Will Obama chasten the Air Marshals?

Another Air Marshal on a United Airlines DC to Denver flight did his job.  99% of us will say “job well done”  and “thank you.”  But probably not Obama.

If it was “mere sarcastic jesting”, I predict Barack“kiss-the-butt-of-Muslims” Hussein Obama will chasten and intimidate the entire Air Marshal staff for “over-reacting.”  It will be another shoot-from–the-hip Cambridge Police-esque loose lip Obama blunder.  He may even order the Attorney General to file charges against the Air Marshal for assault and battery and committing a “hate crime” along with racial profiling.

The fact the dimwit was joking is beside the point.  At best, we have a wise ass Qatari diplomat, Mohammed al Modadi, with full immunity provoking our airline security apparatus by illegally smoking in the john and then jesting to the Air Marshal that he’s trying to light his shoes on fire.  His actions were indications of the worst case:  Attempting to blow up the plane.  In any event, he was an arrogant and stupid bas-ard.  I love name-calling when it really fits.  More on the story HERE.  It doesn’t help his case that he went to Denver to visit a jailed Al Qaeda operative.  Why wouldn’t his visit be called “giving aid and comfort to the enemy” – the crime of treason*? Oh wait, Obama does the same thing. 

As it turns out, we apparently allow Islamic diplomats to visit Islamic terror convicts all the time.  No wonder they communicate so well.  They don’t even need cell phones, oh, except to trigger the explosives.

Another probability:  Mohammad was testing airline security under the protection of diplomatic immunity.  

Don’t forget what Obama (or Ayers) wrote in his Audacity book:  If things turn ugly, he will stand with the Muslim immigrants.  That’s like saying “to hell with the rest of you Americans.  I will defend Muslims and the Islamic religion if things turn ugly.  I don’t care who creates the ugliness.”

That’s just what we have to expect from this unfortunate-for-the-US Muslim-inspired president.

____________________

*Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution:  “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them [the United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

…the Supreme Court of the United States established that for a prosecutor to take an "aid and comfort" treason indictment to a jury he must prove four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) an overt act, (2) testified to by two witnesses, (3) manifesting an intent to betray the United States (which can be inferred from the overt act itself), (4) the act providing aid and comfort to the enemy. More…

_____________________

From the Denver Post:  “Maybe he slipped by while the TSA was busy with this important task…”
Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14840644#ixzz0kTebXai2

Technorati Tags: Mohammed al Modadi,Barack Obama,United Air Lines Qatar Muslim Diplomat

Terrorism by any other name…

Another kiss on the cheek and deep bow to Islamic nations:

CBS News reports:  President Barack Obama's advisers plan to remove terms such as "Islamic radicalism" from a document outlining national security strategy and will use the new version to emphasize that the U.S. does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terrorism, counterterrorism officials say.

So, the Obama administration refuses to “view Muslim nations through the lens of terrorism”, hmmm?  Because the ideological source of the hundreds of terror attacks per week does not wear a Nazi uniform or an Attila-the-Hun hat and cannot be precisely pointed out by Grandma, we will play blind and stupid with our verbiage.  Not bright.

No, no, no.  That is not the reason for failing to identify the world-wide ideology of Islam as the root of terror.   The reason is the regrettable merging of Obama’s affinity for Islam with the cultural diversity-loving liberal agenda of our current crop of hallucinating pot-smoking ex-hippie leaders.  Obama has demonstrated his defense and promotion of Islam in numerous speeches and writings, both here and in the many Islamic nations he visited. 

What verbiage would he wish to substitute for “Islamic radicalism”, “Islamic Jihad”, and “war on terror?”  Might he resort to terms such as “devout behavior”, “inner struggle”, or “exercise in international relations?”  Will those phrases be sufficiently bland for our Islam-pandering president?

Here are the words we should be using to identify what we are up against:

• Islamic-inspired fascism
• Islamic-inspired terror
• Islamic-motivated violence
• Islamic-motivated intolerance
• Islamic supremacism
• Islamic anti-Semitism
• War on Islamic terror
• Refer to Islam as an “intolerant, fascist ideology”, not a “religion”

These words and phrases concisely define what the west is up against much better than the vague, misdirecting verbiage Obama is hiding behind.

Even the words “Islamic Radicalism” are inadequate. What inspires the radicalism?  Which of the worlds’ religious ideologies inspire at least 10% of their adherents to directly support or commit acts of terror, with most of the rest applauding the result?  Is it the Hindus?  The Buddhists? The Christians?  The Jews?  Even the atheists?  NO!  It is the Islamic ideology that inspires 120 million from their 1.2 billion to wage their terror against the infidel.  And worse, the majority if not nearly all Muslims support the intolerant fascist outcome of intended Islamic dominance.

