Hey Obama...you keep saying you support our military..so get Bowe home NOW!
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Feb 3 (Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury Department on Monday confirmed that it has allowed the transfer of $550 million in Iran’s frozen oil revenues to the country under an interim nuclear deal.
A U.S. Treasury spokeswoman said the transfer began Jan. 31 and would be complete early this week but declined to specify which foreign banks were involved.
No U.S. banks were involved in the transactions, but the United States, which has extensive sanctions on Iran tied to its disputed nuclear program, helped facilitate the transfer of funds, the spokeswoman said.
The money is the first installment of $4.2 billion in blocked oil funds that were to be made available to Iran under the nuclear deal signed in November. Iran received limited sanctions relief in exchange for agreeing to curb its nuclear activities.
I
don't have a completely satisfactory answer when people ask me what we
can do to combat the tyranny we are witnessing in this country, but one
brave and principled Texas physician is showing how people can stand up.
Dr. Kristin Held of San Antonio, whom I've befriended on Twitter and grown to deeply admire for her vocal advocacy against Obamacare, has taken the next step in her battle -- our battle.
Last week, she wrote a letter to Aetna insurance company terminating her participation in its program because of unilateral changes she said the company had made to its contract with her.
In her letter, Dr. Held informed Aetna that "Obamacare, the 'law of the land,' contains ever-changing-at-the-whim-of-HHS, politically expedient mandates, rewards, penalties, rules and regulations with which I cannot rationally or morally treat my patients and run a practice, much-less interpret, implement, or comply."
She continued with something that cannot be said often and strongly enough, if for no other reason than President Obama will simply not acknowledge it and callously glosses over it, whether in his self-serving State of the Union speech or in his painfully evasive interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly. "Millions of Americans," wrote Dr. Held," have lost coverage because of the healthcare law and must now shop on a defective, insecure government website and sign up for more expensive policies through Federal and State exchanges."
Next, she described how she only accidentally found out that the insurance company with which she had enjoyed a contractual relationship for years had changed the contractual terms in the middle of the stream without her knowledge, much less with her consent.
"Only by logging in as a prospective patient," said Dr. Held, "did my office manager and I discover that Aetna was selling plans for which I am a provider -- effectively selling my services without even asking, much less informing me that my services would be sold on such a site, under the auspices of new terms with which I will not comply." Bravo!
She said that "after the fact," she received a "form letter" informing her of the company's "new allowables." She told the company in no uncertain terms that she would not be treated this way.
"I will not sell my services under such terms," she wrote. "While treated as such, patients and doctors are not commodities worthy of such impersonal, inconsiderate, and cavalier treatment. We choose dignity and personal service over disrespect and form letters."
She went on to scold the company for "getting new business offering health insurance plans featuring (her) services with (her) consent under terms which are unacceptable to (her)."
In closing, she wrote, "It saddens me to think of the decreased access to care from actual physicians and the shockingly increased costs Aetna patients will now experience because of your choice to collude with big government rather than collaborate with patients and physicians."
Dr. Held wrote in her blog on Dec. 21, 2013: "Obamacare empowers a few political elites, their operatives, and cronies to do whatever they want to the American people on the false promise of access to 'free', 'quality' 'medical care', AKA tyranny-through-medicine. They write and rewrite the deceitfully-passed law for political expediency, power, and money; patients are an afterthought, an annoying impediment to their ultimate goal -- socialized medicine, the keystone in the arch of Socialism. ... Our current Federal government is the antithesis of all that composes American medicine and the sacred patient-doctor relationship."
Dr. Held is exactly right. This law was deceitfully passed, and patients are the last thing Obamacare's designers and supporters are concerned about. In their obsession to continue with this law's implementation, they are obliterating the nation's health care system, forcing millions off their plans and apart from their chosen physicians, and then disgracefully pretending it hasn't happened. They are ensuring that patients will have less access to and fewer choices of care, despite promising more of both, and that their health care costs are increasing, despite explicitly guaranteeing cost reductions.
Please don't assume that Dr. Held is exaggerating when she says that the goal of these statists is to impose socialized medicine on America. It's not deniable. They can no longer credibly say they are pushing this system for the reasons they initially claimed, because every one of those has proved to be false -- and they knew it ahead of time.
I watched a debate between Obama's radical friend Bill Ayers and Obama critic Dinesh D'Souza over the greatness of America. Guess which one touted America's greatness and uniqueness? D'Souza, of course, credited America's founding, and Bill Ayers claimed, essentially, that any greatness America possesses comes from its radicals and activists against the government.
