Who is Mitt Romney??
MITT ROMNEY AND FAMILY
A few things we may not know but should about Mitt!
· His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney.
· He was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old.
· His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan.
· He was Raised in: Bloomfield Hills , Michigan.
· He is Married to: Ann Lois (Davies) Romney since 1969; they have five children. (Mitt says his kids and grandkids are his main hobby, not golf or tennis. They sent out Christmas cards of the ‘whole’ family, like above, as governor.)
· Education: B.A. from Brigham Young University, J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University.
· Religion: Mormon The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints. (Ann converted to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1966 on her own while Mitt was gone on his mission).
· After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary.
· After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar, but never worked as an attorney.
· In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States.
· In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy.
· He was President and C.E.O. of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
· In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit (and their unemployment was around 4.5%).
Some Interesting and Noteworthy Facts about Romney:
· Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts , turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people.
· Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino’s, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.
· He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad’s gubernatorial campaign 1 year.
· He was an unpaid intern in his dad’s governors office for eight years.
· He accompanied and campaigned all over Michigan (unpaid) with his mother when she ran for Senator.
· He was an unpaid bishop and stake president of his church for ten years.
· He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years.
· He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years.
· He gave his entire inheritance from his parents to charity.
· Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men.
Mitt Romney is Trustworthy:
· He will/has show(n) us his birth certificate
· He will show us his high school and college transcripts.
· He will show us his social security card.
· He will show us his law degree.
· He will show us his draft notice.
· He will show us his medical records.
· He will show us his income tax records.
· He will show us he has nothing to hide.
Mitt’s friends and business associates all have great stories about him, his friendship and his character. A must read story: Romney’s true personality and colors deserve to be told
Because Romney does not toot his own horn and is steady and calm instead of boastful and grandiose a lot of people like to say that he isn’t tough enough and doesn’t show enough feelings. You might want to read the information below.
Sometimes, this facet of Romney’s personality isn’t so subtle. In July 1996, the 14-year-old daughter of Robert Gay, a partner at Bain Capital, had disappeared. She had attended a rave party in New York City and gotten high on ecstasy. Three days later, her distraught father had no idea where she was. Romney took immediate action. He closed down the entire firm and asked all 30 partners and employees to fly to New York to help find Gay’s daughter. Romney set up a command center at the LaGuardia Marriott and hired a private detective firm to assist with the search. He established a toll-free number for tips, coordinating the effort with the NYPD, and went through his Rolodex and called everyone Bain did business with in New York, and asked them to help find his friend’s missing daughter. Romney’s accountants at Price Waterhouse Cooper put up posters on street poles, while cashiers at a pharmacy owned by Bain put fliers in the bag of every shopper. Romney and the other Bain employees scoured every part of New York and talked with everyone they could – prostitutes, drug addicts – anyone.
That day, their hunt made the evening news, which featured photos of the girl and the Bain employees searching for her. As a result, a teenage boy phoned in, asked if there was a reward, and then hung up abruptly. The NYPD traced the call to a home in New Jersey, where they found the girl in the basement, shivering and experiencing withdrawal symptoms from a massive ecstasy dose. Doctors later said the girl might not have survived another day. Romney’s former partner credits Mitt Romney with saving his daughter’s life, saying, “It was the most amazing thing, and I’ll never forget this to the day I die.”
So, here’s my epiphany: Mitt Romney simply can’t help himself. He sees a problem, and his mind immediately sets to work solving it, sometimes consciously, and sometimes not-so-consciously. He doesn’t do it for self-aggrandizement, or for personal gain. He does it because that’s just how he’s wired.
Many people are unaware of the fact that when Romney was asked by his old employer, Bill Bain, to come back to Bain & Company as CEO to rescue the firm from bankruptcy, Romney left Bain Capital to work at Bain & Company for an annual salary of one dollar. When Romney went to the rescue of the 2002 Salt Lake Olympics, he accepted no salary for three years, and wouldn’t use an expense account. He also accepted no salary as Governor of Massachusetts.
Character counts!! (and yes…that’s worth reading again!) Sounds pretty presidential to me!
Greg Gutfeld, co-host of The Five and host of Redeye made one of the most interesting observations of Romney’s debate performance and his overall demeanor in general that I have heard: “Mitt Romney is an alpha-male in a religion that prizes humility… ”
Bet you didn’t see this on the six O’clock news!
I have even read this and checked its validity on left-leaning Snopes and is is true! www.snopes.com/politics/romney/search.asp
Mitt Romney’s background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent President of the United States.
