Sunday, January 1, 2012

If Obama lies then why should anyone continue to believe him? If he tells the truth, should we fear him even more?

Two stories came to my attention this morning, one in the local newspaper and the other on the Huffington Post. Both suggest a serious character flaw that should make anyone question the true intent that Barack Hussein Obama holds for America. One points out his willingness to lie to create a false image of himself to convince people that he is something that he is not and the other makes you hope he wasn't telling a lie in the first place.
During the presidential campaign in May 2008, during a speech an audience member asked Obama a very specific question about Presidential Signing Statements. He was asked at one rally: "when congress offers you a bill, do you promise not to use presidential signing statements to get your way?" Obama gave a one-word reply: "Yes." He added that "we aren't going to use signing statements as a way to do an end run around Congress." Obama was telling an outright lie.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: When Congress offers you a bill, do you promise not to use presidential signings to get your way?
OBAMA: "Yes... This is part of the whole theory of George Bush that he can make laws as he is going along. I disagree with that. I taught the Constitution for 10 years. I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We are not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end run around Congress. All right?" 
A "Signing Statement" is a comment that has been added by the president when he signs a bill into law stating that he does not agree with or intend to enforce a part of that law. The practice has been used to some limited degree by every president since James Monroe but traditionally, has been one of "generally triumphal, rhetorical, or political proclamations and went mostly unannounced" as described in Wikipedia. But lately, presidential signing statements have touched on constitutional issues and have raised serious legal questions.
Wikipedia: In July 2006, a task force of the American Bar Association stated that the use of signing statements to modify the meaning of duly enacted laws serves to "undermine the rule of law and our constitutional system of separation of powers". In fact, the Constitution does not authorize the President to use signing statements to circumvent any validly enacted Congressional Laws, nor does it authorize him to declare he will disobey such laws (or parts thereof). When a bill is presented to the President, the Constitution (Art. II) allows him only three choices: do nothing, sign the bill, or (if he disapproves of the bill) veto it in its entirety and return it to the House in which it originated, along with his written objections to it.
Back in April 2011, Obama used a signing statement to tell Congress he was going to ignore their defunding of his unconstitutional Czars when he signed the new budget bill. And, according to a story in today's newspaper, during his Christmas vacation in Hawaii Obama added another signing statement to the wide-ranging National Defense Authorization Act which includes provisions that would allow the President to use the U.S. military to round up and throw American citizens in jail and keep them there indefinitely without trial. "My administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded," Obama said in the signing statement. Remember that before he signed that bill he had said that he was opposed to that controversial section. Another lie. This sounds very similar to what Pontius Pilate said when he washed his hands after accepting the death sentence for Jesus Christ. Should we all hope this was another Obama lie or should we begin to worry that he was, in fact, telling the absolute truth?
So why is this such a critical issue in 2012? This is the year that Barack Hussein Obama is about to undergo an extreme image makeover to convince the American public how much good he has done for them and this country. Obama's leftist supporters in the news media will be doing a lot of overtime dropping his name before our eyes and ears and creating word associations to build up his new image. The one-time community organizer, the limp-wrist-ed fairy waif who threw the opening baseball pitch like a girl a few years ago will be transformed into the Hero of America who was able to bring down Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki when no one else before him could. And less we not forget, Obama brought the troops home from Iraq in time for Christmas in 2011 after keeping them in the battlefield three years later than he promised with untold casualties due to his Rules of Engagement changes. You do remember those, don't you? Troops on patrol were forbidden from carrying a live round in the chambers of their weapons or from firing on an enemy until first fired at or from shooting at the enemy if they were hiding in schools or hospitals or dwellings, like they often did.
2012 is the year we must begin to remind America of what Barack Hussein Obama really is all about: who his friends and associates were and are; those communists like his father, Frank Marshall Davis and Van Jones; those anti-American racists and terrorists like Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn; what he has said about Islam and America and what he has done to loot our Treasury to fill the pockets of his corporate and union supporters and make him answerable for everything. We may never have another chance.


  1. If this Resident's comments, speeches, etc are placed within the context of the socialist (some say communist) mindset, he does not lie. Took me awhile to get to this point as I kept reacting to what he was saying based upon the principles in the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. I don't do that any longer. Therefore, everyone should be alarmed at what they are hearing. It appears, sadly enough, that the majority are not.

  2. Mr. AL, On the subject of the National Defense Authorization Act and the provision to allow the military to round up American citizens and hold them indefinitely without trial, I suggest you read this Reality Check commentary that was broadcast last night on our local Fox News station:

    The pertinent remarks are these:

    "But even as President Obama puts on the face of seeming reluctant but willing to accept these new powers, don't believe everything you hear."

    "According to Democrat Senator Carl Levin, it was Obama administration that demanded the power to indefinite detention be placed inside the bill."

    "And I'm wondering whether the senator is familiar with the fact that the language, the language which precluded the application of section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved in the armed services committee, and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section?

    "Is the senator familiar with the fact that it was the administration which asked us to remove the very language we had in the bill which passed the committee and that we removed it at the request of the administration, that would have said that this determination would not apply to U.S. citizens and lawful residents?" said Levin.


No foreign language comments allowed. English only. If you cannot access the comments window send me an email at