Why? Tragedy in Newtown

The personal tragedy must be unbearable. For those of us who have never been through a horrific experience as the families of those murdered in Newtown, Connecticut are going though, it is impossible to imagine. Thoughts and prayers first go towards them.

What could possibly have gone through the mind of a madman who would do something like this is incomprehensible. Intentionally taking the life of another human being is hard to imagine, killing 20 kindergartners is beyond belief. Everybody seems to be asking, why?

The thoughts of many may go something like this; certainly, if there was a God he would've stopped 20 year old Adam Lanza before he committed one of the most horrific crimes we will hear of in our lifetimes. He who is mindful of a sparrow that falls from the sky would cause the perpetrator to crash his car on the way to this murder spree, his guns to jam, or his demented mind to change before committing this un-godly act. Certainly a loving God could do that and perhaps we are unaware of the times that He does. There are no headlines when God intervenes. 

To understand why tragedies happen in life, you must first understand agency. This requires a "big picture" perspective. Why do people do bad things to others on incomprehensible levels? Agency. Other than life itself, the greatest gift we have from God is the agency to choose what we do with that life. With our agency we must accept that others have the freedom to make their own choices. Most often we experience the richness of life from those around us who enliven our experience. We grow, we learn, we love, and we live thanks to those around us who lift us up. With that, we must also except that same agency will be abused for evil.

This may be of little, or no comfort to those who lost a loved one today---but to answer the question of why, we have to look at the entire human experience, a hard thing to do when the tragedy is so horrific and so personal.

I'm not saying we sit back and allow ourselves to be victimized by others because they have agency, quite the opposite, we do everything possible to protect ourselves and others from evil. The same agency that allows tragedy must be used for our safety, how best to do that will be debated forever. 

Thomas Jefferson once described the "sea of liberty" as "tempestuous." He understood the negative side of Liberty. Tonight we are seeing the tempest 24/7 on cable TV. 

For those of us watching Newtown from a distance we are praying for those who are hurting and thanking God for our family and loved ones. We must also understand the principle of agency and how it is most often used for greatness, but it is sometimes horribly misused for tragedy. Today, if we could, we may be tempted to want a life where we are sheltered by a Garden of Eden. Instead, live in an imperfect world of great good, and occasionally, horrific evil. Agency, as a gift from He who loves us most, makes both possible. We cannot have one without the other. 

Benghazi Simplified for The Media

I hear my friends in the media strain over questions about Benghazi and I wonder why. There are simple answers here.

Of course, what should be mentioned first is that most of the Activist Old Media have stopped covering the story. It's just too personally painful for them to report on Dear Leader clearly lying to the American people, and they don't want Chris Matthews to think they're racist, so it's best they just ignore. If they say it didn't happen through their non-reporting, then I guess it just didn't happen and those 4 families who lost husbands, sons, fathers and brothers can just figure it out on their own. Way to look out for the "little guys," there, media. I guess "truth to power" only counts when a Republican is in power.

This is actually pretty easy to figure out. I knew the day after the terrorist attack in Benghazi what had happened and how the administration and its media were spinning the facts. I wrote about it on my blog. September 12, The Day After. I had no inside sources, no secret sauce, no deep throat. I just figured it out on my own. If I knew what happened in Benghazi while sitting in my pajamas in Las Vegas, then they knew in Washington DC. Don't angst over what Obama knew and when he knew it, he knew right away. His embassy in Egypt said so (he appointed everybody there) and it sounded good to him, so he applied it to Libya. A week later, things were even more clear and I explained it again. This was my column September 19, a week before Susan Rice went on TV. My stories were accurate then, and they have stood the test of time. Still, we have media members, and the administration saying they don't know what happened. To this day they are feigning foolishness. They're trying to cook up a new story that their Activist Old Media will suck on. And they will.

Barack Obama lied to the American people about Benghazi and he knew he was lying. All Rice did was give the same story that Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Jay Carney had given before her. Sure, the focus is now on Rice to take the heat off of Dear Leader, but we know where this talking point first game from. Barack Hussein Obama. This should not be hard for anybody to figure out. It was his talking point that the administration and its media have parroted.

So, why did Obama lie and blame a video for an obviously planned terrorist attack? That answer is just as easy to come up with. He lied because he does not want to believe there are terrorists in the world, not in the middle east, and not in the middle of an election. He has said this many times. Obama believes what Reverend Wright said when he told us, "America's chickens have come home to roost." You don't need a dog ears to figure this whistle out.

We have a President of the United States of America who refuses to accept the fact that 30 years ago Muslim extremists declared jihad on the free world. His idea of "change" and "forward" is for us all to believe that we caused terrorism to exist through our Imperialism, The Crusades, our oppression of people a world away, and McDonald's. Make no doubt, he believes that.

Obama also talks often about bringing the "killers to justice." Who cares about that? You bring car thieves and bank robbers to justice. Terrorists must be stopped before they act, but that requires you acknowledge they exist. Security should've been upgraded at the Consulate in Libya before the attack. Chris Stevens asked for it. Often. But you must first believe there are terrorists and they are evil before you upgrade security. That is the danger that should scare us all. Obama didn't/doesn't see that.