Think somebody’s getting nervous… You betcha!! 😉
Romney’s negatives… He has done his share of ‘evolving’ and he has a lot of left-leaning elitist friends because of his social and economic circle plus the states he was born in and was Governor in. Too many of Romney’s advisors are CFR members and not enough are strong conservatives (Oct 2011), but unlike Obama his advisors and friends are not Socialists, Communists and Marxists (often self-avowed). If this list of advisors concerns you, and it should, send the list and your concerns to the Romney campaign and ask him/them why? And ask him to replace them if you don’t like his explanation. Mitt does, however, have a lot of very conservative friends from his church, the Olympics and others in his circle. Why is he not choosing more people from that pool?
But as bad as this appears (is), Romney is still the better choice over Obama. I was just listening to David Limbaugh on his new book, The Great Destroyer: Barack Obama’s War on the Republic; he has over a 100 pages of research sources, who says if we don’t get Obama out of office in November, we are done… definitely for at least a generation, but perhaps done done… He said he would gladly not make a dime on the book and have Mitt (anyone) win verses make a ton of money on the book and have Obama re-elected because another Obama term will destroy the lives of our kids and grandkids.
WND’s Josef Farah Answers New Romney Eligibility Craze – Ginned up by Team Obama like they did with McCain
Don’t know enough about Mitt Romney? Notice above that you have more released background information and documents on him than after a presidential campaign and almost 4-years in office on President Obama. And…have you read these books?:
Mitt Romney is pretty much a ‘what you see is what you get’ kind of guy. He is a man you can count on and is steady in a crisis. And if anything, those that know him well say Mitt gets better the longer you know him because he is innately private so shares more of his inner self the more comfortable he becomes in his situation and with his surroundings and the people he is with.
Mitt Romney ha actually laid out a very detailed plan explaining what he plans to do when elected, and did so during the primaries, something the American people are still waiting for from President Obama. It is posted on his website.
Who Is Barack Obama?
Barack Hussein Obama is an enigma. He is everybody and he is nobody. He is whatever you want him to be or at least what that was during the election cycle of 2008. BHO is at best a composite, like everyone in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father, written by someone else… Underground Weatherman radical progressive professor Bill Ayers. Obama is the masquerade of a man, a Manchurian Candidate and now President, who does not exist and was created just so that we, the American people, the people who chose to come to the Ball regardless of the price, without the facts or the realities that surround the cost, could say we danced. (Too many allowed themselves to be enamored with an idea that really was never presented, in a person that didn’t exist or wanted to be part of electing the 1st black (at least half black) president, perhaps hoping it would put an end to racism… all an illusion.)
Obama managed to avoid being vetted or even questioned about the kinds of things we, Americans, people, voters, want to know about their leaders. In the book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama addresses the fact that he purposely didn’t fill in the blanks and chose to be the blank page that anyone who followed him could write on themselves to describe him and the hope and change they personally hoped for.
All of a sudden in about a week’s time frame Edward Klein releases his new book The Amateur along with a 3-hour taped interview with the controversial Reverend Wright that has been featured in sections on Hannity, people have begun reading and releasing snippets from BHO’s Dreams from My Father and then Hannity ran a one hour special on that book whose audio version was recorded by Obama himself. And the week before that, Glenn Beck did a two part special (see below) on Barack Obama.
The Blaze – The Fiction and Non-Fiction of Obama – Tiffany Gabbay – annotated with links and comments by Marion Algier for this post (below)
Part I of this report examines President Obama’s earliest role models and the influence each likely had on him as he shaped his worldview. With an anti-colonialist father, a mother who rejected Western society, a communist mentor, a domestic-terrorist benefactor, and an anti-Semitic preacher, the reasons behind Obama’s past and present actions come more sharply into focus. Below, we navigate through just some of the president’s questionable political positions.
Part two of this special report reviewed some of the president’s political actions and associations that likely reflect the influences he acquired from this strange and controversial cast of characters.
It could be argued that if then-presidential candidate John McCain had truly assailed his rival Barack Obama over his exhaustive collection of dubious dealings and less-than-scrupulous friends (think: Davis, Rashid Khalidi, Father Pflager, Wright, Ayers, Rezko, Said, etc.), he just might have taken the election. Instead, McCain chose to “keep above the fray” — although few are clear as to why bringing up substantive and valid concerns over the first-term senator’s past constituted otherwise to the Maverick-camp. Now, President Obama is three years into his first term as president, and his campaign for reelection has officially kicked off with a record-setting $15 million celebrity-fundraiser hosted by devotee George Clooney.
