Though it steps on one of my drafts, there is growing suspicion about Obama’s intent as to all these problems.
For months and longer, a debate has raged over Obama’s intentional destruction of America. Some see the damage as as collateral, some see it as the main objective. Whatever your opinion on it, that is finally coming around.
Bill O’Reilly of all people has begun talking about the willful intent in these problems and scandals. He also had Krauthammer on who artfully explained the scenario of Obama’s willful behavior, as only Charles can.
Krauthammer said that things are pretty bad, but noted, “There’s a big difference between decline as a condition and decline as a choice. What we have with Obama is a president choosing decline.”
At the least, the problems are the natural results of his ideology and policies. On the further end, the results are fully intentional. Well, in either case all is working according to plan. They are using the ideas they want, and they are having their negative affects.
From the Liberals’ perspective, the only problem is getting people to see both ideas and results as good. A segment of his base will see everything he does as good, and therefore accept any results as good — even if actually bad. This is where the Democrats’ spin comes in handy. Convince people to see a negative as a positive.
Now we are back to that scripture: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20)
Now we have lots of people finally coming out on the side of willful intent, seeing the results of Obama’s actions as intentional. But that makes sense because to try to blame it all as accidental is about impossible.
On 6/24, in his talking points, O’Reilly admitted that the early criticisms — aside from qualifications and religion — of right-wing conservatives was true. A big admission for Bill that only took 6 years. But the first clue might have been Obama using his campaign as his resume’. Maybe O’Reilly missed that obvious clue.
RightRing | Bullright