Tuesday, October 14, 2014

And We Wonder Why Democrats Are Hypocrites.


This example of Hillary is why people hate democrats.  We always talk about someone else doing the right thing, yet we can't.  How can you complain about high education costs on one hand and reach for the $225K check with the other hand.  No one with a sane mind can support her.




Hillary Hypocrisy Talks About Student Debt, Hits UNLV Foundation For $225K Speaking Fee

The UNLV student body protested the large fee especially at a time when the school's tuition was increasing by almost 20%


http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/hillary-hypocrisy-talks-about-student-debt-hits-unlv-foundation-225k-speaking-fee

Despite objections from a student body which faces the burden of 17% tuition hikes during the next four years, probable Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton spoke to the UNLV foundation Monday night drawing a speaking fee of $225,000. Ironically, in her speech, she opined that more needs to be done to assure young people can achieve their dreams and free students from debt.

Friday, October 10, 2014

Obama or Bush A Better Speaker




WHO WAS AMERICA’S MOST WELL-SPOKEN PRESIDENT?

We crunched the data on more than 600 presidential speeches and addresses to see how they changed over time, and had Bill Clinton's speechwriter check the results. Our findings may surprise you

https://www.vocativ.com/interactive/usa/us-politics/presidential-readability/

Despite President George W. Bush's reputation as a poor speaker, Obama's speeches are only slightly more sophisticated.

“I don't see a huge discrepancy here. I think President Obama, no more or less than President Bush, tries to pack a lot of nuance and subtext into language that is as plain and straightforward as possible. While President Bush was often inarticulate off the cuff, Bush's speeches were underestimated. There was a crisp formality to a lot of his best speeches, particularly the ones he delivered shortly after Sept. 11.”

Thursday, October 9, 2014

And Now Chris Matthews?


Chris Matthews Says Obama Should Stop ‘Pandering’ to ‘Ethnic Groups’ 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/08/chris-matthews-says-obama-should-stop-pandering-to-ethnic-groups-video/

If there are two things MSNBC host Chris Matthews is known for, they’re his love for President Barack Obama and his knack for assuming that everyone who disagreeswith him is a racist. It’s a bit shocking, therefore, to hear him tell Obama to lay off the racial politics not once, but twice.


Matthews was on “Andrea Mitchell Reports” Wednesday discussing his most recent book on the relationship between Ronald Reagan and former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill. Matthews pointed out that when the country faced serious problems during the Reagan presidency, both parties were able to sit down and compromise. He wondered why no one could do that on issues like illegal immigration.
“Why don’t the Democrats say that? Why doesn’t the president say, instead of pandering to the Hispanic vote and liberals, why doesn’t he just say ‘You know what, I’m willing to strike a compromise. We need to get tough on illegal immigrants?’”
Matthews made a similar point when Mitchell asked whether or not Obama could rescue the final two years of his presidency. “The fact is, this president has the opportunity to put it together,” he said. “But he needs to stop playing politics, stop running for office, stop playing the ethnic groups, and say, ‘Look, I’ve only got two years left. I have to get something done.’”

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

And Now Pier Morgan?

The problem isn’t the world spinning too fast, Mr President, it’s you flip-flopping too often: How Obama’s broken promises have put America in danger 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2785467/The-problem-isn-t-world-spinning-fast-Mr-President-s-flip-flopping-How-Obama-s-broken-promises-America-danger.html#ixzz3FamoHiYE 



If you’re President of the United States, and therefore unofficial Leader of the Free World, then your most important job every day is to make everyone feel calm and secure even as chaos reigns.
POTUS is supposed to be a global figurehead for stability.

That’s why when George W Bush was told about the second World Trade Center attack while sitting in a classroom full of kids, he didn’t jump up and race out of the room. He remained sitting, determined not to exude fear or panic in front of the cameras. It’s what Presidents have to do.

That’s also why Martin Sheen’s character President Jed Bartlet in the West Wing was so popular – he took everything, 
even being shot, in his easy, confident, reassuring stride.

