Our 'Irreplacable", Fearless, Always Honest, Commander-In-Chief

Uhhh... What did you say...?

 

"I Have A Pen...!!!  I don't need Congress!

 

I bow to your holiness, the leader of all Muslims...

 

Please make sure I'm doing it the Muslim way...

 Any questions...!

 

The REAL 'One'...

On the prayer rug... With another Muslim...

"POT is the same as drinking alcohol..."

 

Is there a better description...? 

No explanation needed...

 

Family Picture...

More Disrespect for America!  The Crotch salute...

 ________________

And... Of course, our last resort...

 

Mrs. Clinton, The Truth About Benghazi Does Make A Difference...

Mrs. Clinton, The Truth About Benghazi Does Make A Difference... 
By Michael Ingmire - FOXNEWS  

President Obama nominated Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State and she was confirmed by the Senate in January 2009.   A tenure lasting less than four years that would affect the lives of four American families forever. 

While traveling the globe during her time in office as Secretary of State, Clinton was vocal in her support for the empowerment of women in countries throughout the world.   But were there any major foreign policy initiatives led by Secretary Clinton during her time in office? 
Unfortunately, no. 

Was Secretary Clinton hoping to create a substantial legacy with the establishment of a diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya? 
Without a doubt, success in Benghazi would also help support the 2012 campaign narrative coming from the Obama White House claiming that Al Qaeda was "on the run.” 

With J. Christopher Stevens at the helm, Secretary Clinton’s appointee, a fully operational diplomatic outpost in Benghazi would show that democracy could succeed in post-Qaddafi Libya. 

Could this be a version of ‘Peace in the Middle East’ as negotiated by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton?   Perhaps she may have even been able to tout this achievement during future campaign rhetoric in 2016. 

Secretary Clinton ignored the warnings and object lessons that were present from the 2012 terrorist attacks on the Red Cross, the assassination attempt on the British Ambassador to Libya and the attacks that occurred at the American Diplomatic Outpost in Benghazi, all before September 11, 2012. 

Most importantly, she refused the Ambassador’s repeated requests for additional security at the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya. 

When coupled with her inability to answer the proverbial "3 a.m. phone call" during the terrorist attack on the diplomatic outpost, Secretary Clinton’s lack of competency was brought to light. 
It is amazing how wrong one person can be. 

In January 2013, during her testimony on Capitol Hill concerning Benghazi, Secretary of State Clinton famously stated to Senator Ron Johnson, when testifying about the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods, and my nephew Sean Smith, “...what difference does it make?” 

How wrong can one person be? 

I can assure Mrs. Clinton that the contributing and determining circumstances make a huge difference to the families of these four brave Americans and to a substantial percentage of the American public. 

It made a difference to my nephew Sean Smith as he called his mother, Pat Smith, on September 11, 2012.   We can only imagine the fear that Sean was experiencing in his service to his country; expressing his fears, he stated there were “suspicious men taking pictures of the compound where he was staying.” 

The January 15, 2014 release of the Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi confirms what hundreds of hours of research, inquiry, and conversation revealed to me and many other Americans the following: 
 

1. The September 11, 2012 attack could have been prevented.

2. Secretary of State Clinton did not do an appropriate risk assessment for Ambassador Stevens and other outpost personnel.

3. Al Qaeda was directly involved in the detailed planing and execution of the attack.

4. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both knew it was a terrorist attack on the evening of September 11, 2012.

5. A lie was manufactured and perpetuated as they repeatedly blamed an anti-Islamic video as the impetus of the attack.

I must conclude that the Obama administration has, and will continue to stonewall, lie, and belittle any attempt to establish any real efforts to achieve accountability for the September 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi.

Consideration of the truth versus a calculated deception is of upmost importance when seeking the office of Presidency of the United States of America.   Whether it is was during the Presidential election of 2012 or the upcoming campaign of 2016; deception and apathy, concerning the deaths of four Americans due to a terrorist attack, do not have an expiration date.

With the recent findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee Report of Benghazi, I wonder if House Speaker John Boehner and the Obama administration still find the claims made by the family members of these four murdered Americans to be false. 

Reacting to a scathing letter sent on January 6, 2014 to House Speaker John Boehner, an anonymous aide to senior GOP leadership called our claims "absurd and inaccurate." 
Really? 

I will continue to seek the truth and demand full accountability regarding the terrorist attack on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi, Libya. 
IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

Michael Ingmire is a musician, writer, and activist based in North Carolina. He is the uncle of Sean Smith, one of the four Americans killed during the attacks in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.

