maddogs hideaway
Welcome to Maddogs hideaway, The poormans predictor. Somedays I just feel like ridin...!
About Me
- Name: MADDOG10
- Location: Beautiful Florida
- Country: United States
- Interests: restoring old cars, winning the lottery, avid football fan, and riding my motorcycles... Both (Harleys)...!!
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Thursday, September 26, 2013
And the walls keep tumbling down..
Scarborough admits Obama wasn’t ready to be president; sold to us like bag of chips
MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough is waking up to the fact that despite all the hype that accompanied President Barack Obama when he made his 2008 presidential run, he wasn’t ready for primetime.
“Barack Obama has proven over the past five years that he wasn’t ready to be president of the United States,” Scarborough said on his show Tuesday, according to Newsmax. “And he proves it still today.”
Scarborough said Obama “came out of nowhere” as a freshman senator, and “a couple years later, people elected him president of the United States.”
Obama served less than a decade in the Illinois Senate with a less-than-stellar record that included numerous instances of voting “present.”
He followed that distinguished service with less than a full term in the U.S. Senate, also unimpressive. Most of his time there seemed to be spent running for the presidency.
Yet, solely on the basis that “Barack Obama was against the [Iraq] war,” the Democratic Party “went out and sold him like he was a bag of potato chips, they marketed him [and] he becomes president of the United States,” Scarborough said.
To illustrate his point, the TV host challenged guest Donny Deutsch to “name me a major piece of legislation that Barack Obama passed in the United States Senate, that would suggest that he knew how to work in the United States Senate and would be an effective president of the United States.”
Neither Deutsch nor any of Scarborough’s other guests could.
“You have people that come out of nowhere and get in the Senate. They don’t want to be in the Senate. They don’t want to work for the people that hired them. Immediately, they start running for president of the United States a week after they get to the Senate,” Scarborough said, referring not only to Obama but also U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, who Scarborough described Wednesday as a “phony narcissist.”
Scarborough’s comparison of Cruz’s meteoric rise to Obama’s is misplaced.
The president has demonstrated time after time that he tends to take the path of least resistance. When he spoke against the Iraq war, he was among the majority of lawmakers — including many in his own party.
Cruz’s crusade to defund Obamacare is in opposition to his own party leaders. An aide to U.S. Sen. John McCain said that his boss “f**king hates” Cruz, according to The Daily Caller, and The New York Times reported that U.S. Peter King, R-N.Y., called Cruz a “fraud” who promotes “government terrorism.”
Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz described Cruz, a former student, as “off-the-charts brilliant.” Obama has steadfastly refused to release any of his college records.
Prior to being a lawmaker, Obama worked in a law firm and as a community organizer. Cruz actually ran things, directing the Texas Solicitor General’s Office for five years, serving as his state’s first Hispanic solicitor general and the youngest in the United States.
Cruz also served as the director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Federal Trade Commission, and in the private sector, Cruz led the Morgan, Lewis and Bockius law firm’s U.S. Supreme Court and national appellate litigation practice while a partner there.
But did I mention? Obama was also a community organizer.
“You can go one after another after another,” Scarborough said. “This doesn’t work. The Barack Obama way does not work.”
I agree, but Cruz is not a part of this ilk.
In 2008, GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was more qualified for the presidency. She had successfully run a city and a state. Obama, on the other hand, had only run for office.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
I wonder if a Low informed Troll can tell the difference?
"When a man is getting better he understands more and more clearly the evil that is still left in him. When a man is getting worse he understands his own badness less and less. A moderately bad man knows he is not very good: a thoroughly bad man thinks he is all right. This is common sense, really. You understand sleep when you are awake, not while you are sleeping. You can see mistakes in arithmetic when your mind is working properly: while you are making them you cannot see them. You can understand the nature of drunkenness when you are sober, not when you are drunk. Good people know about both good and evil: bad people do not know about either." -
C.S. Lewis
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Monday, September 23, 2013
Fact: Democrats and their unlimited VALUES.
Democrat Scandals Scandals involving leaders of the Democrat Party
William Jefferson Clinton- Impeached by the House of Representatives over allegations of perjury and obstruction of justice, but acquitted by the Senate. Scandals include Whitewater - Travelgate Gennifer Flowersgate - Filegate - Vince Fostergate - Whitewater Billing Recordsgate - Paula Jonesgate- Lincoln Bedroomgate - Donations from Convicted Drug and Weapons Dealersgate - Lippogate - Chinagate - The Lewinsky Affair - Perjury and Jobs for Lewinskygate - Kathleen Willeygate - Web Hubbell Prison Phone Callgate - Selling Military Technology to the Chinesegate - Jaunita Broaddrick Gate - Lootergate - Pardongate
Edward Moore Kennedy - Democrat - U. S. Senator from Massachusetts. Pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident, after his car plunged off a bridge on Chappaquiddick Island killing passenger Mary Jo Kopechne.
Barney Frank - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Massachusetts from 1981 to present. Admitted to having paid Stephen L. Gobie, a male prostitute, for sex and subsequently hiring Gobie as his personal assistant. Gobie used the congressman's Washington apartment for prostitution. A move to expel Frank from the House of Representatives failed and a motion to censure him failed.
DNC - The Federal Election Commission imposed $719,000 in fines against participants in the 1996 Democratic Party fundraising scandals involving contributions from China, Korea and other foreign sources. The Federal Election Commission said it decided to drop cases against contributors of more than $3 million in illegal DNC contributions because the respondents left the country or the corporations are defunct.
Sandy Berger - Democrat - National Security Advisor during the Clinton Administration. Berger fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents and handwritten notes from the National Archives during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings.
Robert Torricelli - Democrat - Withdrew from the 2002 Senate race with less than 30 days before the election because of controversy over personal gifts he took from a major campaign donor and questions about campaign donations from 1996.
James McGreevey - Democrat - New Jersey Governor . Admitted to having a gay affair. Resigned after allegations of sexual harassment, rumors of being blackmailed on top of fundraising investigations and indictments.
Jesse Jackson - Democrat - Democratic candidate for President. Admitted to having an extramarital affair and fathering a illegitimate child.
Gary Condit - Democrat - US Democratic Congressman from California. Condit had an affair with an intern. Condit, covered up the affair and lied to police after she went missing. No charges were ever filed against Condit. Her remains were discovered in a Washington DC park..
Eliot Spitzer- Democrat - New York governor - resigned from office after being tied to a prostitution ring.
Sowande Ajumoke Omokunde - Democrat - the son of newly elected U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, was booked on charges of criminal damage to property for allegedly slashing tires on 20 vans and cars rented by the Republican Party for use in Election Day voter turnout efforts.
Daniel David Rostenkowski - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Illinois from 1959 to 1995. Indicted on 17 felony charges- pleaded guilty to two counts of misuse of public funds and sentenced to seventeen months in federal prison.
Melvin Jay Reynolds - Democrat U.S. Representative from Illinois from 1993 to 1995. Convicted on sexual misconduct and obstruction of justice charges and sentenced to five years in prison.
Wayne Bryant - Democrat NJ state senator- was convicted was found guilty on all 12 counts against him including bribery and pension fraud.
Charles Coles Diggs, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Michigan from 1955 to 1980. Convicted on eleven counts of mail fraud and filing false payroll forms- sentenced to three years in prison.
George Rogers - Democrat - Massachusetts State House of Representatives from 1965 to 1970. Member of Massachusetts State Senate from 1975 to 1978. Convicted of bribery in 1978 and sentenced to two years in prison.
