Obama’s year-end presser

There is much more to the nuance of Obama’s speech but it basically was book-ended by two paragraphs, at the beginning and at the end.

“Meanwhile, around the world, America is leading. We’re leading the coalition to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL — a coalition that includes Arab partners. We’re leading the international community to check Russian aggression in Ukraine. We are leading the global fight to combat Ebola in West Africa, and we are preventing an outbreak from taking place here at home. We’re leading efforts to address climate change, including last month’s joint announcement with China that’s already jumpstarting new progress in other countries. We’re writing a new chapter in our leadership here in the Americas by turning a new page on our relationship with the Cuban people.“

America is leading? It would have to be in spite of Obama not because of him.

Remember that saying I used: “if it happens in politics, you can bet it was planned that way.” Notice a hint of this philosophy in Obama’s remarks:

“In terms of my own job, I’m energized, I’m excited about the prospects for the next couple of years, and I’m certainly not going to be stopping for a minute in the effort to make life better for ordinary Americans. Because, thanks to their efforts, we really do have a new foundation that’s been laid. We are better positioned than we have been in a very long time. A new future is ready to be written. We’ve set the stage for this American moment. And I’m going to spend every minute of my last two years making sure that we seize it.”

That saying is believed to be a maligned loose paraphrase of FDR. (Liberal academics say FDR never said those words.) I don’t really care, but here are some words from FDR’s speech in October 1935 (6 years after ’29):

“I am glad, in coming back here … to find a very definite evidence of what I found in my trip across the continent… there was general admission that this country was coming back. You could see it with your own eyes.

Yes, we are on our way back— not just by pure chance, my friends, not just by a turn of the wheel, of the cycle. We are coming back more soundly than ever before because we are planning it that way. Don’t let anybody tell you differently.”

I almost laugh at reading FDR’s words then Obama’s speech. So we see Obama trying to lay the foundation, not for America’s interests but for his own legacy.

There was another vain reference to his self-relevance in his prepared closing remarks.

“My presidency is entering the fourth quarter; interesting stuff happens in the fourth quarter. And I’m looking forward to it. But going into the fourth quarter, you usually get a timeout. I’m now looking forward to a quiet timeout — Christmas with my family. “

Depends what you mean by interesting. If you mean a flurry of executive orders because you cannot dictate to Congress, then “interesting” probably is not quite the word I was thinking of. “Interesting stuff”…or more planned catastrophe to come.

Had Bush said that, those words “interesting stuff” would be in headlines of every paper. America (and history) should be so lucky to get a time-out from Obama.

Reference popular saying:
In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.

RightRing | Bullright

Unibama strikes again

To rewrite his legacy and the election results. The year-end finale.

There’s a saying: “If it happens in politics, you can bet it was planned that way.”*

That’s the scenario in Obama’s end of year presser before dashing off on his coveted vacation in Havana er Hawaii.

People can say it was for various reasons: his disintegrating popularity and credibility, his divisive policies, or his explanations for his Havana policy. No, he has political reasons. He stirred the pot by normalizing Cuba relations to inflame. Now he does a presser to take questions, as if those influence any dictator, and supplies contentious answers.

He intentionally stirred up a hornets nest with yet another Executive – whatever he is calling them these days – action. Then he goes off on vacation while everyone discusses his latest unilateral controversy. Since people are outraged by his arrogance abuses of power, it ensures they’ll be talking about him and what he did. So they’ll be talking about his agenda and he then controls the agenda.

So even after finishing the year with Democrats’ landslide loss, everyone has been talking about is his agenda, backed by his pen. Why only baffles some people — more outrage. But our outrage is only a reaction not a defense against it. (Much like the election)

Even in taking questions, he selected certain press to control some of the questions. Thus, even the appearance of having an open presser was a fraud. It is about control, controlling national dialogue into the new year. His way of saying bah-humbug to Republicans.