This Is Why Black People Living In America Are Thought of As Un-American and Cruel

This is why Black People living in America are thought of as Un-American and nasty, evil, and almost 'not human' people. They are disrespectful and cruel, and hove NO regard for ANYONE other than themselves.  

They call themselves African-Americans... Are they African?  Or are they American?  They need to choose or we will exterminate them when the revolution begins...
They live in their own feeble little minds... 
LINK TO STORY

 

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!

Phillip Manning on Obama...

The truth at last...
______________________________

WE'RE IN A LOT OF TROUBLE !!!

Obama's Ex-Bodyguard:  Scandal's 'Worse Than You Know' !!!
By Max Slavo
November 6, 2013
- You may have your suspicions about what’s going on behind closed doors at the White House...




But according to one of President Obama’s former body guards it’s much worse than we can even imagine.

Dan Bongino has protected numerous Presidents over his career, including President Obama.   He has been within ear-shot of many a discussion in the Oval Office, but up until this administration has stayed out of the lime light.   Apparently, however, the activities of this administration are so abhorrent that he could no longer keep quiet.

Bongino is so upset with what he witnessed that he is now running for Congress because he feels it’s the only way to take America back from the sycophants who have made every effort to enrich themselves with money and power at the expense of the American people.

How bad is it?

"We’re in a lot of trouble.
The President sees government – and I think it’s because of his lack of experience and maybe community organizing in the past – as this shiny new toy.

For all the disagreements I had with Clinton, Carter and Bush there were always limits… there was that line you just didn’t cross… We cross it seemingly every day. We’re lost in the scandals…
The Jamie Dimon shakedown at Chase… the HHS scandal.. Kathleen Sebelius shaking down the health care industry for money… the IRS… it’s to the point where these scandals in and of themselves would be huge back-breaking scandals [but] are just lost in the scandal fog of this administration…
It’s worse than people know… and I’m not trying to scare you either."

This is coming from someone who has stood next to Presidents for his entire career.
The implications are absolutely terrifying, especially considering how bad the publicly known scandals already are.   Can you imagine what’s happening outside the view of Americans?

This is not about Republican or Democrat, it’s about liberty, pure and simple, and this administration has done more to damage our individual rights than any that has come before it.

Bongino expresses this succinctly when discussing the NSA scandal and the administration’s use of the information acquired by government snoops all over the country.

"You give the government information and it will be abused.  It is not a matter of if it’ll be abused, it’s only a matter of when…

When the line between the personal self and the public self… when that line is determined by the government that keeps your information in a trove for release any time they need it, how are you free?
...the bottom line is, having worked inside the government, it will be abused. It is only a matter of time.

We are all doing something wrong.   The catch is not “if” we’re doing something wrong.  It is “are your private wrongs impacting on my civil liberties?”

If not, the government has no business in your life…  it’s a red herring…
If you’re not doing something wrong?   The question is only whether your private wrongs that have no effect on anyone else become exposed for the government’s benefit.

…It’s only a matter of time before someone slaps an email on your desk from fifteen years ago…  and says ‘look what we got against you.’
Remember, when the key is held by someone else, liberty means absolutely nothing. That personal and private self are being evaporated."

Make no mistake. 
They - and that especially includes this administration and/or agents acting under their directives and initiatives - will use everything they can against you when it suits them.

The prerogative has always been to destroy anything or anyone who threatens the establishment.   We’ve seen it time and again with this, as well as past, White House administrations and Congressional membership.

Now, more than ever before, they will start targeting those who speak out against them and jeopardize their agenda.
____________________________

I guess we all now know... It's gonna get WORSE before it get's BETTER!
Stand strong AMERICANS!  
The thieves, they are among us!

Adelson: US should drop atomic bomb on Iran

Adelson: US should drop an atomic bomb on Iran

By MAYA SHWAYDER JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT   10/24/2013 14:58

American-Jewish billionaire blasts Obama over negotiations with Tehran; says US should show Iran nuclear capabilities.  

 

 

NEW YORK – 

During a panel at Yeshiva University on Tuesday evening, Sheldon Adelson, noted businessman and owner of the newspaper Israel Hayom, suggested that the US should use nuclear weapons on Iran to impose its demands from a position of strength.

Asked by moderator Rabbi Shmuley Boteach whether the US should negotiate with Iran if it were to cease its uranium enrichment program, Adelson retorted, “What are we going to negotiate about?”

Adelson then imagined what might happen if an American official were to call up an Iranian official, say “watch this,”  and subsequently drop a nuclear bomb in the middle of the Iranian desert.

