Oriental detective Harry Hoo (to Maxwell Smart, in a mid-sixties episode of TV secret agent parody, "Get Smart"): "What do you think this trained (lol) black widow spider means? (found on dead man).
Max: "It means that the exploding birthday cake was no accident."
You shuld be able to figure out why I feel like Preisdent Obama has put me in some sorrt of "Get Smart" parody of the real world. For political reasons, Obama denied the OBVIUS from the day of the Libyan attack, and only backed off (very reluctantly, and not really personally) maybe a WEEK after the terrorist attack that KILLED our ambassador to Libya, along with 3 other Americans. It is not jsut that Obama spoke to the U.N. and talked ONLY about the video. It is not just that Obama went on Letterman a full WEEK after the attack, and STiLL reused to call the attack a terrorist attack (USING the "pending investigatino" ploy to maintain his terrophobic fear of the word "terror" and "terrorist"). It is that the Obama Administratin had an obvius POLICY-for POITICAL REASONS--of refusing to acknowledge that the Libyan attack was a preplanned terrorist attack--preferring to BLAME that anti-Muslim for ALL of the violence in the Middle East and Arab world. That is hwy the U.N. ambassador went on FIVE Suday "news" shows, and blamed the Libyan attack on a "spontaqneous demonstratin" that NEVER EXISTED. It is simply unaccpetable to me to have a man like this (Obama) as President of the United States, which is why I CHANGED my endoresement from Gary Johnson to Mittt Romney. My vote, in Texas, does not mean anything. And I don't delude myself that peole will slavishly follow my endorsement. But I can no longer contemplate, as I could before Obama's disgraceful POLITICAL DECEIT on Libya, the idea of casting a "protest vote" and "endorsement", even if it means I undercut Romney (to whatever small degree). As I have stated, Obama wants to be elected Presidetn again over the BODIES of 4 dead Americans he has BETRAYED with the POLITCAL GAMES he has played with regard to the Libyan terrorist attack. The "Get Smart" excerpt above actaully portrays how absurd Obama has been.
Do I really think that Obama would DENY that an exploding birthday cake was a BOMB representing a terrorist attack, if it fit his POLITICAL AGENDA? That is exactly what I believe, and the evidence is actually conclusive that Obama is willing to be that blatantly deceitful. Look at the Ft. Hood TERRORIST SHOOTING, by a shooter who EMAILED the al-Qaida head in Yemen (later killed by one of our predator drones). The Obama Administratin STILL categorizes the Fr. Hood shooting as a "workplace incident". Do you think they would be doing that if a TEA PARTY "extremist" had done such a shooiing, after emails to Sarah Palin? Not a chance. Ft. Hood only directly involved one shooter, but it was a clear TERRORIST ATTACK. Just like Libya, Obama promised to "get to the bottom" of the Ft. Hood massacre, when what he has really done is try to sweep it under the rug (as he has tried, and is tring, to do with the Benghazi terrorist attack). The mann simply should not be President of the United States. No. I do not believe that ANY other Preisdent in my lifetime would have treated the Libyan attack KILLING 4 Americans as a POLITICAL EVENT to be HANDLED POLITICALLY (rather than as a terrorsit attack that killed those Americans). The Obama emphasis on that VIDEO was totally POLITICAL, and DIMINISHED the deaths of these Americans as virtually an "accident (being in the wrong place at the wrong time). Do yo see why I say Obama is perfectly capable of saying that an exploding birthday cake was an ACCIDENT? That is almost what he has done in Libya, with this ridiculous attempted narrative about a "spojntaneous demonstratin" that NEVER EXISTED.
There are other problems with Obama and Libya. Did he Obama Administrratin fail to take sufficient steps to secure the safety of our consulate, and our ambassador, for POLITICAL REASONS (wanting Obama's Libyan "policy" to seem a "success")? Maybe so. However, hindisght always is a danger here. What I thin is more obvius is that Obama was so intent on a SOFT response to the EGYPTIAN attack on our embassy, that the entire Obama Administratin was sending out the message that this was ALL ABOUT THE VIDEO (and not Obama POLICY) . Did this DELAY our RESPONSE to the attack in Libya. Why was not the American MILITARY IMMEDIATELY SCRAMBLED. We suposedly had a DRONE over Libya at the time. We had "rapid resonse temas" nto that far away. Should we not have IMMEIDATELY responded to the "firefight' as best we could, even if all we ended up doing was SECURING THE AREA after the Americans were already dead? i think so. Obama had already SET IN MOTION the idea that ALL of this was about the VIDEO, and the Obama Administratin maintained that "message" about LIBYA, for POLITICAL reasons and to keep up this POLICY positon, even after it was obvius it could not fly. UNFORGIVABLE. I certainly can't forgive it, and I won't Obama dserves nothing but RIDICULE for what he said and did AFTER the Libyan terrorist attack that killed four Americans.
