The Chilean president, visiting Obama at the White House, decides he wants to sit in the president’s chair. Why not? Doesn’t Obama believe that we’re not the greatest country in the world and maybe we need third world status to take us down a notch?
One of the interesting things that has come out about the Snowden leak is the reaction to it. In the Nixon White House critics claimed it wasn’t so much the crime – bad enough of itself – as the coverup. In some ways it is appalling, but not surprising, that our own government is doing this, but it is more appalling that some react to it with indifference or with anger towards the leaker.
I can’t say that Edward Snowden is a hero or a traitor. We don’t know what his true motives are. We don’t know enough about him. More will come out, I hope, and shed some light on him.
I do think that the government monitoring of us is a terrible thing. Sure, most of us aren’t doing anything that would get us in trouble. However, I know, too, that anything you do or say can be taken out of context, twisted and made to look terrible. Giving information about yourself is giving your opponents a tool to use against you.
Some say no one is listening to our phone calls. Evidently that’s not true as it was discovered that the calls of soldiers in Iraq making intimate phone calls home to wives or girlfriends was something people sought out to listen to. Anyone who wants to run for office who made such an innocent call can have that used against him. Remember Barack Obama’s opponent for the Senate seat in Illinois? The sealed records of Jack Ryan’s divorce papers were released and his career went phhffft. Multiply that by millions and you think everyone’s safe?
It’s disturbing who’s not disturbed by this. Speaker John Boehner, for instance. This top Republican should be leading the charge to find out more and stop this surveillance of innocent people. Karl Rove is for it, too. Really? Shame on him. So are Steve Moore, economist and co-founder of the conservative Club for Growth; Senator Rob Johnson of Wisconsin; former NSA director Michael Hayden; analysts Bill Krystal and Brit Hume.
The reaction of young people is particularly stunning. Many just shrug their shoulders and say government’s been doing that a long time, who cares? Some want to appear sophisticated. They know all about web technology. In truth they are exceptionally naive.
Maybe it has something to do with education. Those of us who are older were taught the traditional American values of freedom and the Constitution. Who knows what they’ve been learning the past twenty years? Obviously it was not the same history and beliefs we hold dear. The world has been turned upside down. For once, young people are the complacent while the older population the revolutionary ones.
Thankfully some are standing up for freedom. In the good column are Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz; Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner who helped write the Patriot Act; Glenn Beck and a few others. The co-founder of Home Depot, Ken Langone, said yesterday that “I’d throw a party for Edward Snowden” and praised his courage for outing this info.
Have we become so enamored of our daily personal pleasures that freedom and privacy no longer matter? If so, that is what Obama is counting on. That is how tyranny is ushered in.
Congressman Darryl Issa is taking a lot of flak for calling White House spokesman Jay Carney a “paid liar” yesterday.
Even some on our side are saying, well, he went too far. That made him look bad and got his goat. The Obama administration is getting to him, he needs to tone it down and take the high road.
Boloney! When I heard that Issa said that I thought good for him. At last someone has opened the window and yelled I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.
We all know that Carney has lied for Obama. You can find it in the many contradictions on issues he’s held. For example, the Benghazi YouTube video. Carney supported the idea that it was the cause of the attack on our embassy and promoted it all over TV. No one mentions that now or sees it as the cause of the death of our ambassador.
So why shouldn’t Issa call him a “paid liar?” Isn’t a congressman paid to find the truth and tell it? He would be lying to the American people if he swallowed Carney’s whoppers, wouldn’t he? Republicans are always held to higher standards, but it’s different for Democrats. It’s time for that to end.
Besides, immediately after Issa appeared on some of the Sunday shows, the Obama machine brought up a bogus indictment made against Issa when he was 17. They accused him of arson and grand theft auto. That’s pretty awful and something Issa should not let get off the ground.
Democrats can call Romney a killer; a dog hating meanie; the whole party a bunch of anti women bigots, and add in black/Hispanics/gays/Native Americans/young people/college students. They called George Bush Hitler, made a movie about his assassination and put his head on a pike in a TV show. This is all appropriate to them.
I’m glad Issa spoke up. He can lose his temper any time he wants. I’m tired of defense. Time – and ammunition aplenty – for offense.
It appears that all three in the title are targeted for elimination by this White House.
