Category Archives: George W Bush

George W Bush

Obama scrapped stricter travel quarantine practices in 2010, Bush administration proposals to detain sick airline passengers, Obama lets anyone in and we have Ebola and Enterovirus D68

Obama scrapped stricter travel quarantine practices in 2010, Bush administration proposals to detain sick airline passengers, Obama lets anyone in and we have Ebola and Enterovirus D68

“Barack Obama is endangering the children of the US and now our troops. Where is the outrage?”…Citizen Wells

“You can see that these doctors, who are highly trained people, got themselves infected,”
“So sending troops into an area, if they’re dealing one-on-one with a patient, they’re not going to be able to protect themselves very well. It’s not easy to [prevent transmission], because you get tired and you get careless and you make some simple mistakes. All it takes is one virus particle.”…Dr. Lee Hieb, former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

From the Washington Times October 4, 2014.

“Ebola in the U.S.: Stricter travel quarantine practices dropped by Obama admin. in 2010

Many health and transportation officials are calling for stricter quarantine practices in response to the growing threat of the deadly Ebola virus being carried in by travelers from West Africa, but in 2010 the Obama Administration scrapped a set of regulations that might have prevented the disease from entering the U.S.

Bush administration proposals in response to the avian flu crisis in 2005 would have granted the federal government the power to detain sick airline passengers, USA Today reported in 2010.

The regulations also would have required airlines to report sick passengers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and mandated that airlines collect passenger contact information in case flyers needed to be tracked down as part of an outbreak investigation.”

“Now the threat of Ebola has prompted lawmakers and transportation officials to call for travel bans on flights coming in from West African countries stricken by the disease.

“We should stop accepting flights from countries that are Ebola stricken,” Louisiana Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal said in a statement Friday. “Even countries in Africa have cut back on or stopped accepting flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks.””

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/4/ebola-in-the-us-stricter-travel-quarantine-practic/

 

Obama lies from Stepanie Cutter, Obama campaign spokesperson lies about Obama job growth compared to Bush and Reagan, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Obama lies from Stepanie Cutter, Obama campaign spokesperson lies about Obama job growth compared to Bush and Reagan, Bureau of Labor Statistics

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“Propaganda must not serve the truth, especially not insofar
as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent.”
… Adolf Hitler

From News Busters August 26, 2012.

“‘Fact Checkers’ AWOL After Obama Spokesperson Lies About Jobs Created Under Reagan and Obama”

“Obama campaign spokesperson Stepanie Cutter, appearing on MSNBC earlier this week, claimed that “over the past, you know, 27 months we’ve created 4.5 million private-sector jobs. That’s more jobs than in the Bush recovery (or) in the Reagan recovery.”

A Thursday Investor’s Business Daily editorial plaintively asked: “Where are those allegedly unbiased fact-checkers when you need them?” As will be seen shortly, the answer is “AWOL.”

First, to debunk Cutter’s lie (source: Bureau of Labor Statistics):”


“Thanks to the graph, yours truly doesn’t need to bore readers with lots of numbers. Outside of very small blips, there is virtually no point on the above graph where the trajectory of job growth under Obama is as high as that seen under Reagan, even though the Reagan-era workforce was about one-third smaller. If done on percentage of workforce, the slope of the Reagan-era ascent would be even steeper.

For those who crave some numbers — In its first 37 post-recession months, the economy under Reagan added more than 9.8 million nonfarm payroll (NFP) jobs, over 7 million more than the 2.7 million added under Obama. To replicate the Reagan-era performance, the economy under Obama would have needed to add over 14 million jobs since the recession’s end; it has really added less than 20% of that. The Reagan-era private sector margin is over 5.7 million jobs.

And of course, there’s an obvious point to be made about the unemployment rate, as IBD noted:

What’s more, after 29 months of allegedly stellar job growth under Obama, the jobless rate is still 8.3%. By this point in the Reagan and Bush jobs recoveries, the unemployment rate was 7.2% and 4.9%, respectively.
If we were one of those fact-checking organizations, we’d give Stephanie Cutter the “Lying Liar from Liersburg” award.
A Google News search done this morning on “Stephanie Cutter Reagan” (past week, not in quotes, sorted by date with duplicates) returned six items (the final result listed pre-dates Cutter’s lie). The results are from American Thinker, Real Clear Politics (2), National Review, Washington Examiner, and United Liberty.

