S-Ol’ Obama Hypocrite – 2

The dancing hypocrite takes his show to the stage – part 2

Obama did Jay Leno to roll out his thoughts on national security, Benghazi, and embassy closings. Did someone move the press room to NBC studios?…

In this episode, we find Hypobama grappling with heavy issues and scandals, which he and his administration created. But the fearless deceiver that he is opted for a high-profile visit, seeking low-info ears to reduce his increasing disapproval and criticism. Not to provide Jay with “the Beast” replica.

Q What do you say to those cynics who go, oh, this is an overreaction to Benghazi — how do you respond to that?
Hypobama: One thing I’ve tried to do as President is not over react, but make sure that as much as possible the American people understand that there are genuine risks out there. What’s great about what we’ve seen with America over the last several years is how resilient we are. So after the Boston bombing, for example, the next day folks were out there, they’re going to ball games. They are making sure that we’re not reacting in a way that somehow shuts us down.
And that’s the right reaction. Terrorists depend on the idea that we’re going to be terrorized. And we’re going to live our lives. And the odds of people dying in a terrorist attack obviously are still a lot lower than in a car accident, unfortunately. But there are things that we can do to make sure that we’re keeping the pressure on these networks that would try to injure Americans. And the first thing I think about when I wake up and the last thing I think about when I go to bed is making sure that I’m doing everything I can to keep Americans safe.

Fine, if by genuine risks out there he meant internet videos, which they blamed for the terrorist attack. They’re on the trail of those anyway.

What’s great is our resilience. Yea, we’ve shown the ability to bounce back from 9/11, the Boston bombings, or his blunders like putting politics ahead of national security over the Benghazi attack, right?  Resilience was not the word I would use for that. Or how about our resilience over how Obama went to Libya in the first place — acting unilaterally without Congress. Or his strong support for Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Actually, Mr. Obama, we don’t have that kind of resilience over those like you hoped.  So when the administration says Benghazi happened a long time ago, as old news, we don’t have the resilience to get past that messaging. It’s hard to bounce back, when a video was blamed for Benghazi our resilience comes up short.

When we question the chain of events that led to the attack, our resilience does not connect those dots, it needs some help. When the WH approved talking points do not match the events, we should be resilient. When the Sec. of State tells grieving family members that they’ll get the man who made the video, what resilience is needed to get over that?

Not reacting in such a way that shuts us down“.  No one was trying to shut down our security or defenses in Benghazi… except maybe the administration. Obama politicized our security and boasted al Qaeda was “on the run”. It was an integral part of his campaign message everywhere.  Then came Benghazi and, 11 months later, we don’t even know Obama’s whereabouts or what he did that night.

But I think the way we reacted with outrage in questioning it — determined to find out the truth — was the “right reaction”, contrary to his desire. I’m proud of that reaction. After Obama’s administration seeded our skepticism by telling us a false narrative, most of us reacted the way we should.(…despite media) Obama, however, reacted by criticizing us, changing his story and called it a phony scandal. Shall we compare proper reactions?

The last thing he thought about when he went to bed, after the attack, was “doing everything I can do to keep Americans safe” — after hardly paying attention to it, according to Leon Panetta. And the next morning he went to Vegas as planned.

Then, having had another terror attack on his watch in Boston, Obama compliments our reactions? In case he missed the immediate reaction to Boston, people wondered how the bombers slipped through the ever-watchful eyes of feds, not once but repeatedly?

Sure we reacted, in identifying the bombers because feds could not. And people reacted with bewilderment that Russia had warned us about Tamerlan Tsarnev, but feds pretty much cleared him. But thanks, Hypobama, for complimenting the vigilant reactions of people. Oh, people also reacted over trying 9/11 terrorists in NYC– another overlooked, prudent reaction.

But maybe it is really Obama’s reactions that are the problem?

Same old Obama the hypocrite

(The dancing hypocrite takes his show to the stage.)

Obama did Jay Leno to roll out his thoughts on national security, Benghazi, and embassy closings. Did someone move the press room to NBC studios?

This is probably the most insulting thing from this president yet. I let the words sink in; it was inflammatory when he said it and gets worse the longer it distills.