Obama also declared al Qaeda "dead," before Benghazi so he was worried about the inconsistency of his statements not jiving with reality during the presidential campaign.  If you blame the video that was spawned from Evil America and its clearly misguided First Amendment, how could you blame al Qaeda? I would also ask, why would Obama worry? Who was going to ask him about the inconsistency? Candy Crowley?

There will be Congressional Hearings about Benghazi, media angst, questions about who approved the talking points, straining over gnats and swallowing camels (apologies to my Muslim friends for the Biblical reference--I assure you, I was not around during The Crusades.) There is nothing about Benghazi that is tough to figure out. I've done it. Did it long ago. In my pajamas.

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell

Ron Futrell Interview with Andrew Breitbart, 2011

My interview with Andrew Breitbart, August 15, 2011---7 months before his death.

CLICK HERE to hear the interview.

Lincoln: Movie Review, via Today's Politics

One of the greatest stories in American history comes to life on the big screen courtesy director Steven Spielberg.

Spielberg captures the politics and the personalities of the moments surrounding the passing of the 13th amendment to the US Constitution. To most Americans, this was probably a moment not thought of much, but without the 13th and 14th amendments, our nation, and the world, would be much different.

This was a political battle the likes of which we have rarely seen. The bloodiest war in American history was drawing to a close. The nation had long since grown weary of the brutality. Abraham Lincoln had just been elected to his second term, and he knew that if the loss of 700,000 lives was to mean anything, the issue of slavery would have to be dealt with. Time was running out.

Spielberg makes two political points very clear with this movie. First, Republicans were united behind Lincoln to put an end to the horror of slavery once and for all. Democrats were racist and pro-slavery and they fought the amendment every step of the way. This point was not made in the movie, but it should be noted, the Republican Party was founded to fight slavery.

Second, politics is messy business.  If the President wants something to happen, he uses his power to make it happen by working with members of both parties, and if he has to, he will knock some heads around. Lincoln also had no problem buying votes from Democrats to get what he wanted. This issue was that big to him, and to a nation severely divided.

Some may try to compare what Lincoln did with the 13th amendment to what Barack Obama has done with ObamaCare. They would be foolish to make that comparison. Like Lincoln, Obama wanted badly to get the legislation passed, but other than that...

Democrats should've tried to make ObamaCare constitutional by passing it as the 28th amendment. They did not because they knew it had no chance of passing. Like Lincoln, Obama and Harry Reid bought votes, but they had to buy the votes of fellow Democrats. Then knew no Republicans would vote for this monstrosity of a bill, so they played total partisan politics and used our tax dollars to bribe fellow Democrats to vote for ObamaCare.

Perhaps the biggest difference between the 13th amendment and ObamaCare is that one increases Liberty, the other decreases it, other than that...

Few who watch this movie will not learn something they did not know about history. The timing of Congress ratifying the 13th amendment, the end of the Civil War, and the death of Lincoln speaks to the divine nature of what Lincoln was doing. Or, call it fate if you wish---Lincoln felt his cause was divine and that he had to get the amendment passed quickly.

Another point that makes this movie relevant to politics in our day; Democrats are still working to enslave minorities. Black scholars have argued that the government entitlements have decimated the black family. Only the most leftist among us would argue otherwise. In modern history it began with Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson's so-called "war on poverty." 150 years ago Democrats enslaved blacks because they were racist, today they do it because they want the power minority votes will bring. Government handouts given to this degree can only enslave.

Lincoln is a must see because of its deft display of history---and for what we can learn today.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

ABC Sets Up Obama Victory Template

Here it is---ABC making sure Barack Obama knows how he can win election and save the nation from disaster, both at the same time---and they will be there to help.

You may have heard there's this storm on the east coast, Sandy. A "Mega Super Storm" is what ABC News has called it. Complete with disaster music, new motion graphics and the Extreme Weather Team on the ground. Few storms live up to the media hype and let's hope this one follows that predictable track.

This column is not about the seriousness of the storm, but about ABC and the politics of disaster and how the network is both advising the president, and creating his template for success.

Witness this set-up discussion Sunday morning between Dan Harris and George Stephanopoulos.

Dan (liberal question asker): "If you're the president, how do you manage campaigning, because his job is truly on the line here, with governing and managing perhaps a large disaster?"

George (Clinton's boy): "You show you're in touch and that's why the president has already put out photos of him talking to the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and he's also returning to the White House tomorrow afternoon already cancelling some events. The biggest problem for the president now, if he makes any mishandling of this storm it could affect the final days of this race more than any other factor."

Interpreted, what they're saying is: "Dear Leader, get back to the White House so that we can show everybody how brilliant you are and how you have saved America from this disaster. You just do what we say, we will take care of the rest."

Of course, this is all a set-up and is easily manipulated. You find out how effective true leaders are by how they react when they are outside the glare of the spotlight.

We have the perfect example, and ABC has virtually ignored it.

Anybody at ABC heard of the terrorist attack on Benghazi? Oh ya, you've done the story alright (a :15 reader by the anchor in the B-block,) but have you bothered to connect this directly to the White House as an example of how Barack Obama is as a leader? No, you have not.

