October Surprise: The Un-making Of An American President

        

Ambassador Christopher Stevens

Political pundits have been warning about an October surprise that could affect the outcome of the presidential election. But this year's October surprise may have been the 9/11 murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, along with three other Americans, and President Obama's deceitful, cowardly response. 

The fallout is the collapse of the false narrative that the assassination of bin Laden brought finality to Muslim threats, the proof of the failure of President Obama's Middle East policy, and the cover- up. A cover-up is a bad act or false statement followed by an effort to conceal or mislead public knowledge.

If Americans needed more proof that Barack Hussein Obama is a radical Muslim Marxist terrorist operating from the people’s Oval Office, they now have it in the Benghazi story.

What we now know about September 11^th events in Benghazi Libya is far from what the Obama administration has been telling us about the events of that day for the last several weeks.

Obama got away with his war on Libya without congressional approval because no Americans were killed. Now four Americans have been killed. The 9/11 attack in Benghazi, Libya was a pre-planned, calculated, organized, military-style assault on U.S. territory and personnel. But the Obama administration persisted for two weeks in spinning the fairy tale that it was just the spontaneous outburst of a mob angry about an anti-Muslim video.

 

The lies about Benghazi are so numerous that one would have to re-play the large numbers of video to chronicle them all, so let’s see what I’ve been able to obtain. The kist of lies are as follows:

·   The Obama administration said they had no prior warning of the attacks on Benghazi – LIE

·    They said the attacks were due to a protest – LIE

      They said the protest was a reaction to a totally obscure YouTube video – LIE

      They said that they did not know what happened for more than 17 days after – LIE

     They said that they had nothing to do with that YouTube video – LIE

     They said they were confused by a “fog of war” – LIE

     They said it was not a terrorist attack – LIE

      They said it had nothing to do with Obama foreign policy – LIE

·    They said they had bad intelligence – LIE

     They said they didn’t have the funds for more security – LIE

    They said they didn’t know who killed our Americans – LIE

     They said Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood were not involved – LIE

    They said that Obama was not directly involved – LIE

    They said that concerned people were “politicizing Benghazi” – LIE

     They said that they didn’t arm the people who killed four Americans – LIE

     They said they did all they could do – LIE

On Sept. 16, the Obama administration sent U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice onto five Sunday TV programs to redundantly present the party line that the torching of the consulate and murder of the U.S. Ambassador were merely an angry mob reaction to an anti-Islam video made in the U.S. Rice called the event “spontaneous”, not a premeditated response" that seemed "to have been hijacked" by "extremists who came with heavier weapons."

Jay Carney

White House spokesman Jay Carney insisted on Sept. 14 that the attack was all about an anti-Muslim video saying, "We have no information to suggest that it was a pre-planned attack." He spent eight days denying the obvious before he admitted that the label of terrorism was "self-evident." When Obama spoke to the United Nations on Sept. 25, he announced, "the vision we will support." Expressing "outrage" at the anti- Islam video (which he mentioned six times), but not at the terrorists or violent enemies of the United States, Obama proclaimed that "the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Islam."

 

Candy Crowley

In an emotional pitch to the U.N. Obama announced that it's the world's duty to condemn the video Obama and Administration spokesmen almost sounded like they were empathizing with the rioters, and that it must be our fault for allowing a video to be shown that hurt the rioter's feelings. Mitt Romney challenged Obama on the Libyan attack in the second presidential debate on Oct. 16 Obama responded by claiming he had called it a "terror" event the day after it happened, after which moderator Candy Crowley showed her bias by immediately backing up his statement.

 

The original unclassified Benghazi cables covering more than twelve months leading up to Benghazi prove that the Obama administration is full of bold faced liars, at a minimum. An Executive Brief covers the period leading up to the events of 9-11-12.

The House Committee on Oversight of Government Reform is asking questions that they already know the answers to and in case you are wondering why nobody is taking any serious action on the Obama massacre in Benghazi, it’s because many Washington DC politicians have American blood on their hands, see for yourself in the video below.

Since we covered the Benghazi tragedy and unclassified cables long before information was reported by FOX News and ignored by every other mainstream press room busy campaigning for Barack Obama, much more damning information is emerging.