Yet today, Barack Obama gave a speech to fellow Democrats in New York where he said the following words: ‘There’s a sense possibly that the world is spinning so fast and nobody is able to control it.’



Really, Mr President?

You think what we all need to hear that from you right now is that the whole planet’s going to hell in a handcart?
YOU’RE the guy who’s supposed to be controlling it!

Perversely, Obama then went on to infer he HAS got everything under control, boasting of how America’s had to tackle just about every major problem facing the world right now - ISIS, Ebola, Russia, climate change – virtually on its own.

Interestingly, he also deployed the word ‘we’ as he took credit throughout this speech – in direct contrast to the word ‘they’ he deployed last week when chucking his intelligence agencies under the bus for NOT stopping the rise of ISIS. I’ve never trusted bosses who say ‘we’ when talking about supposed success and ‘they’ when talking about failure.

I trust Obama even less when he talks up the way he’s dealt with ISIS, Ebola and Russia as some kind of triumph.
In every case, the glaring warning signs were ignored until it was way too late. ISIS is now on the rampage thoughout the Middle East, Russia grabbed Cr
imea and is trying hard to grab vast swathes of Ukraine, and Ebola’s both out of control and now on American soil.
All this comes as former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave a damning verdict on Obama’s leadership skills, particularly over Syria, in his new book.

Obama, of course, vowed to hit Syria hard militarily if they ‘crossed the red line’ and used chemical weapons, but then did nothing when Assad promptly used them to kill 1,400 of his own people.
‘It was the right thing to do,’ said Panetta, ‘but once he did that, the credibility of the United States is on the line. It was important for us to stand by our word and go in and do what a commander in chief should do.’
Obama seems to have a lot of trouble standing by his word.

He repeatedly promised to close down Guantanamo Bay if he became President. It’s still open.
He repeatedly promised Newtown families he would get action on gun control after Sandy Hook. Nothing happened.
He repeatedly promised ‘no more secrecy’ in open, more transparent government. Five years later, we discovered the NSA were secretly bugging and hacking almost the entire planet.

As a father of four children, I’ve learned the hard way that the number one rule of parenting is never break a promise to your son or daughter. If you say you’re going to do something, then do it.

By not keeping his promises, Obama has emboldened Assad, Putin and ISIS on the foreign stage. And made America less safe.

Carter on Obama - "Blew it"

Jimmy Carter: President Obama blew it on ISIL

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/jimmy-carter-barack-obama-isil-111692.html#ixzz3FalgNUti



Former President Jimmy Carter is criticizing President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy, saying he has shifting policies and waited too long to take action against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.
In an interviewed published Tuesday in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, the 39th president said the Obama administration, by not acting sooner, allowed ISIL to build up its strength.


“[W]e waited too long. We let the Islamic State build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” he said, using an alternate name for the terrorist group. “Then when [ISIL] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

The administration has launched airstrikes in both Iraq and Syria, the group that has swept across much of northern and central Iraq and has released videos of its members beheading two U.S. journalists and two British aid workers.
Carter said Obama’s air campaign against ISIL in Iraq has “a possibility of success,” provided that some troops are available on the ground. He did not specify whether he meant U.S. or other ground forces.
The former Democratic president and Georgia governor also said the president has shifted his Middle East policy on several occasions.

“It changes from time to time,” he said of the president’s Middle East strategy. “I noticed that two of his secretaries of defense, after they got out of office, were very critical of the lack of positive action on the part of the president,” Carter added, in reference to former defense secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, who have each released a memoir detailing frustrations with Obama’s foreign policy and management style. In particular, Panetta, who stepped down from the post last year, has criticized Obama in several interviews since the release of his book earlier this week.
Former presidents are often seen as reluctant to criticize one another and the sitting president out of respect for the difficulty and pressures of the job, and former Republican President George W. Bush has repeatedly declined to disparage his successor. But Carter has previously spoken out against Obama’s policies on drones and surveillance programs, and last year called the implementation of the Affordable Care Act “questionable at best.”
In Tuesday’s interview, Carter continued his criticism of Obama’s targeted killings program.
“I really object to the killing of people, particularly Americans overseas who haven’t been brought to justice and put on trial,” citing the administration’s acknowledgment in 2013 that it had killed four U.S. citizens with drones in the Middle East. Carter said those killings “[violate] our Constitution and human rights.”

Monday, October 6, 2014




Panetta: '30-year war' and a leadership test for Obama

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/06/leon-panetta-memoir-worthy-fights/16737615/
CARMEL VALLEY, Calif. — Americans should be braced for a long battle against the brutal terrorist group Islamic State that will test U.S. resolve — and the leadership of the commander in chief, says Leon Panetta, who headed the CIA and then the Pentagon as Al Qaeda was weakened and Osama bin Laden killed.
"I think we're looking at kind of a 30-year war," he says, one that will have to extend beyond Islamic State to include emerging threats in Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere.
In his first interview about his new book, Worthy Fights: A Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace, Panetta argues that decisions made by President Obama over the past three years have made that battle more difficult — an explosive assessment by a respected policymaker of the president he served.
Even before it's published Tuesday by Penguin Press, the 512-page book has provoked rebukes at the State Department and by Vice President Biden. But Panetta says he was determined to write a book that was "honest," including his high regard for the president on some fronts and his deep concern about his leadership on others.
In an interview at his home with Capital Download, USA TODAY's video newsmaker series, Panetta says Obama erred:
• By not pushing the Iraqi government harder to allow a residual U.S. force to remain when troops withdrew in 2011, a deal he says could have been negotiated with more effort. That "created a vacuum in terms of the ability of that country to better protect itself, and it's out of that vacuum that ISIS began to breed." Islamic State also is known as ISIS and ISIL.
• By rejecting the advice of top aides — including Panetta and then-secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton — to begin arming Syrian rebels in 2012. If the U.S. had done so, "I do think we would be in a better position to kind of know whether or not there is some moderate element in the rebel forces that are confronting (Syrian President Bashar) Assad."
• By warning Assad not to use chemical weapons against his own people, then failing to act when that "red line" was crossed in 2013. Before ordering airstrikes, Obama said he wanted to seek congressional authorization, which predictably didn't happen.
The reversal cost the United States credibility then and is complicating efforts to enlist international allies now to join a coalition against the Islamic State, Panetta says. "There's a little question mark to, is the United States going to stick this out? Is the United States going to be there when we need them?"
Showing leadership in the fight against ISIS is an opportunity "to repair the damage," he says. He says it's also a chance for Obama to get a fresh start after having "lost his way."

MULTIPLE MEMOIRS
Panetta's behind-the-scenes account of events during Obama's first term, including the internal debate over helping Syrian rebels, is consistent with those in memoirs published this year by Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates, whom Panetta succeeded as Defense secretary.
But Panetta's portrait of Obama is more sharply drawn and explicitly critical.
He praises the president for "his intelligence, his convictions, and his determination to do what was best for the country." He notes that Obama has faced bitter opposition, especially from congressional Republicans. He credits him with scoring significant progress in fighting terrorism and righting the economy.
In the book's final chapter, however, he writes that Obama's "most conspicuous weakness" is "a frustrating reticence to engage his opponents and rally support for his cause." Too often, he "relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader." On occasion, he "avoids the battle, complains, and misses opportunities."
n the interview, Panetta says he thinks Obama "gets so discouraged by the process" that he sometimes stops fighting.
An example: The budget deal that included automatic spending cuts known as sequestration. Even though nearly everyone agreed privately that they were bad policy, Panetta says he found himself a lonely figure actively opposing them by lobbying Congress and making speeches warning that the Pentagon cuts would harm national security.
The book was the target of a veiled rebuke Thursday by Biden. "I'm finding that former administration officials, as soon as they leave write books, which I think is inappropriate," Biden told students at Harvard. "At least give the guy a chance to get out of office."
The vice president disputed whether it would have made a difference if U.S. aid had been given earlier to Syrian rebels, and State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki denied that a deal to allow a residual force in Iraq could have been reached in the face of resistance by then-prime minister Nouri al-Maliki.
It is surely no surprise to Panetta that his assessment is drawing White House ire. He provides fodder for the blistering partisan critiques of Obama's leadership by Republicans, and he is considerably more candid about his misgivings than is typical in memoirs by former officials about the presidents they served, especially while they are still in office.
"Look, I've been a guy who's always been honest," Panetta says. "I've been honest in politics, honest with the people that I deal with. I've been a straight talker. Some people like it; some people don't like it. But I wasn't going to write a book that kind of didn't express what I thought was the case."
Panetta also argues that there is time for Obama to change tactics and recover — and that it is imperative he do so.
Congressional leaders, Democratic and Republican, share the blame for the dysfunctional state of affairs in Washington, he says, but he adds they might well respond to stronger and more engaged presidential leadership.
"He's going to have to jump in the ring and fight it out for the next two years," Panetta says. "My hope is that the president, recognizing that we are at a kind of critical point in his administration, will take the bit in his teeth and will say, 'We have got to solve these problems."
'THE AMERICAN STORY'
Panetta's résumé gives his words weight. He has held top jobs in Congress and the executive branch, dealing with both domestic and national security issues, and emerged with his reputation for competence and good humor intact.
"In many ways, my story is the American story," he says when asked why he wrote the memoir. "I'm the son of Italian immigrants, and they really believed that by coming to this country they could give their children a better life, and the reality is, I kind of lived that life."
At first a moderate Republican, he worked in the Nixon administration before being pushed out after aggressively enforcing civil rights laws. He changed parties, was elected to nine terms in the House from California as a Democrat and served as chairman of the House Budget Committee. Clinton appointed him Budget director, then moved him to White House chief of staff to impose order in what had been a chaotic operation. After the 2008 election, Obama tapped him as CIA director, then named him to head the Pentagon.
At the end of Obama's first term, Panetta headed home to California, where he and his wife, Sylvia, have founded the Panetta Institute for Public Policy, based at California State University-Monterey Bay — an institution he helped establish in his congressional district when Fort Ord closed.
Now 76, he lives in the comfortable, casual house his father built in 1948, on a 12-acre ranch dotted with the walnut and elm trees planted then. In one corner of the living room is the Baldwin grand piano his parents gave him for his 12th birthday. (His musical prowess raised his mother's hopes that he would become a concert pianist, though his father at one point advised dentistry as a career.) Framed family photos are everywhere.
His 12-year-old golden retriever, Bravo, trails him indoors and out.
Sitting in the living room, Panetta briefly assesses the legacies of the three presidents he has served.
For Richard Nixon, history will "probably be a little kinder to him later on," given his achievements in opening relations with China, protecting the environment and other issues. "But the problem is that once a president resigns because of scandal, I think that'll always darken his view in history."
For Bill Clinton, history will remember that he "always kept fighting back" to get things done, even while battling impeachment. "Whether it was Democrats or Republicans, you know, he found a way to be able to do some things, to be able to accomplish some things that were important."
He makes a similar observation about Hillary Clinton, saying she would be a "great" president. "One thing about the Clintons is, they want to get it done," he says, in words that draw an implicit contrast with Obama. "When it comes to being president of the United States, it's one thing to talk a good game. It's another thing to deliver, to make things happen."
And Barack Obama's legacy?
"We are at a point where I think the jury is still out," Panetta says. "For the first four years, and the time I spent there, I thought he was a strong leader on security issues. ... But these last two years I think he kind of lost his way. You know, it's been a mixed message, a little ambivalence in trying to approach these issues and try to clarify what the role of this country is all about.
"He may have found himself again with regards to this ISIS crisis. I hope that's the case. And if he's willing to roll up his sleeves and engage with Congress in taking on some of these other issues, as I said I think he can establish a very strong legacy as president. I think these next 2 1/2 years will tell us an awful lot about what history has to say about the Obama administration."