Obama watched  for hours on video as Americans were attacked and killed at a US Consulate. He could've sent in help and did not. Then he knowingly lied about the cause of the terrorist attack. He sent others to lie about the terrorist attack, then he took off on Air Force One to Las Vegas for a campaign event.

That's what he did and you know that's what he did, but you refuse to tell that story.

Instead, you now approach your viewers with a template that will be used by you to try to save his failed presidency in the final days of this election.

How do you put on your make-up and walk on set with a clear conscience and try to tell your viewers that you are "looking out for them?"

Besides, if Benghazi has taught us one thing, if the president does "mishandle this storm," the Activist Old Media won't report it.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

The White House Lied About Benghazi

One of the favorite questions the media asked during the Watergate Era was, "What did Nixon know, and when did he know it?" Once the media found out what Richard Nixon knew and when he knew it, his presidency was over and careers in journalism were made.

We now know what Barack Obama knew and when he knew it about the Benghazi terrorist attacks, and the media sits in relative silence.

Oh, there are stories breaking every day on this, but overall, the media refuses to connect the dots and put this story right where it belongs---on the desk in the Oval Office of Barack Obama.

Obama, Hillary Clinton, Jay Carney, and Susan Rice lied by calling the terrorist attack in Benghazi a "spontaneous attack" fueled by a movie, and more importantly, they knew they were lying at the time. Reuters now has e-mails showing the White House knew this was a coordinated terrorist attack hours after it began, still, the administration lied to America about it. I wrote about this story a week after it happened, and I knew the administration was lying then, and I said so. If I knew, they knew. Oh wait, I wrote a column the day after the attack exposing the lies. Read it here.

Oh, Good Morning America mentioned the e-mails, as other media have, but they still refuse to tie this lie directly to their Dear Leader. CBS Radio News failed to mention this story during their top of the hour newscast at 12 noon Eastern time today. But, they found time to work in a story about identity theft at a few Barnes and Noble stores. CBS Evening News first exposed the damaging e-mails, but this is just the tip of the story. Real "junk yard dog" reporters will latch on to this story and not let go until they destroy those responsible. That's what the media does---or is supposed to do.

This story needs to be told with the Obama Lie front and center. He also failed to react and send troops to save the lives of those being murdered by terrorists. Tell me both of those issues don't deserve more attention than they are currently being given.

I'm guessing the folks at the networks have the video of Obama blaming that stupid video that nobody has seen. Check the video files---go back to the last month. In case they have burned that video of Obama's statements, I found this on YouTube.  Obama blaming the video for the terrorist attack in Benghazi. Match it up with the e-mails that have now been uncovered and whaddya know---you have one hell of a story about known lies at the highest level of government. Maybe the Networks are waiting for the Aaron Sorkin version to come out on HBO before they do anything.

Networks and newspapers are trying to excuse themselves on this story by giving it cursory mention. This is not a :15 second "reader" or "voice-over" type story. This is an hour-long prime-time special type story. You can hear them in newsrooms now, "Oh ya, we did that story at the end of the B-block at 4:30. We covered it!"

Beginning November 7th the investigation will go into full gear and the media will expose these known lies and they will ask why action wasn't take at the time to save the lives of the 4 Americans brutally killed by terrorists in Benghazi. At that time journalists will start thinking about the Emmy's and Peabody's on the table for the taking.

Until then, they have an election to win.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

Andrew Sullivan: Off The Deep End

The Chris Matthews Show is always good for entertainment. A handful of libs sitting around a small table chatting about how best they can get Dear Leader elected. 

Once a week is about all of this anybody can take.

Andrew Sullivan was one of the five (counting Chris) lib panelists this week talking about Barack Obama's debate failure, why it happened, and how he needs to fix it. His quote was one for the ages.

"I think that they (bad evil Republicans) got into his (Obama's) head with all this racist stuff before the first debate, you know, the Hannity stuff, 'look there's a black guy running for office,' like two days before, I think he, he, he (has) repression of his own anger. 

"He (Obama) should be angry that these people (Romney, Ryan, and more bad, evil Republicans)  have the gall to talk to him about the deficit and the gall to talk to him about foreign policy after their record."

So, lets see here, so much to dissect with this one statement. Sean Hannity apparently just figured out two days before the recent Presidential Debate that Obama was black and he launched a racist attack at Obama (who apparently watches Hannity) and that got into his head to the point that it messed him up during the debate. That makes perfect sense. Why not just blame the altitude, Andrew? 

The second half of the quote is even better. Sullivan calls himself a "journalist" but he doesn't want anybody attacking Dear Leader. Talking "truth to power" is now, "people have the gall to talk to him."

Let's see here. Obama's deficits are 5 times greater that George W. Bush's and Sullivan does not want Obama to be questioned about that. Obama's foreign policy is filled with lies (lies that the administration knew they were making at the time,) the middle east is falling apart, and Sullivan doesn't want anybody to question Obama about that. 

While we're at it, the bigger question here; what are Romney's deficits and foreign policy failures? He has none. He has never been president. Sullivan thinks Romney is George W. Bush. Please get some new glasses, Andy. 