"Then you say, ‘See!    The next one is in the middle of Tehran.   So, we mean business.   You want to be wiped out?   Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development.   You want to be peaceful?   Just reverse it all, and we will guarantee you that you can have a nuclear power plant for electricity purposes, energy purposes’," Adelson said.

“So a tremendous demonstration of American strength?”  Boteach clarified.  “So that they would get the message?”

“It’s the only thing they understand,”  Adelson said.

“And do you see the current negotiations as a sign of weakness?”  Boteach asked.

“Absolutely,”  Adelson said.

Adelson, who donated tens of millions of dollars to defeated Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney during the most recent campaign, criticized the Obama administration's willingness to engage the Iranians diplomatically.

"[It's] the worst negotiating tactic I could ever imagine, my entire life," he said.

"Because you can’t get anything.   He’s not saying to them, Roll back your entire program and show that you’re willing to be peaceful.   So, roll it all back… and we’ll roll back the sanctions….   What is that, a game of chicken, who’s going to blink first?"

In response to Adelson's comments, Boteach said whether the remarks were regarded as serious or an exaggeration to exemplify the extreme measures that the U.S. must take to thwart Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, the international community often employs double standards on Israeli issues.

“When I heard Sheldon make his remark, my initial thought was that his purpose was to goad his more liberal critics into attacking the policy so that their double standards on nuclear threats against Israel could be exposed,”  said Rabbi Boteach in a statement.

“I would hope that those who seem alarmed by Sheldon’s overstatement on the extent to which the United States should go to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon will at least protest that much more loudly against its actual development,”  he added.
 

Islam A Religeon of Peace? Are You Kiddin' Me...?

I'm a Christian.  
I do not worship Jesus, The Christ, I worship GOD.

I was raised to believe that religion was the worship of GOD, and NOT the worship of a man.

These Mulsims worship their prophet Mohammed, who they believe is in the same group of other prophets such as Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Jesus.  All of whom were very peaceful believers of their faith.
 
So I'm having a little difficulty with this Islam propaganda that says they are the 'religion of peace' when I put their ideas up against the facts.  

I don't see any other world religion behaving so violently, by killing people or terrorizing people.  And I don't hear any other world religion saying that they will 'rule the world'.

That kind of activity doesn't mix very well with ANY peaceful intentions or Godly behavior that I have EVER heard about or witnessed.  

Frankly I believe these Muslims are a bunch of frauds.  They're not a religion at all... They are a group of gangsters, and criminals, and frankly a group of terrorist intimidating the worlds population.

Their goal is to scare folks, intimidate folks, and threaten folks to join them... or be killed.  
REAL Religions DO NOT behave in such a manner.

Watch this video from CBN of how Muslims have nearly taken over Belgium, and listen to their rationale...



So what do you think?  The religion of peace...? 
I believe they are mere violent gangsters.  
Hitler would be proud of their behavior.

This is what the 'religion of peace' does to Christians who refuse to 'convert' to their beliefs...

Soon, there will be fighting in the streets of the United States of America... NOT because we disagree with their behavior or their beliefs... 
No, it will be to save our way of life.  
DO YOU WANT TO BECOME ONE OF THEM?
The time to decide is NOW!

NEVER Trust ANY Muslim!

Non-Muslims Targeted In Deadly Attack On Nairobi Mall, Witness Says...
From The Associated Press

Nairobi, Kenya - Gunmen threw grenades and opened fire Saturday killing at least 22 people in an attack targeting non-Muslims at an upscale mall in Kenya's capital that was hosting a children's day event, a Red Cross official and witnesses said.
 
The attackers remained inside and firing subsided as military surrounded the mall hours after the attack. People continued to trickle out from hiding places within the Westgate mall, which is frequented by expatriates and rich Kenyans in Nairobi's affluent Westlands neighborhood.
 
Kenya Red Cross official Abbas Gullet said at least 22 people were killed in the attack that police blamed on terrorists. He said the death toll would likely rise.
 
"We are treating this as a terrorist attack," said police chief Benson Kibue, adding that there are likely no more than 10 attackers involved.
 
Police did not say what group was responsible for the attack.
 
Somali's rebel group al-Shabab vowed in late 2011 to carry out a large-scale attack in Nairobi in retaliation for Kenya's sending of troops into Somalia to fight the Islamic insurgents.
 
Off duty Sgt. Major Frank Mugungu said Saturday he saw four male attackers and one female, and that he could clearly identify one of the gunmen as a Somali, though he could not identify the rest.
 