The same search at the Associated Press’s main site returned nothing.

AP’s “Presidential Campaign Fact Check” appears to be limited to what the presidential and vice-presidential candidates say. The wire service is currently carrying its interview with President Obama, naturally headlined “AP INTERVIEW: OBAMA CALLS ROMNEY’S IDEAS ‘EXTREME’,” on its “Top Story” page. Zheesh.

As to “fact-checkers” like PolitiFact and others, nothing demonstrates that they have turned themselves into just another tool of leftist bias than the “fact” that they haven’t called out Stephanie Cutter’s lie for four days and counting while trying and failing to nitpick the Romney campaign over its true statement about women’s job losses during the recession several months ago. PolitiFact falsely claimed it was “Mostly False.”

Oh, by the way, as James Pethoukouis noted in his second crucifixion of Cutter’s comment (his original post relating to Reagan is here), “both the Reagan and Bush recoveries were stronger than the current recovery under President Obama.””

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/08/26/fact-checkers-awol-after-obama-spokesperson-lies-about-jobs-created-unde

Obviously, congress is mostly at fault. The Democrats controlled both houses beginning in 2007 to create a “perfect storm” of failing liberal policies with the help of Obama.

Consider the following:

Reagan inherited an economic mess from Carter. Many of you remember the long gas lines and 18 percent mortgage rates from the Carter years.

In January 1983, 2 years after Reagan took office, the unemployment rate was 10.4 percent. In January 1989, when reagan left office, the rate was 5.4 percent.

When George Bush took office in January 2001, the unemployment rate was 4.2 percent. When the Democrats took control of congress in January 2007, the rate was 4.6 percent.

So, the impact of a Democrat congress with the addition of Barack Obama in January 2009 led to an unemployment rate of 9.1 percent in January 2011.

The Republicans took control of the house in January 2011. The stated unemployment rate is 8.3 percent but would be much higher if so many folks had not dropped out of the labor force.

Check for yourself:

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

From the Ulsterman,  February 24, 2012.

For a bit of contrast check out thiscomparative chart detailing the Reagan recovery vs the Obama recovery. One president charged ahead with plans to greatly reduce taxes, lessen regulations, and pushes to increase domestic energy production in the United States. The other president – Barack Obama, called for more taxes, more regulation, and has fought increasing domestic energy production at every opportunity – such as his shutting down of the much-needed Keystone pipeline:”


“The truth is clear – the Obama presidency has been a near-complete disaster for working Americans.  This might explain a term growing in popularity of late – “ABO”  –  Anybody But Obama in 2012…”

Salisbury N Rowan teacher warns student of disrespecting Obama, Arrested for speaking ill?, Criminal to slander a president, Thought police in NC

Salisbury N Rowan teacher warns student of disrespecting Obama, Arrested for speaking ill?, Criminal to slander a president, Thought police in NC

“”You’re a traitor!” yelled the boy. “You’re a thought criminal!””…George Orwell, “1984”

“An ominous new development within the HJ was the appearance of HJ-Streifendienst (Patrol Force) units functioning as internal political police, maintaining order at meetings, ferreting out disloyal members, and denouncing anyone who criticized Hitler or Nazism including, in a few cases, their own parents.” …TheHistoryPlace.com

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

The Thought Police is alive and active in NC.

From the Salisbury Post May 19, 2012.

“After reviewing a video in which a North Rowan High School teacher tells a student he can be arrested for speaking ill of President Barack Obama, the Rowan-Salisbury School System said it can be a learning experience.

Meanwhile, an expert on politics at Catawba College says the social studies teacher just doesn’t have her facts straight when she insists speaking your mind about a president can get you charged with a criminal offense.