Which speaks to the essence of the Obama Campaign 2012. Andrew Sullivan exposed it. Obama is running on Bill Clinton's record and attacking George W. Bush. It's all he's got.

Forward. 

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell

America, Finally Seeing The Real Mitt Romney

The media is trying to figure out how this happened.

How could Mitt Romney be blasting his way to the top of the polls after just one debate?

Would you like a very simple answer? Here it is: The media tried to tell America that Romney was one thing, while the debate showed them he was another. The difference between the two are seen in the poll numbers. It really is that simple.

For the last year or so the media created a template that reflected their opinion, not reality. Mitt Romney was a gaffe machine who didn't care about people and wasn't intelligent enough to reside within the blinding light of their Dear Leader.

The media has spent this time being dishonest to Americans about Mitt Romney.

I know Mitt Romney and have spent plenty of one-on-one time with him. As a sports reporter I covered the 2002 Olympics and saw first hand his ability to fix things. I had many friends who worked with him and they all came back with the same story. They were amazed at his ability to lead and succeed.

During my times with Romney I have seen him as very personable, approachable, and caring. Yes, caring. Everything the media has told us he is not.

I arrived late to a meeting a couple years ago with a handful of people in the room (yes, I arrived late for a meeting with Romney,) not to worry, with no chairs in the room, Romney quickly stood up and offered me his. A little thing---a personal thing---but it told me a lot about the man.

Yes, Obama was horrible during the Disaster in Denver. He acted like he would've rather been hitting a buried ball out of the sand at the 9th hole at Congressional Country Club (hey Barry, nice recovery!) than actually having to answer Romney's questions about the economy (hey Barry, nice recovery!) But that's just part of the issue here, the bigger issue is that the media told us Romney was something that he is not. The polls reflect the disconnect between what the media told us, and what the people have seen.

A 12 point swing in the Pew Poll doesn't happen by accident, it only happens when the media lie to the American people about what a candidate is and they figure out the truth on their own. The debate was Romney unfiltered. Nothing about his performance surprised me, but that night, America finally saw Romney for who he is.

There is still time for the media to turn this election around. Over the next four weeks they will try every trick in the book. The media have too much invested to back up now. Like the cheap, transparent, Vegas magician, you can see the cards up their sleeve and they will pull them out and play them at every turn. It is what it is, except more people are now on to their sleight of hand.

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell

Unprepared in Vegas

The Hangover III

The Empty Chair has better odds in Round Two. 

Buster Douglas was better prepared for his fight against Evander Holyfield. Buster came to Vegas, took naps at the golf course, spend evenings at the buffets and decided not to train for his only Heavyweight Championship defense. It ended in a third-round knockout. Not sure if Barack Obama failed to train while spending 3 days here in Las Vegas before his debate, but if he did, he's in more trouble than anybody knows.

Certainly, most people who come to Vegas and spend three days here, expect to leave losers, but not this bad. I've seen a lot of Presidential Debates in my lifetime and never has there been a bigger blowout. At least some people who listened on radio thought Nixon beat JFK. You could've listened through a string and cup and the conclusion would've been the same. Romney by KO.

As the media searches, questions, wonders and freaks out (didya see MSNBC?) over why Mitt Romney smacked Barack Obama silly on Wednesday night, there are two simple answers---1) Romney has truth and facts and Obama is armed with failure, 2) the media lobbing non-stop softballs has left Obama totally unprepared.  Obama's friends in the Activist Old Media bear much of the blame for the Denver Disaster 2012. 

Think about it---at every turn Romney has been challenged, badgered, questioned, and queried over and over again and he has been forced to come up with answers. As it should be. Republicans know the game and it is not a level playing field. Obama has been coddled, protected, babied, and fed pablum by his media and when finally challenged, he fails miserably.

Yes, the media's game plan for Obama Victory 2012 has backfired miserably. It's just Round One in a Five Round debate season, but there were times when I almost felt sorry for Obama on that stage. Almost. Jim Lehrer finished second on this night mainly because he fed Obama better answers than Obama gave himself. 

Romney still has Fast and Furious and Benghazi in his quiver. He fired Solyndra with laser-like accuracy.

The Veeps are up next. I'm making Paul Ryan a 14 and a half point favorite. Early money is coming big on Ryan. This line will be -17 by kickoff. 

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

The Media Cover-up (For Now)

If the media is one thing---it is transparent. It is also leftist and predictable, but that would be three things.

So, here we go with a prediction born of the leftist transparency we find with the Activist Old Media. 

Sometime after November 7th the media will begin doing its job. Now...it still won't fully do it's job, but it will at least give it the ol' College Journalism School Try. 

Two scandals should be rocking this White House right now. By themselves, each is worse than Watergate, and combined they would make Barack Obama the most scandalous president in history. Fast and Furious, the Benghazi terrorist attack; and lies and cover-ups with both.

There is an election to win right now for the media and its Dear Leader, so neither scandal will get the attention it deserves. We know that, we see that. Oh...they may touch on these stories and bite around the edges, but the junk yard dogs sit muzzled and chained while the Obama administration has its way with the merchandise (in this case, we would be the merchandise.) Never forget this is the same media that spent four years, four years attacking the George W. Bush White House over the supposed leaking of a non-covert CIA agent's name. A story the media got horribly wrong, but oh well, the Bushies had it comin'.

