President – “On A Happier Note”

A frosty terrorism response to Turkey, and on to politics as usual.

Sorry, but we have never had a genuine “happier note” with Obama. Clearly his golden rule is never let terrorism get in the way of your political agenda. Turkey no exception.

Obama’s presidency has been terrorism by other means. He worries about offending his BFF Mo-Bro and the greater Islamic family. Obama stokes fears of Global Warming.

On Wednesday, Obama took less than a minute giving condolences to Turkey, saying he “called President Erdoğan” this morning. Then he said “On a happier note.” turning to the politics of his meeting in Canada. No matter how hard he tries, his climate change, global warming agenda will not defeat terrorism.

Contrast Turkey with Orlando where he didn’t even bother to call the governor. I cannot think of a more disgusting example of a President than Barack Obama, or their nominee.

We were told by Loretta Lynch that love and compassion are the solution to the terrorism in Orlando. Maybe if the victims in San Diego would have given the shooter another baby shower or housewarming, the Islamists would have taken a shine to them?

Now Hillary says

FB: “Terrorists have struck again in the heart of one of our NATO allies—and all Americans stand united with the people of Turkey against this campaign of hatred and violence. Already, stories of heroism on the part of Turkish police are emerging, as their quick actions to confront the suspects may have prevented an even worse tragedy. Today’s attack in Istanbul only strengthens our resolve to defeat the forces of terrorism and radical jihadism around the world. And it reminds us that the United States cannot retreat. We must deepen our cooperation with our allies and partners in the Middle East and Europe to take on this threat. Such cooperation is essential to protecting the homeland and keeping our country safe. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and the Turkish people.”

Do you mean “retreat” like you and Obama did in and after the Benghazi attack? You mean how you made excuses and lied about the source of that attack? You mean how we stood down our defense in response to that attack even while you were the chief proponent of military action in Libya? A place now known as a terrorist haven and failed state. Thanks.

John Kerry, live from Aspen, said:

“We are still collecting information and trying to ascertain what happened and who did it,” Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters Tuesday at the Aspen Ideas Festival. “And I won’t comment further on it except to say that this is daily fare. That’s why I say the first challenge we need to face is countering non-state violent actors.”

“Heigh-ho heigh-ho,” it’s off to collect we go…

    We dig dig dig dig dig dig dig
    In our mine the whole day through
    To dig dig dig dig dig dig dig
    Is what we like to do — Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

You can bet that if Obama does say more about Turkey’s terrorism attack, it will be to lecture Christians for their reaction, lack of empathy, patience, or some nonsense. The brutal truth of the Islamic war on the West to be buried in a subterfuge of political attacks. Much like a terrorist cell, Obama really only has one thing in mind.

RightRing | Bullright

How the truth became politically incorrect to Obama

The story here is not only that truth became politically incorrect to Obama but also, more importantly, that anyone endorsing or trafficking in truth became the opposition to Obama. Imagine that, just by aligning oneself with the truth turns one into an enemy of Obama. And by extension, considering his position, it thereby turns one into an enemy of the state. We see how all this works. In effect, truth has become Obama’s chief enemy, and thereby an enemy of the state.

Of course it would be a difficult thing for media to accept. Fortunately, they don’t have to worry about such a thing. That would admit being played or hoodwinked by Obama.

The Iran deal reveals a chunk of this truism about Bary Soetoro. Go back to his campaign days where, asked about Iran, he always favored talking to Iran. His supporters loved it. Conservatives took issue with that for exactly the reasons we witnessed, of “negotiation” with the talks. Of course we were told we were wrong that talks do not equal negotiating. But they do and did. Now we also see how that negotiation turned out .

So they made it so complex, attaching side deals, which no one will see between Iran and IAEA, that it would be purposefully hard to understand. Trust us, they said, it is a good deal. (a good deal of BS) See it would require trust. However, trust does not make it a good deal. But “trust” is the fallacy that Obama has peddled all along, since his early days as Senator, to his first campaign to today. We are always to just trust him, with little or no basis for it, and then we get screwed in the end. Trust though is a central ingredient in his modus operandi and agenda. It’s the top necessary ingredient with Obama. Which is why I called his a faith-based campaign: “Hope and change” and “change you can believe in.”

