Monday, December 7, 2015

Seer Madness

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, terror, speech, san bernardino, isis

We're writing this before Obama's Sunday night address to the nation about the largest successful terror attack on American soil since 9/11. And as much as we'd like to hold off on our commentary until he's spoken, stringent press deadlines simply won't allow it. Because by "stringent press deadlines," we mean that there's only a 50% chance that we'll be cold sober when Barry starts talking, and a 0% chance that we'll be sober afterwards.

So instead we've decided to exercise our mystic psychic powers to predict what Obama is going to say, and let you check us for accuracy. Hush now as we dim the lights, put on some eerie music, and gaze into the future...

• Obama will still give "workplace violence" as much blame as ISIS.
• Obama will say that by virtue of committing murder, the California killers weren't Muslims.
• Obama will say (feistily) that GOP candidates are stirring up a rhetoric of hate which plays into the hands of our enemies.
• Obama will partially blame that darned 1st Amendment for making it hard to keep people from finding self-radicalizing materials.
• Obama will more strongly blame the 2nd Amendment for making "weapons of war" too easily accessible.
• Obama will call for bipartisan action on gun control, express doubt that it can happen, then announce that he intends to take executive action on stricter gun control measures.
• Obama will say our nation's greatest weapon against terror is multi-culturalism and the increasing importation of refugees who are very, very carefully screened.
• Obama will not find fault with the very, very careful screening process that allowed Tashfeen Malik to enter our country for the purpose of mass murder, nor will he suggest that the process be changed.
• Obama will not make a strong statement of war against ISIS, nor concede the growth of their size, wealth, and influence on his watch.

And finally, we predict that he will end his speech by saying "God bless America" but not meaning it.

Okay, now we've seen the remarkably passionless speech and we're going to honestly review our predictions. First, we'll say that overall Obama actually seemed to reluctantly acknowledge that radical Islam is a problem (although he didn't have much of a choice). Below are our predictions and whether we got them right, partially right, or wrong.

• Barry didn't blame "workplace violence" but made a point of referring to the victims as "coworkers." (partially right)
• Barry said that the ideology of ISIS is a "perversion" of Islam (partially right).
• Obama referred to "this political season" and rhetoric which plays into the hands of ISIS (right).
• Obama did not blame the 1st Amendment for access to radicalization materials (wrong).
• Barry said that making guns harder to obtain will help fight terror (right).
• He called for bipartisan gun control efforts, but did not say he was taking executive action (partially right).
• Obama praised multi-culturalism, refugees, and immigration (right).
• Obama said he is asking for a "review" of the process that let Tashfeen Malik into the country, even though other officials have already said the policy won't be changed. Still, we'll call it (wrong).
• Obama did not make a credible war cry against ISIS, or admit to its growth (right).
• Obama said "God bless the United States" but didn't mean it (right).

All in all, we'll credit ourselves with a pretty good batting average.

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, loretta lynch, DOJ, free speech, prosecute, muslim

Just to make sure everyone knows where the battle lines are drawn, Attorney General Loretta Lynch went before a Muslim group to announce that she now intends to prosecute anyone who voices anti-Muslim opinions which "edge toward violence," whatever the heck that means.

But apparently, calls for violence are still peachy keen and totally legal as long as the persons making those calls are of the same race and political disposition as the president and his legal toady.

How else to explain the fact that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan isn't on Lynch's radar for his frequent exhortations that white people need to die? And remember the black marchers following Al "Freddie's Fashion Mart" Sharpton who chanted, "What do we want? DEAD COPS! When do we want them? NOW!"  Days later, two officers were shot to death in their patrol car by a man who had said that this kind of anti-cop rhetoric was his inspiration.

But is Lynch prosecuting any of those people? Absolutely not. Rather, she's just announced that she's kicking off a big investigation to prosecute Irving school officials and police officers who believed "See something, Say something" was a good idea when Ahmed the Suspicious Timing Device Maker flashed his "invention" all over a school then refused to talk about it.

Let's be clear: Hope n' Change never has and never will support or tolerate calls for violence against any religious or ethnic group. But what Lynch is doing serves only to further divide our nation by applying unequal standards of law.


Today we remember Pearl Harbor and mourn those who lost their lives, while also giving thanks for the countless others who subsequently served our nation in wartime to ensure our freedom and that of other nations and peoples. 


Joseph ET said...

@Stilton Another great edition and always correct! Well done!

One problem with our so called rigorous vetting processes for visas is they are processed by bureaucrats, many of which become complacent in time. Once they become complacent they will no longer take the time or effort required to do a thorough job of investigating, thus they become a rubber stamp culture. “Oh, you want a Fiancé Visa? Congratulations, here you go honey.”
Is it okay to be naïve or inept? Who’s going to get fired for this?
Hah. Just kidding. We all know that failure to protect America doesn’t cost any bureaucrat anything.