Whether Obama wins or loses this election, the media will suddenly learn of these two stories through osmosis (or they will click into Big Government and read them) and they will cover them as if they knew them all along. They will try to maintain a smidgen of credibility. Investigative reporters will be unleashed, books will be written, and Peabody's and Emmy's will be awarded en-mass.

If Obama loses November 6th, the media will have ignored its motto of "speaking truth to power" because Obama will be out of power. It does little good then. The time to do these stories is now. Right now. But clearly the media feel loose seats on an American Airlines jet where nobody was hurt is more important. Gotta protect our viewers from bumping their heads---but 4 dead in Benghazi and 300+ killed in Fast and Furious will have to wait (oh, plus the lies and cover-ups, remember with Watergate it was the lies and cover-ups that were worse.) There was no desire by the media to tell the voting public who Obama was in 2008, why would they suddenly do it in 2012? They will not, they have not. 

If Obama wins November 6th (heaven help us---no really, heaven help us) the media will do what it has done to the second-terms of the most recent presidents in memory. The media will exert its power and make surethat president knows that they are in charge.  Never forget, as much as they love Obama, they love themselves and their power more. 

Second-term scandals, real or perceived are the reality. Nixon-Watergate, Reagan-Iran Contra, Clinton-Monica, Bush-Just being alive. Historians have argued that presidents get cocky in their second terms and that leads to their demise, and part of that is true, but the Obama scandals have been uncovered in his firstterm. I shutter to think what scandals might become us if he gets four more years. I haven't even mentioned the scandals of where the "stimulus" dollars were spent.

The Activist Old Media will do these stories and they will want credit for doing them. They will tell themselves how tough they were on Obama and they will point to the awards on their shelves as proof. Of course, we know the truth. When these stories needed to be done the junk yard dogs sat silent, by choice. 

There are still a few weeks left to do these stories when they matter most, but the media will not do them. They would've by now. The facts are out there now and it will matter little when they report them later.   

They have muzzled and chained themselves. 

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell

Finally, The Media Hits Its Breaking Point

It's great to see that the Activist Old Media finally has a cause that angers them to the point of delirium.

They have had enough! They are as mad as hell, and they're not going to take it anymore!

Those Replacement Refs caused the Green Bay Packers to lose a football game last night. 

Oh, don't get me wrong---I was not happy about the horrible call either. I live in Vegas and know the point spread. Packers were favored by 3 and would've covered the spread. Lots of cash was bet on the Packers and the sports books couldn't be happier today with those Replacement Refs who gave the Seahawks the win and the "cover."

But I do find it interesting to see what it takes to send the media to the breaking point. Football apparently does it. 

They haven't cared much that The President of the United States misses intel briefings so he can golf. Now we see a middle east in turmoil and American's dying as a result. Yes, if you miss as many intel briefings as Barack Obama has, and Americans are not prepared to defend themselves at Embassies around the world, the boss who misses the meetings is to blame. Maybe the NFL Commissioner, Roger Goddell can be blamed for this as well. 

The top Democrat Senator in the Senate, Harry Reid makes up fairy tales about Mitt Romney's taxes and that's not enough to anger this Activist Old Media. Jennings intercepted the pass! Everybody saw it!

More than 300 Mexicans and a Border Patrol agent are dead because of this administrations gun-running operation to Mexico and the activist in the media don't have the time or courage to get to the bottom of what really happened here. But they will show us that replay of the interception-turned-touchdown enough times that we know the shoe size of Golden Tate.

The unemployment figures are horrible right now and even the 8.1% number is as fabricated as hell. But we must be worried about the hundred or so NFL officials who are on the sidelines in a labor dispute.

Hey, I want 'em back too, but the causes the media choose to take on are not accidental. This is their cause, their mission. Save the NFL. 

At least we know the media has its breaking point.

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell 

For the Record, Obama Did Not End the War in Iraq

On 60 Minutes this week, Barack Obama once again took credit for ending the war in Iraq. "I said I'd end the war in Iraq, I did," boasted Dear Leader. 

Reporter Steve Kroft also parroted the company line by giving Obama full credit. 

As the lies pile up by this administration and its Activist Old Media, this is one that gets repeated often and needs to be corrected right here, right now. 

Obama was the President who did nothing more than follow the timeline set by his predecessor, George W. Bush. 

Here is the Status of Forces Agreement, from October 2008 (Bush was still president---BTW) which states, in part:

All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011.

George W. Bush made that happen, he put the timeline into effect, and ended the war with victory for America and the Iraqi people. Do you hear any bad news coming out of Iraq these days? Rarely. They are one of the few middle eastern countries living in relative peace right now and we can thank the Bush Doctrine and those soldiers who bravely implemented it and sacrificed everything for it.

But Obama wants credit. I guess he needs credit. He shall have credit for following the Bush timeline, and nothing more. 

