Why Did Obama Lie? Why Did Others Lie?

Slowly buy surely the actual facts in the Islamic radical assault on our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya are coming to light. 

We now know that Ambassador Stevens asked for increased security many times before the attack.  We know the State Department turned him down in a dismissive and arrogant manner.  It appears no one at the State Department will pay the price for this gross error in judgment.

We now know that drones overhead witnessed the attack and that officials in the CIA, the State Department and even President Obama himself knew this was a terrorist attack.

We now know that there was no protest of demonstration preceding or during the assault on the Consulate.

And today we know that President Obama was fully aware that the radical group Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.  The White House had emails from this al Qaeda allied group within two hours of the attack.

What we will never know is why President Obama lied continuously and consistently for two solid weeks about the attack.  We will never know why he forced Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary to lie, when Carney knew the truth.

We will never know why the President ordered Susan Rice, the United Nations Secretary to outright lie on four Sunday Morning News Interviews, destroying her credibility forever.

We will never know why in the world Vice President Biden told such an involved fictional account of the information known to the administration, even recounting totally false dates, during the Vice Presidential Debate.  Biden knew from day one.  Why did he destroy any chance he might have had of becoming President? 

Certainly the administration will never explain these lies and the bizarre and unnecessary cover-up of the facts.  It's a mini-Watergate with no logical explanation. 

We can only guess that the President was trying to place the blame elsewhere, on an obscure video maker, to avoid any direct blame that would harm his re-election chances.  It just all seems so odd.

If President Obama wins re-election the Main Stream Media will then investigate and ask these same questions.  If he loses it will fall upon a disgruntled staffer to reveal the truth.  But either way, Mr. PResident, the truth will come out.

The Video Game President

There is a world wide uproar over President Barack Obama's appearance on Comedy Central last night.  President Obama stated that the rape, torture and murder of Ambassador Stevens and three others was "not very optimal."

"Not very optimal."

Sean Smith was one of the diplomats slain in an attack Obama has been trying to cover up for weeks.  He mother feels sorry that the event just wasn't "optimal" for the President.  She told a reporter for the UK Daily Mail, "My son is not very optimal - he is very dead."

As I mentioned in yesterday's blog, Whoopi Goldberg asked Ann Romney how her husband could possibly speak to parents of fallen soldiers since he himself had never served in Viet Nam.  I can answer that question right now for you, Whoopi, "One Hell of a lot better than Barack Obama did last night!"

This get back to the point I raised a few days ago in the blog entry, The Paint By Numbers President, where I discussed Obama's use of sterile form letters to parents of fallen servicemen and women.  President has no feel for the office of President. He has no sense of gravity.  He avoids all aspects of the job of being President except for the Television appearances and perks of the job.

He is exactly like a child playing the popular video game "Call of Duty."  None of it is real to him.  It's all just a video game.  

That's all the raid on Osama bin Laden was to him.  A big video game, an opportuninty to brag (and release government secrets to the press).  Likewise, the drone attacks that kill terrorists along with innocent Pakistanis.  It's one big video game.  And Obama gets to play the President.

This time I hope America elects a real President.

Mary at FREEDOM EDEN Takes on The View

Working in retail and heading into the Holiday selling season, I've just not had the time to prepare and write the blog posts I want to write.  I'd like to write an entire blog post about the amount of shear "hatred" I read in many posts, especially on the left.  And Twitter? OMG!!!

I will devote a few short paragraphs to Candy Crowley's role as Moderator of the Presidential Debate this past week.  President Obama won the debate, exactly as I predicted and expected.  No surprise there.  But why and how did Candy Crowley suddenly jump into the debate to defend President Obama with an obscure single word, out of context, factoid from a Rose Garden Speech?  It revolves around one word, "terrorism." 

In fact, why did President Obama, after weeks and weeks of absolute denial of ANY KNOWLEDGE THIS WAS A PLANNED, ORGANIZED, TERRORIST ATTACK during that first ten day period following the torture and murder of Ambassador Stevens (including a lengthy and tortured denial by Vice President Biden last week), suddenly remember he actually DID call it terrorism before any of the "facts" were known?  

More importantly why did the otherwise objective Candy Crowley have that Rose Garden speech literally memorized?  How was she suddenly able to verify Obama's obscure single use of the word "terrorism" in the middle of the Wednesday night debate?  

And why did she need to "fact check" Mitt Romney instantly?  

