WASHINGTON — He had just hung up the telephone with the devastated parents before heading in front of the cameras. Unusually emotional, President Obama declared himself “heartbroken” by the brutal murder of an American journalist, James Foley, and vowed to “be relentless” against Islamic radicals threatening to kill another American.
But as soon as the cameras went off, Mr. Obama headed to his favorite golf course on Martha’s Vineyard, where he is on vacation, seemingly able to put the savagery out of his mind. He spent the rest of the afternoon on the links even as a firestorm of criticism erupted over what many saw as a callous indifference to the slaughter he had just condemned.
Presidents learn to wall off their feelings and compartmentalize their lives. They deal in death one moment and seek mental and physical relief the next. To make coldhearted decisions in the best interest of the country and manage the burdens of perhaps the most stressful job on the planet, current and former White House officials said, a president must guard against becoming consumed by the emotions of the situations they confront. And few presidents have been known more for cool, emotional detachment than Mr. Obama.
It was all the more striking given that Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain canceled his vacation after the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria released the video showing Mr. Foley’s death because the accent of the masked killer suggested he came from Britain. Former Vice President Dick Cheney told Fox News that Mr. Obama would “rather be on the golf course than he would be dealing with the crisis.”
But the criticism went beyond the usual political opponents. Privately, many Democrats shook their heads at what they considered a judgment error. Ezra Klein, editor in chief of the online news site Vox, who is normally sympathetic to Mr. Obama, wrote on Twitter on Wednesday that “golfing today is in bad taste.” The Daily News published a front-page photograph of a grinning president in a golf cart next to a picture of Mr. Foley’s distraught mother and father under the headline, “Prez tees off as Foley’s parents grieve.”
“As a general rule, I think that he’s right that you can’t be held hostage to the news cycle — the man deserves a bit of downtime,” said Jim Manley, a longtime Democratic strategist. “But in this particular instance, I think a lot of Democrats flinched a little bit.”
The video, Mr. Manley added, “was just so shocking that the idea that he was going to immediately run to the golf course was just a little too much for folks; it was tone-deaf.”
Mr. Obama has traditionally resisted what he sees as the empty political gesture of abruptly upending his schedule in reaction to the latest crisis. Aides said the golf game did not reflect the depth of his grief over Mr. Foley, noting that the president had just spoken with his parents that morning. “His concern for the Foleys and Jim was evident to all who saw and heard his statement,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the White House communications director.
Mr. Obama is not the first president to get in trouble with a golf club in hand. On the course one day in 2002, President George W. Bush delivered a tough-worded statement denouncing a suicide bombing in Israel and then, barely missing a beat, told reporters, “Now, watch this drive.” Mr. Bush later concluded that such scenes sent a bad message, and in the fall of 2003, with the Iraq war raging, he gave up golf for the remainder of his presidency.
What really matters, according to Mr. Obama’s defenders, is not what the president does to blow off steam, but what he does to blow up ISIS. Aides to Republican and Democratic presidents have long argued that the commander in chief is on duty no matter where he is, and that even on vacation, he is receiving briefings, making phone calls and issuing orders. Other presidents have taken vacations during major crises and times of war. This year Mr. Obama has repeatedly interrupted his summer break to deal with Iraq and the racial unrest in Ferguson, Mo.
For Mr. Obama, the video of Mr. Foley’s death is acutely personal because it showed one of three other American civilians held hostage, Steven J. Sotloff, suggesting he would be killed next if the president did not stop bombing ISIS targets in Iraq. “The life of this American citizen, Obama, depends on your next decision,” the masked killer says while holding the back of Mr. Sotloff’s orange, prison-style shirt.
There could hardly be many more wrenching situations for a president. Sending American troops into harm’s way is difficult enough, but they at least volunteered for duty and are trained for the dangers they confront. The rise of social media has made such life-or-death blackmail all the more horrific. As far as aides knew, Mr. Obama did not watch the ISIS video, and advisers did not think he should.
“That’s got to be exquisitely disturbing,” said Peter D. Feaver, a former national security aide to Mr. Bush and President Bill Clinton, who now teaches at Duke University. “And it’s different than for average Americans who are watching this on television but know there’s nothing they can do. With President Obama, there are things he can do, but he’s concluded that he can’t do them.”
Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University, said ISIS appeared to design its video to instill maximum fear in Mr. Obama and a country it perceives as exhausted by war. Mr. Obama’s forceful response on Wednesday, he said, was “a necessary and important one — that we’re not being intimidated, we’re not backing down.”
Including Mr. Sotloff in the video, Mr. Hoffman added, intensified the direct threat the group was sending the president. “They put the knife in, and they’re trying to twist it by making it personal,” he said.
Former presidents have been the subject of personal appeals from terrorists threatening American lives, from the Iran Embassy seizure under Jimmy Carter to the hijackings of T.W.A. Flight 847 and the Achille Lauro cruise ship under Ronald Reagan.
Mr. Obama, too, has faced this situation before. Warren Weinstein, an American development consultant abducted by Al Qaeda in Pakistan, appealed directly to the president in a video late last year. In May, Mr. Obama authorized a prisoner swap with the Taliban to secure the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl after concluding that his life was at risk.
Frances Fragos Townsend, a former counterterrorism adviser to Mr. Bush, said it is important to avoid letting the president become too emotionally involved in such situations, adding that she would not have shown the ISIS video to Mr. Obama. “You fight very hard to not have it be personal,” she said. “You just don’t let them do that. They can use your name, and they can make it personal. But it’s not.”
BRIETBART BIG GOVERNMENT by CHARLIE SPIERING (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/09/Ted-Cruz-ISIS-is-the-Face-Of-Evil)
MY TWO SENSE
Ted Cruz: ISIS is the Face of Evil
Sen. Ted Cruz responded to President Obama’s statement on Iraq on Saturday, criticizing him for failing to properly address the threat posed by ISIS.
“Sadly what’s happening in Iraq is the latest manifestation of the failures of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy,” Cruz said, pointing out that since Obama took power, America’s leadership has receded.
Cruz spoke at length about the crisis in Iraq with reporters following his appearance at the Faith Leadership Summit in Iowa.
“What ISIS is doing in Iraq is unspeakable; ISIS is the face of evil,” Cruz said. “ISIS right now is crucifying Christians in Iraq. Crucifixion is not something that just occurred 2000 years ago; they are doing it right now today. ISIS is beheading children who are Christians in Iraq.”
Cruz suggested that the United States acting militarily to thwart the terrorist threat posed by ISIS was a worthy goal, but that Obama should make the case.
“ISIS right now is fighting with U.S. weaponry, with Abrams tanks from America that they seized,” he said.
Cruz reminded that the leaders of ISIS were so extreme they were thrown out of Al Qaeda.
“That says something,” he said. “That’s not easy to do,”
Cruz added that he was glad that President Obama had decided to take the threat of ISIS seriously, pointing out that Obama dismissed them earlier this year as “Junior Varsity.”