It’s a clever way of denying that voters declared him all but irrelevant weeks before. Yet he manages to be as relevant as ever by controlling the discussion, despite losses. Republicans go into a new year with more power than they have had in years, thanks largely to Obama’s unpopularity. He couldn’t even campaign for the Dems that lost, who disassociated with him. But can he continue to do it into the new year?

Now he is standing there saying you cannot ignore me. Not only can’t we, but everyone is left talking about his disgusting Executive abuses. He seems to argue “at least they’re talking about me”. Even that is deceiving, narcissist that he is. What he really cares about is forcing his crappy agenda — stinking up the room — back to the center of the table.

He completely dismisses and ignores Congress, yet no one can ignore him and his plans. He demands a response to his failed policies and agenda even after the people rejected them. Dems could not run on anything Obama was doing. In fact, in many places, like Louisiana, they spoke out against him to win votes.
That is just the backdrop and purpose to his presser. Mission: deny and defy reality.

[*sometimes attributed as a quote, I use it as a popular saying that it is]

RightRing | Bullright

Fleeting election and “immigration”

As soon as the election was over almost everyone was talking about “immigration”, which it is not anyway. But why?

It’s even less understandable if you look at the history. Last year is when approval polls really started going down, just as they were haranguing over “immigration reform” and the Senate was moving a bill. So what have we learned? People really were not happy or interested in doing what they wanted to do. Did they learn the lesson?

Another example of big government. Politicians saw some euphoric “bipartisan support” for it in the Senate, but the unpopularity or dislike for amnesty among the people was high and growing.(blaming them) There were some other events at the time, too, though disapproval spiked from that point remaining to date.

And yet here we are in the 2014 midterm election and its the very first thing they want to talk about. It is now Obama’s unilateral threat, as soon as he can do it.

In my view, it is chief among reasons people are/were angry and distrust pols, yet they are chomping at the bit. Even after we just had an insurgency of over 60,000 more illegals, and people were really ticked off at that. Within 24 hours they were back at it.

We have so many problems: the border is Swiss cheese, enforcement a problem and our security is at risk, yet they are worried about people besides voters. Isn’t that typical? At least by now you would think they could try to call it something besides “immigration”.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s Casablanca problem

The infamous scene from Casablanca is the line “shocked that there’s gambling going on here.” No one could be that naive, it would seem. I’ve said my Casablanca face is wearing thin. How many times can you feign shock when the reality is you should have expected it? It’s tough to remain surprised anymore.

That brings me to the point in this post. Obama’s problem; it’s not necessarily a problem with reality. The problem is his reaction to reality. His perception is a problem.

Now we have a large percentage of people in the US that are not shocked anymore by the scandals, his rhetoric, the conditions and our policies, or even by the condition of the country. People are beyond that, they are in Casablanca now.

We also have a saying: “I’m from Missouri,” the “show me” state. When we’ve gotten to the point where we expect corruption and cannot give politicians any benefit of doubt, much less trust them, then we are in a dark place. But where we are not is the state of denial. At this point, they’d have to show us something, consistently. Obama speechifies about being consistent. He’s consistently wrong.

In denial seems to be where Obama is though. In denial that we are on to him and see through him, that his policies are not the cure he thinks they are. In denial about the causes and effects of real problems. Denial about reality.

The old line on Russia was “trust but verify.” We can’t trust politicians and can’t verify anything….except our reason not to believe them. For some unknown reason this does not seem to bother Captain Denial. He seems to relish that we don’t trust him, just as long as we can’t trust anyone else either. It’s fine with him.

But now he is talking it up by saying the dangdest things to the dangdest people. He asks his base of borderless Brahmas, when they demand he take more executive action and decrease deportation for illegal aliens, “You’re not going to get me impeached, are you?” Does he now see a Constitutional limit on his executive credit card? No, it’s an excuse. He claimed he has lots of other stuff to do too.(and more EOs) He’s reminding them that they brung him to the dance, and need to go home with him at the end. (as Rangel says)

As for the rest of us, in growing numbers, we’re in Casablanca. Nothing he does should shock us anymore. But we aren’t alone, the rest of the world doesn’t believe Obama much either. For a faith-based candidate and a faith-based presidency, that says something.