The facts are starting to support a theory that the Obama administration might have been much worse than inept. The facts are adding up to blatant treason by the Obama administration in Benghazi, possibly setting up Benghazi for death and destruction as a campaign stunt to win re-election.

Fact checkers emphatically pointed out Obama had made a vague reference to unspecified "acts of terror" in his Sept. 12 Rose Garden remarks, but he absolutely did not apply the "T" word to the fatal Benghazi attack. It took Obama two weeks to admit that we had suffered another deliberate enemy attack, meanwhile whining that suggestions that he would "mislead is offensive." suggestions that he would "mislead is offensive."

Obama spent more time discussing the evils of the video than castigating any particular violent attack from the Muslim world. He said Ambassador Stevens was "killed" in Benghazi without mentioning who murdered him much less labeling them as terrorists. Obama is deeply committed to the myth of a liberating "Arab Spring" and "the forces of change" to bring about democracy in the Middle East. He seems oblivious to the reality of how his policy of dislodging dictators friendly to the United States, such as in Egypt and Libya, has resulted in rule by Islamist forces who attack and kill Americans. 

The Obama administration has such a long string of lies already in the air on Benghazi that Obama is scared to utter a word on the matter until after the election. They are trapped in their own web of lies and administration rats are looking for cover, exposing Obama to campaign problems if they can’t shut down this story until after the election. 

Hillary Clinton says Have I got a story for you

There is no way that Benghazi was an accident. What happened in Benghazi was a direct result of decisions made by numerous members of the Obama administration, including Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The list of Obama administration officials who should be facing charges of treason today is long and distinguished. But the buck stops with Obama. The Commander-in-Chief was the only administration official with the authority and duty to issue a final order to deploy a defense (or) stand down on Benghazi. Unclassified cables will neither confirm nor refute this fact. But the classified documents that Hillary keeps hinting to would.

CIA officials have publicly stated that it was no one in the CIA who issued any order to “stand down.” Hillary says that she didn’t issue any order to stand down. DoD chief Panetta is also refusing to accept responsibility for standing down in Benghazi… that leaves Obama, the Commander-in-Chief.

Charlene Lamb

The evidence is overwhelming that Ambassador Stevens and his tiny security staff had made repeated requests to the Obama administration for enhanced security and more security staff. Fox News reported 230 prior security incidents in Libya. Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb, who was in charge of diplomatic security, testified on Oct. 10 she had placed "the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11 for what had been agreed upon." That doesn't square with the denials of repeated requests for enhanced security measures and staff.

Obama revealed his messianic self- importance in this interview given on New Hampshire Public Radio on Nov. 21, 2007: "The day I'm inaugurated, not only the country looks at itself differently, but the world will looks at America differently. If I'm reaching out to the Muslim world, they understand that I've lived in a Muslim country, and I may be a Christian, but I also understand their point of view." I want a congressional investigations that will keep digging. We all still want to know what Obama and other administration officials know and when they knew it.

With one week to go before the 2012 election, people in DC are running cover and the so-called news media is so focused on campaigning for Obama that they too are responsible, only the American people can hold any of these criminals accountable.

Glen Doherty And Tyrone Woods: The Disobedient Heros

The American people will get only ONE chance to politically correct them all on November 6, 2012.

If they have the courage and honor to remove these criminals from power on November 6^th, they should demand treason charges be filed against a laundry list of Obama officials on the morning of November 7^th.

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.9

"Some Budget And Tax Reality" Numbers Don't Lie

The U.S. has never before had a President who thinks so little of the American people that he imagines he can win re-election running on the opposite of reality. But that is the reality of President Obama today.

Obama has recently claimed on the campaign stump, (Where else) “That federal spending since he took office has risen at the slowest pace of any President in almost 60 years.”

This was startling to a lot of people, So, I’ve looked into it and found that the president had left out most all of the spending from 2009, the first year of Obama’s Presidency. The President was deliberately using a misleading argument to paint a false picture!  But you know, why would he go out there waiving an article that could immediately be debunked?  Maybe because he thought it was true.  That’s even more alarming, isn’t it? The idea that he knows so little about the effects of his own economic program that he thinks he really is a low spender.”