We need to clearly identify the ideological inspiration for the radicalism:  Islam.

Our president denies we are at war.  So it follows that he ignores the only way to win a war:  Know thy enemy!  9-11 with the applauding Islamic masses apparently wasn’t an adequate introduction.  And our Islam-inspired President is doing his damndest to assure the real enemy remains unknown.

Technorati Tags: islamic radicalism,Obama,know thy enemy

Obama announces limits to use of our nukes…

…even for defensive purposes.  What an ass.  Here is the entire NY Times article.

I don’t have much more to say about this statement.  Except:

Our President has announced to the world the conditions under which we will NOT use our nukes even for defensive purposes.  Consider the consequences of this public announcement.  And here is Atlas Shrugs comment.

My analogy:  The perverted mutha dressing up her 14 year old to look like a hooker and sending her onto the streets of Tehran.  No defense.  The perfect target.

Does this make YOU feel safer?

This man needs to be impeached and replaced.

Technorati Tags: impeachable offense,Barack Obama,sell-out

Palin is one of THEM!

Well well well.  It seems that dear Sarah cannot keep her principles intact – just like most of the others.  She had to endorse John McCain for Arizona Senator over J. D. Hayworth.  As you probably know, McCain has been a proponent of legalizing illegal aliens, the immigration “nuclear option” aka “amnesty.”

J. D. Hayworth, who, by the way, has markedly gained in the polls against McCain, has been and remains a staunch proponent of controlling our borders.  Anyone who is endorsed by Joe Arpaio and Chris Simcox is a candidate worth voting for.  Hayworth is.

So, Sarah has sunk to the depths of political back-scratching by her  payback endorsement of McCain, the weak-willed, milk-toast, get along with everyone, conservative flip-flopper.

By the way, while Sarah gives entertaining speeches, her performances do not hold a candle to Mitt Romney’s.  I saw him in person last night giving a stand up one and one-half hour performance “in the round” to a group of 300 or so.  No podium, no notes, no reminders on his hands.  He received applause every 20 seconds and hearty laughs with every political joke he offered.  His book “No Apologies” lays the foundation for his campaign beginning in 2011.  Just for grins, read the acknowledgements section of Romney’s book and compare it to the acknowledgments section of Obama’s book, the “Audacity of Hope.”  Obama audaciously cites left wing radicals, socialists and communists in his while Romney cites patriots, business and economic experts, Christians, and national security experts in his.  What a stark contrast.  How refreshing “No Apologies” is compared to the destructive crap we hear from Obama.

Speaking of books, viscerally  I couldn’t bring myself to part with $20 for Palin’s book.  I couldn’t hold myself back from buying Romney’s “No Apologies.”  “Audacity” was a Christmas gift from my daughter three years ago.  She hasn’t apologized yet.

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney,No Apologies,Obama,Audacity of Hope,Sarah Palin

Wright and Manning: Similarities and Differences

Jeremiah Wright and David Manning: An interesting pair.  Jeremiah Wright is the racist, America-damning Black Liberation Theology pastor Obama sat under for 20 years.  David Manning is the pastor of a church best known for his rant predicting whites rising up and rioting in the streets.

Here are snippets of Jeremiah Wright’s now famous rants against America:

Now watch David Manning’s video HERE.

The contrast between the philosophies of these two men reminds me of a lesson in physics:  For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.  The same principle applies to social philosophy.

In Wright we have a black pastor who is unabashedly racist, dwelling on his condemnation of Europeans, whites, and America for all past sins.  Most of the theological distinctives of his church focus on themes* of…

• Commitment to the Black Community
• Commitment to the Black Family
• Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
• Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
• Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
• Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
• Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
• Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System."

Racist?  Oh yeah.  Imagine a church that used the word “White” instead of “Black.”  And “disavowal of middleclassness?”  What is that about?  Oh, its just the communist principle of a “classless” society.  All workers.  No middle class.  No elites.  No free enterprise.

In Manning we have a similar style of preaching by another black pastor, but the opposite and just as radical message.  By the way, “radical” isn’t necessarily wrong.  It is just not “main stream” or politically correct, at least at the moment.  In the Manning video, we see him playing the role of a prophet, proclaiming the whites have had enough of the Obama “Mack-Daddy” and predicting that there will be riots in the streets as a back-lash against decades of black affirmative action and resource- and initiative-robbing entitlements.  A big difference from Wright is that Manning agrees with those disgusted with the thieving entitlement mentality and would join whitey, in spirit if not in person.  He is not a racist as Wright is a racist.

It is interesting how the hyper-sensitive liberals are all bent out of shape over someone like Manning, but seem to have little problem, in fact, just love a President who sat for 20 years under a man like Jeremiah Wright and who obviously agrees with most if not all he preached during those 20 years. Manning is more likely to be stoned by the intolerant liberals than Wright is by the rest of us.  Manning has already been banned by YouTube.