We already know that Michelle Obama would like to prohibit such goodies as apple pie and works feverishly to stop you from eating one (although she has been known to stop at Mom’s Apple Pie Company in Occoquan, Va., to purchase the namesake plus others for herself).
Barack is doing everything he can to ruin our democracy, economy, voting system, Constitution, freedom of speech and prestige in the world. Motherhood hasn’t escaped the administration’s ire either. Americans may not want to believe this of their president, but how else can you interpret the actions of the Justice Department?
Here’s what CNS reports:
The Obama Justice Department is arguing in the United States Supreme Court that children do not need mothers.
The Justice Department’s argument on the superfluity of motherhood is presented in a brief the Obama administration filed in the case of Hollingsworth v. Perry, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended California’s Constitution to say that marriage involves only one man and one woman.
The Justice Department presented its conclusions about parenthood in rebutting an argument made by proponents of Proposition 8 that the traditional two-parent family, led by both a mother and a father, was the ideal place, determined even by nature itself, to raise a child.
The Obama administration argues this is not true. It argues that children need neither a father nor a mother and that having two fathers or two mothers is just as good as having one of each.
“The [California] Voter Guide arguably offered a distinct but related child-rearing justification for Proposition 8: ‘the best situation for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father,’” said the administration’s brief submitted to the court by Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr.
“As an initial matter, no sound basis exists for concluding that same-sex couples who have committed to marriage are anything other than fully capable of responsible parenting and child-rearing,” the Department of Justice told the court. “To the contrary, many leading medical, psychological, and social-welfare organizations have issued policy statements opposing restrictions on gay and lesbian parenting based on their conclusion, supported by numerous scientific studies, that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are as likely to be well adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents.”
“The weight of the scientific literature strongly supports the view that same-sex parents are just as capable as opposite-sex parents,” says the administration.
To support this argument, one of the documents the administration cites is a “policy statement” by the American Psychological Association. This statement claims that some studies indicate same-sex parents might be “superior” to mother-and-father families, but then concedes there is little actual data on the results of raising children in two-father households.
“Members of gay and lesbian couples with children have been found to divide the work involved in childcare evenly, and to be satisfied with their relationships with their partners,” says this APA policy statement the administration cited to the court. “The results of some studies suggest that lesbian mothers’ and gay fathers’ parenting skills may be superior to those of matched heterosexual parents. There is no scientific basis for concluding that lesbian mothers or gay fathers are unfit parents on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
…In effect, the administration is arguing that California had already conceded the administration’s point that children do not need a mother or a father when it enacted laws treating same-sex couples the same as married couples in its adoption, foster-parenting and other laws–which Proposition 8 did not seek to overturn.
So far in the history of the human race, no child has ever been born without a biological father and mother. Now, in the Supreme Court of the United States, the Executive Branch of the federal government is arguing that, regardless of the biological facts of parenthood, states have no legitimate and defensible interest in ensuring that children conceived by a mother and a father are in fact raised by mothers and fathers.
The brief that the Justice Department presented to the Supreme Court discussed children only as items controlled by others, not as individual human beings who have God-given rights of their own. It simply assumes that a child has no inherent right to a mother or father and that the only right truly in question is whether two people of the same-sex have a right to marry one another and that that right encompasses a right to adopt and foster-raise children.
Why would the Obama people want to do this? Why do they care to interfere so much in what culture has promoted from earliest times?
The only explanation is that they want to tear down the fabric of society to rebuild it the way they want it – with their class holding the power – and the family stands in the way.
D.W. Ulsterman, who has access to a Republican Insider in Washington, got him to give a glimpse behind the scenes right now as Eric Holder increasingly finds the hot water turned up on him.
Here’s what he said:
“I apologize again for not getting back to you sooner. I know I keep telling you that. All of us are being very careful regarding off the record disclosures. The situation keeps shifting right under us. Will let you know of a morning meeting this week involving members of the White House Legislative Affairs Office and members of the Senate Majority Office, the Senate Minority Office, the House Speaker’s Office, and the House Minority Office. Meeting lasted nearly an hour. I have confirmed four things from this meeting that I can share with you.
One, the primary subject of this meeting was the future status of Attorney General Eric Holder. A secondary topic was Obamacare related. ???
Two, direct discussions regarding Eric Holder’s departure and possible replacement. Both sides wanted plenty of notice and prep time if and when that transition was to take place.
