the Oval Office.
That would make it logical to release an IRS story that, while embarrassing, also could be cubbyholed as another “conservative” dispute with the White House.
She was referring to the ongoing hearings on the administration’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack by al-Qaida-linked terrorists on a U.S. foreign service post in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the ambassador.
House Republicans allege the U.S. government knew of a terrorist threat but ignored it. After the attack, critics charge, the administration blamed the deaths on reaction to an obscure anti-Muslim video, despite evidence from the beginning that it was a premeditated terrorist attack.
Locked in a tight presidential race, a deliberate assault on American assets and the murder of Americans by al-Qaida on a date as significant as 9/11 would have damaged Obama’s campaign claim that his administration had al-Qaida under control.
Bachmann said the IRS announcement of misbehavior was intended to provoke conservatives and draw their anger and attention.
“I was in that Benghazi hearing,” she told WND. “I think the Obama administration is desperate to spin Benghazi, and they can’t. I think they saved this story up for a day like today so that conservatives would focus on this admission.”
It won’t work, she insisted.
“Conservatives can handle two shocking stories at the same time,” she said. “Both are equally unconstitutional and call into question the very president.”
The Benghazi investigation has been getting worse for Obama, with witnesses testifying to a House panel Wednesday that military troops were prepared to come to Benghazi but were told to stand down. Today, the White House was grilled about the elimination of references to terrorism in the talking points officials used in the aftermath of the attack.
It’s on. As the White House grapples with a growing backlash over its Libya lies and lapses, President Obama’s apologists are gearing up for battle. Put on your hip-waders. Grab those tar buckets. Get ready for Operation Smear Benghazi Whistleblowers.
Capitol Hill hearings this Wednesday on the deadly 9/11 consulate attack by jihadists will feature three compelling witnesses, all State Department veterans: Gregory N. Hicks, deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya and highest-ranking U.S. diplomat in the country at the time of the Benghazi jihad attacks; Mark I. Thompson, a former Marine who now serves as deputy coordinator for operations in the agency’s Counterterrorism Bureau; and Eric Nordstrom, a diplomatic security officer who was the top security officer in Libya.
Nordstrom first testified last fall about how State Department brass spurned his requests for increased security at the compound. Hicks and Thompson are coming forward publicly for the first time this week with more damning evidence contradicting Team Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s claims about the administration’s response the night of the attack and in the ensuing months of cover-ups.
According to the House Oversight Committee, Hicks reportedly will refute Team Obama’s claims that nobody was told to stand down and that all military resources available were used in the rescue efforts. As Special Forces prepared to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi to save lives during the attacks, Hicks says the team received a phone call from the U.S. Special Operations Command Africa telling them “you can’t go” and that the decision was “purely political.”
The State Department press office already has accused Victoria Toensing, attorney for one of the Benghazi whistleblowers, of “lying” about administration pressure on her clients. Left-wing operatives funded by billionaire George Soros have taken to Twitter to mock reports of fear and intimidation among the new witnesses. White House press secretary Jay Carney continues to sing “Long, Long Ago” and deny all wrongdoing.
And one anonymous State Department official told Fox News reporter James Rosen that Hicks and Thompson have “axes to grind.”
Gee, who wouldn’t have an “axe to grind” if your bosses lied to you, blocked you from saving your co-workers and friends, and lied shamelessly and repeatedly to the American public about the reasons for their deaths?
It’s this corrupt and vengeful White House that wields the sharpest axes and biggest grindstones. The casualty count in Obama’s war on whistleblowers is double-digit.
ATF insiders who testified before Congress about Obama’s Fast and Furious gun-running nightmare faced systemic retaliation and harassment — both from government supervisors who openly declared witch hunts against them and from liberal media water-carriers.
Don’t Count on Benghazi Exploding on Obama…
Constitutionalists are wondering if the Benghazi cover-up will bring down the most corrupt and immoral presidency in America’s history.
Don’t count on it.
The Examiner opens its article on the Benghazi affair with the following:
“Although the Benghazi debacle is far from the only scandal that has rocked the Obama administration, it has a very real potential of being the one scandal that could explode, blowing up right in the faces of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other top administration officials.”
Barack Obama is not George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, or Richard Nixon. As long as the welfare checks keep coming, food stamps are available, abortion remains legal, homosexuality is pushed as a new civil rights cause, and Republicans don’t have an alternative conservative platform they are willing to run on, Benghazi will not affect the president.
The Republicans won’t get any public traction for at least six reasons: (1) Barack Obama is not Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, or Bush 1 or Bush 2, (2) the Justice Department and State Department will drag their feet and obfuscate, (3) the Obama administration will not cooperate, (4) the Democrats will circle the wagons after initially expressing outrage on the Benghazi debacle, (5) the media won’t report aggressively on the story, and (6) the media, Democrats, and Obama will find a scapegoat to blame.