If the president’s true history continues to be replaced by the alternate narrative he has constructed for himself; if his fact, rather than fiction-based life is swept under the carpet again, he will likely retake the Oval Office.
With this in mind, Glenn Beck dedicated an entire Thursday evening broadcast (2-hrs.) to reviewing the staggering array of inconsistencies, embellishments and “manufactured lies” perpetuated by the president over the course of his political career.
“His life is complete fiction,” Beck said. Let’s review the non-fiction version before we go any further: SEE VIDEO HERE
In Part II of this report, we will briefly profile some of the president’s more questionable deeds, but in order to provide proper context, consider the following cast of characters who helped to shape Obama’s life and mindset.
Dreams from an anti-colonialist father
It is difficult to understand what truly moves the president without understanding who his father was. In his book, “The Roots of Obama’s Rage,” Dinesh D’Souza described in painstaking detail, an unsavory character who womanized, abused, drank excessively (killing a man in one drunk-driving incident, losing both of his legs in another, and later killing himself in yet another), abandoned his eight children at various points in their lives, married thrice without ever divorcing his previous wives, and advocated taxing income at a 100% rate. Unbelievably, the man described is not a work of fiction. He was President Barack Obama’s father.
Barak Obama Sr. (spelled without the “c”) was a Harvard economics graduate student from Kenya and despite the president’s insistence that his paternal lineage comprised humble stock, Barak Sr. was actually from a prominent and wealthy farming family. His father, Hussein Onyango Obama, was also an observant Muslim who chose the Arabic name “Barak” because it means “blessed.”
In an article written for the East Africa Journal in 1965, “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Barak Sr. explained that in the wake of colonialism, socialism was necessary to ensure national autonomy for Kenya. “The question,” he wrote, “is how are we going to remove the disparities in our country, such as the concentration of economic power in Asian and European hands . . .?” [emphasis added]
Obama Sr. went on to insist that “theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100 percent of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.”
D’Souza explains the significance:
Absurd as it seems, the idea of 100 percent taxation has its peculiar logic. It is based on the anti-colonial assumption that the rich have become rich by exploiting and plundering the poor; therefore, whatever the rich have is undeserved and may be legitimately seized.
Recall now that the president’s book is titled Dreams from My Father, not Dreams Of My Father. In the memoir, Obama described longing to emulate his senior, writing, “it was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself.”
D’Souza also noted those close to Obama Jr., including his grandmother Sarah Obama, agreed with the passage. She told Newsweek, “I look at him and I see all the same things — he has taken everything from his father . . . this son is realizing everything the father wanted.”
While some might argue that it is implausible to think the president would seek to live-out the dreams of a deeply flawed man who callously abandoned him, human nature and psychology dictates otherwise. Even into adulthood, we often seek the approval of our parents — sometimes even the ones that withhold love — because theirs is the affection we most desire gaining. True, one cannot hold the president responsible for the sins of his father, but that does not mean he doesn’t still seek his approval.
All the while, Obama dismisses the influence his father had on him. Yes, it is possible that the president is so repulsed by his father’s life that he would reject everything the man ever stood for, but then why would his own memoir read as a tribute to the dreams his father never had the opportunity to realize?
“We’re not in Kansas anymore”: Stanley Ann Dunham
Not a tremendous amount his known about the woman with an unusual first name who married Barak Obama Sr., some say, to spite her racist father. But what we can glean from various accounts provides relevant insight into Obama’s upbringing and influences.
After moving several times as a child, Stanley Ann Dunham eventually settled in progressive Mercer Island, just outside Seattle. She attended Mercer Island High School, a place that distinguished itself by having a former Communist Party member serve as chairman of the island’s school board. But that is not where the leftist connections ended.
According to the American Thinker, Dunham attended her high school’s ”anarchy alley,” where philosophy courses on Karl Marx were offered. The academics leading the effort were Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman, both reportedly of the Marxist “Frankfurt School“ and who taught ”critical theory” to students that included curriculum on the rejection of societal norms, and attacks on Christianity and the traditional family. She and her parents attended the Little ‘Red’ Church. Dunham’s peers considered her an “inquiring mind” and it is said that she grew to become part of the left’s intelligentsia.