What this shows most importantly is that the recognition is starting to break through to the general public regarding the President’s rhetorical strategy that I’ve have been calling Calculated Deception.  The latter is deliberately using a misleading argument to paint a false picture.  This has been a central Obama practice not only throughout his entire presidency, but also as the foundation of his 2008 campaign strategy, and actually throughout his whole career.

The President is not as nuts as he may seem at times.  He knows very well that he is not a careful spender.  His whole mission was to transform the U.S. not just a Big Government country, but a Huge Government country, because only a country run by a Huge Government can be satisfactorily controlled by superior, all wise and beneficent individuals like himself.  That is why he is at minimum a Swedish socialist, if not worse.  Notice, though, how far behind the times he and his weak minded supporters are, as even the Swedes have abandoned Swedish socialism as a failure.


The previous administration, or President, proposes a budget.  The previous Congress approved that budget.  And what Congress approves can be radically different from what the President proposes. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress.

President Bush began a spending spree in his term that erased most of the gains in reduced government spending as a percent of GDP achieved by the Republican Congress in the 1990s led by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, in conjunction with President Clinton.  But for fiscal year 2009, President Bush in February, 2008 proposed a budget with just a 3% spending increase over the prior year.  Fiscal year 2009 ran from October 1, 2008 until September 30, 2009.  President Obama’s term began on January 20, 2009.

Nancy Pelosi

Recall, however, that in 2008 Congress was controlled by Democrat majorities, with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House, and the restless Senator Obama already running for President, just four years removed from his glorious career as a state Senator in the Illinois legislature.  

The budget approved and implemented by Pelosi, Obama and the rest of the Congressional Democrat majorities provided for a 17.9 percent increase in spending for fiscal 2009!

So actually, President Obama and the Democrats were even more deeply involved in the fiscal 2009 spending explosion than that.  The Democrat Congress [in 2008], confident Obama was going to win in 2008, passed only three of fiscal 2009’s 12 appropriations bills (Defense, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security).  The Democrat Congress passed the rest of them in 2009, and President Obama signed them.”  So Obama played a very direct role in the runaway fiscal 2009 spending explosion.

Note as well that President Reagan didn’t just go along with the wild spending binge of the previous Democratic Congress for fiscal year 1981 when he came into office on January 20 of that year.  Almost no one remembers now the much vilified at the time 1981 Reagan budget cuts, his first major legislative initiative. 

Then Democrat Rep. Phil Gramm joined with Ohio Republican Del Latta to push through the Democratic House $31 billion in Reagan proposed budget cuts to the fiscal year 1981 budget, which totaled $681 billion, resulting in a cut of nearly 5% in that budget.  Obama could have done the exact same thing when he entered office in January, 2009, even more so with the Congress totally controlled by his own party at the time.

Reagan then ramped up the spending cuts from there.  In nominal terms, non-defense discretionary spending actually declined by 7.1% from 1981 to 1982.  But roaring inflation at the time actually masks the true magnitude of the Reagan spending cut achievement.  In constant dollars, non-defense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983.  Moreover, in constant dollars, this non-defense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms!  By 1988, this spending was still down 14.4% from its 1981 level in constant dollars.

Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which, remember, won the Cold War without firing a shot, total federal spending as a percent of GDP declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989.  That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%, a huge achievement.

In sharp contrast to Reagan, Obama’s first major legislative initiative was the so-called stimulus, which increased future federal spending by nearly a trillion dollars, the most expensive legislation in history up till that point.  We know now, as thinking people knew at the time, that this record shattering spending bill only stimulated government spending, deficits and debt.  Contrary to official Democrat Keynesian witchcraft, you don’t promote economic recovery, growth and prosperity by borrowing a trillion dollars out of the economy to spend a trillion dollars back into it.

But this was just a warm up for Obama’s Swedish socialism.  Obama worked with Pelosi’s Democratic Congress to pass an additional, $410 billion, supplemental spending bill for fiscal year 2009, which was too much even for big spending President Bush, who had specifically rejected it in 2008.  Next in 2009 came a $40 billion expansion in the SCHIP entitlement program, as if we didn’t already have way more than too much entitlement spending.

But those were just the preliminaries for the biggest single spending bill in world history, Obamacare, enacted in March, 2010.  That legislation is not yet even counted in Obama’s spending record so far because it mostly does not go into effect until 2014.  But it is now scored by CBO as increasing federal spending by $3.7 trillion in the first 10 years alone, with trillions more to come in future years.