I am becoming increasingly aware of the similarity in level of rabid intolerance among the left in this country and others, and the intolerance of the defenders and promoters of Islam toward free speech – the expression of of sometimes critical ideas and opinions.  Free speech should not be banned just because you disagree with it.  That is the test of true free speech.  The left and Islam are speaking from the same podium.  I can’t wait for liberals to discover exactly how un-liberal Islam is.  How quickly we will see their cum-by-Yah tolerance vaporize.

If you are curious, HERE are David Manning’s other videos form his website.

*From Trinity Church website in 2008.

Technorati Tags: David Manning,Jeremiah Wright,intolerance,for every action there is and equal and opposite reaction

Obama’s “Muslim Nation” Fantasy

The following is from an anonymous source but nails the wishful, imaginative Islam-loving predisposition of Obama:

Barack Obama, in his Cairo speech,  said: "I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story."

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN'S RESPONSE:

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the pilgrims first landed?  Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day?  Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution? Declaration of Independence? Bill  of Rights?Didn't think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country's freedom from England?  No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America?  No, they did not.  In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery. Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as "pug nosed slaves."  Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family's "rich Islamic heritage," doesn't it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country?  Not present. There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country's Woman's Suffrage era? Again, not present.  In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture.  So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the 'hajib' or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband.  Yep, the Muslims are all for women's rights, aren't they?

Where were Muslims during World War II?  They were aligned with Adolf Hitler.  The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi's in killing Jews and promoted their extermination as they still do today.

Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001?  If they weren't flying planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East.  No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day.   Or were those who were rejoicing just reminding us of the many sins of our “evil empire” as American-haters are prone to do.

Strangely, the very "moderate" Muslims who's asses you bent over backwards  to kiss in Cairo, Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11.  To many Americans – and in the heart of their Islamic faith - their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the "rich heritage" Muslims have here in America.

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates.  They were Muslim, as are most of Somali pirates today.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 - the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That, Mr. Obama, is the "Muslim heritage" in America that continues to this day.

“Arrogant, ignorant, deceived, destructive” are words that come to mind when I think of this president.

Technorati Tags: Obama,America's rich Islamic heritage,Obama ignorance,Obama deception

More Obama Muslim Pandering

Picture yourself as the US Director of missile technology in 1940.  President Auschwitz directs you to share your evolving missile technology with Nazi Nuclear Scientist Carl Friedrich von Weizsaecker.  Of course, being the dedicated public servant you are (and in the aftermath of the Great Depression you certainly need your job) you feel compelled to comply, although you don’t like it.

Now, fast forward to 2010.  You are the Administrator of NASA.  You are directed by President B. Hussein Obama to share your missile technology with Islamic nations.  These are the nations whose “religious” ideology supported and motivated Nazi Germany to exterminate Jews, the very ideology that desires to wipe our ally Israel off the map, the ideology which considers Christians and Jews as inferior “infidels”, the ideology behind dozens of terror attacks weekly, and the ideology that creates psychotic intolerance in their culture and wishes to impose this intolerance on the rest of the world.

Do you notice any parallels? 

This is real.  Read the following news story…

NASA plans more outreach to Muslim countries

Posted by Mark Matthews on February, 16 2010 4:55 PM

Discuss This: Comments(11) | Add to del.icio.us | Digg it

NASA chief Charlie Bolden

WASHINGTON — NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden said Tuesday that President Barack Obama has asked him to “find ways to reach out to dominantly Muslim countries” as the White House pushes the space agency to become a tool of international diplomacy.

“In addition to the nations that most of you usually hear about when you think about the International Space Station, we now have expanded our efforts to reach out to non-traditional partners,” said Bolden, speaking to a lecture hall of young engineering students.

Specifically, he talked about connecting with countries that do not have an established space program and helping them conduct science missions. He mentioned new opportunities with Indonesia, including an educational program that examines global climate change.

“We really like Indonesia because the State Department, the Department of Education [and] other agencies in the U.S. are reaching out to Indonesia as the largest Muslim nation in the world. We would love to establish partners there,” Bolden said.

As a presidential candidate, Obama espoused a space program that invited more participation from the international community and Deputy NASA Administrator Lori Garver said recently that the next time NASA lands on the moon it would be part of an international exploration effort.

So, let me understand this.  Our President is eliminating our own space program, he has directed NASA to share our space/rocket technology with Islamic nations, and declares we are not at war with the centers of terror, while his VP expresses fear of impending attacks.  Oh but of course, they would only be “isolated” attacks.

If we could only win enough seats in November to end this insanity before 2012.

