A ‘Threat Against Clinton’? Seriously??? The Neverending Bias and Hypocrisy Of The Media

If Donald Trump were to say “Good morning,” the media would ignite a giant scandal, suggesting he said those words on a cloudy day – and worse yet said it with a hateful tone – and even worse still, clearly was implying that only white males deserved to actually have a good morning.

So it shouldn’t be any surprise that Donald Trump is in the hot seat again.  He will continue to be in that hot seat for another 3 months.  Because virtually every single “journalist” in America is a love child of Joseph Goebbels.

NBC covers the latest story this way:

Trump ‘Second Amendment’ Comment Seen as Veiled Threat Against Clinton
by Andrew Rafferty

Donald Trump’s comments Tuesday suggesting that “2nd Amendment people” could stop Hillary Clinton from making judicial nominations sparked outrage from opponents — but the campaign defended the remarks by arguing that Trump was referring to the group’s considerable political power.

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment,” Trump said during a rally in North Carolina on Tuesday.

“By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”

The Clinton campaign and other Trump opponents rejected Trump campaign’s explanation and blamed the GOP nominee for suggesting violence as a possible means of preventing Clinton from appointing judges if she is elected president.

“This is simple — what Trump is saying is dangerous. A person seeking to be the President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way,” Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said in a statement.

And Sen. Chris Murphy, D-CT, responded on Twitter: “Don’t treat this as a political misstep. It’s an assassination threat, seriously upping the possibility of a national tragedy & crisis.”

And Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., took to social media to say: “@realDonaldTrump makes death threats because he’s a pathetic coward who can’t handle the fact that he’s losing to a girl.”

She added, “Your reckless comments sound like a two-bit dictator.”

One of the strongest voices condemning Trump was that of Gabby Giffords, who as a congresswoman from Arizona was shot in the head during a public event in January 2011.

“Donald Trump might astound Americans on a routine basis, but we must draw a bright red line between political speech and suggestions of violence,” Giffords said in a joint statement with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly. “What political leaders say matters to their followers.”

But Trump’s campaign denied that he was suggesting violence, instead saying the real estate mogul was referencing the power gun rights advocates have at the voting booth.

“It’s called the power of unification — 2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power,” Trump campaign spokesman Jason Miller said in a statement. “And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won’t be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump.”

And Trump running mate, Mike Pence, told reporters Tuesday afternoon that Trump “is clearly saying is that people who cherish that right, who believe that firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens makes our communities more safe, not less safe, should be involved in the political process and let their voice be heard.”

Asked whether Trump was suggesting violence, Pence said, “of course not, no. Donald Trump is urging people around this country to act in a manner consistent with their convictions in the course of this election, and people who cherish the Second Amendment have a very clear choice in this election.”

Clinton obviously has Secret Service protection, and Cathy Milhoan, director of communication for the agency said they were “aware of the comments” but had no further statement.

It’s not the first time suggestions of violence have become part of the campaign. Last month, the Secret Service said it was investigating New Hampshire State Sen. Al Baldasaro, who serves as an adviser for Trump’s campaign on veteran’s issues, after he called for Clinton to be executed for “treason” related to her use of a private email server.

A Trump spokesperson said the candidate did not agree with those statements. Still, Baldasaro received a shout-out from the candidate at a campaign event last weekend.

Ooh, it’s so, so terrible.  Donald Trump is trying to arrange for Hillary’s assassination.  And neither Hillary nor any of her supporters have said one single thing suggesting a dark and terrible and terrifying future if Donald Trump were to be elected president, such that a crazed Democrat – Democrats and Democrat race-identifying groups being responsible for more than ninety percent of all violent crime in America – might actually assassinate Donald Trump.

As an example, consider what Hillary Clinton supporter Will Smith just suggested:

Actor Will Smith thinks Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy is a good thing for America — because now the country can “cleanse” itself of the Republican nominee and his supporters.

At a press event in Dubai to promote his latest film Suicide Squad, the 47-year-old actor said he believes it is important to “speak out about the insanity” of the 2016 presidential race.

