Tag Archives: Obama racist

What has Obama actually accomplished? NOTHING!

Posted on by

And this video displays that fact in a way few other words or pictures can:

Mr Obama is clearly mouthing the same empty platitudes he did back in 2008.  He’s back with “promise” after “promise.”

He “promises” once again.

But what has he actually delivered?

The only difference?  Mr Obama’s hair exhibits just a bit more gray.

In the meantime, back at the ranch, Romney now takes the edge in “favorability.”

Gallup: 51% to 46%, Romney.

Rasmussen: 50% to 46%, Romney.

Obama supporters continue to threaten Romney with death, backed by riots.

In a global poll, Obama is massively ahead.  That said, I couldn’t care less what Europe thinks of the United States, nor any other country for that matter.  If Europe, for example, so elevates and adores Mr Obama then they can have him, and I suggest he move immediately — upon his defeat — to another continent.

Which he won’t do, of course, because he won’t place his very narrow ass where his mouth trots.

Mr Obama’s “doctrine“?  Here is the actual “Obama Doctrine“:

Embolden our enemies. Undermine our friends. Diminish our country.

I used to think that my former governor, Gray Davis, was the emptiest of political empty suits.

Mr Obama has since taken that title by leaps and bounds.

Empty Suit: thy name IS Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

BZ

P.S.
I’m not cocky; I’m confident.  Mr Obama is a one term president.

 

 

 Share

From Obama’s Thursday “performance” on Comedy Central: “If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.”

Posted on by

“Optimal“?

I know it’s Comedy Central, but you’ve now declared the deaths of four Americans to be less meaningful than “optimal”?

Mr Obama, you are absolutely disgusting and hideous.  You don’t even rate an F word.

Just go away and let the adults handle things, you petulant, self-centered, preening child.

BZ

UPDATE:
The mother of an American diplomat killed during a terrorist raid on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has hit out at Barack Obama for describing the attack as ‘not optimal’, saying: ‘My son is not very optimal – he is also very dead.’

 

 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

What if Obama loses?

Posted on by

There have already been prognostications made with this eventuality:

New Threats to Riot if Obama Loses Election

Despite the issue receiving national media attention, Obama supporters continue to threaten to riot if Mitt Romney wins the presidential election, raising the prospect of civil unrest if Obama fails to secure a second term.

The new threats continue to dominate Twitter and the vast majority make no reference to press coverage of the issue over the last week, illustrating the fact that they are a legitimate expression of how many Obama voters plan to respond if Romney comes out on top, and not merely a reaction to media hype.

Louis Farrakhan, of course, also weighed in, in terms of “keeping America white.”

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Speaking in Charlotte on Sunday, Louis Farrakhan had this advice for President Barack Obama:

Fight.

“Mr. President, you’ve got to realize you’re fighting for your presidential life,” the leader of the Nation of Islam told an estimated gathering of 6,000 at Bojangles’ Coliseum. “You’re fighting for your vision of the Democratic Party and the country.”

In marking the 17th anniversary of his 1995 Million Man March on Washington, D.C., Farrakhan was scheduled to talk about the economy and a Muslim “blueprint for ending need and want.”

But with the Nov. 6 election three weeks away, the 79-year-old Muslim leader changed his mind, instead offering advice to the president and country, describing a United States still ruptured by race.

Then Farrakhan spent two hours hammering at racial – some critics will call them racist – themes.

To begin, the highly controversial Farrakhan accused Republicans of having “overt” racist motives in their opposition to Obama, the country’s first black president. He attacked a political process that he says is controlled by monied interests and wants “to keep America white.”

And while he claimed Obama’s Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, had lied about his real positions on most major issues throughout the first presidential debate, he also criticized Obama’s low-energy response.

So:

What happens if America actually votes against Obama?

BZ

 

 

 Share