NY Times Columnist David Brooks States: “Obama Has a Manhood Problem in the Middle East … Is He Tough Enough …?”
OUCH, Obama has a manhood problem in the Middle East, subtitled … Obama wears mom jeans.
New York Times columnists David Brooks went there this past Sunday on Meet the Press, questioning whether Barack Obama has the “co-jones” to deal with tough situations like in the Middle East and against a leader like Russia’s Vladimire Putin … “[L]et’s face it. Obama, whether deservedly or not, does have a, I’ll say it crudely, but a manhood problem in the Middle East. Is he tough enough to stand up to somebody like Assad, somebody like Putin?” NBC’s Chuck Todd said during the round table, “Internally they fear this”.
David Brooks: “And let’s face it, Obama, whether deservedly or not, does have a — I’ll say it crudely, but a manhood problem in the Middle East,” Brooks said. “Is he tough enough to stand up to somebody like Assad or Putin? A lot of the rap is unfair, but certainly in the Middle East, there’s an assumption he’s not tough.”
Chuck Todd: “Internally they fear this. It’s not just Bob Corker saying it, questioning whether the president is being alpha male — that’s essentially what he’s saying, he’s not alpha dog enough, his rhetoric isn’t tough enough. They agree with the policy decisions, but it’s the rhetoric. Internally, this is a question.”
Daily Commentary – Monday, September 9, 2013 – Looks like Charlie Rose of CBS Nabs the Big Interview With Assad
- Assad claims in his interview with Rose that he was not behind the chemical attacks
CNN Poll: 71% of Americans Against Obama Backed Military Strike Against Bashar al-Assad Regime in Syria
Bi-partisan support against Barack Obama’s military action against Syria …
As President Barack Obama sets out to do a media campaign blitz for a military strike against the Bashar al-Assad Regime in Syria to win over the America people, a CNN poll shows that “We the People” resoundingly oppose it. Obama has so miserably handled the run up to a military strike and Obama has failed to convince the American people that a strike is in our best interest. Americas are also tired of war in the Middle East and fighting for people that hate us, that 71% of Americans oppose any military strike what so ever. Only 27% support it. Most people believe that Assad did use chemical weapons against his people; however, they want no part of any military action.
Obama has no International support, he has no domestic support … will Democrats be willing to defy the will of the people just to support this president and have him save face from his “red line” comments?
As President Barack Obama presses his case for a strike on Syria, a new national survey shows him swimming against a strong tide of public opinion that doesn’t want the U.S. to get involved.
The CNN/ORC International poll released Monday shows that even though eight in 10 Americans believe that the Bashar al-Assad regime gassed its own people, a strong majority doesn’t want Congress to pass a resolution authorizing a military strike against the regime.
More than seven in 10 say such a strike would not achieve significant goals for the U.S. and a similar amount say it’s not in the national interest for the U.S. to get involved in Syria’s bloody two-year long civil war.
And if this fails in Congress Obama will not have the GOP to blame. Democrats in mass, including MoveOn.org is soundly against any military strike in Syria. Also, it shows a fail of leadership of this president as four 5 years he has done nothing but demonize Republicans. Now, Obama suddenly wants their support .
Posted September 9, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
Barack Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Campaigner in Chief, CNN Opinion Research, Community Agitator, Democrats, Divider in Chief, Epic Fail, Liberals, Media, Middle East, Military, Misleader, Obamanation, Polls, Progressives, Syria, The Dodger in Chief, US National Security, Violence, We the People | 4 comments
CNN: Obama Administration Using These Gruesome Videos of Alleged Chemical Attack to Guilt America into Military Action Against Assad & Syrian
As reported at CNN, the Obama Administration is using gruesome and disturbing videos of the aftermath of a chemical attack against the Syrian people by Syrian President Assad. But how is this any different than being told that a chemical attack occurred? It’s more of the same play on emotional, rather than telling us, “We the People” and Congress, what is the reason why there needs to be US involvement in a Syrian civil war. Of course this is heinous, but there are many things that occur in this world that are heinous that the US does nothing about. Sec. of State John Kerry had stated regarding Syria, ‘Not the Time to Be Silent Spectators to Slaughter’. So let’s understand this, the first 100,000 people killed in Syria, that was OK to be a silent spectator, but now that chemical weapons were used, that is different? Really?