RightRing | Bullright

Case for Impeachment grows … as does Obama’s tyranny

At the very time the case for impeachment and strategy grows, Obama is defiantly escalating his executive order”-war on America. He threatens running executive order end runs around anything in his way, with nothing to fear or restrict him, and hired White House advisers to pursue his objective — an all out assault on our Constitution. He’s long been at war with the Bill of Rights.

But some of his opposition put all their emphasis on the Senate’s ability to convict.

Obama’s regime views Snowden as a traitor and talk continues about what to do with him. While concerned about Snowden, his own actions poking his finger in the eye of the Constitutional republic reveal a different story. One of calculated, deliberate opposition and defiance to the Constitution. So much hypocrisy.

[Daily Caller] “One of the things I’ll be emphasizing in this meeting,” Obama said, “is the fact that we are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help that they need.”
I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” the president asserted, “and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward in helping to make sure our kids are getting the best education possible, making sure that our businesses are getting the kind of support and help they need to grow and advance, to make sure that people are getting the skills that they need to get those jobs that our businesses are creating.”
“And I’ve got a phone,” he continued, “that allows me to convene Americans from every walk of life — nonprofits, businesses, the private sector, universities — to try to bring more and more Americans together around what I think is a unifying theme, making sure that this is a country where if you work hard, you can make it.” — See Video

Read more

Did he just say he’d use executive orders on the economy? Jobs by Executive Order.

A very defiant Oval Office Occupant threatening to use more executive power to usurp Congress and/or the will of the people. And promising to dial up whatever support for his executive order power he can. Why not just do that by EO, too?

RightRing | Bullright

Obama cozies up with Muslim Brotherhood

See previous article, Shariafying the Governmment

About: Does Barack Obama represent the EndGame for America?
Islamist-allied operatives appointed by Obama are undermining U.S. security policy — explains counter-Intelligence expert, Prof. Clare Lopez. Aimed at co-opting Americas foreign policy in the Middle East, a network including well-known American diplomats, congressional representatives, figures from academia and the think tank world — with ties to the clerical regime in Tehran — is directing the Obama Administration’s policy towards the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Middle East.

Shariafying the Government

Big hat tip to Dave the Rave for the original article, Many thanks.

Obama Administration Paves the Way for Sharia Law

by William Bigelow DATELINE: 6 Aug 2012

The most terrifying danger Americans face from a second Barack Obama term isn’t the economy, which is scary enough.

The most harrowing prospect is the Obama Administration’s passivity in the face of attempts to introduce aspects of sharia law into our legal system. Now there is strong and open evidence of the Obama administration collaborating with Islamist activists to ensure the path toward sharia law is accelerated.

Just last week, Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, was asked this question by Trent Franks (R-AZ), a member of the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution: “Will you tell us here today that this Administration’s Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?”

Perez refused to answer. Four times.

And why would Franks target Perez?

Here’s why:

Last October, at George Washington University, there was a meeting between DOJ officials, including Perez, and Islamist advocates against free speech. Representatives from the Islamist side included Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). The ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding trial in 2008, as well as functioning as a Muslim Brotherhood Front. The leader of the Islamist attack was Sahar Aziz, an Egyptian-born American lawyer and Fellow at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, a Muslim advocacy group based in Michigan. At the meeting, the Islamists lobbied for:

1.Cutbacks in U.S. anti-terror training
2.Limits on the power of terrorism investigators
3.Changes in agent training manuals
4.A legal declaration that criticism of Islam in the United States should be considered racial discrimination

Aziz said that the word “Muslim” has become “racialized” and, once American criticism of Islam was silenced, the effect would be to “take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.”

And what was the response from Perez and the DOJ officials?


That’s right: no objection, no defense of our first amendment right to free speech.


