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

Obama And The I-Word (If Only We Could Recall Him)

The Liberals tried and failed to recall my governor, Scott Walker. They thought they could win but what they didn't realize is that even Democrat voters knew we needed to reign in the greed of the public sector unions. No doubt that quite a few teachers, firefighters and cops voted for Walker, knowing it would cost them but willing to give up what they knew they didn't deserve. Certainly not when the rest of us with private sector jobs are still suffering under the Obama economy.

With Obama, however, there is a stark contrast. Obama, unlike Walker, isn't doing what is necessary to get the country back on the right fiscal path. Instead he spends our money to buy votes and campaign contributions for himself and his fellow Democrats.

The corruption of this administration is becoming much more clear in it's second term, what with the lies and cover up concerning Benghazi, using the IRS to target political opponents, and the tyrannical seizing of records from reporters. There are many more scandals of course (listed at the beginning of my previous post) but it is these three that are generating some serious talk of impeachment.

If only we could recall him, I think many Americans who voted for Obama the last time out would not just go with whatever candidate the Democrats put up in Obama's place (Biden or Hillary) - but would acknowledge they were wrong in not electing Romney when they had the chance. Certainly Romney would get the vote of independents and conservative Democrats who deeply regret voting for the miserable liar who occupies the White House.

Alas, the Constitution does not allow for the recall of a president. The best we could hope for would be a president Biden if the Republicans retook the Senate in the midterms. Unless it could be proven Biden was in on the lying and we impeached him as well. That, however, would be historically unprecedented (and therefore quite unlikely).

Still, there could be some benefits to impeaching Hussein, namely slowing down (or even halting) his Socialist agenda of spending money we don't have and making the "rich" he vilifies pay for (some of) it (while borrowing the rest from China). What do you think? Should we impeach or should we not impeach?

I say yes, but wait until we get nearer to the midterms so we can use it as ammunition to take out his Democrat allies and win the Senate. When, exactly that would mean impeachment proceedings should begin I do not know, but I'm sure the Republicans are on top of it (or I hope they are).

TLB #43

The Scandal Predicted to Bring Down the Barack Hussein Obama Administration

Barack Hussein Obama will not serve out his second term. Instead he will be forced to resign or be impeached and leave office in disgrace. I read about this prediction on a well known Conservative News site. Several Republicans were quoted as believing it will be the Benghazi cover up that will be the undoing of Obama.

Frankly I'm not so sure. Yes, I think there was a cover up, and yes, I believe it could be of a magnitude that removing Hussein from office would be entirely appropriate -- but will it actually happen? Only one president has ever resigned from office. Two others were impeached, but they were not removed. Richard Nixon said if a president does it, then it is legal.

People considered that to be an arrogant statement, but I think for (the most part) it is true (not necessarily that anything a president does is legal, but that he can get away with it). It was only because Nixon recorded his misdeeds, and then did not destroy those tapes, that he made his removal from office a certainty. If he had not resigned he would have been bounced out by an impeachment and conviction.

According to the Washington Post, the "U.S. Embassy officials in Tripoli, some 600 miles away, tried unsuccessfully to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets" and that "the embassy also was unable to get permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops in Benghazi during the attack".

The question is why did Hussein allow these attacks to continue without responding? Was the Hussein administration's failure to act due to their incompetence or was there some other reason? Did they actually order those who could have responded to stand down?

Greg Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya, says, "Special Forces personnel were planning to board a C-130 flight at around 6am local time on Sept. 12 but [were told] "you can't go now, you don't have authority to go...".

I don't know about you, but that sounds quite damning to me. A commenter on the "Atlas Shrugs" message board has a theory regarding the stand down order -- he says, "the corruption of this administration pales in comparison to any other scandal. ...to have a Muslim President in office so soon after 9/11 is by design and no accident".

What do you think about this theory? Is it conspiracy theory nonsense from a nutjob, or a very real possibility? I'm leaning toward the later.

TLB #41

Is Barack Hussein Obama an Illegitimate President?

There are those who believe the last election was stolen. That massive voter fraud swung it in Obama's favor and that Romney actually won. I think these people are definitely on to something. But, as history has shown us, once a president is elected (or he appears to have been elected), nothing can be done to undo the announced election results.

So Obama, legitimate or not, won't be ejected from office. His "win" won't be overturned because nobody is investigating the voter fraud issue. Republicans continue to work to see that it's reduced in the future, but past voter fraud will stand. Clearly Obama'a presidency could be illegitimate in that his win was due to voter fraud (that will never be investigated and thus never proven), but what about the "natural born citizen" issue? That issue was resolved when Obama (under pressure) FINALLY released his Hawaiian long form birth certificate, right?

Not so fast kemosabe! The Hawaiian birth certificate that Hussein released may have fooled the Liberal media, but others say it's a forgery. CBS News in Arizona reported on an investigation initiated by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and they say Joe's investigators "confirmed" the document was created using Photoshop (see video below).

