Saturday, 31 August 2013

Fwd: [New post] You know, there’s a lot to be said for a ‘sneak attack’



BareNakedIslam posted: "Barack Hussein Obama is like a gossipy teenage girl who can't wait to call up all his little friends and tell them to tell the world how smart/tough he is. Our friend Ezra Levant in Canada does a good job of scolding Obama, a pussywhipped sorry excuse fo"

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

You know, there's a lot to be said for a 'sneak attack'

by BareNakedIslam

Barack Hussein Obama is like a gossipy teenage girl who can't wait to call up all his little friends and tell them to tell the world how smart/tough he is. Our friend Ezra Levant in Canada does a good job of scolding Obama, a pussywhipped sorry excuse for an American Commander-in-Chief, whose loyalties are solidly […]

Read more of this post

BareNakedIslam | August 31, 2013 at 7:15 pm | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-Xvw

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/08/31/you-know-theres-a-lot-to-be-said-for-a-sneak-attack/




--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Obama asks Congress to green-light war with Syria







Fox News reported that right after his Syria speech Obama went golfing with Biden.

 

The ultimate face saving move.  I wanted to bomb Syria, but the Congress wouldn't let me.

http://news.yahoo.com/author/olivier-knox/

Obama gambles on getting Congress to green-light war with Syria


Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News 53 minutes ago Politics & GovernmentMilitary & DefenseBarack ObamaUnited States

President Barack Obama on Saturday declared that he has decided that the United States should launch limited military strikes against Syria and pressed Congress to authorize them, warning "in a world with many dangers, this menace must be confronted."
"After careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets," Obama said in the Rose Garden of the White House.

"This would not be an open-ended intervention, we would not put boots on the ground," he said. "Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope."

Obama said he had spoken by telephone with Republican House Speaker John Boehner, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and that they agreed to hold a debate and a vote on authorizing the use of force "as soon as Congress comes back into session." That would be Sept. 9 unless they opt to return earlier.

"I'm prepared to give that order, but having made my decision as commander in chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interest, I'm also mindful that I'm the president of the world's oldest constitutional democracy," Obama said. "I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress."
The president said his top military advisers had assured him that American military assets are in place and can "strike whenever we choose" and that the decision to unleash an attack is "not time sensitive – it will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now."

After Obama spoke, aides said top national security officials would brief all members of the Senate and House of Representatives on Capitol Hill at 2 p.m. ET on Sunday.

National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey had been set to brief lawmakers on Saturday and Sunday, but it was not immediately clear whether they would be the officials to inform Congress on Sunday.





__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Obama's Syria plans in disarray after Britain rejects use of force



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/30/obama-strike-syria-britain-vote

 

Obama's Syria plans in disarray after Britain rejects use of force

White House forced to consider unilateral strikes against Assad after British PM unexpectedly loses key motion on intervention

Paul Lewis and Spencer Ackerman in Washington

Barack Obama's plans for air strikes against Syria were thrown into disarray on Thursday night after the British parliament unexpectedly rejected a motion designed to pave the way to authorising the UK's participation in military action.

The White House was forced to consider the unpalatable option of taking unilateral action against the regime of Bashar al-Assad after the British prime minister, David Cameron, said UK would not now take part in any military action in response to a chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus last week.

Although Britain's support was not a prerequisite for US action, the Obama administration was left exposed without the backing of its most loyal ally, which has taken part in every major US military offensive in recent years.

Caitlin Hayden, a spokeswoman for Obama's national security council, indicated the administration would consider acting unliaterally. "The US will continue to consult with the UK government – one of our closest allies and friends. As we've said, President Obama's decision-making will be guided by what is in the best interests of the United States.

"He believes that there are core interests at stake for the United States and that countries who violate international norms regarding chemical weapons need to be held accountable."

The US appears to have taken British support for granted. Hours before the vote, the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, Diane Feinstein, expressed confidence that Britain would join any strike.

Feinstein, a Democrat and staunch administration ally, told Time magazine: "I think the UK makes a difference. I think if the president were to decide to go there's a very high likelihood that the United Kingdom would be with us."

The timing of the British vote, 272 to 285 against the government, was disastrous for Obama. Less than 30 minutes after the vote, senior intelligence officials began a conference call with key members of Congress, in an attempt to keep US lawmakers on side.

Congressional leaders and the chairs and ranking members of national security committees were briefed by the most senior US intelligence officials, amid signs that some of the support for military strikes against Syria was fading.

