Russian President Putin Laughs at Obama’s Weak Statements as Russian Troops Invade the Crimea Region of Ukraine (Update: Russian Parliament Unanimously Approves Military Intervention in Ukraine)

Elections do have consequences, especially when you elect a community agitator, a Campaigner in Chief, a Golfer in Chief, rather than a serious Commander in Chief …

Russian President Vladimir Putin looks to bring back the footprint and prestige of the former Soviet Union while Barack Obama makes the United States less influential and respected in the world. President Barack Obama issued a stern warning to Putin that Russia’s actions were a  “clear violation,” “breach of International law” in Ukraine. Obama also went on to say “that he was deeply concerned” and “there would be costs” and the U.S. would stop participating in preparatory meetings for the G8 summit set to be held in Sochi June 4-5. Obama said in an unscheduled statement from the White House briefing room, “Any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing, which is not in the interests of Ukraine, Russia or Europe.” I am guessing that Putin has made a cost/benefit analysis that it is in the best interest of Russia. Who honesty thinks that Putin is afraid of anything Obama says?

As the rest of the world watches Ukraine, so does the White House.

Amid reports of Russian military and paramilitary presence in Ukraine, President Obama spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin for 90 minutes today, calling on Russia to withdraw its forces.

Obama “expressed his deep concern over Russia’s clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, which is a breach of international law,” according to a White House readout, warning that Russia’s activity “would negatively impact Russia’s standing in the international community” and “will lead to greater political and economic isolation,” according to the White House’s paraphrasing.

The U.S. will also stop participating in preparatory meetings for the G8 summit set to be held in Sochi June 4-5, the White House said.

UPDATE I: Charles Krauthammer: ‘The Ukrainians – and I Think Everybody – Are Shocked by the Weakness of Obama’s Statements’.

Some were astonished by Barack Obama’s comments as being incredibly weak, present company included. If you watch the above video and Obama’s statements you can see that this president does not get it. The weak, naive president’s statement sounded in more of a professorial lecture of a laundry list of feel good items like Obama was at a State of the Union speech rather than facing down a ruthless individual. Putin is KGB, he is merely laughing at Obama’s weak response and wanting no part in confrontation.

The Blaze reports on Charles Krauthammer’s comments from Fox News ‘Special Report’. Welcome to what 1980 would have looked like had the voters of the United States not had the common sense and where with all to elect Ronald Reagan over Jimmy Carter.

Syndicated columnist and political commentator Charles Krauthammer on Friday said President Barack Obama’s statement on the alleged Russian invasion of Crimea, Ukraine, was so weak it was “staggering.” In fact, he argued the president “could not have issued a more flaccid statement.”

Krauthammer told Bret Baier that the “Ukrainians — and I think everybody — are shocked by the weakness of Obama’s statements.”

“I find it rather staggering,” he added. “What he’s saying is we’re not going to really do anything, and we’re telling the world.”

UPDATE II: Russian President Vladimir Putin in calls Obama’s bluff and invades the Ukraine.

But the request appeared likely to go unheeded as the Kremlin issued a defiant-sounding statement saying Putin stressed to Obama that the situation in Ukraine poses “real threats” to the life and health of Russian citizens and compatriots who live in Ukrainian territory.

“Vladimir Putin emphasized that, in the case of a further spread in violence in eastern regions (of Ukraine) and Crimea, Russia maintains the right to protect its interests and the Russian-speaking population that lives there,” the Kremlin statement said.

Russia Invaded Ukraine: ‘Invasion’ by Russian Soldiers

Russia invading Ukraine  … Looks like a scene from ‘Red Dawn’

Putin’s War in Crimea Could Soon Spread to Eastern Ukraine And nobody—not the U.S., not NATO—can stop him, Welcome to 1979 and Jimmy Carter.

Why is Putin doing this? Because he can. That’s it, that’s all you need to know. The situation in Kiev—in which people representing one half of the country (the Ukrainian-speaking west) took power to some extent at the expense of the Russian-speaking east—created the perfect opportunity for Moscow to divide and conquer. As soon as the revolution in Kiev happened, there was an unhappy rumbling in the Crimea, which has a large Russian population and is home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet. It was a small rumbling, but just big enough for Russia to exploit. And when such an opportunity presents itself, one would be foolish not to take it, especially if one’s name is Vladimir Putin.

