Barack Obama Is A Liar

Yeah man. Those old deacons would start leading and everyone would follow in that exact same tune. I think that is actually how the slaves would do it.

Great words

A charge to keep I have,
A God to glorify,
A never-dying soul to save,
And fit it for the sky.

To serve the present age,
My calling to fulfill:
Oh, may it all my pow’rs engage
To do my Master’s will!

 

We're Marching Up To Zion!!!

[video=youtube;i4OSy7Z9ayQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4OSy7Z9ayQ[/video]

 

I agree that the nuclear threat is real but, I do not think voting in Red over Blue or Blue over Red is going to diminish that threat.

Since WWII the Soviets/Russians have been losing ground to NATO. As Russia moves out (demilitarizes), NATO moves in and builds bases. MSNBC had a historian/expert in Russia on at the beginning of the Crimea issue (prior to de facto annexation) saying just that. As soon as things heated up the Mainstream media went silent with regard to any historical context or factual reporting.

The reason for this is because it was NATO that was at least in part, if not mostly responsible for the crisis. In 2002 Bush unilaterally withdrew from the Anti Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty. The point behind the ABM treaty was so that some buckaroo would not get the idea that nuclear war was winnable thinking ... We can shoot first and when they shoot back we will shoot them down.

Putin's response was "This is a mistake"

Not only does Bush pull out of the ABM treaty, in 2007 he makes plans to put ABM's on Russia's border in Poland and Czechoslovakia.

This action destabilizes nuclear detente and forced Russia to take counter measures - ramping up the nuclear arms race. There are a number of options Russia could take.

1) more subs
2) Nukes in space - This options was mentioned/threatened by Russia. It takes roughly 30 min for a Russian nuke to make the trip. The idea of having a nuke in space above my head 30 seconds away does not make me sleep better at night.

Thank goodness it did no come to this.

3) Short and Intermediate range nukes (nuclear cruise missiles) - This was the option Russia chose in violation the short and intermediate range treaty.

Prior to a launch Russia would just take out the ABM's with nuclear cruise missiles.

We then had the Obama-Clown on TV whining "Russia is violating the Short and Intermediate range treaty". For the rest of the week the media had old clips of Reagan signing treaties. No mention of .. "By the way - we were the one that forced Russia to do this by withdrawing from the ABM treaty and putting ABM's on Russia's border"

Can you imagine if Russia started putting ABM's on US borders ? The Pentagon and State Department would go crazy.


The Naval Port in Crimea has been a Russian strategic interest for 400 years. NATO knew that admitting Ukraine (or even accepting an application) was crossing a red line. There is no way Russia was going to allow NATO anywhere near Crimea, Yet .. they poked the Bear anyway.

What was a complete joke was the Leaders of NATO nations wandering around feigning ignorance after the fact. What a bunch of disingenuous clowns.

Again no context from mainstream media - Left, Right or Center.

I do not think there was any real threat of the US giving arms to Ukraine, the consequences of such an action would be too great. That was just tough talk for the raging masses.

I think the US may have secretly invited Russia into Syria. US ( along with Allies Saud, Turkey and others) were arming Extremist Islamic Jihadists to fight a proxy war against Syria.

The objective was never to topple Assad. The objective was to destabilize the region to block a Pipeline from going through to the "new silk road" India/China.

The rebels were a little too successful and took over most of Syria in short order ( Strict Sharia as the law of the land was the call to Jihad). The Sunni Wahhabi (Saudi Inspired version which they export around the world) inspired strict sharia nut jobs then decided to form their own Islamic State (IS) - ISIS and move in to Iraq.

The big Benghazi elephant in the room is arms were going from Libya to Al Qaeda/Al Nusra and other of the same Wahhabi extremist ilk in Syria. It was arming of these nut jobs (with sophisticated technology like stinger missiles) that led to the rise of ISIS

Things got out of hand. Russia came in and calmed things down.

 

If Obama really believes that Hillary Clinton is the most qualified person to have ever run for President in America's history, then Obama isn't a liar if he believes that.

But if Obama really believes that, then Obama is the most stupid person who ever occupied the White House. Just not stupid but as dumb as a piece of green amphibious (*)(*)(*)(*).