Technorati Tags: NASA,sharing technology with Muslim nations,Islam,Obama

Dismal State of our National Security

Within a six month period in 2009 we've had the Fort Hood shooting by a devout Muslim, the Nation of Islam-affiliated cop massacre near Seattle, and the "angelic" Muslim from Nigeria in a miraculous failure to blow up a Detroit-bound plane.

These terrorist attacks all have one thing in common.  Our failure of acknowledging the root cause of the terrorist threat.  No, the root cause is not "poverty" or "the haves vs. the have nots" or "racial discrimination" or "religious discrimination."  It is not the "evil US suppression" of other peoples or nations, although this is a popular "blame-America-first" belief.

The root cause is our failure to understand the basic historical teaching and goals of Islam, and the motivation of those who become devout in its practice.

Instead we have leaders who believe Islam must be respected and dealt with benevolently.  We have sympathizers who continue to insist that Islam is a "religion of peace."    We have national security leaders who confusedly profess that "the system worked really, really smoothly."  We have a President who rewards Islamic nations while snubbing our allies - who has the Islamic threat totally off his radar of national concerns.  Heck, he doesn't even recognize any "terror threat" as a high priority, never mind admitting that 99% is Islamic motivated.

We have been "reactive" and not "proactive."  We are being severely manipulated by our failure to acknowledge the root problem.  After 9-11, we had cockpit doors fortified and searches of passengers for box cutters.  After the shoe bomber, we all have to remove our shoes in the security line-up.  After the European plot to carry small vials of liquid explosives onto planes, no one can bring perfume, aftershave, or liquid medications in our carry-ons.  Literally tons of these were confiscated at the gates.  As a result of the underwear bomber, we will either have full body scans revealing every mole or be subject to pat downs up to our crotch.  When the devout Islamist conceal their explosive of choice in their body cavities, we may be induced to accept body cavity searches as well.

Don't you think we are missing something here?  Instead of punishing Americans who love our freedoms, why don't we focus on those whose ideology promotes the terror?  Instead of reducing the freedoms of those who respect freedom, why not reduce the freedoms of those who want to destroy our freedom?  Is this approach too logical?  Yes, it involves profiling.  Before the Islamic cancer spreads further, every individual who claims Islam as their faith, and every individual from an Islamic-dominated nation must receive special attention.  This special attention must be carried out at the airport gates as well as in our selection of individuals for sensitive positions in our government and defense organizations and industries.  This is the least we should do.  Others may soon be calling for the deportation of all who profess a devout belief in Islam, or worse, especially if we experience another successful attack of 9-11 proportions or worse.  We need to stop our demeaning harassment of the innocent majority out of our insane desire to not offend those who profess their offense toward us.

We know our President is not with us when he declares in his book "Audacity of Hope" that he promises to “stand with them [Muslim immigrants] if the political winds became ugly.”   I take that to mean that he will defend Islam and Muslims in this nation no matter how severe the political backlash might be as a result of future Muslim atrocities.  Stunning.

Daniel Pipes, in this pointed article about our security failures, asked "What size disaster must occur to inspire a serious approach to counterterrorism?"

I would add "What size disaster must occur and how much of our culture and freedom must we sacrifice to inspire a serious approach to Islam?"

LiveJournal Tags: Islam,Islamic terror,root cause of terror,Muslims,national security,Obama,reacting

Changing 1,000 years of tribal history in 2 years - say what?

President Obama finally announced his decision on Afghanistan over three months after his appointed general provided his recommendation: Send in three quarters of the number of troops requested, stabilze the country by making buddies, then vacate the country within 18 months.

I have a number of problems with not just the President's response and how he handled it, but with the whole US approach in Afghanistan and to Islamists generally.

First, the Fort Hood incident is a clue that generals, including General McChrystal, don't have an accurate appreciation of Islam's deep devotion to its worldwide mission. The generals can't even disceern the Islamic enemies pandered to within their own ranks.

Second, the President proposes to stabilize Afghanistan within 18 months? Yeah, that'll happen. We had indiginous tribes in this nation and it took many decades of sustained military/Indian conflict for the military to prevail. And we lived here, too. And do our own native Americans look on our act of conversion of their "old ways" with glee and thanksgiving? Hardly. Thanksgiving is what we celebrate, not the folks who's culture was sunamied. And I'm not at all convinced that the native American ever harbored as much deep seated, religion-based, rabid hatred toward us as the middle east Islamists do.

Obama is either deceived or the deceiver. He will be wasting lives over the next year and a half for what? A stable, democratic Afghanistan? Maybe gaining stability during our presence there. He's failing to highlight one major factor: Islamic democracy equals "one vote; one time." Then Sharia law. That's what we will have fought for. Their right to vote in Islamic law. Two years for the west to sustainably change 1,000 plus years of tribal Islamic governance - you have got to be kidding. The hatred of the west and the Jihadi mentality will still remain. Just wait to see what happens in Iraq over the next year or two when we have only a few thousand troops remaining.