Well, let's take a page out of the Ayers-Obama-Alinsky community organizing playbook and, like Dr. Held, exercise our own form of activism to fight the lawless tyranny of the current federal government. Except that when we engage in activism, as it was with Dr. Held, it will be within the law.
God bless Dr. Held for standing up to tyranny and fighting for her patients, her profession and the unique protections of God-given liberty enshrined in our Constitution.
Dr. Kristin Held of San Antonio, whom I've befriended on Twitter and grown to deeply admire for her vocal advocacy against Obamacare, has taken the next step in her battle -- our battle.
Last week, she wrote a letter to Aetna insurance company terminating her participation in its program because of unilateral changes she said the company had made to its contract with her.
In her letter, Dr. Held informed Aetna that "Obamacare, the 'law of the land,' contains ever-changing-at-the-whim-of-HHS, politically expedient mandates, rewards, penalties, rules and regulations with which I cannot rationally or morally treat my patients and run a practice, much-less interpret, implement, or comply."
She continued with something that cannot be said often and strongly enough, if for no other reason than President Obama will simply not acknowledge it and callously glosses over it, whether in his self-serving State of the Union speech or in his painfully evasive interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly. "Millions of Americans," wrote Dr. Held," have lost coverage because of the healthcare law and must now shop on a defective, insecure government website and sign up for more expensive policies through Federal and State exchanges."
Next, she described how she only accidentally found out that the insurance company with which she had enjoyed a contractual relationship for years had changed the contractual terms in the middle of the stream without her knowledge, much less with her consent.
"Only by logging in as a prospective patient," said Dr. Held, "did my office manager and I discover that Aetna was selling plans for which I am a provider -- effectively selling my services without even asking, much less informing me that my services would be sold on such a site, under the auspices of new terms with which I will not comply." Bravo!
She said that "after the fact," she received a "form letter" informing her of the company's "new allowables." She told the company in no uncertain terms that she would not be treated this way.
"I will not sell my services under such terms," she wrote. "While treated as such, patients and doctors are not commodities worthy of such impersonal, inconsiderate, and cavalier treatment. We choose dignity and personal service over disrespect and form letters."
She went on to scold the company for "getting new business offering health insurance plans featuring (her) services with (her) consent under terms which are unacceptable to (her)."
In closing, she wrote, "It saddens me to think of the decreased access to care from actual physicians and the shockingly increased costs Aetna patients will now experience because of your choice to collude with big government rather than collaborate with patients and physicians."
Dr. Held wrote in her blog on Dec. 21, 2013: "Obamacare empowers a few political elites, their operatives, and cronies to do whatever they want to the American people on the false promise of access to 'free', 'quality' 'medical care', AKA tyranny-through-medicine. They write and rewrite the deceitfully-passed law for political expediency, power, and money; patients are an afterthought, an annoying impediment to their ultimate goal -- socialized medicine, the keystone in the arch of Socialism. ... Our current Federal government is the antithesis of all that composes American medicine and the sacred patient-doctor relationship."
Dr. Held is exactly right. This law was deceitfully passed, and patients are the last thing Obamacare's designers and supporters are concerned about. In their obsession to continue with this law's implementation, they are obliterating the nation's health care system, forcing millions off their plans and apart from their chosen physicians, and then disgracefully pretending it hasn't happened. They are ensuring that patients will have less access to and fewer choices of care, despite promising more of both, and that their health care costs are increasing, despite explicitly guaranteeing cost reductions.
Please don't assume that Dr. Held is exaggerating when she says that the goal of these statists is to impose socialized medicine on America. It's not deniable. They can no longer credibly say they are pushing this system for the reasons they initially claimed, because every one of those has proved to be false -- and they knew it ahead of time.
I watched a debate between Obama's radical friend Bill Ayers and Obama critic Dinesh D'Souza over the greatness of America. Guess which one touted America's greatness and uniqueness? D'Souza, of course, credited America's founding, and Bill Ayers claimed, essentially, that any greatness America possesses comes from its radicals and activists against the government.
Well, let's take a page out of the Ayers-Obama-Alinsky community organizing playbook and, like Dr. Held, exercise our own form of activism to fight the lawless tyranny of the current federal government. Except that when we engage in activism, as it was with Dr. Held, it will be within the law.
God bless Dr. Held for standing up to tyranny and fighting for her patients, her profession and the unique protections of God-given liberty enshrined in our Constitution.