The Westgate mall, with shops like Nike, Adidas and Bose, has Israeli ownership, and security personnel have in the past identified the mall as a likely terror target in the city.
 
Elijah Kamau, who was at the mall at the time of the midday attack, said that the gunmen made a declaration that non-Muslims would be targeted.
 
"The gunmen told Muslims to stand up and leave. They were safe, and non-Muslims would be targeted," he said.
 
Jay Patel, who sought cover on an upper floor in the mall when shooting began, said that when he looked out of a window onto the upper parking deck of the mall he saw the gunmen with a group of people.
 
Patel said that as the attackers were talking, some of the people stood up and left and the others were shot.
 
The gunmen carried AK-47s and wore vests with hand grenades on them, said Manish Turohit, 18, who hid in a parking garage for two hours.
 
"They just came in and threw a grenade. We were running and they opened fire. They were shouting and firing," he said after being marched out of the mall in line with about 15 people who held their hands in the air.
 
Rob Vandijk, who works at the Dutch embassy, said he was eating at a restaurant inside the mall when attackers lobbed hand grenades inside the building. He said gunfire then burst out and people screamed as they dropped to the ground.
 
It appears the attack began at the outdoor seating area of Artcaffe at the front of the mall, witnesses said.
 
Patrick Kuria, an employee at Artcaffe, said:  "We started by hearing gunshots downstairs and outside.  Later we heard them come inside.  We took cover.   Then we saw two gunmen wearing black turbans.  I saw them shoot."
 
Some people were shot at the entrance to the mall after volleys of gunfire moved outside and a standoff with police began.

Ambulances continued to stream in and out of the mall area, ferrying the wounded who gradually emerged from hiding inside the mall.
 
People clutched their small children, and some cried.  At one point in the day mall guards used shopping carts to wheel out wounded children.

A local hospital was overwhelmed with the number of wounded being brought in hours after the attack, so they had to divert them to a second facility.
_______________________
 
Need any more proof?  Muslims are out to take over the ENTIRE world! 
And you thought Hitler was a monster... 
As I said above...
NEVER TRUST ANY MUSLIM ! ! !

Obama’s 1st Term: Real Median Income Down $2,627; People in Poverty Up 6,667,000

Census on Obama’s 1st Term: Real Median Income Down $2,627; People in Poverty Up 6,667,000; Record 46,496,000 Now Poor 

From CNS News   By Terrence P. Jeffery

(CNSNews.com) - 
During the four years that marked President Barack Obama’s first term in office, the real median income of American households dropped by $2,627 and the number of people in poverty increased by approximately 6,667,000, according to data released today by the Census Bureau.

The record total of approximately 46,496,000 people in the United States who are now in poverty, according to the Census Bureau, is more than twice the population of Syria, which, according to the CIA, has 22,457,336 people.

In 2008, the year Obama was elected, real median household income in the United States was $53,644 according to the Census Bureau. 
In 2012, the last full year of Obama’s first term, median household income was $51,017. Thus, real median household income dropped $2,627—or 4.89 percent—from 2008 to 2012.

In fact, real median household income dropped in every year of Obama's first term. 
In 2008, when he was elected, it was $53,644. In 2009, the year he was inaugurated, it dropped to 53,285.  In 2010, his second year in office, it dropped to $51,892. In 2011, his third year in office, it dropped to $51,100. And, in 2012, his fourth year in office, it dropped to $51,017.

At the same time the number of people living in poverty in the United States increased. In 2008, according to the Census Bureau, there were approximately 39,829,000 people living in poverty in this country. In 2012, there were 46,496,000.  That is an increase of approximately 6,667,000—of 16.73 percent—from 2008 to 2012.

The number of people in poverty increased during three of the four years of Obama's first term--taking a slight dip from 2010 to 2011, but then rising again from 2011 to 2012. 
In 2008, there were 39,829 people in poverty in the U.S. In 2009, it climbed to 43,569. In 2010, it climbed again to 46,343.  In 2011, it dipped to 46,247. And, in 2012, it climbed to an all-time high 46,496.

In 2008, the year Obama was elected, people in poverty represented 13.2 percent of the national population.  In 2012, they represented 15.0 percent of the population.
The income threshold at which a person was determined to be in “poverty,” according to the Census Bureau, depended on the size of their household. 

If a person lived by themselves and earned less than $11,270 in 2012, they were considered to be in poverty.  A family of two people was considered in poverty if they earned less than $14,937.  The threshold for a family of three was $18,284, for a family of four it was $23,492, and for a family of five it was $27,827.