Hat tip to Dave the Rave for this article

Now, the administration goes even further: (how big is this bed going to get?)

Obama to Muslims: Tell me what you want

‘Outreach summits’ launched, 1st stop Chicago

Published: 3 days ago

A series of Muslim Outreach Summits are planned coast-to-coast by the Obama administration to get feedback from Muslims on how the government can better serve them and their specific desires.

The president’s adopted home town of Chicago will be the first stop.

WND initially discovered documents referring to the Muslim summits while examining a U.S. Department of Education procurement of data-gathering and report-writing services.

The services are specific to information being assembled by the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, or WHIAAPI, which Obama created via executive order in 2009.

Upon closer inspection, however, WND learned that the Education Department explicitly will direct the selected contractor to chronicle findings and recommendations gleaned from the Muslim Outreach Summits.

The White House views this year’s venues as an extension of a previous outreach to “new immigrants and refugees – some of the most underserved in the AAPI community,” according to a document titled “WHIAAPI 2013 Faith-Based and Community Engagement.”

Complementing the prior effort will be the three “regional convenings,” tentatively scheduled June 15 in Chicago, June 22 in San Francisco and June 29 in New York City.

“These cities are main AAPI immigrant hubs and entry points for new immigrants/refugees,” according to a related document, “Questions Received from Vendors: Development and Preparation of the AAPI Annual Report to the President.”

“Each convening with [sic] include panel discussions/workshops with federal officials on key issues impacting the community and also an open-dialogue session to hear directly from the community about issues of concern.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/obama-to-muslims-tell-me-what-you-want/

Obama Schedules Series Of Muslim Outreach Summits

Donna Anderson
May 31, 2013

In the 2004 and 2008 elections, nine out 10 Muslim Americans voted for Democratic candidates.
As part of his Executive Order to increase participation of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in Federal Programs, President Obama has scheduled a series of Muslim Outreach Summits to find out how to make it easier for Muslims to assimilate into American society. Aside from the obvious, there’s one big problem here – there is no mention of the word “Muslims” in the executive order.
Obama’s executive order states: The purpose of this order is to establish a President’s Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and a White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Each will work to improve the quality of life and opportunities for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders through increased access to, and participation in, Federal programs in which they may be underserved. In addition, each will work to advance relevant evidence-based research, data collection, and analysis for AAPI populations and subpopulations.
But a request for quote looking for someone to write the annual report for the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) states: The report must reflect the work and recommendations of the Commission, as well as the findings and recommendations gleaned from the Muslim Outreach Summits.
In a response to questions from contractors, there is no separate legislation to cover the Muslim Outreach Summits, it’s part of the AAPI EO and “The Muslim Outreach will cover Muslims that are part of the AAPI Community.”
The Muslim Outreach Summits are already scheduled. The first will be in Chicago on June 15, followed by San Francisco on Jun 22 and New York on June 29. The town-hall meetings will discuss was to “remove barriers to AAPI access.”
According to the “Overview & Objectives” document accompanying the request for quote, participants in the AAPI and Muslim summits will learn about federal resources and programs that can assist their constituency base,” and they’ll be able to engage directly with federal representatives from a broad range of federal service and federal aid agencies.
In the 2004 and 2008 elections, nine out 10 Muslim Americans voted for Democratic candidates. In the 2012 election the numbers dipped a little. Only 68 percent of Muslims said they’d vote for Obama, and 25 percent were undecided.
According to a 2012 HuffPo article, Muslim Americans “continue to place high importance on civil rights and foreign policy,” but they’re also concerned about the economy, jobs, education and health care.
“We came to this country for the opportunities it offered us, and we need to be focused on domestic issues that impact all Americans because now this is our home,” said New Yorker Zeba Iqbal, an Obama supporter and former executive director of the Council for the Advancement of Muslim Professionals.
Read more:

But hold your hats, it can get worse and usually does with Obama. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… well, it isn’t an elephant.

Obama took great pride in nominating Brennan as CIA chief. But there is some murky water there.