Our only purpose in Afghanistan, along with our allies who share our concerns, should be to monitor, through covert means, terror plots and characters that pose a threat. Period. At the same time, we need to get a clue about subversive Islamic supremacist activities in our own nation, within our own leadership, and within our own military and take appropropriate measures to identify and eliminate them.

Waste, waste, waste.

"But what about Pakistan?" some may protest. "If we abandon Afghanistan, the Islamists will take over Pakistan and its nukes. " If we are in Afgahnistan to keep Pakistan from going "Islam," what sense does that make? It already is. If we are in Afghanistan to keep the "radicals" from overpowering the Pakistani government, that can be done better with direct assistance to Pakistan. Rather than wasting hundreds of billions on the rat hole in Afghanistan each year, wouldn't it be better to focus a portion of those billions on the root concern in Pakistan - toward whatever measures that will bolster their resistance to radical elements? Fortunately, so far, it appears that most of the Pakistani leadership has not yet caught the "true Islam" bug that is spawning across the globe. But it is just a matter of time before they do.

Obama’s Affinity for Islam…

Here is a video worthy of going viral on the net.  Obama’s comments bring to me the strongest feeling of being a foreigner in my own land.  He is our nation’s Trojan Horse who has entered our gates at the invitation of our ill-informed and gullible electorate.

His statements on this video about the glories of Islam deserve refutation:  He glorifies Islam beyond all common understanding of history.  He elevates the Islamic culture above all that America is based upon.

The video compresses every pro-Islamic statement Obama has publicly uttered over the past two years – statements when heard in isolation were uneasily dismissed as a random gaff or reminiscence of his childhood.  Most of us wishfully thought that such statements couldn’t possibly really represent the thoughts of OUR president.  To many, it clearly answers the questions about why a decision about Afghanistan is taking so long; why he panders to Islamic nations and shows disdain for Israel; why he eliminates the missile shield from one of our best European allies; why he supports Gaza, Palestine and Hamas over Israel, why he refuses to acknowledge that Fort Hood was attacked by a Muslim Jihadist to further Islamic supremacist goals.  It explains why in his book Audacity of Hope he promises to “stand with them [Muslim immigrants] if the political winds became ugly.”

What will it take for America to wake up?

LiveJournal Tags: Obama's Muslim video,Barack Obama,Obama,Islam,Muslim president,Trojan Horse

Obama’s contrasting views on “drawing quick conclusions”

Remember back in July during a press conference when Barack Hussein Obama defended his radical friend Henry Gates by saying “I don’t have all the facts but the Cambridge cops acted stupidly?”

Well, today the very same Obama warned the public “against drawing quick conclusions” about the motivation behind Hasan’s Jihadist attack that killed 13 people at Fort Hood.

These two events along with Obama’s radical history and actions doesn’t leave much to the imagination to conclude the President is a defender of his radical friends, holds police and military in low regard, and is either ignorant or disingenuous about the teaching, practice, and goals of Islam.

And who exactly recommended Nidal Malik Hasan to be a “Task Force Event Participant” for the Homeland Security Policy Institute’s Presidential Transition Task Force report “Thinking Anew—Security Priorities for the Next Administration?” Out of the several dozen participants on that task force, how many Muslims were ask to provide their advice on homeland security matters?  At least two stand out based on their titles:  Waleed Alshahari, Embassy of Yemen (a Muslim nation next door to Saudi Arabia) and Safiya Ghori, representing the Muslim Public Affairs Council. How many more were there, like Hasan, whose title was not revealing and whose attitudes and motivations not in our nations’ best interests?

Technorati Tags: Islam,Muslim,Obama,Barack Obama,duplicity,Nidal Hasan

Obama: I Won't 'Rush' Afghanistan Decisions

No freakin’ kidding.  How much time does this dude need?

Am I the only one who thought that the President’s policy advisors had these kinds of things planned out months in advance of a decision needing to be made – with multiple scenarios and options for action?  This man is scaring me.

Obama: I Won't 'Rush'
Afghanistan Decisions

President tells troops he won't risk their lives unless 'absolutely necessary,' as critics say time is running out.

Whoopsie – he’s lying again.

“If it is necessary,” Obama added, "we will back you up to the hilt."  Apparently he doesn’t think it is necessary.

All the while, we are losing 5 men here, 10 troops there, 30 somewhere else.  I know its a war and in war we lose people.  But this cat is sacrificing Americans because of his lack of decision.  We are months beyond when the decision should have been made.  And he still blames Bush.  Unfrickinbelieveable.

