CIA had Bin Laden residence under surveillance for months

This excerpt from the NY Times article about the CIA and information that is being gleaned from the data the SEALS recovered is giving total credence that Obama kept dithering when they knew where Obama was located. We were not expecting to see this first paragraph below from the NY Times:

The C.I.A. had Bin Laden’s compound under surveillance for months before American commandos killed him in an assault on Monday, watching and photographing residents and visitors from a rented house nearby, according to several officials briefed on the operation.
The documents taken at the Abbottabad compound, according to American officials, show that Bin Laden was in touch regularly with the terror network he created. With his whereabouts and activities a mystery in recent years, many intelligence analysts and terrorism experts had concluded that he had been relegated to an inspirational figure with little role in current and future Qaeda operations.
Excerpt: Read More at the New York Times

Now even the Times is saying the CIA had Bin Laden under surveillance for months, but yet we hear the statements that Pakistan didn't say a peep about him to the United States. We find that hard to believe just like we find hard to believe that the CIA was not an active participate in this whole mission since our resources in Pakistan had him under surveillance.
This Obama White House will do anything to make Obama look good but in the end he dithered for months. For once the NY Times is putting the information out there for all to see. What other news organization is going to pick up the fact that the CIA knew where he was at but Obama would not approve any type of raid for months?
Is the real reason Obama fired McChrystal is because McChrystal wanted to go after Obama as soon as the CIA confirmed he was there? Beginning to make sense because little else has made any sense. What took Obama so long that CIA Director Panetta had to issue the order? Obama said he didn't want to do an air raid as they couldn't identify if it was Bin Laden, but Obama had him buried at sea in less than 24 hours and talks about how DNA was confirmed right away when anyone with an ounce of brains has googled how long it takes to get a 99% match. Is Obama ever going to tell the truth or are we going to have to listen to 21 more months of lies and spin?

Obama Displays a Mean Streak as he goes into Campaign Mode

We are seeing more articles about the mean streak of Obama but we only have to look back to his verbally attacking the Supreme Court Justices at his State of the Union speech on January 27, 2010, to understand that Obama is not Mr. Nice Guy. If a President will attack the Justices of the Supreme Court sitting in the front row, it is not shocking that Obama attacked Paul Ryan sitting in the front row of his speech on Wednesday night about the budget followed by his attack at a fundraiser later in the week.  What other President has been so nasty to someone he invited to hear his speech? 

Unfortunately, we agree with Mark Tapscott's last paragraph of his column which appeared at the Washington Examiner this morning, Mean streak: Obama is not as nice as he looks:

Odds are we will see more of this meaner side of the Obama persona in the months ahead because, as columnist and former GOP presidential aide Pete Wehner notes, "now that he finds himself intellectually outmatched by Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, and in a precarious situation when it comes to his re-election, Obama is dropping his past civility sermons down the memory hole. Decency and respect for others has suddenly become passe. Talking about our disagreements without being disagreeable has been overtaken by events. Not impugning the character of the opposition is fine as long as it's convenient, but it's to be ignored whenever necessary." In other words, we're now seeing the real Obama in what promises to be an ugly campaign.

We can see Obama along with the Obama media turning this into one nasty Presidential campaign. We remember how Obama treated Dr. Coburn and Senate McCain after he was elected when they extended their friendship to him with his words "I Won" which spoke volumes about the low class of this man who had been sworn in as President. Dr. Coburn went out of his way to help Obama learn the ropes of the Senate after he was elected, but obviously that didn't make any difference to Obama.

We didn't understand the 'nice guy' tag to Obama to begin with because what 'nice guy' could sit in Rev Wright's anti-white church for years and be a 'nice guy?' Rev Wright's sermons were used to inflame blacks against whites in sermon after sermon that Obama said he didn't hear but he went to Church all the time. That should have been a clue in the general election campaign that Obama and the truth are not friends. How many people did Obama end throwing under the bus during the election? Every time you turned around he was disavowing someone else. The man has 'zero' core values except he knows he wants to be king or a dictator not a President who answers to the American people.