Barack Obama, John Kerry, et all have still failed to explain how this was against US national security.
I still do not know how Obama could draw a “red line” yet have nothing in place so if one went over that line, retaliation would occur. You don’t make such claims and ultimatums if you have butkis. This rodeo clown is so used to playing politics with his rhetoric against the GOP, that he has no concept how to act as a leader on world events. Instead, he folded like a house of cards and showed he has zero leadership skills.
These are some of the hard-to-stomach images that the Obama administration has shown a select group of senators in closed-door briefings to make the case that a limited military attack on Syria is justified.
CNN was the first to obtain the 13 different videos seen by members of the Senate Intelligence Committee that depict the gruesome scene of an chemical weapons attack in Syria on August 21. The administration told senators that their authenticity was verified by the intelligence community.
The attack, allegedly carried out by Syrian forces under President Bashar al-Assad, has touched off the most critical foreign policy question since the uprising began in 2011: Is a military response merited?
Video Warning – Disturbing in nature
As the anniversary of 9-11 is nearly upon us and the one year anniversary of the Benghazi terror attack, Obama’s greatest obstacle is how does he justify attacking Assad that will benefit the Al-Qaeda infested Syrian government opposition, when we have supposedly been at war with these terrorists for 12 years? Sorry, but how does the United States act in any military fashion that would aid Al-Qaeda?
Posted September 8, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
Act of War, al-Qaeda, America - United States, Barack Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Benghazi-Gate, Campaigner in Chief, Community Agitator, Epic Fail, Leading from Behind, Misleader, Syria, Terrorism, US National Security, War on Terror, We the People, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 6 comments
President Barack Obama – The Lying King … “My Credibility Is Not On The Line” … “I Didn’t Set a Red Line. The World set a Red Line … “Congress set a red line …”
LION LYING KING: Is Barack Obama capable of telling the truth, or taking responsibility for anything?
President Barack Obama actually had the audacity to say that he did not set a red line. Instead, the buck stops with everyone else but President Obama. It is unbelievable that this man cannot take the accountability and responsibility for admitting to what he has already said. Obama says that his “credibility is not on the line” and that he “didn’t set a red line”, it was the world and the Congress that did so. Hmm, really? If the world had set a red line when it came to chemical weapons in Syria, why does Obama have a Coalition of None when it comes to military action against Syria? And Congress also set the red line, the same Congress that Obama had no intention of getting military approval from until he was forced to. So instead, on a world stage a US president threw the International community and US Congress under the bus. UNREAL. What else should be have expected from a community agitator?
Can you say: MISLEADER!
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Let me unpack the question. First of all, I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous thing that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for. And so, when I said, in a press conference, that my calculus about what’s happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn’t something I just kind of made up. I didn’t pluck it out of thin air. There was a reason for it. That’s point number one. Point number two, my credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’ credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.
How does Obama words above that he did not draw a red line contrast with Obama’s words from an August 2012 statement? It would appear that he most certainly did have a red line for us. The me, me, me, I, I, I president said “us” which most likely meant his administration, not the United States. Remember, Obama had no intention of asking for Congressional approval until the British Parliament said “NO” to PM Cameron and the US polls were so negatively opposed to a military strike against Syria.
Daily Commentary – Wednesday, September 4, 2013 – You Shouldn’t Give a Bully Like Syria’s Bashar Assad A Warning
- All a warning does is give him time to move/hide his weapons and prepare for a strike
Daily Commentary – Wednesday, September 4, 2013 Download
Pew Research Poll: 48% of Americans Against Military Strike against Syria, Only 29% Support It, 48% Against … ABC/WAPO Poll: 36% For, 59% Against
America has finally reached a bipartisan consensus, they are against Obama’s actions of wanting a military strike against Syria …
A PEW Research poll shows that Barack Obama, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the new found Democrat military hawks have little support among the American people with regards to a military action against Syria for Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his people. According to the poll, 48% of Americans are against military action, while only a meager 29% support it. The numbers against any military action against Syria are negative for Obama across party lines. Finally we have bi-partisan agreement, (Democrats: pro 29% – against 48%) … (Republicans: pro 35% – against 40%) … (Independents: pro 29%, against 50%).