Don Siegelman - Democrat Governor Alabama - indicted in a bid-rigging scheme involving a maternity-care program. The charges accused Siegelman and his former chief of staff of helping Tuscaloosa physician Phillip Bobo rig bids. Siegelman was accused of moving $550,000 from the state education budget to the State Fire College in Tuscaloosa so Bobo could use the money to pay off a competitor for a state contract for maternity care.
John Murtha, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania. Implicated in the Abscam sting, in which FBI agents impersonating Arab businessmen offered bribes to political figures; Murtha was cited as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Otto Kerner - Democrat governor of Illinois from 1961 to 1968 was jailed after the manager of two horse-racing tracks admitted to bribing the then- governor; charges were filed after Kerner left office he was convicted in 1973.
Dan Walker - Democrat governor of Illinois from1973 to 1977 served less than two years of a seven-year sentence for receiving improper loans a decade after leaving office.
Gerry Eastman Studds - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Massachusetts from 1973 to 1997. The first openly gay member of Congress. Censured by the House of Representatives for having sexual relations with a teenage House page.
Hiram Monserrate- Queens City Councilman and state Senator-elect - who has claimed to be an advocate of victims of domestic violence - was arrested for breaking a glass over his girlfriend's face. Monserrate, 41, a former cop, won election to the state Senate as a Democrat in November 2008.
James C. Green - Democrat - North Carolina State House of Representatives from 1961 to 1977. Charged with accepting a bribe from an undercover FBI agent, but was acquitted. Convicted of tax evasion in 1997.
Frederick Richmond - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New York from 1975 to 1982. Arrested in Washington, D.C., in 1978 for soliciting sex from a minor and from an undercover police officer - pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. Also - charged with tax evasion, marijuana possession, and improper payments to a federal employee - pleaded guilty.
Raymond Lederer - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania from 1977 to 1981. Implicated in the Abscam sting - convicted of bribery and sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000.
Harrison Arlington Williams, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Senator from New Jersey from 1959 to 1970. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Allegedly accepted an 18% interest in a titanium mine. Convicted of nine counts of bribery, conspiracy, receiving an unlawful gratuity, conflict of interest, and interstate travel in aid of racketeering. Sentenced to three years in prison and fined $50,000.
Frank Thompson, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New Jersey from 1955 to 1980. Implicated in the Abscam sting, convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges. Sentenced to three years in prison
Michael Joseph Myers - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania from 1976 to 1980. Implicated in the Abscam sting - convicted of bribery and conspiracy; sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000; expelled from the House of Representatives on October 2, 1980.
John Michael Murphy - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New York from 1963 to 1981. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Convicted of conspiracy, conflict of interest, and accepting an illegal gratuity. Sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000.
John Wilson Jenrette, Jr - Democrat - U.S. Representative from South Carolina from 1975 to 1980. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges and sentenced to prison
Neil Goldschmidt - Democrat - Oregon governor. Admitted to having an illegal sexual relationship with a 14-year-old teenager while he was serving as Mayor of Portland.
Alcee Lamar Hastings - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Florida. Impeached and removed from office as federal judge in 1989 over bribery charges.
Marion Barry - Democrat - mayor of Washington, D.C., from 1979 to 1991 and again from 1995 to 1999. Convicted of cocaine possession after being caught on videotape smoking crack cocaine. Sentenced to six months in prison.
Mario Biaggi - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New York from 1969 to 1988. Indicted on federal charges that he had accepted bribes in return for influence on federal contracts.Convicted of obstructing justice and accepting illegal gratuities. Tried in 1988 on federal racketeering charges and convicted on 15 felony counts.
Lee Alexander - Democrat - Mayor of Syracuse, N.Y. from 1970 to 1985. Was indicted over a $1.5 million kickback scandal. Pleaded guilty to racketeering and tax evasion charges. Served six years in prison.
Bill Campbell - Democrat - Mayor of Atlanta. Indicted and charged with fraud over claims he accepted improper payments from contractors seeking city contracts.
Frank Ballance - Democrat - Congressman North Carolina. Pleaded guilty to one charge of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and money laundering related to mishandling of money by his charitable foundation.
Hazel O'Leary - Democrat - Secretary of Energy during the Clinton Administration - O'leary took trips all over the world as Secretary with as many 50 staff members and at times rented a plane, which was used by Madonna during her concert tours.
Lafayette Thomas - Democrat - Candidate for Tennessee State House of Representatives in 1954. Sheriff of Davidson County, from 1972 to 1990. Indicted in federal court on 54 counts of abusing his power as sheriff. Pleaded guilty to theft and mail fraud; sentenced to five years in prison.
Mary Rose Oakar - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Ohio from 1977 to 1993. Pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor charges of funneling $16,000 through fake donors.
David Giles - Democrat - candidate for U.S. Representative from Washington in 1986 and 1990. Convicted in June 2000 of child rape.
Gary Siplin - Democrat state senator Florida- found guilty of third-degree grand theft of $5,000 or more, a felony, and using services of employees for his candidacy.
Edward Mezvinsky - Democrat -U.S. Representative from Iowa from 1973 to 1977. Indicted on 56 federal fraud charges.
Lena Swanson - Democrat - Member of Washington State Senate in 1997. Pleaded guilty to charges of soliciting unlawful payments from veterans and former prisoners of war.
Abraham J. Hirschfeld - Democrat - candidate in Democratic primary for U.S. Senator from New York in 1974 and 1976. Offered Paula Jones $1 million to drop her sexual harassment lawsuit against President Bill Clinton. Convicted in 2000 of trying to hire a hit man to kill his business partner.
Henry Cisneros - Democrat - U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from 1993 to 1997. Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of lying to the FBI.
James A. Traficant Jr. - Member of House of Representatives from Ohio. Expelled from Congress after being convicted of corruption charges. Sentenced today to eight years in prison for accepting bribes and kickbacks.
John Doug Hays - Democrat - member of Kentucky State Senate from 1980 to 1982 Found guilty of mail fraud for submitting false campaign reports stemming from an unsuccessful run for judge. He was sentenced to six months in prison to be followed by six months of home confinement and three years of probation.
Henry J. Cianfrani - Democrat - Pennsylvania State Senate from 1967 to 1976. Convicted on federal charges of racketeering and mail fraud for padding his Senate payroll. Sentenced to five years in federal prison.
David Hall - Democrat - Governor of Oklahoma from 1971 to 1975. Indicted on extortion and conspiracy charges. Convicted and sentenced to three years in prison.
John A. Celona - Democrat - A former state senator was charged with the three counts of mail fraud. Federal prosecutors accused him of defrauding the state and collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars from CVS Corp. and others while serving in the legislature. Celona has agreed to plead guilty to taking money from the CVS pharmacy chain and other companies that had interest in legislation. Under the deal, Celona agreed to cooperate with investigators. He faces up to five years in federal prison on each of the three counts and a $250,000 fine
Allan Turner Howe - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Utah from 1975 to 1977. Arrested for soliciting a policewoman posing as a prostitute.
Jerry Cosentino - Democrat - Illinois State Treasurer. Pleaded guilty to bank fraud - fined $5,000 and sentenced to nine months home confinement.
Joseph Waggonner Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Louisiana from 1961 to 19 79. Arrested in Washington, D.C. for soliciting a policewoman posing as a prostitute
Albert G. Bustamante - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Texas from 1985 to 1993. Convicted in 1993 on racketeering and bribery charges and sentenced to prison.
Lawrence Jack Smith - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Florida from 1983 to 1993. Sentenced to three months in federal prison for tax evasion.
David Lee Walters - Democrat - Governor of Oklahoma from 1991 to 1995. Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor election law violation.