Anonymous said...

The point of the speech:

To push for a law to keep those on the No Fly List from buying guns.

Small coincidence that the executive branch (yup, Obama) determines who is on the list.

So, to recap, Obama gave a speech asking for authority to strip American citizens of their 2A rights at his discretion.

This congress is stupid enough that they might do it. The day our little tyrant's pen scribbles across the bottom of that bill, every patriot's days are numbered.

Exciting times, the smell of revolution on the breeze.


John Robert Mallernee, KB3KWS, in Vernal, Utah said...

48 years ago, on Thursday 07 December 1967, at 1630 Hours (i.e., 4:30PM) Pacific Time, at the Armed Forces Entrance and Examination Station in Portland, Oregon, I walked from one side of the room to the other side of the room, stepping across a yellow line painted on the floor, and THAT was how I became a soldier in the United States Army.

The room was full of inductees, which is why they did it that way, for they had to process a LOT of guys, as we were a nation at war.

We went next door to the YMCA for supper, and then boarded a bus for an all night ride to Fort Lewis, Washington.

Judi King said...

74 years ago we went to war because of a direct attack on Americans. My how times have changed. As for "see something, say something", I see an anti-American traitor in the White House. To whom Who should I say something? Just asking.

Judi King said...

PS: Congratulations on your batting average.

Gang of One said...

I wonder, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, had A.G. Francis B. Biddle declared that any "hate speech" directed at Japanese, Italian or German citizens would result in the speaker's prosecution, that the entire nation would have howled for his resignation. Today, we have the mental illness called 'political correctness' and I have no doubt almost have the American people suffer from some form of it.

Gang of One said...

have = half

*hate when that happens*

Fred Ciampi said...

The person named obama is destroying our great country from the inside. Bit by bit. I read a blurb from a liberal saying that the hildabeast should be our next president because she is so beautiful .... arrrrrggghhhhh!!!!!!! What in the name of all that is sane is this county coming to? Just how many more terrorist attacks will it take before someone says "enough!!!"?

Geoff King said...

The No Fly Watchlist which Øbysmal wants to ban gun ownership from is too vague in it's definition of who should be added. If you are missing fingers or have more than 7 days of food stored up you may be added to the list:

OpenTheDoor said...

Although O'Bajas action would fly in the face of the 2nd amendment, it would deliver a sucker punch to the 4th, 5th, and 6th as well.

Stilt, you have way more will power than I, cannot stand to see or hear that lying, double dealing, bowing, sniveling coward speak.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Joseph ET- When things go grievously wrong (as in this case) I think the explanation is more likely stupidity and lax job performance rather than evil conspiracy. Bureaucracies eventually become self-running machines with gears made of well-paid meat; people devoid of actual emotional investment in their jobs, control over what they're doing, or fear of consequences if they do the job poorly.

Ask yourself who got fired over Benghazi and you'll know how likely it is that anyone will pay a price for giving Tashfeen Malik a first class ticket to Soft Target Land.

@Anonymous- As you point out, the same administration under which conservatives were illegally and improperly barred from getting tax exempt status could easily find themselves on the "no fly" list and denied gun ownership. The current objection to restricting gun sales to those on the "no fly" list is that the list is poorly and improperly maintained. Fix that, or established an "elevated risk" list, and both parties could probably agree on something.

@John Robert Mallernee- Thank you for your service, sir! I can't think of a more fitting date to make such a huge and meaningful commitment to our country.

@Judi King- You've asked the key question. According to our founding fathers, you should have been able to "see something, say something" about the president to your elected representatives who would begin impeachment procedings. But sadly, that system seems to be broken.

@Gang of One- If Obama had been our president when World War II broke out, we would have lost...assuming we didn't end up as an Axis power. Today, we remember a president who said of an attack on US soil that it was a "day of infamy" and compare him to our current president who says of such an attack that it is cause for us to celebrate Islam and look to our Moo-slim allies for salvation.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Geoff King- Exactly. Under this administration, any rule which can be abused will be abused. We've already heard who this administration (via the DHS) considers to be suspicious: military veterans, tea party patriots, pro-lifers, those who advocate legal immigration, those who believe in Constitutionally mandated states' rights and on and on. None of which, interestingly, described Tashfeen Malik.

@OpenTheDoor- You're right that Obama's move would impact more than just the 2nd Amendment. As far as watching Obama's speech, I can't ascribe it to willpower so much as a sense of responsibility for what I write here: unlike liberals, I can't complain without knowing what I'm talking about.

Plus, it's perversely fun to shout expletives at my television while Barry is lying.

CenTexTim said...

re: Loretta Lynch - when muslims stop killing people I'll stop my anti-muslim rhetoric.