But does Obama care what “We the People” think? Hardly, look how we got Obamacare rammed down our throats. Remember the lies were were told about that as well when the “Campaigner” in Chief misrepresented that as well? Most Americans understand that the using of chemical weapons is hideous, but how is it different from the 100′s of thousands of people previously killed in this Syrian civil war? They also understand that with a “chicken hawk” like Obama at the reigns, an attack on Assad and taking out his military and infrastructure would only allow Al-Qaeda to swoop in to power. So why doesn’t Obama, or does he?
President Obama faces an uphill battle in making the case for U.S. military action in Syria. By a 48% to 29% margin, more Americans oppose than support conducting military airstrikes against Syria in response to reports that the Syrian government used chemical weapons.
The new national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Aug. 29-Sept. 1 among 1,000 adults, finds that Obama has significant ground to make up in his own party. Just 29% of Democrats favor conducting airstrikes against Syria while 48% are opposed. Opinion among independents is similar (29% favor, 50% oppose). Republicans are more divided, with 35% favoring airstrikes and 40% opposed.
The military action is resoundingly looked upon by Americans as doing little good and in fact making matters much worse in the Middle East. A whopping 74% believe that U.S. airstrikes in Syria are likely to create a backlash against the United States and its allies in the region. Gee, ya think? Barack Obama claims that GITMO is a vehicle for terrorist recruitment, um, what the hell does he think a solo US strike with no, none, nada collation would do? Another 61% of Americans think that such a military action could lead to a long term military action in Syria.
CNN also is reporting that another national poll, an ABC News/Washington Post survey shows that only 36% of the public supports launching missile strikes against the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad if the U.S. has determined that Damascus has used chemical weapons against its own citizens. 59% of Americans oppose military action.
Nearly six in 10 Americans in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll oppose unilateral U.S. missile strikes against Syria, and even more oppose arming the Syrian rebels – a complication for Barack Obama and proponents of military action in Congress alike.
Even given the United States’ assertion that the Syrian government used chemical weapons in the civil war there, 59 percent in the national survey, conducted Wednesday through Sunday, oppose U.S. missile strikes, far more than the 36 percent who support them.
The American people have lost trust in Obama and his foreign policy because frankly, he has none. Obama’s vision has worked so well in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and now Syria.
John Kerry: He Was For Assad, Before He was Against Him and Called Him Hitler … Kerry Seen in Pic Dining with Assad
How many of you would have had dinner with Adolf Hitler or Saddam Hussein?
Talk about your embarrassing pics and a lack of credibility. The UK Daily Mail has a 2009 photo of John Kerry having a pleasant dinner with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and their wives. As reported at the Weekly Standard, Kerry has met with Assad on numerous occasions and once lauded Assad in 2011 as being a “very generous”. Hmm, that is a far cry from what Kerry is saying these days. It would appear that Obama’s Secretary of State has a severe credibility issue. I guess Kerry was for Assad before he was against him. How is it that Kerry goes from an intimate dinner for four to calling him the Hitler of our time. Really? I mean seriously, how many get to dine with Hitler? And this is the guy who is trying to sell us on attacking Syria?
Once again we see John Kerry, reporting for duty or is it reporting for dinner?
An astonishing photograph of John Kerry having a cozy and intimate dinner with Bashar al-Assad has emerged at the moment the U.S Secretary of State is making the case to bomb the Syrian dictator’s country and remove him from power.
Kerry, who compared Assad to Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein yesterday, is pictured around a small table with his wife Teresa Heinz and the Assads in 2009.
Assad and Kerry, then a Massachusetts senator, lean in towards each other and appear deep in conversation as their spouses look on.
A waiter is pictured at their side with a tray of green drinks, believed to be lemon and crushed mint
The picture was likely taken in February 2009 in the Naranj restaurant in Damascus, when Kerry led a delegation to Syria to discuss finding a way forward for peace in the region.
Well, I personally believe that — I mean, this is my belief, okay?” Kerry said. “But President Assad has been very generous with me in terms of the discussions we have had. And when I last went to — the last several trips to Syria — I asked President Assad to do certain things to build the relationship with the United States and sort of show the good faith that would help us to move the process forward.”
Looks like John Kerry has protesters at his home telling him “Hands off Syria” and it does not look like a Tea Party rally.
Hey, and go to Patterico’s Pontification … look who is shaking the hand of Assad, it is none other than two faced Nancy Pelosi. I guess she had to shake his hand in order to see what a miserable, murderous dictator he was.