Saturday, October 27, 2012

What is worse than American traitors on the ground, Like Hanoi Jane?

You must be asking yourself what anyone could believe is worse than the Communist Traitor Bitch, Jane Fonda, and her actions in Vietnam in the 1960s?  Well a friend of mine from Central Texas offers his view, based on the recent actions (actually in-action) by the Obama Administration in response to the terrorist attacks in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.  

"What's worse than Jane Fonda and her actions in Vietnam, it's an American command structure that:
1)  doesn't defend American diplomats who are under attack, with real time audio and video of the military attack in progress,
2)  that has mobile, competent military resources with 1 to 2 hours of the site of that attack,
3)  that has a few assets in the same city and orders them to stand down (one of the dead Seals disobeyed the order to stand down and defended / rescued as many as 30 people), and 
4)  an administration that spends weeks and weeks deceiving the American people about all of this, for the sake of an ELECTION.

"I suspect our president, our Secretary of State, our UN Ambassador and our Secretary of Defense all are responsible for various combinations of 1 through 4 (and more critical items could be added to this list--I'm just writing with quick thoughts, not comprehensively!).

"EVERY DAY for the last three or four days we hear more and more specific, heart rending details of our soldiers and our diplomats not protected before, during or after the military murder, WITH NO ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON, quite possibly ignored by the President himself.

"You won't see anything about this in the Liberal TV or print media."

While this is indeed likely based on what I have read and seen in the news, there is another possibility!  I have no evidence that this is true, but as I often say in regard to the Obama Administration, this is certainly believable!

What if, the whole attack on our Benghazi Embassy was part of an elaborate plan by a desperate politician to get re-elected gone terribly wrong?  We already know that the Democrats and Obama are desperate, have zero integrity, and are not only willing but also prone to do, or say, anything to get re-elected.  What if this was to be the October surprise that was to insure Obama's landslide re-election?

Just suppose, that someone created what is now known to be a bogus story about riots caused by a video, which few, if any in the Middle East have seen. Then uses the bogus riots as cover and in cahoots with a couple bad operators in Libya, have our Benghazi Embassy come under fire and Ambassador Stevens captured and taken hostage.  The idea possibly being to have our Ambassador just roughed up but not killed.  (We do have evidence now that the CIA told several organizations, including one of the former seals who died, to "stand down" when the embassy in Benghazi asked for help.) 

Then three weeks later, after weeks of intense negotiation and diplomatic efforts by President Obama personally, Ambassador Stevens is released safely and comes home to a hero's welcome.  Ambassador Stevens then accompanies the Great One, on the campaign trail the last few weeks of the campaign as Obama wins in a landslide because of his great and eloquent efforts as "peace maker"!

But what someone didn't understand is that real American's just don't "stand down" and watch as other American's are being captured and roughed up.  The two former seals, now dead, stepped in and did what real Americans do and things then went to hell!  The White House, the State Department, and the Obama Campaign are in a panic, Obama dissembles and the lying and cover up begins.  

As I said there is no evidence of this but it certainly is believable, based on the actions of the Obama Administration!  

But I'm just speculatin!

Willie P

Friday, October 26, 2012

Chicago is famous for three Things!

Obamas Campaign in one Picture

Real Leadership!

American Arrogance? I think NOT!

What is threatening America's Gene Pool?

You want to know why I like Alan West, here it is!

Willie P

Campaign Spending tops $2 Billion

Now I appreciate those who are willing to serve in public office, I don't have the patience.  I would make a good benevolent dictator, but not a good middle of the road appeaser.  But I digress.

Campaign spending this presidential election cycle will approach $2 billion.  That is $2,000 million dollars to win the election for a job that pays $0.4 million a year for four years plus perks probably totaling another $1 million per year.  Is it no wonder that the politicians we elect have a hard time balancing the Country's checkbook?  It is also a fact that when you depend so heavily on "other people's money" there are a lot of favors that must get repaid during your term.  Never ever believe that large donors give money to politicians because they just believe in their causes.  Large donors contribute because they want to influence decisions and get something in return!  And that my friends is true whether the donor gives to the Republicans or the Democrats.  Follow the link above and look at the donors to the Super Pacs!