Now his latest target is Cong Paul Ryan who took a machete to the Obama budget while Obama in his do-over speech on the budget Wednesday night brought first grader scissors to the budget but he brought a mean streak he used to attack Ryan in his bitter speech that most of the media is having trouble spinning.  With the true mean-spirited Obama coming out this week, is the Obama media going to continue to spin or are they finally going to tell the truth that deep down Obama is not a nice guy?  The Obama media has seen it up close and personal but only a few like Jake Tapper and Chip Reid have been willing to report up until now. They media has not done a good job spinning the Paul Ryan attacks so what are they going to do when he keeps attacking Republican candidates running for President with lies and untruths during the campaign? We don't think Obama when backed in a corner knows any other way except to attack. In his mind, he cannot to be shown up by anyone including his wife from all accounts.,

The review of Obama speech he delivered on the April 13th, is blistering in an editorial from The Wall Street Journal, The Presidential Divider Obama's toxic speech and even worse plan for deficits and debt starting out with the first paragraph:

Did someone move the 2012 election to June 1? We ask because President Obama's extraordinary response to Paul Ryan's budget yesterday—with its blistering partisanship and multiple distortions—was the kind Presidents usually outsource to some junior lieutenant. Mr. Obama's fundamentally political document would have been unusual even for a Vice President in the fervor of a campaign.

This morning when you read Mark Tapscott's column you are left with the thought that this President doesn't act Presidential but is now acting like a spoiled brat who wants to be a king or dictator where no one dares to question what he says or what he submits to Congress:

Mean streak: Obama is not as nice as he looksBy: Mark Tapscott, Examiner Editorial
04/16/11 8:05 PM

Liberal Democrats were often befuddled by President Reagan's "Teflon presidency."

By their lights, Reagan could commit the most heinous acts, but their criticisms were usually shrugged off by the American people, who judged him a "nice guy" who deserved the benefit of the doubt. President Obama has enjoyed something similar during his first 2 1/2 years in office. Even as public opposition mounted to his policies -- Obamacare, the failed economic stimulus program, cap and trade, skyrocketing government deficits -- Obama retained a reserve of public good will reflected in consistently strong personal favorability ratings. People who didn't like his policies generally still saw Obama as a likeable guy, somebody they would enjoy having over for dinner with the family.

But that may be changing. Recall that Obama invited House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin to George Washington University to hear his Wednesday address on the federal government's dire fiscal situation. The speech was advertised by the White House as a major address in which the president would join the serious conversation initiated two weeks ago by Ryan in his detailed proposal for cutting spending. What Obama instead delivered, with Ryan sitting in the front row, was, in the Wall Street Journal's unsparing description, a "poison pen" speech dripping with mean-spirited partisanship, gross misrepresentations of fact, and sophistry of the lowest sort concerning Republicans' alleged desire to hurt old people, the poor and mentally challenged children. It was the sort of harangue one would expect from a rabidly devoted partisan hack, with no relation whatever to the thoughtful appeals to reason and common values that historically have characterized presidential leadership in this country.

Obama then spent Thursday evening regaling an audience of Democratic donors with what he thought were off-the-record insider jabs about his recent budget negotiations with House Republicans, including this cheap shot at Ryan: "When Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure he's just being America's accountant, that he's being responsible, I mean this is the same guy that voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for. So it's not on the level." The reality is that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars under President Bush were regularly funded by Congress, claiming tax cuts must be "paid for" is a hoary piece of Democratic class-warfare demagoguery, and the prescription drug plan Ryan supported cost half as much as the Democratic alternative then on the table. Such fact-free commentary is to be expected from blind partisans, but not the president of the United States.

(snip)

Read more from Mark Tapscott at the Washington Examiner

The spin from the White House after Obama was caught on an open microphone attacking Paul Ryan for not being sincere is mind boggling as we learn from the Washington Examiner's, Byron York:

White House: When Obama said Paul Ryan is 'not on the level,' he meant Ryan is 'absolutely sincere'

In his caught-by-an-open-microphone remarks to a private fundraiser in Chicago Thursday night, President Obama questioned the sincerity of House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan's effort to reduce the federal deficit. Ryan's approach, Obama told Democratic donors, is "not on the level."

"When Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure, you know, he's just being America's accountant…," Obama said, "this is the same guy that voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for. So it's not on the level. And we've got to keep on, you know, keep on shining a light on that."

Read more at the Washington Examiner

Would someone like to explain how the new White House press secretary, Jay Carney, could spin those remarks into Ryan is "absolutely sincere" when questioned by a reporter on Air Force One about Obama's remarks. We have heard spin but Jay Carney's spin is one of the biggest whoppers yet. When Obama picked Carney was he looking for someone who wasn't afraid to look foolish while spinning for Obama? If he was, he picked the right person.

This is Your National Security Advisor (Not a Serious Man)

BY Herschel Smith 1 day, 17 hours ago
From Jim Jones (via Jake Tapper):

Responding to criticism from former Vice President Cheney that President Obama is making the nation more vulnerable to terrorism, the president’s National Security Adviser, Gen. Jim Jones (Ret.), told ABC News in an exclusive interview that actually the reverse is true: President Obama’s greater success with international relations has meant more terrorists put out of commission.

“This type of radical fundamentalism or terrorism is a threat not only to the United States but to the global community,” Jones said. “The world is coming together on this matter now that President Obama has taken the leadership on it and is approaching it in a slightly different way – actually a radically different way – to discuss things with other rulers to enhance the working relationships with law enforcement agencies – both national and international.”
Jones said that “we are seeing results that indicate more captures, more deaths of radical leaders and a kind of a global coming-together by the fact that this is a threat to not only the United States but to the world at-large and the world is moving toward doing something about it.”

So the message is that since Obama has taken office more terrorists have been put out of business. The metrics show success because of the person of Obama.

Continuing:

The former Marine General didn’t provide any specific numbers to back up his claim, but he said “there is an increasing trend and I think we seen that in different parts of the world over the last few months for sure.” He added that he was not “making a tally sheet saying we are killing more people, capturing more people than they did — that is not the issue.”

So it’s not about a tally sheet, and that is clearly not the issue.

Continuing:

Click here to read more at Captains Journal

Comment: This quote from the article says it all: "Got it? Neither do I. Your NSA is not a serious man." How did Obama manage to find so many unqualified people to put in office, but more importantly how did this Marine Corps General make General with his logic?

R&R for Bill and Hill (Target Area for Hurricane Bill)

New York Post
August 21, 2009
JENNIFER FERMINO

Looks like the country's top diplomat and her headline-grabbing hubby have reached a détente while on a romantic Bermuda vacation yesterday.

The laid-back Clintons looked like any other happily married couple outside the Cambridge Beaches resort, where they are staying for a brief vacation.

The getaway comes less than two weeks after a feisty Secretary of State Hillary, during a visit to the Congo, lashed out at a university student who she thought had asked her Bill's opinion on an international issue.

And on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton raised eyebrows when she skipped a meeting between President Obama and Bill Clinton regarding her husband's North Korea trip.

Meanwhile, the Clintons' cozy vacation might be dampened, coincidentally enough, by Hurricane Bill. The first major storm of the hurricane season appears ready to bypass Bermuda -- but it could still sock the idyllic island with torrential rains.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...

NOTE: Romantic vacation? That one is good for a laugh -- more like she is reading him the riot act about interferring in something that should have come from the State Department. Just more of a photo op but did notice she is leading him. How ironic that Hurricane Bill is coming their direction. Ash trays or lamps flying? Place your bet. Wonder why they didn't go to Martha's Vineyard this year with the Obama's?

Obama's WWII Uncle Flap

Amanda Carpenter
Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Barack Obama’s campaign staff is scrambling to explain a family story Obama told on the campaign trail that rivals say is untrue and warrants explanation.

At a Memorial Day campaign stop Obama told a story about his WWII veteran uncle who allegedly liberated Auschwitz. Upon returning to the United States, according to Obama family lore, the uncle spent months alone in his attic. “Now obviously, something had really affected him deeply, but at that time there just weren’t the kinds of facilities to help somebody work through that kind of pain,” Obama said. “That’s why this idea of making sure that every single veteran, when they are discharged, are screened for post-traumatic stress disorder and given the mental health services that they need – that’s why it’s so important.”

The trouble is, the Red Army liberated Auschwitz and Obama’s mother is an only child. (His father left him at a young age, so it was unlikely the uncle in question was related to his father.)
The Republican National Committee and members of the media seized on the story, demanding clarification. RNC spokeswoman Liz Mair said in a statement: “Barack Obama owes the American public an explanation in light of his statement yesterday regarding his uncle and the liberation of Auschwitz. It is a well-known fact that Soviet troops liberated Auschwitz. Unless Obama’s uncle served in the Red Army, his statement looks nothing short of fatuous—and Americans expect something better than exaggerations and outright distortions from a candidate who hopes to become our next Commander in Chief.”

Shortly after, an Obama campaign spokesman said Obama did have a great uncle who helped liberate a different war camp. The campaign said Obama’s great uncle on his mother’s side, Charlie Payne, was a member of the 89th Infantry Division that liberated Buchenwald in 1945.
http://www.townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=c3ba2e15-0352-410c-929d-7582791b0aea&t=c

*******
The stretching of the truth seems to be catching with the Dems. I am gone for three weeks and some things don't change. First it was Hillary and the sniper fire when they landed when it turned out to be flowers they were given not bullets. Now Obama on Memorial Day makes up a story without regard for facts. Excuse me but where is the MSM as they continue to cover for Obama, the most liberal Dem in the US Senate?

Inquiring minds want to know why the MSM doesn't give facts about Obama but prefers to ignore his gaffes. Not holding our breath because we would turn blue before the MSM answered that question.

Thanks to the Town Hall writer for pointing out the truth!

Obama's 'I Didn't Inhale' Defense

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, March 17, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election 2008: Barack Obama's story that he never once heard his preacher trash whites and America in hundreds of sermons sounds like Bill Clinton claiming he never inhaled while smoking dope.

The mushrooming church scandal has taken the shine off the golden boy of politics, a two-decade regular at "unashamedly black" Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

With his phony defense, the Democrat front-runner has exposed himself as both a typical Beltway spinmeister and a hypocrite.

From the start of his presidential campaign, Obama has positioned himself as a straight shooter and a uniter — the very antidote to the sinister Clintonian politics of the past.

"Voters don't believe what politicians say. They get cynical," he said during the Nevada primary in response to what he described as dishonest "tricks" by both Clintons. "We have to change that politics, and that's why I'm running for president."

"You know what I'm saying is true," he reassured voters.

Yet his denial over Rev. Jeremiah Wright's vitriol does not ring true. He's suddenly shocked — shocked! — that his black nationalist church would spew anti-American venom.

"I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally," he insisted, "either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew."

Back in February 2007, however, Obama knew Wright might be a political liability. His chief campaign strategist, David Axelrod, was so worried about his provocative statements that he urged Obama to withdraw a request that Wright deliver an invocation at his presidential campaign kickoff.

Reluctantly, Obama "uninvited" his long-time friend and mentor, according to Wright's own account at the time, telling him "it's best for you not to be out there in public."

And earlier this year, Obama had to release a statement distancing himself from a decision by Wright to honor black bigot Louis Farrakhan with a "lifetime achievement" award in Wright's name. In its November/December issue, Obama's church magazine heaped praise on Farrakhan in a cover story.

Obama seemed neither surprised nor very offended. "I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders," he shrugged.

Only the magazine, published by Wright's daughters out of church offices, never mentioned Farrakhan's work with ex-cons.

Obama claims he never heard Wright suggest as he did in a Sept. 16, 2001, sermon that America brought the 9/11 attacks on itself.

But he said essentially the same thing, only worse, in 2005 — this time, in the same church magazine, Trumpet, that Obama and his family receive as members. There on page 7 of the August 2005 issue, Wright blames the attacks on "white America," suggesting outrageously and cold-bloodedly that the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11 was retribution for America's past racism.

Obama argues his pastor's hate speech was strung together and compiled in the media out of hundreds of sermons over the course of a lifetime. "They basically culled five or six sermons out of 30 years of preaching," he complained.

In fact, the clips shown represent Wright's bread and butter. These are just the Greatest Hits he sells as DVDs in the church bookstore. Obama, a church regular whose membership spans 1,040 sermons, expects us to believe he not only missed these particular lessons, but was unaware of such bile ever coming from the pulpit of his home church.

"If I had been in church those days, I would have objected fiercely to them and I would have told him personally," he now claims.

Really? A reporter witnessed Obama nod his head in agreement during a July 22, 2007, sermon in which Wright trashed the "United States of White America."

Here's another whopper Obama tells concerning Wright: "He hasn't been my political adviser, he's been my pastor."

Yet it turns out Wright quietly had a formal role in Obama's campaign, and was only pushed out last week as a member of his spiritual advisory committee when the tapes hit the airwaves.

Spinning harder, Obama claimed Wright's remarks are not "reflective of the church."

Yet the videos clearly show fellow members whooping and thumping in their applause of Wright's hateful rants. These weren't just a smattering of amens and hallelujahs. They were standing ovations.

Point is, these are the folks with whom the Obamas worship and socialize. Yet we're expected to believe Obama never heard the same incendiary remarks from them, either?

His plea of ignorance doesn't wash. And if he were sincere in his outrage, he would have distanced himself from these haters at the first opportunity.

He wouldn't be doing it as damage control only after the light is shone into the dark corners of his social and spiritual life.

Obama's image as a man of integrity is starting to fade along with his carefully crafted image as a refreshingly race-neutral candidate.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290645937799103#