After her family moved to Hawaii, Dunham attended the University of Hawaii at Manoa where she studied anthropology. It was in her Russian language class that she met the future president’s father, who would later leave Dunham and their new child, Barack Jr. to attend Harvard. Eventually the two divorced (though some claim they were never married in the first place) and she went on to marry Indonesian Lolo Soetoro, who worked as a government relations executive for an Oil company. While Soetoro was a Muslim, accounts differ as to the level of his observance. In 1967 the family moved to Jakarta, Indonesia. Obama’s memoir paints Soetoro as an even-tempered man who became increasingly interested in Western culture while Dunham became increasingly interested in Indonesian and other world-cultures. Inevitably a rift was formed.
According to Dr. Rich Swier, Dunham moved between Indonesia and Hawaii twice more before traveling the world to “pursue a career in rural development that took her to her Ghana, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Nepal and Bangladesh.” She also traveled to China and Pakistan and by 1992 earned her Ph.D. in anthropology from the University of Hawaii. Her 1000-plus page dissertation, according to Swier was titled: “Peasant blacksmithing in Indonesia: Surviving and Thriving Against All Odds.”
What perhaps bears mention is that President Obama has portrayed his mother as a simple girl from Kansas when she was in fact anything but. He has also credited her with providing him with his political world view.
Mentored by a Communist
After Barack Jr.’s family re-relocated to Hawaii, he found another mentor. In his book “Dreams from My Father,“ Obama often and affectionately mentioned his ”dashiki-wearing” role model from whom he sought both career and personal advice. While it is clear this father figure played a pivotal role in the young Obama’s life, the mystery-man is only ever referred to by his first name: “Frank.” Given the history, most believe the person in question is none other than the late Frank Marshall Davis – a man publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA).
Recalling his friend, Obama wrote: “It made me smile, thinking back on Frank and his old Black Power, dashiki self. In some ways he was as incurable as my mother, as certain in his faith, living in the same sixties time warp that Hawaii had created.” But by that point in time, Frank was far from the harmless throw-back caricature Obama painted him to be — that is of course assuming his last name was Davis. National Review’s Paul Kengor revealed that after moving to Hawaii Davis launched a Communist publication espousing the virtues of the Soviet Union. Kengor wrote:
Davis served as an editor and writer for a Communist-line publication, the Chicago Star, in the 1930s. I next learned that the Midwest native had flown thousands of miles away to Hawaii to take up permanent residence, just when American Communists were looking to launch a publication there, namely the Honolulu Record. Subsequently, Davis wrote a weekly column for that publication.
Kengor went on to reveal that with the determined help of research assistants, he obtained Davis’ weekly column, “Frank-ly Speaking” and that its contents mirrored perfectly “Soviet propaganda.”
All the while Obama has denied his Frank is the same Frank.
A Christian of the Black Liberation variety
After his 1960s-style awakening with Frank, another influential figure found his way into Obama’s life. In fact, Reverend Jeremiah Wright is the man credited with having led the community organizer to Christianity. A member of Wright’s Trinity United Church in Chicago’s South Side for 20 years, so influenced by the controversial pastor was Obama, that he even named his other book, “The Audacity of Hope,” after one of the reverend’s sermons.
Wright is of course best known for espousing anti-Semitic and anti-Western sentiment, once declaring that America’s “chickens had come home to roost” in the wake of the September 11 attacks. To Wright, the U.S. had brought the worst terrorist attack in history upon itself by perpetrating crimes against humanity across the world.
“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Wright blasted. “We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards.”
Wright practices and preaches a form of Christian ideology rooted in Marxism dubbed “Black Liberation Theology,” which operates with the mindset that members of the black community are still subjugated by white, racist oppressors. Those “oppressors” can range from a single individual to a head of state or even an entire government or geographical region (i.e.: “The West”).
With a victimhood mentality deeply entrenched in the collective mindset of the movement, Black Liberation Theology preys upon and seeks to reignite past resentments within the black community, thus fomenting a racism of its very own. While this tactic is certainly anathema to tenets of Christian “brotherly love,” it does not seem to stop Wright from fanning the flames of hatred. In fact, Black Liberation Theology condones violence so long as it is wielded by “the oppressed” in their “struggle to remove inequities” (whatever those might be).
In an analysis of the theology, Ron Rhodes writes: “The removal of inequities is believed to result in the removal of the occasion of sin [i.e., the oppressor] as well.”
In other words, assaulting, even killing your perceived foe is considered a good deed by Black Liberation standards.
Despite this, President Obama sat in the pews of Wright’s church for 20 years while the incensed
Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers
preacher spouted a steady stream of anti-Semitism and 9/11 conspiracy theories, proclaimed the HIV virus was an invention of the U.S. government to infect and ultimately annihilate the black populace, vehemently opposed interracial marriage and post-segregation assimilation, and praised the dictatorships of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez. Wright is also friendly with fellow-Chicagoan and radical Louis Farrakhan.