Pro-Muslim, anti-Christian Obama agenda…

Would you be concerned if the government imposed a tax on tithing? In fact, our government is currently considering such tax.

Refer to this link for specifics on the proposal – and be sure to view the video. From Atlas Shrugs: Obama And Allies Moving Against Non-Islamic Religions while Promoting "Zakat"

As currently proposed, this tax would be applied to any tithe beyond 5%. While all churches that practice tithing will be affected, this measure is aimed particularly at LDS in part as retribution for their stand on gay marriage.

This proposed measure is especially ironic in light of Obama’s vow to protect the Zakat in the US, which is the Islamic equivalent to the tithe. A portion of the Zakat is directed toward Islamic military, i.e., terror organizations.

This is further implementation of Obama’s promise “… that I will stand with them [Muslim immigrants] should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” While a couple of internet “truth sites” fail to see through Obama’s nuanced rhetoric, I clarify the real meaning for doubters, below:

The quote appears in The Audacity of Hope” page 261, which reads in part as follows:

“…and I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” The question is - who is “them” he is referring to?

In context, within the paragraph, he is referring to US citizen immigrants from Arab countries and Pakistan (as his text reads “Arab and Pakistani Americans”), which happen to be countries of what official religion: Jewish? Methodist? Noooo. Islam. Therefore, it is NOT a distortion to insert the word “Muslims” in place of “them” in the above sentence, so the clear meaning, in context, can be taken to be:

“…and I will stand with Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

This proper interpretation is consistent with Obama’s actions of handcuffing the CIA and FBI both in war zones as well as in the US when interrogating terror suspects. He is already “standing with them.” He apparently considers the work of the FBI and CIA (their investigative methods) to be among the “political winds” shifting in an ugly direction. He wishes to give Islamic terror suspects the benefit of the doubt. This causes me to wonder to what extent he is interfering with investigations such as the recent New York City subway bombing suspects case to further his “standing with them [Muslims]?

I realize that Snopes and TruthOrFiction give Obama the benefit of the doubt with their published renderings of his “intent.”

From “Truthorfiction.com” (Snopes says roughly the same thing):

"I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."-Fiction! [not really!! – Muccings]
This is a corruption [not really – Muccings] of a quote from Obama's book The Audacity of Hope. It is from a section that talks about the concerns of immigrants who are American citizens. [The paragraph the quote is taken from is specifically speaking of American Muslims from the Islamic Arab states and Islamic Pakistan. Snopes and TruthorFiction ignore this context. Obama cleverly avoids use of the terms “Muslim” and “Islam” here. These terms are used in a variety of other places in Audacity but are not referenced even once in the extensive Index of the book. He is either ignorant of or choosing to ignore the fact that the Islamic religion is at the core of Jihadi violence in the world. Why would he want to do that? - Muccings]

Here is the accurate and more complete quote: "Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. [It appears Obama is opposed to questioning terrorist suspects. - Muccings] They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II [At the time, the entire nation was fearful of Japanese sabotage, which was a real threat after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Obama is being a historical revisionist! – Muccings], and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction [Apparently he will stand with the saboteurs and the terror suspects. - Muccings]"

The Gelding of the President

Barack Obama has just joined the ranks of Yasser Arafat, The United Nations, Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, and Albert Gore, Jr. in being awarded (as opposed to ”winning”) the Nobel Peace Prize.

From Pamela Geller:

Because nothing means anything anymore. Because good is evil and evil is good. Because we live in a morally bankrupt world.

Obama won what? This is embarrassing. Who's next? Bill Ayers? Stuart just pointed out this Nobel Fun Fact: This year's Nobel Peace Prize winner (Our Esteemed President, peace be upon him) recently refused to meet with the winner of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize (the Dalai Lama), in an attempt to suck up to China.

Obama has sided with evil, abandoned the Jews, the Iranians, the Hondurans, the Eastern Europeans, capitalism, individual rights, American sovereignty -- in under a year.

This wasn’t awarded for what he has accomplished, but for what anti-Americans hope he will accomplish.  Its purpose is to stoke his ego into “performing” as the world wishes.  One commentator called Obama’s prize, “the gelding of the President.”  The purpose of “gelding” in the world of horses and mules is to make the animal calmer and better-behaved, and more suitable to being manipulated into subservience. 

This is the purpose of the Nobel Prize in the case of Obama.

Actually, this is a case of transparent manipulation of an ego on the international stage – a bribe.  A wiser recipient would decline the “Prize” in this situation.

Time Magazine came out with this article:  Obama’s Nobel:  The Last Thing He Needs.  Refreshingly on target for such a left leaning publication.

Nazis are new US partner in German coalition

That is the moral equivalent of what Obamaniac wants to do in Afghanistan with the Taliban:

“The official…added that the president is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan's political future, reiterating what Obama said in March.