UPDATE III: Russian Parliament Unanimously Approves Military Intervention in Ukraine, even after Russians had already invaded the Crimean peninsula.

Russia’s parliament approved a motion to use the country’s military in Ukraine after a request from President Vladimir Putin as protests in Russian-speaking cities turned violent Saturday, sparking fears of a wide-scale invasion.

The motion follows President Barack Obama’s warning Friday “there will be costs” if Russia intervenes militarily, sharply raising the stakes in the conflict over Ukraine’s future and evoking memories of Cold War brinkmanship.

“I’m submitting a request for using the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine pending the normalization of the socio-political situation in that country,” Putin said in his request sent to parliament.

I cannot reiterate more the words from The Lonely Conservative“Elections have consequences. Not just for us here in the US, but for the world. Mission accomplished.” Amen Sister!!!

Reversal of Fortune: 53% of Americans Believe President Barack Obama is Not Respected on World Stage, 41% Think He Is

Leading from Behind: Remember when everyone said that all we had to do was elect Barack Obama and the world would respect us?

What happened to Barack Obama, the International Rock star? Now for the first time in his presidency, a majority of Americans think he is not respected Internationally. According to a recent Gallup poll, 53% of Americans believe that Obama is not respected on the world stage, while 41% think he is. This is quite a turn-around from 2013 where 51% thought he was respected and 43% thought he was not. Barack Obama is not only destroying America from within, he is dwindling America’s respect in the world as well. Can you say … EPIC FAILURE!

Does anyone really wonder why so many Americans have ‘Buyers Remorse’ and if they had a chance to have a re-vote on the 2012 election, they would not vote for Obama to be president.  Barack Obama can thank his lucky stars he was not elected the President of Ukraine. Speaking of the Ukraine, the Obama administration is warning Russia against intervening in Ukraine after the country’s parliament ousted president Viktor Yanukovych. As seen in the poll below that world leaders do not respect Barack, does anyone think Putin is scared of Obama? Hardly.

Gallup_Obama_world_022414

Gallup.com

GALLUP:

For the first time, more Americans think President Barack Obama is not respected by other world leaders than believe he is. Americans’ opinions have shifted dramatically in the past year, after being relatively stable from 2010 to 2013.

The results are based on Gallup’s annual World Affairs poll, conducted Feb. 6-9. Although opinions about a president’s perceived world standing often track with his job approval rating, a majority of Americans still thought world leaders respected Obama in 2010 and 2011, when his job approval was similar to what it is now. Thus, the recent decline may be more tied to specific international matters from the past year, such as the revelation the U.S. was listening in on foreign leaders’ phone calls, the situation in Syria, increased tensions with Russia, and an uneasy relationship between Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Check out the amazing reversal in numbers from Democrats and Independents on their beliefs that Barack Obama is no longer respected as a world leader on the world stage. With Democrats a shift from +14 in 2013 to -11 in 2014. And for Independents, a shift from +12 in 2013 to -15 in 2014.

Gallup_Obama_world_022414_2

What would you rather have America, a Cowboy or a coward?

Barack Obama Campaign Bundler Noah Bryson Mamet Nominated as Ambassador to Argentina Even Though Has Never Been to the Country

What a joke, Don’t Cry for Me Argentina … Obama Style. What else would you expect from a community organizer and a “Campaigner in Chief”?

Remember when Barack Obama campaigned that he was going to change the way things were done inside the Belt Way? Well you can forget that as Barack Obama is rewarding one of his campaign blunders with an ambassadorship to Argentina. Noah Bryson Mamet bundled more than $500,000 for President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign and is now being rewarded for his fundraising. There is just one problem, the man who is supposed to represent the United states in Argentina has never been to the country. UNBELIEVABLE. One would think, as echoed at Slate, with the current state of affairs in Argentina, “delicate times, probably opportune times for a diplomat with years logged in South America”.

The Buenos Aires Herald reports, Mamet, who would be replacing Vilma Martínez after her term ended on July 4, is a veteran Democratic fund-raiser and consultant who has no evident experience with Latin American issues.

