« | »

AP: Obama Has No Hidden Russian Agenda

Obama’s praetorian guard at the Associated Press rush to his defense:

Obama says he’s not ‘hiding the ball’ on Russia

March 27, 2012

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — Speaking to the microphones intentionally this time, President Barack Obama on Tuesday assured he had no hidden agenda with Russia for a second term, seeking to contain a controversial gaffe that bounded all the way to the campaign trail at home and back again.

We should tweak Ronald Reagan’s advice when dealing with anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth. ‘Dis-trust and verify.’

Obama’s Republican rivals back home pounced, accusing him of secretive plotting and dealing over American national security.

How despicable those Republicans are! Don’t they know that he was just joshing? Mr. Obama would never do anything behind the American public’s back.

So one day later, with Medvedev at his side again, Obama tried some on the record candor and humor to put it all to rest.

The president’s explanation: He wants to work with Russia on the deeply divisive issue of a missile defense shield in Europe, knowing only by building trust first on that matter can he make gains on another goal of nuclear arms reductions. And there’s no way to expect progress during the politics of this election year, so he is already looking to 2013.

And what better way to ‘build trust’ than to promise to stab your own country in the back.

"This is not a matter of hiding the ball," Obama said, well aware of criticism erupting at home. "I’m on record."

Yes, Mr. Obama is already on record for wanting to give away our missile defenses and our nuclear arsenal.

Obama showed up at a nuclear security summit ready to clarify his caught-on-tape words even at the risk of overshadowing his message for a second day. He fielded a question but failed to address the presumptuousness of plotting out 2013 strategy with Russia when, in fact, he must win election again for any of that to matter

As if that is the scandal here. Really, the AP is just pathetic sometimes.

The president also sought twice to dispense with the controversy with a dash of humor. Before taking his seat at the nuclear summit, he caught Medvedev’s eyes and said "Wait, wait, wait, wait." Obama then covered up his microphone and jest, enjoying a hearty laugh and handshake with the Russian leader.

And when he decided to offer his explanation about the flap, Obama said, "first of all, are the mics on?"

Our sides are sore from laughing. But you can see why Obama would find all of this amusing. He simply can’t understand where he did anything wrong. And that is the real problem with him.

Obama’s candid remarks Monday illustrated the political constraints that hem in any president who is running for re-election and dealing with a congressional chamber — in this case, the House — controlled by the rival party.

Republicans have fought Obama fiercely on health care, taxes and other issues. They are eager to deny him any political victories in a season in which they feel the White House is within reach

Poor Obama. By the way, does the AP actually think that the House Of Representatives has any say in our nuclear treaties with the Soviet Union Russia? (Hint: they do not.)

Obama said the way the Republicans seized on his open-mic comments only made his point that the atmosphere is too politicized right now to advance arms control with Russia.

"The only way I get this stuff done is if I’m consulting with the Pentagon, if I’m consulting with Congress, if I’ve got bipartisan support, and the current environment is not conducive to those kinds of thoughtful consultations," Obama said. "I think we’ll do better in 2013."

Apparently, this was another joke. When has Obama ever worried about having bi-partisan support for anything? When has he ever worried about Congress? He is bragging about his ‘We Can’t Wait’ program of bypassing Congress at every opportunity.

And, again, the Senate ratifies treaties. The House is powerless. And in 2013 the Senate might well be in the hands of the Republicans.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, March 27th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

8 Responses to “AP: Obama Has No Hidden Russian Agenda”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    If ever there was confirmation of this aphorism, How can you tell when Obama’s lying? His lips are moving. this is it.

  2. Liberals Demise says:

    When dinglebarry says, ” bipartisan support” does he mean the same bipartisan support as we saw with Health Care?
    2112……… ” The end of an error”

  3. Rusty Shackleford says:

    “…and the current environment is not conducive to those kinds of thoughtful consultations,” Obama said. “I think we’ll do better in 2013.”

    “Obama said the way the Republicans seized on his open-mic comments only made his point that the atmosphere is too politicized right now to advance arms control with Russia.”

    Gee, say it ain’t so, yer majisty. But let me ask you, “typical black guy”–how did it get so “politicized”? Mister “unifier”, Mister “lower the seas and all that”? Let me tell you, it’s because of you! YOU bring up crap that should never be brought up. YOUstick your stinky little fingers where they don’t belong. YOU! YOU! YOU!