This smells bad.  I have no proof, of course, but I genuinely believe there was some sort of collusion between Crowley and the President's Election Committee. I don't believe in accidents.  And this was no accident.  This doesn't feel right.  

And it wasn't necessary. President Obama was winning on style and substance.  Worse yet we now know that Candy Crowley was essentially wrong.  She herself has personally "walked back" the interruption saying that Romney essentially correct.

Finally I'm bothered by the vicious attack on Ann Romney on The View today.  Mitt Romney wasn't there (and he should have been).  But, after the sickeningly sweet cotton candy interview of President and Michele Obama, how is it that Barbara Walters let the Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar dogs loose on Ann?

I'm going to let superb blogger Mary from FREEDOM EDEN take it from here. Read her entire post:   ANN ROMNEY: THE VIEW

The Paint By Numbers President

I have three thoughts tonight that need little or no expansion.

1.)  I remember the "Bush Haters" really well from just four years ago.  It seems like a century ago, doesn't it?  President Bush could do nothing right.  McCain lost, at least in part, because he was unable to distance himself from the reviled President Bush.

2.)  Four short years later we have the mirror image of the "Bush Haters" in the "Obama Haters." For these critics Presidnet Obama can do nothing right.  Every tiny move is subject to review and criticism.  

The newest cause celeb in the "Obama Haters" click is the growing critcism of President Obama's use of one single standard and terribly impersonal form letter being sent to the families of every soldier killed in Afghanistan, Iraq or on any duty.  One cold letter, printed and signed again and again and again.  They point out that President Bush, for all his flaws, usually wrote personal notes,often by hand.

The Gateway Pundit has covered the controversy here: Confirmed: Obama Sent Same Form Letter to Parents of All Fallen Soldiers, Marines, SEALs

3.) I will refuse to ever become an "Obama Hater."  He is not a bad man.  He doesn't deserve the vilification thrown his way. 

I'm voting for Mitt Romney for a variety of rational reasons outlined elsewhere in this blog.  I think this "letter" controversy is overblown.  But, it does reflect Obama's approach to his entire Presidency.  He has no feel for the job or its gravity.  It's all paint by the numbers, sign the form letters, then on to The View.

He's not a bad man.  He's just not the man we need in the Oval Office.

Eye Candy

I agree completely

Just a Reminder: YOU Pay for Every Obama Phone

Somehow a vast number of Americans believe the "Government" pays for certain things (or many things).  This, of course, isn't true.  The "Government" actually pays for absolutely nothing.  Either we taxpayers pay the bill through our taxes or, more increasingly, the government borrows the money and pays using these borrowed funds.  Either way we are ultimately on the tab.

But the phenomena of the "Obama Phone" has gone viral this campaign season.  This program, begun long before Obama even thought of running for President, was originally designed to help poor rural citizens pay for telephone service and to encourage the telephone companies to extend telephone lines to remote areas.

For reasons that defy understanding, a few years ago (again before Obama was President), the program was expanded to provide cell phones to virtually all low income people nationwide.

It is curious how some enterprising salesmen and telephone resellers have renamed the program the "Obama Phone" implying the President deserves full credit for providing cell phones to millions. Check out this URL: www.obamaphone.net

Assuming that you are NOT one of the low income people receiving an Obama Phone, you are paying for them!  You are on the hook for millions and millions of cell phone bills!  And the program is absolutely EXPLODING.

I want to emphasize that this isn't Warren Buffet or the multimillionaires paying, it's virtually anyone who uses a telephone.  It is an egregiousness TAX on lower income and middle income people.

Here's HOW YOU PAY: The program is funded through the “Universal Service Fund” charge on phone bills — usually a dollar or two per bill per month — and the amount of the fee is determined by the cost of this and other programs. In other words the more people given the supposedly "FREE" Obama Phones the higher YOUR PHONE BILL RISES!!!

A growth of $100 million in this program could result in an increased fee of a few cents on the average bill, according to officials from the agency that administers the program. The total cost of the program nationwide was $1.5 billion in 2011, up from $1.1 billion in 2010.

Today, thanks to the viral You Tube Video requests for the phone have also gone viral! Costs could jump to over $2 billion by the need of this year.  You phone bill could jump to by another $2.00 a month.

Just remember the government pays for absolutely nothing.... ever.  Every government program is ultimately paid by individual citizens.
______________________________________________________________________

Certainly an interesting question is, "Will FREE Obama Phones throw the election to President Obama?" There is a reason its illegal to provide financial incentives to voters.  But keep in mind that the President is not doing that.  This program began and expanded long before Obama became President.