Sen. Marco Rubio shows his disbelief that the nominee for Ambassador to Argentina has never been there

Presidents often award diplomatic posts to campaign donors and fundraisers, but Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suspects that Obama’s choice of ambassador to Argentina — a man who bundled more than $500,000 for President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign, but who has never been to the country — is in over his head.

“Have you been to Argentina?” Rubio asked Noah Mamet during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Thursday.

“I haven’t had the opportunity yet to be there,” Mamet replied. “I’ve traveled pretty extensively around the world, but I haven’t yet had a chance [to visit Argentina].”

Rubio implied that Argentina is too important a country to be entrusted to a campaign donor rather than a professional, as is the case with some other diplomatic posts. “I don’t view this appointment as one — I think this is a very significant post,” he said.

UPDATE I: This nomination by Barack Obama gets worse, if possible. In the VIDEO below the US State Department spokesperson does not even know if the nominee for the position to be an Ambassador in a Latin American country speaks Spanish. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!  How could you not know this? Is it any wonder how the Hillary Clinton lead State Department botched Benghazi?

“I don’t have his personal biography in front of me.”

 This presidency cannot end soon enough!

Barack Obama – Bill O’Reilly Contentious Pre-Super Bowl Interview Discusses Obamacare Failed Promises, Benghazi, IRS-Gate … “Not Even a Smidgen of Corruption” … “These Kinds of Things Keep on Surfacing, Because Folks Like You Will Promote Them.”

THE THIN SKINNED PRESIDENTIAL INTERVIEW …

President Barack Obama and FOX News’ Bill O’Reilly went back and forth in a contentious pre-Super Bowl interview in which the president provided few answers. Instead of answering the tough question that not only Americans want to hear, but are entitled to, Obama played the blame game, ducked and dodged, and allowed his thin skin to dictate the non-responsive interview. Obama’s attempt to try and put all his administrations scandals behind him, most likely only made matters worse. When being asked questions, Obama actually blamed FOX News for daring to bring up and question such scandals like Benghazi, IRS-gate, Obamacare and the rest of the all too numerous scandals of the Obama presidency. Obama actually thinks the media is supposed to be his propaganda arm. In the end Obama stated that there was no corruption, “not even a smidgen.”

Obama addressed concerns over Benghazi, the launch of HealthCare.gov and the IRS, during the interview Sunday before the Super Bowl. He adamantly rejected the suggestion that the IRS was used for political purposes by singling out Tea Party groups seeking tax exemption.

“That’s not what happened,” he said. Rather, he said, IRS officials were confused about how to implement the law governing those kinds of tax-exempt groups.

“There were some bone-headed decisions,” Obama conceded.

But when asked whether corruption, or mass corruption, was at play, he responded: “Not even mass corruption — not even a smidgen of corruption.”

Bill O’Reilly’s Super Bowl interview with President Obama

obama_oreilly_SB Interview 3

Picture: Source Fox News screen grab – Click in Pic to watch VIDEO

I have just one question, why did President Barack Obama agree to do this interview if he did not intend to answer any question or offer anything new other than the same old BS and blame game? It would appear that the folks at Hot Air are asking the same.

Seriously, I don’t know why Obama bothered to do this interview at all. The only answer he seemed interested in sharing was that Fox News is a big Meany Channel with Meany Reporters who Keep Asking Questions When I Give The Only Answers I Want To Give.

However, the best question of the interview did not even come from Bill O’Reilly. It came in a letter from Kathy LaMaster of Fresno, California. Kathy asked the fantastic question … “Mr. President, why do you feel it’s necessary to fundamentally transform the nation that has afforded you so much opportunity and success?” BINGO!!! This is why Obama has no credibility anymore. Obama tried to say that, “I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation” … even though he is the one who said we had to, see video below. Some how the US was fine for Obama to be afforded the opportunity of the first black man being elected president, but he has to fundamentally change it for others. Hmm?

Here is what Candidate Obama wanted for our country when he was running for President of the United States of America. He said that “we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

O’REILLY:  OK.  I got a letter from Kathy LaMaster (ph), Fresno, California.  I said I would read one letter from the folks, all right?
O’REILLY:  “Mr. President, why do you feel it’s necessary to fundamentally transform the nation that has afforded you so much opportunity and success?”

