Tag Archives: federal incompetence

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

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

Tuesday’s second Presidential Debate: Obama vs Romney

Posted on by

I believe you can count on these points:

1. Obama will come out swinging;
2. Romney had better have some major details in re his plans;
3. Obama cannot afford to be seen as obnoxious as Biden; he will be treading a fine line;

I will be blogging on this and updating as events occur.

It has started.  Live-stream here.  I am watching this very specific live stream.

Romney, in terms of energy, just made some massive factual points against Obama.

Romney: “That wasn’t a question, that’s a statement.”  NICE.

Governor Romney: time to REMIND Mr Obama that HIS budgets were roundly REFUSED by BOTH the Demorats and Republicans.  Mr Obama cannot even achieve ONE budgetary vote??  Paul Ryan actually ACQUIRED votes for HIS budget.

Mr Obama: where is YOUR budget?

Apparently Mr Obama learned nothing from Joe Biden.  Smirks and smiles whilst Romney speaks won’t play very well.

Obama’s voice is clearly an octave over what he normally displays.  Mr Romney’s is not.

More smiling by Mr Obama quite like Joe Biden.  He ought not to go there.

Romney stepped away from Bush.  And well he should have.  I disagreed with Mr Bush on any number of domestic and foreign issued.  Bush spent like a drunken sailor.  I can only hope that Romney will NOT.

Mr Obama still speaks in an octave above, yet with the “points” that Obama made, Mr Romney did not go for the “throat.”

Mr Obama EXPOSED his throat for you, sir.

THANK YOU!  You just KILLED Mr Obama with the FOODSTAMP FIGURES!

Obama: “our crossings are lower than they have been in 40 years.”

Hello?  Because our economy is the WORST that it has been in years!

Romney: Obama said he wanted those who were “normal” to NOT be challenged on the borders.

How about, Mr Obama, our CITIZENS to NOT be challenged when they try to BOARD AN AMERICAN COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT?

Mr Obama “takes the failure”?

Hello??  The first ambassador assassinated since 1979?

A strategy of “leading from behind”?

“Grieving with the families?”  You sent them FORM LETTERS, you bastard.

When the audience applauds for a Candy Crowley point, that audience is IN THE TANK for Mr Obama.  Particularly when they were ADMONISHED to NOT make applause.

Romney, now, here, was particularly quiescent.

And FINALLY Romney mentions FAST & FURIOUS.  And Candy Crowley did her best to diffuse this point.

Romney still mentions China as a “currency manipulator.”

Obama says we should “LOWER OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE” — ??

Candy Crowley cut Mitt Romney off.

“That government creates jobs.  That’s not what I believe.”

You LIE, Mr Obama!  You LIE!

No rebuttal?  Clearly biased.

Per ABC News: “President Obama will come out with a narrow win.”

BZ

 

 

 Share

Obama: won’t get fooled again

Posted on by

Mr Obama wasn’t happy, nor were his Minions, following his first debate with Mitt Romney.

Quotes back then included CNN reporting that Obama said: “Basically they’re keeping me indoors all the time. It’s a drag.  They’re making me do my homework.”

Obama was predominantly disinterested, just as he has been for the bulk of his presidency.  He is too damned good for the job which, truly, when you bottom-line it all, is a Truism we all need to recognize.

“This time,” however, things may be different.  Mr Obama has allegedly been “cramming” for the past four days.

Though, according to the Chicago Tribune, Mr Obama is going to face some significant challenges as the topics include, in the second debate this Tuesday, both foreign and domestic policies:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Losing ground to Republican Mitt Romney on a host of issues, President Barack Obama faces a serious challenge to put his re-election bid back on track when the two men face off on Tuesday in their second debate.

Obama’s passive performance in their first debate two weeks ago and Romney’s subsequent surge have raised expectations for a more fiery encounter at New York’s Hofstra University.

Mr Obama’s handlers are indicating he’s going to come out fast and furious himself — though he’ll be doing his level best to completely avoid Fast & Furious itself.  He’ll simply be more aggressive.  However, one very interesting point from Nancy Cordes of CBS News:

But also because if the Obama campaign is looking for a comeback, a way to turn around his performance from the first debate, it’s challenging. He can’t go after Gov. Romney as much as he would in a normal debate format because he’s also is going to have to be working on connecting with the members of the audience and dealing with the questions they are asking.

Your thoughts or predictions on tomorrow’s debate?

BZ

 

 Share

“Do black people support Obama because he’s black?”

Posted on by

Only idiot GOWP Caucasoids would be sufficiently daft to even pose this question.

Yet, according to the Associated Press, this is a question of heft, bearing and serious import:

Are black people supporting Obama mainly because he’s black? If race is just one factor in blacks’ support of Obama, does that make them racist? Can blacks’ support for Obama be compared with white voters who may favor his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, because he’s white?

Let me make this simple for the Leftists who may occasionally visit.

In a word: yes.

Not just regular yes, but extra-crispy yes.

BZ

 

 

 Share