“As painful as it is to hear Donald Trump talk and as embarrassing as it is as an American to hear him talk, I think it’s good,” Smith said, according to the Associated Press. “We get to know who people are and now we get to cleanse it out of our country.”

But so what?  That’s different.

EVERY SINGLE TIME IN HISTORY THAT WORD “CLEANSE” HAS BEEN USED IN ANY SIMILAR CONTEXT, IT WAS A EUPHEMISM FOR THE EXTERMINATION OF A GROUP OF PEOPLE FOR EITHER POLITICAL OR RACIST REASONS.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.  Hitler used it that way; Stalin used it that way; Chairman Mao used it that way; Pol Pot used it that way.  And one more than one hundred million human beings are DEAD because of words just like the words that Hillary supporter Will Smith just used.

And of course, you’ve just got to hand it to Hollywood liberals who make millions of dollars marketing themselves as gun-toting heroes and then campaigning to make everybody else poor as they disarm them.

How many Democrats will never again go to see a Will Smith movie because the man just morally disqualified himself from ever receiving so much as one penny from any American ever again?  Not ONE.

More important, how many mainstream media “journalists” will tie Will Smith directly to Hillary Clinton and associate his incredibly vile remarks to her???  Not ONE.

Another act of savage hypocrisy comes out in this story:

Imagine if Trump were ahead in the polls and one of his leading elected senatorial spokespeople mocked Hillary Clinton, personally attacking her for cowardice and then ending with by mocking that Hillary “can’t handle the fact that she’s losing to a man.”

It is a terrible, unforgivable thing to be a misogynist; but there aint nothing wrong in our culture with a woman openly being a misandrist (a hater of men).  And so the same media that rabidly froths at the mouth every single time Donald Trump or one of his supporters says something that smacks of male chauvinism merely yawns every single time Hillary Clinton or one of her supporters says something anti-male.

But the fact that if you are a journalist, you are a two-faced dishonest hypocrite guarantees that double-standards don’t need to be mentioned.

So Obama CIA-Director Michael Hayden continues with the demonstration of how “facts” work when he said this of Donald Trump:

The former head of the CIA, retired Gen. Michael Hayden, told CNN’s Jake Tapper: “If someone else had said that said outside the hall, he’d be in the back of a police wagon now with the Secret Service questioning him.”

US Secret Service communications director Cathy Milhoan told CNN the agency “is aware of Mr. Trump’s comments.”

Hayden added: “You’re not just responsible for what you say. You are responsible for what people hear.”

Let’s just categorically first state for the record that if “someone else had illegally installed an unauthorized and unsecured secret personal server in a bathroom closet and placed thousands of top secret emails on it so our worst enemies could easily hack the system and steal our most vital secrets, she’d be in GITMO getting WATERBOARDED.

But I guess we’re going to apply a different standard now.

Just as Hayden says, “You’re not just responsible for what you say.  You are responsible for what people hear.”

You know, unless you’re Hillary Clinton, in which case you get to brazenly violate our national security laws and then get away with it on the grounds that you had no idea you were actually doing what you were in fact caught doing.

Here’s a final one: in another so-far-over-the-top-remark it is beyond UNREAL, Hayden called Trump “a clear and present danger”:

MICHAEL HAYDEN: Look, we gotta call balls and strikes the way we see them, alright? We all felt strongly enough about what we believe to be a clear and present danger, that we felt compelled to say what we said…

JAKE TAPPER: You just called Donald Trump a clear and present danger.

You look at the parlance of what that phrase means: If somebody is declared “a clear and present danger,” it literally becomes the duty of every soldier to eliminate that threat by any means necessary.  So in other words, Michael Hayden just called for the assassination of Donald Trump.

But as blatant as all this crap is, we still don’t get to the REAL hypocrisy until we get to Barack Obama’s words:

Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’
By WSJ Staff
Jun 14, 2008 1:29 pm ET

[Editor’s note: This blog post was published in 2008. In the wake of Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz., a number of lawmakers and others have called for toning down the political rhetoric and President Barack Obama led a moment of silence this morning for the victims. Click here and here for more. Also, check back with Washington Wire for updates.]

