Category: Politics

Getting Ready for the Big Show

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

So…here we are…the day when the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and Republican Candidate Mitt Romney square off in their first National Debate.

Channel 9 News reports

The presidential candidates are leaving the heavy lifting of campaigning to their running mates as they spend one more day preparing for their first debate, scheduled for Wednesday night.

President Barack Obama is in Henderson, Nev., for a strategy run-through ahead of the debate in Denver. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is set to spend most of Tuesday in debate prep at a Denver hotel.

He told supporters at a rally Monday night that he would get America working again.

In Iowa, Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, is set to visit three towns during a bus tour.

The Wisconsin congressman will be in Clinton, Muscatine and Burlington on Tuesday. Vice President Joe Biden has two campaign events scheduled in another swing state, North Carolina. He’ll be in Charlotte and Asheville.

This debate could, if you believe the polls, actually make a difference in the outcome of the election.

According to NationalJournal.com, Obama and Romney are in a dead heat:

President Obama and Mitt Romney are deadlocked among likely voters as they prepare to square off in their first presidential debate, according to the latest United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll.

The survey showed that voters remain resistant to either Obama or Romney holding full control of the federal government.

Obama and Romney each pulled in 47 percent support in the poll among likely voters. It is among the narrowest margins of several presidential surveys published ahead of the debate this week. Other polls have shown the president with a slim lead. In this survey, while the race is tied among likely voters, Obama has a 5-point lead, 49 percent to 44 percent, among registered voters.

The survey was conducted Sept. 27-30 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

Romney led in the poll among independents, 49 percent to 41 percent, with both candidates winning more than 90 percent support from their respective parties. The survey had Obama winning 81 percent of the nonwhite vote and Romney carrying 55 percent of white voters.

In estimating the turnout on Nov. 6, the poll projects an electorate that is 74 percent white, 11 percent African-American, and 8 percent Latino. The likely-voter party splits are 36 percent Democratic, 29 percent Republican, and 30 percent independent.

The estimates are similar to the 2008 turnout, when, according to CNN exit polling, 74 percent of voters were white, 13 percent black, and 9 percent Latino, with Democratic turnout at 39 percent, Republicans at 32 percent, and independents at 29 percent.

Of course, that was before Tucker Carlson and The Daily Caller aired an Obama video, circa 2007, on Hannity last night. What was so special about the video, is that Obama had a Hillary “no ways tard” (tired) moment, affecting a homeboy attitude and dialect that would make the Rapper “Fifty Cents” proud.

Per FoxNews.com:

In June 2007, then-Sen. Barack Obama told a mostly black audience of ministers that the country’s leaders “don’t care about” New Orleans residents, suggesting the city was neglected in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina because of institutional racism, according to a video uncovered by The Daily Caller.

In the address, delivered during the upswing of the Democratic presidential primary season, candidate Obama specifically criticizes in outspoken terms the decision not to waive a federal law known as the Stafford Act that requires communities hit by disasters to match 10 percent of federal aid.

“When 9/11 happened in New York City, they waived the Stafford Act. … And that was the right thing to do,” he tells the crowd at Hampton University in Virginia. “When Hurricane Andrew struck in Florida, people said, ‘Look at this devastation. We don’t expect you to come up with your own money. Here, here’s the money to rebuild. We’re not going wait for you to scratch it together, because you’re part of the American family.’ “

Obama, echoing rapper Kanye West’s infamous anti-Bush remarks a couple years earlier, then argues that New Orleans was treated differently, suggesting the reason was that the city is mostly black.

“What’s happening down in New Orleans? Where’s your dollar? Where’s your Stafford Act money?” Obama says. “Makes no sense. … Tells me that somehow the people down in New Orleans they don’t care about as much.”

The speech was reported on at the time, but the Daily Caller said it had obtained clips from the speech that had never aired. It posted what it said was the complete speech on the website.

FoxNews.com asked the Obama campaign to comment on the the Daily Caller report and the video but has yet to receive a response.

By January 2007, nearly a year and a half after Hurricane Katrina hit, the federal government had committed $110 billion to relief efforts in areas hit by Katrina through a variety of programs, including Community Development Block Grants, funding for the Corps of Engineers and Small Business Administration loans, according to a report that May by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic and Statistics Administration.

But at the time of Obama’s speech, there were still concerns about federal response to the disaster under the Stafford Act, which governs relief efforts. The Federal Emergency Management Agency was unwilling to waive the law’s 10 percent local match provision for aid, like it did after the Sept. 11 attacks and other hurricanes.

“One reason cited for FEMA’s reluctance to waive the 10 percent match in New Orleans is concern about corruption,” the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies said in a 2008 report on the relief efforts.

That report also noted that then-Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco was pushing in early 2007 for a federal law eliminating the 10 percent match. The House passed the bill, but it stalled in the Senate and President Bush had threatened to veto it.

The video of Obama’s 2007 speech, surfacing barely a month before the presidential election and the night before Obama’s first debate with Republican rival Mitt Romney, could complicate Obama’s efforts to avoid a politically risky debate over race that partly ensnared him during the 2008 race. Four years ago, his fiery pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, became a political liability over videos that showed Wright making controversial statements.

Obama, after initially defending him, eventually was forced to condemn Wright publicly, and the controversy prompted Obama to deliver his much-heralded 2008 address on race in Philadelphia.

Wright reportedly attended the 2007 speech, and in the video obtained by the Daily Caller, Obama is heard calling Wright “my pastor, the guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me. He’s a friend and a great leader. Not just in Chicago, but all across the country.”

The Daily Caller also highlighted a segment in which Obama questions federal priorities in transportation spending.

“We need additional federal public transportation dollars flowing to the highest-need communities. We don’t need to build more highways out in the suburbs. If we have people in the cities right now who want to work but have no way to get into those jobs, we’ve got to help connect them to the jobs that exist,” Obama said. “We should be investing in minority-owned businesses, in our neighborhoods, so people don’t have to travel from miles away.”

Yeah, I know. Big surprise: Obama’s a Black guy.