The side deals, as they are referred to, are unknown to Kerry and even Obama. By law, all materials of the deal must be given to Congress. So how can they sign off on something they don’t know the details of, and cannot see? But that is what Obama is asking of Congress. It’s a good deal, trust us, “peace in our time.” Trust is the operative word.

Remember Reagan’s maxim of trust and verify?

We always verify after the fact that he lied to us. But it always shows in the end our trust was without merit. We always get a raw deal or royally screwed. He is not happy enough to screw us in the present, he wants to stick to future generations too. There are normally multiple layers of screwage. He also sets it up where future negotiations with Iran will be necessary. Then the future administration(s) will have to deal with Tehran. We really made Iran some kind of a partner.

Every step along the way on issues Obama abused our trust and destroyed the grounds for it. I can’t say he actually destroyed our trust because people cannot accept that their trust was shot through, because that would be admitting they were taken, lied to, or hoodwinked. Who wants to admit being a mark? But they continue to trust him.

It is a serial abuse relationship Obama has with even many of his voters and base. (they aren’t all communists though they endorse Marxist people, which is another subject) To admit it is more than they can take. Each step Obama requires people to just trust him.

Seeing is believing, or not.

We know it is not the transparency he promised, another lie. So behind their backs he is abusing their trust in him. A few, and I don’t know how many, are probably privy to this whole charade Obama plays but who also believe in the destination anyway, so it is acceptable. Remember the professor of Obamcare, Jonathan Gruber, and his repeated statements that they had to lie to us. Which is more profound, that they believed they had to lie to us or that lying is such a necessary tactic in their agenda?

Well, it was the same premise in the Iran deal, they had to lie to the American people. From the beginning they said we would have anytime anywhere access and that would be in any agreement. Now we see we don’t have anywhere anytime access. Then Kerry said that anywhere anytime was not promised, or part of the plan. He denied that there were any side deals and, low and behold, there are side deals. They denied that sanctions were working though they claim that sanctions, in fact — ones congress not Obama imposed — were the pressure that brought them to the negotiation table. Then they condemned any talk of new sanctions or reinstatement of the previous ones, which Obama lifted. They claimed eliminating the prospect of a nuclear Iran was the objective, while they in effect enshrined their nuclear ability. They also denied that containment was their strategy, but voila theirs is a strategy of containment.

Furthermore, let’s back up again to the campaign trail. Obama claimed his mission was to stop proliferation. In fact he wants to eliminate all nuclear weapons. We now see he has proliferated them starting a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He said he would do these things with, he assured us, the purest of motives. Now we look at what really motivated him.

The political strategy, lie a lot — early and often.

Probably the biggest parallel theme to things though is the lies. Its a tactic and an overall strategy of his. Tell us anything in order to get his way, pass legislation, accomplish his mission or goal — preferably the opposite of what he is doing. Obamacare was built on lies and illusion. He sold the initial idea that it would only affect those who didn’t have insurance or medical coverage. Hello, it affected everyone. He said if you liked your plan you could keep your plan. Wrong, you couldn’t. He said if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor. Wrong. He said it would lower the cost of your insurance, saving average family 2500 per/yr. In fact, it increased the cost and for some families by 2500 a year. He said it would lower our debt while it added to it.

But probably the central, critical lie he used from the onset was that, since there was a majority of people already covered, it would not affect them. That made it very palatable. It basically was only going to help those who had no coverage. So people went along because they believed it would not affect them personally, least not negatively. And many of those are the very ones it affects the most, and in the worst way. Now they have soaring premiums and deductibles. It was a pack of lies, actually built on a foundation of lies. Sound familiar? Then came Professor Gruber who said just that. Well, then it was the lie that he was nothing and not connected with drafting the law. Actually he was an architect of the law. See?