Most qualified post WW ll person to have run for President would have to be G.H. Bush (41) when you look at his military, government service and political career.

Dwight D. Eisenhower had no political experience but his military career, 38 years of service made him more than qualified to be President.

Obama was the least qualified person to run for President in the past sixty years and his lack of accomplishments shows it.

 

On that assumption he might be eligable for a role in the military or defense or homeland security but America is a whole lot more than the war on terror.

 

It appears to me that it is not a matter of Red vs Blue as much as it is that one candidate, Hillary Clinton, has clearly expressed an open hostility to Putin, going even so far as to call him Hitler. Those are fighting words. Donald Trump, despite his very glaring flaws, has at least expressed a desire to work with Putin. Hillary appears to be of the view that that is not possible. Therefore I conclude that the risks of nuclear war are greater under a Clinton presidency.

Let's be clear here and put things in the proper context. After WWII both Russia, essentially then the Soviet Union, and the US were trying to crush one another. Of this, there is no doubt. While it is true that the US had an advantage in that it surrounded the Soviets with bases, that advantage was countered by Russian missile technology. Therefore there was a strategic parity between the two opponents which resulted in the effectiveness of the doctrine of mutually assured destruction. However, the problem at the present is that the US has overcome that parity and now has the upper hand. The result is that some, such as Ariel Cohen et al, would like to use the current advantage that the US has to bring Russia to its knees. However, as I have said over and over again, that while it is true the US is in a superior position, the Russians have astutely held on to the trump card of a nuclear arsenal that is capable of destroying the US. Make no mistake, if the Russians feel that they have been pushed to far into a corner, they will play that trump card. There defense strategy openly states such. Because Hillary Clinton subscribes to the philosophy of Ariel Cohen, the risk of nuclear war with Russia is a real possibility under a Clinton administration.

There are too many problems with implementing a space based nuclear weapon system. For one thing its very vulnerable to attack which means that you would have to deploy a sizeable array of satellite defense to defend it. Far to expensive to put into place and maintain. That's something that neither side is going to be doing in the near future.

I agree with you on the point that it was obvious that Russia had to defend its base in Crimea. It is ridiculous to think otherwise.

I think that the US giving lethal support to Ukraine will become a reality in a Clinton administration. I think that proponents of this point of view feel that the US needs to take much stronger action than what Obama was comfortable with. That is one reason why I think that Farkas resigned. They probably feel that they can wear Russia down by keeping it engaged in a protracted, drawn out armed conflict in Ukraine that will force it to drain its resources, while simultaneously applying crippling economic sanctions. Maybe they think that they can impose such hardship on Russia that the Russian people will vote Putin out of office in 2018, and then they will be in a position to impose humiliating conditions on his successor. However, it is a dangerous option because as you have indicated, the conflict could spiral out of control, and lead to a direct military confrontation between the two powers.

I disagree with you in the strongest terms on this point. The US indeed wanted to topple Assad because it would seriously cripple Iran. Assad was no threat to the US. However, toppling Iran's only ally in the Middle East would have been a significant strategic victory for the US. Not only that, but it is likely that powerful people in the US such as Dick Cheney conspired with the Israelis to topple Assad because they discovered that the Golan Heights is actually rich in energy resources and water. That is an interesting topic and much can be said on the subject. But I will just state it and leave it at that.

Well there is no doubt that things got quite a bit out of hand with regards to the rise of ISIS. It actually begs the question, at least in my mind, were there some in power in the US that let this take place in order to bait the US into re-engaging in the Middle East?

- - - Updated - - -

I have said repeatedly in this thread that Obama knows well that the President of the United States has to choose his words carefully. Therefore we can conclude that those words were carefully chosen for maximum political effect. Therefore it is deceit, and he should be called out on it.

 

I think that the President's ability to influence domestic affairs is constricted by Congress and his political opponents. However, he has quite a bit of influence with regards to US foreign policy. The US is at a very critical juncture in history with regards to foreign affairs. Therefore I conclude that Wesley Clark would be well suited for the job. He has his warts, but he is someone I can live with. He is by far superior to Clinton or Trump in this regard.

 

obama lives in Superman's Bizarro World.

 

I was brought up in the Baptist church. We used to sing this before a baptism.

Take Me To The Water

None but the righteous shall see God. Of this, there is no doubt!!! All glories to the Lord of the Universe, in Sanskrit, Sri Jagannath!!!

[video=youtube;PzMz3Sh7yjU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzMz3Sh7yjU[/video]

 

I'm going to get this one in one more time. When I was a boy, there was this man named Sammy Douglas who could play organ like this. When I heard him play for the first time, I worked real hard to learn to play like that. By the time I was more or less in the eight grade, I had gotten it down, and I actually had a couple of choirs I used to play for. My father was so proud of me! He used to be a jazz pianist when he was in college and had taught me some tunes. But he wasn't into that type of thing anymore and used to spend quite a bit of time in church related activities. He would just smile and nod his head to the beat when I would play. You could tell he was so happy! I really miss my father!!! He was a great guy!

[video=youtube;vXfwJOIZoWY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXfwJOIZoWY[/video]

 

You have to remember, Donald Trump has condemned political correctness and is waging a war against political correctness. (cultural-marxism) Trump made it clear after he announced his candidacy that political correctness is destroying America and he's not going to be politically correct or run a PC campaign.

 

Its beginning to become clearer to me. Donald Trump is not going to win. They are going to destroy his character beyond any recognition. He may even have to step down from the nomination before the election. The powers that be have other plans for the US military. Clinton is suitable for their purposes. Trump will be in the way. Look for an all out media blitz against Trump. I guarantee it.

 

Donald Trump is America's last chance.

 

Colin Powell, completely disqualified himself when he allowed the deranged lunatic in chief George W. Bush, to send him to Congress to give a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation falsifying go-to-war evidence about mobile chemical weapons platforms in Iraq, producing botulinum toxin, sarin, mustard and anthrax cocktails just waiting to be unleashed on the American population in "terror attack" that every Neocon on the planet knew would never happen.

This proved that PowerPoint can be used to make careers as well as destroy them. I've used them quite effectively around the world in corporate conference rooms, but never to the utter destruction of my professional career and professional reputation as Powell did during the run-up to the illegal invasion of Iraq.

Yes, I would get behind General Wesley Clark in a heart beat. Hell yeah! In fact, I will be sending him a personal letter saying as much and I will offer him my full financial backing. I would personally be honored to either support or strategize his campaign.

Given the complete and utter destruction of the Republican Party by Donald Tramp and the Socialist agenda of the Democratic Party, I will strongly urge General Wesley Clark to formulate a preservation and renewal agenda for the country that is fundamental based upon the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.

I will urge him to mandate as part of the Preservation & Renewal Platform a balanced budget amendment as a promise to the American People and his first act as President of the United States. The nation must get its financial house in order as a matter of first protocol.

This country is now politically unbalanced, unstable and highly volatile. I will urge General Wesley Clark to formulate leadership language that drives the nation to the center of problem solving resolutions and to calculate solutions that pays no homage to any political extreme or any one political agenda outside of that which involves mandates for common sense approaches to solving strategic problems.

I am a Black Man. General Wesley Clark is a White Man. I would go to war with General Wesley Clark, because regardless of his ethnic heritage he's a man that I can relate to because he has the best interest of the entire country at heart and he's not weighted down with small minded constraints and selfish personal agendas. He's intelligent, works from a baseline of common sense, seeks consensus where appropriate but willing to take individual action as a leader when necessary and when appropriate for the country as a whole. I've got nothing but good things to say about General Wesley Clark and I think now is the right time to begin formulating an Independent drive for the White House in 2020.

Unfortunately, both political party nomination mechanisms are rigged to the teeth against anyone who does not fit their extremist agenda focus. This is what has prevented General Wesley Clark from succeeding in the past. But, given the Globalist agenda of the left wing and its bent for "deleting" the Constitution and given the Whack Nut Neocon agenda for blowing up every damn thing in sight in the Middle East and its penchant for creating "terrorists" on ever street corner of the world, I think now is the time for America to step away from Party Politics and move towards the Middle of Common Sense. Right smack in the heart of it.

I see Wesley Clark, as one individual who actually has the credibility to make that happen - if the common sense core of America can get behind him. The question is: Is there enough core common sense in America to push a General Wesley Clark over the top as the next fully Independent President of the United States of America.

I am very serious about this. He would be perfect for America right now. Absolute, stunningly perfect. America Needs General Wesley Clark right now. Desperately. I would kill to get him into office. Yes, we are in that much trouble. I would literally kill to make him President. We NEED him.

Ok, maybe not kill. But, I would kick some serious azz to get him into office.

- - - Updated - - -

Delusional.

 

Well he's gonna lose so you should leave. But you won't. LOL

 

Gen. Powell was a "yes man." The kind of a general Obama demands.

Gen. Wesley Clark is a loose cannon and almost started WW lll. Even Clark's boss, President Bill Clinton had to fire him.

Wesley Clark is a loon and a dangerous man.

No President should allow Wesley Clark near the White House.

- - - Updated - - -

I should "leave" ? What in Hell are you talking about ?

 

I don't know if I would go so far as to say that. But at least he would provide a much needed break from our current heavily neocon influenced foreign policy.

 

LOL @ maybe not kill part.

Although you are right that Powell let himself be used for that nefarious task of appearing before the UN, unless it can be demonstrated that he actually knew the charges were false, I'm wiling to cut him some slack. He's a pretty decent guy, real smart, and is someone that I don't think would lead us into war unnecessarily.

Yeah, I would really like to see Clark in there now. I don't want to wait another four years. It may be too late by then. The thing is this, it appears that all of that regime change that has been going on in the Middle East had been pre-planned. I would even speculate that someone in the military establishment knew that ISIS was forming and may have purposefully downplayed the threat to get the US back into the Middle East. It is a well known fact that Saudi Arabia was highly pissed when we refused to get rid of Assad. Wesley Clark even predicted that if we left Iraq then the Saudis would use Al-Qaeda to fight the Shia there. They probably paid off the generals in the Iraqi army to abandon their posts so that the soldiers would be leaderless and therefore easily subdued by ISIS. How we can tolerate that damn nonsense is mind boggling. Any rate, Wesley Clark appears to have the necessary experience and analytical skills to properly lead the US at this critical moment. The electoral college should just put him in there and get rid of the two clowns that are currently running.

 

Yeah, but still he was no fool. My understanding is that he debated Rumsfeld forcefully against intervention in Iraq. However he lost out, and as you indicate, like a good soldier, he played the part that he was asked.

Clark did not almost start WWIII.

 

If that can proved conclusively that's explosive. What I read there was high speculative. Interesting tho.

 

That's all quite true, but the *******s don't care, that's why they are *******s!

The dims tend to cater to liars and crooks, Hillary and Barry are the proof!

 

He has told us how he'll do it. You're mistaking him with Mrs. Bill Clinton, the woman who wouldn't be
where she is if her husband hadn't become president. She the one who has provided nothing
whatsoever about how she's going to fix anything. Not that she intends to do anything.

Here's his reply to the most important questions.

Trump is going to cut personal income taxes. History shows that it always improves the economy.
Raising taxes harms the economy.

Trump is going to build a wall and start sending the illegals back. Just like any other nation would
do.

Trump will appoint Constitutionalist to the Supreme Court instead of left winged extremists with
an agenda.

 

Trump wants to cut taxes on the wealthy which is a proven economic disaster. Thanks, try again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfVENwfeGHw And by the way, illegal immigration is way way down since Obama.

What extremist agenda?

It's too bad you couldn't answer my question.

 

You can't provide a single shred of evidence that it's a proven economic disater. History shows us
that it's worked every single time it's been done.

I can't wait to see your evidence, which you don't have.

No it hasn't. It's gone up.

http://cis.org/2.5-Million-Join-Illegal-Population-under-Obama

Virtually the same failed extremist agenda the current president has. More government, less
liberty and extremist supreme court justices.

Too bad you couldn't understand the clear answer.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/kansass-failed-experiment/389874/