It is kind of funny, how the Marxist Media portrays Obama. "He is cool and challenging when under fire." That is what they want you to believe. The facts of the matter are quite different. Turns out he hates confrontation unless, of course, he is the instigator. "Cool" left the building two years ago.
In a local interview on a Texas station, last Friday evening, Obama became obviously angry with the interviewing reporter, Brad Watson, for, first, correcting him and then, challenging him on a couple of additional issues. Obama had claimed that the Texas vote against him in 2008 was by only " a few points." The fact was, Obama lost in Texas by 12 points and may lose by 20 points in 2012. Watson corrected Obama on this and Obama began to steam. But, more than being wrong on this point, Obama resented being interrupted and told the reporter so, in no uncertain terms, at the end of the interview. Understand that Obama filibusters his answer, preventing reporters from asking more than a few questions. Brad Watson did not let Obama pull that trick and Obama get angry.
After the interview was over, a White House spokesman made it clear that Brad Watson might not get another interview . . . . as if that were news to those of us who know who Obama really is. OF COURSE THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER INTERVIEWS WITH WATSON.
Obama, as a community organizing functionary, was little more than a union punk who ordered businesses to do things his way, under threat of retaliation. He brought that kind of thuggish behavior to our White House. His "tough guy BS stance" is not unnoticed; the Right is getting more and more determined to kick his butt out of office by the same measure of victory as the midterms. The Left thinks his "in your face attitude" is the ticket to winning the election. I have seen Liberal reactionary after Liberal reactionary praise Obama for returning to antagonist of old. They think his presidential crap will win the election.
I have a theory about the 2012 elections. I believe that the 2012 election will include a collusion of forces, working against Obama . . . and I think he is fully aware of what he is up against. That is why he is campaigning now, 18 months before the election; he is so far behind in the polls that he thinks he can no longer wait to begin his campaign.
In the fall of 2009, the financial magazine, Bloomberg, took a survey of Wall Street executives and CEOs; 77 % thought Obama was anti business. They won a major Supreme Court decision just after that decision, announced on January 25 of 2010 (Citizens United) . The decision gave corporate America the right to spend money in political elections. Obama was furious and chided the Justices in his State of the Union speech, two days later. Know that he doubled the spending of the hapless John McCain, but that will not be the case, this time around.
A second electoral consideration if this: if he continues to act like a punkish tough guy, he will not win back the Independents lost over the course of the past two years. They hate that type of thing.
Third: he is about to start pulling troops out of Afghanistan. If that country reverts back to the enemy, he will be blamed for the inhumane waste of over a 1,000 American soldiers, killed in his ridiculous war effort. General Patraeus should be Court Marshaled for supporting this presidential moron. No one is thinking of our soldiers, not even the generals in charge of their safety. No one in this country should ever support military advancements organized by Liberals. It is just that simple, especially when that includes troops on the ground. They are idealistic morons when it comes to fighting a war. "Fair" should have nothing to do with the matter . . . only winning and winning as fast as possible.
Bush won the Iraqi war. Obama is on the verge of losing two wars; Afghanistan and Libya. If I have anything to do with this, Obama will pay at the ballot box for his criminal behavior in this regard.
Fourth, inflation will be in full swing by the time the 2012 elections roll around. That is my prediction. Non-partisan voters vote their pocket book. If inflation is full blown, Obama cannot win re-election. Understand that if inflation was counted using the methodology of the 80's, inflation would be somewhere between 6 and 8%, but the game players in the White House do not count fuel increases and food hikes.
If GM motors finally fails, Obama will take a hit for that circumstance. Know this: General Motors is not in the shape the Obama spin machine wants you to believe. There is a boycott of GM products and it includes about 25% of GM's recent customer base. The current headline in Forbes (April 19, 2011) is "Treasury to sell GM stake, end Myth of a Profitable Auto Bailout." Obama has misappropriated funds (Fannie.Freddie or TARP) to make it appear that GM was paying off its loans, that all was well with the sick auto giant. He raped teacher and police union retirement funds in order to take over GM and put it in the hands of the auto union. Some of those teachers and police voted for Scott Brown back in special election of January , 2010.
Finally, there is the very real possibility that the Supreme Court will rule ObamaCare unconstitutional and do so before the general election. The nation will note this defeat and vote the bums out of office.
Understand that 60 million people voted against him the first time. All of those people will make the same vote, again. If he loses a swing vote collective of just 4 million votes, moving from his column to the GOP, Obama will lose that election. Just 4 million swing votes will give him a vote count of 65 million to 64 for the GOP plus the under reported 3 to 5 million conservatives who did not vote in the election in protest to the McCain candidacy.
Ben Stein told Fox News' Neil Cavuto, today, that he did not think Obama was a smart man. Neither do we. Look, when you get up and tell the nation that all we have to do to get off Middle Eastern Oil is to tune up our cars and air up our tires, well, you know you are not working with an Einstein.
No comments:
Post a Comment