Some
supporters of President Obama may be worried about how he and the
Democrats are going to fare politically, as the problems of ObamaCare
continue to escalate, and it looks like the Republicans have a chance to
win a majority in the Senate.But Democrats may not need to worry so much. Republicans may once again come to the rescue of the Democrats, by discrediting themselves and snatching defeat from the very jaws of victory.
The latest bright idea among Republicans inside the Beltway is a new version of amnesty that is virtually certain to lose votes among the Republican base and is unlikely to gain many votes among the Hispanics that the Republican leadership is courting.
One of the enduring political mysteries is how the Republicans can be so successful in winning governorships and control of state legislatures, while failing to make much headway in Washington. Maybe there are just too many clever GOP consultants inside the Beltway.
When it comes to national elections, just what principles do the Republicans stand for? It is hard to think of any, other than their hoping to win elections by converting themselves into Democrats lite.
But voters who want what the Democrats offer can vote for the real thing, rather than Johnny-come-lately imitations.
Listening to discussions of immigration laws and proposals to reform them is like listening to something out of "Alice in Wonderland."
Immigration laws are the only laws that are discussed in terms of how to help people who break them. One of the big problems that those who are pushing "comprehensive immigration reform" want solved is how to help people who came here illegally and are now "living in the shadows" as a result.
What about embezzlers or burglars who are "living in the shadows" in fear that someone will discover their crimes? Why not "reform" the laws against embezzlement or burglary, so that such people can also come out of the shadows?
Almost everyone seems to think that we need to solve the problem of the children of illegal immigrants, because these children are here "through no fault of their own." Do people who say that have any idea how many millions of children are living in dire poverty in India, Africa or other places "through no fault of their own," and would be better off living in the United States?
Do all children have some inherent right to live in America if they have done nothing wrong? If not, then why should the children of illegal immigrants have such a right?
More fundamentally, why do the American people not have a right to the protection that immigration laws provide people in other countries around the world -- including Mexico, where illegal immigrants from other countries get no such special treatment as Mexico and its American supporters are demanding for illegal immigrants in the United States?
The very phrase "comprehensive" immigration reform is part of the bad faith that has surrounded immigration issues for decades. What "comprehensive" reform means is that border control and amnesty should be voted on together in Congress.
Why? Because that would be politically convenient for members of Congress, who like to be on both sides of issues, so as to minimize the backlash from the voting public. But what "comprehensive" immigration reform has always meant in practice is amnesty up front and a promise to control the border later -- promises that have never been kept.
The new Republican proposal is to have some border control criteria whose fulfillment will automatically serve as a "trigger" to let the legalizing of illegal immigrants proceed. But why set up some automatic triggering device to signal that the borders are secure, when the Obama administration is virtually guaranteed to game the system, so that amnesty can proceed?
What in the world is wrong with Congress taking up border security first, as a separate issue, and later taking responsibility in a Congressional vote on whether the border has become secure? Congress at least should come out of the shadows
.
The Republican plan for granting legalization up front, while withholding citizenship, is too clever by half. It is like saying that you can slide halfway down a slippery slope.
Republicans may yet rescue the Democrats, while demoralizing their own supporters and utterly failing the country.
EGYPT attacks al-Jazeera on charges of aiding and abetting the enemy – The Muslim Brotherhood
From Jihad Watch
Private Egyptian TV channel Al Tahrir at the weekend aired an amateur-quality video of the arrest in a Cairo hotel room of two journalists with the Qatari channel Al-Jazeera on the 29th of December. Qatar is a main power center of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East.
EuroNews With dramatic music added, the video shows the foreign channel’s head of the Cairo bureau, the Canadian-Egyptian Mohamed Fahmy and Australian journalist Peter Greste — who asks for an interpreter.
Security officers are heard questioning the pair, but they are not shown. The journalists say they don’t have the accreditation to work in Egypt, but have applied for it. Equipment is filmed in the hotel room that Fahmy says is serving as temporary work-space until an office can be found. Then the two are taken away in a police van.
Al-Jazeera has denounced the broadcast of the video and said the journalists were working openly, and that their not having press accreditation was no grounds for arrest and being jailed. The company asked that they be released.
The police closed Al-Jazeera’s Cairo office after the removal as president of Mohamed Mursi on 3 July. Work space was improvised in the Marriott Hotel, and some Egyptian media referred to this as ‘the Marriott cell’.