After just one year of the Obama spending binge, federal spending had already rocketed to 25.2% of GDP, the highest in American history except for World War II.  That compares to 20.8% in 2008, and an average of 19.6% during Bush’s two terms.  The average during President Clinton’s two terms was 19.8%, and during the 60-plus years from World War II until 2008 — 19.7%.  Obama’s own fiscal 2013 budget released in February projects the average during the entire 4 years of the Obama Administration to come in at 26.4% in just a few months.  That budget shows federal spending increasing from $2.983 trillion in 2008 to an all time record $3.796 trillion in 2012, an increase of 27.3%.

Moreover, before Obama there had never been a deficit anywhere near $1 trillion.  The highest previously was $458 billion, or less than half a trillion, in 2008. The federal deficit for the last budget adopted by a Republican controlled Congress was $161 billion for fiscal year 2007.  But the budget deficits for Obama’s four years were reported in Obama’s own 2013 budget as $1.413 trillion for 2009, $1.293 trillion for 2010, $1.3 trillion for 2011, and $1.327 trillion for 2012, four years in a row of deficits of $1.3 trillion or more, the highest in world history.

President Obama’s own 2013 budget shows that as a result federal debt held by the public will double during Obama’s four years as President.  That means in just one term President Obama will have increased the national debt as much as all prior Presidents, from George Washington to George Bush, combined.

Paul Ryan

But this 2012 election is defined for the voters by the future, not the past.  And that future is fully revealed by the stark contrast between President Obama’s spending, deficits and debt projected under his proposed 2013 budget, and the projections under House Budget Committee Chairman and VP candidate Paul Ryan’s budget, adopted by the Republican House, and endorsed by presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

Despite all the controversy in Washington and in the media over Ryan’s budget, what it all adds up to is just to restore federal spending to its long term, postwar, historical average of 20% of GDP.  That stable level of federal spending, with some modest variance, prevailed for over 60 years after the end of World War II, until 2009.  Ryan’s budget reduces federal spending from an average of 26.4% of GDP during the Obama years to 20.1% after just 3 years, by 2015.

By contrast, under the budget policies supported by President Obama and Congressional Democrats, federal spending soars to 30% of GDP by 2027, 40% by 2040, 50% by 2060, and 80% by 2080.  Obama’s 2013 budget proposes to spend $47 trillion over the next 10 years, the most in world history by far, increasing federal spending by $1.5 trillion above the current CBO baseline.  Ryan’s budget proposes to cut that by $6.8 trillion.  By 2022, Ryan’s budget would be spending nearly a trillion dollars less per year than President Obama’s budget.

Ryan proposes tax reform to consolidate the current 6 individual income tax rates, ranging up to 35%, to just two rates of 10% and 25%.  His budget would otherwise retain the Bush tax rates of 15% for capital gains and 15% for corporate dividends, and repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax.  Ryan also proposes corporate tax reform, closing loopholes and reducing the federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%, which is roughly the international average.  CBO scores these reforms, even with the rate cuts, as again restoring federal revenues to their long term, postwar, historical average of 18.3% of GDP by 2015.

Obama’s budget, in sharp contrast, proposes to increase federal taxes by nearly $2 trillion over the next 10 years above the CBO baseline.  The budget projects that under Obama’s tax policies federal income tax revenues will double by 2020, federal corporate tax revenues will double by 2017, and federal payroll taxes will double by 2022.

Next year, under President Obama’s policies, the top tax rates of virtually every major federal tax are already scheduled to increase under current law.  That is because the Obamacare tax increases are scheduled to go into effect, and the Bush tax cuts expire, which President Obama proposes refuses to renew for singles making over $200,000 a year, and couples making over $250,000.  President Obama is now proposing on top of that the Buffett Rule, which would increase tax rates on capital gains and dividends even further.  Counting that, next year the top tax rate for capital gains would increase by 100%, the top tax rate on corporate dividends would increase by 100%, the top two income tax rates would increase by nearly 20%, and the Medicare payroll tax again for singles making over $200,000 and couples making over $250,000 would increase by 62% (under Obamacare).