“The president’s foreign policy team utterly missed the threat of ISIS, indeed, was working to arm Syrian rebels that were fighting side by side with ISIS.”
America needed to remain vigilant, Cruz said, to avoid a hostage situation, or a situation where Americans in Iraq were put in danger.
Obama’s demands for a political solution in Iraq were naive, Cruz suggested, pointing out that the Sunni and Shite factions in the country were clearly divided. He added that he was concerned that Obama was acting out of political motivation.
“History has taught us that America gets in trouble in military engagements when we get involved on the whims of politicians, without a clearly defined objective.” Cruz said.
Obama Gets Into it With Louisiana Governor Over Healthcare.gov
POTUS decided to travel to Lousiana Friday and discuss the economy; his goal mainly to divert attention from Healthcare.gov. He began speaking about how he was going to create jobs by fixing roads, but Lousiana Governor Bobby Jindal immediately brought focus back to health care.
“We will not allow President Obama to bully Louisiana into accepting an expansion of Obamacare,” Jindal said in a statement, saying the expansion would cost the state too much.
“The dysfunction of the website and the president’s broken promises on being able to keep your health plan are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to the problems with this law,” Jindal added.
Obama has repeatedly promised that Americans could keep their health care plans/doctors, which was a fat lie. In his speech, he made promises to fix the failing website. The remainder of his speech focused on urging Congress to focus on infrastructure progress.
“I know if there’s one thing that members of Congress from both parties want, it’s smart infrastructure projects that create good jobs in their districts,” he said.
This just goes to show that POTUS can’t own up to his mistakes, and even when someone like Jindal brings it up, he still waves it away with lies and broken promises. Not surprising of course, but equally maddening.
Nice save Mr. President. But it’s apparent you’re still not listening to us.
Obama Gets Into it With Lousiana Governor Over Healthcare.gov (downtrend.com)
Jindal Calls Obama A ‘Bully’ After President Takes Shot At LA Gov (gopthedailydose.com)
Obama seeks to turn conversation from healthcare woes to economy (news.yahoo.com)
TEA PARTY PETITION Follow these link to read, sign, and send to your public servants demands to stop Obama and his band of Communist thugs!
Watch: California Beachgoers Sign ‘Repeal Bill Of Rights’ Petition To Support Obama (personalliberty.com)
Egypt Without Illusions: What Is Obama’s Obsession With Muslim Brotherhood? (freedomoutpost.com)
Obama Supporters Sign Petition to Repeal Bill of Rights (vineoflifenews.com)
Percy Sutton: Pro-Communist Obama Enabler, Holder Mentor (trevorloudon.com)
Obama Supporters Sign Petition to Repeal Bill of Rights… (redflagnews.com)
Home » 2012 presidential campaign » ‘It Gives Me Chills’: Bret Baier Reads Emails Proving Obama Negligence Responsible For Amb. Stevens Murder
Oct 25, 2012 Dinah Tellya
It’s Obama negligence because Hillary brought this information to him as the basis of her request for more Benghazi security for the ambassador, who was basically in an unfortified house. Totally unfortified, including no sandbags. Nothing. Obama, upon whatever calculation, said “no”.
Other articles of interest:
Bret Baier Links Texas Abortion Bill To Dr. Gosnell (newshounds.us)
TO ALL POLITICAL BLOGGERS by JUST ME (MY TWO SENSE: If you would like to help me spread the word, please feel free to copy and paste any, or all, of my posts. I don’t get my panties in a twist when bloggers do thatand I believe this comes under the Fair Use Notice. Below is a list of videos that show how this country is changing and why. JM)
Obama has been significantly successful in his Presidential efforts. What most folks are missing is the relative understanding of his actual agenda and goals. When he said the would “fundamentally transform America,” he meant exactly that, and, starting on day one of 2008, he has pushed forward on those goals. He never intended to create jobs, he never intended to support our freedoms, he never intended to work on the deficit, and he never wanted anything positive for our nation. He meant to take us down, strip our liberties from us, and control as much as he could all the while expanding his wealth and vision for the New World Order.
When we look at Obama’s history in the White House, we clearly see that he is following Saul Alinsky’s teachings in his book, Rules For Radicals; that he is using Cloward and Piven’s 1974 design for, Regulating the Poor. Overload the welfare system, remove a significant portion of members in our society using obamacare, control every aspect of life, and you are at the doorstep of the New World Order. Obama means to become the overseer of a global society of human drones. There are many things he and his cronies have done to hurry this change along, and all should become well aware of what they are.
GET ERIC HOLDER OUT OF OFFICE PETITION
BETRAYED BY AARP FOR MONEY
HOLDER DENIES FUNDS FOR YOUNG MARINES IF THEY MENTION “GOD”
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER–OBAMA IS EMBARRESSING
THE BLAZE by DAVE URBANSKI (MY TWO SENSE: What a double-dealing, lying sack of you know what, is playing rich with a G-u-N!! OMG! What more proof does anyone need that this Administration would explode if any members would tell the truth for a change. Not only does bobama set the national standard for ethics and morality, he and his, are playing the parental game of “Do As I Say, Not As I Do,” the whole time they’re not playing “Hide The Truth.” Obviously they are all gathering as much power and wealth as they can, and this “Me” generation is right in there giving it all up to the big guys in the red diapers. JM)
‘You Should Be Suspended’: Obama Skewered for Playing with an Object That’s Spelled Trouble for Many School Kids
Jun. 16, 2013 7:13pm
Considering the flurry of punitive measures taken against youngsters lately who dare:
And it’s no surprise that President Obama is getting roundly ridiculed for the photo of him brandishing a pretty lethal-looking water gun during daughter Sasha’s birthday party at Camp David.
The 2011 photo is part of a White House web site gallery that shows Obama just “being a dad” in honor of Father’s Day:
Most prominent of the mockers was Laura Ingraham, who tweeted:
She was joined by a chorus of fellow “isn’t this ironic” revelers:
And the hoots and hollers continued:
And not to be outdone…
THE BLAZE by BECKET ADAMS (sohereandnow.wordpress.com)
MY TWO SENSE: DOES ANYONE KNOW WHO THIS ANTI-AMERICAN, COWARD IS? WE SHOULD KNOW WHO HAS SUCH HATRED. JM
- Gutfeld Blasts Jim Carrey: ‘Dirty, Stinking Coward’ (breitbart.com)
- One Hundred Articles Of Impeachment Against Obama (sgtreport.com)
- Are Democrats in Decline? (politicalwire.com)
- Ron Hart: Where did stimulus money for ‘shovel ready’ projects go (appeal-democrat.com)
- Gary Hart: Weep for the Senate (huffingtonpost.com)
- Casting a Light on the Shadows of an Evil Empire (ireporters.wordpress.com)
DAYLIGHT SAVINGS REMINDER
GOOD ADVICE FOR obama
COPY MACHINE NUG-GUN
This one should go to the White House
More WH humor
“POP” goes the weasel!