Amy Chozick reports on the presidential race from Philadelphia.

Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?

That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

For what it’s worth, that “Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson, Arizona” was the very one that ended with Gabby Giffords – who is now all of a sudden “one of the strongest voices condemning Trump” – being shot.

She has never ONCE called out the wicked Barack Hussein Obama for his terrorist threat to use GUNS against Republicans.

Obama also infamously told Latinos on a racist basis “to punish your enemies.”

And to put those words into perspective, Donald Trump didn’t threaten with “guns” the way Obama did; he threatened with the “2nd Amendment.”  Which apparently is even more dangerous than guns.

If Donald Trump meant his threat, than Barack Obama meant his more direct threat.

The fact that Barack Obama said something he shouldn’t have said and got elected means that we have to elect Donald Trump for saying something he shouldn’t have said, just to be fair.

Hey, let’s go back to Hillary Clinton, 2008, explaining why she should remain in the race:

“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right?” Clinton said. “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it.”

Oh, oh.  Hillary Clinton suggested to her followers that it wasn’t too late yet to assassinate her political rival.

The media jumped all over her for that and Hillary was forced to apologize for her “assassination remark.”  But that was ONLY because the mainstream media was totally in the tank for Obama and treated Hillary like a Republican.

Just as now they’re all totally in the tank for Hillary and are treating Trump like an alien species of Nazi cockroach.

But did Trump use the word “gun” the way Obama did?  Nope.  Did Trump use the word “assassinated” the way Hillary Clinton did?  Nope.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the media actually gave you that history when they breathlessly reported on this story of Donald Trump going beyond the pale that only Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have ever gone beyond before?  Wouldn’t facts in context change the meaning of the story???  Which is why they’re not doing it.

If the media wanted to lambast Trump in a fair way, they could title their story thus: “Trump joins Hillary Clinton in suggesting the assassination of a political rival.”  But it appears that they don’t remember what Hillary did.  And they don’t want anyone else too, either.

The entire project of the mainstream media right now is to make Donald Trump absolutely unelectable by depicting him as an unhinged man.  If the American people understood that Barack Obama threatened to kill his opponents “the Chicago Way” and Hillary Clinton threatened to have her opponent assassinated, you’d have a very different view of Donald Trump’s supposedly “beyond the pale” remark.

Hillary Clinton just came out and said this regarding the “2nd Amendment” as “threat” remark:

“Words matter, my friends.”

You mean, except for every single word in every single one of the 33,000 emails you destroyed so the American people couldn’t see how much YOUR words would have mattered given that they would have put you in prison for the remainder of your natural life???

Mainstream media “journalists” will NEVER be fair.  You can understand that the media has driven in their aiming stakes so that the field of fire will always be directed at Donald Trump.

The only thing we can hope here – given the sheer number of Americans who believe in their 2nd Amendment right to protect themselves in a world that Obama and Clinton have allowed to careen wildly out of control – is the fact that people will rightly view this as proof that Hillary Clinton (who wants to allow any victim of any incident involving a firearm to sue the gun manufacturer thereby putting gun makers out of business and thereby taking away our guns by fiat) truly DOES want to take away our 2nd Amendment and the guns that keep our families safe in our own homes.  All we can do is hope that in their biased frenzy to demonize Trump, the media goes too far and inadvertently strikes a nerve in the American psyche.

Let’s consider what the media is “forgetting” to cover while they hyperventilate over Donald Trump allegedly calling for the assassination of Hillary Clinton…

As we speak, Hillary Clinton just got caught featuring the father of the terrorist mass-murderer at a gay Orlando nightclub proudly supporting the presidential candidate who is by far and away the most pro-terrorist and the most anti-American:

Hey kids, that’s “Seddique Mateen, whose son Omar killed 49 people at Pulse nightclub on June 12, was seen grinning as he watched the Democratic presidential nominee speak from the area behind the podium usually reserved for VIPs.”

Usually reserved for VIPs and ALWAYS carefully VETTED.