The data reported here on real median household income and the number of people in poverty come from the Census Bureau’s report “Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2012,” which was released today.
______________________

Feel better now...?

(CNSNews.com) - During the four years that marked President Barack Obama’s first term in office, the real median income of American households dropped by $2,627 and the number of people in poverty increased by approximately 6,667,000, according to data released today by the Census Bureau.
The record total of approximately 46,496,000 people in the United States who are now in poverty, according to the Census Bureau, is more than twice the population of Syria, which, according to the CIA, has 22,457,336 people.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-obama-s-1st-term-real-median-income-down-2627-people-poverty#sthash.hS3zGvpP.dpuf

Best Speech of 2012? Maybe So... Listen...

"Leadership"? ... What Leadership...?

Five Leadership Lessons on Syria and Military Power for Commander-in-Chief Obama  

By James Jay Carafano

President Obama's Saturday speech on Syria (where he decided not to decide) offers at least five fine examples of how not to employ military power.

Consulting with Congress is, of course, exactly the right step to take before committing both U.S. armed forces and the American people to ventures overseas. But, how the president got to this point is a lesson in lousy leadership.

Lesson #1.  Surprise is Still a Principle of War. 

If the president's priority was really to punish Assad with shock and awe, he went about it all wrong.  

The regime has had plenty of time to get ready--disperse assets; marshal its allies; deploy human shields; and decide how it will respond or preempt US action.

Lesson #2.  Red Lines Only Work When They Are Red. 

The whole idea of a red line is prevent bad behavior by declaring if the line is crossed there will be swift and decisive action. 

If President Obama was really serious about holding Assad accountable he should have consulted Congress before he issued a red line--not after. 

In all likelihood he didn't because there was a good chance they would have said--no--and well they might. 

Intervening in civil wars;  getting conclusive evidence about what is going on  the ground;  

and defining clear, achievable, realistic military objectives for punitive strikes is really hard- -

And the White House had no good answers for addressing any of these issues.

What happens to Obama's next red line, if Congress rejects this one?

Or will Congress have to rubber stamp a stupid red line to preserve the president's credibility?  Wouldn't that just encourage Obama to make more reckless red lines in the future?

Did the White House think about any of these questions before it stated making declarations?

Lesson #3.  A Shot Across the Bow Only Works if the Enemy Thinks You Are Serious About Sinking Their Ship. 

President Obama has already declared he won't intervene in the civil war, so any strikes will be little more than a nuisance to a regime that plans to fight to the bitter end.

Lesson #4.  Victory Has a Thousand Fathers, Defeat is an Orphan. 

President George W. Bush had a Congressional authorization for a use of force in Iraq, a UN resolution, popular support for military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and support of a broad international coalition. 

That mattered little when the wars did not go well. 

All the legitimacy in the world will mean nothing- -

- if military action does not turn out well. 

The president doesn't have a solid game plane for Syria, a resolution from Congress is not a "get out of jail free card."

Lesson #5.  Think Before You Act. 

In terms of salvaging the president's shattered credibility as a foreign policy leader turning to Congress won't help. 

A wise president would have built a coalition of support before the crisis--not waited for the crisis--then tried to build a coalition. 

And, failing that, then make it seem like military action is all up to Congress--and the president is just a bystander.

From Obama's perspective, turning to Congress now may seem like a brilliant move.  

- If Congress votes no, he has shown he has empathy with the international community--and he is still a good guy. 

- If Congress votes yes--and it all turns out badly--he will say we are all in this together.

But from the standpoint of acting like the world's leader this may be the nadir of American power.

The reality is that every decision on how to employ the armed forces has turned out badly for Obama.

He ran away from Iraq--the violence there is worse now than when he came into office.

He wants to go to "zero" in Afghanistan. The Taliban can't wait for that. 

He led from behind in Libya and that failure became a front page story after Benghazi.  

Moscow mocks him.

Beijing ignores him.

All these acts as president show Obama has not learned his lessons very well.  The Saturday speech just makes his shortfalls as commander-in-chief even more glaringly apparent.

__________________________________

My Opinion...?

Obama has ABSOLUTELY NO EXPERIENCE in foreign diplomacy.

Obama has ABSOLUTELY NO EXPERIENCE in dealing with a crisis of ANY kind

Obama IS NOT QUALIFIED to be The President of The United States

Additionally, 'Our President' played golf after his Saturday speech on Syria...

The closest he has ever come to ANY interaction with The Military was when he rummaged through a Military Graveyard looking for a lost ball...

Our President IS A JOKE! 

The entire world is laughing at The United States of America because of this clown...