Also, it should be noted, as a US Senator, Obama did everything he could to try to make the war end in failure for the United States. Senator Obama did this purely for political purposes. He opposed the war and the surge that led to the successful end of the war for both countries. Obama hated the surge and joined the rest of the Democrats in saying that the surge would not work. We can all be thankful they did not get their way in 2007. Remember when they wanted us to leave in defeat? Pull out now, was the battle cry of Obama's Democrats. Does Obama think we can't remember what he was pitching just 5 years ago? He can only pull off this ruse with the medias full cooperation. which he is getting. Hopefully historians will correct this.  

Obama and the Democrats were as wrong as any political party has ever been on an issue of this much importance. This should not be forgotten, but the media has removed this fact from the Iraq War narrative. 

Obama called the Iraq War a "dumb war" and a "rash war." In 2002 his words were praised by liberals and leftist who still revere them today, in spite of our victory in Iraq. That is as delusional as it gets. Tell those in Iraq now living under Liberty and without the boot of the worst terrorist of our time, Saddam Hussein, on their throats, that it was a "dumb war."

Obama opposed it; now he wants credit for it, and his media is helping him with this narrative. Were Obama being honest with America he would be thanking Bush for our success in Iraq and pointing out that it was his timeline that ended the war. He has never done that, not once. Like all Great Leftists throughout history, all the glory must go to them. 

So if that's how this timeline thing works, let's play that game. Richard Nixon gets credit for man first landing on the moon, not JFK. He was president July 20, 1969 when it happened. 

See how far that argument flies.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

All That "Noise" From Israel

Now Barack Obama can't stand the "noise" coming from Israel.

The noise of the crowd at fundraisers and late night TV is fine, but those folks in Israel with all that noise is just too much for the leader of the free world to deal with. 

This line by Obama (and others) caused me to yell at the TV during the 60 Minutes interview. It got loud in my living room.

As for meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Obama said his plan was "simply to do what is right for the American people. And I am going to block out any noise that's out there" Noise? Israel is just noise? And, by the way, Mr. President, backing Israel is what is right for the American people. It is also right for the free world. I'm assuming you don't believe that, and you feel listening to Israel is just "noise." 

Obama also said Israel is "one of our closest allies in the region." One of? Israel is our closest ally in the region but Obama won't say that because his sympathies lie with the Muslim nations. They do. That's who Obama is. 

The sooner American and Jewish voters understand that fact, the better off we will be. 

If the noise coming from 5 million Jews is the middle east surrounded by 500 million Arabs who want to wipe them off the face of the earth is too much for you, Mr. Obama---after 

November 6th you can spend more time on the golf course. Not much noise out there.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

Media Covering Up Truth About Benghazi Attacks

This is like not seeing plane that just crashed into your house. What plane with the tail section sitting in the backyard? I'm not talking about before the crash, but after the crash you still don't see the plane. 

That's how the media is approaching the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya that killed 4 Americans.

This is a story just waiting to be told properly, and the Activist Old Media is not doing it. 

So far, the White House has called this a spontaneous event on the anniversary of 9-11. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have also been spreading the story that this was just a group of radicals who were angry over a movie, so they killed Americans. That story is bad enough, but with every day that goes by, that story looks more and more ridiculous. The Obama Administration knows the truth, the State Department knows the truth, and the media knows the truth. They are all lying about what really happened in Libya. Americans deserve the truth.

This was a planned, coordinated attack on Americans working at the Consulate. There are indications that people within the Libyan government were involved, and America was given advance warning on the attacks. Nothing was done by Obama to prevent these attacks and the media seems unconcerned about finding out who knew what---and when did they know it. Since Obama doesn't attend most of his intel briefings, I guess he should not be culpable, right? 

It has taken the Obama administration more than a week to figure out that this was a terrorist attack. It took that long only because Obama does not like to acknowledge there are actually terrorists in the world who do not like Americans, even with His Highness in the White House.

Hey, there's an election coming up in a few weeks---this would look very bad for Dear Leader if the truth is told right now about the Benghazi attacks. Let's just drag our feet on this for a while.

We've seen this story before. After November 6th the media will look into this attack, books will be written and blame will be placed on the lame duck President Obama, but since the stories were held when they mattered most, and he won the election, the Activist Old Media will wash their hands and try to act responsible when it's too late. Now is the time to put these pieces together. Bits and pieces are trickling out on this story, but somebody with access needs to put them all together and try win a Peabody or an Emmy. If truth is not is not enough motivation, perhaps an award will be.  

Of course, this is the same media who won't report properly on Fast and Furious. They still haven't bothered to ask the president who authorized the selling of 2,000 guns to Mexican drug lords that has lead to the death of two Americans and 300 Mexican citizens. If the media doesn't care about reporting on the Obama administration "gun running" to Mexico leading to hundreds of deaths, why should they are about this?

Hey, what is that? It looks like fuselage in the pool? Let's order pizza. We'll get around to covering that plane crash when we're good and ready.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

The Media and Obama, Taking Us Down The Rabbit Hole

To re-elect Barack Obama the media has a long list of what they expect us to believe. We would have to "suspend disbelief" (as Hillary Clinton once said of General David Petraeus) to vote for Barack Obama on November 6th.

Okay, let's suspend disbelief. 