Just wonderin!

Willie P

Thursday, October 25, 2012

What did our Golfer/Campaigner in Chief Know and when? More than you have been told!

10/25/2012   Thursday   Noon

If you care about Middle Eastern affairs, particularly the facts about the Benghazi assassination of our ambassador and the military-style invasion and burning, looting and murderous killing spree in a sovereign U.S. territory in Libya, you should know there is new information evolving into the public sphere EVERY day now . . . very interesting and revealing emails and so on.  You can follow it all on the web if the National Liberal TV News doesn't tell you about it.

Here is a good piece for you to read over.  Just the title and beginning is given here, but the details are fascinating and informative if you wish to click into the details.  Our own movement's complicity, duplicity and incompetence probably is occurring, right up until today, at the highest imaginable levels.  These can-of-worms realities get in the way of a good election campaign.  

Hey, fuhgeddabout all that U.S. guvmint stuff!  Can't be bothered.   We've Got An Election to Run Here!    

Think the liberal media will be reporting on any of this?  Or will they help cover it up and hide it from the American public to assist the Obama re-election?

A. Thinker


Obama Knew
Twitter Share on
Obama Knew
By Jeffrey Lord
Did ideological soft spot for Sharia keep U.S government from protecting Benghazi consulate?
Obama knew.
Say again, Obama knew.
So. The question.
If what happened in Benghazi wasn't incompetence . . . [could it have been . . . a cover up . . . ideologic blindness  . . . . ?]
Much more to read in the remainder of the article.  Today's new emails.  Commentary is all over the web.

. . . my position of the "War on Women"

. . . my position on the “War on Women”: 
I’m still looking for a place to declare my surrender.

10/25/2012   Thursday   10:20 AM

Glory hallelujah!  Giant liberal discovery!

If ANY conservative, EVER, said that women's voting brain and thinking mechanisms were influenced, even a little bit, by their HORMONES, you know what would happen:  they would be drawn and quartered on the public square, after having their manly parts removed while they were alive.  You realize that drawing and quartering is a fatal activity for the primary participant, so to get their attention, you have to remove the manly parts FIRST.

But LIBERALS CAN SAY (ANY DUMB) THING THEY WANT (and get fawning media coverage)!  Here we have such fantastic expertise telling the whole world that hormones have large effects on women's voting.  Hey, I'm just reporting this to you.  Don't shoot the messenger.