For the official record, the murderous son, Omar, was ALSO a registered Democrat.

If you’re a terrorist, there is absolutely zero question whom YOU’RE voting for.

Just as if you’re a cop-assassinating criminal, there is zero question whom you’re voting for.

The Democrat Party – especially the Democrat Party that will exist if Hillary Clinton is elected president – is an utterly vile, demonic entity.

But hey, we journalists are Joseph Goebbel’s love children; let’s refuse to talk about ACTUAL TERRORISTS WHO MASS-MURDERED AMERICANS and instead talk about some crap Donald Trump said that we could savagely attack him for.

As we speak, Hillary Clinton is being busted all over the place for quid pro quo deals in which she sold out America to enrich herself at the American people’s expense.  Even the leftist Huffington Post is openly asking, “Has Hillary Clinton won the email battle only to lose the corruption war?”  Even BEFORE this latest slamming indictment proving yet ANOTHER Hillary Clinton act of corruption came out, HuffPo was saying:

You HAVE to click on that to read it: “The evidence showing clear-cut, stupid proof, quid-pro quo between Bill and Hillary Clinton donors and candidate Hillary Clinton is getting too obvious to ignore.”

Unless you are a mainstream media “journalist” love-child of Joseph Goebbels, that is.  Then you can easily ignore it by alleging that whatever quip Donald Trump said today rises to a level that forces us to give ZERO air-time to the documented treasonous criminal that Hillary Clinton is.

We are finding what are textbook examples of “quid-pro quo,” in which access, influence and favors were bought and sold.  In one stunning example, Huma Abedin, Clinton’s top aide – in spite of her now-provably false testimony that Hillary Clinton burned her schedules for security – is caught having an email exchange in which she’s asked for Hillary’s schedule (you know, so people who paid to play can “just happen” to show up where Hillary is) emails back basically saying, “I just happened to leave it on my bed in my hotel room and the door just happens to be unlocked and I just happen not to be there to physically see if you’re looking at it.”

Aside from the obvious sale of that schedule, who ELSE could have seen that schedule?  hen you see this blatantly cavalier attitude toward security when it comes to Hillary Clinton enriching herself, how is it NOT a surprise that the Russians and probably all our other enemies hacked Hillary’s unsecured server that was installed totally for Hillary’s a) convenience and b) ability to break the law and purge the evidence???

Why was Huma Abedin on both payrolls for the Clinton Foundation AND the State Department???  How is that not the very embodiment of “conflict of interest”???  Why did Hillary Clinton personally sign off on such an obvious blatantly dishonest and corrupt double-dip???  Despite signing a pledge that she would never ever EVER conflate State Department business with Clinton Foundation business????

Why did Bill Clinton’s value as a speaker-for-hire suddenly skyrocket so massively after Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State when every other president’s value rapidly declines after leaving office???  Nine years after leaving office, why does Bill Clinton’s value as a speaker suddenly soar from $100,000 a speech to $500,000 a speech???  Other than paying to play for Hillary’s influence as Secretary of State???  Why did the Hillary Clinton State Department approve of so many obvious conflicts of interests involving entities with business or policy interests with the U.S. State Department???

It is WRONG to say that none of this indicts Hillary; ALL of it indicts her.  She signed off on ALL of it.  She is literally the one who set up the entire criminal enterprise.

Donors pushed the Clinton State Department for access, favors, even JOBS.  And of course “jobs” as “favors.”  Pay-to-play.  Quid-pro quo.

Here is just one of MANY textbook dictionary definitions of quid-pro quo “pay-to-play”.

And by the way, NONE of these emails were in those that Hillary turned over to the State Department despite her swearing under oath that she turned over ALL emails involving the State Department to the State Department.

The fact that these emails even exist in and of themselves proves that Hillary Clinton is a criminal.

