“Obama Bin Laden’s” gun walking scheme …. Bob Schieffer got it right ?

During the last presidential debate, moderator Bob Schieffer flubbed when he mixed up Obama’s and Bin Laden’s names referring to the deceased terrorist as “Obama Bin Laden”.

Romney is now receiving intelligence updates. Both he and Obama during the debate danced around the true identities of the elements in Syrian opposition forces that Romney says deserve our support and to whom Obama has already supplied weapons through secret CIA operations.

Both claim we must be careful as to whom we arm, but in fact we are arming Al Qaeda, and it’s going to literally blow up in our faces. Jordanian authorities broke up an Al Qaeda plot to attack our embassy there using weapons smuggled in from Syria that were supplied to the opposition forces in that country.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/10/22/syrian-anti-assad-activists-say-al-qaeda-getting-weapons-to-hijack-revolution/1650291/

In Libya we did the same thing. Al Qaeda linked terrorist cells were formerly our sworn enemies but magically transformed by the administration into “freedom fighters” to aid in the overthrow of Qaddafi.

And lest anyone believe that Libya was such a great success in establishing Democracy there consider the credible published reports that say the human rights violations and atrocities taking place are far worse than when Qaddafi’s tyranny reigned.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/10/23/libya-and-the-human-rights-double-standard/

Oh well …. Just a few more irritating “bumps in the road” on the way to an “optimal” result.

Now we’re trying the same stagecraft in Syria. But this time the stakes are much, much higher.

This “gun walking” scheme on the part of the Obama Administration and Obama will ultimately make the “fast and furious” debacle look paltry and puny in comparison. It is the Democratic Administration's equivalent of “Contragate”, but this time we’re serving the political interests of Iran, who also tacitly support the so called “freedom fighters” in Syria while maintining their backing of the Syrian regime.

In the meantime Israel waits and its apprehension grows.

Obama ....we've come too far to turn back now ... But who needs to turn back when Romney can fix what's wrong.

The Obama campaign sensing that it's previous negative, personal attack advertising isn't resonating very well with voters on October 6th unveiled its new campaign theme about the economy with the "we've come too far to turn back now" missive.

My car stopped working the other day. All in all, even though I bought it used, it's a pretty good car and until now for just about the past 50,000 miles has gotten me where I wanted to be when I wanted to be there.

But the "service engine soon" light had been on for some time. Far, far longer than I really care to admit. I suppose I had my reasons for ignoring the warning for so long but in hindsight none of them were valid - I should have taken it to the garage.

So even though I'd like to go somewhere "forward"' I can't - at least not until the car is fixed.

Fortunately for me it finally stopped running just before the warranty was up.

The guys in the garage said the problem was a "piece of crap" alternator. 

They replaced the defective part with what they said was the best in the industry - solid, trustworthy and dependable - and promised that I wouldn't have anymore problems. 

After all, they said, it's still a pretty good car and got a lot of life in it. I've done business with those guys before and know that I can trust them.

My car, now repaired, is running fine once more. The "service engine soon" light's out too.

I don't think I'll ever ignore it again !

Obama's offended ? .... Hell, what about the rest of us !

In  last night's Presidential debate, Obama said that he found it "offensive" that anyone would suggest (dare) that either he or anyone on his team had lied about the Benghazi attack that left 4 Americans dead, "...That's not what we do. That's not what I do as President, that's not what I do as Commander in Chief."

Oh really ... Indignation coming from a proven liar ?

Well, Mr. President here's what I find offensive - you made a promise to govern all of us together, to start anew by throwing off the influence of paid lobbyists, to create a transparent government, and to bring us together to resolve our differences.

It's not just your critics who say you failed, you graded yourself a failure.

And when America desperately needed the leader you promised to be you failed in achieving anything close to the standards you yourself set. You drove a wedge deeper to divide us. You delivered to us instead a partisan ideologue - not a healer, not a reformer, not someone truly interested in the welfare of ALL Americans, but a guy who likes to make speeches filled will hollow promises.

What we got was Barack the perpetual fund raising campaigner, the partygoer, the golfer, the guy always on a family vacation, and the guy with a zillion "air miles" to and from God only knows where. 

Despite your protestations that "you work hard" what we do know is that you're not in Washington hard at work doing our business.