This Is a Dumb Way of Measuring Voter Attitudes . . . Period.
Hey, remember when it was offensive to talk about women voters as if they were nothing more than their, er, “lady parts”? (This was before the Obama campaign website offered, and then removed, an illustration declaring, “Vote like your lady parts depend on it.” I missed the part of the GOP platform that called for national mandatory hermaphrodism.)
CNN demonstrates that just about any social scientist can get headlines during election season if their research’s conclusions are likely to generate web traffic:
New research suggests that hormones may influence female voting choices differently, depending on whether a woman is single or in a committed relationship.
Please continue reading with caution. Although the study will be published in the peer-reviewed journal Psychological Science, several political scientists who read the study have expressed skepticism about its conclusions.
The researchers found that during the fertile time of the month, when levels of the hormone estrogen are high, single women appeared more likely to vote for Obama and committed women appeared more likely to vote for Romney, by a margin of at least 20%, Durante said. This seems to be the driver behind the researchers' overall observation that single women were inclined toward Obama and committed women leaned toward Romney.
Here’s how Durante explains this: When women are ovulating, they “feel sexier,” and therefore lean more toward liberal attitudes on abortion and marriage equality. Married women have the same hormones firing, but tend to take the opposite viewpoint on these issues, she says.
“I think they’re overcompensating for the increase of the hormones motivating them to have sex with other men,” she said. It’s a way of convincing themselves that they’re not the type to give in to such sexual urges, she said.
That’s Kristina Durante of the University of Texas, San Antonio, lest you think some lunk-headed man came up with the notion that voting for Romney was a sign of repressed sexual urges.
Ace at the Ace of Spades offers a supremely skeptical post, and I’ll quote the semi-clean portion:
It looks like single women become diehard liberal partisans when they're fertile, and women in committed relationships become more . . . well, Republican.
I have no idea if this is true. I suppose there might be some biochemical mechanism that causes women to think more about their future when ovulating. Maybe there's a biochemical impulse to start thinking about future security. If so, I imagine that would mean single, liberal-leaning women might start thinking about Daddy Government, and married women might start thinking about pro-family policies.
But supposin' don't make it true, and "studies" are, by and large, a non-scientific enterprise chiefly occupied with extracting money from taxpayers to produce junk women's-health pop "science" for slick-covered magazines like Cosmo, and, once upon a time, Newsweek.
Now, you know my position on the “War on Women”: I’m still looking for a place to declare my surrender.
But if you really did believe in some sort of cultural war on women, the notion that a society awash in the lowest-common-denominator entertainment has cultivated a pervasive way of judging women by a different and tougher standard — not the most outlandish theory in the world, from where I sit — then wouldn’t so-called scientific research suggesting that women’s voting patterns are reflections of their hormonal shifts be pretty good example of this?
And while CNN offers quite a few caveats and disclaimers about the research in the article, wouldn’t too-credulous news coverage be an accomplice of sorts in this war?
They may have realized that themselves: The post has been removed: “After further review it was determined that some elements of the story did not meet the editorial standards of CNN.”
Kat Stoeffel of New York magazine: “Female voters! Kindly tell Nate Silver the date of your last period and your relationship status so he can figure out once and for all who's gonna win this thing November 6.

Great article, huh?  Aren't you glad we got all that clear?  Remember, it's intelligent because it came from the liberal side of the world.  

Here's another point from the Democrat Champions of Women in the War Against Women that is currently taking place.  See my initial epigraph, Jar-Jar Binks, "MnyI gipmf up!  MnyI gipmf up!".  The Obama campaign actually told women "to vote as if your lady parts depended on it."  Now I'm not sure what lady parts are in regard to voting.  How about man-ey-man parts?  I dunno.  Someone help me before my mind becomes a pretzel logic conundrum of Obamaconfusion!  Send me clarification and a life vest before I drown in the vast sea of liberal intelligence.

OK, liberal ladies, it's the Obama campaign that labels you by your parts and appearance.  Do big bosoms mean your lady parts carry more weight?  Does that make you more of a power player in the lady parts game?  I dunno know that either.  Call Obama headquarters to find out.  Ask them.  They're the ones who thought all this up and promote it as a campaign theme, to bring us a better election, of 
course . . .  I would think most ladies do not want to be judged by all that, appearances, looksism, bosoms, just like we don't want to judge people by color.  But maybe that's all there is for some people, people who can't think very well:  parts and appearances, shallowness and distractions.  Did you know Mitt Romney once strapped a dog in a doggie crate to the top of his car?! . . . Hey, dog stories about Romney are not a distraction!  They're RELEVANT . . . Is this the smallest president and presidential campaign ever, or what?

Mitt Romney, the Republicans and all Constitutional Conservatives recommend to ladies that you vote with your mind and your hands, especially after thinking about the principles of traditional American government (NOT Fundamentally Transformed America!), $16 trillion (and growing by $1 trillion per Obama-year) indebtedness to China for your children and grandchildren and how we can get this country back on the road to prosperity AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE.    Think about those things!

All your lady parts can do for you is help you populate the world, or give you a pregnancy to abort so that you won't be "punished with a baby" (who said that quote?) or give you a moments pleasure with some man who is, probably, deep down, if he tells you, A REPUBLICAN.  If he's small, maybe a Democrat.  More "parts talk" here.

But if you just vote with your parts, you won't have to bother with thinking, which is based in being a part of intelligent humanity.  Is that what you want?  Yuk.

Best wishes,
An Admirer of Thinking Women (and their parts)

Obama Supporters are throwing in the towel, It's Bill Clinton's Fault!