Three, negotiations for Eric Holder to stay on was presented by White House reps. This negotiation was apparently shut down by both the Senate Office reps. I find that very interesting and if I were Eric Holder, very troubling for his future employment status with the DOJ. He’s losing the support of his own party.
Four, House Speaker’s Office demanded a decision regarding Attorney General Holder’s status by June 14th. Not sure if that is a bluff or they are serious. Also don’t know what they would do if the White House ignores the request. Up to now they have pretty much done nothing, right?
I asked if there was anyone from DOJ at the meeting. Was told no. Not sure why not as normally someone from DOJ would have been included given what the situation is, unless the entire upper DOJ administration is at risk? Or can’t be trusted? That is speculation on my part there, but I found that to be a little odd and there has been some whispering of many at DOJ who are quietly “lawyering up”. I have not personally confirmed that though.
Now please do not take this information as 100% certainty that Attorney General Holder’s position at the DOJ will not survive this current challenge. I recall a similar meeting to this early last year when the possibility of Holder being pushed out before the 2012 Election was circulating. I think -name deleted- (WHI) told you something about that. Whatever plans for that were being discussed they were effectively terminated by the White House. I would guess it was Jarrett’s call that Eric Holder remain on at DOJ. When -name deleted- (WHI) called Jarrett the “de-facto president a few years back it seems he has since then been proven correct many times by various other media reports that have made similar claims. The power and influence she wields is no longer questioned by any of us. She is feared. What I’m not sure about at this point is if she is willing to override Democratic Party leaders who now want Eric Holder gone before his scandals negatively impact them during the 2014 Midterms. President Obama is now entering Lame Duck territory, so Jarrett’s influence will be much more diminished now than it was before the 2012 Election. Hopefully the Republican leadership understands this and will push back with the right force. They remain my biggest challenge when it comes to getting the right things done though. As far as I’m concerned, they remain way too incompetent and untrustworthy. I’m really hoping 2014 can change some of that.”
Obama’s speech on Thursday concerning foreign policy was long and long on his wish to say he’d concluded the War on Terror.
He hasn’t. He has always exploited Amerricans’ wish to get out of war by hiding facts. The media gives him cover by ignoring bombings and ignoring threats like Iran. They agree to muffle these things and Obama acts dismissive about any act that the rest of us would consider terrorism.
But Obama selectively edits information, too. The White House dossier blog calls attention to a deliberately misleading quote Obama made in his speech:
President Obama Thursday deceptively took Osama Bin Laden’s words out of context to help make a point about how al Qaeda is on its knees and we can curtail our use of drones – and start winding down the rest of the War on Terror. Or what’s apparently now “The War on a Couple of Remaining Terrorists.”
Next time get your facts straight, infidel.Next time get your facts straight, infidel.
The deception was uncovered by terrorism analyst Thomas Joscelyn, who wrote today in The Weekly Standard. Joscelyn notes that the drone program has indeed been effective at killing bad guys. But he also makes the important point that drones are a tactic, not a strategy – and a tactic to which al Qaeda has adjusted.
In Thursday’s grand strategy speech before the National Defense University, Obama said this:
“To begin with, our actions are effective. Don’t take my word for it. In the intelligence gathered at bin Laden’s compound, we found that he wrote, ‘We could lose the reserves to enemy’s air strikes. We cannot fight air strikes with explosives.’”
Sounds like Bin Laden is saying, OMG, we’re even about to lose the reserves! We’re helpless with our primitive explosives before these high-tech air strikes!
But Joscelyn takes a look at the entire document of Bin Laden’s writings, as released by the White House, and notices that, well, that’s not what Bin Laden was saying at all. Here’s the full quote:
“The Ummah will use the reserve in the future, but during the appropriate time. In the meanwhile, we do not want to send the reserves to the front line, especially in areas where the enemy only uses air strikes to attack our forces. So, the reserves will not, for the most part, be effective in such conflicts. Basically, we could lose the reserves to enemy’s air strikes. We cannot fight air strikes with explosives!”
What Bin Laden is actually saying is – We got reserves, let’s not waste them! And, Bin Laden goes on the suggest, he has lots of reserves:
“It is known that they teach in military and war science that if a war breaks out between two countries, the two countries do not send all of their forces to the front line. Instead, they hold back some forces, especially forces with special training . . .