Most conservatives, myself included, have been pointing out all along that Hillary Clinton did not have a secret unauthorized private server installed to post national security secrets for our enemies to hack and view; rather, she did it as a criminal conspiracy to prevent the transparency that the law requires of our public servants and maintain the ability to destroy evidence – which she did to the tune of some 33,000 purged emails.  The legal theory of the spoliation of evidence inference holds that when a party destroys evidence, it is justifiable to infer that the party had “consciousness of guilt” or other motivation to avoid the evidence.  The destruction of evidence is itself evidence.

In any legitimate system of justice, a court would find Hillary Clinton guilty and respond to her protests by saying, “Well, then, it’s just too damn bad you destroyed all the evidence of your innocence, isn’t it”?

We all understand what Habitat for Humanity does.  What does the Clinton Foundation do?  It was ALWAYS murky.  And now we know with crystal clarity: the Clinton Foundation was a conduit for influencing federal officials at the State Department for the purpose of rewarding Clinton donors with jobs, with favors, with influence on a quid-pro quo basis.

Will the media report the facts?  Will the mainstream media create the drumbeat of saying to Obama and Hillary and all the tools who speak in their stead, “YOU DID WRONG!!!  AND WE ARE GOING TO HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE!!!”

NO.  Don’t hold your breath.

Instead, it’s like Trump says “It’s my duty to…” and the entire mainstream media is like, “Trump said ‘doody’!!!”

Realize whether we’re talking about ANY of the ENTIRE Hillary Clinton email scandal, the mainstream media has been WORTHLESS in reporting.  Do you know who forced this story open?  Judicial Watch and the Republican House.  Because the mainstream media that will crawl up Donald Trump’s rectum with a magnifying glass WILL NOT DO ITS JOB OR BE FAIR OR HONEST IN ITS COVERAGE.

No entity on earth is more evil than a biased media that distorts the facts and shapes their narratives.

You might see such a statement and think, “Wait a minute!  ISIS is worse than the mainstream media!”  And my contention is no it isn’t; because if the mainstream media had just done it’s damn JOB rather than spend the last eight years whitewashing for Barack Obama, Obama would NEVER have been allowed to get away with doing NOTHING while that terrorist army exploded into existence and created a caliphate.  The only way an Islamic State can get away with such disgusting and vicious evil is when a dishonest media refuses to report the truth and allows people to believe lies.  Just as the only reason Hillary Clinton is free to run for president rather than already having been convicted and serving a long sentence in PRISON is because the same corrupt, dishonest media will not hold Barack Obama responsible the way they would have had a Republican president tried to exonerate an obviously guilty successor.  Had the Democrats not been allowed to nominate such a terrible and yes, CRIMINAL candidate, the Republicans would not have angrily responded by nominating Donald Trump.  If history proves anything, it is that if you distort or warp history, you allow the most evil things to happen as lies triumph.  The media again and again has allowed the worst outcomes to become reality by playing political games with reality.  People cannot even POSSIBLY do the right thing if they don’t know the truth; and the mainstream media exists today to prevent people from knowing the truth.  And it is for that reason that I believe that journalists will one day scream as they burn in a lower level of hell than the Nazis.

 

 

Yet Another Vile Liberal (And Is There Any Other Kind?) Busted For Faking Hate Crimes Against Conservatives

I have detailed several examples of this crap on my blog.  There was the case of the liberal who vandalized a Democrat headquarters in Colorado in a deliberate effort to blame Republicans.  I recounted the case of a liberal woman who literally carved swastikas on her own body in an attempt to frame innocent people for a bogus “hate crime.”  There was the case of a liberal public school employee who started a movement to brand Tea Party protestors as racist bigots by encourging liberals to infiltrate the movement with hateful signs.  I have also pointed out that the media is now INFAMOUS for screeching hate against the Tea Party when they have done NOTHING wrong even as they have continually covered up the liberal and Democrat-praised Occupy Movement whose members have been arrested going on eight-thousand times for crimes including rape and actual terrorism.  I’ve documented that we can go back to Saul Alinsky encouraging liberal demonstrators to show up at Republican events wearing KKK outfits to falsely insinuate that racists are pro-Republican.

It doesn’t even matter to Democrats that they steal their targets from the Nazis.  These people are THAT wicked.