The officials said there was "no doubt" that chemical weapons were used in Syria last week, Reuters reported. Obama aides cited intercepted communications of Syrian officials and evidence of movements by Syria's military around Damascus before the attack that killed more than 300 people, said Eliot Engel, the top Democrat on the House foreign affairs committee.

The 90-minute briefing was conducted by secretary of state John Kerry, secretary of defense Chuck Hagel, national security adviser Susan Rice, among others.

After the briefing, Carl Levin, the Democratic chairman of the Senate armed services committee, urged a cautious approach. "I have previously called for the United States to work with our friends and allies to increase the military pressure on the Assad regime by providing lethal aid to vetted elements of the Syrian opposition.

"Tonight, I suggested that we should do so while UN inspectors complete their work and while we seek international support for limited, targeted strikes in response to the Assad regime's large-scale use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people."

The UN has said more time should be given to diplomacy, and France, which earlier this week declared its support for taking action against Syria, is now calling for more time so UN inspections can be completed. A session of the United Nations security council in New York, called by Russia, broke up without agreement.

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, instructed the 20-strong inspection team in Damascus to leave on Saturday, a day ahead of schedule. Ban also announced that the team would report to him immediately on departure, raising the possibility that the UN could issue an interim report on the 21 August chemical attacks that left hundreds of people dead.

The inspectors had not been due to deliver their findings for a week at least. The demand for a rushed early assessment reflects the fraught atmosphere at the UN triggered by US threats to launch punitive air strikes within days.

Shortly before Britain's parliamentary vote, the New York Times quoted senior administration officials saying the US administration was prepared to launch strikes on Syria without a UN security council mandate or the support of allies such as Britain.

Earlier on Thursday, Joshua Earnest, the White House deputy spokesman, seemed to confirm that was a possibility when he was asked whether the US would "go it alone". He repeatedly said it was in US "core national security interests" to enforce international chemical weapons norms. "The president of the United States is elected with the duty to protect the national security interests of America," he said. Any strikes would be "discreet and limited", he said.

However, Earnest also stressed the broad international support for the US position – backing that now appears to be dissipating. The Arab League has blamed Syria for the chemical attack, but stopped short of advocating punitive strikes by the US.

In recent days, Obama has spoken personally with leaders of France, Australia, Canada and Germany. But none were as important as Britain, a traditional ally during US military actions which has been lobbying behind the scenes for months for a tougher action on Syria.

Ken Pollack, a fellow from the Saban Centre for Middle East Policy, said that with continuing uncertainty over the intelligence picture, and no obvious legal mandate for military action, the US will be desperate to secure more international backing to argue that intervention is "legitimate".

"If the administration can't even count of the full-throated support of our closest ally, the country that stuck by us even during the worst days of Iraq, that legitimacy is going to be called into question," he said.

Now that the UK parliament has rejected an attack on Syria, Washington's space for planning one is likely to be constrained, particularly as the Obama administration prepares to release its intelligence tying Assad to the 21 August gas attack. An unclassified report is due to be published on Friday.

Paul Pillar, a former senior CIA Middle East analyst and Georgetown professor, said the loss of British support would lead to more "intense" scrutiny of the US case for action against Syria. "The UK is, in many important respects, the most important ally of the United States," said Pillar. "This action by parliament is unquestionably significant in that regard."

 



__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Obama steps around Congress to take aim at our Second Amendment rights







Obama steps around Congress to take aim at our Second Amendment rights

August 30, 2013 By Matt

Pistol_4495

 

In yet another abuse of his executive powers, Obama has again attempted to curtail 2nd amendment rights by bypassing congress.

The Obama Administration announced it would close two gun-sale loopholes that restrict the re-sale of military weaponry and require background checks for the sale of fully automatic weapons, short barreled shotguns and other high capacity weaponry when registered by a corporation and company.

"The Obama administration has once again completely missed the mark when it comes to stopping violent crime," NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said earlier this week. "This administration should get serious about prosecuting violent criminals who misuse guns and stop focusing its efforts on law-abiding gun owners."

These new laws build on the 23 executive actions Obama had previously announced to further the unconstitutional disarmament of law-abiding citizens. His piece by piece attack stems from Congress' refusal to pass his dictatorial laws. Gun advocates understand that his laws will do nothing to reduce crime, but rather reduce the number of American's able to defend themselves from criminals and the possibility of a government coup.