“We still have a powerful force which we can organize and prepare for deployment.”
Now, whether or not Bin Laden has a “powerful force” lying in wait – I got no idea. What’s important here is that Obama has selectively quoted Bin Laden to suggest Bin Laden himself knows the jig is up. And that just ain’t so.
It is disappointing that our fellow Americans don’t understand the concepts of war and peace. There is no such thing as peace in this world. It can only be achieved in the next. On earth we are always facing war: war from viruses, war from militaristic countries, war from terrorists, war from the forces of nature. It’s just a fact of life. There is good and evil in the world and the two forces will continue battling until the Second Coming.
Our enemies will never completely go away. They will always have to be dealt with. To deny this is to deny the nature of life. Obama may be fooling some people, but in the end he will not be able to deny that we have enemies who must be curtailed.
There is never enough time for vacationing in the Obama family. If you’re not on one, you’re about to go on one or planning one. Already, the First Family has had, what, four vacations? According to White House Dossier, Michelle plans a whopper.
With scandal swirling about the White House, First Lady Michelle Obama may be considering an extended exit from Washington this summer, fleeing for weeks to the Obamas’ traditional summer haven, Martha’s Vineyard.
According to the Boston Globe, “Michelle Obama and the children may be on the island for an extended period.” But the president would hardly be suffering by comparison. He may come up on weekends and then stay for two weeks at the end of the summer, the Globe reports.
The White House has not commented on the Obamas’ vacation plans.
They don’t comment on much ever, do they?
D.W. Ulsterman, who has provided an outlet for a Democrat working in the White House who knows what’s going on and doesn’t like it, gives this latest installment of what’s really happening in D.C.:
WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: “For the first time – Barack Obama truly fears American public opinion”
by Ulsterman on May 13, 2013
A brief but very much appreciated update received today from perhaps the most colorful and politically intelligent figure I have ever had the pleasure to call both friend and enemy – White House Insider. The update focuses on just one subject – the all out attempt by a few key figures within the Obama White House to insulate the president from the damage now coming over the Benghazi Massacre and subsequent cover up, and certain operatives’ plans to prevent that from happening.
My boy my boy my boy. We are finally seeing some real deal dynamics coming out to play on this Benghazi situation. In case you might not know, there’s been some Republicans who have had at least some of this information for several weeks. Not sure the game they are trying to play, or if they can even play it right. Or get off their ass and onto the f*cking field. I already told you it’s the CIA’s turn next and it looks like that part is about to develop. Now here’s the thing about CIA. Those boys don’t play nice. You sh*t on them, they shove a size 12 so far up your ass you can tie the laces with your teeth. Jarrett don’t quite know that world, and she’s way overplayed her one real card in all of this. Now she’s trying to call in favors within the party, but the party don’t much care for her. Never has. Feared her plenty. Never liked her though. Most of them ain’t calling her back.
She’s got Kerry running interference inside State, but he’s an incompetent and will f*ck that up soon enough. Carney is just about as used up as a two dollar hooker during shore leave. Poor dumb bastard. Got him walking the plank every time he goes out there now. He’s got that Mike McCurry “why did I ever take this job” look to him. I know that look well. I actually don’t mind Carney so much. He’s in way over his head now though and he knows it.
Now I don’t want you getting your hopes up too much just yet. Lots of sh*t can go wrong here. First, we’re talking the Republican leadership, right? That bunch of flatulent dimwits could always manage to learn new ways of being stupid. See McCain doing his same old “don’t jump to conclusions” bullsh*t on Benghazi while at the same time pushing for more resources to go to the revolution in Syria? The guy has more than a touch of the simple these days. Traitorous lying old f*ck. Give him a camera and he’ll be there in a second. Give him a way to defeat Obama and he backs off at the last minute because he still ain’t over his personal dislike of the Republican candidate. Never seen that kind of sh*t from Republicans before but it’s pretty much what they’re all about these days.
Now what is going on inside the WH is just a few people circling the wagons to insulate the president. At this point they know they are going to take a beating on this Benghazi stuff. They just don’t know how much will get out, what the Republicans actually know, who is willing to deal, and who, if anyone, is willing to run this thing all the way into the end zone if they have the chance. Seen this before. A White House in crisis mode. I think at this point it’s the first time since he’s been president that Barack Obama truly fears American public opinion. See the presser? That look in his eyes? Guy was sh*tting himself.