The state prosecutor’s office last week said 20 or the channel’s journalists would be tried, 16 of them on charges of belonging to a terrorist organisation, and four foreigners on charges of creating a false impression of a civil war in Egypt. Al-Jazeera denies the charges.
Sherif Mansour, with the Committee for
the Protection of Journalists in the Middle East and North Africa said
the move under the new military authorities is unprecedented:
“We have never seen a TV network with local and international operatives — a total of 20 — accused of terrorism-related charges. Those who work with Al-Jazeera might have their biases and of course being a journalist would involve having an opinion, but that doesn’t mean that they get to go to jail because of it.”
Hey, Egypt, you missed this one!
Click on link to watch the video...
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/02/03/egypt-attacks-al-jazeera-on-charges-of-aiding-and-abetting-the-enemy-the-muslim-brotherhood/
Op-ed:
Too bad Hannity didn't interview Obama...now that would've been something to see
By: Diane Sori
The Super Bowl is over and it's one for the history books as they
say what with Denver getting their butts kicked. Poor Denver but what
is...is...and even more pathetic than this one-sided game was Bill
O'Reilly's pre-game interview of the self-anointed king of us
all...Barack HUSSEIN Obama.
The interview...which focused on the disastrous ObamaCare roll out, the Benghazi fiasco, and the IRS's targeting conservative groups applying for 501-C3 status...had O'Reilly trading for-the-camera barbs with Obama like they were good buddies. And while at times O'Reilly did seem a bit annoyed with Obama when he asked him certain questions he knew Obama did NOT want even brought up (as in Benghazi), he still let Obama slink out of answering them directly...accepting vague alludings instead of demanding simple YES or NO answers to those questions. Evasive rhetoric with NO substance...the hallmark of Obama and his entire administration.
But sadly, O'Reilly showed his true colors when in a phone interview on 'FOX and Friends' yesterday morning he said, "I don't think he (Obama) wants to hurt anyone but his policies are hurting people." Give me a freakin' break...how about the five million plus people he knew beforehand he would hurt with his out and out LIE about being able to keep their health insurance...how about the multitude of seriously ill people who have now been cut off from the very doctors treating them...how about the countless handicapped children and adults now without the services they require...these are living, breathing, flesh and blood people hurt NOT by policies per se, but hurt by a miserable excuse of a president who did NOT and still does NOT care one damn iota about them even knowing they would be hurt.
And O'Reilly backed away from this very critical point both in the Obama interview and in his musings yesterday morning.
And so O'Reilly bloviated (one of his favorite 'Words of the Day') on to 'FOX and Friends' that his being tough on Obama...especially with his Benghazi questions... with tough being a happening in his mind alone...would be fodder for the liberal press as they would say he was a shill for the GOP because all he did was ask GOP questions. And while some questions O'Reilly did ask were indeed ones asked by Republicans during the Benghazi hearings...the problem is he let Obama off the hook time and again by NOT pounding home...or even mentioning for that matter...that Obama deliberately and with malice left four Americans to die nor did he touch upon the true reason why the attack happened...as in Obama's ILLEGAL gun and weapons running operation to the al-Qaeda backed Syrian rebels...done through Benghazi...went sour.
NOT a word about that on 'FOX and Friends'...NOT a word during the Obama interview either.
Instead during the Obama interview, O'Reilly focused on the same old, same old, of whether the administration did NOT describe Benghazi as a terrorist attack because Obama’s people did NOT want to use the word 'terrorist' right before the November presidential election for fear it would contradict Obama's infamous, now come back to haunt, statement of "al-Qaeda is decimated and on the run."
“Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a
terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out,” O’Reilly
said. “That’s what they believe.” And Obama's retort was to blame FOX
with his statement that, “They believe it because folks like you are
telling them that” and throwing in for good measure, “These kinds of things
keep on surfacing, because folks like you will promote them," he said in
reference to the IRS scandal.
"Folks like you"...subtle racist words out of a NOT so subtle racist's mouth...and you have NO idea how I wanted to give O'Reilly a slap upside his head for he let Obama take control of the interview with those two sentences.
Continuing on to say that Fox News is to blame for "misinforming" the public on issues that have stalked his presidency during the past year, Obama thought he had sweep the matter of Benghazi under the rug...for now at least...but oh how wrong he is. And I hate to tell Obama...NO...actually I love to tell Obama...but FOX News was the ONLY news channel that reported the truth about his traitorous Benghazi actions...his ObamaCare roll out nightmare...and his IRS scandal that keeps growing in scope, albeit at times a watered down version of that truth, but hey, watered down is better than what the alphabet media gave us...as in NOT a damn thing at all.