Q Everyone is concerned about these embassy closings. How significant is this threat?
BO [Barry the Hypobama]: “Well, it’s significant enough that we’re taking every precaution. We had already done a lot to bolster embassy security around the world, but especially in the Middle East and North Africa, where the threats tend to be highest. And whenever we see a threat stream that we think is specific enough that we can take some specific precautions within a certain timeframe, then we do so.
Now, it’s a reminder that for all the progress we’ve made — getting bin Laden, putting al Qaeda between Afghanistan and Pakistan back on its heels — that this radical, violent extremism is still out there. And we’ve got to stay on top of it. It’s also a reminder of how courageous our embassy personnel tend to be, because you can never have 100 percent security in some of these places. The countries themselves sometimes are ill-equipped to provide the kind of security that you want. Even if we reinforce it, there are still vulnerabilities.
And these diplomats, they go out there and they serve every day. Oftentimes, they have their families with them. They do an incredible job and sometimes don’t get enough credit. So we’re grateful to them and we’ve got to do everything we can to protect them. (Applause.)”

Obama said that “this radical, violent extremism is still out there.” Double Duh!! Is that his latest term for it?  He still can’t manage to say Islamic radicalism. After a Ramadan Iftar Dinner, he can’t change his vocabulary now. Islamists happen to be the ones who declared a fatwa and war on us. So it could be a bit much for him to address them as such.

So whenever they see a stream of specific enough threats they take specific precautions? Someone needs to ask the absentee prez what “specific precautions” they took in Benghazi, after everyone else pulled out and requests came up the chain for increased security? No, they cut back on security. Now he wants to sell us on a need to take specific precautions?

(“Specific precautions” — neither word has meaning to Obama, unless referring to contraceptives, namely Catholics and contraceptives.)

The time frame of an imminent attack any day in Bengazi was not critical or specific enough? Maybe he ought to blame the dead heroes and Ambassador for not being specific enough about threats in their specific situation? Tell us, Hypobama, how they don’t get enough credit! And credit wasn’t what they wanted – a little help was. They got none.

We’ve got to stay on top of it“?  Imagine telling us we have to stay on top of it,  after a major attack on our embassy that he still wants to ignore.  Then he claims it is a reminder of how “courageous our embassy personnel tend to be”? You mean how courageous in the face of having no help — or no help and justice after the fact — from the country they serve. This is insulting. I really need some help with that asininity.

Then he says we have to do everything we can to protect our diplomats. Where was he last year? Campaigning — election was way more important. That’s his clear message to them. Hillary was no better. Now he uses “protect them” for an applause line.

With no honesty or credibility he has the nerve to do an informational media appearance telling us there’s a serious concern? (as he runs off to vacation)

Q This global travel warning, this is for Americans all around the world? Are we telling people don’t take that European vacation just yet? What are we saying?
PREZ-O: “I think the general rule is just show some common sense and some caution. So there are some countries where you’re less likely to experience a terrorist attack. There are some where there are more dangers. And if people are paying attention, checking with the State Department or embassy, going on the website before you travel, find out what kind of precautions you should be taking, then I think it still makes sense for people to take vacations. They just have to make sure that they’re doing so in a prudent way.

Golly gee, talking about prudent vacations!  What glaring hypocrisy.

This thing called Obama woke up one morning and said to himself; “I need tell people to be prudent about making their vacation plans. And I need to do it just before I go to Martha’s Vineyard on vacation” … “And I must do it before cramming ObamaCare down their throats“.

He is also compelled to remind people  these are just “phony scandals”. In his latest speech, Obama took aim at Republicans for focusing on “phony scandals.”

“That’s what we’ve been fighting for, but with an endless parade of distractions, political posturing and phony scandals, Washington has taken its eye off the ball. And I am here to say this needs to stop. This needs to stop.

The guy in Washington’s highest office, has Fast and Furious, Benghazi and now IRS in his rear view mirror, defending the biggest farce in law(ObamaCare) foisted on people in decades, on a scandal-plagued road, deflecting at every turn, declares them all phony scandals, and then pushes the accelerator pedal to the floor.

This is what makes Americans sick: that this stuff happens and he goes around trivializing it, tells us a false narrative, and then comes to lecture us on the seriousness of the condition he did not address at the time. But we need lectured….from this guy?