Posts tagged Obama
Sure Obama is bad, has run up a huge debt and holds many views that are anti-thetical to the principles that have made our country successful over the years. If you don’t like him, I get it, and I respect you for wanting to improve our country.
But we have come to a point in our history with “conservatices” and “liberals” becoming far too similar, with Obama and Romney being major examples of that terrible trend. See 40 reasons why here and another 100 reasons why here.
If you like Romney and hate Obama, fine, let’s be optimistic about the future with Romney and Ryan in office. Let’s just be honest please.
Billionaire financier George Soros thinks that, if Mitt Romney wins the presidency, there will be “little difference” between him and Barack Obama in the White House.
Soros offered the reassuring news to liberals across Europe during an interview this week in Davos, Switzerland.
As policymakers from Hong Kong to Canada pressed Greece and its creditors to strike a deal to cut the nation’s debt, Soros pressed in on GOP presidential candidate Romney:
“Well, look, either you’ll have an extremist conservative, be it Gingrich or Santorum, in which case I think it will make a big difference which of the two comes in,” Soros told Reuters in a videotaped interview.
“If it’s between Obama and Romney, there isn’t all that much difference except for the crowd that they bring with them.”
Soros added, “Romney would have to take Gingrich or Santorum as a vice president and you probably have some pretty extreme candidates for the Supreme Court.”
“So it won’t be that great a difference,” he concluded, if Romney becomes president.
Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh described Soros’ move this way: “He’s endorsing Romney. ‘Romney, that’s cool, no difference, I could go either way that way.’”
Soros also told Reuters that many hedge fund managers in the United States are backing Romney because Obama wants to raise their taxes.
Soros predicted that “there won’t be a great deal of enthusiasm on either side of the battleground. It will be more civilized than the previous elections have been.”
It’s a funny thing today to see the battles waging against “liberals” and “conservatives” raging for either “free market capitalism” or “government-controlled industry”—but what if our commonly perceived choices aren’t all that different?
Despite the logical perception and the apparent differences between Obama and Romney, Jon Stewart does a great job showing how “socialist” many prominent “conservatives” really are.
If Obama’s policies and core philosophy is so flawed, and Romney shows a multitude of similar positions, why are so many placing so much faith in him?
In the end this is a Strong Word: “Do not put your trust in princes, in mortal men, who cannot save.” Psalm 146:3
Do you want a President, or a King?
Are you willing to accept a government that kills who it chooses without respect for Law, due process and/or our national charter The Constitution?
The value provided to us by removing these men (and boys) from the face of the Earth is not worth the price we pay in liberty.
2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul polls better against President Barack Obama in a head-to-head matchup than establishment-choice moderate Mitt Romney, according to a recent survey conducted by Public Policy Polling.
The poll found that Obama defeats Romney by 4 percentage points (48-44) and Newt Gingrich by 8 percent (50-42). While Santorum also joins Paul being within striking distance of the President by 3 points (48-45 and 46-43 respectively), Paul brings Obama a noticeable 2 percentage points further away from the 50 percent a candidate seeks to win on election day. Considering the +/- 3.3-percentage point margin of error, Paul in this poll is statistically tied for the presidency.
Reinforcing the electability case for Paul is that he ties Obama among independent voters, while Romney loses the largest voting segment by 6 percent, Santorum by 8 percent, and Gingrich by 15 percent – a cause for concern whether Paul’s three rivals would even be competitive come November.
While many polls have shown Paul to be the most competitive Romney alternative, it also shows Paul to be making substantial progress and momentum for a general election bid. The new poll reveals that Paul is narrowing the gap between himself and Obama by 5 percentage points since last month’s PPP poll.
Other notables are that among one of the fastest growing voter segments, the Hispanic vote, Paul takes a full third of the Hispanic vote against the sitting President, with no other candidate able to come within 5 points of Paul’s Hispanic support.