First and foremost, the vast majority of gun deaths in the United States are perpetrated by criminals in possession of illegally purchased handguns, not fully automatic, military grade assault rifles. Secondly, gun owners typically register weaponry with corporations or businesses in order to keep firearms and military heirlooms in the family.

Obama's war on the 2nd amendment is unconstitutional, but also painfully ironic. Earlier this year, the Department of Homeland Security, under the orders of President Obama, purchased over 1.8 billion rounds of ammunition. What's even more disturbing is that the hollow-point ammunition purchased is banned by the Geneva Convention for use in international wars.

Obama is not only threatening our constitutional rights, he's threatening our survival. There's a reason the Founding Fathers wrote the constitution as such, and Obama is that reason.



__._,_.___
 




   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [New post] GREAT IDEA! Israel will pay an African country to take thousands of African Muslim illegals off its hands and off the government dole

All illegals should be rounded up and deported with only their shirts on their backs. No exceptions.
 
And seal the southern border so tight a cockroach can't get over.


On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Brian Bednarek <brineb@gmail.com> wrote:
We should do that with illegals here!!!


On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Travis <baconlard@gmail.com> wrote:



BareNakedIslam posted: "We should do that with our illegal aliens, too. Israel has agreed to provide substantial economic and military aid to an unnamed African state in return for their taking in illegal alien African refugees from southern Tel Aviv. Middle East Monitor  Haaret"

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

GREAT IDEA! Israel will pay an African country to take thousands of African Muslim illegals off its hands and off the government dole

by BareNakedIslam

We should do that with our illegal aliens, too. Israel has agreed to provide substantial economic and military aid to an unnamed African state in return for their taking in illegal alien African refugees from southern Tel Aviv. Middle East Monitor  Haaretz newspaper has reported that Israel is preparing to start a large-scale campaign to deport […]

Read more of this post

BareNakedIslam | August 31, 2013 at 6:30 pm | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-Xve

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/08/31/great-idea-israel-will-pay-an-african-country-to-take-thousands-of-african-muslim-illegals-off-its-hands-and-off-the-government-dole/




--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
brine
http://brineb.blogspot.com/

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [New post] GREAT IDEA! Israel will pay an African country to take thousands of African Muslim illegals off its hands and off the government dole

We should do that with illegals here!!!


On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Travis <baconlard@gmail.com> wrote:



BareNakedIslam posted: "We should do that with our illegal aliens, too. Israel has agreed to provide substantial economic and military aid to an unnamed African state in return for their taking in illegal alien African refugees from southern Tel Aviv. Middle East Monitor  Haaret"

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

GREAT IDEA! Israel will pay an African country to take thousands of African Muslim illegals off its hands and off the government dole

by BareNakedIslam

We should do that with our illegal aliens, too. Israel has agreed to provide substantial economic and military aid to an unnamed African state in return for their taking in illegal alien African refugees from southern Tel Aviv. Middle East Monitor  Haaretz newspaper has reported that Israel is preparing to start a large-scale campaign to deport […]

Read more of this post

BareNakedIslam | August 31, 2013 at 6:30 pm | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-Xve

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/08/31/great-idea-israel-will-pay-an-african-country-to-take-thousands-of-african-muslim-illegals-off-its-hands-and-off-the-government-dole/




--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
brine
http://brineb.blogspot.com/

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Obama uses phrase ‘my military’; blood pressures rise!

Nor our problem.  Neither was Iraq or Afghanistan where we should never have been.  Let those damn muzzies fight it out.


On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
if the reason to bomb Syria is to save people Assad is gassing, why would you delay?

On Saturday, August 31, 2013, Travis wrote:







Only racist anti-Americans want US to go to war over nothing more than Obama's ego.

 

B

 

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/08/31/obama-uses-phrase-my-military-blood-pressures-rise-82502

 

Obama uses phrase 'my military'; blood pressures rise!

August 31, 2013 by Joe Saunders 7 Comments

President Obama gave the egotistical game away Friday when he referred to U.S. armed forces as "my military" during a White House news conference explaining pending action against Syria.

"… I have had my military and our team look at a wide range of options," he said. "We have consulted with allies. We've consulted with Congress …" (Check out the video below)

Bad move.

A guy who ticked off half the country last year when he told Americans who own successful businesses "you didn't build that" looks pretty hollow claiming ownership over something the country inarguably built collectively.