The leftist-owned mainstream media is all over this: they falsely accuse conservatives all the damn time at the very highest levels.  And of course they are joined by uber-Democrat Nancy Pelosi.

I’ve pointed out that this is so damn typical of the left it is beyond unreal.  And documented cases of where liberals tried to pull their crap off on me.

This crap happens all the time on the part of the left because they are bad people with no morals and no decency and no integrity and no honor whatsoever.

At least this one got busted (Note that this psychotic fraud is an “award-winning” blogger from a known liberal and pro-Democrat Party organizaton):

Lib Blogger Meg Lanker Allegedly Faked Rape Threat from Conservative
By Howard Portnoy | May 02, 2013 | 14:55

If you can’t beat ‘em, frame ‘em. That in a nutshell would appear to be the motivation behind Think Progress award-winning blogger Meg Lanker-Simons’s false claim that she had been threatened with a hate crime via social media. On Wednesday, she was charged by University of Wyoming Police with faking her own threat.

Trib.com reports that Lanker-Simons was charged with interfering in a police investigation, which is a misdemeanor. University police say that Lanker-Simons admitted to authoring an anonymous threat of sexual violence targeted at her on Facebook last week.

---

Lanker-Simons accused an anonymous source of posting a threat of rape on the Facebook page ‘UW Crushes’ on April 24. But the citation issued Monday claims Lanker-Simons admitted to making the post, then lying about it….

The post, purported to be the work of an out-of-control conservative detractor, read:

I want to hatef**k Meg Lanker — so hard. That chick that runs her liberal mouth all the time and doesn’t care who knows it. I think its [sic] hot and it makes me angry. One night with me and she’s gonna be a good Republican b**ch.

Trib.com notes that Lanker-Simons has been in similar situations in the past. She reported receiving a death threat via email in March 2011 just before syndicated columnist Ann Coulter was to visit the University of Wyoming.

The message, which was emailed to the Star-Tribune, read, “If I see her I will send her to Hell with one shot and you can bet I wont [sic] miss.”

Cross-posted from Liberty Unyielding.

And by “busted” I mean “arrested” by the police:

Liberal Blogger Cited For Allegedly Faking Facebook Rape Threat And Blaming It On Conservative
May 1, 2013 by Ben Bullard

A liberal University of Wyoming student who routinely berates conservatives on her blog and college radio show has been charged for allegedly staging an anonymous rape threat against herself and attributing it to a fictitious conservative Facebook poster.

Meg Lanker-Simons, whose cognitive dissonance blog last year even garnered her an honor from liberal spigots Mother Jones and Think Progress, was cited by University of Wyoming police for interference with an investigation and making false statements to the police department, following this rape threat she allegedly made against herself on the “UW Crushes” Facebook page, posing as a close-minded conservative creep:

I want to hate f**k Meg Lanker-Simons so hard. That chick that runs her liberal mouth all the time and doesn’t care who knows it. I think its hot and it makes me angry. One night with me and shes gonna be a good Republican bit*h.

The threat gave Lanker-Simons, pictured, the opportunity to scold the allegedly phony, would-be “hate f**ker” on her award-winning blog, where she called the threat “disgusting, misogynistic, and apparently something the admins of this page think is a perfectly acceptable sentiment.”

In 2011, Lanker-Simons reported she’d received an emailed death threat, which was allegedly timed to coincide with a campus visit from conservative columnist Ann Coulter.

“The message, which listed Lanker-Simon’s address and included a description of her car, was emailed to the Star-Tribune,” reported the Casper Star Tribune of the 2011 incident.

H/T: campusreform.org

These liberals are demon-possessed people.  There is no other way around it.

Liberals are people who live in a world of lies.  They are people who prefer lies and hate the truth.  Falsely slandering conservatives is merely the next logical step to actualizing the world of  lies that they live in.

And the demon-possessed mainstream media propagandists are on their side.