But it is now always called "Obama Phones" and over 1,000,000 (one million) OHIO residents alone now receive Obama Phones.  That's more than enough votes to sway the election.  What if Mitt Romney is right?

This article in The Dayton Daily News was certainly helpful in preparing today's blog entry.  Read it in full and you decide: 1 million Ohioans using free phone program

The photograph above is of Ohio resident Aliesa Azbill and was taken by Chris Stewart.  It is from the Dayton Daily News article.

Why Romney Must Win and Why He Will Lose

Mike Allen, Jonathan Martin and Jim Vandehei, writing the lead, in depth, story today in Politico, have managed to encapsulate both the reasons Romney would be a great President, ready on day one to take on the country's problems, AND the reasons Romney cannot possibly win. It's both a sobering and eye opening article.

Even the article title says it all: In the End, It's Mitt

I'll limit myself to just a few small quotes. Please read the entire article.

It kills his admirers to say it because they know him to be a far more generous and approachable man than people realize — far from the caricature of him being awkward or distant — and they feel certain he would be a very good president. 

“Lousy candidate; highly qualified to be president,” said a top Romney official. “The candidate suit fits him unnaturally. He is naturally an executive.” 

That comment captures precisely why his closest confidants think he is a much better, bigger and more qualified man than often comes through on the trail. He treats his staff with respect, works hard on his weaknesses and does all of it because he possesses supreme confidence in his capacity to lead effectively.

Yet many of the folks who are despairing about Romney [campaign weaknesses] would actually love what he would do in office. Romney’s metric-obsessed transition team is fleshing out a “200-day plan” (100 days wasn’t enough time to pass a bunch of big bills) aimed at goosing the recovery and creating jobs by bringing corporate cash off the sidelines in the United States and attracting investment from abroad. 

The weapons would include tax and regulatory policy and what one aide called a “very aggressive” series of executive orders, many already on the drawing board. Two of Romney’s friends told POLITICO he would be eager to sign a bipartisan grand bargain in the first four months in office to calm markets and ease partisan tensions.

The Worst President in the Last 100 Years

My last essay (blog entry) about Mitt Romney's ill fated campaign for President began with the sentence "Barack Obama is, in many ways, the worst President in the last 100 years."  My Liberal Friends on Twitter, while agreeing with me that Romney will lose the election, lambasted me for my condemnation of Obama. I wish they were right. I wish my accusations were not true. But they are.

President Obama loves to campaign and loves to play President, but is both unwilling and unsuited to actually do the work of the job. He is the first President in 20 years to not meet a single Head of State during his visit to the United Nations. He instead appeared on “The View.” 

His avoidance of his National Security Briefings (he attends only 30% of the briefings) and his failure to hold a single meeting of his own Jobs Council in over 6 months are just two of dozens of examples of his avoiding the actual work of being President. He doesn’t love the work, he loves the role.

This is also why he avoids the work of actually compromising with Congress. By delegating his normal role to Pelosi and Reid, he abdicated the normal responsibilities of the executive branch.

I applaud the few out there who admit to knowing Obama's flaws and have decided to vote for him anyway. These are wise folks who weigh the facts and the risks of a Romney Presidency and feel Obama is the better choice.

I've chronicled many of the problems with Obama's policies and p[practices in previous blog entries.  You can go back and read them here: President Obama (WARNING: There are dozens of articles, some only tangentially mentioning Obama).

But recent events in Libya and the Middle East may well be President Obama's lowest point.  His policies were wrong to begin with and have failed badly.  He was cavalier about defense and never took the threat from Islamic Radicals seriously.  His avoidance of Security Briefings and total failure to prepare for the anniversary of 9-11 are failures enough to warrant his defeat, but the lying now coming out of his office and  the State Department demand he be removed from office.

You just don't lie when the entire world know the truth.  And he is bringing down Secretary of State Clinton with him, although she shares some of the blame, especially for misleading Congress.  

The murder of Ambassador Stevens lies at their door.  If they were candid and honest I could forgive the lapses of judgement, but the cover-up is unforgivable.

If the Press were to honestly cover these issues (and they are finally starting to do this) Obama could not possibly be reelected.

