CNN's Nick Robertson Interviews Mohamed al-Zawahiri Day of Benghazi Attack

The following video directly contradicts the Obama Administration's Benghazi narrative. It was recorded by veteran CNN correspondent Nick Robertson on the morning of the Benghazi, Libya attack. The attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other heroic Americans. In the interview,  Mohamed al-Zawahiri discusses the protests scheduled to demand the release of Al Qaeda leaders and does not mention any youtube video.

Full CNN video here

Obama Lies About "Acts of Terror" Comment During Presidential Debate

In a contrived debate comment about the 9/11/2012 terror attack in Benghazi, President Obama falsely claimed to have called the attack terrorism. In the White House Rose Garden on 9/12/2012 the phrase "Acts of terror" is being pointed to by the left-wing media. Of course, this is a lie. The President's "acts of terror" comment was referencing the 9/11/2001 attack. The White House transcript of the speech points to this:

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks.  We mourned with the families who were lost on that day.  I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed.  And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it.  Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.  Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America.  We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act.  And make no mistake, justice will be done.

President Obama knew during the Rose Garden speech that the attack was terrorism, but attempted to blame a youtube video over the next two weeks. A lie still pushed by Media Matters. Regardless, the speech mentioned 9/11/01 and the sacrifices by our military in the battle against terrorists. The speech then connected the military service of the former Navy SEALs and Ambassador Stevens service to the sacrifices of other military service members. Clearly, the speech did not describe the Benghazi attack as terrorism.

Watch from 3:20 to see the comments as delivered.

Mitt Romney tried to clarify during the debate:

You said in the Rose Garden, the day after the attack, it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration?

President Obama's reply:

Please proceed Governor.

Evidence that the debate preparation of President Obama included the specific phrase "Act of Terror" in order to link back to the comment about 9/11/01. This is clearly deception against the American people, revealed by the President's "voting present" non-answer to the specific phrase "spontaneous demonstration."

For more information on Benghazi read; Killing Stevens: The Obama Scandal.

Obama Lying to Women About Rape

Enough. The entire "legitimate"/"forcible" rape discussion is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. That the media continues the lie is a disgustingly bias mutilation of the American system. The fact that this is now spun into a statement on women's health care is simply intolerable.

Allow me to set the record straight, then you can decide to continue reading or not.

Republicans are not against women's health, they are opposed to the government forcing Catholics and others into paying for abortions. The entire #WarOnWomen is a fantasy created to scare women into voting for Barack Obama.

Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin mistakenly used the term "legitimate" in place of "forcible" when discussing rape. Everyone in the news business understands the difference between statutory rape and "forcible rape." The difference is the lack of consent.

The term "forcible rape" is a legal definition used to distinguish between statutory rape and non-consensual rape. The term is used by legislators and law enforcement in the United States and in United Nations statistics.

Some types of rape are excluded from official reports altogether (the FBI's definition, for example, used to exclude all rapes except forcible rapes of females)

Statutory rapes are legally different and carry different criminal penalties than forcible rapes.

These definitions have important consequences to legislation. For example, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R)  recently removed the term "forcible" from legislation that may have harmed young victims of statutory rape, by forcing them to contact their rapist for child support before being able to qualify for state childcare assistance.

Lets look at the full context of the Todd Akin statement, in the event there is any doubt that his intention was to distinguish between statutory and forcible rape. His full comments during the Jaco Report interview is available here. The abortion and rape comments occurring in part two around the 1:56 mark:



After watching the entire context, it is clear that Rep. Akin

• Rep. Akin was very emotional at the moment he was speaking.
• Does not believe that it is impossible to get pregnant from a rape.
• He meant to distinguish between statutory rape and forcible rape. A point which he further explains here.

In addition to the Missouri Senatorial Candidate's recent comments, the media has attempted to tie Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan to the misstatement. The connection is attempted through the expressed legislative language "Forcible rape" within a recent proposed bill. A bill that neither Rep. Paul Ryan nor Rep. Todd Akin wrote, but both had supported as cosponsors in an effort to reduce public funding of abortion. The bill was titled: the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act."

In the original language, it also allowed exceptions in cases of "forcible rape." The term provoked an outcry from critics, who said that rape is by definition committed by force and that lawmakers were seeking to exclude from coverage certain kinds of rape by adding the modifier - for example, cases in which the victim was underage or unconscious.