James Guy Tucker, Jr. - Democrat - Governor of Arkansas from 1992 to 1996. Resigned in July 1996 after conviction on federal fraud charges as part of the Whitewater investigation.
Walter Rayford Tucker - Democrat - Mayor of Compton, California from 1991 to 1992; U.S. Representative from California from 1993 to 1995. Sentenced to 27 months in prison for extortion and tax evasion.
William McCuen - Democrat - Secretary of State of Arkansas from 1985 to 1995. Admitted accepting kickbacks from two supporters he gave jobs, and not paying taxes on the money. Admitted to conspiring with a political consultant to split $53,560 embezzled from the state in a sham transaction. He was indicted on corruption charges. Pleaded guilty to felony counts tax evasion and accepting a kickback. Sentenced to 17 years in prison.
Walter Fauntroy - Democrat - Delegate to U.S. Congress from the District of Columbia from 1971 to 1991. Charged in federal court with making false statements on financial disclosure forms. Pleaded guilty to one felony count and sentenced to probation.
Carroll Hubbard, Jr. - Democrat - Kentucky State Senate from 1968 to 1975 and U.S. Representative from Kentucky from 1975 to 1993. Pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud the Federal Elections Commission and to theft of government property; sentenced to three years in prison.
Joseph Kolter - Democrat - member of Pennsylvania State House of Representatives from 1969 to 1982 and U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania from 1983 to 1993. Indicted by a Federal grand jury on five felony charges of embezzlement at the U.S. House post office. Pleaded guilty.
Webster Hubbell - Democrat - Chief Justice of Arkansas State Supreme Court in 1983. Pleaded guilty to federal mail fraud and tax evasion charges - sentenced to 21 months in prison.
Nicholas Mavroules - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Massachusetts from 1979 to 1993. Pleaded guilty to charges of tax fraud and accepting gratuities while in office.
Carl Christopher Perkins - Democrat - Kentucky State House of Representatives from 1981 to 1984 and U.S. Representative from Kentucky from 1985 to 1993. Pleaded guilty to bank fraud in connection with the House banking scandal. Perkins wrote overdrafts totaling about $300,000. Pleaded guilty to charges of filing false statements with the Federal Election Commission and false financial disclosure reports. Sentenced to 21 months in prison.
Richard Hanna - Democrat - U.S. Representative from California from 1963 to 1974. Received payments of about $200,000 from a Korean businessman in what became known as the "Koreagate" influence buying scandal. Pleaded guilty and sentenced to federal prison.
Angelo Errichetti - Democrat - New Jersey State Senator was sentenced to six years in prison and fined $40,000 for his involvement in Abscam.
Daniel Baugh Brewster - Democrat - U.S. Senator from Maryland. Indicted on charges of accepting illegal gratuity while in Senate.
Thomas Joseph Dodd - Democrat - U.S. Senator from Connecticut. Censured by the Senate for financial improprieties, having diverted $116,000 in campaign and testimonial funds to his own use
Edward Fretwell Prichard, Jr. - Democrat - Delegate to Democratic National Convention from Kentucky. Convicted of vote fraud in federal court in connection with ballot-box stuffing. Served five months in prison.
Jerry Springer - Democrat - Resigned from Cincinnati City Council in 1974 after admitting to paying a prostitute with a personal check, which was found in a police raid on a massage parlor.
Guy Hamilton Jones, Sr. - Democrat -Arkansas State Senate. Convicted on federal tax charges and expelled from the Arkansas Senate.
Daniel Flood - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania from 1945 to 1947, 1949 to 1953 and 1955 to 1980. Pleaded guilty to a conspiracy charge involving payoffs and sentenced to probation.
Otto Kerner, Jr - Democrat -Governor of Illinois from 1961 to 1968. While serving as Governor, he and another official made a gain of over $300,000 in a stock deal. Convicted on 17 counts of bribery, conspiracy, perjury, and related charges. Sentenced to three years in federal prison and fined $50,000.
George Crockett, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Michigan. Served four months in federal prison for contempt of court following his defense of a Communist leader on trial for advocating the overthrow of the government.
Cornelius Edward Gallagher - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New Jersey from 1959 to 1973. Indicted on federal charges of income tax evasion, conspiracy, and perjury
Mark B. Jimenez - Democrat fundraiser - sentenced to 27 months in prison on charges of tax evasion and conspiracy to defraud the United States and commit election financing offenses.
Bobby Lee Rush - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Illinois. As a Black Panther, spent six months in prison on a weapons charge.
Bolley ''Bo'' Johnson - Democrat - Former Florida House Speaker - received a two-year term for tax evasion.
Roger L. Green - Democrat - Brooklyn Democrat Assemblyman. Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for accepting travel reimbursement for trips he did not pay for and was sentenced to fines and probation.
Gloria Davis - Democrat - Bronx assemblywoman. Pleaded guilty to second-degree bribe-taking.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Friday, September 20, 2013
Admiral admits Special Ops ordered to 'hold in place' during Benghazi attack
Admiral admits Special Ops ordered to ‘hold in place’ during Benghazi attack
A special operations team, geared up and about to offer assistance to the Americans trapped at the besieged foreign mission in Benghazi, Libya, was ordered to “hold in place,” a witness testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Thursday.
Adm. Mike Mullen, a member of the Benghazi Accountability Review Board, testified that although technically no “stand down” order was sent to the special forces team, the unit was nonetheless ordered to “hold in place,” according to Breitbart News.
Breitbart reported:
Testifying before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Admiral Mike Mullen said that the direction given to Special Operations Command Africa commander Lt. Col Gibson was to “hold in place” on the night of the attacks.
Gibson is the boss of Gregory Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya who had testified that a “stand down” order was given to Special Forces who wanted to help Americans who were under assault in Libya.
Whether there was a stand down order has been part of an ongoing debate between administration officials and those who were in Libya during the attack. Those on the ground have vehemently insisted that a stand down order was issued. The administration has steadfastly denied it.
Let’s put an end to the semantics. Whether it was a “stand down” order or a “hold in place” order is of little consequence. It’s a distinction without a difference.
The result was the same. Americans who had every right to expect aid from their government were denied it, and four brave souls are dead. Still a “phony scandal?”
Thursday, September 19, 2013
This shows what a Democrats character really is..!
Democrats WALK OUT of Hearing With Parents of Benghazi Victims
Earlier today, an important hearing regarding the attack on Benghazi was being held by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The parents of the Benghazi heroes who died fighting to protect the US consulate were about to speak.
Then, in a turn of events that’s disgusting even by DC standards, most of the Democrats stood up and walked out. Apparently, they were either protesting or trying to show disrespect — either way, if there was any honor in their districts at all, this would end their careers.
A picture from Rep. Issa’s Twitter account and a list of the names of the congressmen who left is listed on this page. Disgusting. Spread this far and wide — their names should be known and shamed.
Here’s the image from Issa:
You have to admit, Issa has been fighting for the truth even without support from the GOP establishment. He might not be perfect, but he deserves recognition for his work on getting to the truth about Benghazi.
Here’s the list of people who walked out:
Carolyn Maloney, NY Danny Davis, IL Eleanor Holmes Norton, DC Gerald E. Connolly, VA Jim Cooper, TN John Tierney, MA Mark Pocan, WI Matt Cartwright, PA Michelle Lujan Grisham, NM Peter Welch, VT Stephen Lynch, MA Steven Horsford, NV Tammy Duckworth, IL Tony Cardenas, CA William Lacy Clay, MO
HT to WZ and the Gateway Pundit.
Remember, last week John Kerry stopped the Benghazi survivors from being even questioned by congress.