OBAMA:  I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation…
O’REILLY:  But those are your words.

Full Transcript of the Interview:

Snippets from interview:

With regards to the disastrous roll-out of Obamacare, President Obama claims everybody will be held accountable. REALLY? No one has been held accountable by this president with anything from Obamacare to Benghazi, from Fast & Furious to IRS-gate. Who is he kidding?

O’REILLY:  And I’m paying Kathleen Sebelius’ salary and she screwed up.
OBAMA:  Yes.
O’REILLY:  And you’re not holding her accountable.
OBAMA:  Yes, well, I — I promise you that we hold everybody up and down the line accountable.  But when we’re…
O’REILLY:  But she’s still there.

Obama and O’Reilly spar on Benghazi. The president incredibly is sticking to the story that he called the Benghazi attack a terror attack, even though non-Kool Aid drinking folks know it is a lie. Obama could not answer in a “yes” or “no” manner whether he was told it was a terrorist attack.

O’REILLY:  Did he tell you, Secretary Panetta, it was a terrorist attack?
OBAMA:  You know what he told me was that there was an attack on our compound…
O’REILLY:  He didn’t tell you…
OBAMA:  — (INAUDIBLE)…
O’REILLY:  – he didn’t use the word “terror?”

Really Mr. President, you did not say it was a terror attack in the ’60 Minutes’ interview, when you discussed it with Joy Behar or to the United Nations.

Bill O’Reilly’s Super Bowl interview with President Obama
O’REILLY:  It’s more than that because if Susan Rice goes out and tells the world that it was a spontaneous demonstration…
OBAMA:  Bill…
O’REILLY:  — off a videotape but your…
OBAMA:  Bill…
O’REILLY:  — your commanders and the secretary of Defense know it’s a terror attack…
OBAMA:  Now, Bill…
O’REILLY:  Just…
OBAMA:  — Bill…
O’REILLY:  — as an American…
OBAMA:  — Bill — Bill…
O’REILLY:  — I’m just confused.
OBAMA:  And I’m — and I’m trying to explain it to, if you want to listen.  The fact of the matter is is that people understood, at the time, something very dangerous was happening, that we were focused on making sure that we did everything we can — could — to protect them.  In the aftermath, what became clear was that the security was lax, that not all the precautions and — that needed to be taken were taken and both myself and Secretary Clinton and others indicated as much.

Obama blames the FOX News blame game, good grief, how small of you.

O’REILLY:  — but I just want to say that they’re — your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out.
OBAMA:  Bill, think about…
O’REILLY:  That’s what they believe.
OBAMA:  – and they believe it because folks like you are telling them that.
O’REILLY:  No, I’m not telling them that.
(LAUGHTER)
O’REILLY:  I’m asking you whether you were told…
OBAMA:  But — and what I’m saying is…
O’REILLY:  — it was a terror attack and you…
OBAMA:  — and what I’m saying is that is inaccurate.

On the IRS scandal where conservative and Tea Party groups were specifically targeted by the IRS, Obama says there was no corruption, not even a smidgeon of corruption.

O’REILLY:  — so you’re saying there was no…
OBAMA:  — if you are involved…
O’REILLY:  — no corruption there at all, none?
OBAMA:  That’s not what I’m saying.
O’REILLY:  (INAUDIBLE).
OBAMA:  That’s actually…
O’REILLY:  No, no, but I want to know what…
OBAMA:  — (INAUDIBLE)…
O’REILLY:  — you’re saying.  You’re the leader of the country.
OBAMA:  Absolutely.
O’REILLY:  You’re saying no corruption?
OBAMA:  No.
O’REILLY:  None?
OBAMA:  There were some — there were some bone-headed decisions…
O’REILLY:  Bone-headed decisions…
OBAMA:  — out of — out of a local office…
O’REILLY:  But no mass corruption?
OBAMA:  Not even mass corruption, not even a smidgeon of corruption, I would say.

BTW, how about you wear a tie! Good grief, if you can’t act presidential, could you at least look presidential?