This is all on top of the corporate income tax rate, which counting state corporate rates is nearly 40%, the highest in the world now, except for the socialist one party state of Cameroon.  Under the Buffett Rule, America’s capital gains tax rate would be the fourth highest in the industrialized world.  Based on historical precedent, these tax rate increases are unlikely to raise anywhere near the revenue projected by CBO, meaning even higher future deficits and debt.

Under Ryan’s budget, even with CBO’s static scoring, the federal deficit in actual nominal dollars would be reduced to $182 billion by 2017, the fifth year of the budget.  That compares to $1,327 billion, or $1.327 trillion, today.  So in just 5 years, the deficit would be reduced by at least 86%.  

The deficit under Ryan’s budget would be less than 1% of GDP by 2017, at 0.9%, where it stabilizes for 6 years to the end of the 10 year budget window.  Most importantly, given the sharp tax rate cuts in Ryan’s budget, with dynamic scoring the budget would probably be balanced by 2017.  That is because in the real world the rate cuts will not lose nearly as much revenue as CBO scores.

Under President Obama’s budget, his own projections show the deficit never gets anywhere near balance.  Indeed, the deficit never gets below or anywhere near the former all time record in 2008.  By 2022, his own budget projects the deficit rising over the previous 5 years to $704 billion.  But if Obama’s comprehensive tax rate increases throw the country back into recession next year, the deficits will soar much higher for several years, to new all time records.

Even under CBO’s horse and buggy static scoring, Ryan’s budget does serve to get federal debt under control and avoid any debt crisis, putting federal debt held by the public on a declining path from 77% of GDP in 2013 to 62% by 2022.  That debt continues on a sharp decline from there, as the long term effects of Ryan’s structural entitlement reforms phase in.  Debt held by the public is reduced to 53% of GDP by 2030, 38% by 2040, and 10% by 2050.  That means the national debt is all but paid off by 2050, and would be soon thereafter.  In fact, under dynamic scoring it probably would be paid off by then.

In stark contrast, on our current course, under President Obama’s budget policies, federal debt held by the public rockets to 140% of GDP by 2030, 220%by 2040, and 320% by 2050, on its way to over 700% by 2080.  That would undoubtedly create a Grecian style sovereign debt crisis for America before that point.

So which course will you choose America? Do we become Somalia? Or, Do we become America? Once again? Your vote will decide who we become on November 6, next month; Don’t throw it away re-electing what doesn't work.

Time To Leave The Plantation

Democrat Party

Bishop E. W. Jackson

Bishop E. W. Jackson unapologetically said it was time for black Americans to take a stand for what is right and called for a mass exodus from the Democrat Party due to the "irreconcilable conflict" between what the Democrat Party represents and their faith in God.

Regrettably, the Democrat Party has drawn a line in the sand forcing Christians of all colors to decide whether they will stand for their faith or against it if they stay in a party that blasphemes God when giving standing ovations for platform planks like same-sex marriage and abortions. Divorcing the Democrat Party has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with "saving a generation" as Bishop Jackson said during his speech.

Realistically speaking, it truly is, considering the damage done to the black race via abortions thanks to the Planned Parenthood organization Democrats enshrine.

 

Margaret Sanger Speaking To KKK

Democrat hero and founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was racist to her very core; Sanger was photographed at KKK meetings sharing her dream to rid the planet of society's "undesirables." Liberals do their best to spin facts, but there really is no coincidence black population has decreased in large cities where Sanger's clinics are planted. Even President Obama said unplanned children are punishments, that’s what he said

Hey Barack, unplanned pregnancies are children, not punishments.

Even still, there are those who cannot see beyond the freebies Democrats indiscriminately toss to them. Listening to the rants of a black Ohio woman over the weekend singing the praises of a party and president she hasn't a clue is taking advantage of her disadvantages reminded me that bigotry has a new face that looks nothing like an elephant and an awful lot like a donkey. 

Though she meant well, her words are an indictment on everything that is wrong with a party gone awry. Here, in her own unabridged and unedited words, is why she's voting for Obama:"Everyone in Cleveland, low minority got Obamaphone...keep Obama in President...you know, he gave us a phone; he gone do more." When asked how, specifically, she qualified to get her tremendously special Obamaphone she answered, "You sign up, if you on food stamps, you on social security, you got low-income, you on disability."