Earlier, Obama even hid the survivors and had them change their names with threats towards their families.
The entire idea of the cover up is to defend Obama and Hillary so they can remain unscathed from their illegal plan to arm Syrians through Libya and their workings with radical Islamic groups.
Here are 6 facts that show how absurd Hillary’s handling of the entire situation was. It’s disgusting.
Spread this article far and wide on Facebook and Twitter — their names should be known and shamed.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Gun Violence is Not a Republican Problem, It's a Democratic Problem
Gun Violence is Not a Republican Problem, It’s a Democratic Problem
Forget Wal-Mart and skip your local gun show. The murderers of tomorrow will not be found wearing orange vests at your local sporting goods store. They won’t have NRA memberships or trophies on their walls.
You won’t find them in America. Look for them in Obamerica.
67% of firearm murders took place in the country’s 50 largest metro areas. The 62 cities in those metro areas have a firearm murder rate of 9.7, more than twice the national average. Among teenagers the firearm murder rate is 14.6 or almost three times the national average.
Those are the crowded cities of Obamerica. Those are the places with the most restrictive gun control laws and the highest crime rates. And many of them have been run by Democrats and their political machines for almost as long as they have been broken.
Obama won every major city in the election, except for Jacksonville and Salt Lake City. And the higher the death rate, the bigger his victory.
He won New Orleans by 80 to 17 where the murder rate is ten times higher than the national average. He won Detroit, where the murder rate of 53 per 100,000 people is the second highest in the country and twice as high as any country in the world, including the Congo and South Africa. He won it 73 to 26. And then he celebrated his victory in Chicago where the murder rate is three times the statewide average.
These places aren’t America. They’re Obamerica.
In 2006, the 54% of the population living in those 50 metro areas was responsible for 67% of armed killings nationwide. Those are disproportionate numbers especially when you consider that for the people living in most of those cities walking into a store and legally buying a gun is all but impossible.
Mayors of Obamerican cities blame guns because it’s easier than blaming people and now the President of Obamerica has turned to the same shameless tactic. The NRA counters that people kill people, but that’s exactly why Obamerican leaders would rather talk about the guns.
Chicago, the capital of Obamerica, is a city run by gangs and politicians. It has 68,000 gang members, four times the number of police officers. Chicago politicians solicit the support of gang members in their campaigns, accepting laundered contributions from them, hiring their members and tipping them off about upcoming police raids. And their biggest favor to the gang bosses is doing nothing about the epidemic of gang violence.
80% of Chicago’s murders are gang-related. But in 1999 when a bill came up in the Illinois State Senate to charge anyone carrying out a firearm attack on school property as an adult, a law that would have largely affected gang members, the future leader of Obamerica voted present. Had he not voted present, it is doubtful that he would have been reelected in an area where gang leaders wield a great deal of influence.
The majority of murders in the cities with the worst homicide rates are gang-related. And while it isn’t always possible to be certain whether a killing was gang-related, the majority of homicide victims in city after city have been found to have criminal records.
In 2010, there were 11,078 firearm homicides in the United States and over 2,000 known gang-related killings, over 90% of which are carried out with firearms. Since 1981, Los Angeles alone has had 16,000 gang related homicides. That’s more than twice the number of Americans killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is what Obamerica looks like. It’s a place where life is cheap and illegal guns are as available as illegal drugs. It’s the war that we aren’t talking about, because it’s easier to talk about the inanimate objects being used to fight that war.
There are, as John Edwards said, two Americas. America is a country that runs pretty well. And then there’s Obamerica. Not all of Obamerica is broken, but a lot of it is. America does not have a gun violence problem. Obamerica does. And Obamerica has a gun violence problem for the same reason that it has a drug problem and a broken family problem.
Democratic leaders and machines, combined with social workers and justice crusaders have run Obamerica into the ground. Obamerican cities used to be the homes of industry and progress. Now they’re places where young Black and Hispanic men kill each other in growing numbers.
America does not need gun control. It is a mostly law-abiding place. And gun control cannot help Obamerica. Not when its murder rate is driven by gangs who have no trouble obtaining anything; whether it’s legal in the United States or not.
This country does not need to have a conversation about how many bullets should go in a clip. It does need to have a conversation about how many parents should go in a family. It needs to talk about the ghettos of Obamerica and have a serious conversation about broken families and generational dependency.
Obama has become a role model to millions of people in the black community. If anyone can address these problems, it’s him. But instead of trying to solve the problems of Obamerica, instead of doing something about the high levels of unemployment, the broken families and the glamorization of drug dealing and violent crime, he wimped out and picked a fight with rural America.
AIDS prevention was sabotaged by the claim that the disease was a general problem spreading through the population. It wasn’t. Neither is gun violence.
Adam Lanza is as much of a poster boy for gun violence, as Ryan White was for AIDS. A better poster boy for gun violence might be Jay-Z, who boasts of having been a drug dealer and claims to have shot his brother at the age of 12. The drug dealer to millionaire rapper is the Horatio Alger story of Obamerica. And Jay-Z can be seen partying with Obama.
If Obama really wants to get serious about gun violence, then all he has to do is turn to the man standing next to him. But Obama, like every Chicago politician before him, don’t want to end the violence. The death toll is profitable, not just for rappers writing bad poetry about dealing drugs and shooting rivals, but for the politicians atop that heap who score money and gain power by using the problems of Obamerica as some sort of call to conscience for the rest of the country.
That’s what Obama is doing now. Hiding behind Newtown and adorable little kids is the grim specter of Obamerica’s death toll. It’s buried inside the gruesome figures of how many Americans are shot each year issued as an indictment against the entire country in general and gun owners in particular. But those numbers are not an indictment of America. They are an indictment of Democratic mayors and liberal social policy. They are an indictment of Obama.
We need to set aside the same old tired social justice rhetoric and have a serious conversation about what is wrong with New Orleans, Detroit and Chicago. And we need to do it before it’s too late.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Where do you stand?
Our flag doesn't fly just because the wind moves it,
It flys with the last breath of each soldier who died
Protecting it..!
Something the occupant of the White House doesn't recognize, and Says, " It's just a bump in the road".
REMEMBER....... REMEMBER.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Barack got snookered, NO say it isn't so..!
Barack got snookered – us too!
Exclusive: Barbara Simpson ponders reason for 'wide-open invitation to a real war'
Published: 18 hours ago
Poor old Barack – accused by so many last week as having been played by Russia and Syria as he was attempting his level best to be a tough president, in charge of not only the country but with his eye on the world.
He spoke, threw down the gauntlet with his “red-line” threat and expected everyone to hop to.
Unfortunately, no one over there was scared, least of all the people who were to be the target of his threats.
Wait – wait. I take that back.
Some people everywhere were scared, and a good number of them were Americans who saw Obama’s threat against Syria as being a wide-open invitation to a real war.
You know what they were thinking – military in the air and on the ground, people shooting and getting shot and dying from that and from the bombs dropping from the sky. Comparisons to Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were rampant.
In the midst of all that was (and is) the threat of more of that poison gas Syria finally admitted it has and the possibility of a nuke dropped into the mix somewhere.
All in all, it was an ugly scenario, and for what?
Americans wanted to know, and when Barack Obama took to the TV cameras last week, they expected the president of their country to present a masterful and strong picture of what was going on and what would happen.
In other words, they wanted a leader.
I hope they weren’t holding their breath because, oh me, he did it again. Fifteen minutes or so of scripted blather, devised to capture emotion about dead children, framed with repeated personal pronouns – me, me, I, me, me – but which essentially said – nothing.
When Obama was done, we knew no more about the crisis than before he opened his mouth.