All the while, Obama claimed ignorance, suggesting he was absent the days Wright delivered his more piquant declarations and dismissed his spiritual adviser of 20 years as a kind of “crazy uncle” that you may love, but take with a grain of salt. Wright must have been none-too-pleased.
Hannity Audio: Ed Klein with Rev Wright on Obama’s Christianity
Jeremiah Wright told Klein that he “made it comfortable” for Obama to accept Christianity “without having to renounce his Islamic background.” This is consistent with a point made in 2010, that Muslims could join Wright’s church without giving up their Muslim faith. In an upcoming book, The Communist (Frank Marshall Davis, the Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor, published by Mercury Ink), author Paul Kengor casts more doubt on Obama’s Christian identity. Wright also added that Obama was ‘steeped in Islam’. For those that avail themselves of foreign news coverage, they are aware that Muslims all over the world take pride in the fact that America has a Muslim president, while the rest of their populations ponder about the stupidity of the American populace.
Launching his career with the help of Marxists and domestic terrorists
Another point of contention has been President Obama’s ties to notorious domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, who many believe was instrumental in launching Obama’s political career. Leader of the radical “Weather Underground,“ Ayers has railed against capitalism and the ”establishment” for nearly half-a-century, often resorting to physical violence to carry out his goals. Aside from organizing typical protest demonstrations (some of which turned riotous), Ayers is perhaps best known for orchestrating a series of bombings: at the New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the Capitol Building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.
You might also recall that Ayer’s “Days of Rage” demonstrations — in which he incited aspiring revolutionaries to “kill all the rich people” including their parents — served as inspiration for the Occupy Wall Street movement.
Where does a resume like that take you in life? The halls of academia, of course. Ayers served as a “distinguished” professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago from 1987 to 2010.
No one knows the exact origins of their relationship. Perhaps it was through Frank Marshall Davis, or Obama’s parents, or the fact that he lived merely three blocks away that Obama connected with Ayers in a seemingly profound way. Whatever the case, the 1960s radical must have taken a shine to the Obama as he is credited with helping him gain admission to Harvard and, in 1995, along with his wife Bernadine Dohrn, organized meet-and-greet gatherings at his Chicago home to introduce the aspiring state-senator to their inner-circle of friends political allies (including fellow Marxists Alice Palmer and Quentin Young). Evidence also strongly suggests Obama’s memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” was in fact penned by Ayers.
Obama has brushed off the level of his involvement with Ayers but in his book, “Fugitive Days: Memoirs of an Anti-War-Activist,” Ayers admitted the tie:
“In 2008 there was a lot of chatter on the blogosphere about my relationship with Barack Obama: we had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fundraiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign.”
It is also worth noting that Ayers’ father Tom is said to have given Obama his first professional break, yet the president claims to have never met him.
All the while, the president has trivialized his relationship with Ayers, begrudgingly admitting to have attended a political event at his home, but that he had no clue of the Weather Underground nor Ayer’s history as a domestic terrorist.
Forward… Part II
“Brave” enough to order the killing Osama bin Laden…but had a back-up memo to blame the military in case it went wrong? The entire Obama administration along with the American left has heaped praise on the president for his “daring” and “brave” decision to send a Navy SEAL team into an Abottobbad compound to assassinate 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden. In fact, Obama has even used the accomplishment as the crux of his latest campaign ad — a move even liberal mediate Arianna Huffington deemed despicable. Yet in April it was revealed that then-CIA Director Leon Panetta drafted a memo that included an escape clause for the president should the operation go awry [emphasis added]: “The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven’s hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out.” In plain-speak, Obama chose to blame the military, through “Patsy” Admiral McRaven, should the mission to kill bin Laden fail. Does this sound like something a Commander in Chief would or should ever do? The Wall Street Journal adds:?"
Moreover, the president does not seem to have addressed at all the possibility of seizing material with intelligence value—which may explain his disclosure immediately following the event not only that bin Laden was killed, but also that a valuable trove of intelligence had been seized, including even the location of al Qaeda safe-houses. That disclosure infuriated the intelligence community because it squandered the opportunity to exploit the intelligence that was the subject of the boast.
While it comes as no surprise that a politician might go to great lengths to protect his or her own image, a wartime president overseeing one the most redemptive moments for America in the wake of 9/11 (and who surely took the credit for all the glory) while at the same time plotting to use the military as a scapegoat in the event bin Laden’s takedown was botched, is beyond the pale by just about anyone’s standards. Disdain for troops or plain indifference?