And when O’Reilly zeroed in and asked Obama why Kathleen Sebelius had NOT been fired for the major part she played in the ObamaCare nightmare roll out, he again went the kumbaya route saying, "I'm sure that the intent is noble but I'm a taxpayer, and I'm paying Kathleen Sebelius' salary, and she screwed up. And you're not holding her accountable." Nobel my eye for she and Obama knew months before the roll out that the Healthcare.gov website was but minimally operational at best and bold-faced LIED...yet again...to the American people that all was well.
"Well, I promise you that we hold everybody up and down the line
accountable," Obama answered...NO...Obama LIED again for NOT one single
person has been held accountable for anything...NOT one.
And when asked if Obama thought the, “If you like your plan you can keep your plan” comment (O'Reilly should have called it what it was...an out-and out LIE) was his “biggest mistake,” Obama skirted this question by saying that the implementation of the Affordable Care Act...he now NO longer calls it ObamaCare as if we don't know why...was an ongoing process, and he was committed to getting it to work rather than dwelling on past mistakes. “I try to focus not on the fumbles but on the next play,” Obama said.
And here O'Reilly should have tossed Obama's ridiculous football reference aside as ObamaCare is beyond mere fumbles, and gone for the jugular for with ObamaCare there is much to rip apart...but Mr. Fair and Balanced didn't. Hannity would have...you can bet on that.
But really, in an interview of this sort when all is said and done the point remains that it's NOT what O'Reilly said but what he didn't say for here he had a chance to nail Obama to the wall with tough, insightful, demanding of answers questions, but instead he chose to go the soft way with beaten to death regurgitation of the same old tired questions that we've NOT only heard before but questions that actually allowed Obama to deflect them...as he's done so many times that he can do it even without his trusty teleprompter prompting him.
And while I know that 10 or so minutes do NOT an in-depth interview
make...and maybe if Bill O'Reilly had more time he would have insisted
on more direct answers...you still know that O'Reilly will hawk
this interview ad-nauseum on his show for weeks, and Obama gets to
continue to take digs at FOX News... something he loves to do every
chance he gets.
So with O'Reilly hoping to end this what turned out to be a yawn of an interview on a positive touchy-feely note, he instead made all we Conservatives and TEA Partiers sick with his comment that he felt Obama’s “heart was in the right place”...for how can Barack HUSSEIN Obama's heart be in the right place when his heart is NOT with this country...with 'We the People'...or with the Constitution he took an oath to "protect and defend."
Just saying...
Too bad Hannity didn't interview Obama...now that would've been something to see
By: Diane Sori
The Super Bowl is over and it's one for the history books as they
say what with Denver getting their butts kicked. Poor Denver but what
is...is...and even more pathetic than this one-sided game was Bill
O'Reilly's pre-game interview of the self-anointed king of us
all...Barack HUSSEIN Obama.
The interview...which focused on the disastrous ObamaCare roll out, the Benghazi fiasco, and the IRS's targeting conservative groups applying for 501-C3 status...had O'Reilly trading for-the-camera barbs with Obama like they were good buddies. And while at times O'Reilly did seem a bit annoyed with Obama when he asked him certain questions he knew Obama did NOT want even brought up (as in Benghazi), he still let Obama slink out of answering them directly...accepting vague alludings instead of demanding simple YES or NO answers to those questions. Evasive rhetoric with NO substance...the hallmark of Obama and his entire administration.
But sadly, O'Reilly showed his true colors when in a phone interview on 'FOX and Friends' yesterday morning he said, "I don't think he (Obama) wants to hurt anyone but his policies are hurting people." Give me a freakin' break...how about the five million plus people he knew beforehand he would hurt with his out and out LIE about being able to keep their health insurance...how about the multitude of seriously ill people who have now been cut off from the very doctors treating them...how about the countless handicapped children and adults now without the services they require...these are living, breathing, flesh and blood people hurt NOT by policies per se, but hurt by a miserable excuse of a president who did NOT and still does NOT care one damn iota about them even knowing they would be hurt.