The only problem is:

He’s supposed to be the President of all Americans. In fact, he’s supposed to be our biggest cheerleader…not our biggest critic.

The President of the United States is supposed to pick us up.

Not put us down.

Obama: More Debt, More Taxes

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

If Americans allow Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) to have a second term, he has big plans.

Judging from his last four years, all of his plans require a lot of money.

Our money.

Per cnsnews.com:

According to the U.S. Treasury, the debt of the U.S. government climbed by a total of $1,275,901,078,828.74 in fiscal 2012, which ended yesterday.

That means the federal government borrowed approximately an additional $10,855 for each household in the United States just over the past twelve months.

The total debt of the United States now equals approximately $136,690 per household.

In fiscal 2011, the debt increased by about $10,454 per household–$401 less than the $10,855 per household increase of 2012.

The $1.2758 trillion that the debt increased in fiscal 2012 was about $47.18 billion more than the $1.2287 trillion that the debt increased in fiscal 2011.

The federal fiscal year begins on Oct. 1 and ends on Sept. 30.

At the close of business on Sept. 30, 2011, the total debt of the U.S. government was $14,790,340,328,557.15, according to the Treasury. At the close of business on Sept. 28, the last business day of fiscal 2012, it was $16,066,241,407,385.89

That meant the debt increased in fiscal 2012 by $1,275,901,078,828.74.

At the close of business on Sept. 30, 2010, the debt had stood at $13,561,623,030,891.79. Over the course of fiscal 2011, it increased by $1,228,717,297,665.36 before closing at 14,790,340,328,557.15 on Sept. 30, 2011.

The fiscal 2012 increase of $1,275,901,078,828.74 exceeded the fiscal 2011 increase $1,228,717,297,665.36 by $47,183,781,163.38

The Census Bureau estimated that there were 117,538,000 household in the United States in 2010. The $1,275,901,078,828.74 that the debt increased in fiscal 2012 equaled about $10,855 for each one of those 117,538,000 households.

Here is how much the debt has increased in each of the last six fiscal years:

Fiscal 2007: $500,679,473,047.25

Fiscal 2008: $1,017,071,524,650.01

Fiscal 2009: $1,885,104,106,599.26

Fiscal 2010: $1,651,794,027,380.04

Fiscal 2011: $1,228,717,297,665.36

Fiscal 2012: $1,275,901,078,828.74.

So, how does America crawl out of this financial abyss?

Will Obama pledge to be a better steward of our money, and, actually, finally be fiscally responsible?

Does Toure write Polka Music?

Don’t worry, boys and girls. Obama has a plan. He’s simply going to tax the stew out of us.

A typical middle-income family making $40,000 to $64,000 a year could see its taxes go up by $2,000 next year if lawmakers fail to renew a lengthy roster of tax cuts set to expire at the end of the year, according to a new report Monday

Taxpayers across the income spectrum would be hit with large tax hikes, the Tax Policy Center said in its study, with households in the top 1 percent income range seeing an average tax increase of more than $120,000, while a family making between $110,000 to $140,000 could see a tax hike in the $6,000 range.

Taxpayers across the income spectrum will get slammed with increases totaling more than $500 billion – a more than 20 percent increase – with nine out of 10 households being affected by the expiration of tax cuts enacted under both President Barack Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush.

The expiring provisions include Bush-era cuts on wage and investment income and cuts for married couples and families with children, among others. Also expiring is a 2 percentage point temporary payroll tax cut championed by Obama.

The looming expiration of the large roster of tax cuts is one of the issues confronting voters in November, with the chief difference between Obama and GOP candidate Mitt Romney being the tax treatment of wealthier earners. Obama is calling for permitting rates on individual income exceeding $200,000 and family incoming over $250,000 to go back to Clinton-era rates of as much as 39.6 percent.

Both candidates call for rewriting the tax code next year, but any such effort promises to be difficult and could take considerable time.

Monday’s study, by the independent Tax Policy Center, deals with the immediate increases set to slap taxpayers in January under the existing framework of the tax code.

Few are talking of renewing Obama’s payroll tax cut, even though that would mean a healthy tax increase for many working people. Working families with modest incomes would be hit hard as the child tax credit would shrink from a maximum of $1,000 per child to $500.

As a result, a married couple earning $50,000 with three dependent children that currently receives an almost $1,500 income tax refund largely due to the child tax credit would see their fortunes reversed by more than $3,000 next year and pay more than $1,500 in income taxes while seeing their payroll taxes go up by $1,000 if the full menu of tax cuts expire.

“It’s just a huge, huge number,” said Eric Toder, one of the authors of the study.

Economists warn that the looming tax hikes, combined with $109 billion in automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect in January, could throw the fragile economy back into recession if Washington doesn’t act. The automatic spending cuts are coming due because of the failure of last year’s deficit “supercommittee” to strike a bargain. The combination of the sharp tax hikes and spending cuts has been dubbed a “fiscal cliff.”

“The fiscal cliff threatens an unprecedented tax increase at year end,” says the report. “Taxes would rise by more than $500 billion in 2013 – an average of almost $3,500 per household – as almost every tax cuts enacted since 2001 would expire.”

The Greatest President of our Generation, Ronald Wilson Reagan once said:

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.

Ronaldus Magnus was a prophet.

The Obama Administration, quite frankly, for all of his platitudes, does not  care that average Americans are having trouble paying their bills. As we say in Dixie,

It don’t bother him none. He’s got his.

In fact. he and Moochelle are worth $11 million!

He would rather everyone turned to Uncle Sugar in their time of need, instead of pulling themselves up by their boot straps, bucking up, and carrying on, with help from their family, friends, and neighbors.

There are several catch phrases that we’ve learned during these last few years such as  “social justice” and “spread the wealth around”.

However, one phrase has been missing from Obama’s vocabulary:

American Exceptionalism.

He doesn’t believe in it…or us.

We’ll make believers out of him on November 6th.