Considering Obama’s OBL-escape clause memo, it seems clear the value he places on military is questionable. While a U.S. president serves many roles during his or her term in office, their greatest responsibility lies in being “Commander in Chief” of the nation’s armed forces. It is perhaps for this reason more than any other, that the president’s gaffes, flubs, and insults where America’s servicemen and women are concerned are so egregious. Recall that nearly one year ago, speaking to the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, the president announced that a soldier (who had died serving in Afghanistan) was in fact alive. In his speech, he recalled a time when he awarded the first Medal of Honor to someone “not receiving it posthumously.” However, the deceased Jared Monti did receive the medal posthumously. Then, back in 2009, Fox contributors Fred Barnes and Charles Krauthammer criticized the president’s lack of leadership and reverence for soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan when they revealed that in a 20-minute long speech, the president did not use the word “democracy” once even though America established “the only functioning democracy among the 22 Arab states.” The two also noted that the Commander in Chief did not treat soldiers as warriors, bur rather as “victims.“ ”We lost a lot of good men and women in order to establish a democracy,” Krauthammer said. “And he, as commander-in-chief, did not even acknowledge that.”
There was another gobsmacking incident where the president displayed what even mainstream networks dubbed a shocking display of insensitivity. During a press conference to address the 2009 Fort Hood shooting in which 13 people were killed and another 29 injured by an Islamic ideologue, the president set aside compassionate eloquence to “give a shout out” to “Dr. Joe Medicine Crow — that Congressional Medal of Honor winner.” He spoke for some three minutes before ever mentioning the shooting or those who paid the ultimate price.
Obama also came under fire after refusing to visit wounded troops, presumably because there was no photo-op in it for him.
Scrubbing the term “Special Relationship” from the lexicon Now recall that Obama’s father was a staunch anti-colonialist. With this in mind, it might make sense that the president insisted on returning to Britain, our staunchest ally, the bust of “pro-colonialist” Winston Churchill — even though the move was an insult of epic proportions. The bust had been a loaned gift in the wake of September 11, meant to show the U.K.’s solidarity with America in a most grievous time. But this was not the only time Obama snubbed Britain. In fact, the Telegraph’s Nile Gardiner pointed out that this “world-class ‘statesmen’” has delivered no less than 10(11 if you count the embarrassing iPod for the Queen incident) beyond-the-pale insults to the nation with whom we supposedly shared a “Special Relationship.” Below is a list of how the ever-diplomatic Obama has handled that special relationship:
- Sending then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown a “gift” of improperly formatted DVDs that could not be played on DVD machines outfitted in the U.K. This of course was after Brown was denied a Rose Garden press conference, as well as dinner with the president when he was stateside. Gardiner said the move “would have shamed the protocol office of an impoverished Third World country.”
- Refusing to personally meet with Brown after no less than five requests while proceeding to “give him the run-around at the UN General Assembly.”
- Declaring neutrality over the Falklands dispute, a move dubbed “the most brazen betrayal so far of a US ally” especially considering 255 British soldiers died retaking the islands from Argentina in 1982.
- Downgrading Special Relationship by “not mentioning Britain once” in any major policy speech and expunging the term from use by administration officials fullstop.
- Undermining British influence in NATO by pandering to France. This was done by giving Paris
Gordon Brown takes back seat
“a lead role in the NATO alliance at Britain’s expense, granting it one of two supreme NATO command positions – Allied Command Transformation (ACT).”
- Refusing to recognize Britain’s sacrifice of 250 servicemen and women in Afghanistan, as well as its stationing of 10,000 soldiers in the warzone. Gardiner writes that in contrast to George W. Bush, “who frequently thanked the British armed forces and people for their role in the War on Terror, Obama has spectacularly failed to do so.”
- Allowing White White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to belittle British press by stating that if it’s “truthful news” you want, Britain is not the place to look. “This kind of attack would normally be made against the likes of the North Korean or Iranian state media,” quipped Gardiner.
- Reducing the United States’ greatest ally to “nothing special.” This was reflected in the words of a senior State Department official following Brown’s chilly reception at the White House: “There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.”