This is Alice and the "Rabbit Hole" at it's finest. Choose a pill, jump right in, and don't mind the smile on the Cheshire Cat---that's just the Activist Old Media having a good laugh as they try to convince us the Queen of Hearts will protect our best interests. 

The media expect us to believe that Barack Obama is a foreign policy expert, and Mitt Romney knows nothing about foreign policy. How's the middle east looking?

The media expect us to believe the Arab Spring was a good thing and the Muslim Brotherhood are our friends. 

The media expect us to believe Obama cares about national security, even though he golfs more often than he goes to intel briefings. 

Grab that croquet mallet, Queenie, we have a tee time.

The media expect us to believe we are more angry over how Romney spends his money than how Obama spends ours.

The media expect us to be angry over Romney's taxes, while we watch government spending and ObamaCare send our own through the roof. 

Take another blue pill.  

The media expect us to believe that if only Obama had a few trillion more dollars, unemployment might go down to 7.9%.

The media expect us to believe that those millions who have stopped looking for work, must really not want to work.

The media expect us to believe the unemployment numbers aren't rigged. 

The media expect us to believe that we just have to pay $4.00 a gallon. The new normal.

The media expect us to believe that, if only they would cooperate, Obama would work well with Republicans, even though he never has, while Romney can't work well with Democrats, even though he has.   

The media expect us to believe they aren't choosing sides in this election. 

Got another blue pill?

The media expect us to believe Obama is transparent even though he has given them only two short new conferences this year. 

The media expect us to believe Obama is the Great Uniter who will bring us all together.

The media expect us to believe that a Beer Summit is how problems are solved.

Oh...pay no mind...that's just a blue caterpillar sitting on a mushroom smoking a hookah. He could be Chief of Staff during the Second Term.

The media expect us to believe that somebody who won't care for his own brother is really his "brothers keeper."

The media expect us to believe Joe Biden is just a lovable, old, harmless gaffe machine and not The Dodo running a never ending Caucus Race. 

The media expect us to believe that Obama is the smartest person on the planet, even though he won't show anybody his academic records. 

The media expect us to believe that if only Obama had 4 more years, he would finally get it right. 

Oh, I'll bet Lewis Carroll would be proud of the literary nonsense being spread by the Activist Old Media these days. Perhaps there's a reason Carroll penned the blue pill as blissful ignorance and the red pill as the sometimes painful truth of reality. 

America needs the red pill November 6th. Time for another Tea Party.

Follow Ron Futrell on twitter @RonFutrell

Media Protects Obama, Blames Movie For Terrorist Attacks

At a time of tragedy when Americans have been murdered by brutal terrorists in Libya, who will defend Liberty?

Not the American TV networks. 

They instead blame the principle of free speech, Liberty itself, if you will, for these horrendous attacks. 

A movie made in the USA depicts Muhammad in a negative light and the American media seems to excuse the murderous actions of terrorists because of the movie. Holy hell---what country did I wake up in?

MSNBC went a step further, even excusing the attacks because of the movie. 

"These protests are taking place, this anger is all based on that film that the US government has come out and chastised," was the question asked to Richard Engel of NBC while on the ground in Cairo. 

"This is all based on that film, but it's more than that, this is a perceived insult, an attack on Islam," responded Engel. "It touched such a sensitive issue and they feel they could not take this lying down, they had to come out and speak for their prophet, speak for their religion."

Terrorists don't hate us because of a movie. Islamic extremists declared jihad on the free world 30 years ago. The media expects us to believe that a movie made 'em do it, and Engel is excusing their actions. "They could not take this lying down." 

This was the reaction across the board from the Activist Old Media. 

Where does the media stand on free speech? If you threaten to take away First amendment rights the media would be the first to take a stand, and rightly so, but when it comes to Muslim terrorists, they somehow forget that founding principle. 

The main reason the media blames the movie is to excuse the horrendous foreign policy of Barack Obama. They cannot point to the numerous failures by this president. Obama has missed most intelligence meetings at the White House, but has been able to sneak in 104 rounds of golf.  

The media flip flops on free speech in order to protect their Dear Leader. Blame a movie, because you cannot blame Obama.

Holy hell, what country did I wake up in?

Democrats With Vote Fraud on Display at Convention

It was there for all to see. 

You want to see an example of Democrats rigging an election, watch the video here. 

Democrats had gotten so much heat for removing God and Jerusalem from their platform that they decided to put it back in....but to do so a vote was required. 

Clearly, Democrats at the top of the party wanted it back in because they knew the political heat they had already taken, and would continue to take between now and November 6th. They internally made the decision to put God and Jerusalem back in the platform purely for political purposes. 

Then came the voice vote for all to see. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villar (which is his real name, but he changed it to Villaraigosa) conducted the voice vote and this circus kept getting worse the longer it went. 

Three voice votes total and the last one was probably 50/50.  It takes a two/thirds majority to pass an amendment to a resolution and this clearly did not pass. Most people on the floor of the convention were not happy and you could hear their boos. They knew the power players in the Democrat Party had just put something in the platform that they wanted out. 

It was voter fraud there for all to witness and the Democrat Leadership was behind it. 

Anybody trust the Democrats November 6th?