American Cowboy said...

My two cents opinion about Øbama's speech:

Them as can DO, them as can't TALK!

And yes, I too am thankful for the patriotic Americans who put it all on the line 74 years ago today.

Rod said...

Barry admitted the California attack was terrorism, but "we" will defeat it. Yes, America will defeat it. He will not. He even gets that weird look anytime he's force to bad-mouth Islamists... and the "I'm lying again" look when he tries to act like a patriot.

Shelly said...

I know this is a petty point but why does Obama have to stand behind a lectern instead of sitting at his desk like a REAL president? I know it's supposed to impart greater importance if an address is given from the Oval Office, but if it looks like a thousand other speeches he's given (and sounds like them too), what difference does it make? Does he put a lectern at the head of the dinner table? Maybe he loves them so much because he loves to lecture (get it?). I know, petty, but the other great commenters and Stilton have covered the salient points.

Judi King said...

@ Shelly: Maybe the lectern hides his notes better than a desk. Who knows, but you can bet he has a twisted reason for it.

rickn8or said...

Shelly, Obama can't sit behind that desk without putting his feet on it.

John the Econ said...

Well, after watching Obama for 7 years, it really shouldn't require mystic psychic powers to predict what he's going to do or say.

For the fun of it, I'll play with a few of the items here and even make a few predictions of my own.

Workplace Violence: Even though sentient beings can any longer hang on to that narrative, the Progressive bureaucracy will behave as though it's still at least a partial cause. So I fully expect "Christmas" parties to start disappearing from government offices in your larger jurisdictions, just as they're currently being purged from college campuses. So consider that another victory for the jihadists.

ISIS as a "perversion" of Islam: For some time now, I've been contemplating the "perversion" of Islam. Until being purged from southern Europe and the holy land by the crusades by the 15th century, the Taliban and ISIS forms of Islam were largely the norm from the 7th century. So who are we to say which version of Islam is the "perversion"? Could it not be that the mostly "peaceful" version that America largely hosted up until the end of the 20th century is in fact the "perversion"? I find it interesting and hypocritical that the multiculturalists who's basic tenant is that judging other cultures by western European moral standards is fundamentally flawed and wrong have no problem deciding which Islam is the correct one.

Obama did not blame the 1st Amendment for access to radicalization materials, but Hillary is on a tear to do so, and is looking to co-opt the social media industry to effectively censor ISIS:

"You are going to hear all the familiar complaints: ‘freedom of speech,’ ” Mrs. Clinton said in an hourlong speech and question-and-answer session at the Saban Forum, an annual gathering at the Brookings Institution that focuses mostly on Israel’s security issues.

Yeah, you are when you combine your agenda with that of Loretta Lynch-job. Since we already know that today's Progressives consider Constitutionalists, the Tea Party, white males, gun owners and pretty much everyone who isn't them as the real threat, we have every reason to be both skeptical, and paranoid of their real intentions.

Immigration: What he is really saying is that we should expect to endure a San Bernardino or Paris every so often a price we must pay for "our shared values". Nice sentiment, but said knowing that while he and his family will be surrounded by a small army of Secret Service personnel forever, hundreds to thousands of the rest of us will randomly be exposed to what he calls our "shared values" while being deprived the kind of protection he takes for granted.

Department of Just Us: "If you see something, say something". And if you say something, the DOJ will be coming after you. It's as though they're reading Orwell as a script.

The beauty of the "white privilege" argument is that from the leftists mind, it renders all logical counter-argument moot. So it really doesn't matter what Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton have done or will do. Just as it's said that it's up to the peaceful Muslims to rise up and stamp out the violent Muslims, it's up to the peaceful black Americans to rise up and stamp out the violent black Americans. In the meantime, we're made to suffer the collateral damage.

John the Econ said...

@Joseph ET, I'm afraid you're right. Not only is nobody ever held accountable, the government rarely fires anyone. Still waiting for any accountability that one would expect from the EPA's debacle in Colorado. Don't hold your breath. More than likely, bonuses will be handed out like they are at the scandal-ridden VA.

@John Robert Mallernee, thank you for your service on my behalf. Some of us still get it.

Colby Muenster said...

So... here I am, happily watching football on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. I go to the fridge for some liquid refreshment, and when I come back, THERE'S O'LIAR BLATHERING ABOUT GOD KNOW'S WHAT (because I had the TV muted)! I immediately started changing channels, and the lying, anti-American, anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, anti-anythingnotmuslim, a-hole is on every channel! I finally (thank GOD!) came across a McGuyver re-run, so I could sit and drink my beer in peace.

Did he really think people would bow in front of their TV's during Sunday afternoon football? Yes. Does he really think his words are meaningful or wise? Yes. Does he really hate this country? YES!


