Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

Never forget the real enemy: Media attacks Romney in attempt to cover for the failure of Obama’s leadership.

Written By: Bob - Sep• 12•12

Another “day at the office” for King Putt, who has spent more than 600 hours on the golf course.

Fact: Barack Obama has missed over half of his White House intelligence briefings:

During his first 1,225 days in office, Obama attended his PDB just 536 times — or 43.8 percent of the time. During 2011 and the first half of 2012, his attendance became even less frequent — falling to just over 38 percent.

Fact: Barack Obama has spent more time playing golf than he has in economic meetings:

In July, a GAI analysis of President Obama’s calendar found that the president has spent just 412 hours in economic meetings of any kind throughout his presidency versus the over 600 hours he’s spent golfing.

If a Republican President had abdicated his responsibility to stay abreast of ever-changing security issues while tens of thousands of American soldiers were at war, the media would savage him. They would paint him as callous and uncaring, detached and self absorbed, unfit for office and perhaps worthy of impeachment.

And they’d be right to do so.

If a Republican President had abdicated his responsibility to put his heart and soul into digging the nation out of a economic recession where the real unemployment rate is 11.2 percent, where the nation is on the cusp of receiving it’s second credit downgrade and the economic havoc that will bring, and the President spent 50% more time engaging in leisure that the core focus of his office, the media would call for riots. They would compare him to the North Korean dictators that live lives of opulence as the people starve, and demand he be removed from office.

And they’d be right to do so.

Yesterday, on the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks, rioting Islamic extremists attacked the U.S. embassy in Cairo, Egypt. They mounted the walls of the compound during the day, pulled down the American flag and ripped it to shred, and ran the black flag of al Qaeda up the flag poll.

Hours later in Benghazi, Libya, under the cover of darkness, a terrorist attack took place on the U.S. consulate staff. Ambassador Chris Stevens was murdered by al Qaeda-aligned terrorists armed with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades, and his half-dressed body was carried through the street as a trophy. Foreign service officer Sean Smith and two U. S. Marines were also murdered during the attack.

The excuse for both attacks was the online trailer of a film about the murderous Islamic pedophile prophet Mohammed. The modern Muslim cult declares any depiction of their prophet to be blasphemy, something that would have surprised Muslims of old that used depictions of him in art for centuries.

Image of Mohamed in an Islamic text.

Mohammed was used in Islamic art repeatedly for more than a thousand years; the modern prohibition is just that: modern.

Mohammed with an angel

The thugs in Cairo and more open terrorists in Benghazi are two extensions of the same jihad to dominate the citizens of the world under the black flag of Islam, a death cult that has been responsible for constant warfare around its fringes for 1400 years that has been responsible for the fall of advanced civilizations and which today represents the vestiges of the Dark Ages that  most modern humans would love to leave behind.

The film that was the excuse for these events was made in the United States, a nation with a First Amendment right to the freedom of expression, even obnoxious, heavy-handed and infuriating religious expression.

Yesterday, before the mob surged onto our embassy walls in Cairo or last night, before terrorists murdered American citizens, the Cairo embassy released a statement via Twitter condemning the film.

The tweet itself is offensive to the concept of the First Amendment, as was the embassy’s reiteration of the statement after the mob ripped down our flag.

The tweets were so offensive to basic American beliefs about the freedom of expression that the Cairo embassy later deleted the tweets and pretended that they’d never been made.

Late last night, Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney condemned the actions of the Cairo embassy, the unAmerican beliefs they espoused, and the feckless foreign policy of the Obama Administration that the embassy represents.

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi,” Romney said. “It’s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Romney has every reason to criticize Obama, an inexperienced novice awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for merely being elected, who has missed 38% of his intelligence briefings within the past year, even as he finds time to pose with celebrities, ceaselessly campaign, appear on late night television, and do fluff interviews with pop culture magazines.

Barack Obama represents a radical leftist view of the United States where our core beliefs should be minimized to keep from offending lesser nations and violent adherents of a faith trapped in the Dark Ages. Romney was right to lambast the Cairo embassy and the Administration it represents for betraying core American values.

This morning and throughout the day as more information has been revealed about the murders of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans by these terrorists, I’ve watched in disgust as the mainstream media has turned Mitt Romney’s support of core American values into an attack upon his character, using deception, spin, and outright lies to defend and support the failure of Barack Obama’s administration in this debacle.

The media should have been asking the Obama Administration the obvious questions about the weak security at American embassies on the anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.

The media should have excoriated the Administration’s weak foreign policy and incompetent messaging that allowed embassy to go rogue and post statements to social media at odds with our nation’s core belief  in the freedom of expression.

The media should have lambasted President Obama for a tardy, tepid response to both attacks, and for fleeing his press conference this morning without taking any questions.

The media should have asked if the repeated “spiking the ball” of Osama bin Laden’s death during the Democratic National Convention last week may have contributed to anger against the United States in a part of the world where bin Laden is viewed as a martyr.

Instead of asking the obvious and hard questions of a distant, detached, and apparently unfeeling President, the media followed the lead of the White House, and instead attack Mitt Romney for daring to point out the record of failure that is Barack Obama’s foreign policy. Romney made a statement again this morning about the embassy attacks and Obama’s softness in dealing with Islamic terrorists. How did the media respond?

As you have come to expect from sycophants:

1. Reporter brings up that Romney had a “toughly worded statement last night,” and asks, “Do you regret the tone at all given what we know now?”

2. “Do you think, though, coming so soon after the events really had unfolded over night was appropriate, to be weighing in on this as this crisis was unfolding in real time?” Follow-up: “What did the White House do wrong then, Gov. Romney, if they put out a statement saying they disagreed with it?”

3. “The world is watching. Isn’t this itself a mixed signal when you criticize the administration at a time that Americans are being killed? Shouldn’t politics stop for this?”

4. “Some people have said that you jumped the gun a little bit in putting that statement out last night and that you should have waited until more details were available. Do you regret having that statement come out so early before we learned about all of the things that were happening?”

5. “If you had known last night that the ambassador had died, and obviously, I’m gathering you did not know . . . if you had known that the ambassador had died, would you have issued such a strongly-issued statement?”

6. Reporter comments that Romney is running on his “economic know-how and private sector experience,” and adds, “but now that foreign policy and the situation in the Middle East has been thrust into the presidential campaign, can you talk about why specifically you think you are better qualified than President Obama to handle these issues?”

7. “How specifically, Governor Romney, would a President Romney have handled this situation differently than President Obama did? You spoke out before midnight, when all the facts weren’t known. How would you have handled this differently than the president did?”

Romney answered these questions—which the media mob had coordinated beforehand in service to the Obama regime—in a manner that can only be described as Presidential. He took questions from a hostile press, answered them directly and clearly, and refused to be either angered or pushed off topic as reporters tried to come to the Obama Administration’s defense.

In contrast, Obama made a brief statement after Romney, then fled the stage.

Americans lay dead.

The President flees the scene.

And the band plays on.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

One Comment

  1. david7134 says:

    You should note that Obama’s “statement” was nothing but his reading a carefully edited note. He looks like he is reading something for the first time and has no emotion whatever. In fact, he actually looks bored and detached. Hopefully he realizes that this is the death of his election. Romney on the other hand was speaking well off the cuff and looked more like a leader than a janitor who was stumbling through reading class.