He had threatened an attack. He had sworn no boots on the ground. He had said it would be short and would accomplish the goal.
Which was?
Frighten Syria so it would never use poison gas again?
Destroy Syria’s chemical stockpile?
Enable the “rebels” to succeed in toppling Assad’s government?
Who knows?
We didn’t learn anything about goals from the speech, and we certainly didn’t learn any more from hapless Secretary of State John Kerry, who is in so far over his head that it would be laughable if it weren’t so serious.
And it is serious, because, like it or not, the Middle East is a tinderbox just waiting for the right spark to set it all off.
Iraq teeters on the edge of a breakdown of any semblance of order.
Egypt and Libya, all because of the masterful decisions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, are in their own form of chaos.
Iran is on the verge of its nuclear weapons, if it hasn’t already got them stockpiled.
Syria is in the midst of a civil war, which would leave al-Qaida in charge if Assad were toppled.
Through it all, the Muslim Brotherhood is cheering its victories at our expense – think Benghazi and Egypt – and despite that, it appears the U.S. president wants to assist the rebels in Syria to topple that government.
Does he really think that helping al-Qaida to victory will result is any semblance of regional stability?
Does he really think?
Through it all, Israel, which would be the next target along with Jordan if the rebels succeed, has remained relatively silent.
I have no doubt they’re ready with decent defense plans; I would expect no less of them. Their very survival is on the line, and while Obama mouths words of support, there aren’t many who would put money on it.
The most surreal aspect of all this is that after the immediate verbal fall-out from the speech and Kerry’s verbal gaffes, we end up with Russia’s Vladimir Putin being the ostensible hero.
He’s now running things – calling the shots and working with Syria to make the U.S. follow their lead.
He even wrote a scathing op-ed criticism of the United States that was published in the New York Times.
No reaction from our lap-dog administration, but Sen. John McCain says he’s going to write his own version for Pravda!
You go, John. That’ll show them.
What’s the matter with the people running this country that something like this can happen right under their noses and they allow it – and it doesn’t seem to bother or embarrass them in the least?!
No wonder the world laughs at us – U.S. – all because of the man in the Oval Office, a political incompetent surrounded by an administration filled with similarly unskilled political hacks.
It remains to be seen how all this plays out but it’s still a volatile situation that could, as many have projected, turn out to be a World War III of unimaginable magnitude.
As for how history will describe Obama when it tells his story, I have a summary, from Macbeth:
“… It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/barack-got-snookered-us-too/#qU1IDgEFRmTWUmZj.99
Sunday, September 15, 2013
What we've learned in the past week...
Judge Jeanine: Mr. President, you’ve been played by big, bad Vlad
What a difference a week makes. In a scathing critique of the president’s handling of the crisis in Syria, Judge Jeanine Pirro scolded President Obama on the values of leadership.
“Leaders are not born, they evolve,” Pirro said on her FoxNews show Friday. “They earn respect because of their character, integrity and credibility. Leaders are direct, clear and concise.”
Pirro cited Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan as examples of real leaders.
“Leaders don’t dither, vacillate, get boxed into corners or play games,” she said. “They make the hard decisions. They don’t pass them off on others. They understand the buck stops with them.”
Pirro said every time Obama opens his mouth he gets into trouble – even by contradicting Secretary of State John Kerry on the type and effects of a military strike on Syria.
“But enter big, bad Vlad doing the Putin pivot,” Pirro said referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin. “The Russian president throws a lifeline to both Syria’s Assad and to the president of the United States.”
Pirro said that the United States should have been able to solve this crisis on its own, adding that she doubted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ever feared an attack orchestrated by Obama.
“Mr. President, admit it: You’ve been played, been caught flat-footed by a devil that doesn’t wear Prada,” she said.
Watch Pirro’s opening statement on Fox News:
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Man robs bank in Obama costume; liberal outrage in 3, 2, 1
Man robs bank in Obama costume; liberal outrage in 3, 2, 1 . . .
Photo credit: Merrimack Police
A man wearing a President Barack Obama mask, a suit coat, tie and jeans, was recorded Wednesday morning on surveillance video robbing a Bank of America in Merrimack, N.H..
Officers responded after the man demanded money from a teller, then fled on foot with an undisclosed amount of cash, according to the Merrimack Patch.
Witnesses helped determined the direction the man traveled and police arrested John Griffin, 52, of Newport, N.H., the Patch reported. While he never pulled a gun during the robbery, he was apprehended with a semi-automatic pistol and ammunition in his possession.
Griffin was charged with robbery and is being held on $75,000 bond pending a Sept. 20 court appearance.
No word yet on whether liberals will charge Griffin with racism for mocking the president.
Friday, September 13, 2013
When a Community Organizer Goes to War
Coulter Column: When a Community Organizer Goes to War
By Ann Coulter | September 5, 2013 | 18:31 |
A A |
Oh, how I long for the days when liberals wailed that "the rest of the world" hated America, rather than now, when the rest of the world laughs at us.
With the vast majority of Americans opposing a strike against Syria, President Obama has requested that Congress vote on his powers as commander in chief under the Constitution. The president doesn't need congressional approval to shoot a few missiles into Syria, nor -- amazingly -- has he said he'll abide by such a vote, anyway.
Why is Congress even having a vote? This is nothing but a fig leaf to cover Obama's own idiotic "red line" ultimatum to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria on chemical weapons. The Nobel Peace Prize winner needs to get Congress on the record so that whatever happens, the media can blame Republicans.
No Republican who thinks seriously about America's national security interests -- by which I mean to exclude John McCain and Lindsey Graham -- can support Obama's "plan" to shoot blindly into this hornet's nest.
It would be completely different if we knew with absolute certainty that Assad was responsible for chemical attacks on his own people. (I'm still waiting to see if it was a Syrian upset about a YouTube video.)
It would be different if instead of killing a few hundred civilians, Assad had killed 5,000 civilians with poison gas in a single day, as well as tens of thousands more with chemical weapons in the past few decades.
It would be different if Assad were known to torture his own people, administer summary executions, rapes, burnings and electric shocks, often in front of the victim's wife or children.
It would be different if Assad had acted aggressively toward the United States itself, perhaps attempting to assassinate a former U.S. president or giving shelter to terrorists who had struck within the U.S. -- someone like Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood terrorist.
It would be different if Assad were stirring up trouble in the entire Middle East by, for example, paying bounties to the families of suicide bombers in other countries.
It would also be different if we could be sure that intervention in Syria would not lead to a multi-nation conflagration.
It would be different if we knew that any action against Syria would not put al-Qaida or the Muslim Brotherhood in power, but rather would result in a functioning, peaceful democracy. And it would be different if an attack on Syria would so terrify other dictators in the region that that they would instantly give up their WMDs -- say, Iran abandoning its nuclear program.
If all of that were true, this would be a military intervention worth supporting! All of that was true about Iraq, but the Democrats hysterically opposed that war. They opposed it even after all this was known to be true -- indeed, especially after it was known to be true! The loudest opponent was Barack Obama.
President Saddam Hussein of Iraq had attempted to assassinate former president George H.W. Bush. He gave shelter to Abdul Rahman Yasin, a conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He paid bounties to the families of suicide bombers in Israel.
Soon after Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, Libya's Moammar Gadhafi was so terrified of an attack on his own country, he voluntarily relinquished his WMDs -- which turned out to be far more extensive than previously imagined.
Al-Qaida not only did not take over Iraq, but got its butt handed to it in Iraq, where the U.S. and its allies killed thousands of al-Qaida fighters, including the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Iraq became the first genuine Arab democracy, holding several elections and presiding over a trial of Saddam Hussein.