The Liberal Pundits’ Poll Propaganda Campaign

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

The Main Stream Media, and all the Liberal Pundits, both paid and unpaid, have been all over the Internet in the last couple of weeks, trying feverishly to discourage Americans from voting for Mitt Romney on November 6th, 2012, by bombarding us with one skewed poll after another.

We’ve seen this tactic before.

From Time Magazine, 9/15/1980, courtesy of cnn.com:

The latest public opinion poll conducted for TIME by Yankelovich, Skelly and White discloses just how close the race is once again. Carter and Reagan are deadlocked at 39% each, while Anderson’s support is 15% — precisely the level set by the League of Women Voters for him to qualify as a “viable” candidate and therefore earn a third spot in its crucial opening debate, set tentatively for Sept. 21 in Baltimore. Carter, who insists on meeting Reagan first without Anderson, still threatened last week not to appear if the Congressman was included. The league’s directs were to meet this week to examine the range of recent poll results and decide whether or not to invite Anderson.

For so early in the campaign, a surprisingly low 7% of registered voters claim to be undecided about whom they now favor. (The study was based on a national sample of 1,644 registered voters interviewed between Aug. 26 and 28. The sampling error is thus plus or minus 3% and 4.5% when comparing present trend readings with previous TIME studies.) Still, the survey discloses just how shaky those current preferences are. Fully 55% say they are not “personally interested or excited about” any of the candidates. Only 11% report genuine enthusiasm for Reagan; a mere 9% feel that way about Carter and 6% about Anderson. In fact, much of the support given their preferred candidates is based on voters’ opposition to the others, the choices are essentially anti votes. Thus 43% of the voters who prefer Reagan say they do so because they are “really voting against Carter.” Similarly, 34% of Carter’s supporters say their choice is based on opposition to Reagan, while a hefty 61% of Anderson’s followers admit that they are motivated by being “against Carter and Reagan.”

Though Carter and Reagan are even up in the race, the poll discloses areas of serious slippage for Reagan in important areas. For one thing, 59% of those preferring Carter claim they do so out of a positive feeling for him: they like his “experience,” and consider him “safer” in foreign affairs. Only 48% of Reagan’s followers feel a similar sense of confidence in their choice’s ability to get things done and to answer the need for a change. At the same time, Reagan’s rating on abilities regarded as important by voters has declined. In TIME’s last survey in May, 49% of those sampled agreed that Reagan was a leader “you can trust,” while 42% believe that now. Reagan was then considered “acceptable” as a President by 64%; the current figure is 54%. Voter confidence in Reagan’s ability to handle the economy has dropped from an impressive 75% to 66%, and his perceived competency in foreign affairs has slipped from 72% to 63%.

And, now, once again, we are being told that “it’s a tight race”.

Per RasmussenReports.com:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows President Obama attracting support from 48% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 46%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided.

n Reports tracking showed Obama leading John McCain by a 51% to 45% margin. The numbers barely budged for the rest of the campaign season as Obama enjoyed a comfortable lead and stayed between 50% and 52% every day for the last 40 days.

When “leaners” are included, it’s now Obama 49%, Romney 47%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question. Today is the last day that results will be reported without leaners. Beginning tomorrow, Rasmussen Reports will be basing its daily public updates solely upon the results including leaners. Platinum Members will be still be able to see the more detailed numbers along with demographic breakdowns, and additional information from the tracking poll on a daily basis.

Currently, 43% of voters are “certain” they will vote for Romney. Forty-two percent (42%) are that certain they will vote for Obama. The remaining 15% are either uncommitted or open to changing their mind. To many Americans, especially partisan activists, it is hard to imagine how someone could be anything but certain at this point in time. One of the distinguishing features of these potentially persuadable voters is that they don’t see the choice between Romney and Obama as terribly significant. In terms of impacting their own life, just 28% say it will be Very Important which man wins.

There is particular pessimism among these persuadable voters about the economy. Only 14% think it will get better if the president is reelected. But just 28% believe it will improve with a Romney victory.

Allow me to point out a few things.

1.  These polls are telephone based. How many Americans still have land lines as their personal telephone number?

2. Look around the parking lot at work, the grocery store, or where ever you go during the day. How many Obama/Biden bumper stickers do you see? How many Obama/Biden yard signs do you see?

3. Talk to your friends at work, school, or lunch after church. How many voluntarily admit that they are going to vote for Obama?

4.  Per Gallup.com, as of 1/12/12, 40% of Americans continue to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal.

Liberals remain the minority political ideology in America. They are just loud.

5.  Again, per Gallup.com, as of 12/23/2011, 78% of American adults identify with some form of the Christian religion in 2011. Less than 2% are Jewish, less than 1% are Muslim, and 15% do not have a religious affiliation.

Christianity is not just a Sunday-only Faith. Christians vote.

The point is, the Liberal desperation over trying to determine the outcome of November 6th is palpable. You can smell their fear…and they will do anything…I mean, anything, to maintain political power.

Unfortunately for them, Americans have more ways of keeping up with the news in 2012, than we did in 1980.

Like this Blog, for instance.

Free Speech: The Right of All Americans

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

Recently, we have all been witness to a disturbing trend going on in the Greatest Country on God’s Green Earth: a not-so subtle war on Free Speech.

The scary thing is, it is not some foreign power going to war with us. It is our OWN GOVERNMENT!

We’ve seen two examples of this, this past week:

First, the producer of a youtube.com video, which no one has seen, and yet, was used by the Obama Administration as a scapegoat to excuse Muslim Extremist violence in the Middle East, was brought in for questioning by the Los Angeles police, and now faces charges for a “violation of parole” for posting the video.

Then, a Liberal Pundit from the seldom-watched cable news channel, MSNBC, took it upon herself to rip up a New York Subway Advertisement, which was anti-Muslim. Evidently, the MTA endorses her actions, because, next thing you know, they banned the advertisments under one of their rules, which states:

The advertisement, or any information contained in it, is directly adverse to the commercial or administrative interests of the MTA or is harmful to the morale of MTA employees or contains material the display of which the MTA reasonably foresees would incite or provoke violence or other immediate breach of the peace, and so harm, disrupt, or interfere with safe, efficient, and orderly transit operations.