Among the largest voter segment, self-identified independents, Paul is viewed favorably by 41 percent, whereas Romney and Santorum are relegated to a melancholy 29 percent and Gingrich further behind with a mere 24 percent favorability. These favorability numbers among independents translate into a clear Election Day advantage unique to Paul, where he would tie President Obama 42 to 42 for their votes.
Young voters, those 18 to 29 years in this poll, have long been considered to be in the President’s court. Yet, in a Paul-Obama matchup, these voters leave Obama and comparatively flock to Paul, backing him with a hefty 40 percent of their support. The range of youth support for Paul’s three competitors in a head-to-head with Obama ranges 22 to 29 percent, meaning about half of Paul’s margin to weak at best.
“The media may find an inevitability about Romney becoming nominee, but it is clear that with anyone other than Ron Paul as nominee a second term for Obama is the inevitability,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton.
“When polls say ‘Romney is actually not the most electable Republican candidate,’ voters should flock to the candidate who can defeat Obama by winning on true conservative principle. That man is Ron Paul,” added Mr. Benton.
The PPP poll is based on telephone surveys of 900 voters and has a +/- 3.3-percentage point error margin.
We have laws to prevent the tyranny of evil men from dominating society. The fact that this discussion is even taking place is amazing. Check the vid for FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney General Eric Holder making the case that the President can murder American citizens because he and his “advisors” say so.
There aren’t any bad times to try to get right with God, but given the storm that appears to be on the horizon now might be a particularly good moment for seeking the face, will and forgiveness of The Lord.
Despite the madness we see, keep your peace and joy inside the Faith that this life is just a brief physical escapade across a vast and unimaginably glorious universe; the life to come is the real one, be patient.
“Keep calm and carry on.”
Driving to Mass this morning I was listening to FOX on the issue of Afghanistan and the killing of U.S. and NATO soldiers by our supposed Afghan allies. FOX had its “terrorism expert” on and he was blathering about how President Obama’s apology for the recent Koran burning was causing more violence in Afghanistan and across the Muslim world. The apology, said the “expert”, was typical of Obama’s weakness, and this weakness is contributing to the rise of Islamist power in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Afghanistan, and other places.
Somehow Obama’s apology for the Koran burning was explained by FOX’s “expert” as an apology for “U.S. policy,” which surprised me as I did not know our policy was to burn Korans.
Anyway, that this sort of truly brain-dead stuff passes for acceptable — or even plausible — analysis on any U.S. network falls into the appalling but not surprising category. The violence in Afghanistan against U.S. and NATO forces, for example, has nothing to do with the repeated apologies of Obama, Bush, Secretary Clinton, etc. for various incidents.
The violence comes from the fact that we and NATO are viewed by the overwhelming number of Afghans as, to quote an old but true phrase, “foreign infidel occupiers.”
Now, there is no doubt that burning Korans alienates Afghans, but it is the icing on the cake of 2,000-plus years of unrelenting, violent Afghan opposition to all occupiers — Greeks, Persians, Mongols, British, or Soviets. FOX’s “expert” said that Washington and NATO should be “partnering with pro-democracy Afghan social groups” to discredit the Taleban and other Afghan mujahedin and thereby reduce violence and spur democracy.
This analysis is truly a howler as those Afghans who are killing Western soldiers are the only social forces that count in Afghanistan, and they are the only ones that have counted since we invaded in 2001. Had we smashed these folks to the edge of extinction and then left in the 18 months following 9/11, all would have been well. But we stayed to build a secular democracy and empower women, and today the world’s greatest power and its allies are acknowledging defeat at the hands of shaggy lads armed with weapons of Korean War vintage.
This is brilliant—Cenk nails Obombya on a his support for the power to indefinitely detain (read: lock you up for as long as he likes) American citizens without a lawyer, trial, or formal charges. We are drifting towards the abyss; and most of us are too obsessed with TV shows, booze or other cheap thrills to notice.