Does anyone imagine that any of this would result from an Obama-led operation in Syria? How did his interventions work out in Egypt and Libya?
As for chemical weapons -- the casus belli for the current drums of war -- in a matter of hours on March 16, 1988, Saddam Hussein slaughtered roughly 5,000 Kurdish civilians in Halabja with mustard, sarin and VX gas. The victims blistered, vomited or laughed hysterically before dropping dead. Thousands more would die later from the after-effects of these poisons.
Saddam launched nearly two dozen more chemical attacks on the Kurds, resulting in at least 50,000 deaths, perhaps three times that many. That's to say nothing of the tens of thousands of Iranians Saddam killed with poison gas. Indeed, in making the case against Assad recently, Secretary of State John Kerry said his use of chemical weapons put him in the same league as "Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein."
Not even close -- but may we ask why Kerry sneered at the war that removed such a monster as Hussein?
There were endless United Nations reports and resolutions both establishing that Saddam had used chemical weapons and calling on him to give them up. (For the eighth billionth time, we did find chemical weapons in Iraq, just no "stockpiles." Those had been moved before the war, according to Saddam's own general, Georges Sada -- to Syria.)
On far less evidence, our current president accuses Assad of using chemical weapons against a fraction of the civilians provably murdered with poison gas by Saddam Hussein. So why did Obama angrily denounce the military operation that removed Hussein? Why did he call that a "war of choice"?
Obama says Assad -- unlike that great statesman Saddam Hussein -- has posed "a challenge to the world." But the world disagrees. Even our usual ally, Britain, disagrees. So Obama demands the United States act alone to stop a dictator, who -- compared to Saddam -- is a piker.
At this point, Assad is at least 49,000 dead bodies short of the good cause the Iraq War was, even if chemical weapons had been the only reason to take out Saddam Hussein.
Friday, September 13, 2013
Boehner needs non-negotiable response to Obama
Boehner needs non-negotiable response to Obama
Exclusive: Joseph Farah has plan to take political hammer from president's hand
House Speaker John Boehner wrote a column for USA Today recently that shows he doesn’t plan to stand up for the people or the Constitution in the looming fight over yet another hike in the debt limit – one that will assuredly either provide Barack Obama with the money he needs to implement nationalized health care or deny it.
Boehner just keeps repeating his goal – tying an increase in the debt limit to cuts in spending.
In other words, he has announced plans to keep doing the same thing over again expecting different results.
Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew held a press conference two weeks ago in which he laid out the very specific and clear demands of the administration: There will be no negotiations with Congress over the debt limit issue. Obama, too, evidently plans to keep doing the same thing over again, understandably expecting the same results he has achieved before – capitulations by Republicans to hand over to Obama all the borrowed money he needs to implement Obamacare and other wasteful, counterproductive and unconstitutional spending programs.
So what can Republicans who control the House do to get themselves engaged to end Obamacare, as they claim to want, and radically reduce spending?
First, I would refer you to my previous commentary on this issue titled “Not defunding is defending.” It is an important premise to understand before moving on to a Republican strategy and slogan for winning the debate.
Second, it’s clear that Obama thinks he has the upper hand because he is a better poker player than Boehner. It makes sense to bluff when it has worked over and over and over again. Now it’s time for House Republicans to offer up their own non-negotiable demand.
Notice what Lew, speaking for the Obama administration said. The debt limit must be unconditionally raised for the following reasons:
- to protect America from defaulting on its debt, a development that would hurt the economy;
- to ensure Social Security benefits are uninterrupted;
- to ensure that veterans benefits and support for the U.S. military continue;
- all negotiations about entitlement reform and taxes are to take place in formulating a budget rather than in the context of a debate over the debt limit.
There’s a simple way for Boehner to trump Obama on the debt limit that will force him to negotiate – if that’s the speaker’s real goal.
All he needs to do is to approve a continuing resolution to fund all payments on the debt, to pay Social Security benefits, to pay veterans benefits and to fund the military. That would effectively kill Obama’s implicit threats to cut spending on programs that have popular support.
Boehner needs to do this tomorrow – or Republicans will once again lose the battle to cut spending in a meaningful way, including defunding Obamacare.
At that point, Obama would at least have to invent new rationalizations to prevent a government shutdown. And Boehner would be in the driver’s seat knowing that he has removed the political hammer from Obama’s hands.
Will House Republicans do it?
Not without pressure from you.
And there is an easy and inexpensive way for you to get through to Boehner, who is facing a mutiny from his own caucus.
It’s called the “No More Red Ink” campaign.
It allows you to utilize an effective, high-tech, grass-roots lobbying tool to save your country from going off the fiscal cliff – which will happen only if the borrowing-and-spending merry-go-round is finally stopped.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/boehner-needs-non-negotiable-response-to-obama/#AzcyQmoz1o8vTEOp.99
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Our bumbling, stumbling president
Our bumbling, stumbling president
Exclusive: Ted Nugent hits Obama for causing 'international embarrassment' over Syria
Published: 14 hours ago
Going to war should not be a game of posturing and political charades, but rather a quantified presidential decision based on our national and strategic interests or to defend the nation.
Barack Obama’s ever-shifting policy on lobbing a few rockets or dropping a few “little” bombs on Syria is a political debacle – an international embarrassment engineered by a guy who knows as much about international maneuvering as I do about quantum physics. Actually, less.
It is not the credibility of Congress, the international community or Mr. Bush that is on the line, but Mr. Obama’s presidential integrity. He was the one who mentioned a “red line” regarding the use of chemical weapons by the Assad punk, or maybe his Muslim Brotherhood buddies.
Recognizing that he jumped the red line Syrian shark, Obama is once again looking for a way to slip out of his self-imposed political noose. This time, however, the noose is much tighter, and Secretary of State Kerry is tightening it each time he opens his pro-bombing mouth.
The only people in America who want to bomb Syria are the traditionally anti-war Democrats who now support an attack to protect their Democratic president. There are also a couple of Fedzilla-genuflecting RINOs who support bombing Syria.
If he bombs Syria, the president risks escalating military confrontation in the Middle East, which would likely cause gas prices in the United States to double and further cripple our increasingly artificial economy. If he doesn’t bomb Syria, he looks like a tin-horn paper tiger, a community organizer so to speak. The president has painted himself into a corner.
The nation watching this charade most closely has got to be Iran, which is still building a nuclear weapon – which, by the way, was another “red line” of our president.
Iran has to figure that if our president doesn’t bomb Syria, the United States probably won’t bomb them, either. That job would be tossed over the fence to Israel, which is just what Iran wants.
What the president is doing is hoping the Syrian bombing debacle fades into the sunset so that he doesn’t have to make a decision. He’s hoping the whole thing will fall off the front pages and that the next three years pass by as quickly as possible so that he can hop on the $200,000-a-speech circuit.
Instead of bombing Syria, the president should be reminded that our dismal economy is what matters most to Americans. Regretfully, our president knows even less about how the engine of our economy operates than he does about maneuvering in the Middle East.
Fasten your seat belts, America. The next three years are going to be a mighty bumpy ride.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/our-bumbling-stumbling-president/#xFoIV4B3OEzRH3le.99
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Monday, September 9, 2013
Monday, September 9, 2013
Judge Pirro to Obama: 'Didn't you win Nobel Peace Prize . . . Give it back!'
Judge Pirro to Obama: ‘Didn’t you win Nobel Peace Prize . . . Give it back!’
In a scathing “opening statement” Saturday night, Fox News’ Judge Jeanine Pirro laid out the case against President Obama’s “dithering” on Syria – and it was <snip>ing.
