Shocking news.

OT: Sanford admits affair. On MSNBC video now.

Matticus Finch on June 24, 2009 at 2:38 PM

I wasn’t going to vote for him anyway. He can keep his preemptive social penance.

Baxter Greene on June 24, 2009 at 3:23 PM

Ohh sh!t!
Sorry about the double post.

and it stops exporting terrorism outside of its borders.

Bambi doesn’t want Iran to export terror outside its borders, but it’s perfectly okay with him if they murder and terrorize their own citizens within their borders. That’s just some “robust debate” that we Americans have no business interfering with, right Bambi? We don’t have any right to tell another sovereign nation how to conduct their own internal affairs (unless that nation is Israel, of course, in which case we have every right to tell “dem Jews” how to behave).

Thanks, Obamabots, for saddling the rest of us with this pantywaist fool for the next 3-1/2 years.

The big problem with Obama playing both sides is the fact that when he takes a U-turn,the press takes it with him.

This was very evident during the primaries with Hillary:

Obama criticizes Clinton over her words about Iran

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) – Barack Obama scolded Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on Sunday for saying that the United States would “totally obliterate” Iran if it attacks Israel, and likened her to President Bush. Clinton stood by her comment.

On “Meet the Press,” Obama said: “It’s not the language we need right now, and I think it’s language reflective of George Bush. We have had a foreign policy of bluster and saber rattling and tough talk and in the meantime have made a series strategic decisions that have actually strengthened Iran.”

When Obama was polled as looking weak on this issue,he took a U-turn.
The press took it with him.

Source: Obama to nuke Iran if Iran nukes Israel
(via Allah Hot Air)
posted at 3:52 pm on December 11, 2008 by Allahpundit

I didn’t get it when Krauthammer proposed it, I didn’t get it when Hillary proposed it, I don’t get it now.
U.S. President-elect Barack Obama’s administration will offer Israel a “nuclear umbrella” against the threat of a nuclear attack by Iran, a well-placed American source said earlier this week. The source, who is close to the new administration, said the U.S. will declare that an attack on Israel by Tehran would result in a devastating U.S. nuclear response against Iran…

Obama: On second thought, it’s not that important to capture Bin Laden
(via Ed Hot Air)
posted at 6:18 pm on January 14, 2009 by Allahpundit
Remember at the debate when he vowed, “We will kill Bin Laden, we will crush al-Qaeda”? He’s stressed the importance of taking out Osama on other occasions, but never quite as forcefully as that. Why, enter the quote in Google and you’ll find it immortalized in the very first hit with an especially fulsome tribute at the Daily Dish.
Anyway, change of plans:

COURIC: How important do you think it is, Mr. President-elect, to apprehend Osama bin Laden?

OBAMA: I think that we have to so weaken his infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function. My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. But if we have so tightened the noose that he’s in a cave somewhere and can’t even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America.

That’s more than nuance their,it is blatant hypocrisy that was ignored by the press and looked over by his sheep.

Obama’s even able to commit,according to liberals,war crimes and turn them into “smart power”:

Obama Begins Air-Raiding Villages & Killing Innocent Civilians

“We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”

Barack Obama
On US troops in Afghanistan
August 14, 2007

Of course now we see Obama bombing villages and civilians left and right.
Over 80 killed yesterday in a drone attack.
Apparently when a democrat is in office,air raiding villages and killing civilians is no longer a war crime,it is “smart power”.

On Iraq he has played both sides with the help of the press:

This video shows Obama and Biden’s hypocrisy on Iraq:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aryTu4ZlhZc&eurl=http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/&feature=player_embedded

Now we have this from Obama without the slightest rebuke from the press concerning how wrong and bad his judgment was on this issue:

Obama to troops: “You got the job done” in Iraq
(via Ed at Hot Air)

Thanks in great measure to your service, the situation in Iraq has improved. Violence has been reduced substantially from the horrific sectarian killing of 2006 and 2007. Al Qaeda in Iraq has been dealt a serious blow by our troops and Iraq’s Security Forces, and through our partnership with Sunni Arabs. The capacity of Iraq’s Security Forces has improved, and Iraq’s leaders have taken steps toward political accommodation. The relative peace and strong participation in January’s provincial elections sent a powerful message to the world about how far Iraqis have come in pursuing their aspirations through a peaceful political process…

This has been his MO throughout his political career.
This combined with the enormous amount of broken promises has been embraced by the press as being “pragmatic” instead of stubborn like that Cowboy Bush.
Not keeping your word and saying whatever it takes to make the people you are speaking to vote for you is considered “smart and open to change” if you listen to the liberal constituency of today.
No matter how hypocritical and wrong Obama is,he has his sheep and the press to go to bat for him.

This democrat sums this sickness up quite well I think:

(via Talk left)

Is This What It Means To Be An Obama “Progressive?”
By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:05:15 PM EST

I am an Obama supporter. Who could not be when McCain is the other choice? But pols are pols and do what they do. That’s why I rip them all when they do the wrong thing, by my lights. For example, as Obama did on FISA Capitulation. But a new breed of Democrat and “progressive” is emerging. Glenn’s Greenwald’s interview with Mort Halperin allows us to coin a new phrase – a Halperin “Progressive.” What is a “Halperin” progressive? One who decides what the right position is for progressives based on what Barack Obama does. Glenn writes:

[T]here was only one meaningful change that occurred between Halperin’s June 9 opposition [to FISA Capitulation] and his July 8 support [for FISA Capitualtion]: namely, it was in that interim — on June 20 — that Barack Obama announced that he would support the FISA bill . . .

The big problem with Obama playing both sides is the fact that when he takes a U-turn,the press takes it with him.

This was very evident during the primaries with Hillary:

Obama criticizes Clinton over her words about Iran

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) – Barack Obama scolded Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on Sunday for saying that the United States would “totally obliterate” Iran if it attacks Israel, and likened her to President Bush. Clinton stood by her comment.

On “Meet the Press,” Obama said: “It’s not the language we need right now, and I think it’s language reflective of George Bush. We have had a foreign policy of bluster and saber rattling and tough talk and in the meantime have made a series strategic decisions that have actually strengthened Iran.”

When Obama was polled as looking weak on this issue,he took a U-turn.
The press took it with him.

Source: Obama to nuke Iran if Iran nukes Israel
posted at 3:52 pm on December 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/11/source-obama-to-nuke-iran-if-iran-nukes-israel/

I didn’t get it when Krauthammer proposed it, I didn’t get it when Hillary proposed it, I don’t get it now.
U.S. President-elect Barack Obama’s administration will offer Israel a “nuclear umbrella” against the threat of a nuclear attack by Iran, a well-placed American source said earlier this week. The source, who is close to the new administration, said the U.S. will declare that an attack on Israel by Tehran would result in a devastating U.S. nuclear response against Iran…

Obama: On second thought, it’s not that important to capture Bin Laden
posted at 6:18 pm on January 14, 2009 by Allahpundit

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/14/obama-on-second-thought-its-not-that-important-to-capture-bin-laden/
Remember at the debate when he vowed, “We will kill Bin Laden, we will crush al-Qaeda”? He’s stressed the importance of taking out Osama on other occasions, but never quite as forcefully as that. Why, enter the quote in Google and you’ll find it immortalized in the very first hit with an especially fulsome tribute at the Daily Dish.
Anyway, change of plans:

COURIC: How important do you think it is, Mr. President-elect, to apprehend Osama bin Laden?

OBAMA: I think that we have to so weaken his infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function. My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. But if we have so tightened the noose that he’s in a cave somewhere and can’t even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America.

That’s more than nuance their,it is blatant hypocrisy that was ignored by the press and looked over by his sheep.

Obama’s even able to commit,according to liberals,war crimes and turn them into “smart power”:

Obama Begins Air-Raiding Villages & Killing Innocent Civilians

“We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”

Barack Obama
On US troops in Afghanistan
August 14, 2007

Of course now we see Obama bombing villages and civilians left and right.
Over 80 killed yesterday in a drone attack.
Apparently when a democrat is in office,air raiding villages and killing civilians is no longer a war crime,it is “smart power”.

On Iraq he has played both sides with the help of the press:

This video shows Obama and Biden’s hypocrisy on Iraq:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aryTu4ZlhZc&eurl=http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/&feature=player_embedded

Now we have this from Obama without the slightest rebuke from the press concerning how wrong and bad his judgment was on this issue:

Obama to troops: “You got the job done” in Iraq
(via Ed at Hot Air)

Thanks in great measure to your service, the situation in Iraq has improved. Violence has been reduced substantially from the horrific sectarian killing of 2006 and 2007. Al Qaeda in Iraq has been dealt a serious blow by our troops and Iraq’s Security Forces, and through our partnership with Sunni Arabs. The capacity of Iraq’s Security Forces has improved, and Iraq’s leaders have taken steps toward political accommodation. The relative peace and strong participation in January’s provincial elections sent a powerful message to the world about how far Iraqis have come in pursuing their aspirations through a peaceful political process…

This has been his MO throughout his political career.
This combined with the enormous amount of broken promises has been embraced by the press as being “pragmatic” instead of stubborn like that Cowboy Bush.
Not keeping your word and saying whatever it takes to make the people you are speaking to vote for you is considered “smart and open to change” if you listen to the liberal constituency of today.
No matter how hypocritical and wrong Obama is,he has his sheep and the press to go to bat for him.

This democrat sums this sickness up quite well I think:

(via Talk left)

Is This What It Means To Be An Obama “Progressive?”
By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:05:15 PM EST

I am an Obama supporter. Who could not be when McCain is the other choice? But pols are pols and do what they do. That’s why I rip them all when they do the wrong thing, by my lights. For example, as Obama did on FISA Capitulation. But a new breed of Democrat and “progressive” is emerging. Glenn’s Greenwald’s interview with Mort Halperin allows us to coin a new phrase – a Halperin “Progressive.” What is a “Halperin” progressive? One who decides what the right position is for progressives based on what Barack Obama does. Glenn writes:

[T]here was only one meaningful change that occurred between Halperin’s June 9 opposition [to FISA Capitulation] and his July 8 support [for FISA Capitualtion]: namely, it was in that interim — on June 20 — that Barack Obama announced that he would support the FISA bill . . .

I love the LEFT.They keep advertising how GUTLESS they are.

Disturb the Universe on June 24, 2009 at 2:51 PM

very true….

His wife has known for 5 months!

Any love children?

Disturb the Universe on June 24, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Didn’t mention any. He was stammering like you wouldn’t believe. I’d be surprised if he makes it three more days with his job. It was bad, bad, bad.

A terrorist in a slick suit.

myrenovations on June 24, 2009 at 2:41 PM
He is going to end up having a grand mal seizure the way his mind is working like a contortionist.

Any love children?

seems to be alot of them recently….but you’ll never hear of all the scandalous affairs of folks with a (D) next to their names….

cmsinaz on June 24, 2009 at 2:45 PM

Or, when you do, it’s okay because the Dems are so enlightened and all, while the Republicans are painted as hypocrites.

“On the one hand, they [the Obama administration] write a letter to us to express their respect for the Islamic Republic and for re-establishment of ties

Nuance, er Toad in Chief wrote letter to the butchers of Iran. ‘Jesus”s timing not very good.

Freedom for him, thuggary for all other.