63% Don’t Have Confidence in Obama to Make Right Decisions

JUST 63%?

On the eve of President Barack Obama’s State of the Union Address, the American public have no confidence in Obama. The state of the union is that a majority of Americans do not believe that Barack Obama is a strong leader and they have no confidence that he will make the right decision. In other words, pretty much everything he will say tonight will be heard by Americans as , blah, blah, blah.

Obama_Pout

On the eve of President Obama’s State of the Union Address, a new poll from Washington Post-ABC News shows that fully 63 percent of Americans have either little to no confidence Obama will make the right decisions. The public is evenly split on whether Obama is honest and trustworthy, with 49 percent of Americans answering in the affirmative, and 48 percent answering negatively.

A bare majority of Americans, 52 percent, feel Obama does not understand the problems of people like them – a shocking downward turn for Obama on an important likeability issue in which he dominated in 2012. A majority of Americans, 51 percent, also believe Obama is not a strong leader. His disapproval rating stands currently at 50 percent, with 41 percent disapproving strongly – only 23 percent support him strongly. 50 percent of Americans have an unfavorable impression of the president.

With Terror Threats Ahead of Sochi Winter Olympic Games, American Athletes and Americans Urged Not to Wear Anything that ID’s them as Americans in Public

Sorry, but if this is what the Olympics has come to, then the terrorists have won …

The Olympic represent the pinnacle of National pride for the host country and for the athletes who represent their own countries competing in the games. But as reported by CBS News, Americans might be hard pressed to find the stars and stripes and team USA logos in Sochi. The Olympic committee told the US athletes not to wear anything that identifies them as American in public. Sadly, the gutless Barack Obama/John Kerry State Department agrees. So athletes and fans are not supposed to show pride and patriotism in the US, they are supposed to cower in fear. Why even go if that is the case? This speaks volumes of our current federal government an namely Barack Obama, doesn’t it!!!

It would appear that the motto of the Olympics of Citius, Altius, Fortius  (faster, higher, stronger) has been changed to take part in your sport under the cloak of anonymity and hide from those who would kill you.

So let’s understand this, the US is succumbing to the threats of terrorists?  Really? We are allowing terrorists to dictate what we do and how we act? What a gutless government we have.  Sorry, but if the Olympic committee was really serious about any of this they would have never granted the Winter Olympic games to be held in the middle of a terrorist hot bed. How bad is it that athletes who have trained their entire lives for this one moment in time have to ask their families to stay how for safety reasons? What the hell was the IOC thinking in granting these games in the first place? Hey, I say the Summer games should be held in Egypt, Syria or Iran next. It makes about as much sense.

Has anyone ever told the IOC, Barack Obama and the State Department that you do not appease bullies, you stand up to them? Terrorists pride themselves upon fear and sadly Obama is showing that he is just that weak.

Barack Obama Says that He Would Not Let the Son He Does Not Have Play Pro Football

Once again Obama interjects himself into something that one cares to hear his opinion on …

In an interview with The New Yorker, Barack Obama said that he would not let his son play pro football. Maybe some one needs to tell Obama that he does not have a son that looks like Trayvon Martin. Although I would say that if Obama’s son played football anything like Barack Obama throws a baseball, no one in the NFL would worry much that Obama’s son was skipping the NFL. Those who have lost their insurance and are now paying more premiums for  lesser coverage and no quality of network of doctors and hospitals could hardly care less about Obama’s hypothetical son and what he would or would not allow him to do. AMERICANS ARE DEALING WITH REAL PROBLEMS THANKS TO OBAMA.

President Obama said that he believed NFL players “know what they’re doing” and understood the impact that concussions could have on their long-term health in an interview with The New Yorker published on Sunday, adding that he would not let his son play pro football.

“At this point, there’s a little bit of caveat emptor,” Obama said. “These guys, they know what they’re doing. They know what they’re buying into. It is no longer a secret. It’s sort of the feeling I have about smokers, you know?”