Although two students provided the name of the teacher, the Post is not publishing it because officials within the school system would not confirm her identity and she could not be reached for comment.

The video captures audio of the dispute but does not show the teacher or anyone else. It appears to have been shot with a phone or other device as the camera pointed at the ceiling the entire time.

Rowan-Salisbury spokeswoman Rita Foil confirmed the teacher is still employed with the district and has not been suspended for disciplinary reasons. Foil emailed this statement to a Post reporter Friday on behalf of the school system:

“The Rowan-Salisbury School System expects all students and employees to be respectful in the school environment and for all teachers to maintain their professionalism in the classroom. This incident should serve as an education for all teachers to stop and reflect on their interaction with students.

“Due to personnel and student confidentiality, we cannot discuss the matter publicly.”

The nearly 10-minute video, shot by a student and uploaded to YouTube on Monday, had been viewed more than 1,000 times by Friday afternoon.

It begins with a classroom conversation about a recent news story detailing Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney allegedly bullying a classmate in prep school. It turns into a heated, sometimes confrontational debate.

One student asks, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?”

The teacher responds: “Not to my knowledge.”

In response to the Romney story, conservatives have recently been pointing to a passage in Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father,” in which the president writes that while in grade school he shoved a little girl, the only other black student in his grade, after other students called him her boyfriend.

When the student tells the teacher that Obama admitted to bullying a girl in school, the teacher goes on the defensive.

“Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” she says. Romney, she says, is “running for president. Obama is the president.”

When the student says they’re both “just men,” the teacher continues to argue that Romney, as a candidate for president, is not to be afforded the same respect as the president.

The teacher tells the class Obama is “due the respect that every other president is due.”

“Listen, let me tell you something, you will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom,” she says.

The student replies that he’ll say what he wants.

“Not about him you won’t,” the teacher says.

Later in the conversation, the teacher tells the class it’s criminal to slander a president.

“Do you realize that people were arrested for saying things bad about Bush?” she says of former President Bush. “Do you realize you are not supposed to slander the president?”

The student responds by saying being arrested for talking badly about the president would violate the right to free speech.

“You would have to say some pretty f’d up crap about him to be arrested,” he says. “They cannot take away your right to have your opinion. … They can’t take that away unless you threaten the president.”

Principal Darrel McDowell referred questions about the video to Foil.

Michael Bitzer, a political science professor at Catawba College and a widely known political analyst, weighed in on the video.

“I think what this broke down to was a perceived personal slight by an instructor against someone she sees in a positive view, and things just went out of control from there,” Bitzer said in an email to the Post.

Bitzer said he thinks the teacher did go a “bit overboard in being rude towards the student.”

“I think the student was also trying to pick a fight, honestly,” he said.

Bitzer said it appears the teacher’s attempt to make a point about showing respect for the office of the president gets overshadowed by her personal feelings for Obama.

“Her point about not being able to say anything ‘disrespectful’ about the president does fly in the face of the First Amendment, and while she may wish to enforce that edict about ‘respecting’ the president, the issue seems to have gotten personal on her part,” Bitzer wrote.

“Granted, she apparently tried to ensure that a respectful conversation was had about the president, but she seems to have taken things a bit too personally — and it appears the student was set on making a confrontation in the guise of raising a question about ‘who bullied who — both Romney and Obama?’ ”

Referencing former president George W. Bush, Richard Nixon and Abraham Lincoln, Bitzer said the fact that there are a lot of “mean, derogatory things said about our elected officials” is part of American history.

Bitzer said he has “no idea” what the teacher is talking about when she claims people were arrested for saying bad things about Bush.

“I have never heard of anyone arrested for saying derogatory things about George W. Bush , which I am assuming she is referring to,” he said. “Her belief that if one slanders the president is not very accurate — if you ‘threaten’ the president, that is another story, and that is a criminal offense.””

http://www.salisburypost.com/News/051912-North-teacher-on-video-qcd

Thanks to commenter Rob.