The assessment comes from an official who has been involved in the president's discussions with his war council about Afghanistan strategy.” From Fox News “Politics.”

So, did we get it wrong these past several years.? The Taliban is really not so bad? We will now suck up and partner with them to form an Afghan government? You have got to be kidding! Read this excerpt from Wikipedia:

In 1996, Osama bin Laden moved to Afghanistan from Sudan. He came without any invitation from the Taliban, and sometimes irritated Mullah Omar with his declaration of war and fatwa to murder citizens of third-party countries, and follow-up interviews,[97] but relations between the two groups became closer over time, and eventually bonded to the point where Mullah Omar rebuffed its patron Saudi Arabia, insulting Saudi minister Prince Turki and refusing to turn over bin Laden to the Saudis as Omar had reportedly promised to earlier.[98] Bin Laden was able to forge an alliance between the Taliban and his Al-Qaeda organization. It is understood that Al-Qaeda-trained fighters known as the 055 Brigade were integrated with the Taliban army between 1997 and 2001. Several hundred Arab Afghan fighters sent by bin Laden assisted the Taliban in the slaughter at Mazar-e-Sharif.[99] Taliban-Al-Qaeda connections, were also strengthened by the reported marriage of one of bin Laden's sons to Omar's daughter. During Osama bin Laden's stay in Afghanistan, he may have helped finance the Taliban.[100][101]

Perhaps the biggest favor Al-Qaeda did for the Taliban was the assassination by suicide bombing[102] of the Taliban's most effective military opponent mujahideen commander and Northern Alliance leader Ahmad Shah Massoud shortly before 9 September 2001. This came at a time when Taliban human rights violations and extremism seemed likely to create international support for Massoud's group as the legitimate representatives of Afghanistan.[102] The killing, reportedly handled by Ayman Zawahiri and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad wing of Al-Qaeda, left the Northern Alliance leaderless, and removed "the last obstacle to the Taliban’s total control of the country ..."[103] After the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Africa, Osama bin Laden and several Al-Qaeda members were indicted in U.S. criminal court.[104]

The Taliban protected Osama bin Laden from extradition requests by the U.S., variously claiming that bin Laden had "gone missing" in Afghanistan,[105] or that Washington "cannot provide any evidence or any proof" that bin Laden is involved in terrorist activities and that "without any evidence, bin Laden is a man without sin... he is a free man."[106][107] Evidence against bin Laden included courtroom testimony and satellite phone records.[108][109] Bin Laden in turn, praised the Taliban as the "only Islamic government" in existence, and lauded Mullah Omar for his destruction of idols like the Buddhas of Bamiyan.[110]

Yes, indeedy. The Taliban is now our friend. Is there any wonder why Army chaplains in Afghanistan are seeing a huge upswing in troops who are confused about their mission and losing heart? This sentiment is typical…

“Sergeant Christopher Hughes, 37, from Detroit, has lost six colleagues and survived two roadside bombs. Asked if the mission was worthwhile, he replied: “If I knew exactly what the mission was, probably so, but I don’t.””

Does our mission sound fuzzy or inane to you? Yes, me to. That simply means our leadership sucks.

These kinds of unfathomable revelations are what cause normally well-adjusted people to consult with chaplains and turn religious in general. The astounding things in religion that require faith to believe are more solid and rational than the goings on in world politics - especially the goings on of the Obama administration. Hey, this may be the one positive "change" coming out of this radical in the White House - an increase in religious faith.

Wow! The end game of homo activists…

Ceasing discrimination against homosexuals is not enough.  We must stop our subtle advocacy of heterosexuality.  It is wrong to infer that heterosexuality is the best practice.  That might warp little minds.  There should not be any preference shown that heterosexuality is preferred.  What’s next?  We shouldn’t suggest that abstaining from pedophilia is the best practice?    Oh wait, Kevin apparently believes that, too.  Read below the video.  Is there any line against deviancy anymore?

Here is Obama’s “Safe School Czar” Kevin Jennings criticizing schools for using proms and Romeo & Juliet to promote heterosexuality.

Kevin has a different interpretation of what constitutes safe schools than most of us.  Of course, most of us are wrong.  He didn’t see fit to report a case of pedophilia that was reported to him when he was a teacher:

Obama's Safe School Czar Hid Case of Pedophilia
washingon times/the lid ^ | 9/28/09 | The Lid

Posted on Monday, September 28, 2009 9:09:04 PM by Shellybenoit

Everybody may have a different Idea of what "safe schools" may mean, but I would imagine many people who would include pedophilia in a list of things that make schools safe, with the exception of President Obama's safe schools Czar, Kevin Jennings.