The Obama campaign press office, the New York Times, posted this article about how Bill Clinton hurt the Obama campaign!  Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall when Bill and Hillary are talking about this piece!

My view, the Obama campaign has given up and started the "it wasn't my fault defense"!  But what is new, nothing has been Obama's fault.  Obama is the personification of Eddie Haskel!

George W. Bush is not doubt relieved, at least this wasn't his fault!

Wille P

From the New York Times!

President Obama with Bill Clinton at the Democratic convention last month.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesPresident Obama with Bill Clinton at the Democratic convention last month.
When the histories of the 2012 campaign are written, much will be made ofBill Clinton’s re-emergence. His convention speech may well have marked the finest moment of President Obama’s re-election campaign, and his ads on the president’s behalf were memorable.
Political Times
Matt Bai’s analysis and commentary.
But there is one crucial way in which the 42nd president may not have served the 44th quite as well. In these final weeks before the election, Mr. Clinton’s expert advice about how to beat Mitt Romney is starting to look suspect.

Brazilian Student Catarina Migliorini Sells Virginity for £483,000!

I would like to give Catarina Migliorini a bit of advice make sure you fully understand the Call Girl Law of Economics: "The perceived value of all goods and services is higher before they are delivered!"  so be sure you get the cash before you deliver the product!

Willie P

Brazilian Student Catarina Migliorini Sells Virginity for £483,000

By HANNAH OSBORNE: Subscribe to Hannah's 
October 25, 2012 11:38 AM GMT
Catarina Migliorini and Alex Stepanov both sold their virginity in an online. (
Catarina Migliorini and Alex Stepanov both sold their virginity in an online auction. (
A 20-year-old Brazilian student has sold her virginity in an online auction to a Japanese man named Natsu for £483,000 ($772,000).
Catarina Migliorini's virginity was bid on by 15 people, with Lucas Zaiden placing the starting bid of $1 on 7 October on the website Virgins Wanted.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

A desperate man in desperate circumstances does desperate things!

The following was written by a friend, Bill Neinast, from Long Point, Texas.  Bill writes for the Brenham Banner Press in Central Texas.  He wrote this article on October 15, 2012 before the second presidential debate.  His point, do not be surprised how low President Obama will stoop to keep himself in the seat of power!  Enjoy!

Willie P

Bill Neinast


A wild animal is most vicious when it’s cornered.  When the survival instinct kicks in, it will use every claw, fang, tooth, tail, muscle and any thing at its disposal to protect itself.

The same is true of the human animal.  The verbal description here, however, is a bit different.  For humans, the warning is that a desperate man in desperate circumstances does desperate things.

So be wary.  A desperate man is now center stage.

President Barack Obama is desperate.  Three weeks ago, he was riding high.  He was so far ahead of Mitt Romney in the polls that he felt disdainful of that simple man sharing the stage with him on October 3.

His lack of concern, for whatever reason, resulted in a dramatic shift in the polling.  The race is now polled as either dead even or with a slight edge for Romney.

The result has pushed the President into a corner.  Vice President Biden, his first line of defense, failed miserably Thursday evening in trying to neutralize Paul Ryan and return the contest to a more even count.

The corner is created when his abysmal domestic record meets a foreign policy that resulted in four American diplomats losing their lives because reports of danger were ignored.

The tragedy of Ambassador Steven’s assassination might have been minimized as a campaign issue if the Obama camp had not tried to cover it up. The cover up was exasperated Thursday evening when VP Biden smilingly contradicted administration intelligence sworn testimony by responding that “we” did not know this was a terrorist attack.

So Obama was faced with having to take the gloves off in the debate or forum Tuesday evening and come out swinging.  He had the daunting task of supporting his failed domestic policy and justifying his excuse of waiting for the facts to be developed in the Steven’s murder.

The facts of Ambassador Steven’s and his guards’ sacrifice are as clear as they will ever be for anyone who wants to look.  They were the result of a well planned and executed attack by al Qaeda, carried out on an anniversary of 9/11, were not preceded by other demonstrations, and had nothing to do with a degrading video of Muhammad that had been released months earlier.