Dick Cheney outs Colin Powell, Powell agenda must be scrutinized, Cheney book sheds light on Powell and Patrick Fitzgerald, Libby and Rove victims

Dick Cheney outs Colin Powell, Powell agenda must be scrutinized, Cheney book sheds light on Powell and Patrick Fitzgerald, Libby and Rove victims

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”…Thomas Paine

Citizen Wells readers, fellow Americans, we have a three for one, a trifecta, in this article. While the focus of the article is on Colin Powell, the real Colin Powell, whose agenda now must be scrutinized, Patrick Fitzgerald and the Chicago Tribune will be exposed for their agenda. But first, Powell.

Dick Cheney has a new book out, “In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir.”  Cheney was interviewed by Rush Limbaugh today. During the interview Cheney explained that Colin Powell knew that Richard Armitage was the source of the Valerie Plame leak and allowed Scooter Libby and Karl Rove to be investigated. Cheney also mentioned our good friend Patrick Fitzgerald, who was recently praised by the Chicago Tribune for being apolitical. More on that later.

From the Washington Post August 29, 2011.

“Colin Powell’s cheap shot”

“On “Face the Nation” yesterday, former secretary of state Colin Powell accused former vice president Dick Cheney of taking “cheap shots” in his about-to-be released memoirs. However, in taking on Cheney’s account of the Valerie Plame matter, Powell is the one who misleads and distorts.

Powell had this to say in response to Cheney’s book, which lays blame on Powell’s deputy Richard Armitage as the real leaker who revealed Plame’s identity as a CIA employee, setting off the appointment of a special prosecutor and the eventual conviction of Scooter Libby. Powell says this:

Then he goes on to talk about the Valerie Plame affair, and tries to lay it all off on Mister Rich Armitage in the State Department and me. But the fact of the matter is when Mister Armitage realized that he was the source for Bob Novak’s column that caused all the difficulty and he called me immediately, two days after the President launched the investigation and what we did was we called the Justice Department. They sent it over the FBI. The FBI had all the information that Mister Armitage’s participation in this immediately. And we called Al Gonzalez, the President’s counsel, and told him that we had information. The FBI asked us not to share any of this with anyone else, as did Mister Gonzalez. And so, if the White House operatives had come forward as readily as Mister Armitage had done, then we wouldn’t have gone on for two more months with the FBI trying to find out what happened in the White House.

There wouldn’t have been special counsel appointed by the Justice Department who spent two years trying to get to the bottom of it. And we wouldn’t have the mess that we subsequently had. And so if the White House and the operatives in the White House and Mister Cheney’s staff and elsewhere in the White House had been as forthcoming with the FBI as Mister Armitage was, this problem would not have reached the dimensions that it reached.

Let’s count the ways in which this is inaccurate or misleading. To begin with, Powell leaves out the critical fact: He and Armitage never told the president what Armitage had done. Instead, they sat silent as the investigation played out and others, including Karl Rove and Libby, were ensnared in an investigation for a crime that, if committed at all, was one for which Armitage should rightly have been prosecuted. Powell on Sunday slyly said they informed the attorney general that they “had information.” But they most definitely did not tell him, the president or the country that the leaker was Armitage.

The best account of this comes from Michael Isikoff, hardly a Cheney or Libby apologist. In his book, he explained what unfolded after Armitage told Powell about his role in the leak:

The next day, a team of FBI agents and Justice prosecutors investigating the leak questioned the deputy secretary. Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that [ Joe] Wilson’s wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA… [William Howard Taft IV, the State Department’s legal adviser] felt obligated to inform White House counsel Alberto Gonzales. But Powell and his aides feared the White House would then leak that Armitage had been Novak’s source — possibly to embarrass State Department officials who had been unenthusiastic about Bush’s Iraq policy. So Taft told Gonzales the bare minimum: that the State Department had passed some information about the case to Justice. He didn’t mention Armitage. Taft asked if Gonzales wanted to know the details. The president’s lawyer, playing the case by the book, said no, and Taft told him nothing more. Armitage’s role thus remained that rarest of Washington phenomena: a hot secret that never leaked. [Emphasis added.]
Notice that in Isikoff’s account the FBI never told Armitage and Powell to keep quiet. No, the secrecy was their idea. Moreover, Powell states that White House aides were not “forthcoming.” We know, of course, this is false. Numerous aides were dragged into FBI interview and grand jury rooms, required to pay for counsel and, in the case of Libby, prosecuted and convicted while the actual leaker’s identity remained secret. Talk about cheap shots.