Let’s review the First Amendment, shall we?

The First Amendment (1791)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances.

The following are quotes by famous Americans about this American Right:

If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.

George Washington

It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them.

Mark Twain

I live in America. I have the right to write whatever I want. And it’s equaled by another right just as powerful: the right not to read it. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend people.

Brad Thor

I begin to feel like most Americans don’t understand the First Amendment, don’t understand the idea of freedom of speech, and don’t understand that it’s the responsibility of the citizen to speak out.

Roger Ebert

We don’t have an Official Secrets Act in the United States, as other countries do. Under the First Amendment, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and freedom of association are more important than protecting secrets.

Alan Dershowitz

Freedom of speech is always under attack by Fascist mentality, which exists in all parts of the world, unfortunately.

Lawrence Ferlinghetti

Hans Bader at OpenMarket.org, wrote the following, concerning this situation:

This idea that you can ban speech because people react violently to it is at odds with Supreme Court rulings and basic First Amendment axioms. The Supreme Court has rejected this so-called “heckler’s veto” in cases like Terminiello v. Chicago (1949). In that decision, the Supreme Curt ruled that the First Amendment protected unsavory, anti-semitic speech that enraged an “angry and turbulent” crowd. The Supreme Court rejected the idea that speech can be banned to prevent unrest, declaring that “a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea.”

Banning speech because someone reacts violently to it sets a terrible precedent. It gives the most violent or angry members of society a veto over free speech and what issues are discussed. It is always possible to blame the victim of violence for inciting aggression by an angry person through expression of views that offended that person. (For example, when a security guard working for a conservative group was shot by a critic of the group, some people blamed the group’s rhetoric for supposedly creating a “climate of hate” that led the outraged shooter to react by attacking it, and said it must “share” the “blame” for the “growth of” such “violent acts.”)

…Banning speech because it offends violent people will backfire and lead to more violence in the future by emboldening, rewarding, and conditioning them.

As I’ve written before, my father was a Master Sergeant with an Army Engineering Unit in World War II.  He was one of our Brightest and Best, who waded onto Normandy Beach on D-Day, in a hail of gunfire.

He also led me to Christ, through his leading of the singing of hymns in his 150 person Sunday School Class, his powerful, loving witness in his daily life, and “instructing me in the way I should go”.

Regardless of the wishes of forces, both seen and unseen, who would restrict our rights as Americans to state our opinion, and to stand for Traditional American Values at this important moment in our country’s history, I will be here, doing just that, as is my God-given right as an American.

And, I will exercise my right to vote on November 6th, 2012.

God Bless America.

These are the Times That Try Men’s Souls (Again).

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but “to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER” and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.

Thomas Paine (December 23, 1776)

Thomas Paine, unfortunately, was ahead of his time.

Extremists from groups linked to al Qaida struck the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in a “deliberate and organized terrorist attack,” the top U.S. intelligence agency said Friday, as it took responsibility for the Obama administration’s initial claims that the deadly assault grew from a spontaneous protest against an anti-Islam video.

The unusual statement from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence appeared to have two goals: updating the public on the latest findings of the investigation into the assault, and shielding the White House from a political backlash over its original accounts.

“In the immediate aftermath (of the assault), there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo,” spokesman Sean Turner said in the statement. “We provided that initial assessment to executive branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly.”

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which coordinates and sets policies for the 16 other U.S. intelligence agencies, is led by retired Air Force Gen. James Clapper, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in August 2010.

U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died in the assault staged by scores of assault rifle- and rocket-propelled grenade-toting assailants on the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

Republicans, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, have accused the administration of misleading the country about the nature of the attack to protect Obama’s campaign claim that his policies have hurt al Qaida’s ability to launch attacks and eased anti-U.S. hatred in the Muslim world.

In his statement, Turner said that U.S. intelligence agencies’ understanding of what happened in Benghazi, Libya’s second largest city, has evolved as they’ve collected and analyzed information on the incident. “As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists,” he said.

“It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attack, and if extremist group leaders directed their members to participate,” he said. “However, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to, al Qaida.”

Turner didn’t name a specific group. Other U.S. officials have said that they were focusing on the possible involvement of the North African affiliate of the terrorist network, al Qaida in the Maghreb, known as AQIM, and local Islamic militant groups.

If you believe that Obama, Hillary, and the State Department did not know what was going on, I have a Roseanne Barr musical CD, I want to sell you.

So, what are the purveyors of Smart Power! going to do about this Anti-American Jihad going on in the Middle East?

Buck up and show the Muslim Terrorists who is the greatest country on the face of the Earth?

Tell them the way the cow ate the cabbage?

Would you believe…try to buy their friendship with money?

The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday that it would provide Egypt’s new government an emergency cash infusion of $450 million, but the aid immediately encountered resistance from a prominent lawmaker wary of foreign aid and of Egypt’s new course under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The aid is part of the $1 billion in assistance that the Obama administration has pledged to Egypt to bolster its transition to democracy after the overthrow last year of the former president, Hosni Mubarak. Its fate, however, was clouded by concerns over the new government’s policies and, more recently, the protests that damaged the American Embassy in Cairo.

The United States Agency for International Development notified Congress of the cash infusion on Friday morning during the pre-election recess, promptly igniting a smoldering debate over foreign aid and the administration’s handling of crises in the Islamic world.

An influential Republican lawmaker, Representative Kay Granger of Texas, immediately announced that she would use her position as chairwoman of the House appropriations subcommittee overseeing foreign aid to block the distribution of the money. She said the relationship with Egypt “has never been under more scrutiny” than in the wake of the election of President Mohamed Morsi, a former leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

“I am not convinced of the urgent need for this assistance, and I cannot support it at this time,” Ms. Granger said in a statement that her office issued even before the administration announced the package.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaking at a meeting of the Group of 8 nations in New York, said on Friday that the world needed to do more to support the governments that have emerged from the Arab Spring uprisings, including those in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia.