If Fast and Furious had happened under Bush’s presidency, it would have been reported as a mega scandal. Benghazi would still be a front page story. Exposes would be written, and a Pulitzer or two would have been awarded by now. There would have been resignations by the score
We’ve seen how the establishment media have virtually ignored the abortion-butcher story of Kermit Gosnell. Compare the media’s relative silence on this very public act on American children with the way the media covered interrogation techniques at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad during Bush’s presidency. Pictures of the abuse were everywhere. In fact, the media are still publishing articles on interrogation techniques used on prisoners at Guantánamo.
The Examiner’s comments later in the article bring us back to political reality:
“The Fast and Furious scandal is in all likelihood far worse than Benghazi. But due to the current political landscape where politicians and the news media are determined to keep the administration’s dirty little gun smuggling issue out of public view, Benghazi appears to be the one that has the most potential in unraveling public confidence in Obama, which already has been slipping in the polls over the past two months.”
If Republicans believe Benghazi is going to be Obama’s political Waterloo, they better wake up before it’s too late. Counting on the president being savaged by the press is a pipedream.
The GOP needs to learn that they can’t beat something with nothing. American voters need to see a true conservative alternative. So far, the Republicans don’t have a thing.
They’re pinning their hopes on a falling star. It’s not going to happen. They can’t win a game hoping the other side will lose.
RED LINE? What RED Line?
“How can we attack another country unless it’s in self-defense and with no Security Council resolution?” an unnamed Obama administration official tells the paper. “If he drops sarin on his own people, what’s that got to do with us?”
But they concluded that drawing a firm line might deter Mr. Assad. In addition to secret messages relayed through Russia, Iran and other governments, they decided that the president would publicly address the matter.
Several officials said they recalled no discussion about the “red line” phrase but suspected that it came out of the election-year conversation about Iran and how far to allow its nuclear program to progress before being forced to take action. It was a concept that was “embedded in people’s prefrontal cortex,” one of the officials said.
While surprised at the president’s use of the term in regard to Syria on Aug. 20, advisers concluded that it had succeeded, at least for a while, since months passed with no chemical weapons attack.
But if the tough rhetoric “succeeded” for a time, it appears to have backfired in the long-run. Because Syria has now apparently used chemical weapons, and President Obama is not willing to do anything about it.
At the National Rifle Association‘s convention in Houston, TX, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre announced that the NRA has now grown to an unprecedented 5 million active members. He concluded his speech with the theme of all the NRA officers, vowing, “From liberty’s defense, we will never back down. We will never surrender. We will always stand. We will always fight.”
Well over 70,000 members of the NRA are assembled in Houston, Texas for its 142nd Annual Meeting—projected to break the all-time record for the nation’s oldest and largest Constitutional rights organization. The convention houses over 300,000 square feet of exhibits (mostly firearms and accessories), seminars on various topics including women’s and children’s safety, and formal speeches from national political leaders and the NRA’s leadership. The central focus on the annual convention—as always—is protecting the Constitution’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
NRA members for working together to generate Obama’s humiliating loss, saying, “Apparently, there’s nothing the president will not do to get something—anything—through Congress to advance his agenda to destroy the Second Amendment. Nothing. So far, thanks to you and millions of Americans like you, that’s exactly what President Obama has gotten—absolutely nothing!”
NOW IS THE TIME TO JOIN THE NRA..
Obama: The fall
Fate is fickle, power cyclical, and nothing is new under the sun. Especially in Washington, where after every election the losing party is sagely instructed to confess sin, rend garments and rethink its principles lest it go the way of the Whigs. And where the victor is hailed as the new Caesar, facing an open road to domination.
And where Barack Obama, already naturally inclined to believe his own loftiness, graciously accepted the kingly crown and proceeded to ride his reelection success to a crushing victory over the GOP at the fiscal cliff, leaving a humiliated John Boehner & Co. with nothing but naked tax hikes.
Thus emboldened, Obama turned his inaugural and State of the Union addresses into a left-wing dream factory, from his declaration of war on global warming (on a planet where temperatures are the same as 16 years ago and in a country whose CO2 emissions are at a 20-year low) to the invention of new entitlements — e.g., universal preschool for 5-year-olds— for a country already drowning in debt.
To realize his dreams, Obama sought to fracture and neutralize the congressional GOP as a prelude to reclaiming the House in 2014. This would enable him to fully enact his agenda in the final two years of his presidency, usually a time of lame-duck paralysis. Hail the Obama juggernaut.
Well, that story — excuse me, narrative — lasted exactly six months. The Big Mo is gone.
It began with the sequester. Obama never believed the Republicans would call his bluff and let it go into effect. They did.