Because of the deadline for this publication, these words were penned before the forum last night.  So I did not know when they were written how the President tried to fight his way out of the corner.

I am guessing that, as there will be no prepared remarks to read from Teleprompters, he will recite a prepared soliloquy quite different from one of his highly regarded predecessors.

Last week I drew a distinction between Obama and Teddy Roosevelt by noting that Obama’s philosophy was to speak softly and not carry a weapon of any kind.  Now it is time to note that Obama is no Harry Truman.

President Truman is often remembered for the sign on his desk that read “The buck stops here.”  Unfortunately, Obama is no Truman.  His spiel will be that, “the buck never got here. It was stopped in the State Department.”  There goes Hillary Clinton under the bus again.  Will she take it this time?

The administration’s  black eye from the Stevens’ assassination is darkening so quickly that Obama may not be able to heal it before November 6.  His excuse that the incident is still under investigation may not protect him until election day, so he is desperate to create a distraction.

In the three weeks remaining before the election, there is nothing that he can do domestically that would have an instant, dramatic effect to turn the tide.  The closest he could come on something in that arena would be to approve the Keystone Pipeline project.  That would be welcome, but would be of interest to so few voters that it is hardly worth the effort.

There are several boiling pots in foreign affairs, however, that are potential election savers for Obama.  Each requires him to interfere in the internal affairs of Muslim governments.  But these are desperate times for a desperate man, so watch out.

The event most likely to occur is an intervention in Syria.  After many months of sitting idly by while tens of thousands of Syrians were murdered or forced into squalid refugee camps in adjoining countries, the great humanitarian Obama may say, “enough is enough,” and commit American forces to the rescue.  Tuesday of last week, there was a quiet, little noticed announcement that U.S. Army personnel and equipment had moved to the Jordanian/Syrian border.  Why?  Most of the refugee traffic is across the Turkish/Syrian border.

Another possibility is to launch bombing attacks against the Iranian nuclear program.  This is a strike that might require the joint action of Israel and the U.S.  Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is anxious to take such action. Currently, however, he has such distain for Obama that he probably would refuse any action that might help the president get reelected.  The PM is probably willing now to wait another three weeks.

So here’s the perspective.

Syrian intervention could sway large numbers of committed and uncommitted voters to go to the polls on November 6 to vote not to change horses in the middle of a war stream.

A military intervention in Syria would cost more American lives.  So what?  An election hangs in the balance and desperate men do desperate things in desperate times.

The Ultimate Insult

Monday, October 22, 2012

Obama get's crucial Endorsements

Obama has pulled off the trifecta of endorsements this week.  Not sure why he is even to bother to campaign with these three on his team.

Chavez, Castro, Putin: Four more years!

by: Ilana Freedman
Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Chavez, Castro, Putin: Four more years!
Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez, right, and Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin find time for a chat during a welcoming ceremony at Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas, April 2, 2010. Photo Credit:AP
The latest [dictator] to publicly announce his support for the commander-in-chief’s reelection bid was Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who this week assured he’d vote for Obama if he were from the United States. The America-bashing strongman made the announcement on state-owned television, saying “Obama is a good guy” and that if Obama was from Caracas, he’d surely return the favor by voting for Chavez.

Read more:

When Politics frustrates you or you are depressed, think If Nick Vujicic

Life without Limbs - Here is the most positive, can do person I have ever heard about.  Please share this with your friends.

Willie P

Another Confidence Building Appointment by Obama!

What would have happened if George Bush (either one) or Reagan would have appointed an individual who characterized the 1983 bombing of the military barracks in Beirut that killed 299 U.S. and French servicemen as "exactly the kind of attack that Americans might have lauded had it been directed against Washington's enemies" to become the UN Human Rights Emissary of their administration!

The media and the citizens would have gone wild demanding to know why!  And they should.  

Well Obama just did that with the appointment of Salaam al-Marayati.  Mr. al-Marayati is the founder and president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, MPAC and made the statement quoted above. 

Vote the idiots out on November 6!  