And it didn't take long for Twitter to come alive:

Obamaphiles who are used to making excuses for His Eloquence will probably call it a slip of the tongue, but considering it was followed immediately by "our team," you get the impression Obama was saying exactly what he thought.

He probably does think of the military as his own. And he's got some reasons:

He's got a lapdog secretary of defense in Chuck "I won't be in a policy-making position" Hagel. He's surrounded by generals who've spent five years coming up with rationalizations for liberal positions like why having gays openly serving in the military is a great idea, why women should be in combat, and how, given the witch-hunt atmosphere of sexual assault in the military these days, every 18-year-old man in uniform is a rapist-in-waiting.

But having reasons for thinking so is no excuse for blurting it out, particularly on the eve of attacking another country that poses no military threat to the United States whatsoever — and never has – in what is, at bottom, a fit of imperial pique. (And even emperors have the class to say "our.")

One thing Obama's going to learn, fast and hard, if he goes through with dragging this country into attacking Syria:

There really is no "I" in war.

 



__._,_.__





   
__,_._,___



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Obama uses phrase ‘my military’; blood pressures rise!

if the reason to bomb Syria is to save people Assad is gassing, why would you delay?

On Saturday, August 31, 2013, Travis wrote:







Only racist anti-Americans want US to go to war over nothing more than Obama's ego.

 

B

 

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/08/31/obama-uses-phrase-my-military-blood-pressures-rise-82502

 

Obama uses phrase 'my military'; blood pressures rise!

August 31, 2013 by Joe Saunders 7 Comments

President Obama gave the egotistical game away Friday when he referred to U.S. armed forces as "my military" during a White House news conference explaining pending action against Syria.

"… I have had my military and our team look at a wide range of options," he said. "We have consulted with allies. We've consulted with Congress …" (Check out the video below)

Bad move.

A guy who ticked off half the country last year when he told Americans who own successful businesses "you didn't build that" looks pretty hollow claiming ownership over something the country inarguably built collectively.

And it didn't take long for Twitter to come alive:

Obamaphiles who are used to making excuses for His Eloquence will probably call it a slip of the tongue, but considering it was followed immediately by "our team," you get the impression Obama was saying exactly what he thought.

He probably does think of the military as his own. And he's got some reasons:

He's got a lapdog secretary of defense in Chuck "I won't be in a policy-making position" Hagel. He's surrounded by generals who've spent five years coming up with rationalizations for liberal positions like why having gays openly serving in the military is a great idea, why women should be in combat, and how, given the witch-hunt atmosphere of sexual assault in the military these days, every 18-year-old man in uniform is a rapist-in-waiting.

But having reasons for thinking so is no excuse for blurting it out, particularly on the eve of attacking another country that poses no military threat to the United States whatsoever — and never has – in what is, at bottom, a fit of imperial pique. (And even emperors have the class to say "our.")

One thing Obama's going to learn, fast and hard, if he goes through with dragging this country into attacking Syria:

There really is no "I" in war.

 



__._,_.__





   
__,_._,___



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Obama uses phrase ‘my military’; blood pressures rise!








Only racist anti-Americans want US to go to war over nothing more than Obama's ego.

 

B

 

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/08/31/obama-uses-phrase-my-military-blood-pressures-rise-82502

 

Obama uses phrase 'my military'; blood pressures rise!

August 31, 2013 by Joe Saunders 7 Comments

President Obama gave the egotistical game away Friday when he referred to U.S. armed forces as "my military" during a White House news conference explaining pending action against Syria.

"… I have had my military and our team look at a wide range of options," he said. "We have consulted with allies. We've consulted with Congress …" (Check out the video below)

Bad move.

A guy who ticked off half the country last year when he told Americans who own successful businesses "you didn't build that" looks pretty hollow claiming ownership over something the country inarguably built collectively.

And it didn't take long for Twitter to come alive:

Obamaphiles who are used to making excuses for His Eloquence will probably call it a slip of the tongue, but considering it was followed immediately by "our team," you get the impression Obama was saying exactly what he thought.

He probably does think of the military as his own. And he's got some reasons:

He's got a lapdog secretary of defense in Chuck "I won't be in a policy-making position" Hagel. He's surrounded by generals who've spent five years coming up with rationalizations for liberal positions like why having gays openly serving in the military is a great idea, why women should be in combat, and how, given the witch-hunt atmosphere of sexual assault in the military these days, every 18-year-old man in uniform is a rapist-in-waiting.

But having reasons for thinking so is no excuse for blurting it out, particularly on the eve of attacking another country that poses no military threat to the United States whatsoever — and never has – in what is, at bottom, a fit of imperial pique. (And even emperors have the class to say "our.")

One thing Obama's going to learn, fast and hard, if he goes through with dragging this country into attacking Syria:

There really is no "I" in war.

 



__._,_.__





   
__,_._,___



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Obama's Long List of Broken Promises






http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/08/23/obamas-long-list-of-broken-promises/#.UhfH-kDfhj0.twitter

Obama's Long List of Broken Promises

In his column yesterday, Daniel Henninger–in writing about President Obama's summer trips and series of speeches on the economy–asks, "Is anyone listening to these speeches? Do they matter?"

The answer to both questions is, I think, no. And it raises a deeper issue: Has any previous president devalued his words quite so much, in quite so many ways? Perhaps, but I rather doubt it. 

In order to support my claim, it's worth taking a stroll down memory lane, to compare what Mr. Obama has said with what he has done. The sheer bandwidth of his broken promises and empty claims is quite extraordinary.

For example, there was his promise not to allow lobbyists to work in his administration. (They have.) His commitment to slash earmarks. (He didn't.) To be the most transparent presidency in history. (It's not.) To put an end to "phony accounting." (It started almost on day one and continues.) And to restore trust in government. (Trust in government is at near-historic lows.) Think, too, about his pledge to seek public financing in the general election. (He didn't.) And to treat super-PACs as a "threat to democracy." (He embraced them.)

Then there was his administration's pledge to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent. (It remained above 8 percent for the longest stretch since the Great Depression.) To create five million new energy jobs alone. (The total number of jobs created in Obama's first term was roughly one-tenth that figure.) To identify all those "shovel-ready" jobs. (Mr. Obama later chuckled that his much-hyped "shovel-ready projects" were "not as shovel-ready as we expected.") And to lift two million Americans from poverty. (A record 46 million Americans are living in poverty during the Obama era.)

Let's not forget the president's promise to bring down health care premiums by $2,500 for the typical family (they went up) … allow Americans to keep the health care coverage they currently have (many can't) … refuse to fund abortion via the Affordable Care Act (it did) … to respect religious liberties (he has violated them) … and the insistence that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was not a tax (it is).

There was also Mr. Obama's pledge to stop the rise of the oceans. (It hasn't.) To "remake the world" and to "heal the planet." (Hardly.) To usher in a "new beginning" based on "mutual respect" with the Arab and Islamic world and "help answer the call for a new dawn in the Middle East." (Come again?) To punish Syria if it crossed the "red line" of using chemical weapons. (The "red line" was crossed earlier this year–and nothing of consequence happened.) That as president "I don't bluff." (See the previous sentence on Syria.) And of course the much-ballyhooed Russian reset. (Tensions between Russia and the United States are increasing and examples of Russia undermining U.S. interests are multiplying.)

And let's not forget Mr. Obama's promise to bring us together. (He is the most polarizing president in the history of Gallup polling.) Or his assurance to us that he would put an end to the type of politics that "breeds division and conflict and cynicism." (All three have increased during the Obama presidency.) And his counsel to us to "resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long." (Remind me again whose campaign allies accused Mitt Romney of being responsible for the cancer death of a steelworker's wife.)

I'm sure people could add to this list, but there's enough here to establish a pattern. Even if you stipulate that politicians often make claims they can't keep–that some are the product of cynical deception and others the product of unforeseen circumstances–Mr. Obama is in a category all his own.

Does it matter? I think so, in part because I don't believe it's good to have as president someone for whom words have no objective meaning and who believes he can construct his own narrative to fit his own needs. But I also think we're seeing an accretion occur. It's happening later than I would have hoped, but the public does seem to be tuning out the president. The latest pivot to the economy–has that pivot occurred a half-dozen or a dozen times before?–is meaningless. Nothing has happened before; why should anything happen now?

Mr. Obama talks, and he talks, and he talks. My how he loves to talk. But his words don't translate into anything real. And eventually that does take a toll.

In the 2008 campaign, while criticizing his opponents, Mr. Obama said in a somewhat exasperated tone, "I mean, words mean something." For most of us they do. But not, it appears, for the president of the United States.



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.