The bill now would allow exceptions in all cases of rape.

A spokesman for Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.), a chief sponsor of the bill, said Thursday that lawmakers decided to change the term because it was being "misconstrued."

(Update) Politifact has joined us in this fact finding mission:

For perspective, we checked the cosponsors of both the 2010 and 2011 introductions of the bill using THOMAS, the congressional database.

The version introduced July 29, 2010, included among its eventual 186 cosponsors all 20 Texas Republicans plus two Democrats -- Solomon Ortiz of Corpus Christi and Henry Cuellar of Laredo -- from the 32-member Texas delegation.
...
We looped back to Angle with our findings on the cosponsors and the intent of the bill. Angle told us that he believes the Texas Republicans showed by cosponsoring the bill that they supported making a legal distinction between rape and forcible rape.

Additionally, the bill had sparked a heated debate in which major far left abortion advocates became unhinged.

The "Protect Life Act" would prohibit federal funding of abortions under the national health care overhaul. It also would prevent funding from being withheld from institutions that are opposed to providing abortions.
...
The heated emotions surrounding the abortion debate were on display at Tuesday's Senate Democratic news conference. Lautenberg said the Pitts and Smith bills sound "like a third-world country that's requiring women to wear head shawls, cover their faces even if they don't want to do it."

The emotional nature of the debate made any mention of abortion a misconstrued mess in the minds of the far left. This is the entire genesis of the false narrative attempting to tie Paul Ryan and the distinction between statutory rape and forcible rape to a Missouri candidate who mistakenly used the term "legitimate."

Rep. Paul Ryan has since clarified the situation by making a public statement that the term "forcible rape" is stock language when writing laws.

Can the media and the Obama campaign now stop with the lies? No.

President Obama and his allies in the media are a bunch of liars who try to use scare tactics against women. It is simply DISGUSTING. The government controlled media and the Democrats are a disgrace.

Obama Lies About Creating 3 Million Jobs: Democrat Policy Since 2007

Once again President Obama and Media Matters have been inundating "popular culture" shows with propaganda that must be corrected. The old saying by the "first television politician" that "a lie repeated enough becomes the truth" has been the core progressive propaganda tactic since the 1930's. The current grand lie is that Obama created 3 million jobs, which we dismanted with raw facts from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

We are adding to our previous discussion by stepping back to the larger economic situation behind the Great Recession. This is a subject that the mainstrem media will not touch.  Democrats took over congress in the November 2006 election. Any Keynesian economist will tell you that policy takes about a year to fully impact the economy, so lets look at how the Democrats crashed the economy to win the oval office and "pass the toxic baton to Barack Obama." Let us not forget that Barack Obama was one of the Democrat senators who passed these policies and killed 10.5 million jobs, destroyed housing, crashed the stock market and inflated gasoline and energy prices.

In November 2006, the Democrats swept congress despite a decent economy and progress in Iraq by villifying George W. Bush. Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House of Representatives. From January 2007 through January 2011, Democrats controlled every aspect of economic policy in America. Bush was a lame duck and politically powerless.

In January 2007, the price of gasoline averaged $2.11 per gallon in the U.S. On February 7, 2007, the Democrats and the 110th Congress began enacting policies. Upon implementation of Democrat economic and political policy the price of gasoline skyrocketed.

By July 2008, the price of gasoline had reached $4.12 and the economy collapsed.

• The stock market was 12,556.08 in January 2007. It peaked in May 2008 at 13,058.20 and fell to 6,626.94 on March 6, 2009.
• Unadjusted employment peaked in July 2007 (147.315 million) and seasonally adjusted employment peaked in November 2007 (146.595 million).
• Unadjusted employment continued at the same level until August 2008 (145.196 million).
• Housing prices had plateaued in 2005 but the market remained stable until mid 2007 when gas prices began relentlessly reducing disposable income.

After the tea party and Republicans took back the House of Representatives in January 2011, the economy stabilized and improved. At the depths of the recession in January 2010, unadjusted employment fell to 136.809 million.  Unadjusted employment in January 2011 remained down at 137.599 million. This means that Democrats and President Obama can, at best, be credited with the creation of 790 thousand jobs (unadjusted) after destroying nearly 10.5 million jobs (unadjusted) between mid 2007 to January 2010. In January 2012 unadjusted employment improved to 139.944 million. The bulk of jobs (2.3 million) created during the weak Obama recovery occured since Republicans and tea party members have retaken congress and established economic confidence.

