Monday, May 20, 2013

How Dumb Does Barack Obama Think We Are?

Notice that, in response to all the scandals that plague his administration, prez Hussein claims he knows nothing? Neither he nor Attorney General Eric Holder knew the ATF had decided to arm the Mexican drug cartels. He says he did not know the attack on our consulate in Benghazi was a terrorist attack linked to Al Qaeda instead of a spontaneous uprising linked to a protest over a video – even though whistle blowers testifying before Congress say they told him it was a terrorist attack.

Eric Holder claims he didn't know about the decision to seize AP phone records. Hussein claims he did not know the IRS was targeting Conservative groups. Not until he saw the news reports.

What is this guy, a figurehead who holds no actual power, or the leader of the free world? Does anyone in this incompetent administration actually make any decisions or stay in the loop in regards to anything for which they are supposedly responsible? Just how dumb does the Hussein administration think we are?

If you're like me you aren't buying these incredibly lame protests of not knowing what the hell is going on. You know the entire Hussein Administration is lying to us. And they've got to know how transparent their lies are becoming. They are so desperate that they'd rather the public believe they are unbelievably incompetent then realize how corrupt they actually are.

What's with these delusional Liberals in complete denial regarding their savior's fall from grace? Is it that they just can't wrap their brains around the fact that Hussein lied to them? That the first Black president is also one of the worst commanders in chief ever to serve? And, NO, Libs, I intend no racism by making that statement. It is just an observation of the obvious.

Regardless of whether the far-lefties continue to defend the indefensible, the American people are waking up. A recent poll reveals that HALF of America wants this crooked liar removed from office, including almost 28 percent of Democrats.

Fritz Wenzel of Wenzel Strategies (the company that conducted the poll) says, "the appetite is growing for impeachment proceedings. It is too early to say it is time for those proceedings to start, but it's now possible to see that day on the far horizon". Sorry Libs.

TLB #44


  1. He's even losing a fair chunk of the media now. Even Chris Matthews has seemingly lost the "thrill".

  2. .

    "How Dumb Does Barack Obama Think We Are?"

    Are you casting aspersions on my asparagus?

    Ema Nymton

  3. Yes Ema, I am. Nothing else to say, huh? All you can do is point to something dumb a Republican said? Wow. Even Ema must see how badly the community organizer has screwed up.

  4. Wouldn't get too excited, even though the GOP congress has been out for his hide forever. Consider Wenzel Polls, work mostly for Citizens United and WND-picked Todd Akin over Clare McCaskill, Romney over Obama and Tommy Thompson over Tammy Baldwin. There is
    a bit of difference between accurate polling and wishful thinking.
    Consider the most recent FoxNews poll-
    "Of the controversies the White House is presently embroiled in, a plurality, 32 percent, said the IRS targeting of conservative groups was most egregious, followed by Benghazi at 27, and the DOJ’s phone records seizures at 21.
    Still, by a nearly two-to-one margin, voters said Obama would’ve won the November election over Republican Mitt Romney even if these issues had come to light before Election Day."

  5. There is a way out for him. Those responsible for the Benghazi disaster are gone. Rice is out and hopefully Hillary will never get a position of responsibility again, let alone elected.

    The racist gunrunner needs to go too, and we need reforms for complete anonymity of donors to nonprofits.

    1. Why do they need complete anonymity? Are they embarrassed?
      Ashamed? Afraid? Self-loathing? Hiding something?

    2. Harassment. The IRS. Been following the news? Anonymity prevents such political reprisals.

      Why not protect this?

  6. And BB, I am not talking about anonymoity for campaign donors. Just for those who help independent groups. There is a concept of right to privacy, and unfortunately there is a track record of harassment by the government and others.

  7. I agree with you about the harassment, dmarks. The corporate types are very worried about customers harassing them by boycotting what they sell if they find out they are donating to organizations that lobby in the interest of the plutocrats and against the interest of the rest of us.

    They are also worried about harassment from stockholders who don't want them spending THEIR (i.e. the stockholders/owners) money lobbying for the plutocrats. This is why I support complete transparency and strongly oppose anonymity. It would prevent these donors from doing things for which they would be embarrassed or ashamed about.

    1. Wish there was something valid in what you said, WD, but there isn't. When you refer to "plutocrats", you mean the 99.99%... those of us not in the ruling elite. When you say "the rest of us", you are speaking on behalf of the 00.01% who rule. And as always your interest is in silencing or discouraging expression you disagree with. You have repeatedly stated your belief that First Amendment freedom is a privilege only granted by government to members of a small group of government-approved "press" organizations.

  8. I meant what I wrote. Also, I have NEVER said First Amendment freedom is a privilege only granted by government to members of a small group of government-approved press organizations. That you continually refer to things I've never said is beyond bizarre.

    Free speech is a right of all INDIVIDUALS and to the one group the first amendment refers to: the press. The first amendment does extend to any other group (like corporations). And I am strongly opposed to silencing or discouraging the expression of INDIVIDUALS, although I do believe corporate speech should be regulated.

    If corporate speech can't be regulated then they will simply purchase more speech and drown out the voices of the rest of us ordinary people. But, being on the side of the plutocrats, this is exactly what Dennis desires.