Obama pressed on failures at Univision forum

U.S. probes whether Benghazi attackers had inside help

State Department was discussing putting Marines in Libya 'sometime in next five years’

Republican senators decry ‘useless, worthless' Clinton briefing on Libya attack

IG: White House ‘Made it Impossible’ to Pursue Lead in Fast and Furious Probe

Deafening Silence About the Camp Bastion Attack

NOT Breaking News: Mitt Romney Can't Win

Barack Obama is, in many ways, the worst President in the last 100 years.  Yet this ego-driven, rather incompetent progressive may well win a 40+ state landslide victory this November.  Thank you Mitt Romney!

I just want to repeat what I've been saying in this blog again and again for the last year.  Mitt Romney cannot possibly win! His flaws are so fatal he will simply self destruct over and often throughout this election cycle.

Yesterday's "hidden tape" released by Mother Jones is simply the latest self destructive explosion, not the last.  But it is the worst so far from a candidate who has proven he can "out Kerry" John Kerry. Wind surfing anyone?

Now Romney will not succeed in "out McGoverning" McGovern.  He can't lose all 50 states. Well, I don't think he can.  But it's early yet, I don't want to underestimate the man.

After the last two weeks Romney is so toxic I believe Republicans will lose the House and most assuredly fail to regain the Senate.

After the election the media will finally turn on Obama.  And the Republicans will most assuredly regain both houses of Congress in 2014.

Rhetorical Question

What if the Catholics begin rioting? 

What if Catholics scale the walls of the Embassies in, say, Italy, Poland and Czechoslovakia and torch American Flags?

What if Catholics kill the Ambassador in Andorra (Andorra is 94% Catholic, by the way)?

What if Catholic protests break out in Germany, Great Britain and much of Europe?

What if the rioters and others claim that the protests are because of Bill Mahar's movie "Religulous?"

Will the FBI bring Bill Mahar in for questioning?  Will the government scour his records looking for criminal activity? 

Will CNN publish his home address, directions to his home, his movements?  

Will CNN News announcers denounce and ridicule the movie? 

Will the Obama Administration contact You Tube and ask that clips form Mahar's "Religulous" anti-Catholic movie be pulled from the service?

Will the The Pentagon call the executives at LIONSGATE (the Studio responsible for "Religulous") and ask them to remove their financial support and repudiate the film?

And, while all this happens, will virtually all so-called Liberals and progressives remain silent?

Honoring the Memory of Peter, Sue and Christine Hanson

In 2006, five years after the horror of September 11, 2001, a diverse and eclectic group of bloggers created the 2,996 Project. In this project, one blogger was assigned to prepare a remembrance for each of the victims who died during the terrorist attacks.

It's hard to believe eleven years has passed since this horrific tragedy. Last year, on the tenth anniversary, there were many television specials, newspaper stories and articles to commemorate the event.  It seems to me that this year the quiet lives of the victims are fading into the mist of time. That is the greatest tragedy of all.  

Please take time to remember just how frail and how fleeting life really is. Read and remember Peter Hanson, Sue Kim Hanson and their little daughter Christine Hanson, the youngest victim of 9/11.

Susan Kim Hanson, her husband Peter and their daughter Christine were just three of the victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack that took the lives of 2,996 souls in the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the fields of Pennsylvania.

Sue, Peter and Christine were on United Airlines Flight 175, flying to Los Angeles to visit Sue's family and to take their daughter to Disneyland.  However, people whose hearts were filled with hate hijacked their plane and crashed it into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. 

Sue Kim Hanson was a great scientist in the making. She was a doctoral candidate in micro-biology immunology at Boston University and working on her final thesis. Her work promised to reveal the workings of a chemical believed to regulate immune responses. She had isolated in lab mice a gene suspected of being involved in asthma sufferers and AIDS patients. Her work had the potential to help millions of people.

Susan Kim was one of those wonderful American success stories. A Korean-American, Sue had lived with her grandmother in Korea until she was 6. Her mother died when she was 15 and she was raised by her strict Korean father. Through hard work and discipline, sacrifice, dedication and sheer will power she neared the goal her mother and father and grandmother had hoped she would achieve, her doctorate degree.

Dr. Hardy Kornfeld, Hanson's thesis adviser, said "She was sort of fearless. Sue just took on tasks that were incredibly challenging, and more often than not she was able to make a go at them."

That she would be attracted to the wild and undisciplined Peter Hanson was a great surprise. Three years younger than Sue Kim, Peter gained his education by following The Grateful Dead. Peter believed that the group and its music would become classics, up there with Beethoven, Bach and company, and he tried to sway the opinion of anyone who would listen. 

But even if Sue wasn't quite convinced about the Dead, she believed in Peter. And her faith was well placed. Peter was, by all accounts, a brilliant software engineer, a great salesman and a wonderful person.