“Really, Mr. President?” Pirro asked rhetorically, before launching into a description of the building of Russian and U.S forces in the eastern Mediterranean and Iranian “fast boat” action in the Persian Gulf that poses a danger of conflict far wider than the “quick military slap” Obama’s talking about.
“It’s teed up,” Pirro said.
She also noted brutality of the Syrian civil war over the past two years that has killed more than 100,000. The gas attack – widely ascribed to Syrian government forces – killed about 1,400, Pirro said.
“Why is killing one way more heinous and worthy of our response than another?” she asked.
Pirro also called out Obama’s ludicrous statement last week in Stockholm that he had not drawn a “red line” against the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian war, and showed a clip of the president doing exactly that during a news conference last year.
“A lie is a lie is a lie,” Pirro said, noting the whole world had heard the president say something he now denies. And that fecklessness can have tragic consequences.
“Your red lines are nothing more than green lights,” she said.
And more than once, she brought the conversation into the context of the shameful attack on the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans – including Ambassador Chris Stephens – were killed in a terrorist attack that the administration refused to even acknowledge for weeks afterward.
“You lost credibility when you left American in Benghazi, then fired up Air Force One to go to your fundraiser in Las Vegas,” Pirro said, in a brutal, unsparing takedown of the series of lies, misstatements and obfuscations Obama and his minions have engaged in over the past year.
“It’s amateur hour in Washington,” Pirro said.
It might be amateur hour in Washington, but Pirro’s 10-minute indictment of the Obama administration is one that bears repeating, in Washington and throughout the country.
“Didn’t you win the Nobel Peace Prize?” Pirro concluded, in her rhetorical interrogation of the president.
“Yeah, you were the one …. Give it back!”
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Friday, September 6, 2013
Dems hammered Bush for 'unilateralism' but embrace it now
On Syria, Obama's a quagmire of incoherency
David Limbaugh: Dems hammered Bush for 'unilateralism' but embrace it now
Published: 18 hours ago
When it comes to President Obama’s prowess as commander in chief, “leading from behind,” at this point, would be a step up.
Some believe that the United States should engage in military action in foreign countries when America’s national interests or those of our allies are at stake. Some believe we should rarely do so, perhaps only when we are under attack. Some think we should actively export democracy to other nations, whether or not our national security interests are currently on the line. And some, like President Obama, are literally all over the map, a quagmire of incoherency.
In withdrawing their support for the war, wholly for political reasons, Democrats made the preposterous claim that Bush, a man whose intellect they accorded the respect of a medieval serf, had deceived them into supporting the Iraq War resolution by false or hyped claims about weapons of mass destruction.
It didn’t matter to them that investigations showed that Bush clearly hadn’t manufactured, doctored or misrepresented the intelligence about WMD in Iraq or that most of the world’s important intelligence agencies came to the same conclusions as ours had. Nor did it matter that they had reviewed virtually the same intelligence reports Bush had when they decided to support the war resolution and that we mustered the support of much of the international community.
When it was in their perceived political interests to support the war effort and apparently too much time hadn’t passed since Sept. 11 to give them the required cover, they supported it. But when they needed to undermine Bush’s clout as a war president, they shamelessly changed their tune.
They started clamoring about the indispensability of an international consensus before going to war. They were impervious to claims that Saddam Hussein had brutalized his own people, including with the use of chemical weapons. They went out of their way to deny any link between Saddam and the war on terror and our enemies in that war. They were unmoved by Saddam’s violation of countless United Nations resolutions.
Democrats trampled one another on the way to the podium to assert that President Bush was a militaristic ogre who lied to get us into war. They manufactured and broadcast wildly exaggerated and spuriously deceitful claims about the deaths and damage America had inflicted in Iraq.
When he was running for president in 2008, Barack Obama strongly emphasized these same criticisms of Bush and the Republicans. Under their leadership, the world had lost its respect for us. Obama promised to change all this and make America beloved in the world.
Based on their statements, we must conclude that Obama and his Democrats abhor doublespeak from America’s commanders in chief and military interventions that are not supported by the international community and are based on dubious intelligence about weapons of mass destruction.
Yet after Obama’s disgraceful double talk concerning a “red line,” the Democrats almost unanimously support Obama’s apparent decision to strike Syria with or without congressional approval – despite there being a conspicuous absence of any understandable foreign policy objective, no discernible national interest at stake, unequivocal disapproval from the American people, little support from the international community, questionable intelligence about the chemical weapons and a substantial risk that the intervention could ignite major disruption in the region, empower Islamic radicals hostile to the United States, which seems to be the common denominator driving all his interventions, and otherwise jeopardize America’s interests and those of our ally Israel.
The only reason anyone can figure for Obama’s deciding to bomb Syria is that he believes he must do so to save face and credibility for having drawn a “red line” against the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons, a line he now says he didn’t draw – as if he’ll enhance his credibility by denying he made a claim we witnessed him making in no uncertain terms. He is now demeaning the very international community he libelously accused Bush of alienating for not joining us in this ill-considered action.
The left is all about opposing military interventions – when Republicans are in power and our proposed intervention is truly in our national security interests. Leftists are all about enlisting the support of the international community when it suits their interests – and ignoring it when it doesn’t. They’re adamant about the necessity of being 100 percent certain about our intelligence data before acting militarily, except when they’re in charge. And they’re all about plain-spoken words from the commander in chief, unless they hold the presidency.
I could have sworn that President Obama and his party decried so-called unilateralism when they falsely claimed Bush had engaged in it. But now they enthusiastically embrace it when Obama is preparing to actually do it – acting unilaterally with respect to both the legislative branch and the international community.
Whether or not the entire international community loved President George W. Bush, they respected him – to the extent that world leaders knew he meant what he said. Obama has neither their love nor their respect.
It’s obvious he hasn’t a clue what he’s doing, but it’s just as obvious he’s hellbent on doing it. What a pathetic mess.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/on-syria-obamas-a-quagmire-of-incoherency/#xiytJoEQFBBk1Hij.99
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
'Catastrophic' John McCain: GOP's worst nightmare --BINGO.
'Catastrophic' John McCain: GOP's worst nightmare
Exclusive: Pamela Geller excoriates senators for enabling Obama's support of al-Qaida
Published: 2 hours ago
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Monday, according to Bloomberg News, that “the U.S. must follow up with more assistance to Assad’s opponents to shift the balance of power in the conflict … dismissing concerns that some rebels have militant ties. ‘Those who say we don’t know who the opposition are, they are either not telling the truth and they know the truth or they are badly mistaken.’”
This is rich coming from a man who posed with known jihad kidnappers in Syria. Back in May, McCain went to Syria to meet with the opposition. While there, he posed for a now-notorious photo with two Sunni jihadists who were involved in kidnapping 11 Shiite pilgrims in 2012. This is what happens when clueless politicians inject themselves into situations in which they clearly do not belong. What was McCain thinking, sneaking into Syria to meet with jihadists?
McCain said Monday that blocking Obama’s Syria strike would be “catastrophic.” No, Sen. McCain. Obama’s support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was “catastrophic,” and so is his backing of the Brotherhood and al-Qaida in Syria.
McCain explained that to refuse to go along with Obama’s Syrian misadventure would be “catastrophic” because “it would undermine the credibility of the United States of America and of the president of the United States.” As if Obama hasn’t undermined his own credibility beyond repair already.
Then on Tuesday, McCain dismissed the Syrian jihadis’ cries of “Allahu akbar” by equating them with saying “Thank G-d.” We are witnessing an embarrassing meltdown right before our very eyes. John McCain equating the cries of “Allahu akbar” after a jihadi attack with “Thank G-d” requires a complete break with reality.