Taken by surprise, Obama cried wolf, predicting the end of everything we hold dear if the sequester was not stopped. It wasn’t. Nothing happened.
Highly embarrassed, and determined to indeed make (bad) things happen, the White House refused Republican offers to give it more discretion in making cuts. Bureaucrats were instructed to inflict maximum pain from minimal cuts, as revealed by one memo from the Agriculture Department demanding agency cuts that the public would feel.
The Greatest Gun Salesman in History..46,455 Background Checks For Gun Purchases Each Day Under Obama..
In 2009, the FBI conducted 14,033,824 background checks. If we subtract the month of January (Obama did not assume office until the end of the month) we get 12,819,939.
The FBI conducted 14,409,616 background checks in 2010, 16,454,951 in 2011, and 19,592,303 in 2012.
Add to that the first four months of 2013 (2,495,440, 2,309,393, 2,209,407 and 1,714,433 respectively) and the total number of background checks under President Obama comes to 72,005,482.
Obama has been President for 1,550 days. That works out to 46,455 background checks for gun purchases each day.
NBC Ignores it’s own chief White House and political director Chuck Todd Grilling President Over ObamaCare ‘Train Wreck..
MSM Socialist media is intentionally protecting Obama at all costs..Screw the People..
While NBC’s chief White House correspondent and political director Chuck Todd pressed President Obama during a Tuesday news conference on the possibility of ObamaCare being a “train wreck,” the network coverage of the presser completely avoided any mention of the question, instead seizing on Obama being pressured from the left to close the Guantanamo Bay prison.
Anchor Brian Williams lead off Tuesday’s Nightly News by declaring: “The hunger strike at Guantanamo that’s now gotten so bad prisoners are being force fed, as the President faces tough questions.” Introducing a report on the topic, Williams lectured: “We don’t get to see them or know their names, and most Americans actually prefer not to spend a whole lot of time thinking about the men who’ve been rounded up as enemy combatants and imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.”
Barack Hussein Obama is called a pure Communist by the Russian Press and many in Russia are making that statement. Maybe that is why the Boston Bombers could get away with what they did. It seems that Russia knew that the older brother was one to watch and they informed our intelligence community of it, yet the FBI once again failed because they “did not want to inflame people with Jihad connections or ideology!” Obama has declared that the United States will not “attack” those who hate the United States and instead, Obama wants to try to appease the situation in the terrorists’ favor. One individual, a man named Xavier Lerma, who wrote many articles about Obama and what he has done, along with calling the people of the United States stupid and ignorant for putting him in office has openly called Obama a Communist! His article, “Obama’s Soviet Mistake,” discusses why what Obama is doing now has been done before in Russia and it failed.
Are we really surprised by this “NEWS”? We elected someone whose father was an anti-colonialist at best, mother, grandmother and grandfather were avowed communists, who was mentored by a communist, sent to school by a Saudi, befriended only communists and Marxists, who had money raised and his career launched with the help of Ayers and sat under the teaching of a militant preacher for 20+years. This is not news to me….
Barack Obama declared that he was “confident” of achieving “our objective of defeating the core of al-Qaeda”.
Although he acknowledged the need to pursue the “remnants” of the terrorist group and its affiliates, the overall message was clear – al-Qaeda was badly degraded, the tides of war were receding and the US was winning this fight that was no longer even officially a war.
The Boston bombings would appear to present a fundamental challenge to that assessment and once again bring the nagging uncertainty of terrorism back on to the American main street.
Elvis impersonator, was arrested for sending letters laced with ricin to Obama and to Republican Senator Roger Wicker. Inhaling the toxin is deadly, and all it takes to kill a human is an amount 1/288 the size of an aspirin.
A picture of the man, a white guy whom I will henceforth refer to as John, surfaced on the Internet (where pictures are wont to surface). It comes from his Facebook page and shows John kneeling down beside the back bumper of a car, which has a sticker on it that reads, “Christian and a Democrat.” John is giving the sticker a thumbs-up.
However, his Facebook page lists his political views as “Independent.” So the fact that he gave a pro-Democrat bumper sticker a thumbs-up and also tried killing a Democratic president likely means he is one of those people who feel that Obama is too moderate, that the Democratic Party is not suitably liberal, and therefore has registered as an Independent.
With the failure of the Democrats’ attempt to exploit the Newtown school shooting to press forward gun control measures, the LIAR a chief took to the microphones along with the relatives of Sandy Hook victims to demonize his opposition. This, of course, was his strategy all along: knowing that he did not have 60 votes in the Democrat-controlled Senate to pass his gun control legislation, he pressed forward anyway, hoping to paint Republicans as intransigent, immoral tools of the gun lobby who don’t care about dead children. After demonizing Republicans, Obama hopes, he can press Americans into voting Democrats back into power in the House of Representatives.