So the facts of the matter are as follows:

• Democrats took control of Congress and the Senate in January 2007.
• The Housing Bubble, created by Democrats, began crashing in 2007 with the additional pressure from gasoline and energy prices.
• Democrat policies pushed up gas prices through July 2008.
• Employment peaked in July 2007 and crashed in September 2008.
• The stock market peaked in July 2008 and crashed in September 2008 when it became probable that Democrats would add the White House to their list of control.
• The toxic economy elected Barack Obama who took office in January 2009 and all confidence evaporated.
• February 2009, tea party protests began due to the economic outlook of adding taxes during a recession. This blog, Doo Doo Economics, began appealing to Democrats for rationality. "Raising taxes in a recession is Doo Doo Economics"
• While Democrats held the legistaltive and executive branches, the economy suffered the Great Recession.
• Keynesian economics, which has not worked in 40 years, was used as justification to waste $789 billion in stimulus for "not as shovel ready as we thought" jobs. The short term jobs evaporated by January 2011.
• The national debt grew by about 33% in 3 years as Chicago cronism made 7 of the 10 richest neighborhoods in America adjacent to Washington D.C.
• From 2009 through 2011, Democrat policies failed to improve the toxic economy from the loss of 10.5 million jobs.
• Republicans took back the House of Representatives in November 2010 and the economy began to recover at the new lower production frontier.
• More than two thirds of job recovery has occured since conservatives took back control of one third of federal government economic policy.

Obama Lies About $4 Trillion Budget Savings

President Obama lies again. This time he says that his fourth budget has $4+ trillion dollars in spending cuts over 10 years. His own numbers show otherwise. Net spending increases by $1.5 trillion with $1.9 trillion in net tax increases. So over 10 years, the Obama budget would only decrease baseline deficit spending by $400 billion or $40 billion per year on average. This is out of a $3.8+ trillion government budget.

To put this into personal perspective, the government is taking $22,000/year tax free and spending about $38,000/year. Obama proposes to reduce the deficit by $400/year. The proposed reduction comes from robbing the tax payers through additional harmful taxation while increasing spending.

The Obama budget adds $11.2 trillion to the national debt in 10 years. Meanwhile, Obama wants credit for Republican budget cuts from 2011 which he opposed. The President's budget counts war spending as "baseline" spending at current levels for 10 years. War spending is passed as supplemental spending by the congress. The executive branch has little power over such allocations unless it is Obama's intention to engage in new wars for the next 10 years.

TownHall.com has an excellent write up by Guy Benson if you want to pursue more information. They point out the excellent job Paul Ryan is doing fighting the Obama budget lies:

Three clips, each one as delicious as the next.  First, watch House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan systematically destroy the Obama budget "savings" farce, a process made even more enjoyable by acting White House Budget Director Jeffrey Zients' feeble attempts to push back:

Click to Enlarge

Obama Lies About Creating 3 Million Jobs

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

Obama claimed to have created 3 million jobs in 22 months. Well, the economy has recovered relative to the depths of the recession. If you review Bureau of Labor Statistics data and begin counting from January 2010 and not January 2009, when Chairman Obama took office, you can come to a net positive job gain.

However, the Obama economy has been a net job loser. From January 2009 through December 2011, the economy is millions of jobs in the hole. If you look at the entire recession, the picture gets even worse. Further, on February 3, 2012 revisions to the number will be released and Marney Cox, Chief Economist at SANDAG believes the numbers may be revised down.

Many economists believe a double dip recession is very possible.  Europe and America are so heavily in debt that confidence in government is waining. U.S. Treasury bills, for the first time in history, are losing investors to the tune of $85 billion dollars over the last six weeks.

The hard fact is that the U.S. economy has lost 2.5 million jobs since Obama became President. Since the beginning of 2008, the economy has lost 6.1 million jobs. From January 2010, the economy has recovered only 2.6 million jobs.

(click for pdf)

President Obama ended the State of the Union Address (SOTA) with an appeal to "get each other's backs." His call was for us to trust each other. This statistical deception alienates thinking Americans from the man who claims to have "created 3 million jobs over the last 22 months."

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (January 24, 2012)

UPDATE: See our follow-up which reviews Democrat Policy since 2007