Sunday, June 14, 2015

Glenn Beck Summarizes Obama's Fictitous Life

One thing among many things frustrating about the Hannitys of the world is their inability to get the big picture. They see things in simplistic Us vs. Them terms and they need to compress larger stories to fit their template. Obama is old news. Let's get Hillary.

First thing, the Clintons do not fit the Left vs. Right format. The reason the Republicans personally attacked President Clinton was because they did not want to engage in an ideological battle. In many ways Bill Clinton was more conservative than Tom Delay or Trent Lott.

But let's leave the Clintons aside for now. Whatever else might be said about Bill and Hillary we know who they are even with thousands of deleted emails to muddy the waters. Hillary might sometimes "misspeak" or "misremember" but the powers that be will call her on her namesake or her Bosnian war stories. Orwellingly, the same people who remind Hillary that she is fibbing actually assist Barack Obama in promoting his fables and attack anyone who challenges his many lies.

As with the Kennedy assassination, the shrouding of Barack Obama reminds us that the whole damn system is broken. If every single member of the press either facilitates Obama's lies or has practiced a vow of silence on exposing the facilitators, then we have jumped through the looking glass. Before we route Barry Barack Soetoro Obama to the history books, shouldn't we at least know his history? The fable of Barack will be relevant ten years from now, twenty years from now, thirty years from now and well beyond that. If mind control and brainwashing and programmed ignorance and programmed apathy are concerns of the day, then we must examine the most successful ruse in the history of planet Earth.

WHO IS BARACK OBAMA?

2 comments:

Tea Party at Perrysburg said...

I don't think I agree with you about Bill Clinton being more conservative than DeLay and Lott. I think Clinton, for all his many leftist faults, wanted to be liked by the populace and thus, in a way, feared their wrath concerning his legacy, the principles of which he now renounces. Indeed, many politicians used to fear the wrath of the populace. Since Obama & Pelosi formed their unholy alliance with the sell out blue dogs and leftists in their despicable party, marching on DC no longer works. Calling and writing no longer work to influence these few grandees who parade about in limousines, making their millions and funneling billions to their cronies who in turn funnel it back. Now if you said Clinton's POLICIES were fairly conservative, well, that's a different matter. But then, Newt had his imprimatur all over that, as I recall.

worldsbiggestloser said...

It might be a stretch to say that Clinton was more conservative than Delay or Lott. As I see it, all three men represent the traits most people resent in politicians. They are out for personal gain and can be flexible to shifting winds. Personally, I am more comfortable with this entity than the petulant, tyrannical Obama or idiots like de Blasio or Sanders.

As discouraged as I get at times, I still believe that calling and writing and organizing still works. We lose a lot of battles but then a David Brat beats Eric Cantor and hope springs eternal.

I agree that Gingrich helped Bill Clinton see the light on a multitude of issues.