He was passionate about Sue and Sue fell head over heals in love with Peter. She obviously had a great effect on him. Legacy.com has a reprint of a New York Times article about Sue that tells the story:

"The relationship spurred Peter Hanson to clip his tangle of brownish-red dreadlocks, trade in tie-dyed T- shirts for suits, go to business school and become one of the best software salesmen his friends and family had ever met. He was vice president of marketing at TimeTrade in Waltham, Mass."

"Her bond with the Hansons was so strong that they accompanied her to California when she went to inform her father about her engagement. She worried that her father would protest because Peter Hanson was not Korean. But her family embraced the Hansons."

Sue and Peter were married and had a beautiful daughter. Sue continued to pursue her doctoral degree. She was scheduled to defend her thesis in November, 2001.
Taking a last break before finalizing her research and thesis, they boarded United Airlines Flight 175 for a mini vacation. 

Peter Hanson is remembered as one of the passengers who documented the hijacking during the flight with two calls to his father.  Peter made a final cell phone call to his parents moments before the plane crashed into the south tower.

"It's getting bad, Dad. A stewardess was stabbed. They seem to have knives and Mace. They said they have a bomb. Passengers are throwing up and getting sick. The plane is making jerky movements. I don't think the pilot is flying the plane. I think we are going down. I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building. Don't worry, Dad. If it happens, it'll be very fast. My God, my God."  The call ended abruptly.

Those memories will haunt us forever.  But there are better memories, too.

Sue's friend Mona Pengree writes, "Sue was awarded her PhD posthumously, as her professor finished her work on her behalf. This is a wonderful picture of her, and she shone every bit as brightly in person. Probably more. Her loss was a loss to all mankind."

Sue gave a great deal to Boston University and she gave a great deal to all of us. Her work in immunology inspired her fellow students, faculty and the University to continue her research and finish her thesis. They awarded her a doctorate degree. And they established the Annual Sue Kim Hanson Lecture In Immunology, not just to honor her memory, but to give full credit to her work and the inspiration, the strength and the courage Sue provides to us all.

Christine Hanson SHOULD HAVE BEEN 14 years old this year. Michelle Malkin wrote this in her syndicated column back in December, 2001:

"Eight children were murdered on hijacked airliners that crashed on Sept. 11. Christine Hanson, 3, was on United Airlines Flight 175 with her parents. She was on her first trip to Disneyland. Christine was brown-eyed and rosy-cheeked and button-nosed. At family meals, she made everyone stand and hold hands while singing the theme song from Barney. During Christine's funeral, mourners re-enacted the scene, singing: "I love you, you love me""

God bless you Christine... and Peter and Sue and all those who died so tragically five years ago.

God bless.

------------------------------------------------------------------
As I mentioned in an earlier entry, there is a wealth of information, tribute and love scattered throughout the Internet in remembrance of Sue Kim Hanson. I owe every contributor who came before me a deep debt of gratitude. Through each of you I have come to know Sue, Peter and Christine. You have touched my heart.

If my Tribute to The Hansons here today fell short in any way, I deeply apologize and would love to hear from any of you.

I suggest these following resources from which I have borrowed freely in preparing this tribute:Remember September 11, 2001
A mother to her son: How could I forget your curiosity and energy? By Eunice Hanson, for The Associated Press

Peter, Sue Kim, and Christine Hanson Memorial Web Site

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Back in 2006, the 2,996 Project asked bloggers to prepare tributes to all who died in the tragic events of September 11th. Many of those blog entries remain on line and many will be reprinted again this year.

Remembering

I've been spending a little time preparing to repost and hopefully enhance my blog entry remembering Sue Kim Hanson.  Sue, along with her husband Peter and daughter Christine were murdered along with 2,996 others on "nine-eleven" as it has come to be called.   My blog entry will appear tomorrow, as it has every year since 2006.

As part of my research I stumbled upon this wonderful video for The Alzheimer's Foundation.  There is a great blog out there called Smoke and Mirrors by Michael Murphy, a. blogger who has all the talent I wish I had. He posted the video at the request of one of his readers.

My mother has Alzheimer's and it has progressed to the point where she remembers very little of her life.  The other day she was unable to remember her name.

The video below is not a "downer." It's neither frightening nor depressing. It's short and, well, it's important.  Don't be afraid to watch it.

Remember those you love.  And give a gift to The Alzheimer Foundation so that we all can remember the important things in our lives.