Recall how all of this played out. Armitage and Powell allowed the entire country and troops in the field to believe a lie, namely that the White House had “outed” Plame. This, aside from the galling display of moral cowardice, also put the president’s reelection in jeopardy since Democrats were all too intent on making this into a huge scandal.

The extent of the dishonesty is quite stunning. In a Cabinet meeting on October 7, 2003, the White House press corps bombarded President George W. Bush with questions about who the leaker was. Bush said he didn’t know, but there would be an investigation to get to the bottom of it. Powell, who had been told by Armitage just days earlier that Armitage was the leaker, sat there next to the president, stone silent. Not very loyal or honest, was it?

Moreover, the notion that Armitage’s slip was somehow inadvertent is belied by Bob Woodward’s taped interview in which Armitage repeatedly mentions Joe Wilson’s wife, evidently doing his best to get Plame’s identity out there. This was no slip of the tongue. Woodward testified that when he spoke to Libby sometime later that Libby never said anything about Plame.

At issue here is not simply Powell and Armitage’s deception and undermining of their commander in chief. There was a victim, one whom neither Powell or Armitage has ever apologized to. The person who ultimately paid the price for this was Scooter Libby. Had the president and the country known about Armitage, a special prosecutor would never have been appointed. Libby was eventually convicted on the basis of a he-said-he-said dispute between his recollection and that of the late Tim Russert. (Charges concerning Libby’s alleged comments to Judy Miller were dismissed, and he was acquitted on the count involving Matt Cooper.) A compelling case for Libby’s innocence can be found in this account by Stan Crock.

Powell may be peeved at being fingered by Cheney. But on this one Cheney has him dead to rights. The Plame is a blot on his record and that of Armitage.

Maybe it is time to own up and make amends rather than bristling at Libby’s former boss.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/colin-powells-cheap-shot/2011/03/29/gIQA2Q0smJ_blog.html?wprss=right-turn

From Citizen Wells August 15, 2011.

“On August 8, 2011, the Birther Summit issued a challenge to General Powell  based on the following:

“It was reported in May of this year that you told South Carolina State University’s 400 graduates that you particularly enjoyed a recent event: “. . . when President Obama took out his birth certificate and blew away Donald Trump and all the birthers!””

Despite the fact that you have been informed that the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov was fraudulent, you have failed to respond to the challenge. I have no other recourse than to call you a traitor and coward. I will say this to your face unless you respond according to your oath.”

Read more:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/colin-powell-traitor-general-powell-ignorant-or-biased-obama-birth-certificate-eligibility-colin-powell-ignores-oath/

It seems that there is much about Colin Powell that we did not know.  Perhaps we will learn more.

George W. Bush, The real man, The real president, Bruce Vincent, Natural born citizen

George W. Bush, The real man, The real president, Bruce Vincent, Natural born citizen

It is the day before Thanksgiving, a holiday proclaimed by one of our greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln. It is fitting, in these tumultuous times, that the truth about another president, George W. Bush, be presented. It is a refreshing reminder of what a real president is. One we are certain was eligible, a natural born citizen.

The following is, by all accounts, an accurate portrayal of Bruce Vincent’s encounter with President Bush.

“Story by: Bruce Vincent

For those of us who sometimes find ourselves having doubts about our former President, here is an excellent piece — worth every minute it takes to read it.  This story is from Bruce Vincent of  Libby  ,  Montana  who had gone to the White House with others to receive an award from the President.
He writes:
I’ve written the following narrative to chronicle the day of the award ceremony in DC.  I’m still working on a press release but the White House press corps has yet to provide a photo to go with it.  When the photo comes I’ll ship it out.  When you get done reading this you’ll understand the dilemma I face in telling this story beyond my circle of close friends.