So now we have an Iran deal following the same formula. Tell the people anything at the beginning, lie and promise them anything. Whatever means to the ends. Then deny what you said and did. But then Gruber’s admission was even worse than admitting they lied. It was, yes we lied to the stupid American people. But it even went a step deeper than that.

Daily Caller

Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber said that lack of transparency was a major part of getting Obamacare passed because “the stupidity of the American voter” would have killed the law if more people knew what was in it.

Catch that? First he told us they had to lie to the stupid people. Then he suggested they had to lie to us because we are stupid. In effect, we are the cause for their lying. It’s our fault they lied.(that’s something like the ultimate lie) Like: I’ll admit I lied but the reason was because you made it so necessary. It’s all our fault and we’re stupid, so we probably can’t even understand that. Geesh. Maybe one day we’ll come up to their level and be able to understand — surely it won’t be soon. By then they will be even smarter. It’s not even that government knows best, it is that the progressives know better than all.

Then there was Senator Hillary CLinton’s statement to General Petraeus that his report “requires the willing suspension of disbelief.” Take that from the Liars Club. Ironically, that is exactly what Obama and his administration, including Hillary, requires from us — “suspension of disbelief.” We know he’s lying to us, but let’s not pay much attention to that detail. Instead, let’s accept what he says as the truth. Most places would call deceit on that level fraud. Just like the kind that ushered Obama into office. But in his campaign, at the time, he was busy pointing out Hillary’s lies. Round and round it goes, where it stops only Obama knows. But it never will stop because he cannot allow the lies to end.

RightRing | Bullright

The art of a raunchy deal

US and Russia agree Syria chemical weapons deal in Geneva

[BBC]Syria’s chemical weapons must be destroyed or removed by mid-2014, under an agreement between the US and Russia.

US Secretary of State John Kerry outlined a framework document under which Syria must hand over a full list of its stockpile within a week.

If Syria fails to comply, the deal could be enforced by a UN resolution backed by the threat of sanctions or military force.

Wait, so we went from Kerry saying turn over the weapons within a week to turn over a comprehensive, self-made list of chemical weapons within a week.
Then Kerry appears to stand on good old terra firma with this:

“There can be no room for games. Or anything less than full compliance by the Assad regime,” Kerry said.

No games, none… I won’t have it. Nope! And just to really nail down this deal, “Inspectors must be on the ground in Syria no later than November.” No room for games there.

Mr Kerry outlined six points to the agreement:

1. The amount and type of chemical weapons must be agreed and “rapidly” placed under international control
2. Syria must submit within one week a comprehensive listing of its stockpiles
3. Extraordinary procedures under the Chemical Weapons Convention will allow “expeditious destruction”
4. Syria must give inspectors “immediate, unfettered access” to all sites
5. All chemical weapons must be destroyed, including the possibility of removing weapons from Syrian territory
6. UN will provide logistical support, and compliance would be enforced under Chapter VII

The White House described the deal as “an important concrete step” towards putting Syria’s chemical weapons under international control.

Games? The whole thing has been a charade. “Inspectors must be on the ground by November.” One red line says to another red line, “let’s make another red line.”

And the Obama WH calls it “an important concrete step” . Sounds more like quicksand.

Sergei Lavrov says, “The military scenario would be catastrophic for this region
Really, as opposed to…?

More at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24091633

When talking points collide

We were told the economy was on the mend. Things are looking up. Come on people, just ignore reality. Kerry was telling the press corp at the convention that they should be reporting on the great, ever-improving economy. You know, all that good going on. Biden chimed in with his prospering economic forecast. (as only Joe can do)

Now with sequestration, all the talk shifts to the damage of this self-created sequestration. It will send shivers down the spine of the economy and threatens to put us in recession, so says the administration. And sending shivers through the editorial pages and Paul Krugman columns.