Shock claim: Obama picks Muslim for CIA chief

Former FBI expert claims John Brennan converted to Islam

Published: 02/10/2013

One of the FBI’s former top experts on Islam has announced that President Obama’s pick to head the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan, converted to Islam years ago in Saudi Arabia.
As WND has reported, former FBI Islam expert John Guandolo has long warned that the federal government is being infiltrated by members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood. But Guandolo now warns that by appointing Brennan to CIA director, Obama has not only chosen a man “naïve” to these infiltrations, but also picked a candidate who is himself a Muslim.
“Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on the behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia,” Guandolo told interviewer and radio host Tom Trento.
“That fact alone is not what is most disturbing,” Guandolo continued. “His conversion to Islam was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him to recruit him. The fact that foreign intelligence service operatives recruited Mr. Brennan when he was in a very sensitive and senior U.S. government position in a foreign country means that he either a traitor … [or] he has the inability to discern and understand how to walk in those kinds of environments, which makes him completely unfit to the be the director of Central Intelligence.”
Brennan did indeed serve as CIA station chief in Riyadh in the 1990s and today holds the official title of Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. On Jan. 7, Obama nominated Brennan as the next director of the CIA, though he has yet to be confirmed.
“Are you kidding me?” Trento balked at Guandolo’s allegations. “The head of the CIA is a Muslim? For real? … Are you sure?”
“Yes I am,” Guandolo asserted. “The facts of the matter are confirmed by U.S. government officials who were also in Saudi Arabia at the time that John Brennan was serving there and have direct knowledge. These are men who work in very trusted positions, they were direct witnesses to his growing relationship with the individuals who worked for the Saudi government and others and they witnessed his conversion to Islam.”
A former Marine and combat veteran, Guandolo worked for eight years in the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division as a “subject matter expert” in the Muslim Brotherhood and the global spread of Islamism. Guandolo boasts he created the Bureau’s first counterterrorism training/education program and twice received United States Attorney’s Awards for investigative intelligence.
Guandolo is also one of the authors of the Center for Security Policy’s Team B II report, “Shariah: The Threat to America.”
“My contention is that [Brennan] is wholly unfit for government service in any national security capacity, and that would specifically make him unfit to be the director of Central Intelligence,” Guandolo told Trento.
Guandolo then broke down a three-part argument against Brennan’s confirmation.
“The first is he has interwoven his life professionally and personally with individuals that we know are terrorists,” Guandolo asserted. “He has overseen and approved and encouraged others to bring known leaders of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood into the government in positions to advise the U.S. government on counterterrorism strategy as well as the overall ‘war on terror.’”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/shock-claim-obama-picks-muslim-for-cia-chief/#sJbHiVQH1wui5kBq.99

Are there any adults in the room?

The only reason I mention this piece is it’s a provocative thought. (which was his objective) And these are his words — Rev Jim Wallis, one who Obama confides in.

I was putting my 9-year-old to bed a few nights ago. He said, “Dad I heard you talking on the phone about guns and the press conference you’re talking at tomorrow. ”

“What do you think about it Jack? What do you think about it Jack?” I asked him.

And here’s what Jack said:
“I think that they ought to let people who, like licensed hunters, have guns if they use them to hunt. And people who need guns — who need guns for their job like policemen and army. But I don’t think that we should just let anybody have any kind of gun and any kind of bullets that they want. That’s pretty crazy.

I agree with Jack.
– Jim Wallis

(copy paste link -www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/the-nras-dangerous-theolo_b_2505401.html)

The rest of the article was a type of lecture attacking NRA’s president and others on morality and theology. But he says he agrees with that statement of his 9-year old.

It is a statement from a 9-year old, just like those “letters” of children Obama used in his performance the other day in signing Executive Orders. They are still statements of children. We cannot really criticize the statements of children. (whatever inspired them) Maybe that is the political value of them to the left. They also portray the very innocence the left abandoned long ago.(think Roe v Wade)

But they do represent children’s thinking!