Stepping into the Oval Office, each of us was introduced to the President and Mrs. Bush.  We shook hands and participated in small talk.  When the President was told that we were from  Libby  ,  Montana  , I reminded him that Marc Racicot is our native son and the President offered his warm thoughts about Governor Racicot.
I have to tell you, I was blown away by two things upon entering the office.  First, the Oval Office sense of ‘place’ is unreal.  The President later shared a story of Russian President Putin entering the room prepared to tackle the President in a tough negotiation and upon entering, the atheist muttered his first words to the President and they were “Oh, my God.”

I concurred. I could feel the history in my bones.  Second, the man that inhabits the office engaged me with a firm handshake and a look that can only be described as penetrating. Warm, alive, fully engaged, disarmingly penetrating. I was admittedly concerned about meeting the man. I think all of us have an inner hope that the most powerful man in our country is worthy of the responsibility and authority that we  bestow upon them through our vote.
I admit that part of me was afraid that I would be let down by the moment — that the person and the place could not meet the lofty expectations of my fantasy world. This says nothing about my esteem for President Bush but just my practical realization that reality may not match my ‘dream.’

Once inside the office, President Bush got right down to business and, standing in front of his desk, handed out the awards one at a time while posing for photos with the winners and Mrs. Bush. With the mission accomplished, the President and Mrs. Bush relaxed and initiated a lengthy, informal conversation about a number of things with our entire small group. He and the First Lady talked about such things as the rug in the offi ce. It is traditionally designed by the First Lady to make a statement about the President, and Mrs.Bush chose a brilliant yellow sunburst pattern to reflect ‘hope.’  President Bush talked about the absolute need to believe that with hard work and faith in God there is every reason to start each day in the Oval Office with hope. He and the First Lady were asked about the impact of the Presidency on their marriage and, with an arm casually wrapped around Laura, he said that he thought the place may be hard on weak marriages but that it had the ability to make strong marriages even stronger and that he was blessed with a strong one.

After about 30 or 35 minutes, it was time to go. By then we were all relaxed and I felt as if I had just had an excellent visit with a friend. The President and First Lady made one more pass down the line of awardees, shaking hands and offering congratulations. When the President shook my hand I said, “Thank you Mr. President and God bless you and your family.”  He was already in motion to the next person in line, but he stopped abruptly turned fully back to me, gave me a piercing look, renewed the vigor of his handshake and said, “Thank you — and God bless you and yours as well.”

On our way out of the office we were to leave by the glass doors on the west side of the office. I was the last person in the exit line. As I shook his hand one final time, President Bush said, “I’ll be sure to tell Marc hello and give him your regards.”

I then did something that surprised even me. I said to him, “Mr. President, I know you are a busy man and your time is precious. I al so know you to be a man of strong faith and I have a favor to ask of you.”

As he shook my hand he looked me in the eye and said, “Just name it.” I told him that my step-Mom was at that moment in a hospital in  Kalispell , Montana , having a tumor removed from her skull and it would mean a great deal to me if he would consider adding her to his prayers that day. He grabbed me by the arm and took me back toward his desk as he said, “So that’s it. I could tell that something is weighing heavy on your heart today. I could see it in your eyes.This explains it.”

From the top drawer of his desk he retrieved a pen and a note card with his seal on it and asked, “How do you spell her name?” He then jotted a note to her while discussing the importance of family and the strength of prayer. When he handed me the card, he asked about the surgery and the prognosis. I told him we were hoping that it is not a recurrence of an earlier cancer and that, if it is, they can get it all with this surgery.

He said, “If it’s okay with you, we’ll take care of the prayer right now. Would you pray with me?” I told him yes and he turned to the staff that remained in the office and hand motioned the folks to step back or leave. He said, “Bruce and I would like some private time for a prayer.”

As they left he turned back to me and took my hands in his. I was prepared to do a traditional prayer stance — standing with each other with heads bowed. Instead, he reached for my head with his right hand and pulling gently forward, he placed my head on his shoulder.  With his left arm on my mid-back, he pulled me to him in a prayerful embrace.