“The recent riots and protests throughout the region have brought the challenge of transition into sharp relief,” Mrs. Clinton said, without mentioning the assistance to Egypt specifically. “Extremists are clearly determined to hijack these wars and revolutions to further their agendas and ideology, so our partnership must empower those who would see their nations emerge as true democracies.”

“Extremists”, Madame Secretary?

You’re giving money to a country run by the Muslim Brotherhood, the granddaddy of Muslim Extremist Groups.

The way you and your boss, Scooter, have handled this whole Foreign Affairs Fiasco in the Middle East, from the galloping terrorist-backed revolution of “Arab Spring”, to the planned, coordinated attacks on 9/11/2012, which you falsely and intentionally blamed on a Youtube Video, knowing full well that none of those Barbarians had ever even seen it, has been reminiscent of the chase scene choreographed to Boot’s Randolph’s “Yakety Sax”, which Americans used to laugh at, at the end of the classic Benny Hill Show.

Only Smart Power! is no comedy. It’s a full blown tragedy, in several acts, unfolding before an astonished and baffled American citizenry.

Did you guys, in this age of digital, speed of light, world-wide communications, actually believe that your cockamamie fable about the fanatical adherents to Islam rioting over a stupid, unknown video, was going to fool the majority of Americans?

Seriously?

You pompous, Liberal-elite jackwagons have provided Americans with the instrument of your own political demise:

BenghaziGate.

Because blaming it on a video means never having to say you’re sorry.

Did Budget Cuts Lead to Throats Being Cut?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Evidently, the money designated for Ambassador to Lybia Chris Stevens’ protection had to be used for something more important: like Michelle’s vay-cays or improving Obama’s Golf Game.

Fore!

The Washington Times reports that

Investigators looking for lessons from the fatal terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi might want to start on Capitol Hill, where Congress slashed spending on diplomatic security and U.S. embassy construction over the past two years.

Since 2010, Congress cut $296 million from the State Department’s spending request for embassy security and construction, with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts, according to an analysis by a former appropriations committee staffer.

Rep. Michael Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, made clear Wednesday that congressional staff will be looking into the attack, in addition to a probe by the State Department’s inspector general and another State Department investigation required by federal law.

The cuts to the embassy construction, security and maintenance budget was almost 10 percent of the entire appropriation for that account over those two years, said Scott Lilly, now a scholar at the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

“Anytime we cut that account back, we are putting people’s lives at risk, people who are serving the country” in dangerous places abroad, said Mr. Lilly.

The cuts mean that “a lot of places you’d intended to secure better, you don’t reach” this year, he added.

He said he did not know whether the cuts had impacted security at the Benghazi consulate that was stormed on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks by heavily armed Islamic extremists, who burned down the building and killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

A State Department official told The Washington Times that there was no impact on security in Benghazi from the cuts.

Since 1999, the official said, the department has spent $13 billion on 94 new secure diplomatic facilities “and security upgrades to existing properties that have moved more than 27,000 people into safer, more secure facilities.”

The cuts were the latest in a series of squeezes on State Department spending. Congress has appropriated less money for the department than requested in every year since Fiscal 2007, according to budget figures.

“During both the latter years of the Bush presidency and throughout the Obama presidency, the administration has recommended boosting spending on foreign aid and [State Department] foreign operations, including security, and Congress has always cut it back,” said Philip J. Crowley, a former State Department spokesman.

“There is simply not a constituency on the Hill to increase spending on diplomacy and development. Resources do matter.” said Mr. Crowley, now a fellow at the George Washington University Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication.

In a completely unrelated story (I’m sure), published on July 25, 2012, at AmericanThinker.com:…

…Walid Shoebat published this 37-page booklet entitled “Proof: Huma has Ties to Muslim Brotherhood — Countless Documents Surface” and this was followed up with Tuesday’s update that “Huma Abedin Served on Board with Al-Qaeda Godfather”. Shoebat states that the latest discoveries “include but are not limited to “[p]roof that Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin served on the Board of IMMA from at least 12/02/02 – 9/24/08” and that “Al-Qaeda Godfather Abdullah Omar Naseef served on IMMA’s Advisory Board from at least 12/02/02 – 12/03/03.”

…Besides extensively citing all of Huma Abedin’s family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Muslim Sisterhood, Shoebat maintains that “[n]either Huma Abedin, Hillary’s aid [sic] or any major western media even mention what is common knowledge in the Arab circles regarding Hassan Abedin, [and] his connections or activities.” Hassan is Huma’s brother.

Why the virtual silence?

Abedin’s brother had a strong working relationship with Abdullah Omar Naseef and Yusuf Qaradawi. Naseef “chaired other entities considered major security concerns for the United States and ran a charity front for terror.” There is no “six degrees of separation” among these men as has been maintained by the mainstream media. Central to Shoebat’s investigation are the overlapping ties of Abdullah Omar Naseef to a number of Muslim Brotherhood offshoots. One such group WAMY or World Assembly of Muslim Youth maintains that “[t]he Jews are humanity’s enemies: they foment immorality in this world.”

Saleha Abedin, Huma’s mother, through the Sisterhood branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, works to advance the Brotherhood agendas against Western interests and policies. In his report, Shoebat shows the interlocking tentacles among various Muslim Brotherhood members which leave “no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood is the author and the one setting policies and standards for the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC), which Saleha Abedin chairs. IICWC’s ‘official policies include marital rape, child marriage, female genital circumcision and polygamy.'”

In a 16 page letter, written last summer to Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison, Rep. Michele Bachmann wrote:

The concerns about the foreign influence of immediate family members is such a concern to the U.S. Government that it includes these factors as potentially disqualifying conditions for obtaining a security clearance, which undoubtedly Ms. Abedin has had to obtain to function in her position. For us to raise issues about a highly-based U.S. Government official with known immediate family connections to foreign extremist organizations is not a question of singling out Ms. Abedin. In fact, these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of anyone seeking a security clearance.

Of course, nothing ever happened, except for President Obama defending Ms. Abedin, in front of his Muslim guests, at his annual Ramadan Dinner.