A teacher was told by a 15-year-old high school sophomore that he was having homosexual sex with an "older man." At the very least, statutory rape occurred. Fox News reported that the teacher violated a state law requiring that he report the abuse. That former teacher, Kevin Jennings, is President Obama's "safe school czar." It's getting hard to keep track of all of this president's problematic appointments. Clearly, the process for vetting White House employees has broken down.

Obama’s most favorite world event yet…

Neutering our national defense is nothing compared to this. Obama can be so proud.

UN Calls for New Reserve Currency

Arabs Plot to Drop Dollar

Word is out. Level the economic playing field by getting rid of the dollar that favors the US in world financial matters. Obama must be wringing his little socialist, one-world equality hands with glee with this one.

“Chinese financial sources believe President Barack Obama is too busy fixing the US economy to concentrate on the extraordinary implications of the transition from the dollar in nine years' time. The current deadline for the currency transition is 2018.”

"Important progress in managing imbalances can be made by reducing the reserve currency country’s 'privilege' to run external deficits in order to provide international liquidity," UN undersecretary-general for economic and social affairs, Sha Zukang, said.

Speaking at the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Istanbul, he said: "It is timely to emphasise that such a system also creates a more equitable method of sharing the seigniorage derived from providing global liquidity."

He said: "Greater use of a truly global reserve currency, such as the IMF?s special drawing rights (SDRs), enables the seigniorage gained to be deployed for development purposes," he said.

Wheeee…all of the Beatles’ and Rolling Stones drug-induced song lyrics are coming true now that the liberal buzz-heads from the 60s drug culture are advising the President.

And I wouldn’t blame the Arabs for this. It is our own consumptive, spendthrift, socially and financially irresponsible habits that are to blame. Let’s spend our way out of recession. Yeah, right, Bush and Obama and Congress. They are all spineless fools. They feel a need to keep the masses happy, despite the long-term consequences. And as long as we, the masses are happy, they stay in power and we all go down together.

Obama’s foreign policy: A possible positive result

Obama has done a lot of things that cause conservatives to believe he is screwing up our national security and relationships with our allies.

But there may be one bright spot. We are no longer perceived as being the lead defender of the west. We have relinquished what many perceive as the Bush junk yard dog mentality. No more “Matt Dillon” galloping to the rescue of the young maiden.

The other “townsfolk” now know they have to share the burden for law and order in their territory, their national defense. But the big question remains: Do they have either the will or the means to defend themselves? History over the past 95 years says they don’t.

Oh well. It was a thought, anyway.

On a related note, Yahoo News reports “…commentators on the left say the military ought to keep its advice private without trying to influence public debate, with New York Times columnist Frank Rich accusing the generals of an attempt to "try to lock him (Obama) in" on Afghanistan.”

But the military rightfully doesn’t want to take the fall for the failure of a political solution to the Afghan war. They are right to lay out what is needed from the military perspective. If the President fails to heed their advice, the failure is properly on his shoulders. No wonder Obama is dumbing down his definition of “victory.” He is preparing us not to expect very much.

Here is a gem of a quote from George Will:

"A presidential strategy is half-baked if its author decides it is dubious after its first collision with difficulty. "

Result of binding and gagging our troops…

Obama has his ways of provoking public sentiment against follow-through that would allow success in Afghanistan.

First, prohibit effective interrogations.

Next, prohibit use of of air cover.

Next, embolden enemies by showing our weakness through pandering

Next, inform the world that we really don’t intend to “win.”

Next, require Miranda rights be given to terrorist captives.

Finally, ponder for months about the need for a troop increase.

Any wonder why we just experienced the death of 10 US soldiers in the deadliest battle in 15 months?

E-mail to the President about my wife’s healthcare plan…

I fired off this e-mail to the White House this evening after I heard from several news sources today that Medicare Advantage Plans are thought to enrich the pockets of insurance companies and will be eliminated by the President’s health care plan.

My wife is covered by a Medicare Advantage plan -the only affordable plan she is eligible for. I understand the Presidents health care plan will be funded to a large extent through cutting or eliminating Medicare Advantage policies. This runs counter to the President's statement:

"Nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: Nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.”

It appears a change in her coverage will be required by the President's plan. Am I misunderstanding something or is the President being less than honest?

Our Medicare Advantage Plan is a great policy for the money – we are happy with the coverage. But the President’s plan requires us to change what we have to something unknown. Was the President:

a) Misinformed?

b) Being disingenuous?

c) Practicing Islamic Taqiyya?

d) Being misleading?

e) Obfuscating?

f) Merely lying?

“Gee”, as in “golly” might be the best response - “all of the above.”

First it was the coal industry that Obama vowed to destroy through his cap and trade program. Next the takeover of banks, and the the auto industry. And now the health insurance companies. What's next? What other businesses and industries does this President wish to take over or destroy?