Your day and calendar might be occupied but you don't know what "hard work" is.

The rest of us do - our daily lives are harder, more difficult, filled with more stress and anxiety and worse now because of your failed, thoughtless policies and politics, and your overall ineptitude and incompetence as a leader.

When the rest of America has trouble putting 2 dimes together, you're living the high life at our expense on the public dime - only it's not pocket change you're diverting from our Treasury - your parties, your golfing, your family vacations, your travel, your entourage, your travel and accommodations, and your security  - all the personal perquisites you claim for yourself cost the rest of us 1.2 billion dollars a year !

Are you still tone deaf ? An astounding 1.2 billion a year for your larks !

All the while 23 million of the rest of us can't find good work and 47 million Americans depend upon food stamps to put food on the family table.

If I could have had any say whether that 1.2 billion was spent on coddling your ass, or having America's starving children go to bed with a full belly and warm roof over their heads - it'd be no contest.

No Obama ..... What's truly, truly offensive to me is  .... You !!!

Hillary Clinton responsible for Benghazi .... Uh huh !

Security failures in the Benghazi terrorist attack tragically left US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens and 3 others dead. Tonight, Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, said she accepts personal responsibility for the outcome of the consulate assault.

Horse shit !

What exactly does she "accepts personal responsibility" actually mean? She'll tender her resignation ? Make personal restitution to the families ? Appear before Congress, under oath, and tell the truth about the entire sorry mess about her involvement and of others; especially those now squirming in the White House over the affair ?

Do all those things and I'm a believer .... Yeah, I'll hold my breath.

Travel back to the Waco, Texas siege in 1993 when then Attorney General, Janet Reno also "accepted personal responsibility" for some 10 deaths resulting from an ill-advised, overzealous government use of lethal force. Unbelievably she avoided any political consequence to her career. Since then a string of parroting politicians have performed the masterful and magical incantation "I accept responsibility" for their fuck ups and successfully dodged consequence, too. Hillary Clinton plans to be the latest.

God, how Liberal America loves contrition - sincere and otherwise.

Politicians may be many despicable things but they are quick learners; especially when it comes to their own political survival.

And let's not forget, Hillary is first and foremost a "progressive, liberal" politician - not a career, non-partisan diplomat.

What beats in her heart and toils in her brain is naked ambition and self-interest !

This is nothing more than cold calculation by Clinton and the Obama administration timed just before the 2nd Presidential debate in the belief that the public can focus on only one thing at a time and their hopes an accommodating liberal press will let the debate command the stage and let everything else be swept away from public focus and scrutiny.

Benghazi and a failed worldwide Obama foreign policy - exit stage left !

"Coverups are initiated to protect someone at the top; not protect someone at the bottom. ca " - K.T. MacFarlan, national security expert

Joe Biden for President ! .....

No doubt this morning many progressive Democrats are thinking about last night's vice-presidential debate along those lines - they're wondering is it really too late to swap out Obama as the presidential candidate with Biden in his place?

Biden, having won the debate, in a perverse way though has actually hurt Obama's re-election prospects.

The job last night for the vice-presidential contenders was to bolster their respective bosses'  likelihood of becoming the next president. Not to eclipse them.

Ryan got by and that's about it - neither helping and importantly for Romney not hurting him.

But the more left wing Democrats gloat over Biden "having knocked it out of the park" and having "buried Ryan" only serves to remind voters of the stark contrast of Obama's pitiful performance in the first debate - leaving even the most casually informed among them to come to the realization that Joe "the gaffe clown" might actually be a better candidate than Obama.

And Romney, for the time being, shines on.

Talk about a painful irony for liberal Democrats !

Lingering Libyan Questions …. Ambassador Stevens’ murder in Benghazi

"You didn't elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear. You elected me to tell you the truth."-- President Obama at the Democratic National Convention, Sept. 6

Yeah, when do we get the truth … after the election?

“Cover-ups are initiated to protect someone at the top not someone at the bottom. (ca)” – K.T. MacFarland, national security expert, comparing the Watergate cover-up to the Obama Administration.

Romney, Finally ! …… Obama, Loser !

In last night’s Presidential debate, Mitt Romney triumphed  …. over the liberal press !