- Watch An Abused Child Get A Secret Help Message In Broad Daylight That His Abuser Can’t See (upworthy.com)
MY TWO SENSE
That dirty danged dog Obama mouthpiece, Jay Carney, wants us to forget Benghazi. It’s old news, he claims.
Well, what else is he going to say? One lie is as good as another. We’re at a point from which all hope that this Administration play fairly or halfway tells the truth about anything. The difficulty for the President and the Attorney General is that we now know that when their lips move, they are lying. They no longer make an effort to come up with viable responses to any questions dealing with information we have a right to. The cloak of National Security has been used so often to hide, or stall, FOIA requests that judges are now stepping in to stop it. Even information that doesn’t require security clearance are deemed National Security to prevent the information from moving out from under the cloak of subterfuge.
Prez losing grip on Benghazi tale (bostonherald.com)
Obama regime to Benghazi injured survivors: ‘Keep your mouths shut’ (righttruth.typepad.com)
New York Post: The Difference Benghazi Makes… (redflagnews.com)
Bumps in the Road (grannygrousings.wordpress.com)
Obama & Clinton’s Benghazi Lies Exposed (frontpagemag.com)
Are Journalists and Academics Purposefully Re-Writing the Bible to Make It a ‘Tool of Progressive Social Change’?
Mar. 13, 2013 11:54am Billy Hallowell
The mainstream media’s handling of issues pertaining to religion has always received a fair bit of scrutiny from conservatives and people of faith, alike, as outlets are generally perceived as lacking understanding about these important cultural structures. And academics and entertainers, too, are frequently accused by conservatives of being biased against both religious sentiment and right-of-center perspectives.
Believing that these sectors work diligently to expand left-leaning policies and ideologies, an intriguing, yet controversial, question has arisen: Are journalists, academics and Hollywood elite purposefully re-writing the Bible to make it a tool of progressive social change?
A new report by the Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute (CMI) entitled, “Rewriting the Bible: The Gospel According to Liberals,” tackles this very subject, alleging that entertainers, journalists and professors, alike, are re-writing the Bible and using it to their ideological advantage.
Written by Paul Wilson, a fellow at CMI, the report charges that these parties — regular targets of conservative angst — have been reworking holy scriptures in an effort to drive home liberal ideals. TheBlaze was given a sneak-peak at the report before its release later this afternoon. We will be sharing some portions of the document to showcase what readers can expect to find within its text.
Vice President Joe Biden (L) places his hand on the Biden family Bible held by his wife Jill Biden as he takes the oath of office from Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayo during and official ceremony at the Naval Observatory on January 20, 2013 in Washington. (Credit: AFP/Getty Images)To begin, let’s explore Wilson’s main contentions about Hollywood, the mainstream media and left-learning politicians:
When they aren’t actively denigrating religion, liberal journalists, entertainers, and politicians use faith as a weapon to bludgeon conservatives. They decided to reinterpret and rewrite the Bible to prop up their brand of politicized theology, claiming, as Huffington Post’s Mike Lux did, that “it is overwhelmingly supportive of … liberal, lefty, progressive values.” At The Washington Post, Marxist ideas have been attributed to the Acts of the Apostles and Jesus’ parable of the talents became a class warfare lesson. The Huffington Post told readers that the Bible champions homosexuality “if only we’re reading it correctly,” to the point of depicting Jesus on the cross with the word “faggot” replacing “INRI.” At the pro-abortion site RH Reality Check, a writer misinterpreted Genesis passages to argue that the Bible supports abortion. Whatever the left-wing cause, chances are the left and their media allies have subverted the Bible to justify it.
On the media front, CMI pointed to a number of issues that purportedly show bias . . .(Read More)
Other Must-Read Stories:
THE BLAZE by JASON HOWERTON,CHRISTOPHER SANTARELLI, BECKET ADAMS, MEREDITH JESSUP, MIKE OPELKA, ERICA RITZ, LIZ KLIMAS, and TIFFANY GABBAY
Why Is the Air Force Suddenly Removing Drone Strike Data?
Posted March 8, 2013 at 10:39 pm by Jason Howerton
Does Your Neighbor’s Drone Infringe on Your Privacy Rights?
Posted March 8, 2013 at 8:20 am by Christopher Santarelli
What’s the Future for Drones and Local Law Enforcement?
Posted March 8, 2013 at 6:41 am by Christopher Santarelli
Fox’s Shep Smith Goes on Scathing Rant Against Obama’s Drone Strike Policy: ‘Are You Kidding Me?’
Posted March 7, 2013 at 9:00 pm by Jason Howerton
Dems Have a Hard Time Explaining Why They Skipped Rand Paul’s Drone Filibuster: ‘I’ve Got Stuff to Do’
Posted March 7, 2013 at 4:44 pm by Jason Howerton
“I’m working right now on many, many, other issues.”
Rand Paul and Ted Cruz Introduce Legislation to Prohibit Drone Killings of U.S. Citizens — Read the Entire Bill Here
Posted March 7, 2013 at 4:15 pm by Jason Howerton
“The federal government may not use drones to kill U.S. citizens on U.S. soil if they do not represent an imminent threat.”
(UPDATED) Eric Holder’s New Letter to Sen. Rand Paul: Here’s Your Answer
Posted March 7, 2013 at 2:01 pm by Becket Adams
“Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on an American soil?”
Meet the only Democrat who stood up for the Constitution Wednesday
Posted March 7, 2013 at 12:35 pm by Meredith Jessup
Sens. McCain & Graham Dedicate Morning to Discrediting Paul Filibuster (Graham Even Uses a Shame Chart!)
Posted March 7, 2013 at 12:00 pm by Becket Adams
Sen. Graham even brought a chart with him for his little presentation.
‘It’s Really Not That Easy To Talk That Long’: Sen. Rand Paul’s First Interview Since Ending Nearly 13-Hr. Filibuster
Posted March 7, 2013 at 10:53 am by Becket Adams
It’s about civil rights.
How Did the Mainstream Media Cover Rand Paul’s Historic Filibuster?
Posted March 7, 2013 at 10:00 am by Mike Opelka
A sad reminder about Barack Obama’s past
Posted March 7, 2013 at 9:54 am by Meredith Jessup
Ron Paul ‘proud’ of son’s filibuster effort
Posted March 7, 2013 at 8:43 am by Meredith Jessup
Tea Party Favorite Rand Paul Is Able to Get Support for His Drone Filibuster From the Far-Left
Posted March 7, 2013 at 2:36 am by Jason Howerton
”Just because I disagree with Rand Paul on 90% of issues, does that mean I have to disagree with him on the other 10%?”
Here Are All the GOP Senators That Participated in Rand Paul’s 12+ Hour Filibuster… and the Ones Who Didn’t
Posted March 7, 2013 at 1:30 am by Jason Howerton
#StandWithRand was the number one trending topic worldwide on Twitter
White House Has Nothing to Say About Potential Drone Strikes Against Americans in U.S.
Posted March 7, 2013 at 12:35 am by Jason Howerton
“You’d think that would be a pretty easy answer for them.”
You Will Never Believe Who Said ‘Rand Paul Is the MAN’ for Filibuster — Seriously, You Won’t
Posted March 6, 2013 at 11:40 pm by Jason Howerton
Liberal Actor on GOP-Led Filibuster Over Drones: ‘For God’s Sake, Where Are Democrats?’
Posted March 6, 2013 at 11:01 pm by Jason Howerton
”Dems? Do [you] have any thoughts on Obama’s transition from a progressive academic humanist [to] a regressive corporate warlord?”
Krauthammer on Rand Paul’s Filibuster: This Is His Moment, ‘He Will Be Remembered’
Posted March 6, 2013 at 10:30 pm by Jason Howerton
“A stroke of political genius.”
Top 10 Quotes From Rand Paul’s Amazing Filibuster on Civil Liberties, Drone Strikes
Posted March 6, 2013 at 8:23 pm by Jason Howerton
“Are you going to just drop a hellfire missile on Jane Fonda?”
‘Real News’ Panel Takes on Rand Paul’s Filibuster and Drones
Posted March 6, 2013 at 8:00 pm by Christopher Santarelli
Sen. Ted Cruz Batters Eric Holder on Domestic Drone Strikes in Tense Exchange
Posted March 6, 2013 at 2:00 pm by Erica Ritz
“You keep saying appropriate. My question isn’t about propriety. My question is about whether something is constitutional or not.”
‘Your Right To Trial By Jury Is Precious’: Sen. Rand Paul Stages Nearly 13 Hour Old-School Filibuster Over Drone Strikes
Posted March 6, 2013 at 12:56 pm by Becket Adams
• Sen. Paul: “I will not sit quietly and let the president shred the Constitution.”
• Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) step in to help Paul.
• Sen. Wyden: “Every American deserves to know when the government thinks it has the right to kill them.”
• Sen. Rubio cracks joke at his own expense — advises Paul to keep water close by.
• Sen. Reid intervenes to end debate — Paul rejects!
• On to the twelfth hour!
Revealed: Drones Equipped With Spy Tech Detailed Enough to See If You’re Armed
Posted March 6, 2013 at 9:28 am by Liz Klimas
“…capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not”
Drone Strikes on U.S. Soil? Glenn Beck Weighs In
Posted March 5, 2013 at 8:34 pm by Tiffany Gabbay
“The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront.”
- 12 hours, 52 minutes, over a million Tweets: @SenRandPaul’s filibuster to debate drone policy, by @bcoyne (nextlevelofnews.com)
- Rand’s 2016 Chances Better Than Many Realize (realclearpolitics.com)
- Rand Paul filibusters Brennan on Senate floor over drones (tv.msnbc.com)
- Obama Addresses Drone Filibuster (huffingtonpost.com)
- CNN Denigrates Rand Paul Drone Filibuster, Plays Up Supposed Racism of Fox’s Roger Ailes (newsbusters.org)
- Fun with words: See the wordcloud from Rand Paul’s filibuster (watchdog.org)
- Let’s Build on the Paul Filibuster (conservativeread.com)
THE BLAZE by MADELEINE MORGENSTERN (People are more afraid of not having an opinion than they are of looking like fools after expressing those opinions. This nation would be so much better off if folks would just fess up and say, “I don’t know what you’re talking about, and I sure as hell won’t know what I’m talking about once I start!” JM)
Hilarious Jimmy Kimmel Prank Asks People What They Thought of the Inauguration — Before it Even Happened
Jan. 19, 2013 8:46am Madeleine Morgenstern
President Barack Obama’s second inauguration was “awesome,” “moving” and “you know, part of history.” Vice President Joe Biden even cried.
Too bad it hasn’t happened yet.
But that small detail didn’t stop people from sounding off in front of ABC late night host Jimmy Kimmel’s cameras on what they thought of Obama’s second swearing-in — days before it actually took place.
“It was awesome,” one woman said. “It was, you know, part of history. It was really nice to see him up there, getting his second term. Proud of him.”
She really liked Obama’s speech, particularly him “talking about what he’s going to do for us, not what he’s going to do for the other countries, what he’s going to do for America.”
They weren’t all positive reviews, however: there was one person who “didn’t really care for it…I turned the TV off, it kind of bored me.”
- Kimmel Hilariously Finds People Have Mixed Reviews Of Inauguration… Which Hasn’t Actually Happened Yet (mediaite.com)
- Obama Supporters Gush After Seeing Inauguration That Hasn’t Happened Yet (conservativebyte.com)
- Low Information Voters Show Their Stuff – Completely Make Up Crap About Obama’s Inauguration (Video) (thegatewaypundit.com)
- Inauguration Weekend Kicks off With Day of Service (abcnews.go.com)
- Lie Witness News asks people about ‘yesterday’s inauguration of Obama’ (bizpacreview.com)
- Here’s Your 2013 Inauguration Schedule Of Events! (praisedc.com)
- Inauguration weekend kicks off with day of service (newsok.com)
Disgrace: Barack Obama Broke Promise to Honor Cold War Veterans
by Joel B. Pollak 11 Nov 2012
President Barack Obama once promised, as a U.S. Senator, to honor veterans of the Cold War, who have never received official recognition and are therefore prevented from full participation in many Veterans Day celebrations. But he never fulfilled that promise–neither in the Senate nor the White House–leaving Cold War veterans in the cold.
This weekend, the Wall Street Journal documented the promise, made in 2006 to Frank Almquist, an Illinois constituent who had served in the Army in the 1980s. A medal for Cold War veterans seemed “appropriate,” Obama wrote, and wrote that he hoped “this impasse can be broken soon.” He never took up the task.
The U.S. has thus far failed to honor those who served in the long struggle against communism, which began almost as soon as the Second World War had ended. Though communist regimes–especially Stalin’s Soviet Union and Mao’s China, and satellites such as Pol Pot’s Cambodia–committed more murders than the Nazis, few Americans are aware of the absolute moral evil that communism represents, or the sacrifices made to stop it.
The fact that the U.S. government has never formally recognized Cold War veterans has meant they have been excluded from veterans’ groups such as the American Legion, which only includes veterans from periods of “hot” wars, regardless of where or how the veterans served. The U-2 pilots who provided essential intelligence; the soldiers who kept watch in Berlin; the sailors who were silent sentinels aboard submarines, tracking Soviet movements, ready to strike–all have gone unheralded, and largely uncelebrated, even on Veterans Day.
It is possible that the reluctance to honor Cold War veterans springs from a political motive. Many on the left opposed the tough line taken against communism by Presidents from Truman to Reagan; many still think of communism as a legitimate alternative economic model that was never given a real chance at success due to western opposition and political failures in implementation. An entire generation of American youth has been educated in the years since the Cold War ended without much idea of how it was fought, by whom, or why.
The official position of the Obama administration is that the Cold war “was not actually a war,” in the words of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs Elizabeth King. For all his happy talk at about assisting veterans, President Barack Obama has left thousands of the nation’s heroes on the sidelines.
They won the longest and most important war of our nation’s history, freeing millions from totalitarianism. But the nation they served has yet to commend them–and the president has, disgracefully, failed to honor his promise.
THE BLAZE by JASON HOWERTON (Everyone, copy and paste this article on your blog! This is censorship and it’s wrong!!! JM)
Politics REMEMBER OUR HEROES jm
Anti-Obama Benghazi Meme Gets Censored for ‘Violating Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities’
Facebook reportedly took down an image, or a meme, posted by the Special Operations Speaks PAC (SOS) that was critical of President Barack Obama’s handling of the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. You may have actually seen it before it was taken down — it had earned roughly 24,000 “likes.”
The meme, which can be seen below, shows both Obama and deceased al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden with the following message: “Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama, THEY GOT DENIED.”
It was first taken down and the account was issued a warning. The account was later suspended for 24 hours for defying the warning and re-posting the image — with the warning above it.
The message is based on reports that indicate CIA operatives in Benghazi were told to “stand down” rather than help after Americans on the ground in Libya attempted to call out for help. Reports also suggest that the White House situation room had access to a live feed of the chaos at the U.S. compound as well as real-time email updates from within State Department.
Breitbart.com’s Awr Hawkins reportedly spoke with Larry Ward, president of Political Media, Inc., the company responsible for the SOS Facebook account.
“We created and posted this meme on Saturday after news broke that Obama had known and denied SEALs the backup they requested,” Ward told Breitbart.com.
He continued: “Once the meme was up it garnered 30,000 shares, approx. 24,000 likes, and was read by hundreds of thousands of people — all within 24 hrs. On Sunday, I went into the SOS Facebook page to post something else and found a warning from Facebook that we had violated Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities with our meme. So I copied the warning, put it on the meme as as caption, and re-posted the meme to the Facebook page.”
The re-posted meme was removed within 8 hours before Facebook suspended the SOS PAC’s account for 24 hours.
Is this a violation of free speech or did SOS violate Facebook policy?
My First Time…I Voted For More Free Crap [Parody Ad]
In what is sure to be an instant classic in the arena of political ads, Stephen Crowder makes a parody of the disgusting Lena Dunham ad for Barack Obama. Sadly, the left doesn’t have the sense to recognize how foolish they look.
The Obama HeathSnare Bill
Salaried Obama Campaign Worker Helps Undercover Reporter Vote Twice
Obama Cancels Raid 3–count ’em–3 times–on Bin Laden!
How Do We Relieve Obama of the Nobel Peace Prize? Or is that prize now a laughing stock?
- Nobel Peace Prize goes to the EU. Does the committee exist just to troll Right-wingers? (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
- No Laughing Matter (personalliberty.com)
- Who should collect the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the EU? (jonworth.eu)
- Farage Slams Nobel Peace Prize Farce As “Insurgency And Violence” Reign (zerohedge.com)
- Hilarious Nobel Peace Prize predictions (salon.com)
- When Nobel Fantasists Attack… (nationalreview.com)
October 25, 2012 at 10:07 am
GM: The Deadbeat of America (Chevy Commercial Parody)
Instead of “Like A Rock” GM’s theme song is “Now We’re Soft.” (Language Warning)
Read more: http://conservativevideos.com/2012/10/gm-the-deadbeat-of-america-chevy-commercial-parody/#ixzz2ALyEaLbC
After editor’s blog, President Obama releases transcript of Register interview
8:48 AM, Oct 24, 2012
FILE – President Barack Obama spoke to a crowd of more than 2,000 on Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2012, at Cornell College in Mt. Vernon, Iowa. (Bryon Houlgrave/The Des Moines Register)
Without comment, campaign officials for President Obama this morning released to the Des Moines Register a transcript of an interview he had Tuesday with Laura Hollingsworth, president and publisher of the Register, and Rick Green, editor/vice-president of news. Initially, the White House had asked that the conversation be considered off-the-record and its details not shared with readers. Its release comes on the heels of a Tuesday evening DesMoinesRegister.com blog post by Green questioning why an endorsement interview with the Register would be off-the-record.
Interview of the President by Rick Green & Laura Hollingsworth, The Des Moines Register
Q: Good morning, Mr. President — Laura Hollingsworth, with the Des Moines Register.
THE PRESIDENT: Hi, how are you?
Q: Very well. We haven’t spoken in four years. We’re excited to be able to talk with you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’m so glad to talk to you. And I understand Rick is joining us as well.
Q: Rick Green is right next to me, our editor, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Great.
Q: Good morning, Mr. President. How are you sir?
THE PRESIDENT: I’m doing great and looking forward to being back in Iowa.
Q: Good, see you later this week.
Q: You’ve been here a lot. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: It’s home away from home.
But I know that our time is limited and you guys have a lot of questions. I thought maybe it would be useful for me to just summarize how I see a second term very quickly, and then you guys can pepper me with questions. Does that sound okay?
Q: Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: Obviously, I’m very proud of what we’ve accomplished over the last four years. A lot of it was responding to the most severe economic emergency we’ve had since the Great Depression. And whether it was saving the auto industry, stabilizing the financial system, making sure that we got into a growth mode again and started putting people back to work, we have made real progress.
But people are obviously still hurting in a lot of parts of the country. And that’s why last night I tried to reiterate a very specific plan that we’ve put forward to make sure that the economy is growing, we’re bringing down our deficit, and we’re creating jobs.
So, number one, I’m very interested in continuing to build on the work that we did not just in the auto industry but some of the other industrial sectors, bringing manufacturing back to our shores; changing our tax code to reward companies that are investing here. There is a real sense that companies are starting to make decisions about insourcing, and some modest incentives I think can make a real difference in terms of us seeing continued manufacturing growth, which obviously has huge ramifications throughout the economy, including in the service sector of the economy.
Number two, education, which has obviously been a priority for us over the last four years — I want to build on what we’ve done with Race to the Top, but really focus on STEM education — math, science, technology, computer science. And part of that is helping states to hire teachers with the highest standards and training in these subjects so we can start making sure that our kids are catching up to some of the other industrialized world.
Two million more slots in community colleges that allows our workers to retrain, but also young people who may not want to go to a four-year college, making sure that the training they’re receiving is actually for jobs that are out there right now. And we want to continue to work — building on the progress we’ve done over the last four years — to keep tuition low for those who do attend either a two-year or a four-year college.
Number three, controlling our own energy. This obviously is of interest to Iowa. Our support of biofuels, our support of wind energy has created thousands of jobs in Iowa. But even more importantly, this is going to be the race to the future. The country that controls new sources of energy, not just the traditional sources, is going to have a huge competitive advantage 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now.
So in addition to doubling our fuel-efficiency standards on cars and trucks, what we want to do is make sure that we’re producing new technologies here — long-lasting batteries, making sure that we are developing the wind and solar and other energy sources that may provide us a breakthrough. In the meantime, we’re still producing oil and natural gas at a record pace, but we’ve got to start preparing for the future. And as I said, it creates jobs right now in Iowa.
Number four, I want to reduce our deficit. It’s got to be done in a balanced way. I’ve already cut a trillion dollars’ worth of spending. I’m willing to do more. I’m willing to cut more, and I’m willing to work with Democrats and Republicans when it comes to making some adjustments that bring down the cost of our health care programs, which obviously are the biggest drivers of our deficit.
But nobody who looks at the numbers thinks it’s realistic for us to actually reduce our deficit in a serious way without also having some revenue. And we’ve identified tax rates going up to the Clinton rates for income above $250,000; making some adjustments in terms of the corporate tax side that could actually bring down the corporate tax overall, but broaden the base and close some loopholes. That would be good for our economy, and it would be good for reducing our deficit.
And finally, using some of the war savings to put people back to work on infrastructure — roads, bridges. We’ve fallen behind in that area. And we can — this deferred maintenance, we can put people to work, back, right now, and at the same time make sure that our economy is more competitive over the long term.
So that’s sort of a summary of the things I want to accomplish to create jobs and economic growth. Obviously, there are other items on the agenda. We need to get immigration reform done, and I’m fully committed to doing that. I think there’s still more work on the energy efficiency side that we can do — helping to retrofit our buildings, schools, hospitals, so that they’re energy efficient — because if we achieved efficiencies at the level of, let’s say, Japan, we could actually cut our power bill by about 20-25 percent, and that would have the added benefit of taking a whole bunch of carbon out of the atmosphere.
So there are some things that we can do, but obviously the key focus is making sure that the economy is growing. That will facilitate all the other work that we do.
Q: Very good, Mr. President. First question for you — obviously, we all know that restoring the national economy is the number-one issue among voters. And here in Iowa, obviously, we struggle with the same thing. I’ll tell you that our editorial board is struggling with that same thing. What will — and many believe that we’ve only engineered a recovery based on more spending, delaying sort of the inevitable, and that even looking at growth projections for next year, very weak based on current trend lines. So why will your plan for a second term yield better results than what we saw in the first four years of the administration? And how are we going to grow at a faster pace?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, keep in mind that some of this is us just working through a very, very deep worldwide financial-based recession. And you guys are probably familiar with some of the work that’s been done on this. Recessions that follow a financial crash of some sort, including the popping of the housing bubble, are not regular recessions. They’re not your typical business cycle recession. And so, in many ways, because of the actions we took early on, we’re actually ahead of pace in the typical recovery out of a recession like this.
But the potential for upside growth remains very strong. Keep in mind that we are growing faster than just about any other large industrialized country. We’re growing faster than Europe. We’re growing faster than Japan. And part of the challenge we have right now — we’ve had a bunch of headwinds because Europe is still getting its act together. China, its economy has been weakened. And so world trade generally has been somewhat depressed over the last year.
But despite that, we’ve doubled our exports. And if you combine a prudent deficit plan, a serious emphasis on our manufacturing strengths, retraining our workers, a very real energy boom both in natural gas but also in clean energy, and the infrastructure that traditionally has not been a partisan issue — we’ve got a lot of deferred maintenance that needs to be done — even as the housing market is starting finally to recover — you combine those things, and there’s no reason why we can’t have a significant surge of growth.
Conversely, if we adopted my opponent’s plans for a $5 trillion tax cut that he claims would somehow be paid for by deductions and — closing of deductions and loopholes that nobody can identify how to pay for, either we’re blowing up that deficit, or what’s going to end up happening is you end up seeing middle-class families taxed. That’s the absolute worst thing that could be done for the economy right now.
So I’m actually optimistic that if you combine the elements of my plan together, we can grow faster and create the kind of virtuous cycle that allows businesses to start investing and hiring a lot more aggressively. Keep in mind, over the first — or let’s say, over the previous two and a half years, corporate profits had been at record levels. Companies are awash with cash. And what they’ve been missing are enough customers out there to prompt demand and justify them investing in more plant equipment and workers. So if we can just trigger that, there’s enough capital out there in order for us to get on that virtuous cycle.
Q: Great. Mr. President, we know that John Boehner and the House Republicans have not been easy to work with, and certainly you’ve had some obstacles in the Senate, even though it’s been controlled by the Democrats. At the time, whenever — we talked a lot about, in 2008, hope and change. I’m curious about what you see your role is in terms of changing the tone and the perception that Washington is broken. But particularly, sir, if you were granted a second term, how do you implode this partisan gridlock that has gripped Washington and Congress and basically our entire political structure right now?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Rick, let me answer you short term and long term. In the short term, the good news is that there’s going to be a forcing mechanism to deal with what is the central ideological argument in Washington right now, and that is: How much government do we have and how do we pay for it?
So when you combine the Bush tax cuts expiring, the sequester in place, the commitment of both myself and my opponent — at least Governor Romney claims that he wants to reduce the deficit — but we’re going to be in a position where I believe in the first six months we are going to solve that big piece of business.
It will probably be messy. It won’t be pleasant. But I am absolutely confident that we can get what is the equivalent of the grand bargain that essentially I’ve been offering to the Republicans for a very long time, which is $2.50 worth of cuts for every dollar in spending, and work to reduce the costs of our health care programs.
And we can easily meet — “easily” is the wrong word — we can credibly meet the target that the Bowles-Simpson Commission established of $4 trillion in deficit reduction, and even more in the out-years, and we can stabilize our deficit-to-GDP ratio in a way that is really going to be a good foundation for long-term growth. Now, once we get that done, that takes a huge piece of business off the table.
The second thing I’m confident we’ll get done next year is immigration reform. And since this is off the record, I will just be very blunt. Should I win a second term, a big reason I will win a second term is because the Republican nominee and the Republican Party have so alienated the fastest-growing demographic group in the country, the Latino community. And this is a relatively new phenomenon. George Bush and Karl Rove were smart enough to understand the changing nature of America. And so I am fairly confident that they’re going to have a deep interest in getting that done. And I want to get it done because it’s the right thing to do and I’ve cared about this ever since I ran back in 2008.
So assume that you get those two things done in the first year, and we’re implementing Wall Street reform, Obamacare turns out not to have been the scary monster that the other side has painted. Now we’re in a position where we can start on some things that really historically have not been ideological. We can start looking at a serious corporate tax reform agenda that’s revenue-neutral but lowers rates and broadens the base — something that both Republicans and Democrats have expressed an interest in.
I’ve expressed a deep desire and taken executive action to weed out regulations that aren’t contributing to the health and public safety of our people. And we’ve made a commitment to look back and see if there are regulations out there that aren’t working, then let’s get rid of them and see if we can clear out some of the underbrush on that. Again, that’s something that should be non-ideological.
My hope is, is that there’s a recognition that now is a great time to make infrastructure improvements all across the country. And we can pull up some of the money that we know we’re going to be spending over the next decade to put people back to work right now at a time when contractors are dying for work and interest rates are really low.
And, again, that’s something that even John Boehner — John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, they’ve got a bridge linking Cincinnati and Kentucky, and the bridge is so broken down that folks are having to drive an hour and a half of extra commuting just to get across the Ohio River. There’s no reason why we can’t work on things like that and put people back to work.
So I just want to contrast with what happens if Mitt Romney is elected. I know that he likes to talk about his Massachusetts record. The truth is there really were two Mitt Romneys. There was the Mitt Romney who initially got elected, passed Obamacare, and was interested in being the governor of Massachusetts. After his second year, it was the Mitt Romney who was running for president and abandoned all his previous positions.
And the problem you’ve seen in this campaign is he’s made commitments — his first day he’s got to introduce a bill to repeal Obamacare. And that’s a commitment he cannot back off of. That is a huge, messy fight. His first day in office, he has to make some commitments in rolling back things like the Consumer Finance Protection Board we put in place on Wall Street reform. His budget — the Ryan budget — there’s no way that, if he’s president, he can avoid having a showdown on a budget that his running mate introduced, or a variation of it, because he’s committed to cutting spending by 20 percent across the board on discretionary and increasing defense spending by $2 trillion.
Q: Yes, that begs a question from us, Mr. President. Some say you had a super majority in your first two years and had this incredible opportunity, but because of what you were talking about, as you were running, you had to go to get Obamacare done. Do you have any regrets taking on some of the economic issues, some of the issues that we’re talking about for your second term, that when you had the chance, so to speak, during your first — do you have any regrets that you didn’t do that at that time?
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely not, Laura. Remember the context. First of all, Mitch McConnell has imposed an ironclad filibuster from the first day I was in office. And that’s not speculation. I mean, this is — it’s amply recorded. He gave a speech saying, my task is to defeat the President.
So we were able to pass emergency action with the stimulus, but we had to get two votes from Republicans. One of them essentially was driven out of the party — Arlen Specter, who recently passed away. We then — because Al Franken hadn’t been seated, didn’t have 60 votes until essentially — there was a four- or five-month span. But at that point, we had already put in place the Recovery Act. We had already moved forward to help states avoid teacher layoffs and so forth.
And we were already in the process of stabilizing the banks. We had already engineered the process that would save the auto industry. And there was not going to be any appetite among Democrats or Republicans to take additional actions until we saw the progress that was making — that needed to be made.
And our health care system is one-sixth of our economy. And if we have a situation where spending on health care at every level is going up at 6, 7, 10 percent a year, and we’ve got millions of people without coverage or inadequate coverage, the suggestion that that’s not a central economic priority for the country is just something that I wouldn’t buy.
And the suggestion somehow that if we hadn’t pursued Obamacare, somehow we would have gotten additional stimulus out of the Republicans, for example, that we could have primed the pump more, that’s just not borne out by any of the evidence.
In fact, the first stimulus, when we were contracting at 8 percent a quarter, as I was on my way up — a month after I’d been elected, or two months after I’d been elected — as I was on my way up to meet the House Republicans to share with them my ideas about how we should pass this Recovery Act, they already said they’d vote against it.
Now, it was a political strategy that won them back the House, but it wasn’t good for the country. And I think the country recognizes that. So what I want to do — now we’re in a different position, and I genuinely believe that one of the best things we can do for the economy is to settle this issue of government spending, entitlements, and revenues so that we can provide the kind of certainty that I think businesses and individuals are looking for.
Q: One question — as you watch voters here and just everyday interactions with people that are so undecided, so fearful of either choice — I found people becoming even more ambivalent and even voters making statements such as it really doesn’t matter who’s President anyway because of the problems in Congress and really that’s what’s going on — what would you say to a statement that somebody was saying, it doesn’t really matter who should be President?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, what I’d say is that it will matter to millions of Americans who may or may not have health care. It will matter to millions of seniors who maybe — or soon-to-be seniors who may be faced with the prospect of a voucher system for Medicare.
It will matter to young people all across the country who were born here, pledged allegiance to our flag, went to school here, and are Americans in every way except they don’t have documentation and would continue to be at risk of deportation.
It will matter to middle-class families who are going to find themselves locked out of the discussion in terms of how we balance our budget, or at least reduce our deficit, facing the prospect that things like the tax credit we put in place for kids going to college, the earned income tax credit, a whole bunch of things that make sure working people stay out of poverty — that could all go away.
The consequences on just about every indicator out there would be enormous. And so if the question is, will the economy drastically improve, are we going to get back to — are we going to get to 4 or 5 percent growth if I’m reelected versus Mitt Romney — there are some big global economic issues that are being worked through.
But the question I think for voters, in addition to what’s going to be good for me and my family tomorrow, is, what’s going to be good for America five years from now or 10 years from now. And if we have not built an education system that works and makes sure that college is affordable, if we have not won the race for future energy technologies, if we’re slashing funding for things like basic research, if we are not rebuilding our infrastructure, then 5, 10 years from now we are going to be a weaker nation. And that has huge consequences.
Now, obviously, if somebody believes that the government has been the problem and will remain the problem, and if we just strip down government to defense spending and Social Security and some watered-down version of Medicare and Medicaid, and we shouldn’t be doing anything else, then obviously Mitt Romney is the candidate. There’s no indication, based on either historical evidence or what’s happening around the world, that that’s the recipe for long-term sustainable economic growth.
Q: Mr. President, we’re very sensitive to your time. I know you’ve got a busy schedule. But we just had just one last question here. As we close in on the final hours of this campaign — it’s been a long one. It’s been exhausting. It’s been very, very expensive, as I know you know. Why should the Des Moines Register offer its endorsement to you, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you guys have seen me up close. I wouldn’t be on the national stage had it not been for the people of Iowa. And if you look at what I said to you this time four years ago, and the commitments I’ve made, I have kept and met those commitments, or I have worked really hard to keep them and meet them.
I said that I’d cut taxes for middle-class families — I did. I said that we would make sure to make college more affordable — we have. I said I would clean up the financial system and pass the toughest Wall Street reforms since the 1930s, and we have. I said that I would make sure that people don’t go broke in this country because they get sick — we did that. I said I’d end the war in Iraq — I have. I said we’d got after al Qaeda and bin Laden — we have. I said we’d begin a process where we could initially blunt the momentum of the Taliban and then a process in which we’d begin transitioning out — we’re in the process of doing that.
So across the board, I’ve done what I said. And this is in the midst of I think what everybody would agree were some pretty historic circumstances. And the criteria by which I’ve made these decisions has always been what’s good for America’s families, how do we build our middle class, how do we grow the economy in a way that broad-based and sustainable.
The notion that somehow we’ve been bad for business is obviously contradicted by the evidence. Corporate profits have been at record levels up until maybe last quarter. The stock market basically has recovered all its losses that it experienced from the financial sector. The auto industry has come roaring back. Our exports have doubled.
For the people of Iowa that are so dependent on the agricultural sector — the agricultural sector has never done better than it has under my administration. Even in the midst of this year’s drought it’s still doing well.