Things that Barack Obama would let his son do instead, if he had one:

  • Smoke Pot
  • Tell people they could keep their insurance and doctors, if they liked them.
  • Allow four Americans, including a US Ambassador, to die in Benghazi without lifting a finger.
  • Lie to the American people that Benghazi was a response to a tape rather than a terror attack.
  • Increase the US debt to record levels of $17 trillion and counting.
  • Not hold anyone accountable in IRS-gate.
  • Not hold anyone accountable for Fast & Furious.
  • Not hold anyone accountable for Benghazi-gate.
  • Destroy America.
  • Blame everything on racism that does not go your way

 

Robert Gates: I Was “Disturbed” By Barack Obama’s “Absence of Passion, This Absence of Conviction [on Afghanistan] of the Importance of Success that Disturbed Me”

Barack Obama, Commander in Chief?

More from Gates-gate: Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates did his first TV interview with CBS this weekend  following the release of exerts from his soon to be released book, ‘Duty.’ Gates said was disturbed by Barack Obama’s lack of conviction on success in Afghanistan. Gates was also critical of Obama’s absence of passion when it came to his making the troops believe that Obama supported him. Gates went in to say that this was not the case when he was secretary of defense under George W. Bush. Gates is basically accusing Obama of just providing lip service to the troops. Gates defended his statements in his new book as the liberal MSM looks to discredit him. However, Gates is getting it from both sides of the aisle as some Republicans are criticizing the former Secretary of Defense for not disclosing his tactical disputes with the Obama administration during his tenure as secretary.

“It’s one thing to tell the troops that you support them. It’s another to work at making them believe that you believe as president that their sacrifice is worth it, that the cause is just, that what they are doing was important for the country, and that they must succeed,” said Gates. “President Bush did that with the troops when I was Secretary. I did not see President Obama do that. As I write in the book, it was this absence of passion, this absence of a conviction of the importance of success that disturbed me.”

One would think that it is a presidents job when you are the Commander in Chief and sending America’s sons and daughters, mothers and fathers into harms way and potentially make the ultimate sacrifice that a president have convictions for a mission. It is just too bad that Obama did not have the same passion and conviction toward the individuals that protect our freedoms than he does for Obamacare or campaigning.

CBS NEWS:

Gates praises Mr. Obama for facing down political opposition from his own party. Yet he also offers some tough criticism of the president, suggesting that at times he was skeptical of his own strategy in Afghanistan.

“You say about President Obama that as much as you admired him on so many levels, he never really had a passion for pursuing the war in Afghanistan, and that kind of bothered you,” said Braver.

“It’s one thing to tell the troops that you support them. It’s another to work at making them believe that you believe as president that their sacrifice is worth it, that the cause is just, that what they are doing was important for the country, and that they must succeed,” said Gates. “President Bush did that with the troops when I was Secretary. I did not see President Obama do that. As I write in the book, it was this absence of passion, this absence of a conviction of the importance of success that disturbed me.”

What’s more, he is harshly critical of some of the president’s staffers.

He called the national security staff under President Obama the most micromanaging and controlling since Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. Braver asked, “Did you ever tell the president about it directly?”

“No,” Gates said. “And I acknowledge that in the book.”

“Should you have, do you think?”

“Well, first of all, things don’t happen that way if the president doesn’t want them to happen that way.”

“Do you have a sense that’s changed? Or do you think they are still running things from the White House?”

“I actually think it’s gotten worse,” Gates laughed.

And then there were his disagreements with the Number 2 man in Washington.

“You are not very flattering to Vice President Biden in this book,” said Braver.

“Actually I think I am in some areas complimentary of him,” Gates responded, “but where I had a particular problem with the vice president was in his encouragement of suspicion of the military and the senior military with the president: ‘You can’t trust these guys. They’re gonna try and jam you. They’re gonna try and box you in,’ and so on. And that did disturb me a lot.”

The outcry over Gates’ criticism of Biden led to that White House solidarity photo op of the president and vice president this past week.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews Names Barack Obama the Political Loser of the Year of 2013 … “Feels Like the 7th or 8th Year of His Presidency”

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews has lost that thrill running up his leg … Hey Mathews, How’s that “Hopey-Changey” thing working out for ya?