For the first time in this race the American electorate got to see and hear the GOP candidate directly and unfiltered on the issues in real time exchanges with Obama without all of the carping, bashing, innuendo, distortions and outright lies of the liberal press and Obama campaign. And the verdict? A resounding debate victory for Romney. Even the Democrats said so!

Polling of undecided voters declared Romney indeed was viable as a candidate, Presidential in bearing and his ‘solutions” deserving of another “look”.

Democrats and liberal press meanwhile looked on stunned and in disarray during and after the debate over Obama’s poor performance.   

Immediately, Obama supporters and pundits began attacking their own candidate (CNBC's Chris Matthews was apoplectic in his rebuke of Obama) and flailing about for explanations no matter how absurd: the difference in altitude between Washington DC and Denver; Obama was distracted by his Anniversary, the insular Beltway Bubble; the incumbent debate curse; ad nauseum until finally there was remaining only grudging consensus on one truly inescapable conclusion for every viewer - Obama was not in command of the facts, and he was unprepared for this debate.

But as his detractors have said all along Obama was unprepared for his “role” as President fully five years ago.

If it were not for all of the sheltered safe harbor, mis-direction and blocking interference run by the liberal press throughout the Obama administration and his 2008, and 2012 campaigns, Obama’s incompetence and failures as a leader would have been more universally understood and acknowledged long before last night.

Last night by virtue of their absence on the stage supporting Obama’s elbow clearly emphasized just how much the liberal press have “spoken” for Obama throughout. Obama having to think on his own during the debate left Bill Maher quipping “Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter!”.

And it’s not as though there hasn’t been enough in print to illustrate Obama’s character flaws by those close to him:  assertions that Obama’s petulance means we’re “truly home alone” with no adult in charge of the administration;  that Obama prefers to remain aloof and to one side side  of the room while disparaging everyone else; that others in his administration rely on Pelosi and Reid for direction; that he believes everyone else is his intellectual inferior and to disagree with Obama only reveals your own bigotry. Hardly the personal traits that foster collaboration and cooperation with others.

Washington is at an impasse. Partisanship has trumped compromise. And Obama, with his partisan hacks, Pelosi and Reid, shoulders the largest part of the blame.

Disingenuously Obama repeated again last night that he doesn’t care where a good idea comes from (Republicans) but as he’s so often demonstrated a “good” idea is only the one that advances Obama and his agenda. In contrast Romney who said he would work with both parties to get “the job done” was all the more convincing because he has a successful record of having actually done it.

As the candidates themselves summarized in their last 3 minutes the hallmarks for their approaches for the next 4 years differed hugely and can be distilled to: Romney, Collaboration and Cooperation … Obama, more Divisiveness and Polarization.

Obama promises more in the future of the same of the last 4 years resulting in the same outcomes – failure for America.

It’s time to hand Obama his walking papers and put Romney to work!

The Saudi Gasoline Fix is In …. How Much You Wanna Bet?

While gasoline prices remain high and under pressure elsewhere in the world, prices here have been stable ($3.80 a gallon down from May 2012)– and – surprise - just in time for the US elections! At least so they won’t be a negative factor for the Obama Campaign barring a shooting war between Israel and Iran.

Wait you say, “That would mean the Saudi’s are interfering with our election process!” No, it means they were invited to by the Obama Campaign and pressured perhaps by the Obama Administration. (in the last 4 years Saudi Arabia purchased over 52 billion dollars of advanced weapons systems from the US – much of it opposed by Israel as a threat to its own national security interest http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/01/09/steeplechase.html )

Legendary investor Jim Rogers in an interview and reported in July 2012 thinks the Saudis want to see Obama re-elected.

Is it at all plausible that the Obama administration accustomed to using and well criticized for hard ball Chicago style election tactics would actually violate US law and pressure the Saudi’s to open up the supply spigot for oil in an effort to drive down gasoline prices at the pump for political purposes?  Or, might they just bend the law up to the point of breaking it, with well placed official assurances that Saudi interests would be better served with Obama occupying the White House for another 4 years - rather than say… oh, I don’t know…. risk an Israeli loving Romney administration who’s also on public record for supporting energy independence for the US from Middle Eastern oil by fully developing US oil, natural gas and coal?