Obama DNI Shockingly Clueless About Major Global Terrorism Incident

Liberals might have excoriated George Bush as failing to recognize the terrorist threat to America prior to the 9/11 attack.  For the record, Bush had only been in office for 8 months prior to the attack.  All of the terrorists who hit us were already in the country prior to Bush taking office.  And Bush’s lackluster pursuit of terrorism merely continued Bill Clinton’s basically nonexistent pursuit of terrorism (eg., Clinton refusing to take Osama bin Laden when the Somalis offered his head on a golden platter).

Still, Bush was caught flat-footed.  And in that sense, he deserved criticism.

Now, compare Bush to Barack Obama.  Unlike George Bush, whose predecessor had done nothing to deal with terrorism, George Bush did so much the left howled in outrage over all of his steps.  Unlike George Bush, who had to build Homeland Security out of nothing, Barack Obama had a giant and successful apparatus which he proceeded to successively dismantle.  And unlike George Bush, who was criticized by the left for not being ready after only eight months in office, Barack Obama clearly isn’t ready even after two full years of office.  And, to further give just blame to Obama, Bush’s 8 months of unpreparedness occurred prior to 9/11, when America wasn’t expecting an attack; Obama’s 2 full years of unpreparedness have occurred in the aftermath of 9/11, when only a genuine moron wouldn’t understand the massive threat of terrorism.

Here’s the latest reason to not think, but KNOW, that the Obama administration is criminally clueless when it comes to terrorism (or should I say, to “man-caused disasters”):

Shocking. Top Obama Intelligence Official Clueless on London Bomb Plot
by Tammy Bruce on December 21, 2010

ABC News:”First of all, London,” Sawyer said. “How serious is it? Any implication that it was coming here? … Director [of National Intelligence] Clapper?”

“London?” James Clapper said, before Brennan entered the conversation explaining the arrests.

Later in the interview, Sawyer returned to the subject.

“I was a little surprised you didn’t know about London,” Sawyer told Clapper.

“Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t,” he replied.

Another indication of how disconnected and chaotic the Obama administration really is when it comes to the security of this nation (and all else for that matter). There is no reason in any scenario for our US Director of National Intelligence to not know of major terrorist arrests in London. After all, everyone else knew–reports had been everywhere starting in the morning. Everyone else at the table knew as well, including Diane Sawyer. Why didn’t Clapper?

Watch the video here.

This reveals a degree of chaos that we could not have imagined, and moves us into the bizarre. There is no logical or reasoned way to explain this. Obama has created an environment where even those who were presumably competent have been swallowed by the self-declared Theatre of the Absurd inside the White House.

Everyone claims Obama is the Come-Back Kid because Republicans have once again, inexplicably, grabbed their ankles during this illegitimate lame duck session. The ridiculousness of Obama ‘coming back’ is made apparent when the most important aspect of the Federal government’s responsibility–national security–is arguably non-existent.

Clapper was confirmed unanimously by the Senate just this past August. He succeeded Dennis Blair. But make no mistake, while this is awful for Clapper, this speaks more about Obama than anyone else. To say this is shocking is an understatement.

DNI Clapper Looks Stumped by ABC’s Sawyer

Gen. James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, is the person charged with coordinating what the nation knows about terrorism and national security.

But Mr. Clapper appeared to know less than even the casual television viewer during an interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, the anchor of World News Tonight.

Hours earlier, reports flooded cable news shows about arrests of 12 people in London suspected of being part of a potential terrorist plot. In the interview, Ms. Sawyer turned to Mr. Clapper and made an indirect reference to the still-developing incident.

“First of all, London,” she said. “How serious is it? Any implication that it was coming here? Director Clapper?”

The look on Mr. Clapper’s face, and his temporary silence, suggested that he had no idea what she was talking about. He hesitated before saying, “London?”

After a moment or two, he was saved by John Brennan, the White House homeland security adviser, who was also part of the interview, along with Janet Napolitano, the secretary of the department of homeland security. Mr. Brennan explained that Ms. Sawyer was referring to the London arrests.

A few minutes later, Ms. Sawyer returned to Mr. Clapper. “I was a little surprised you didn’t know about London,” she said.

“Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t,” he said, shaking his head.