Willie P

Sunday, October 21, 2012

The Al Smith Dinner

You be the judge as to who the smartest man in the room is!

Willie P

Bow to No One, these men fight for you!

No further comment is necessary!  If you like this send Special Operations for America for some to get it on the air!

Willie P

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Hillary Falls on her Saber for Obama!

Last week we saw an interesting event.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while traveling in Peru,  on the morning of the second presidential debate, stated that she is responsible for the State Department!  Everyone says she fell on her saber for Obama, but did she.  Listen to her very carefully selected words.  But it worked, the Integrity Free Media has been talking about this all week.

The question is, what did Hillary get in return for falling on her sword for America's First Black President?

Well, only Hillary and Obama know for sure, but I could envision the following:

Obama:  Hillary you got to save me, get me out of this mess we have too much to accomplish for me to lose this election!  I will do anything you want if you will just get this Benghazi attack off my plate.

Hillary:  Okay Barack get off your knees, I will go out and take the fall for this, trust me.  But here is what you are going to do for me.  If, after I do this, you somehow get yourself re-elected here is what is going to happen.  Two years into your second term, you are going to convince Joe that he isn't feeling well and the pressure is too great on his aging body, and he is going to resign, for health reasons.  You then are going to appoint me as Vice President to fill out Joe's unexpired term and you are going to get me approved by the Senate.  Then you are going to treat me as your equal for the last two years and you are going to insure that I have $1 Billion dollars in my campaign fund and that the Democrats select me to run in 2016!  

And that my friends is the way things work in the sick and perverted world of politics.  

Just tell everyone when this breaks you saw it here on Common Sense Thinkers on October 22, 2012.

Wille P

The 7-11 President

Excellent article from the Weekly Standard.  

The real question is, would you hire Obama to run a 7-11?  I submit he is not actually qualified for that job either! 

Willie P

The 7-Eleven Presidency

7:15 AM, OCT 18, 2012 • BY JEFFREY H. ANDERSON

In the wake of the Treasury Department’s newly released summary of federal spending for 2012, it’s now possible to detail just how profligate the Obama years have been.  Here’s the upshot:  Under Obama, for every $7 we’ve had, we’ve spent nearly $11 (or, to be more exact, $10.95).  That’s like a family that makes $70,000 a year — and is already knee-deep in debt — blowing nearly $110,000 a year.
Obama SOTU
To illustrate this a bit differently, for every Jackson ($20) we’ve had available to spend under Obama, we’ve also borrowed a Hamilton ($10) and a Washington ($1) and spent those too.  The only thing is that, under Obama, we’ve (literally) spent the equivalent of 342 billion Jacksons, 342 billion Hamiltons, and 342 billion Washingtons — borrowing all of the Hamiltons and Washingtons.
Let’s take a look at the scorecard, based on official government figures.  In fiscal year 2012 (which ended on September 30), the federal government acquired $2.449 trillion in tax revenue and other receipts.  It spent $3.538 trillion — 44 percent more than it had available to spend.  The resulting deficit was $1.089 trillion.

How Long can debt-laden US remain world power?

An excellent question?  What is sad is that our president is not asking this question, in fact his strategy seems to be to continue pile on debt with every new spending program.  One has to wonder what where Obama and Democrats real loyalty lies?

Here is another world leader asking the same question?  

Iran: How long can debt-laden US remain world power?

10/18/2012 10:58

Ahmadinejad says US influence in world affairs waning due to massive debt and loss of legitimacy, adds West increasingly questioning legitimacy of "Zionist regime," hints EU hurt more by sanctions than Iran.

Makes you wonder doesn't it, VOTE  Obama and the Democrats out on November 6, 2012!
Wille P

German Leader, "Tax Cuts to Boost German Economy

Merkel Urges Tax Cuts to Boost German Economy

Published: Tuesday, 16 Oct 2012 | 1:11 PM ET
Text Size
By: Reuters
  • Twitter

Even European Union leaders get the basic principle that lowering taxes stimulates the economy, maybe now that his socialist comrades in Europe are on board, maybe Obama will get it.

Willie P