It is difficult to think of another president who has ever treated Britain in such a disdainful way — but this is likely a nod to the influence of Obama’s father. Some speculate that Obama blamed Churchill for suppressing Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion in which Hussein Onyango Obama was allegedly tortured. However, author Diana West notes that Churchill didn‘t become prime minister for the second time until the end of 1951 and that the Mau Mau Rebellion didn’t begin until the end of 1952, “one year after Obama‘s grandfather’s release.” She added that returning the Churchill bust likely indicates a “more an open breach in the Western continuum out of which a new orientation toward the Third World will become increasingly apparent.” In other words, Obama seeks to strengthen the U.S. relationship with the Third World while downgrading the relationship shared with other world powers — particularly ones viewed as colonialists like Britain. Breaking with Israel Following his lead with U.S.-Britain relations, President Obama has been no friend to Israel either. Friends with those who consider the Jewish State the “biggest obstacle to peace” in the region, the president snubbed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in much the same way he snubbed brown when refusing to share dinner with the Israeli leader. This of course seems small in comparison to the monumental sell-out that occurred when Obama’s declared to the world that Israel should “return” to its “1967 borders.” Never mind the fact that there are no such borders but rather armistice lines, and that in either case, they are equally indefensible. Of course, no mention of the president’s stance on Israel would be complete without mentioning his former instructor and friend, the late Edward Said. The pro-Palestinian activist and Columbia University professor openly condemned Israel, which he considered to be an illegitimate, colonialist state. There is that word again: “colonialist.“ Said frequently bemoaned the ”plight“ of the ”oppressed” Palestinians and was even a member of the PLO’s Palestinian National Council throughout the 1970s and 80s. He inevitably stepped down in 1991, allegedly in protest to the Oslo peace accords and to what he considered Yasser Arafat’s unduly moderate stance toward Israel. In 1998 Obama attended a speech by Said in which the scholar called for a campaign “against settlements, against Israeli apartheid.” Given Obama’s apparent animus towards nations he deems “colonizers,” it comes as no surprise that he has abandoned one of America’s greatest ally, indeed the greatest ally in the Middle East. When examining the president’s view on Israel it also becomes clear why his administration supports the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood — a group whose own cleric recently declared that it was sending an army of martyrs to establish a Caliphate in Jerusalem. Ironically, administration official James Clapper infamously declared that the Muslim Brotherhood is in fact “secular.” Meanwhile, a new barrage of rocket-fire into Israel has begun emanating from the Sinai. But perhaps that is just a coincidence. There is increasing question whether Obama is loyal to America or someone else?
Voting against legislation that would ensure life-saving measures were taken to aid infants born alive after botched abortions Outside of foreign policy, Obama’s actions at home are equally puzzling. It sounds like a line from the trailer of a horror movie, yet a September 2000 report from the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee observed that physicians at Christ Hospital in Illinois used induced labor as a means of aborting healthy late-term fetuses and infants “with non-fatal deformities” and that many of these babies ended up surviving the procedure only to be left to die. “Many of these babies have lived for hours after birth, with no efforts made to determine if any of them could have survived with appropriate medical assistance,” nurse Jill Stanek testified. Another nurse, Allison Baker, testified that these live-born infants were being deposited in “soiled utility rooms” where they were left to expire and Stanek recalled when an infant “was accidentally thrown in the garbage, and when they later were going through the trash to find the baby, the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor.” The testimony continued in much the same gruesome fashion, after which a piece of legislation was introduced that would require physicians administer all life-saving measures possible when these botched abortions occur. MCCLPAC explains the bill:
Legislation was then introduced to require appropriate care for abortion survivors. The Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) defined as legal persons “every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.” Further, “born alive” was defined as “the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.”
While this all sounds reasonable, Obama was the sole opponent of the legislation — not once but twice, the second time was during the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 5, 2002. His reasons for voting against the bill, as laid out in an article by Stanek, include that it would: add undue burden to the mother; is a legal trick to define a fetus as a person (if a person then the aborted infant would be subject to the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution); it would interfere with a doctor’s judgment; that there was “no documentation that hospitals were actually doing what was alleged in testimony”; it was all a ploy to derail Roe v. Wade. Regardless of his reasons, it bears repeating that Obama was still the only person who voted against the legislation. When one thinks of the Complete Lives System of Obamacare, this stance, too, might make sense.