A spokesperson for Mr. Clapper said in a statement Tuesday night that, “the question about this specific news development was ambiguous. The DNI’s knowledge of the threat streams in Europe is profound and multi-dimensional, and any suggestion otherwise is inaccurate.”

DNI Claper’s knowledge is “profound and multi-dimensional,” just like the idiot who is responsible for putting that moron there, Barry Hussein.

If that’s not enough, let’s examine what Barry Hussein has given us:

In an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder spoke of the ongoing fight to protect American national security and expressed his growing concern with the threat of homegrown terror – a danger which he said  “keeps me up at night.”

“What I am trying to do in this interview is to make people aware of the fact that the threat is real, the threat is different, the threat is constant,” Holder told ABC’s Pierre Thomas, in an interview that aired Tuesday morning.

“The threat has changed from simply worrying about foreigners coming here, to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens — raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born,” Holder added.

The attorney general said that of 126 people who have been charged with allegations related to terrorism in the past 24 months, 50 had been American citizens.

“It is one of the things that keeps me up at night,” Holder said. “You didn’t worry about this even two years ago — about individuals, about Americans, to the extent that we now do. And — that is of — of great concern.”

Holder noted that while he was confident in the United States’ counter-terrorism efforts, Americans “have to be prepared for potentially bad news.”

Two things:

Thing one, even Eric Holder is openly acknowledging that the primary terrorist threat facing America is brand new under Barry Hussein.

Do you remember all the demagoguery and demonization Obama aimed at George Bush about making America less safe?  And now we’re finding that our Liar-in-Chief has made America less safe than it has EVER BEEN.

By the clear statement of Obama’s own attorney general, Barry Hussein hasn’t made America more safe, but less safe.

Thanks for putting the nation at risk, Barry H.

Thing two, out of those “126 people who have been charged with allegations related to terrorism,” every single one of them – that’s 100% – were MUSLIMS.

And yet the most reckless and immoral administration to ever contaminate the White House are enacting a policy which views 99 year-old nuns as being as much of a threat as the people who have attacked or tried to attack us over and over again.

The Democrat Party’s “fix” is to impose homosexuality on our military by fiat of politically correctness, so that thousands more Bradley Mannings can implode our national security from within.

In Memory of Tony Snow & Tim Russert: Paradigms of Decency

I didn’t write about Tim Russert’s passing, although I thought about it.

But, as I think about the passing of Tony Snow today, I am reminded of Tim Russert’s contribution to political discourse as well.

Tony Snow was an articulate conservative, who always argued conservative values and positions effectively.  But he was much more than that: he was a genuinely real human being who valued other people.

That made him rare in the world of politics.

One of his friends, Fox News’ Griff Jenkins, said of Snow during the July 12 broadcast, “Tony Snow taught me more about optimism, more about joy, more about overcoming, than anyone I have ever known.”

He was – along with Tim Russert – a man of true religion.  Both men came to radiate a sense of profound decency and goodness of character that characterized their work and changed the people around them.

It was from their Christian religion that both Tim Russert and Tony Snow obtained their values that so shaped and molded their characters that they were never without their smiles even during difficult times.  Somehow these two men “got it,” and were able to carry “it” with them even through the bloodsport atmosphere of the world of politics.

I have frequently considered my own tendency to take politics personally, and to consider the “other side” as a threat to everything I stand for and believe in.

The passing of men like Tim Russert and Tony Snow makes me think about the rightness and validity of my approach all the more.

I still believe that many Democrats in key positions of power genuinely do represent a threat to this country, and that I must fight to stand up for what I passionately believe is right and oppose what I passionately believe is wrong.  I also believe that a greater sense of civility would have a powerful positive impact on the nature of our political discourse and upon our society in general.

There’s a tension between these two ideas.  It’s almost like walking on a tightrope.

Men like Tim Russert and Tony Snow found the balance.

Their passing makes me think and gives me hope.  If they can find such a marvelous balance, perhaps I can also.

In any event, I have no question that both men are in heaven right now, arguing politics with smiles on their faces.  Maybe one day we will be able to do the same down here on earth.