Given the fact that the Muslim Terrorists seem to know more about the timing of Administrative Initiatives and inner workings of our government than do most of our elected representatives up on Capitol Hill, as proven by the attack on the Benghazi Consulate, I would say that it may be time to actually investigate Ms. Abedin, and any other Muslims with questionable familial ties, in key Administrative positions in our Government, wouldn’t you?

Benghazi, Dhimmitude, and Liberal Intolerance

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Well, it looks like Obama, Hillary, and their entire Smart Power! team are reluctantly beginning to admit that the attack on the Benghazi, Libya Consulate, which led to the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens, was not the fault of that stupid Youtube Video that nobody has watched.

The New York Times reports that

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday suggested there was a link between the Al Qaeda franchise in North Africa and the attack at the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the American ambassador and three others. She was the highest-ranking Obama administration official to publicly make the connection, and her comments intensified what is becoming a fiercely partisan fight over whether the attack could have been prevented.

Mrs. Clinton did not offer any new evidence of an Al Qaeda link, and officials later said the question would be officially settled only after the F.B.I. completed a criminal inquiry, which could take months. But they said they had not ruled out the involvement of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb — an affiliate of the international terrorist group with origins in Algeria — in an attack the administration initially described as a spontaneous protest turned violent.

Her remarks added to the administration’s evolving and at times muddled explanation of what happened on the evening of Sept. 11 and into the next morning. Republicans in Congress have accused President Obama of playing down possible terrorist involvement in the midst of a re-election campaign in which killing Osama bin Laden and crippling Al Qaeda are cited as major achievements.

Mrs. Clinton made her remarks at a special United Nations meeting on the political and security crisis in the parts of North Africa known as the Maghreb and the Sahel, particularly in northern Mali, which has been overrun by Islamic extremists since a military coup helped lead to the division of that country this year. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb has long operated in the region, she said, and was now exploiting a haven in Mali to export extremism and terrorist violence to neighbors like Libya.

“Now with a larger safe haven and increased freedom to maneuver, terrorists are seeking to extend their reach and their networks in multiple directions,” Mrs. Clinton told leaders assembled at the meeting, including President François Hollande of France and the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon. “And they are working with other violent extremists to undermine the democratic transitions under way in North Africa, as we tragically saw in Benghazi.”

And, even though the truth about the extreme adherents to the “religion of peace” has been revealed, that doesn’t mean that the Liberal Main Street Media are going to give up their dhimmitude easily.

 Newsbusters.org has the story:

The New York Post reported Egyptian-American columnist Mona Eltahawy has been arrested for defacing an anti-Muslim ad in the New York subway system. The video shows her spraying pink paint on the ad while a supporter of the ad tries to block her. She’s a journalist for censorship.

Eltahawy, a former Reuters correspondent, has been a recent favorite of CNN and MSNBC’s weekend morning shows to discuss Egypt, and she often smears together the Islamist “right wing” and the American right wing, as she did on Melissa Harris-Perry just 11 days ago :

ELTAHAWY: We [Egyptians] have a president who is trying to establish his position somewhere in the middle and we have a group that is trying to establish themselves on the right wing. And you`re having a similar situation in the U.S. We are coming up to elections now in less than two months. There is a right wing fringe there as well. So, you`ve got a right wing and a right wing. Both minorities, both trying to provoke people and a whole lot of people with very, very, sometimes legitimate grievances, but sometimes utterly senseless grievances, being caught in the middle.

Eltahawy was even featured on the September 15 NBC Nightly News decrying America’s long-term support for Egyptian dictators. Here’s how the New York Post characterized the subway fight:

“Mona, do you think you have the right to do this?” said Pamela Hall, holding a mounted camera as she tried to block the barrage of spray paint.

“I do actually,” Eltahawy calmly responded. “I think this is freedom of expression, just as this is freedom of expression.”

Hall then thrusts herself between Eltahawy’s spray paint and the poster.

Eltahawy — an activist who has appeared on MSNBC and CNN — engaged her in an odd cat-and-mouse dance, spraying pink every time she had an opening.

“What right do you have to violate free speech,” Hall pleaded.

“I’m not violating it. I’m making an expression on free speech,” an increasingly agitated Eltahawy shot back.

“You do not have the right!” Hall said.

“I do actually and I’m doing it right now and you should get out of the way! Do you want paint on yourself,” Eltahawy shot back.

As the poster defender bobbed and weaved to get in the paint’s way, Eltahawy mocked: “That’s right, defend racism.”

Eltahawy appeared in the typically long segments on the Harris-Perry show on April 28, July 1, and September 15, and also appeared on Up With Chris Hayes on June 24. Just in September, Eltahawy was featured in seven interviews about Egypt just from September 11 to 13, including two appearances on Anderson Cooper 360 (the seven interviews would not count replays).

Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill wrote

Indeed it is evident that Christianity, however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must always exert a modifying influence on men’s passions, and protect them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness.

…civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the [true] religion of peace [Christianity] is usually the better armed.

The 44th President of the United States said in his speech to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday that

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

After observing the intentional dhimmitude of Ms. Eltahawy and President Obama, I’m reminded of two quotes, one famous , one not so famous:

Churchill, when speaking about the Nazis:

An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile hoping it will eat him last.

Me, about Liberals:

Isn’t it funny how those who claim to be the most tolerant among us…are actually the least tolerant of all?

Obama at the UN: It’s That Darned Video’s Fault!

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics8 Comments

Yesterday, the 44th President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), gave a conciliatory speech at the United Nations General Assembly, not designed to show the courage and conviction of the country he is supposed to be protecting, but, instead, designed to kiss the Muslim anarchists’ …ummm…errr…well…you know.

Here are some excerpts of that speech from cnn.com:

…At times, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe; and often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and interdependence of the modern world. In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well – for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion – we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shia pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies. That’s the vision we will support.

Not exactly awe-inspiring.  More like Awww-inspiring.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan believe that Obama has not exactly been forthcoming on how the Libya situation, including the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens, transpired.