He started to pray softly. I started to cry. He continued his prayer for Loretta and for God’s perfect will to be done. I cried some more. My bod y shook a bit as I cried and he just held tighter. He closed by asking God’s blessing on Loretta and the family during the coming months. I stepped away from our embrace, wiped my eyes, swiped at the tears I’d left on his shoulder, and looked into the eyes of our president. I thanked him as best I could and told him that me and my family would continue praying for him and his.

As I write this account down and reflect upon what it means, I have to tell you that all I really know is that his simple act left me humbled and believing. I so hoped that the man I thought him to be was the man that he is. I know that our nation needs a man such as this in the Oval Office. George W. Bush is the real deal. I’ve read Internet stories about the President praying with troops in hospitals and other such uplifting accounts. Each time I read them I hoped them to be true and not an Internet perpetuated myth. This one, I know to be true. I was there. He is real. He has a pile of incredible stuff on his plate each day — and yet he is tuned in so well to the here and now that he ‘sensed’ something heavy on my heart. He took time out of his life to care, to share, and to seek God’s blessing for my family in a simple man-to-man, father-to-father, son-to-son, husband-to-husband, Christian- to-Christian prayerful embrace. He’s not what I had hoped he would be. He is, in fact, so very, very much more.”

WMD, Iraq war, Left wing lies, Truth about Saddam Hussein and WMD

WMD, Iraq war, Left wing lies, Truth about Saddam Hussein and WMD

The end justifies the means for the far left in this country. The same far left that has taken over the Democrat Party. This means they will lie at any opportunity. Obama is the poster child for left wing lies.

One of the big lies perpetrated by the left is that there were no WMD in Iraq even though most well informed people know that he used them on his own people. Even so called educated people around me have short memories or have been brainwashed by the mainstream media.

Consider the following quotes leading up to the Iraq war.

“Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons,”

“Earlier today I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces,”

“Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors,”

“Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning,”
“In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance — not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed,”

“If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will,”

“He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction.”

“The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government — a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people,”

“Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down,”

“But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America’s vital interests, we will do so.”

President Bush remarks?

No, all were made by President Clinton.

And these were just a few of the strident remarks that Clinton made.

Read more:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

From Wired October 23, 2010.

“By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction.”

“Meanwhile, the second battle of Fallujah was raging in Anbar province. In the southeastern corner of the city, American forces came across a “house with a chemical lab … substances found are similar to ones (in lesser quantities located a previous chemical lab.” The following day, there’s a call in another part of the city for explosive experts to dispose of a “chemical cache.”

Nearly three years later, American troops were still finding WMD in the region. An armored Buffalo vehicle unearthed a cache of artillery shells “that was covered by sacks and leaves under an Iraqi Community Watch checkpoint. “The 155mm rounds are filled with an unknown liquid, and several of which are leaking a black tar-like substance.” Initial tests were inconclusive. But later, “the rounds tested positive for mustard.””

Read more:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/

I would like to add something else for the simple minded or brainwashed out there. Just because something is not found, is not proof that it doesn’t exist.

Mainstream media Orwellian campaign, Fact versus fiction, Intelligent people still influenced by MSM, Citizen Wells open thread

Mainstream media Orwellian campaign, Fact versus fiction.

What I am about to say probably applies to many of you. I have a good, dear friend who still watches mainstream media such as CNBC. He was touting tax cuts for small businesses and average Americans. He stated that “I” and most people had a lower tax obligation last year. That did not mesh with the many conversations I have had with many people as well as what I remember hearing and reading. However, anytime I sense a conversation is getting mired down in a gray morass, I try to find a common denonimator, a self evident truth. I stated that if he was correct that it isn’t working. People who believe the Orwellian lies from the mainstream media believe that George Bush and the Republicans are at fault. I then commence to confuse then with facts such as the Democrats have controlled congress since 2006. I also state that I am not a fan or defender of either party. What is clear for me is that I do not understand how any “rational,”  intelligent, informed person can support or defend the modern day Democrat party.