Call me crazy, I also don’t think children should be making the laws or policies, even though at times they might do a better job. Come on. Yea, who wants to argue with or against a 9-year old? Who wants a nation ruled by 9 or 14 year olds? Though I wonder what their view on abortion policy might be?

We are adults and should be a little more intelligent than that. The irony is he criticized Wayne LaPierre for simply suggesting a good person with a gun versus a bad one – or “good” and “bad” persons. Wallis lectured how that is not morally or theologically correct. But then look how a child thinks in his/her naïve innocence, he uses that as his example.

In the 60s you would have been hard pressed to find children who did not want to get rid of “the bomb” or war. Even though doing so does not guarantee a pristine society.

It is idealism on steroids to think just ridding us of guns will rid us of problems, dangers, or dangerous streets. Maybe, as a child might fantasize, we just need a law to outlaw bad and evil. Too bad we didn’t think of that.

No, not to knock any 9-year old’s thinking or idealism, we appreciate it. But they need parents to protect them, a society that doesn’t see them as expendable, and politicians or others who don’t want to extort them or their innocence for political gain either. So let’s put the children in proper perspective. Don’t confuse politics with childhood.

Since he came to office, Obama has been using children to make his case on one policy after another. But the left goes into hysteria when the NRA mentions children in an ad.

Are there any adults in the room?

One flew into the DoJ

Sometimes things can go bump in the night. Those are often unfounded, false alarms or something that inadvertently can be explained in retrospect. Still they cause your hair to stand up if even for a few seconds.

But then here you go of things that should go bump even in broad daylight but not necessarily do. And that is the daylight within government walls.(DoJ walls) They are pretty much admitted and the fears they raise validated; but to the contrary are often celebrated as moving forward. Well, I don’t know how they’d explain this one if they even could. But that is the point: they haven’t and may not have to explain it. Like many of the things this administration does, it is left for us to deal with the consequences.

So there is a post from Gates of Vienna talking about the absurdity or defiance of the Dep. of Injustice(the dep of justice is now obsolete) worth seeing.  Reading Obama’s program for hiring disabled is like reading something from sci-fi.  Obama issues an executive order based on a Clinton EO, but then cranks it up to light speed. It looks like stupid on steroids.

The Washington Times editorial reported:

EDITORIAL: Holder’s “severe mental deficiency”

Justice Department takes affirmative action to crazy extremes

You don’t have to have a severe intellectual disability to work at the Justice Department. But it helps.

According to a July 31 policy memo titled “Hiring of persons with targeted disabilities,” otherwise problematic mental deficiencies are no barrier to jump-starting a career at Justice. The memo lists a number of “targeted disabilities” that trigger special hiring privileges in compliance with President Obama’s Executive Order 13548. Among them are people with “severe intellectual disability,” “psychiatric disability” or other undefined “current severe physical, intellectual or mental conditions.” Most employers would balk at even minor mental disabilities in hiring a lawyer, let alone severe ones. But the policy states that the Cabinet department run by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. must “achieve a work force from all segments of society,” which includes those who are teetering on the edge of sanity.

[…/ And summarizes it with this]

Affirmative action has gone far astray from its origins as a means of correcting specific acts of unlawful discrimination. The Justice Department’s new policy reveals that special preferences are being used actively to deny opportunities to otherwise well- or better-qualified job seekers in the name of an abstract view of fairness. Ironically under the first black president, the federal hiring process is separate and unequal.

Read more: EDITORIAL: Holder’s “severe mental deficiency” – Washington Times

If you go to the PDF form, it states a series of “targeted” disabilities. The list is on the left of the form. If those aren’t enough, they add under “Other Impairments”: epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability, dwarfism.

Of course, under psychiatric disability you can imagine a plethora of things which presumably might bring one from the psych-ward to a coveted job in the DoJ. Maybe this falls under “the wheels of justice”, which apparently need some help.


Tip of hat to Gates of Vienna for reporting it.