This reminds me of what Chris Christie said at the convention about people who care more about winning re-election than about doing the job they were elected to do and about how it is our duty to tell our fellow Americans the truth.
“Barack Obama has displayed a disturbing pattern of work ethics: shirking work; claiming success when he was not entitled to do so; hiding his failures; and claiming the work of others as his own — when it was successful.”
March 2, 2011 – Obama’s ‘Where’s Waldo?’ Presidency By Ruth Marcus
“For a man who won office talking about change we can believe in, Barack Obama can be a strangely passive president. There are a startling number of occasions in which the president has been missing in action – unwilling, reluctant or late to weigh in on the issue of the moment.”
August 24, 2012 – Obama’s Work Ethic Criticized Again By Ed Lasky
“He blows off paying tribute to our veterans, avoids meetings with world leaders whom he has personal piques with (Great Britain’s Gordon Brown, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu), and ignores the work done by the Simpson-Bowles Deficit Commission, his Jobs Council, meetings with Congressional leaders — even those of his own party. The list goes on and on.”
The Washington Post incorrectly reported that this photo had been photoshopped to make Obama look stupid. As per usual, WaPo just went with whatever version of events worked best for the Democrats.
The fact is there were several photos of the event taken by students who were there. Besides that, this would have been a bear of a photoshop, what with switching the two middle figures, whose arms overlap with the others.
(Plus … nothing could make that A right. I’m sorry, but seriously? He’s in COLLEGE? My kids learned the difference between Mr. O and Mr. A in kindergarten.)
I’ve zoomed in on the image to look for signs of tampering. What I found are signs of authenticity. Zoom in yourself and compare the shadows cast by Obama’s right arm on the “I” guy and the shadow cast on Obama by the right arm of the “A” guy.
See the problem? Those shadows are very subtly gradated and exactly the sizes they should be if the picture is authentic. If the middle two figures had been digitally swapped, the shadows on the shirts would either not match the arms casting them or else would show signs of tampering, which they do not.
Romney says he was never asked about his birth certificate [1:15]
August 24, 2012: Mitt Romney started off a Michigan campaign event with, “I love being home, in this place where Ann and I were raised, where both of us were born. Ann was born in Henry Ford Hospital; I was born in Harper Hospital. No one’s ever asked to see my birth certificate; they know that this is the place that we were born and raised.”
Romney also said that he had visited all 83 counties of Michigan while growing up. It’s nice he got the number of counties in Michigan right … unlike Barack Obama, who once told a 2008 campaign crowd he’d been to all 57 states, or his running mate, Joe Biden, who recently told another campaign crowd that this was the 20th century.
A couple of hours after Romney’s speech, the Obama campaign posted on its facebook page:
Mitt Romney directly enlisted himself in the birther movement this morning: “No one has ever asked to see my birth certificate. They know this is the place I was born.” Get the President’s back. Stand with him in this election against false, divisive charges.
Messages sent from Obama’s personal Twitter account called Romney’s dig a “new low” and said, “This is personal now.”
Seriously, Barry?“False, divisive charges”? “This is personal now”? Should we cue the “ominous music” sound track now?
Mr. President, how exactly are we supposed to KNOW these charges are FALSE when you’ve been paying your personal army of lawyers to fight every effort anyone has made to verify your life history?
Obama talks about secrecy [:05]
As for DIVISIVE … puh-leeze. If the charges really were FALSE, you could have ended the whole thing years ago and then there would have been nothing left for anyone to be all divisive about, now would there? But no. To you and yours, we’re all just a bunch of dirty RAAAACISTS!
Except … it’s not racist to ask for proof of your eligibility.
In 2000, Bush’s pasty white VP nominee, Dick Cheney, had his eligibility challenged in court. Nobody sealed his records and screamed the American people had no right to ask the question. And when the court ruled, the issue became a non-issue.
In 2008, at least three cases were filed against pasty white GOP candidate John McCain, all challenging his eligibility based on his birth in the Panama Canal Zone.
According to an article at the Michigan Law Review, all of the eligibility cases against McCain were dismissed for the same technicality I’ve seen cited for the dismissal of most (or all) of the Obama eligibility cases. That is, that the plaintiffs lacked “standing.” As explained in the article,
“It is questionable whether anyone would have standing to challenge a presidential candidate’s eligibility in federal court.”
How weird is it that American voters have NO legal right to demand a presidential candidate prove he has a right to be President?
I don’t understand what “standing” really means, so your guess is as good as mine why a court agreed to rule on the Cheney challenge. Maybe it was because the issue was not his birth, but whether he was a resident of Texas or not. The plaintiffs were Texans, so maybe that gave them standing?
It seems 100% bizarre and unfair that a Texan could challenge a person’s eligibility under the 12th Amendment, but that NO American can challenge a person’s eligibility under the natural born citizen clause that’s actually in the original body of the Constitution!
Anyway …. to get back to the “false, divisive” thing. The way I see it, there has been one huge, important difference between Obama’s and McCain’s birther problems.
A bipartisan legal review and a UNANIMOUS Senate resolution both concluded that McCain was a natural-born citizen, because both his parents were U.S. citizens.This point has no bearing on the questions that exist for Obama’s eligibility.
Two Vice Presidents have fallen into this same not-so-gray area. Democrat VP Al Gore was born in Washington, D.C.; Republican VP Charles Curtis was born in the Kansas Territory.
Personally, I do not believe that President Obama was born in Kenya. But I do think there are a number of compelling questions about Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen.
Remember, McCain, Gore and Curtis were not born in actual U.S. states, but the legal consensus was that the Founders meant “natural born” to mean “born of two American citizens”, not “born on U.S. soil.”
I think this makes a ton of sense. Why would the Founders care where you took your first breath? The important thing is … were you raised with divided national loyalties?
And on that issue, there are serious issues where Barack Obama is concerned, issues that SHOULD have been raised, discussed and SETTLED LONG BEFORE HE GOT ELECTED!
The man he claims is his father was a British citizen in the Colony of Kenya. Did Barack ever have dual American-British citizenship?
There is some question that Ann, Baby Barack’s mother, being only 17 at the time of his birth, was not able to pass citizenship to her son. Is that true? Is it significant?
When Barack was a young boy, he was apparently adopted by Lolo Soetoro, his mother’s Indonesian husband and the father of Barack’s half sister. The family moved to Indonesia, where Barack was registered in school as an Indonesian citizen. Some say Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship. What does that mean for Barack’s American citizenship?
Obama says that he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. In 1981, it was not possible to enter Pakistan on a U.S. passport. How, then, did Barack get in and out of Pakistan?
These are all SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS that people like us were asking back in 2008. We deserved answers. We got nothing but scorn and ridicule.
Since then, even apart from all of the above, we’ve seen serious evidence presented by very credible witnesses that both of Obama’s birth certificates are digital forgeries, that his draft registration has been illegally altered and that the Social Security number he uses actually belongs to someone else. Forging any one of these is a serious crime, so why are we still being treated like wide-eyed, snaggle-toothed whack jobs for wanting answers?
You know that steel guy in the Obama ad? The one who talks about how Romney killed his wife? His company was going bust BEFORE Bain stepped in. And that guy? He was a member of the union that sabotaged Bain’s recovery efforts by going on strike to demand even more benefits just when the ENTIRE American steel industry was crashing in the face of competition from cheap, non-union, imported steel.
They say Obama’s resume would fit on the back of a postage stamp, but Joe Biden’s pre-Senate resume actually makes Obama’s look substantial.
There is no record at Wikipedia that Joe Biden held any job whatsoever before he somehow passed the Delaware bar and got hired on as a public defender. At least Obama scooped ice cream and had an office job for a year or so before law school, then worked for ACORN, taught Constitutional Law and served a term in the State Senate before presuming to declare he was fit and ready to occupy a seat in the United States Senate.
And don’t ask me how Biden managed to even get into law school in the first place, considering his college grades. Maybe Daddy made a call?
Wednesday, August 22, 2012: Today’s Rasmussen and Gallup “If the election were today” poll numbers have Likely Voters and Registered Voters both at Romney +2.
RASMUSSEN
(3 day rolling average 8/19 – 8/21) MOE 3.0 (1500 Likely Voters)
Obama 44% vs. Romney 46% vs. Other 5% vs. Undecided 5%
GALLUP
(3 day rolling average 8/15 – 8/21) MOE 2.0 (3050 Registered Voters)
Obama 45% vs. Romney 47% vs. Not reported (where I could access it) 8%
Limbaugh noted that, “In swing states, Romney and Ryan are gaining ground. And in some places, it’s small but it’s perceptible. … [Democrats] live in a bubble. They lie to themselves about their own popularity. They fall for it because the media creates a false impression of just how many people do support Democrats and liberals in this country. … [But] nobody’s showing up at Obama appearances. … There isn’t the enthusiasm for Obama that there was. Nowhere near it.”
As an example of how they lie to themselves, the latest AP/GfK poll (Registered Voters) has Obama up by one. But I’ve dug into the AP/GfK poll demographics more than once and demonstrated to all y’all how, when their pro-Dem skew is corrected, their numbers match Gallup’s.
Gallup has some other figures that should put HOPE in our hearts for CHANGE in November.
American Adults who answered “Quite a lot” to “How much thought have you given the election?” show Republicans enjoying a 13 point advantage over Democrats: Democrat 61% vs. Republican 74% vs. Independent 60%
RE: The 40% of all-important Independents who are still not engaged
As a former unengaged Independent, I can attest to paying zero attention to elections until after the flurry of back-to-school was over. The next weeks will be interesting!
My best advice … if you’re talking to an undecided (or Obama-ite who seems thoroughly underwhelmed), LISTEN for their key issue. Everybody’s got at least one hot button. LISTEN for that issue.
Also, pay attention to HOW they couch their concerns. Everybody has words and phrases that are particularly meaningful to them. If you don’t talk to them in their own patois, you are a lot less likely to make a lasting impression.
Respond with data on the KEY issue AND present that date in the terms that resonate for THAT person. If you can, go PRO-Romney/Ryan at least as much (if not more than) ANTI-Obama/Biden. As a former unengaged Independent, I can assure you that the “he’s a schmuck” argument did NOT make me want to vote for the other guy!
As for the sneering and insider jokes we enjoy so much amongst ourselves … AVOID THEM.
Unengaged Independents are not interested in politics as a spectator sport; they will not get the jokes and may very well be turned off to your assumption that of course they already agree with you. I know I was!
And NOTHING ticked me off more than someone going all wide-eyed with “I can’t BELIEVE you’re considering voting for THAT jerk!”
I may not have paid attention to politics, but I was very, very aware that for hundreds of years, good people had suffered, bled and died to win and keep my right to vote. The responsibility of their sacrifices, their blood, weighed heavily on me.
From the moment I turned 18, I prepared to vote with all the seriousness I gave to choosing my spouse. Entering the voting booth was a sacred event, as much as receiving Holy Eucharist.
I don’t imagine I am alone in this. When you’re talking to undecided voters, remember and respect this.
A group of former intelligence and Special Forces operatives recently joined forces to speak out about how the Obama White House has been leaking sensitive intelligence and taking credit for what these operatives do on a daily basis.
Enter the slime merchants from the Democrat Media Complex.
In particular, meet Eric Boehlert, a Senior Fellow at Media Matters for America, who tweeted that the members of the group are “gutless” because they do not disclose their funding sources or admit they are a “GOP, anti-Obama campaign.”
This is laughable since Boehlert and his peeps at Media Matters ALSO do not disclose their funding sources or admit they are a DNC, anti-GOP campaign.
Plus, Boehlert has proven personally what a gutless wonder he is! He tweets snipes at Breitbart’s Dana Loesch, but keeps her blocked from his account and refuses her invitations to debate her on her show.
He is such a pussy, he won’t confront a female political opponent in a war of WORDS, yet he has the temerity to call former US Intelligence and Special Forces operatives, who literally get up close and personal with people who are trying to KILL Americans “gutless”??!!