Martin Luther King (MLK) would roll over in his grave to see the state of his people today, who, for an Obamaphone, have sold their souls to a devilish lie that entitlements are free. King's pivotal words "Free at last, free at last" have become "free stuff at last, free stuff at last."

Despite the color of his skin President Obama's job creation policies have been no friend to minorities generally, and blacks specifically. A recent Bureau of Labor Statistics report found black and Latino unemployment numbers continue to lead the pack and remain dangerously elevated.

With all the evidence stacked against them, Democrats continue to label Republicans as racists with ridiculous statements that a vote for a Republican would be a vote to end civil rights, entitlements, and the MLK holiday. Even our beloved Vice President said Mitt Romney would "put ya'll back in chains." 

 

Mia Love

It is as if Democrats quietly believe blacks cannot reason or care for themselves and excuse those like the black Mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah, Mia Love, as anomalies. Many liberal networks blacked-out Love's speech at the Republican National Convention telling a compelling story of self-reliance as the daughter of conservative immigrants. 

Before the night was over liberal bloggers had labeled Love a "worthless whore," an "Auntie Tom," and "house nigger", once again displaying an "irreconcilable conflict" between a party and its people who deserve much better.

The Democratic party is a party of racism. The harder they point the finger at the GOP with accusations of racism the more painfully obvious it becomes. Democrats are race obsessed. And why shouldn't they be? It worked last election. Obama was elected solely based on his race. He was supposed to represent a finale to the civil rights movement; to prove to the country that we've finally moved beyond the days of slavery and segregation. “Look how progressive we are; how far we've come. We elected an African American to be our president”. Never mind the nation didn't know a thing about him at the time. He was charming and slick. And black. And that was all that matter.

However, we know him a little better now. We've observed his attack on religious freedoms, his inability to grasp the most basic concepts of financial prudence, his cronyism, his sympathy to Muslims, and his contempt for the unborn to the extremist extents. So naturally, when held up to scrutiny, Obama must return to the old working strategy of racism if he hopes to be re-elected.

So here we are again, facing another presidential election where Democrats have effectively divided the nation into Minority Groups V. Big-Bad-Rich-White-People. This is a genius and alternately lazy debating tactic. Genius because the focus has been turned around, yet again, on race and deflected off of Obama’s glaring failures. It’s lazy, in that name calling and emotionally charged rhetoric is next to impossible to logically debate. Race is the perfect Straw Man.

How exactly are the Democrats playing the race card? With rousing games of “Look at all the white folks at the Republican National Convention – I knew they were racists”.

What else does the mainstream media, that bastion of liberal bias, do when they aren’t editing out speeches by articulate minorities… why make racist off color jokes about throwing parties while black people drown and race baiting.

But wait, there’s more.

Did you know that if you an well spoken and educated African American you are an Uncle Tom, or in Mia Love’s case, an Aunt Tom and a “house nigger”? Apparently being educated and articulate are not suppose to be characteristics of minority groups. And if you are a black women you’re supposed to be a Democrat by default; if you’re not then you must be a race traitor. How does that thinking leave room for forming individual ideas and beliefs and respecting those ideas and beliefs that may be different from our own? Oh, it doesn’t. Who are the racists again?

And finally, a single race does not collectively think and vote the same way. Just as not all African American’s are democrats, neither are all Hispanics. There is no “Hispanic vote” to be bought with insulting promises of amnesty. That’s stereotyping. It implies that Hispanic’s only political concern is immigration… because, you know, you must be illegal or have an illegal family member or something.

When you have a person who cannot look past another person’s race, who consistently stereotypes based on that race, and treats that person with hostility when they don’t conform to that perception; you have a person who practices racism. You have the Democratic party.

A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Published with Blogger-droid v 2.0.9

Have You Figured Him Out Yet?

Obama is not the man many Americans think he is. Whether you want to believe it or not he has successfully transformed American politics.

The sheer audacity of the successful operation against the American constitution has forced Obama's friends and foes alike to reassess what they make of a chief executive who defies easy categorization and reveals less about himself than politicians are typically drawn to do.

My simple observation is that the United States is going to hell in a hand basket- courtesy of a grisly cast of characters. Barack Obama is my primary source of utter mistrust and he is certainly not alone.

The people have to smarten up and see this person for who hereally is. This person is a Pandora’s Box of all things evil, yet most can’t see past healthcare and greenhouse gases. Look deeper, look into his past

This person who lied, cheated and deceived his way into the White House is best described as traitor, charlatan and definitely enemy of US and the free world. Like a fart in a crowded elevator, right out of nowhere, the presidents mysterious origins complete with huge, huge backing in a financial sense but furthermore in a strange, almost twilight zone sense of illusions, mystery, trickery, forgery and deceit. His birth documents displayed online are not a true birth certificate, but in fact that document came from companies that offer services much as a company similar to VitalChek would.

Obama in an Indonesian Madressa

No one can show a single picture of this citizen imposter that proves any of his history, no one with any credibility remembers him, we cannot see his school records and we don’t have any little footprints and hand prints like they used to do back in the early sixties on children. We don’t have any driver’s licenses, bus passes, library cards, prom photos well except for the photos from the Indonesian Madressa where the little Muslim learned to hate the free people in this world. All we can trace is that he hung around with communist scum, anti-US militant types and terrorists.

Definitely a remote implant into our American political system, being run by a secret cast of grisly puppeteers who to date remain nameless yet if you watch the benefactors of his actions, it allows you a host of potential puppet masters to pick from.  In a world where money and power can mold any outrageous conspiracy into grim reality, anything is possible. The US political system has long been corrupted and is not the safe, democratic model for the republic that it was originally intended to be. We have proven this time and time again. The office of the president is simply an oval stage where the front man sits, while the true powers that be remain hidden behind the curtain. As the marks in this well planned debacle, all we get to see is the front man in this scam, the Wiz.

I am convinced that the only reason this socialist traitor to the US was able to slither into the White house nest is simply because everyone was tired of George Bush & Company and in reality, anyone who knew how to utilize social media, social networking and could appeal to the social malcontents could have run for president and beat out the Republicans. Under normal circumstances Obama wouldn’t have made it into office. But in the middle of two Middle East conflicts with troops being killed, the economy sliding quickly into the toilet, terrorist threats, high fuel prices and just about anything else that could be going wrong was going wrong, anything can happen. Thus it did happen.

Reality is that a good portion of the people thought anything polar opposite of Bush might be worthwhile, all the way down to skin color. Then you dump in corrupt groups like ACORN, the little Obama troops he had campaigning on the streets, black celebrities, the various scumbag Muslim organizations here in the US, the ghetto members of society who think all good things come from the government, our young people who are pretty much clueless about real life outside of daddy’s house or the university who suddenly became experts on life and world in general, the elderly who Bush had shafted on medical benefits- well unfortunately this adds up to enough votes to get even ass clowns like Obama into the White house. Only proves that shit, does indeed happen.

To watch Americans put a known socialist and communist into power only proves that the vote and logic was severely tainted. Obama didn’t win by decision, he won by deceit. This thug wearing a suit hasn’t told the truth about anything since he popped into on the political scene out of nowhere.

He is a protégé of the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the American hating, white people hating big mouthed Negro racist which in itself should shed more insight into this anti-American that wormed his way into the oval office. Of course he quickly distanced himself from the mouthy Negro racist reverend and people bought his excuses and lies on that entire matter. Bottom line is, Obama was a member of that church, until public opinion swayed him into misaligning himself from it.

Obama’s reign only proves that there are indeed some truly uninformed people in this country.  I’m beginning to think that the legal age to vote should be moved to age 21 (the majority of our 18-21 year olds today, especially in college and university are a disappointment when it comes to reality and logical thinking) and perhaps there should be a simple test that the voter should have to pass before he or she is let into the booth to do serious damage. 

Democrat Voter Struggling With Literacy Test

Perhaps some level of literacy should be required, and some recent record of employment along with a utility bill in their name or a rent receipt or receipt for a mortgage payment or a paid off home and as well, we investigate if they are on welfare and haven’t ever had a job – which would basically eliminate anyfurther voters for Obama. In other words, only people that are responsible, productive, tax paying members of society should have anything to say about how this country is run and who will run it. That would certainly improve the current broken voting system.

Besides, if the working people of America have been paying all your bills along with your rent and food since you could walk, then I’m not overly concerned with what you think. And I’m not talking about people that worked hard all their life and just hit some hard times. I’m talking about the ones that never had a job, have 2 or 3 “baby daddy’s” and squirt out children with no shame because they get a bigger welfare check for each one they bring into this world on our tab. These malcontents and disenchanted ones are the very core of the Obama citizen support and voters. But, hey, they did get a government cell phone out of the deal with more than just emergency dialing capabilities, so why not give your vote to the Kenyan in the White House.

The entire voting process in America is a joke. It really doesn’t matter who you vote for because there is this mysterious entity named the “Electoral College” that decides who is going to occupy the White House anyway. In any other democratic country in the world, the actual votes are counted and the votes directly elect the official, however, in the US, the Electoral College determines what the people want or better yet, what the Electoral College think the people need. In the last election I guess they thought the people of the US needed to be bent over a table- and did just that. The voting group has been a source of argument and debate for some time, primarily because it isn’t 100% accurate especially in the latitude and leeway it gives “swing states” and should, in the interest of the voting public be disbanded and done away with.

Let’s look at another very methodically sinister side of Barack Hussein Obama, the Muslim. More than that, we have a Muslim in charge of the most powerful country in the world. A Muslim that has used the office of the President, his authority and the military resources of the United States to help build the Islamic Caliphate, the long sought after single Islamic entity, where all Muslims are together under one rule. Obama thinks he has the right, the authority and the power to tell leaders of other countries to step down so that the inmates can be in charge of the asylum.

He helped topple Egypt’s government, turning the country over to the Muslim Brotherhood or to their chosen minions. The country is still in turmoil. Obama then went after Libya and turned that country over to al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Qaeda was actually assisted by NATO forces in taking over Libya. Look at the flags on buildings and being flown throughout Libya. There is a distinct and undeniable al Qaeda presence throughout the country now and we helped put them there.  Now we are threatening Syria with the same fate.

The issue I have is that although these countries may have had bad guys running them, they were the preferred bad guys as they kept elements such as al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist entities in line, under control. Now, without these leaders in place, the countries are in turmoil and will remain so until someone steps up and offers to be their leader; and after Syria falls, Jordan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia will be next in the four year re-election plan toppling of leaders, the Islamic Obaminoes game.

Last man standing will probably be Iran as Obama conveniently keeps Israel at bay from reducing them to rubble, and Iran will pull these Islamic countries in distress up under its umbrella, either by force or some Islamic call to the Caliphate, and we will be looking at billions of militant Muslims all being led by the most deadly Islamic regime imaginable, that being Iran. A nuclear armed Iran because Obama has let them arm themselves and has done absolutely nothing about Iran, because truth be known, he is in bed with Iran- as Obama is a devout Muslim with a questionable  and obviously manufactured background, no provable history and questionable financing for his sudden rise from punk to President.

Am I crazy? No, not even close. You do the math. You move the chess pieces around in a recent past, current and futuristic game of world power between the good guys and the bad guys. What do you come up with?

Why is the US still just as dependent on Middle Eastern oil as it ever was, four years after promises were made to get off the Middle Eastern oil nipple by Barack Hussein Obama?

Why isn’t the US purchasing every drop of oil it can from its northern neighbor to help get off the ME oil nipple? Obama has tossed up a lot of roadblocks to bringing more Canadian oil into the US which would help cut the US dependency on Middle Eastern crude.

Why has there been several “suggestions” by Obama Democrats that the 2012 elections should be postponed for various reasons? Why do I smell a terrorist attack on US soil, massive market crash or other national/international disaster coming pre-election to be used to postpone the election?

Why does the US want to engage in peace talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan? Are you kidding me? This must be an Islamic thing straight from the White House.

Why is Sharia Law showing its face in the US Judicial system as it did in Pennsylvania? Why is Judge Martin still on the bench? Why was Sharia law used as the precedent over US law?

Note** This Islamic adherence to Sharia law must explain why Obama has no regard for the US Supreme Court, since he as a Muslim would only believe in Sharia law and would deem the US Supreme Court as nothing more than a council of infidels.

There are more questions than there are answers in the Obama puzzle. My advice is keep putting the pieces where they fit as the end game picture will become obvious, and click the link below and watch the Documentary 2016 Obama's America.

http://oicw65-didgitalcrack.blogspot.com/2012/09/2016-obamas-america.html