 Fox News Reports:

Mitt Romney, in a joint Fox News interview with running mate Paul Ryan, accused the Obama administration of failing “to level with the American people” about how the U.S. Consulate in Libya was attacked, leaving the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans dead.

“Look, we expect candor from the president and transparency, and he continues to refuse what is said by the other members of his administration: This was a terrorist attack. We were attacked apparently by Al Qaeda and it is a very troubling development,” Romney said during a campaign stop in Ohio.

Romney’s comments underscored complaints made by Republican lawmakers, who question the administration’s shifting explanation, starting with claims that the Sept. 11 strike was “spontaneous” violence tied to protests over an anti-Islam film produced in the U.S. Obama officials gradually walked back that description, and Obama acknowledged Monday that it clearly “wasn’t just a mob action” — though he did not go as far as to call it a terrorist attack.

One of Obama’s advisers, National Counterterrorism Center Director Matt Olsen, was more direct last week, testifying to Congress that the four Americans “were killed in the course of a terrorist attack.”

“When the director of the Counterterrorism Center comes to Congress and testifies and says that this is a terrorist attack … I think you would want to ask that question of the president, why he is not on the same page with his own administration officials?” Ryan said.

Obama devoted much of his address Tuesday to the United Nations General Assembly to the attack in Libya and unrest in the Mideast. He paid tribute to Ambassador Chris Stevens, who died in the attack, recalling Stevens’ time serving in the Peace Corps as an English instructor in Morocco.

“Chris Stevens embodied the best of America,” Obama said.

The president went on to restate his administration’s support for the Arab Spring, calling it a “season of progress.” But he said the recent violence and unrest is indicative of the difficulties along the way. “True democracy — real freedom — is hard work,” he said.

The president, however, did not mention terrorism in his U.N. speech, and he has yet to elaborate on how extremists were able to launch what now appears to have been a coordinated attack on the consulate. Obama and others in his administration have been criticized by Republicans for not taking a more definitive stance on the attack.

Obama, in an interview taped Monday on ABC’s “The View,” condemned extremist elements in the Muslim world and vowed the U.S. is “not going to shrink back from the world because of this.”

“We are going to hunt down those who did this,” he said. “We will bring them to justice.”

He also said in the interview, which aired Tuesday, that there was “no doubt” that the assault “wasn’t just a mob action” but a sign of extremism in nations lacking stability. “What’s been interesting, just this past week, there were these massive protests against these extremists militias that are suspected, maybe, of having been involved in this attack.”

In interviews and at campaign events Monday, Romney assailed Obama’s leadership abroad, leading a chorus of Republicans in criticizing the president for what they said was minimizing the death of the Ambassador Stevens. Obama, in an interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes,” said recent violence in the Mideast was due to “bumps in the road” on the way to democracy. Romney on Monday also suggested Obama was leaving American foreign policy at the mercy of events instead of working to shape global politics in America’s interest.

In other words, Obama and the Mild Bunch (his administration) are not going out there and stopping things before they happen…they are waiting until horrible things, such as Ambassador Stevens’ murder, happen…and then apologizing to the murderers…as if America made them happen.

Because, Lord knows, it’s not the fault of those beheading Barbarians, known as the Muslim Brotherhood and/or al Qaeda…is it?

An unwatched video made them do it.

 

The Dickensian President…Barack Hussein Obama

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

At dear old Wooddale High School, in Memphis, TN, in 1976, I had my first speaking part in a theatrical production, as one of the night watchmen in Charles Dicken’s epic tale of redemption, “A Christmas Carol” (1843).

Little did I know, at the time, that I would perform in 9 Dinner Theaters as I got older, singing and dancing, and acting the part of comic relief in the productions (who woulda thunk it?).

But, I digress…

In a classic scene, two men approach the miserly Ebeneezer Scrooge in an attempt to solicit funds for the impoverished of London:

…“a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?”

“Nothing!” Scrooge replied.

“You wish to be anonymous?”

“I wish to be left alone,” said Scrooge. “Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don’t make merry myself at Christmas and I can’t afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.”

“Many can’t go there; and many would rather die.”

“If they would rather die,” said Scrooge, “they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides — excuse me — I don’t know that.”

“But you might know it,” observed the gentleman.

“It’s not my business,” Scrooge returned. “It’s enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people’s. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!”

Little did Charles Dickens know that, almost 200 years later, the United States of America would have a President as callous toward the murder of an Ambassador he chose, as Scrooge was toward the suffering of the poor.

The Wall Street Journal has the story:

Mitt Romney accused President Barack Obama on Monday of downplaying recent foreign crises as he seeks to gain an edge on foreign policy – a relative area of strength for the president.

President Barack Obama was assessing his support for the governments that have sprung up in the wake of the Arab Spring when he argued in a 60 Minutes interview that aired Sunday that “I was pretty certain and continue to be pretty certain that there are going to be bumps in the road.”

“Bumps in the road?” Mr. Romney said Monday as he sized up Mr. Obama’s interview performance and rattled off examples of tumult abroad. “We had an ambassador assassinated…twenty thousand people have been killed in Syria. We have tumult in Pakistan and of course Iran is that much closer to having the capacity to build a nuclear weapon. These are not bumps in the road, these are human lives.”

While Mr. Romney has been a regular critic of Mr. Obama’s foreign policies, that’s rarely been truer than in the last few weeks. Amid uprisings in the Middle East that led to the death of an American ambassador, Mr. Romney’s team blasted out a statement that caused a blowback even from conservatives who saw it as inappropriately timed.

Mr. Romney’s team has embraced his sharp tone as a winning strategy to help them contrast with Mr. Obama. Some 45% of registered voters said Mr. Obama would be a better commander in chief, compared with 38% who said Mr. Romney would, in a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

But there are signs that Middle East turmoil has eaten into Mr. Obama’s credibility on the issue. In the recent poll, 49% of voters said they approved of the president’s handling of foreign policy, a five point drop from August.