And O'Reilly backed away from this very critical point both in the Obama interview and in his musings yesterday morning.And so O'Reilly bloviated (one of his favorite 'Words of the Day') on to 'FOX and Friends' that his being tough on Obama...especially with his Benghazi questions... with tough being a happening in his mind alone...would be fodder for the liberal press as they would say he was a shill for the GOP because all he did was ask GOP questions. And while some questions O'Reilly did ask were indeed ones asked by Republicans during the Benghazi hearings...the problem is he let Obama off the hook time and again by NOT pounding home...or even mentioning for that matter...that Obama deliberately and with malice left four Americans to die nor did he touch upon the true reason why the attack happened...as in Obama's ILLEGAL gun and weapons running operation to the al-Qaeda backed Syrian rebels...done through Benghazi...went sour.
NOT a word about that on 'FOX and Friends'...NOT a word during the Obama interview either.
Instead during the Obama interview, O'Reilly focused on the same old, same old, of whether the administration did NOT describe Benghazi as a terrorist attack because Obama’s people did NOT want to use the word 'terrorist' right before the November presidential election for fear it would contradict Obama's infamous, now come back to haunt, statement of "al-Qaeda is decimated and on the run."
“Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a
terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out,” O’Reilly
said. “That’s what they believe.” And Obama's retort was to blame FOX
with his statement that, “They believe it because folks like you are
telling them that” and throwing in for good measure, “These kinds of things
keep on surfacing, because folks like you will promote them," he said in
reference to the IRS scandal.
"Folks like you"...subtle racist words out of a NOT so subtle racist's mouth...and you have NO idea how I wanted to give O'Reilly a slap upside his head for he let Obama take control of the interview with those two sentences.
Continuing on to say that Fox News is to blame for "misinforming" the public on issues that have stalked his presidency during the past year, Obama thought he had sweep the matter of Benghazi under the rug...for now at least...but oh how wrong he is. And I hate to tell Obama...NO...actually I love to tell Obama...but FOX News was the ONLY news channel that reported the truth about his traitorous Benghazi actions...his ObamaCare roll out nightmare...and his IRS scandal that keeps growing in scope, albeit at times a watered down version of that truth, but hey, watered down is better than what the alphabet media gave us...as in NOT a damn thing at all.
And when O’Reilly zeroed in and asked Obama why Kathleen Sebelius had NOT been fired for the major part she played in the ObamaCare nightmare roll out, he again went the kumbaya route saying, "I'm sure that the intent is noble but I'm a taxpayer, and I'm paying Kathleen Sebelius' salary, and she screwed up. And you're not holding her accountable." Nobel my eye for she and Obama knew months before the roll out that the Healthcare.gov website was but minimally operational at best and bold-faced LIED...yet again...to the American people that all was well.
"Well, I promise you that we hold everybody up and down the line
accountable," Obama answered...NO...Obama LIED again for NOT one single
person has been held accountable for anything...NOT one.
And when asked if Obama thought the, “If you like your plan you can keep your plan” comment (O'Reilly should have called it what it was...an out-and out LIE) was his “biggest mistake,” Obama skirted this question by saying that the implementation of the Affordable Care Act...he now NO longer calls it ObamaCare as if we don't know why...was an ongoing process, and he was committed to getting it to work rather than dwelling on past mistakes. “I try to focus not on the fumbles but on the next play,” Obama said.
And here O'Reilly should have tossed Obama's ridiculous football reference aside as ObamaCare is beyond mere fumbles, and gone for the jugular for with ObamaCare there is much to rip apart...but Mr. Fair and Balanced didn't. Hannity would have...you can bet on that.
But really, in an interview of this sort when all is said and done the point remains that it's NOT what O'Reilly said but what he didn't say for here he had a chance to nail Obama to the wall with tough, insightful, demanding of answers questions, but instead he chose to go the soft way with beaten to death regurgitation of the same old tired questions that we've NOT only heard before but questions that actually allowed Obama to deflect them...as he's done so many times that he can do it even without his trusty teleprompter prompting him.
And while I know that 10 or so minutes do NOT an in-depth interview
make...and maybe if Bill O'Reilly had more time he would have insisted
on more direct answers...you still know that O'Reilly will hawk
this interview ad-nauseum on his show for weeks, and Obama gets to
continue to take digs at FOX News... something he loves to do every
chance he gets.
So with O'Reilly hoping to end this what turned out to be a yawn of an interview on a positive touchy-feely note, he instead made all we Conservatives and TEA Partiers sick with his comment that he felt Obama’s “heart was in the right place”...for how can Barack HUSSEIN Obama's heart be in the right place when his heart is NOT with this country...with 'We the People'...or with the Constitution he took an oath to "protect and defend."
Just saying...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)