Pardon my off color remark, but O'Liar uses a lectern to hide the erection he gives himself when he hears himself speak.


Time to launch another letter writing campaign to your Sinators and Reprehensitives. Shove O'Liars "No fly = No gun" BS up his skinny little *ss! Yes, people who are not allowed on airplanes because they are potential terrorists should not be allowed to legally get guns, but A) they can get all the durn guns they want anyway, and B) it's waaaaaay too easy for O'Liar to put EVERYBODY on that list.

FlyBoy said...

So Barry says that anyone on the no-fly list should be barred from buying a firearm. Guess what??? You're an NRA member? Tea Party member? Active in the pro-life movement? You all just went to the top of the no-fly list!!!! (As an added bonus, Louis Lerner is gonna be the administrator of said list!)

On a related note, it's now reported that the Dept. of Homeland Security has at least 72 employees on the terrorist watch list. (Linky: )

I wonder how many of these DHS workers are authorized to carry guns?

REM1875 said...

A Gettysburg address it was not.
He hung old lying lynch out to dry by sending her out on the Sundays morning show to state he would take his highly expected executive order on gun control but by evening the fact that tar, feathers, rails, pitchforks and torches were totally sold out in a single afternoon out he decided to tone it down.
fdr had one day of infamy, oblamer has had thousands.
God bless those who who serve and have served AND those who support us.

REM1875 said...

Interesting but not unusual, we have agencies recommending we have food and water stored and other agencies declaring we are potential terrorist if we do as instructed.

PRY said...

Lame lame lame....yeh, we all saw this speech coming, and we were not disappointed...even if he DID utter some things that I agreed with and sounded logical, at this point, I would take it with a BAG of salt, because I don't trust this guy! So, I have no desire or expectation for him to lay out some stategy that makes sense...surely he has something up his sleeve!

I do believe if he did change his spots on strategy and policy to something more to our liking, too many folks would be sucked into his vortex of falsehoods!

Sheeple...that's what I am most afraid of, following blindly any extreme voice, Obama's or Trump's...both can be destructive!

Colby Muenster said...


Good point! The sheeple got us into this mess, and there is no doubt in my mind they will destroy this country unless something drastic happens. Another scary thought... "something drastic" would likely be bad for everyone, not just the sheeple.

Fred Ciampi said...

Pry, I think you're right. The sheeple will get it worse mainly because they are not armed.

John the Econ said...

I've been considering a new pledge: Every time I see a stupid comment in major or social media regarding guns as a diversion from the real problem, I'll buy another box of ammo. My only concern is that I'd go broke living up to it, and ending up near the top of another government list.

Meanwhile, the left remains befuddled as to why sales of guns and ammo spike every time any Democrat from the President on down opens their mouth.

The President's suggestion that people on the "No Fly List" should not be allowed to own guns has totally backfired. Instead of lining up in agreement, people are questioning the logic of the "No Fly List" itself. So, if the President believes that by being on the "No Fly List you are too dangerous to own a gun, then why should you be allowed to own a car, much less a gun? In fact, why are you even allowed loose in this country?

There's little logical process for adding names to it, and certainly no "due process". Basically, any government mandarin can add any name at any time for any reason, real or imagined. Any name on the list doesn't necessarily relate to a particular individual either. Most of the people who should be on it aren't, and vice-versa. Syed & Tashfeen weren't. Amusingly, dozens of DHS employees are.

So not either the agency charged with our safety is totally incompetent, or the people managing the list are. Or both.

I didn't see Obama's speech Sunday, so I couldn't comment much on it. But I did come across this:

"President Barack Obama spent nearly 20 percent of his Oval Office address on terrorism to urge Americans not to be racist, about twice as long as he took to describe the threat of ISIS. In the third Oval Office address of his presidency Sunday, Obama spoke for 1,910 words. He spent 372 words telling Americans not to discriminate against Muslims, compared to 160 words directly referencing the threat of ISIS. Obama used an additional 131 words, roughly 7 percent of the speech, to talk about the need for stricter gun laws."

So once again, the problem isn't with people who wish us dead. It's with us.

My Progressive friends are apoplectic today about Donald Trump's comments regarding butting the brakes on the immigration of more Muslims. Say what you will about the morality of Trump's xenophobic populism, but the only reason it's working for him is because the Democrats have already surrendered this country. Americans are tired of being lectured about "climate change" and wanting to preserve their own country. If the Democrats aren't going to come up with better answers than more welfare and No Fly Lists, we're going to end up with a President Trump next year.

JustaJeepGuy said...

@John the Econ,

Which would you rather have, a president Trump or a president Hillary? You can be pretty sure those will be the choices. Whom do YOU want in the White House? Personally, I'd take a president Attila the Hun than Hillary.