I take it the “recovery summer” mantra is now off the talking points. Better clear Barry’s teleprompter. It will be doom and gloom forecasts for the foreseeable future. That is until something is done to stop all the cutting. Then it will be “clear sailing” again from the administration. Of course the problem is the talk does not match reality — it never does with Obama.

So they will talk about how this sequestration, as unnecessary as it all is, which only slows the growth of spending, is now threatening to take the economy into a nosedive. And they will point out the signs all around.

Reality check: we the people were never in the rose-colored recovery. We’ve been in the pain camp for some time, ever since the pretender took office. But that matters not to Obama’s perpetual campaign. It was supposed to be sunshine and rainbows — until this dastardly sequestration came along.

So Kerry’s memorable advice to the media to start reporting on this great economy busting out at the seams, and Biden’s “summer of recovery” talk, shift to hurricane warnings. “Hunker down, take cover, plan your escape routes… Be vigilant for the effects of the Sequestration monster lurking in every corner.”

This probably causes some frustration on editorial boards everywhere. They have to scramble to cover the looming sequestration effects. Surging economy, eat your heart out. (it was nice knowing you)

We the people, the sane ones, never fell for that putrid economic talk. We were reminded every time we went to the store or got that last ten dollars in gas to hold us over for a few days.  All the economists will be on notice to start pointing out the damaging economic effects everywhere. Maybe there is some poetic justice here to show that roaring Obama economy is not firing on …. any cylinders, and never was. It was a big fat lie.

It only  shows how deceiving all their mantra was before, and how hypocritical they are. Hey, but at least they don’t have to talk about Solyndragate, the XL pipeline, Fast and Furious, or Benghazigate. And remember the Obama motto, “never let a crisis go to waste” – especially if you create one.

Changing the Dynamics

 

Remember Kerry’s infamous statement, after firing his campaign manager, that he was “changing the dynamics”.

What’s ironic now that Romney won the debate is that Kerry was Obama’s debate coach. Is that hillarious?

All bets are off and apparently those early celebration plans for Obama will be put on hold, with the Kolbe beef order. Everyone can have a bad night. But comparatively how bad? He told us after the attack on our embassador in Libya that they had a “bad day” loosing 4 people. I’ll bet to Obama that day did not compare to his evening in Colorado. What a shame he is probably a lot more concerned about this night than that “day”, enough to change his itinerary a little.

Obama always was a demogogue and idelogue, nothing more. The agent of change is not really the change agent. Surprise. “Mr Obama, you are now entering reality. We will be landing in a few moments. Fasten your seatbelt, you will experience heavy turbulance and a very rough landing.” (you may want to put your head between your knees and brace yourself too)

Even throwing out a life line for 100 thousand new teachers could not save him. I particularly liked Mitt’s use of the phrase “trickle down government”. It was a grand slam for which Obama has no response.

And despite stealing more speaking time than Mitt from early on, about 4 min total, it could not save his defenseless record. All the extra talk could not help. It is unexplainable. Then he threw out a Hail Mary to Bill Clinton who could not protect him. That was a classic example of sophistry. He attempted to claim that merely putting tax rates back to what they were under Clinton would recreate the economic windfall of those years. This is equivilent to telling the patient to click his heels three times and wish himself well.

So trying to recreate the effects of a booming economy will cause one. Gravity will now be reversed. Except for one thing: that was a completely different economy than now, minus a whole lot of our national debt. Clinton had the good fortune of a tech bubble where Obama has a debt bubble, which cannot continue forever. But he’s still blowing it up. If you looked up “specious” in the dictionary, this should be the example.

Still, it made for entertainment. Seeing Obama call out the Hollyweird crowd to campaign for him was a great trailer. Maybe they will soon realize what Obama meant by “all in”. Then they have to get the hang of how it works. When you say “forward” you are supposed to be looking and thinking backward, say toward Clinton…or anywhere except to reality. Just keep repeating the word “forward” while Obama talks about the past. And when Obama talks about saving Medicare he means cutting payments to providers, to plug the giant sucking sound in ObamaCare. Where’s Ross Perot when you really need him?