Changing his stance on gay marriage nearing the election Another of Obama’s contradictions stems from his stance on same-sex marriage. He claims to be a practicing Christian, and that his faith shaped his view that marriage is something that can only be shared between a man and a woman. Obama has since changed that tune — several times in fact — the latest instance being his declaration that same-sex marriage should be legal. Examine the inconsistency: The Blaze’s Billy Hallowell reported that in 1996 the then-state senator candidate affirmed his “unequivocal support for gay marriage.” “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.” But by 1998 Obama, during another election cycle said he was “undecided” on the issue. Then, during a senate campaign debate in 2004 with Alan Keyes, Obama said that marriage is between one man and one woman and that he does not support gay marriage. Hallowell adds:
In 2004 (yes, another election year), Obama took a more middle-ground route, as he publicly supported domestic partnerships and civil unions. He also took the opportunity to say that, unlike his statement in 1998, he did not support gay marriage. “I am a fierce supporter of domestic-partnership and civil-union laws,” he said. “I am not a supporter of gay marriage as it has been thrown about primarily just as a strategic issue.”
By the second year of Obama’s presidential term, he then hinted that a change of heart could be in store yet again:
“I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage,” he said. “But I also think you’re right that attitudes evolve, including mine.”
During his announcement in May, 2012, Obama cited his gay and lesbian friends, soldiers and staffers as inspiration for the change of heart. He also explained that it was his Christianity that helped him to see that people in committed relationships should be allowed to marry. To the contrary, many believe the president was motivated by politics, rather than faith, especially given the suspect timing of his declaration. Other anomalies and contradictions and During his expose, Beck noted a series of other seemingly unfathomable acts committed by either the president, his friends or members of the White House. From the administration member who declared that NASA’s primary goal should be ”Muslim outreach” to a first lady who once said that she was never proud of her country until her husband was elected president; from the president saying that the U.S. Constitution needs to become a “photo-negative” in order for it to make sense in today’s world, to an administration official declaring that our enemies are “not terrorists” nor jihadists — the list reads like something out of a fiction novel. And indeed that is what Beck said: Obama’s life is a “work of fiction.” Though, it’s beginning to feel more like Sci-Fi.
Why don’t we know this? Why didn’t the mainstream media report it? Why didn’t we as individuals read the books, do the research and talk to people we know and respect about this candidate? Why do we as Americans vote without knowing who we are voting for?
Have you read these Books?:
Michelle Fields of the Dally Caller took to the streets of New York with Dreams from My Father in hand quoting Obama’s own words from the book to passersby. Only one had heard anything about the quotes and nobody had read the book.
This is a book that everyone who voted for Obama should have read before voting in 2008 and definitely since! Yet just like in Nazi Germany when Hitler wrote Mein Kampf (Mein Kampf Official Nazi Translation…) telling everyone what he planned to do, nobody read the book…
Why does any of this matter? Because Obama’s background affects his belief system and that belief system plus his small radical inner circle that surrounds him and share that belief system affects how he thinks and the decisions he makes. It also matters if Obama is getting money from International sources for his campaign, especially anti-American sources!
You be the judge…
Barack Obama, Dolores Huerta, Cesar Chavez, Frank Marshall Davis, Socialism and Communism – Just How Far Back Does the Communist Connection Go? (‘Not’ Shocking: Obama picks socialist as Medal of Freedom honoree – Dolores Huerta)
**I have been somewhat inundated the past two days with emails and comments from various groups and undecided conservatives who are considering and even still ginning up the possibilities of either not voting or voting for 3rd party candidates; some even still think that someone might make a play at the convention. I usually sit down on Sunday nights or Monday mornings and write an original piece to post for the week which I started last night and then about mid-afternoon after a day filled with unexpected craziness, I started over.**
For months we heard from everyone… ABO, Anyone But Obama, and now I am hearing… “Well, Romney wasn’t who I wanted; wasn’t my first choice; is a Mormon; has flipped-flopped. Maybe I won’t vote?!? Maybe I should consider a third party?” I was/am a Palin gal and Romney wasn’t my first choice either, but not voting or voting 3rd party is a vote for Obama and we cannot survive another Obama term! We all have to compromise in life. A Mormon sounds better to me than a Reverend Wright style Black Liberation Theology Christian or….??? And when Obama flip-flops he is evolving, yet when Romney flip flops he is a Rhino… HMMMM.
Even in the worst case scenario, especially if we surround and support Romney with a fiscally conservative and Constitution-friendly House and Senate, we can start turning our ship of state, even if ever so slowly. And on the other hand, Romney just might surprise us! If Obama wins, as we know, the plans are in place to hit us with the full blown Progressive agenda with nothing to stop them.
Will Ignorance Lead to a Second Obama Term?? Time to unite around Romney and surround him with fiscal Conservatives and Constitutionalists in both the House and Senate and focus on solutions and ousting Obama in November 2012 to save the Republic.
By Marion Algier – Ask Marion