What The Left Hates Most About Clint Eastwood

His appearance has been widely panned by the left and its Activist Old Media. Clint Eastwood dared jump off the leftist bandwagon in Hollywood and he joined the Evil Right. 

But it gets deeper than that. 

They hate his "bit" on stage at the Republican National Convention because he ridiculed the president. He dared make fun of their Dear Leader. 

You don't do that and expect to leave unscathed. 

The Empty Chair performance by "Dirty Harry" bothered the President to the point that he had to tweet his own response (or his staff did it for him, who knows?) by saying, "This seat's taken."

Oh, you could argue that all of this is being done in good fun, but the Romney's are being asked serious questions by the media about what they think of Eastwood's performance. They have been rock solid behind Eastwood by saying they appreciate his support. Damn! The media had hoped the Romney's would've thrown Clint under their campaign bus. To their credit, they didn't. 

Meanwhile, it's important to note that this administration does not like to be ridiculed. No stateist can allow that. Leftists take themselves very seriously. Obama may occasionally laugh and joke about himself, but deep down he is a Cold Hearted Social Engineer and they are not the type who take to ridicule kindly. 

What they hate most is Eastwood opened the door for more ridicule. Before you make the contention that this "embarrassed the Office of the President," gimme a break. Obama started that when he removed the Churchill Bust. Besides, anybody out there remember what the left and its Activist Old Media did to George W. Bush? Our memories are not that bad. 

Deep down Eastwood's performance did not make Obama's day, it ruined it. 

Scott Walker vs. MSNBC, Classic Mismatch

I don't think MSNBC will mess with Scott Walker again anytime soon.

They went at him, one at a time like in a Jackie Chan movie. Wack, pow, wack, smack!

First reporter Ron Mott was live with Walker on the convention floor. All fine there. Good questions, tough questions. Respectful. 

Then Rachel Maddow jumped in and took her shots at the Wisconsin Governor (while Mott held the mic for the crew back in the studio.) Her misguided shots were over a statement Paul Ryan made during his speech about the closing of a Janesville, Wisconsin GM plant.  

Ryan said (correctly) that Obama had promised during a visit (Feb 2008) that government would help keep the plant open. The announcement of the plant closing came while Bush was in the White House, then it eventually closed for good while Obama was president. Them's the facts---but Ryan's main point was that Obama promised that government would keep the plant open and government did not fulfill its promise. Obama could've kept the plant open and he should be asked why it's closed, but MSNBC would never go there.

MSNBC had gotten some super-secret information (from their super-duper fact checking crew at Wa Po) about when the plant closed and they were ready to pounce. 

Apparently the MSNBC crew back in the studio didn't really understand what Ryan said, they didn't care what Ryan said, or they didn't know the actual date the plant closed. That would be January 13, 2010. Hmmmmm. Not sure who was in the White House then. I'll have Wa Po check that for me. (For the record, the plant is in "stand by" status right now.) Cars were still being produced at the plant through June 2009.

MSNBC should learn how to search Wikipedia. Here are the entries and dates.

In October 2008, GM announced Janesville Assembly would be largely idled December 23, 2008 when production of SUVs would end.^[10] A skeleton crew continued to work at Janesville Assembly through June, 2009, completing the Janesville/Isuzu light truck contract.

[edit]2010

On January 13, 2010 GM put Janesville Assembly on stand-by to produce new vehicles due to recent increase in demand for GM vehicles.^{[citation needed]}

Well, Maddow attacked. She incorrectly said the plant closed during the Bush administration. Walker responded calmly and told her there were "two rounds of layoffs," as Wikipedia points out. Wack!

Rachel backed up and changed the issue to the auto bailout. Walker again responded with class and a deft jab and told her the bailout did not work for Wisconsin and pointed out the closing of the Janesville plant. Pow! One down. That was easy---just gettin' warmed up here.

Then Heavyweight Big Eddie (Schultz, who has been MSNBC's main attack dog on Walker---Eddie flips out whenever he talks about Walker) had his turn. Eddie's face got red, his fists were clinched, his voice was raised as he quoted the Washington Post (big mistake, should've used Wikipedia) on the first "closing." Walker calmly reminded Eddie of what he had said to Rachel that a "managed bankruptcy" would've been best for GM. Poor MSNBC crew, they apparently don't know what a managed bankruptcy is. They never responded to that. All they know is government takeover. 

Then Eddie tried one of his favorite tricks, he asked a stupid question, then gave his own stupid answer while not allowing Walker to respond. When Walker was finally allowed to talk, he reminded Eddie of the point Ryan made that Obama promised the workers that government would keep the plant open. Promise not kept.

Wack! Lights out! Peter McNeely lasted longer against Mike Tyson. I was at that fight. It was a first round disqualification. McNeely, like Eddie, rushed out to the center of the ring to attack his opponent at the first sound of the bell. It wasn't pretty. DQ.

Oh, it gets better.   

Reverend Al Sharpton jumped in and trusted the Wa Po date and took his swings at Walker and wiffed badly. I felt the wind here in Vegas. Tawana Brawley would've given Walker a better fight. Pow! Down goes Sharpton!

Three first round knockouts for Walker. 

They do not want a rematch. 

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell