Posts
If someone told you twenty years ago that the USA will have a black president in the early part of the next century, you probably wouldn't believe that person. But you might think it possible based upon the changes that had begun to take place when the black heroes of the 1960s marched for freedom. If that same person told you twenty years ago that we would have a socialist/Marxist president, you'd laugh and think they were crazy. This is the good ol' US of A and we would never tolerate communism or socialism--that is counter to what made us great.
If, in 2008, during the presidential campaign, the Democratic party candidate defended a statement his wife made by becoming indignant about attacking the candidate's family, but later you discovered that this was exactly what he did to become a senator--by going after court-sealed divorce records of one candidate, and the divorce records of the other, would you have voted for him?Most Americans don't vote for hypocrits so I suppose you wouldn't have either.
If, on September 12, 2001, someone told you that we would have a president in just a few more years who would call Islam a great religion, a religion of peace, a religion that has contributed greatly to the American dream, would you have believed him without any scrap of evidence? All we knew was that the terrorists claimed that the attack was part of their religious responsibility based upon their religion--something they called jihad. Again, I seriously doubt that any true American would have tolerated what he had to say, much less voted for him.
But we voted for him and elected him President of the United States of America. We didn't know who he was because, unlike the conservatives who ran, Obama was not vetted at all by the press; not like the press digs and digs for dirt on every Conservative candidate you can mention. And if they find dirt, use it, then discover they were wrong, they never rescind, never apologize. We have long ago stopped voted with our brain; we now vote with our emotions, which to a very large degree are controlled by the mainstream media. If the candidate is 'cool,' 'handsome,' 'a great speaker,' we stop listening to what he or she says, and we vote for the image created by The New York Times, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and even CNN, who falsely claim to be unbiased. Look at JFK--the women loved him and he loved women, loads of women, in return. He also love his drugs and his prostitutes. The media described his short presidency as "Camelot." He sure did something "a lot" but we never knew until it was over.
Following in JFK's footsteps was Bill "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton. His verbal gymnastics kept him in the presidency when the press sided with him over the definition of the word 'sex' and with anything else he did because he is a liberal. Evidently, oral sex is just oral something else, and Hillary didn't mind because, one can only guess that she was having her own fun. The latest scandal is Anthony "that isn't my bulge in that photo" Weiner, another liberal with a liberal dose of libido, it appears. Perhaps he's innocent, in spite of his reluctance to get the law involved by attempting to locate whoever allegedly hacked his account and sent that vile photo to that young co-ed out west . . . unless his account wasn't hacked, the crotch shot was his, and he's just another liberal who thinks he's beyond the normal confines of marriage vows and the law.
If Obama was vetted before he got into politics he'd still be a community organizer. We would have answers to the questions like: How involved was his mother and fathers with communism and how did it affect him? Who financed his Harvard education? Who in Gaza financed his campaign war-chest for the 2008 campaign? Where is his real birth certificate? How far back does he go with Bill Ayers? How much does he really agree with his pastor of 20 years who said, "God damn America? Why does he favor Muslim nations over Israel, and our enemies over our allies?
If these questions don't bother you, then you're not paying attention. If we had been able to ask these questions before Barack Hussein Obama was elected to office, we woujldn't have to ask questions about his politics and decisions. Maybe he isn't even a Muslim--but so what? I can't tell the difference in his decisions, can you?
If, in 2008, during the presidential campaign, the Democratic party candidate defended a statement his wife made by becoming indignant about attacking the candidate's family, but later you discovered that this was exactly what he did to become a senator--by going after court-sealed divorce records of one candidate, and the divorce records of the other, would you have voted for him?Most Americans don't vote for hypocrits so I suppose you wouldn't have either.
If, on September 12, 2001, someone told you that we would have a president in just a few more years who would call Islam a great religion, a religion of peace, a religion that has contributed greatly to the American dream, would you have believed him without any scrap of evidence? All we knew was that the terrorists claimed that the attack was part of their religious responsibility based upon their religion--something they called jihad. Again, I seriously doubt that any true American would have tolerated what he had to say, much less voted for him.
But we voted for him and elected him President of the United States of America. We didn't know who he was because, unlike the conservatives who ran, Obama was not vetted at all by the press; not like the press digs and digs for dirt on every Conservative candidate you can mention. And if they find dirt, use it, then discover they were wrong, they never rescind, never apologize. We have long ago stopped voted with our brain; we now vote with our emotions, which to a very large degree are controlled by the mainstream media. If the candidate is 'cool,' 'handsome,' 'a great speaker,' we stop listening to what he or she says, and we vote for the image created by The New York Times, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and even CNN, who falsely claim to be unbiased. Look at JFK--the women loved him and he loved women, loads of women, in return. He also love his drugs and his prostitutes. The media described his short presidency as "Camelot." He sure did something "a lot" but we never knew until it was over.
Following in JFK's footsteps was Bill "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton. His verbal gymnastics kept him in the presidency when the press sided with him over the definition of the word 'sex' and with anything else he did because he is a liberal. Evidently, oral sex is just oral something else, and Hillary didn't mind because, one can only guess that she was having her own fun. The latest scandal is Anthony "that isn't my bulge in that photo" Weiner, another liberal with a liberal dose of libido, it appears. Perhaps he's innocent, in spite of his reluctance to get the law involved by attempting to locate whoever allegedly hacked his account and sent that vile photo to that young co-ed out west . . . unless his account wasn't hacked, the crotch shot was his, and he's just another liberal who thinks he's beyond the normal confines of marriage vows and the law.If Obama was vetted before he got into politics he'd still be a community organizer. We would have answers to the questions like: How involved was his mother and fathers with communism and how did it affect him? Who financed his Harvard education? Who in Gaza financed his campaign war-chest for the 2008 campaign? Where is his real birth certificate? How far back does he go with Bill Ayers? How much does he really agree with his pastor of 20 years who said, "God damn America? Why does he favor Muslim nations over Israel, and our enemies over our allies?
If these questions don't bother you, then you're not paying attention. If we had been able to ask these questions before Barack Hussein Obama was elected to office, we woujldn't have to ask questions about his politics and decisions. Maybe he isn't even a Muslim--but so what? I can't tell the difference in his decisions, can you?
If you are interested in terrorism and suspense, I have provided 2 links (below) for a hard copy (soft cover) edition and an eBook edition of my latest novel, Jihad Joe. It's a story about Zed Nill, a New York based reporter, taken hostage by Islamic terrorists. He must escape, or be beheaded the following day . . . the clock is ticking.
No comments:
Post a Comment