Tag Archives: DEM/MSM

Obama, Biden and the White House Lie: “White House told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack: emails”

Posted on by

From Reuters:

Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

The date was 9/11 (of 2012), and radical Islamists claimed to have attacked a United States consulate.  Yes, western-educated Muslims know how to use Twitter and create their own sites on Facebook.  Yes: Facebook.  Yet, despite that date, the Obama Administration didn’t quite seem to understand the importance of the day?

In a nutshell: the staff of the president knew within the very first hour of the Benghazi consulate assault that the attack had in fact begun and of a claim of responsibility by al Qaeda-type terrorists, all within two hours.

Funny thing: as I write this, the Reuters story is NOT in Place One of the NYT website nor that of the Washington Post or LA Times.  The DEM/MSM once again covers the narrow ass of Barack Hussein Obama.  And I’ll bet the story is NOT “above the fold” on any of its Thursday newspapers.

Anyone need any more reasons for what I term the self-immolation of the print media?

Perhaps I’m too strong; let me give everyone involved the benefit of the doubt.

That said, however, the situation then becomes another IF-THEN equation.

IF Obama and the White House was not involved until at least a week or two after —

THEN this points to massive incompetence and cover-ups in the Obama Administration’s intelligence community.

Either way, no matter how you cut it — at the minimum, there was staggering incompetence involved — right up to a cover-up and then leading to a series of outright lies proffered by Barack Hussein Obama, Joe Biden, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton.  Et al.

To those who are yet “undecided”:

You don’t deserve to be citizens.  You don’t deserve to live in this country.  You don’t deserve to benefit from its wonders.  You don’t deserve to walk upright and chew gum simultaneously.  Because, obviously, you cannot.

I might suggest you’d best be served by moving to the UK or France where you can locate hot-and-cold running abortions, prostitutes, drugs, Free Cheese, and cash-for-no-work amongst the finest of historical artifacts western societies have to offer.

Because, being brain-dead, you don’t deserve to live here, in my country.

BZ

P.S.
Please don’t forget: SCOTUS is 4 – 1 – 4.  With Anthony Kennedy in the middle.

The next president will get two — perhaps even three — nominations to SCOTUS.  You want Obama making these nominations again?

 

 

 Share

Third & final presidential debate: Obama v Romney, Monday, 10-22-12

Posted on by

The debate can be watched here via livestream, at ABC/YahooNews.

This debate is being held at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida.  Instead of walking about, the candidates will be seated.  Bob Schieffer is the moderator.

The format calls for six 15-minute segments, each devoted to one international topic.  The topics, chosen by Bob Schieffer, are:

• America’s role in the world.
• Our longest war – Afghanistan and Pakistan.
• Red lines – Israel and Iran.
• The changing Middle East and the new face of terrorism, Part 1.
• The changing Middle East and the new face of terrorism, Part 2.
• The rise of China and tomorrow’s world.

In the two-minute introduction, I recommend that Romney ignore Mr Obama entirely and, instead, lay out his plan for America’s foreign policy and why it’s inherently superior to that of Mr Obama.  Mr Romney needs to get on top of his details and lay them out immediately.

It’s time to not just act “presidential” but be presidential.

This post will be updated as the debate occurs.

IT STARTS:

“Attacking me is not an agenda.  Attacking me does not stem the tide of violence.”  YES, Mr Romney, that is TRUE!

Physically, Obama sits his neck down and scowls.  This won’t play well with women or those who are sensitive to body/head/neck language.

Romney is being quite restrained.  There is little over-riding.

Obama doesn’t look good by interrupting when Romney does not.

Romney: “Number one I get rid of is ObamaKare.  And we get rid of them.”

YES.  Sir, YES!

Romney: “And because states run these programs more efficiently.”

YES.  Sir, YES!

Romney: “The president hasn’t balanced a budget yet.”  YES!

Romney: “Our navy is the smallest since 1917.”

Obama goes with technology.  Romney goes with logic.  Blue water navy vs littoral navy.  It still doesn’t work.  Canoes vs destroyers.

However: one F-22 Raptor does not = 22 Migs.

By this time, Romney’s blinks in repose are in keeping with most every other person.

Romney: “We will have Israel’s back.”  YES.

Romney: “And then the president began with an Apology Tour.”  YES!

Romney: “It’s expected for a president to show strength from the very beginning.”  YES!

Romney: “And by the way, you skipped Israel.  And they noticed that you skipped Israel.”  YES!

Schieffer tried to pull some rugs from under Romney.  And he wasn’t having it.

Romney: “I don’t see our influence growing around the world.  I see our influence receding.”

Obama goes — of course — with the PERSONAL capture of Osama bin Laden.  As if HE “captured” OBL.  I knew he would go there.

So far Romney is too much the kind individual.  That doesn’t play with another who works with fire and lava and brimstone.

Overall, this was a very measured debate.  No one much over-rided Bob Schieffer.  I don’t much know why that was.  Was it because they were seated?  Was it because they were in their third debate?  Was it because Schieffer was more physically and intuitively mellow than the two priors?

Position on the use of drones?  Proper.  We need to have a much more comprehensive strategy for dealing with the Middle East.

So far: Romney has AVOIDED mentioning Benghazi!  This was a target-rich environment, Mr Romney!  What part of “Obama was stupid” did you NOT conceive — ??

Romney didn’t interrupt.  He didn’t insist.  That’s how you lose presidential elections, sir.

Romney: “I will label China a currency manipulator.  But you’ve got to play by the rules.”

Obama: “You invested in jobs that were shipped overseas.”  And so did you, Mr Obama, if you had stock in ANY one of the major investment firms from the United States.  Because you can’t be truthful.

In conclusion, I believe that Mitt Romney was WAY more kind than he needed to be.

“Attacking me is not an agenda for acquiring more jobs for this country.”

Obama smiled with the mention of Solyndra.  Like the lying sack of shit that he IS.

Closing statements:

Mr Obama has a plan: WHAT THE HELL IS IT?

Obama: “We bounce back because of our character.”  Meaning: it’s all on the American Taxpayer.

Romney: “America is going to come back.  And that means a president who can come across the aisle.  Washington is broken.”  And I agree.

Will the REAL Mitt Romney PLEASE come out — ??

“Go vote.  It makes you feel big and strong.”

BZ

 

 Share

Monday’s presidential debate: Foreign Policy

Posted on by

So I ask Mr Obama: what foreign policy?

Oh, right.  This:

Bowing?  Scraping?  Asking for permission and forgiveness?  Kicking Israel to the curb?

Yeah, that’s some kind of foreign policy there, Mr Obama.

UPDATE:

Evil enjoys weakness.

Hence, from the LA Times:

Chavez, Castro, Putin: Four more years!

The latest [dictator] to publicly announce his support for the commander-in-chief’s reelection bid was Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who this week assured he’d vote for Obama if he were from the United States. The America-bashing strongman made the announcement on state-owned television, saying “Obama is a good guy” and that if Obama was from Caracas, he’d surely return the favor by voting for Chavez.

Earlier in the year the government-official daughter of Cuban military dictator Raul Castro proclaimed her country’s support for Obama during a visit to the U.S. “I believe that Obama needs another opportunity and he needs greater support to move forward with his projects and with his ideas, which I believe come from the bottom of his heart,” Mariela Castro said during a cable news interview. …

That brings us to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who has eliminated most elections in his country, monopolized all major media and destroyed the political party system. … In a letter to a major newspaper, the president of a group dedicated to expanding freedom around the world points out that under Putin there has been an “across-the-board crackdown on civil society.” The piece goes on to ask: “Will Obama stand up against Putin’s abuses?” Unlikely, now that the Russian dictator has extended his endorsement.

Evil respects and fears strength; it therefore promotes and does its best to enable weakness in its enemies.

It’s enemies absolute adore a weak America.  They as much as publicly tell us this.

BZ

 

 

 Share

Obama: purposely hiding “Stimulus” information before the election

Posted on by

Mr Barack Hussein Obama, purveyor of the most transparent administration ever.

From The Weekly Standard:

The $831,000,000,000 economic “stimulus” that President Obama spearheaded and signed into law requires his administration to release quarterly reports on its effects.  But “the most transparent administration in the history of our country” is now four reports behind schedule and has so far not released any reports whatsoever in 2012.  Its most recent quarterly report is for the quarter than ended on June 30, 2011.

This is purposeful.  This is an abrogation.  But for close to the fiftieth time in the history of my blog, I write: this information is intentionally not covered by the DEM/MSM.

And, again, were this a Republican administration, this story would have covered for the next month, daily and nightly, plastered on front pages nationally, with the concomitant political shrieks for pogroms and criminal investigations.

BZ

And while I’m on the subject, I couldn’t pass this one up either:

 

 

 Share

Tuesday’s presidential debate: the TRUTH actually comes out now

Posted on by

Despite what you may hear or read on the DEM/MSM — who are doing their level best to confuse, obfuscate, divert, misdirect and outright lie — things are not going quite so well for Mr Barack Hussein Obama.

First: those pesky polling numbers that the Left are trying to avoid like the proverbial plague: 51% would vote for Romney, 45% would vote for Obama.  Hello?  Can you say the word “plummet”?  I knew you could.

Second: it turns out that, factually, the Demorats acquired more speaking time than the Republicans.  How does that happen — ? (The sound of my hand slapping my forehead.)

Third: Candy Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times.  She interrupted Obama 9 times.  In the first debate, Lehrer interrupted Romney 15 times and Obama 5 times.  Nah.  No bias there whatsoever.

Fourth: the University of Colorado predicts there is a 77% chance Romney will win the popular vote.  The poll has accurately predicted every presidential election since it was developed in 1980.

Fifth: the White House itself contradicted the president’s debate statement about his early declaration of the Benghazi attack as an act of terrorism.

Sixth: Mr Obama “spiked the football” in his glee over the assassination of Osama bin Laden.  And political glee it was.  His administration swore that al Qaeda was “on the ropes” when, in fact, they were building for Benghazi.  Even Diane Feinstein (whom I voted out for Emken) — an ancient female Leftist — admits that “it appeared an intelligence mistake along with inadequate security were to blame for the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the American Embassy in Benghazi, Libya that claimed the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens, a Bay Area native, and three others.”

If al Qaeda is “on the ropes,” then WHY did the FBI announce that it recently foiled an attack on the Federal Reserve bank in New York, involving a man named  Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis as the suspect?  He wouldn’t happen to be MUSLIM, would he?  He wouldn’t happen to be linked to al Qaeda, would he?  Nah; not with a name like that.

And there wouldn’t be an online terror magazine name “Inspire,” would there?  In fact, here is Volume One.

No.  Of course not.  None of the above is true.

Just ask Mr Obama.

Because, after all, al Qaeda is “on the run” and “on the ropes” and, if Mr Obama can continue this lie, he can therefore justify the massive defense cuts he proposes.

Who needs the American military, anyway?

Who needs a debate?

Hell, who needs a vote?

Just take the presidency, Mr Obama, by fiat and EO.

BZ

 

 

 Share