Hillary Clinton? You know that Harry Truman (lol) Obama sent Hillary Clinton out to TAKE THE BLAME for LIbya--at least for the failure to have adequate secuirty. I actually heard Mark Warner, a DISHOENST Democrat, say that President Obama deserves "credti" for the low unemployment rate in Virginia, despite the new GOP governor, BECASUE THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE PRESIDENT. Again, it is another one of those items of evidence that God may not exist that a thunderbolt did not strike Warnter dead on the spot. More than anyting else, the LIBYAN BUCK STOPS WITH OBAMA--not the Virginia unemployment rate.
Is Hillary Clinton really a "trained black wido spider" for Obama? Well, I doubt if it is that simple. Hillary Clinton is hardly a person to simply do Obama's bidding, with no agenda of her onw. However, I do think Clinton made a MISTAKE here. IF Clinton has ANY further political aspirations, then I think she has HURT them BADLY by taking "rfesponsibility" for Libya. Not a good move. And, to a degree, I believe Obama ut Clinton "in a box", like a traine black widow spider, where shke either had to "take responsibility" (take one for the team), or be finished in DEMOCRATIC PARTY POLITICS. Clinton may wll have finished herself in NAITNAL POLITICS by what she did, but Obama had her in that box.
I am now sorry I endorsed Hillary Cltinon for Preisdent in 2008. yes, I VOTED for her in the Teax primary, and PROMISED to vote for her against McCain. I could not votre for OBAMA agaisnt McCain, although I could not vote for McCain either, but I did think Hillary Clinton would not DESTROY the country as i thought--correclty--Barack Obama would (and John McCain). One reason for my ositoion, of course, is that GOP politicians would have MORE REASON to oopppose Hillary Clinton than John McCain, meaing that the RESULTS under McCin woud--in my opinion--have been WORSE than under Clinton, and conservatives would be BLAMED for those results. It is because I think the same thing that would have happened wtih McCain will happen with Romney that I endorsed Gary Johnson. However, that wa beofer the last debate made me realize that Obama has gone beyond my capacity for PAIN, antd that it is just UNACCEPTABLE for Obama to be President of the United States. No. Evn I had not hought THIS BADLY of Obama,, and I already thought he was the most dishoenst of American Presidents I had ever seen. There is such a thing as ordinary political deceit, which Obama has taken to new heights (enocuraged by his sycophants in the media). But the Libyan terrorist attack involved the DEATH of four Americans, and to treat that as mere POLITICS is just not what I think ANY other Preisdent would have done. Obama, with Jon Stewart, said that the death of 4 Americans is "not optimal". To me, this is an ACCURATE description of how he looked at the matter: as a challenge for his POLITICAL CAMPAIGN that wa "not optimal". Again, even if lyou accept (as I do, partly because of US) that ALL politicans are "dishoenst" to one degree or another, this parrticular kind of "politics' is beyond the pale. I wil never accept it.
Yahoo "News" featured PROPAGANDA headline from tonight: "After Libyan misfire, pressure is on Romney in foreign policy debate". No. Romney may not have handdled evey;thing perfectly , but this is PROPOAGANDA--a LIE to boot--pure and simple. It is OBAMA wh MISFIRFED on Libya (not to mentin Egypt and the entire Arab world), and who has MISLED the American peole for POLITICAL reasons. You know the story was PROPAGANDA, when you realize that the LEFTISTS from Yahoo took THIS "featured" story from REUTERS. Yahoo "News" "features" very FEW stories from Reuters, and every time it does so the sotry is even MORE LEFTIST PROPAGANDA than the despicable AP (which Yahoo usually uses, if not ABC or some other source besides Reuters). No. BOYCTT YAHOO AND AT&T (which uts its name right up there with Yahoo on these "featured" stories), Yep The body of the "sotry" egven says Rmney faces an 'uphill battle" in the debate. Again, partisan propaganda, pure and simple, which is true of AlL of Yahoo "News" (really all of the mainstream media, as it is not accident that Candy Crowley LIED in saying that President Obama said, right after the Libyan attack, that it was a "terror attakc').
"Terrorphobia": "Unnatural fear of the word "terror', and the word 'terrorist', especially as applied to terrorist attacks by extremist Muslims. The word can be used in a sentence this way: Barack Obama is a victim of terrorphobia, as illustrated by hhis inability to refer to the Libayn terrorist attack as a 'terrorist attack'. The condition hs no known cure"