You are asking what I know as far as people doing what, who is involved etc. Here is what I can tell you. Not what I know. What I can tell you. Hope you understand given my unique position in this thing right now. My own fault on that I know. But what was I supposed to do?
Anyways, as far as negotiations. Communications Office at the WH is going down. To what degree I’m not sure yet. This connects to State and CIA. It’s kind of like a three headed monster which they do on purpose to protect the president. Make everyone involved and nobody involved but most importantly, keep pushing the idea that the president never really knew because if he did, well by God he sure would have done something about it. He’s Barack f*cking Obama, right? He loves everyone and God Bless America. Amen.
Republicans don’t have a blue dress, but they got a pretty pissed off CIA and at least one more person in State who is ready and willing to deal on this thing. But again, we can’t count on the Republicans not to f*ck it up. That’s where all of you come into play. I got to admit something here, if it wasn’t for this secondary media thing, I don’t believe we would have had that latest Benghazi hearing. People are saying ABC set that up, but it was already set up and ABC came in and confirmed it, but it was regular people calling and emailing and all that other stuff they do these days who really made the difference.
I should also let you know you won’t be hearing from -deleted- (R.I) for a bit. He’s so far in this thing now he can’t afford to be doing the other stuff. Keeping them in it to win is no easy task with this group. If we had another 20 people like Cruz about a third of the administration would be heading for the exits by now and Obama would be getting pressure to step down. Give me a guy or gal who just speaks their damn mind these days. We don’t have those kind of people though, so like they say, you hunt with the dog you got even if they’re half blind and smell like an Arkansas summer outhouse.
Now I got at least three Dems ready to break from the pack here on Benghazi and one other issue. Can I trust them anymore than those three Republicans who left my ass hanging in October of last year? Maybe. Probably not. Of course this time around, they have to trust me just as much as I trust them, so when we’re playing that game, I got the leverage son. Obama won’t be president forever, and somebody else will. And that’s leverage and I aim to use it this time around a whole lot better than the f*ckuppery we got into last time. Lesson learned, right? This has been a slow play like it should have been done before. Good intentions but bad execution makes for they win and we lose. Well we ain’t losing this time. No sir.
So I’m hearing “by Friday.” Heard that from more than a few people I’ve been working on getting information out of including -deleted- (RI). So watch for the next phase to hit by then. That’s a sign things are going as planned.
P.S. Bill’s pissed.
Volcano eruption.
That can be good and that can be bad.
Don’t ask me what it will be this time because I got no idea. Haven’t seen him this mad in a looooong time.
So obsessed with gun control is the president that he had a Newtown victim’s mother give the White House radio address today.
This is over the top! He has used these poor people as tools from the first day of the shooting. He had them appear on 60 Minutes, interviewed by Steve (toady) Krofft. He brought them back on Air Force One to plead his cause and pressure individual senators. Now he has one give his Saturday speech to display their heartache to fellow Americans.
How dare he use these poor people to push propaganda! I hope the NRA fires back. If an armed officer had been at the school with one gun he could have stopped Adam Lanza from his killing spree.
Obama desperately wants to take away our guns. It is out of humanitarian reasons? If so, why doesn’t he concentrate on the murder capital of Chicago? Could it be that these laws don’t work? Could it be that another reason causes these killings?
He just wants to disarm us, period. That is a great threat to every freedom loving American.
President Obama struggles with the truth. It usually loses.
It did last night at a fundraiser in San Francisco where our president was pushing his gun control legislation. The Weekly Standard reports he said
that the Newtown killer gunned down 20 children using a “fully automatic weapon.” From the official transcript, provided by the White House:
Now, over the next couple of months, we’ve got a couple of issues: gun control. (Applause.) I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don’t have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon — by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly.
According to the prosecutor, Stephen J. Sedensky III, the killer, Adam Lanza, “killed all 26 victims inside Sandy Hook Elementary School with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle before taking his own life with a Glock 10 mm handgun. He says Lanza had another loaded handgun with him inside the school as well as three, 30-round magazines for the Bushmaster,” ABC previously reported.
Each of the guns used is a semi-automatic weapon, and not one is an automatic weapon.
So either Obama is wrong–or he revealed something last night about the massacre that hasn’t yet been known.