Snopes does a pretty good job "debunking" the "created in Photoshop" charge, but Snopes is the same site that "debunked" the allegation that Al Gore claimed to have invented the internet. They based their conclusion on some bullpucky about "create" and "invent" not having the same meaning - but go to any dictionary website and you'll find that the words are synonyms.

Also, Wikipedia notes that the site's creator David Mikkelson "has said that the site receives more complaints of liberal bias than conservative bias". Maybe their defense of Al Gore using a nonsense argument about synonyms having different meanings could have something to do with these "Liberal bias" accusations?

On the other hand, the Snopes page links to a Fox New article! I suppose this was done to convince Right-wingers? "Look Right-winger, we're linking to FOX NEWS"!! But check this out - if you Google the name of the Photoshop expert, "Jean-Claude Tremblay", one of the articles that comes up on top is, "Fox News expert denies he claimed birth certificate legit".

Tremblay (the Fox News expert) says, "the network must retract the story, [because] it deliberately misquoted him". Tremblay says his findings don't prove the authenticity of the document one way or the other, but Fox News refuses to allow him to correct their story. As a result Tremblay feels "anger verging on disdain" and no longer trusts Fox News. I guess that blows the Snopes "debunking" out of the water. This expert's analysis went from "absolutely legit" to "can't say one way or the other". Question is, why would Fox News put forward a story that misrepresents what the Photoshop expert said?

The newspaper announcements that some cite as "proof" have also been questioned. Both of the two papers that ran the birth announcements said their information came from the state Department of Health and the "certificates of live birth". But these certificates require no proof that the child was actually born in Hawaii; instead they are issued if the child's parents have "declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child".

Furthermore, a neighbor living next to the address where the birth announcement says the Obamas lived can't recall that a White woman who gave birth to a black baby ever lived there, and an investigator looking into the matter discovered the house was owned by an "Orland S. and Thelma S. (Young) Lefforge, both of whom are deceased".

In conclusion I must say that (for me, at least), the question of where Barack Hussein Obama was actually born is still unknown - but the claim that he was born in Hawaii seems incredibly suspect. If he was actually born in Hawaii you'd think there wouldn't be all these questions. For me, the fact that there are all these questions point to a cover-up. And why cover-up where he was actually born unless he was born outside the United States?

Back to the question regarding Barack Hussein Obama's presidency and it's legitimacy. Is he a legitimate president? Was he legitimately elected? Is he Constitutionally eligible to serve? I say the facts seem to strongly suggest that he is illegitimate for two reasons. First of all, his "win" was accomplished via voter fraud, and secondly - he wasn't even eligible to run in the first place!

TLB #38

The Barack Hussein Obama Impeachment

My sources tell me that, should prez Hussein bomb Syria, a bill for impeachment will be introduced in the House. Apparently SecDef Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee "he and President Obama look not to the Congress for authorization to bomb Syria but to NATO and the United Nations". House Republicans say that if Panetta and Hussein carry through with those sentiments it would be a violation of Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which gives the right to declare war to Congress alone.

I say WHY WAIT? Why hasn't Hussein been impeached already? He already broke with the Constitution when he bombed Lybia, as noted by ultra-Liberal congressman Dennis Kucinich. When the most Liberal congressman speaks against the actions of the most Liberal president ever -- one might think the Liberal media would pay attention instead of sweeping the issue under the rug. But no! The Liberal media swept and Kucinich was redistricted out of a job. Coincidence?

Hussein could also be impeached in regards to the Bengazhi cover up, for stealing the election last November, the Fast and Furious cover up, his American citizen hit list, the recess appointments made WHILE Congress was in session, the appointment of czars without Senate approval, violating the 10th amendment by suing Arizona for enforcing immigration laws, executive orders giving amnesty to the here-illegally "dreamers", for his refusal to enforce DOMA, and for his executive actions on gun control.

And, of course there is the fact (or high probability) that his Hawaiian birth certificate is fake. Covering up the fact that you aren't a natural born citizen, and therefore not eligible to serve as POTUS, must be an impeachable offense. The Constitution clearly spells out the requirements one must meet to hold the office, and Hussein, due to his either having been born in Kenya or having a non-citizen father, has never even been eligible to be our commander in chief!

That's such a long list, how could anyone not agree that Hussein is one of the most lawless presidents in US history! Many of his offenses are far worse than Watergate, so what is the Republican-controlled House waiting for?? Hopefully the Republicans will retake the Senate in the 2014 midterms and then the impeachment of our illegitimate prez will commence.

The only problem is then we'd be left with dufus Biden as prez. I wonder if he's done anything he could be impeached for? Unfortunately being a bumbling idiot isn't an impeachable offense, although, being the VP, he probably was involved in some of Hussein's anti-Constitutional actions. Maybe we can get them both out and move John Boehner into the presidency?

TLB #29