“This is time for a president who will shape events in the Middle East, not just be…at the mercy of the events of the Middle East,” Mr. Romney said Monday at his rally on a tarmac here in Pueblo.

The Obama campaign said Mr. Romney was taking the president’s words out of context. Lis Smith, a spokeswoman for the Obama campaign, said: “He’s purposely misinterpreting the president’s words and making reckless statements about the death of four Americans in Libya, apparently for the sole purpose of his own political gain. Using this incident to launch political attacks should be beneath someone seeking to be our nation’s Commander-in-Chief.”

The Democrats also noted that Mr. Obama was referring to the climate in the Middle East more broadly and not specifically addressing recent events in Libya or Benghazi.

“There will probably be some times where we bump up against some of these countries and have strong disagreements, but I do think that over the long term we are more likely to get a Middle East and North Africa that is more peaceful, more prosperous and more aligned with our interests,” Mr. Obama said in the interview.

At the end of “A Christmas Carol”, Dickens wrote the following,

…He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world. Some people laughed to see the alteration in him, but he let them laugh, and little heeded them; for he was wise enough to know that nothing ever happened on this globe, for good, at which some people did not have their fill of laughter in the outset; and knowing that such as these would be blind anyway, he thought it quite as well that they should wrinkle up their eyes in grins, as have the malady in less attractive forms. His own heart laughed: and that was quite enough for him.

Unfortunately I don’t see the same sort of 180 degree turn-around in Obama’s future.

So, I guess I’ll settle for his firing on November 6th, instead.

As Clint Eastwood said, 

If someone’s not doing their job…we’ve got to let them go.

The Odd Couple: President Obama and President Ahmadinejad

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

In an interview to that aired last night on CBS’s 60 Minutes, President Barack Obama said that Israel’s concern over Iran’s march toward a nuclear program was  “noise.”

When it comes to our national security decisions — any pressure that I feel is simply to do what’s right for the American people. And I am going to block out — any noise that’s out there.

Here’s a partial transcript:

STEVE KROFT: “How much pressure have you been getting from Prime Minister Netanyahu to make up your mind to use military force in Iran?”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “Well—look, I have conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu all the time. And I understand and share Prime Minister Netanyahu’s insistence that Iran should not obtain a nuclear weapon, because it would threaten us, it would threaten Israel, and it would threaten the world and kick off a nuclear arms race.”

STEVE KROFT: “You’re saying, you don’t feel any pressure from Prime Minister Netanyahu in the middle of a campaign to try and get you to change your policy and draw a line in the sand? You don’t feel any pressure?”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “When it comes to our national security decisions—any pressure that I feel is simply to do what’s right for the American people. And I am going to block out—any noise that’s out there. Now I feel an obligation, not pressure but obligation, to make sure that we’re in close consultation with the Israelis—on these issues. Because it affects them deeply. They’re one of our closest allies in the region. And we’ve got an Iranian regime that has said horrible things that directly threaten Israel’s existence.

Romney press secretary Andrea Saul responded:

Tonight on 60 Minutes, President Obama called Israel’s legitimate concern about the impact of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons ‘noise’ and referred to Israel as merely ‘one of our closest allies in the region.’ This is just the latest evidence of his chronic disregard for the security of our closest ally in the Middle East. Governor Romney’s views stand in sharp contrast to the President’s. Governor Romney strongly believes that Israel is our most important ally in the Middle East and that support for Israel is essential to extending freedom, peace and democracy throughout the region. As president, Governor Romney will restore and protect the close alliance between our nation and the state of Israel.

Obama also said that he

understands and agrees with Netanyahu’s insistence that Iran not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons as this would threaten both countries, the world in general, and kick off an arms ace.

Romney, who was also interviewed on 60 Minutes last night, said that Obama not meeting with Netanyahu

is a mistake and sends a message throughout the Middle East that somehow we distance ourselves from our friends and I think the exact opposite approach is what’s necessary.

Well, I’m hope you’re sitting down. Guess who is in full agreement with the 44th President of these United States? Would you believe ol’ “Imadinnerjacket” himself?

In an interview with The Washington Post, Ahmedinejad was asked about the possibility of a war with Israel. He answered:

“We, generally speaking, do not take very seriously the issue of the Zionists and the possible dangers emanating from them,” he said early in the interview. “Of course, they would love to find a way for their own salvation by making a lot of noise and to raise stakes in order to save themselves. But I do not believe they will succeed.”

Asked if he thought Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was bluffing in his threats to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, the Iranian president said he agreed with that view and asserted that this analysis was a “common consensus.”

Ahmadinejad’s bland self-assurance is partly a matter of style, for no politician ever wants to display weakness before his adversaries. But in this third interview I’ve had with the Iranian president, I had the sense that he genuinely believes the world is going Iran’s way. He sees an America that is facing reversals across the Muslim world — in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and most recently, in dealing with the Arab uprisings. Close U.S. allies such as Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak are gone, and Ahmadinejad is still standing.

In discussing Iran’s negotiations with the international group known as the P5+1, Ahmadinejad said Iran was willing to make a deal to limit its stockpile of enriched uranium. But he implied that the Obama administration wants to slow the negotiations down until after the November election, to avoid bargaining concessions that might embarrass the president.

“We have always been ready and we are ready” to make a deal that will address the P5+1’s concerns, he said. “But experience has shown that important and key decisions are not made in the U.S. leading up to national elections.”

Ahmadinejad observed at another point in the conversation: “I do believe that some conversations and key issues must be talked about again once we come out of the other end of the political election atmosphere in the United States.”

In talking about America, Ahmadinejad several times referred to a country that, in his words, is tired of “back-breaking expenses” of foreign wars overseas and where public opinion is trending against Israel. He didn’t cite evidence for these views.

“Will the people of the U.S. accept meddling and intervention in the affairs of others?” he mused at one point, before answering his own question. “I don’t believe so. I believe the people of the U.S. are peace-loving people.”

Translation of Ahmadinejad: Their president does not like Israel either. I expect no trouble from that wuss.

Lord… I wish we had an American President. 

C’mon, November 6th.