When I think about the potential horror that the recently passed NDAA legislation can produce, I wonder if is God allowing the poison of chemtrails, the reality of FEMA camps and the horror or false flag terror events to happen so that we are driven to him rather than the joys of this life?
We are in a quick, brief and fleeting world that vanishes so quickly—should we put so much value in it? Upon merely saying that my mind jumps to justify my desire to fight and defend my country and this world from the criminals that have risen to power. But, I am forced to ask myself: “Is our true Citizenship in heaven?” (as mention in Phillipans 3:20). Is this world just a temporary stop that we falsely adorn with value and glory?
For now, I’ll let Isaiah 41:10 sink in: “Fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand.”
If we will force ourselves to look at the hard and ugly evidence proving that we are killing, maiming and terrorizing exponentially more innocent people (and causing their families to become hard-nail terrorists) than we are eliminating real terrorists, we will see that our profoundly sick foreign policy masquerading as logic is a massive shame upon us and needs to be ended now.
For more, read former Chalmers Johnson’s definite text: “Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire.”
You can also check out more articles on blowback here.
In a New York Times Op-Ed yesterday, international human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith describes a meeting he had in Pakistan with residents from the Afghan-Pakistani border region that has been relentlessly bombed by American drones; if I had one political wish this week, it would be that everyone who supports (or acquiesces to) President Obama’s wildly accelerated drone attacks would read this:
The meeting had been organized so that Pashtun tribal elders who lived along the Pakistani-Afghan frontier could meet with Westerners for the first time to offer their perspectives on the shadowy drone war being waged by the Central Intelligence Agency in their region. Twenty men came to air their views; some brought their young sons along to experience this rare interaction with Americans. In all, 60 villagers made the journey. . . .
On the night before the meeting, we had a dinner, to break the ice. During the meal, I met a boy named Tariq Aziz. He was 16. As we ate, the stern, bearded faces all around me slowly melted into smiles. Tariq smiled much sooner; he was too young to boast much facial hair, and too young to have learned to hate.
The next day, the jirga lasted several hours. I had a translator, but the gist of each man’s speech was clear. American drones would circle their homes all day before unleashing Hellfire missiles, often in the dark hours between midnight and dawn. Death lurked everywhere around them. . . .
On Monday, [Tariq] was killed by a C.I.A. drone strike, along with his 12-year-old cousin, Waheed Khan. The two of them had been dispatched, with Tariq driving, to pick up their aunt and bring her home to the village of Norak, when their short lives were ended by a Hellfire missile.
My mistake had been to see the drone war in Waziristan in terms of abstract legal theory — as a blatantly illegal invasion of Pakistan’s sovereignty, akin to President Richard M. Nixon’s bombing of Cambodia in 1970.
But now, the issue has suddenly become very real and personal. Tariq was a good kid, and courageous. My warm hand recently touched his in friendship; yet, within three days, his would be cold in death, the rigor mortis inflicted by my government.
And Tariq’s extended family, so recently hoping to be our allies for peace, has now been ripped apart by an American missile — most likely making any effort we make at reconciliation futile.
This tragedy repeats itself over and over. After I linked to this Op-Ed yesterday on Twitter — by writing that “every American who cheers for drone strikes should confront the victims of their aggression” — I was predictably deluged with responses justifying Obama’s drone attacks on the ground that they are necessary to kill The Terrorists. Reading the responses, I could clearly discern the mentality driving them: I have never heard of 99% of the people my government kills with drones, nor have I ever seen any evidence about them, but I am sure they are Terrorists. That is the drone mentality in both senses of the word; it’s that combination of pure ignorance and blind faith in government authorities that you will inevitably hear from anyone defending President Obama’s militarism. As Jonathan Schwarz observed after the U.S. unveiled the dastardly Iranian plot to hire a failed used car salesman to kill America’s close friend, the Saudi Ambassador: “I’d bet the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. has closer ‘ties’ to Al Qaeda than 90% of the people we’ve killed with drones.”