When it comes to clean energy that I talked about so much back in 2007-2008, we’ve doubled our production of clean energy. And we’re starting to see the costs of that energy come down, the number of jobs it generates go up.
I got to tell you, I feel very strongly that I have a record that justifies a second term. But I guess, more importantly, what you also know is that I’m somebody who keeps my word, that I don’t read the polls, that I do what I think is right for the American people, even when it is profoundly unpopular politically. And I think that’s worth something. I think that’s the kind of leadership the people of Iowa want.
Q: Very good.
Q: Thank you so much, Mr. President, for your time.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, guys. I appreciate you taking the time. I want your endorsement.
Q: Thank you so much.
THE PRESIDENT: You’ll feel better when you give it. (Laughter.) All right? Bye-bye.
Q: Appreciate it.
Q: Best of luck, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Bye-bye.
- TRANSCRIPT: Obama Campaign Releases Transcript of President’s Interview With Des Moines Register After Insisting That It Be Kept Off the Record (foxnewsinsider.com)
- Obama Finally Reveals What He Wants To Do In His Second Term — In A Private Phone Call With A Newspaper Editor (businessinsider.com)
- [UPDATED] Des Moines Register editor protests Obama’s off-the-record phone conversation (jimromenesko.com)
- Green: Obama’s off-the-record comments deserve to be shared with voters (abetteriowa.desmoinesregister.com)
- Des Moines Register Calls Out Obama Over Off The Record Interview (outsidethebeltway.com)
- Iowa paper: Obama should go on record (politico.com)
- Obama Keeps Interview with Des Moines Register Off the Record (Updated: Now It Will Be On The Record) (pjmedia.com)
- Obama seeks Iowa newspaper endorsement (usatoday.com)
- Obama makes ‘personal,’ ‘off-the-record’ call to Iowa newspaper for endorsement (theblaze.com)
Monday, October 22, 2012
The intransigent sloth of our President is one of God’s little mercies
The right has rightly noticed that our President not only wants plenty of free-time, he absolutely demands it! The Obama family had gone on 16 vacations as of February of this year, and that doesn’t even count all the trips to Camp David. In addition, he’s played 104 rounds of golf!
No president has been more vilified for his love of golf than Obama. And perhaps not surprisingly, no president has done more to keep his game a secret. During the 104 rounds Obama has played as president, photographers have been permitted only five times, according to White House pool reports.
I would argue however, that we should absolutely stop vilifying our President for his vacations and golf outings. It’s high time we encourage him to take all the time off he wants. I realize that all these vacations have cost the nation billions of dollars, but consider how much we’d have paid if he hadn’t taken all that time off. A few billion is a bargain!
Every decision Obama has made in the last four years has cost us plenty. Whether it’s his war on energy, his czars and agencies, hyper-regulation of American businesses, hypocritical race demagoguery and class warfare, unimaginably reckless spending, or his foreign policy—which has outclassed even that of Jimmy Carter in damaging American interests around the world—no President in history has done more to destroy America than Barack Hussein Obama.
When you consider all the foregoing, shouldn’t we be incredibly grateful that our President only works part time? Imagine, if you can, where we would be today if the President was a workaholic and put in sixty or seventy hours a week. He’s already added five and a half trillion to the national debt, just think what he could have done if he’d really tried?
Obama’s lack of character is a blessing in disguise. His campaign until now was an unstoppable juggernaut. It was an overwhelming surge that was as inevitable as the tides. The advantages Obama held were nearly insurmountable. He had an adoring mainstream press, an unpaid army of union workers and members of protected classes. He had Air-Force-One, White House staff, the Bully Pulpit, and let’s not forget all the ringing endorsements from a coterie of Hollywood personalities, Communist Party USA, even from the Ayatollah Khamenei himself:
WASHINGTON — The United States and Iran have agreed in principle for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, according to Obama administration officials, setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran.
Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election, a senior administration official said, telling their American counterparts that they want to know with whom they would be negotiating.
All that intrinsic Presidential advantage was completely negated that fateful Wednesday evening in Denver. It was forfeited by a President who really likes his free time, who intransigently demandshis free time:
When President Barack Obama stepped off the stage in Denver last week the 60 million Americans watching the debate against Mitt Romney already knew it had been a disaster for him. But what nobody knew, until now, was that Obama believed he had actually won. In an extraordinary insight into the events leading up to the 90 minute showdown which changed the face of the election, a Democrat close to the Obama campaign today reveals that the President also did not take his debate preparation seriously, ignored the advice of senior aides and ignored one-liners that had been prepared to wound Romney.
During his debate preparation in Henderson, Nevada, Obama broke off to visit a campaign field office. There, he joked with a volunteer about how his advisers were ‘keeping me indoors all the time’ to practice. ‘It’s a drag. They’re making me do my homework.’
Obama also decided to take a break to visit the Hoover Dam. “Its spectacular, and I’ve never seen it before,” he told reporters during the visit, which came about because an aide had mentioned the dam was nearby. I said, ‘Well, we’ve got to go check it out’.”
Where are we today after four years of Obama? It’s almost impossible to successfully start a new business in America today. My grandfather could have done it with ease. My father would have faced a tougher road but with perseverance he probably could have done it. Today if I had the money to start a business, I wouldn’t even try. I’m not sure when it happened, but at some point they’ve made trying to open a new business an insane catch-22 ordeal.
There are so many regulations with their associated agencies: OSHA, NLRB, EEOC, EPA, ICC, CPSC, FTC, FDA, and SEC to name a few, that it’s almost a virtual certainty that I’d run afoul of one or more of them, and when I did you can bet my already long-established competitors would be on the phone to one of those agencies faster than Michelle Obama can snork down a $300.00 Fancy French dinner. You might say our regulatory agencies enable unassailable monopolistic consortiums having no fear of upstart competitors who lack the required staff of lawyers and lobbyists.
Current federal regulations plus those coming under Obamacare will cost American taxpayers and businesses $1.8 trillion annually, more than twenty times the $88 billion the administration estimates, according to a new roundup provided to Secrets from the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Finally, I want to show you something. They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Take a look at this picture from the Denver debate. If this picture doesn’t convince you that Obama is America’s most dangerous enemy then eloquence more astounding than I’ll ever aspire to could never budge you one scintilla either. There truly are none so blind as those who refuse to see. Please Mr. President, go put on your golf shoes and play a few rounds. Take the week off. Take two. You deserve it and frankly, we could all use a break.
- Libya, Iran likely to be main points of contention in final debate (fox13now.com)
- Obama-Khamenei summit would cap long back-channel dialogue (warsclerotic.wordpress.com)
- Who will win tonight’s presidential debate? (wtvr.com)
- Libya, Iran Likely To Be Main Points Of Contention In Final Debate (fox2now.com)
- Final US debate on foreign policy (bigpondnews.com)
- In campaign of memorable debates, Obama and Romney face off again – Reuters (reuters.com)
- No Bounce for Obama Clouds Dem Forecast (commentarymagazine.com)