    The list has been published in numerous places on the interwebz just how shitty a job you’ve done defending and upholding the Constitution of the United States. And…how bang-up of a job you’ve done so far steering this once great nation to a socialist collective. But…on the positive side, you’ve managed to piss off, not just conservatives like me but even liberals who have lost faith in your ability to do anything but be destructive. Even a Nissan Leaf and Toyota Prius owner needs to go to the gas station, you twit. Remember the “Energy prices will necessarily skyrocket” remark?

    You cannot hide form your real position on things and every time you speak, you are so effete, so narcissistic, so ignorant of reality that you don’t even realize that the noise that comes out of your mouth is recorded and is being used against you. I’m all for it and glad we live in the modern age we do because I really wish there was a late-night talk show where I could play your dumbass statements over and over, like that prick Letterman did all the years that Bush was president. Having the cover of the media can only last so long because….you’ll piss them off too. I know you will. It’s just a matter of time. You will address your staunchest, most rigid ally in the news, say, Brian Williams and you will talk to him like you do everyone else, on national TV and you’ll insult him and belittle him and he may take it well…but after awhile he may start walking away from you. Why? Because inasmuch as “everything is political” in this modern world, the left sees it a step further in that “everything is personal” and taken that way. It may not be Brian Williams, it may be Rachel Maddow or some other faithful fan of the Obama-lovin’ spoonful. But you’ll do it. It’s inevitable. It’s what you are, how you operate.

    Part of me almost wishes you do get elected again just so it’s proven how awful you truly are. However, I already know all I need to know about you and prefer the salvation of this nation which will have to spend great time and effort undoing your vast tentacles of regulation, harm-to-business, families and the American Way. You’re a bad thing, Obama. You need to go.

  4. tranquil.night says:

    Hm, Sarkozy then Dmitry. First time anecdotal, second time coincidental…

  5. canary says:

    Every country has heard Obama’s security leak. So, the media and Republicans should be blasting it over and over.

    • canary says:

      Hillary admits Saddam Hussein wanted the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction.

      Hillary says she is bewildered and having more difficulty reading others’ minds.

      CNN: Iran nukes: How would the world know?

      By Pam Benson Mar 26 2012

      But trying to read one person’s mind is no easy thing, observed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently, noting how Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was misread by U.S. intelligence.

      “People sometimes say and do things that are at variance with what one might expect,” the secretary of state said. “It’s still quite bewildering to me why Saddam Hussein wanted everyone to believe that he had chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons of mass destruction when apparently he did not.”

      Ephraim Asculai, a retired Israeli nuclear scientist,… not terribly confident any intelligence service – whether it’s the United States’ or Israel’s or some other nation’s– will discover it.

      “Depending on the intelligence community – this is not very good,” Asculai said.

      By just about anyone’s account, Iran is one of the toughest intelligence targets.

      A CIA stealth unmanned aerial vehicle recently crashed inside Iran. And although the U.S. government said it was on a mission in Afghanistan near the Iran border, U.S. military officials told CNN the Sentinel drone was on a surveillance mission of suspected nuclear sites in the country.

      The unexplained explosions at three sensitive Iranian facilities could suggest a possible sabotage campaign. And cyberexperts say someone with deep knowledge of Iran’s enrichment program contributed to the Stuxnet computer virus that disabled a number of Iran’s centrifuges.

      Then there is the mysterious case in 2010 of the Iranian scientist who defected to the United States, seemed to have second thoughts and ended up returning to Iran. It’s unclear why Shahram Amiri went back to his country, but a U.S official said Amiri had received approximately $5 million for providing the U.S. government with “valuable, original information” on Iran’s nuclear program.

      But in the end, it comes down to whether all of those intelligence assets will paint an accurate enough picture of Iran’s activities to help President Barack Obama make what could arguably be the most critical decision of his presidency.


      Iran knows Obama won’t do anything for 7 or 8 months til after Nov elections. So, Candidates running for President better get on top of this instead of learning how to say “ya all”

  6. Astravogel says:

    I couldn’t agree more with RS. The “media” don’t have any
    money of their own; it all comes from sponsors. How many
    of those sponsor’s stock holders do you think TCP is making
    happy? Fewer and fewer I’ll bet. At the least, a good ‘dose’
    of these socialist ideas my confer some immunity in the future.

  7. Astravogel says:

    I couldn’t agree more with RS. The “media” don’t have any
    money of their own; it all comes from sponsors. How many
    of those sponsor’s stock holders do you think TCP is making
    happy? Fewer and fewer I’ll bet. At the least, a good ‘dose’
    of these socialist ideas may confer some immunity in the future.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »