This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden

  • Biden and his “homeboy” to rescue your ‘hood

    Well, the one good thing about this last election is that we have Joe Bite-Me to give us some blogging material for another four years. Nothing is more embarrassing than a pale white man who tries to be “down” with the culture and uses, even by popular cultural standards, outdated colloquialisms. And Bite-Me was born to it. Apparently, according to the Weekly Standard, he tried to reassure the victims of Hurricane Sandy that they have a “homeboy” on their side. I thought that particular reference died with the Wayans Brother’s In Living Color show, but apparently not.

    Although most people think that Bite-Me is referring to the President, the New York Times is more specific that he’s referring to himself;

    “This is a national responsibility,” Mr. Biden said, standing before a heap of discarded wood on the Boardwalk in Seaside Heights, N.J.

    He promised, referring to himself, that the state had a “homeboy” in the White House.

    I don’t know who he’s referring to, and it really doesn’t matter, it just highlights the fact that Bite-Me is an embarrassment who has no business being anywhere near the national discourse. But he fits right in with the rest of the clowns in the president’s inner circle and it’s frightening to think that Bite-Me actually has input to national policy – especially after his miserable failure in Afghanistan which steadily costs us more American lives.

  • Congress wants investigation into Benghazi

    Despite what Harry Reid says, at least one Democrat Senator wants answers into why this administration changed the intelligence from the CIA to fit their story. From the Associated Press;

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, said she too has lingering concerns about how the talking points were created when it was clear early on that the military-style assault wasn’t a simple protest gone awry.

    She said Congress has asked the administration to provide an explanation.

    “We gave the direction yesterday that this whole process is going to be checked out,” said Feinstein, D-Calif. “We’re going to find out who made changes in the original statement. Until, we do I really think it’s unwarranted to make accusations.”

    Meanwhile, on Twitter, the administration wishes that Republicans would just get over it. They don’t understand why Republicans are so concerned about Benghazi now that the election is over;

    It was just over a month ago when Obama deputy campaign manager and lying liar Stephanie Cutter got the ball rolling, declaring that the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Libya was only an issue because Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan insisted on politicizing it — a claim that seems even more outrageous in light of the “French kiss” of a third presidential debate.

    Confronted yesterday with a question about Benghazi, Democratic Party Communications Director Brad Woodhouse replied by tweeting simply, “We won.” And yet the hearings continue, even though Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday smacked down the proposal of a Senate select committee. His reasoning? “The elections are over; it is time to put aside the partisan politicization of national security.”

    Yeah, “We won” worked so well for the Obama Administration in the last term…so, please try to hide behind it again. “Americans died, Obama lied” will look so good on bumper stickers during the mid-terms. Maybe most of us didn’t really give a rat’s ass about the campaign and were more concerned that four good Americans (three of them veterans) lost their lives and we want answers about how that could happen in this day and age. Especially in light of the warnings to Washington from the consulate that this might happen.

    And I don’t remember the Left shutting up about Abu Ghraib after the 2004 election. Or Scooter Libby, or Valerie Plame, or how much other crap did they try to use against Bush that election.

    John McCain, a day late and a dollar short as usual, came to the conclusion that the Benghazi thing hurt the Obama campaign’s narrative;

    “The narrative of the president is ‘I got Bin Laden, and al-Qaida is [o]n the run,’ but al-Qaida is not on the run, and is making a strong comeback all over the Middle East,” McCain said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “This may interfere with that narrative.”

    McCain said he would allow any nominee to lead the State Department “the benefit of the hearing process,” including top contender U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice. Rice has come under fire for initially saying the Benghazi attack was the result of a spontaneous protests, rather than a planned terrorist attack.

    So, it’s a cover-up on par with the Watergate cover-up. Well, except in this case they’re covering up the circumstances surrounding the deaths of four good Americans (three of whom were veterans). And just because the administration covered it up for political reasons doesn’t mean that we want answers for political reasons. We want answers because those three veterans and their families deserve answers.

  • Petraeus knew it was terrorism in Benghazi

    This is a secondhand quote from Representative Peter King who spoke to Stars & Stripes while David Petraeus was testifying to the House Intelligence Committee behind closed doors, so there is a partisan tinge to it, but regardless;

    Lawmakers say Petraeus told them that CIA talking points written after the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus says that reference was removed by other federal agencies that made changes to the CIA’s draft.

    Fox News quotes King, too;

    …Petraeus testified in a closed-door hearing Friday morning that his agency determined immediately after the Sept. 11 Libya attack that “Al Qaeda involvement” was suspected — but the line was taken out in the final version circulated to administration officials, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.

    […]

    “No one knows yet exactly who came up with the final version of the talking points,” [King] said.

    So, tell me this; what good is a CIA intelligence report if other agencies are allowed to alter it? It makes no sense. If I send a sitrep to my commander and he alters it before he sends it higher to fit what he wants the report to say even though he doesn’t have eyes on the target, is it even a sitrep anymore?

    “Director Petraeus went to Tripoli and interviewed many of the people involved,” said the head of the Senate committee, California Democrat Dianne Feinstein.

    Added Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.: “”I’d like to get his sense of why it took as long as it did to get more accurate assessments of what took place in Benghazi.”

    While the people who sat in front of cameras back here in the states were being spoon fed third or fourth hand information to spoon feed Americans the party line. Not that any of that information would have disrupted the season of giving before the election, I’m just sayin’ that it would be nice to know the facts from folks on the scene, seein’s how we were supposed to making decisions of our own here about who is leading the country.

  • That ‘duh’ moment

    The Associated Press reports that General Carter Ham admitted yesterday that maybe it was al-Qaeda that was involved in the attack on the Benghazi, Libya consulate which left four dead Americans in it’s wake;

    Al-Qaida links had been suspected in the attack on Sept. 11, but not publicly detailed.

    “Clearly some of these individuals have some linkages to AQIM,” or al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, Gen. Carter Ham, the head of the U.S. military’s Africa Command, told reporters in Paris. “That’s not to say that this was an AQIM-planned or organized or led activity.” He did not elaborate.

    Funny how al Qaeda’s involvement in the attack is finally addressed by this administration while the rest of the media is concentrating on trying to get pictures of Lebanese boobies and a week after the election during which this President claimed that al Qaeda is “on the ropes” thanks to his leadership. I guess “on the ropes” means something different in Washington than it does to the rest of the country.

  • Taking the fight to Hamas

    Blackfive‘s Uncle Jimbo says that 83 rockets have fallen on Israel in the last three days from Gaza. Fox News says that Israel responded by killing the military leader of Hamas. (Video of Ahmad Jabari’s demise is at the Blackfive link) So, since retaliation actually means an initial attack to Hamas, they have declared war on Israel, like those 83 missiles never happened;

    “The occupation has opened the gates of hell,” the armed wing of Hamas reportedly said.

    “Israel has declared war on Gaza and they will bear the responsibility for the consequences,” Islamic Jihad reportedly said.

    Israel says that it has destroyed at least 20 facilities which used for storage of more missiles. And they’re sitting under their “Iron Dome” defensive shield which they claim has stopped 13 missiles from landing in Israel in their intended form.

    So, the word on the street is that Israel is preparing to cross into Gaza with ground forces, once again. The Washington Post reports that the handwringers in academia and think tanks are contemplating the far-reaching effects of an Israeli invasion of Gaza;

    The New York Times’s Tehran-based Thomas Erdbrink warned on Twitter; “While Iran and Hamas have been estranged over Syria, Iran’s leaders will be highly upset over Jabari’s assassination today in Gaza,” he wrote. “Forget ANY Iran-US talks if conflict in Gaza escalates. … Iran leaders can never be seen as talking to US, while its ‘eternal’ ally Israel assassinates Iran’s ideological allies.”

    Yeah, so Israel should just let the rockets fall on them so Obama can have talks with Iran. If you’re wonder how the Huffington Post is covering the whole Israel/Gaza thing, Huff-Watch says it’s their typical Hamas-centric view.

  • Ship of fools

    I don’t think a reasonable person can deny that the current administration has failed at everything it’s done since the day it began. I’d argue that it began it’s terrible downward spiral on the day that Obama named Joe Biden to be his running mate in the 2008 election. Obama, who has final say over the advice that he gets from his circle of obviously moronic advisers, so ultimately, he’s responsible, and that is probably his greatest failure. he’s appointed tax evaders to his staff who advise him to raise taxes to balance the budget. He implements Joe Biden’s plan in Afghanistan despite the fact that Joe Biden has been on the wrong side of history since he started shooting his mouth off about foreign policy.

    Now, he’s looking at making US history’s most infamous anti-war protester the Secretary of Defense. Our status in the United Nations has tumbled terribly, so our ambassador to the UN is now named as the first choice for Secretary of State.

    His CIA director involved himself in covert sexual dawdling, while the commander of his military forces actively engaged in combat in a foreign land sends 30,000 emails to a married woman. During those escapades, the chairman of his joint chiefs of staff, instead of complaining that his troops are forced by the Biden policy in Afghanistan to present themselves unarmed to to potential enemy attacks, blames those same troops for blowing their noses in public.

    Now, thanks to a compliant media, we know more about the sexual habits of our generals in one week than we’ve learned about the deaths of four Americans in the Benghazi consulate two months ago.

    They’re still fishing bodies out of the water around New York City, parts of the surrounding communities are still without power as we stand on the cusp of Winter. As Ace of Spades helpfully points out, we don’t even know the name of the FEMA director, the way we had Michael Brown’s name tattooed on our collective consciousness after Katrina.

    Businesses are laying off workers by the thousands anticipating the lack of understanding in this administration about how jobs get created in this country.

    And still, the media is silent, more excited about the hotels in DC filling up with reservations for the Inauguration Day celebrations – and the off-chance that they might get to see Lebanese boobies.

    But on to my main point, that any buffoon can be President as long as they surround themselves with competent people – look at Bill Clinton. but this buffoon can’t even get that right.

  • …oh, look! A squirrel!

    All weekend, I listened to Fox news folks complaining that the Petraeus sex scandal was sucking the air out of the Benghazi investigation, that the media was more interested in the lascivious details of the salacious extra-curricular activities of the CIA director than in the death of four Americans. Well, admitting there’s a problem is only half of the battle;

    Of course, this morning, everyone is wrapped up in the details of “when the President knew” about the Petraeus affair and the White House is not being forthcoming with those details. Yeah, that’s for a reason – because the White House is taking advantage of the media’s focus on L’affaire Petraeus and how easily they’re distracted by the sight of a pair of comely Lebanese twins and the possibility that they’re easy. The Obama White House is going to leak out slowly details of the investigation to keep the media fixated on the scandal.

    The UK’s Telegraph, in announcing the salivating press’ dream come true that Obama is finally going to throw them some crumbs in a press conference this morning on the subject, admits that it’s just a distraction;

    The widening probe into Petraeus’s extramarital affair has raised questions about the US commander in Afghanistan, distracting from talks over a looming budget crisis and efforts to fill high-level positions in Obama’s second term.

    Well, at least as we’re going over the financial cliff we’ll have some entertainment.

  • Kerry considered for SecDef?

    I mentioned on Friday that John Kerry was a likely choice for the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense or the Director of the CIA. Well, it seems that the Obama Administration is considering him for Defense Secretary, according to the Washington Post;

    President Obama is considering asking Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) to serve as his next defense secretary, part of an extensive rearrangement of his national security team that will include a permanent replacement for former CIA director David H. Petraeus.

    Although Kerry is thought to covet the job of secretary of state, senior administration officials familiar with the transition planning said that nomination will almost certainly go to Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

    John O. Brennan, Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser, is a leading contender for the CIA job if he wants it, officials said. If Brennan goes ahead with his plan to leave government, Michael J. Morell, the agency’s acting director, is the prohibitive favorite to take over permanently. Officials cautioned that the White House discussions are still in the early stages and that no decisions have been made.

    In fact, I’ve been predicting this for years, if anyone was paying attention. I hope the VSOs are watching him, because his record of screwing the troops goes back to the “fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan” “testimony” to Congress in 1971.

    I can’t think of anyone less respected by the troops;