I have never heard Christian or Jew (or any non-Muslim) scream “Thank G-d” after beheading someone or blowing up a school, or slaughtering Muslims on their way to mosque. “Allahu akbar” is a war cry, and John McCain is an idiot. The bloodcurdling cry of “Allahu akbar” is meant to “strike terror in the hearts of the unbelievers” (Quran 3:151).
Why isn’t McCain the poster boy for the Christians and religious minorities being persecuted, oppressed and slaughtered under Muslim rule? He is a disgrace. McCain and Graham should be backing the Christians and the Kurds, not jihadists in Syria. The GOP coming to the rescue of the most seditious and dangerous president in American history is inexcusable and unforgivable.
Even the New York Times reported that “nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of.” And that was on April 28. Nothing has improved for secularists in Syria since then. But neither the Democrats nor the RINOs have noticed, despite McCain’s protestations to the contrary. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday compared Bashar al-Assad to “Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein.”
It would be funny if it weren’t so scary. Just last week the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) ran a story featuring jihadists talking about fighting with the “rebels” and the Free Syrian Army – the very groups Obama is supporting. There has to be a complete disconnect to reality for Obama and McCain to support these savages. Despite knowing that the opposition in Syria is driven by jihad and brutal Islamic supremacism and that its players include the Taliban and al-Qaida, Congress caved to Obama’s demand to arm the jihadists. In July, House and Senate Intelligence panel members voted to block Obama from arming the Syrian jihadis, but Obama decided to arm them anyway.
And no, I do not believe Assad used chemical weapons. I think that is an elaborate ruse by the jihadists to get the U.S. and Europe to take up arms against Assad. And it looks as if it is working.
Which Muslim Brotherhood operatives are advising McCain and Graham? Seriously. CAIR, ISNA, ICNA? How otherwise could they possibly have come to the conclusion that Obama’s catastrophic Syria plan is good for America?
Muslims from around the world – the U.S., Europe, Africa, Asia – are joining the jihad in Syria to fight for Islamic conquest and supremacism. Religious minorities are being annihilated by the jihadists, and yet another nation could well fall to this brutal and bloody ideology.
And it isn’t just McCain. John Boehner Tuesday announced his support for Obama’s Syrian plan. And Jeb Bush is going to present an award to Hillary Clinton. Why? Why would the GOP and a potential 2016 candidate sanction this? Remember: Clinton’s State Department was told that Benghazi was a “terrorist attack” minutes after it began – and lied about it.
We don’t need a third party. We need a second party. Ted Cruz is not enough. The GOP is all but disappearing before our very eyes. They are MIA on Obamacare, Benghazi, the IRS and now Syria.
Obama is aiding the jihadists; McCain is sneaking into Syria to pose for pics with them. The former is complicit, the latter is clueless. The outcome is the same.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/catastrophic-john-mccain-gops-worst-nightmare/#xg3hcEVodDHbqtIU.99
Monday, September 2, 2013
Sunday, September 1, 2013
The White House walk-and-talk that changed Obama's mind on Syria
The White House walk-and-talk that changed Obama's mind on Syria
White House
President Barack Obama meets with his national security advisers in the White House Situation Room on Saturday to discuss strategy in Syria. Chief of Staff Denis McDonough is fourth from right.
A stroll around the White House grounds with his top adviser on Friday evening changed President Barack Obama’s mind about getting Congress to sign off on a military strike in Syria, senior White House officials told NBC News.
Obama had been leaning toward attacking Syria without a congressional vote for the past week, the officials said. Obama was convinced he had the evidence to back up a strike and as a result dispatched Secretary of State John Kerry to make a passionate case for U.S. action. But only hours after Kerry called Syrian President Bashar al-Assad "a thug and a murderer" and accused his regime of using chemical weapons to kill 1,429 people, Obama changed his mind as he walked across the South Lawn with Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, the officials said.
NBC's Chuck Todd describes the political process for seeking congressional authorization for a strike on Syria, and says that the president's decision to wait on Congress is a departure from 30 years of strengthening executive branch power.
The plan was immediately met with robust resistance from a whiplashed Obama team who had listened to Kerry lay out the administration's strongest case yet for action against Assad. "My friends, it matters here if nothing is done," Kerry had argued. "It matters if the world speaks out in condemnation and then nothing happens."
Obama's National Security Council had believed since last weekend that requiring a vote was not even on the table and that “consultation” in the form of congressional briefings and behind-the-scenes conversation was all that would be needed before a strike. One senior official noted that no key leaders in Congress had specifically requested a vote on military intervention.
Officials said that after the president met with national security advisers on Aug. 24, they determined the evidence showed Syria’s Assad regime had used chemical weapons in an attack earlier this month. At that time, the president indicated he was leaning toward a strike.
But a growing number of Congressional members were beginning to question the administration’s strategy by the end of the week. And an NBC News poll released Friday morning showed that nearly 80 percent of Americans agreed that the president should seek approval in advance of taking military action.
Officials said Obama also was influenced by Thursday’s lively debate in the House of Commons, where Prime Minister David Cameron lost a vote in Parliament to authorize participation in an allied strike against Syria. Cameron had been a staunch advocate of military action but was chastened in the wake of the vote. “It is clear to me that the British Parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action,” Cameron said. “I get that, and the government will act accordingly.”
While Obama's advisers argued Friday night in private that the humiliating defeat for Cameron starkly illustrated the risks of asking for congressional input, the president responded that the vote in Parliament demonstrated exactly why he should seek a vote on this side of the Atlantic, senior officials told NBC News.
And, the president insisted, seeking legislative backing was the approach most consistent with his philosophy. While debate within the administration continued into late Friday, by Saturday morning the senior advisers acquiesced.
Speaking to the nation early Saturday afternoon, Obama said he was “mindful that I'm the president of the world's oldest constitutional democracy. I've long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people and for the people.”
Where did that come from? Since when has he cared of, by and for the people?
President Obama says the nation should and will take action against the Syrian government, but not without congressional approval. Watch his full speech.
The president also noted, “while I believe I have the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization, I know that the country will be stronger if we take this course, and our actions will be even more effective.”
White House aides said they are fairly confident that Congress will grant them the authority to launch a strike, although they maintain that Obama would be acting within his constitutional authority even if Congress rejects the authorization and Obama orders military intervention.
Congress is not scheduled to return to Washington for debate until Sept. 9. The administration decided not to call them back early due to the Jewish holidays this week, a delay that the Pentagon also signed off on, saying that the wait won’t diminish U.S. military capabilities in the region. There’s an upside to that cooling-off period too, aides said. The delay gives Obama time to make his case to Congress and to keep pushing for international support.
While the United States does not believe it needs military help in a strike, Obama will push allies for political backing when he attends the G20 summit in Russia next week.
Reaction from Congress was mostly positive in the hours after Obama detailed his position. A statement from House Speaker John Boehner other GOP leaders stated: “We are glad the president is seeking authorization for any military action in Syria in response to serious, substantive questions being raised” and noted Congress would begin debate when they return to Washington. And House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said, "President Obama is right that the debate and authorization by Congress for action will make our country and the response in Syria stronger.”
That's just the opposite of what she had sais last week, maybe it will be different next week.
But a key group of Syrian rebels who have been fighting the Assad regime reacted in surprise and anger to the decision.
"The death will continue in Syria because of the (failure of the) leadership of the United States to act decisively at this point," said Louay Safi, a spokesman for the Syrian National Council. "Obama had the moral responsibility (to) act and not waiver."