Friday morning on ‘The Morning Joe,’ Matthews named Barack Obama the political loser of the year for 2013. How painful must that have been for Chris Matthews to say, rather than acting like a school girl with a crush and a thrill running up his leg. Maybe Mathews just hadn’t enough coffee that morning and had a moment of weakness where he was actually telling the truth. Many liberals are going to have an introspective in evaluating Barack Obama and the failure that has been his presidency as his poll numbers near the 30′s. How difficult will it be for Chris Mathews, the rest of the liberal MSM and Democrats to admit … he [Obama] is not the one they were waiting for.

“Terrible year for the president. I mean, it’s terrible,” he said.

Joe Scarborough agreed that it has been a “terrible year” for Obama after there was “so much hope” following his second inauguration.

“There’s another piece of it which you’re subtly getting at,” Matthews continued. “It’s not just that it’s a bad year in terms of the rollout. There’s an erosion in interest. It feels like a very long presidency now. It feels like the seventh or eighth year of a presidency. It doesn’t feel like the fifth.”

VIDEO Hat Tip – NewsBusters

Transcript – NewsBusters:

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Let me ask you losers, political losers of the year?

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Terrible year for the president. I mean, it’s terrible, this…

SCARBOROUGH: Can you go back a year? One year ago, the president was getting ready for his second inauguration. So much hope. This has been a terrible year. [American voters buyers remorse for if the election was today, Obama would have been run out of office in an epic landslide].

MATTHEWS: There’s another piece of it which you’re subtly getting at. It’s not just that it’s a bad year in terms of the rollout. There’s an erosion in interest. It feels like a very long presidency now. It feels like the seventh or eighth year of a presidency. It doesn’t feel like the fifth. There wasn’t that rejuvenation that comes with re-election. There wasn’t any, certainly he was never going to get a honeymoon from the other side, but there was no sense of wow. And I think that’s hurt him a lot.

Seventh or eighth year of the presidency … are you kidding … IT FEELS LIKE THE 7th or 8th TERM OF OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY!!!

NFL Hall of Famer Jim Brown Gives President Barack Obama a Grade of “C”

Wow, Jim Brown doesn’t think Obama is the one we have been waiting for, doesn’t think he is a special kind of person … So much for ‘Hope & Change”.

Jim Brown, NFL Hall of Famer and arguably the greatest running back of all time had a few choice words for President Barack Obama while on the Arsenio Hall show. Never at a loss for words and a man that speaks his mind whether you agree with him or not I have always respected the man because of his convictions and never beating around the bush. During his appearance he was asked what he thought of Barack Obama, his response most likely shocked many libs and blacks. As reported at The Politico, Jim Brown said, “I like him as a human being, but somehow it seems like he’s over his head or maybe he underestimated the system of government we had. [...] I give him a ‘C.”

Asked by Arsenio Hall for his thoughts on President Barack Obama, legendary football player Jim Brown expressed his disappointment in a man he once campaigned for in Ohio.

“That’s a difficult one,” said Brown. “I like his family. I like him as a human being. But somehow it seems like he’s over his head.”

Brown said he’d give the president a “C” grade and added that “maybe underestimated the system of government.”

Jim Brown and I agree, this is the reason why you don’t elect a “community agitator” and someone who has no qualifications to do the job, president. What is also interesting is even Jim Brown calls Obama a partisan.

Full comments:

“When you ask me that, that’s a difficult one. I like his family. I like him as a human being, but somehow it seems like he’s over his head or maybe he underestimated the system of government we had. When Kennedy couldn’t get the Civil Rights Bill passed he was the big liberal. Lyndon Johnson came in and got it passed and he was a conservative and a Southerner. Sometimes in politics, to get something done, it takes a special kind of knowledge and a special kind of person, but it doesn’t always follow the party lines. Obama was elected by the people, and I was glad that barrier was broken down. I did, along with my wife, campaign for him in Ohio because that was a key state. If I had to say does he rate an ‘A’ or does he rate a ‘D,’ it would be very difficult. I give him a ‘C.’”

Personally, I think Jim Brown went a bit easy on his friend, maybe a first in Brown’s career, but for Obama to get a “C”, he would have to be average. Barack Obama is not average, he is well below average and at this point gets a “D” and if Obamacare, the economy and the Middle East continue in uncertain turmoil, it will be changed to an ‘F”.

← Previous PageNext Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It