“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him [Russian President Putin] to give me space. This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” —Barack Obama
President Obama told a university audience in South Korea that the U.S. possesses more nuclear arms than it needs, and can reduce that arsenal without damaging America’s security. Obama: U.S. has more nukes than it needs
***
The prospect of four more years of Barack Obama’s Marxist ‘stewardship’ should be enough to induce blind panic in even the hardiest of American citizens. This man (and the rest of his socialist compadres who masquerade as Democrats) needs to be sent packing before his plan to turn out the lights on the United States leaves us all sitting in permanent darkness. That’s ‘fundamental transformation’ all right, but not of the sort that a gullible electorate thought they were getting when they foolishly allowed this man to Occupy and subvert an office to which he shouldn’t have been allowed within a hundred miles. To wit:
Turner to Obama: What Flexibility?
Rep. Michael R. Turner (R., Ohio), chairman of the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces, sought an explanation for the overheard comments made by the president Monday in a discussion in Seoul with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev…
Turner noted that during the December 2010 ratification debate over the New START arms treaty with Russia the president made specific promises that Russia’s opposition to U.S. missile defenses would not impact U.S. plans to deploy both short- and medium-range missile defenses in Europe and elsewhere.
Additionally, the president promised to make both “qualitative and quantitative improvements in its missile defenses,” Turner said.
“You have already walked away from detailed promises to modernize the U.S. nuclear deterrent; are you now planning to walk away from your promises regarding U.S. missile defense as well?” Turner asked.
Amid concerns that the administration planned to share highly classified missile defense secrets with Russia in an effort to assuage Moscow’s fears that U.S. defenses will target its missiles, the defense authorization bill signed into law by the president contains a provision that limits the president’s ability to share classified data with Russia.
“Congress took this step because it was clear based on official testimony and administration comments in the press that classified information about U.S. missile defenses, including hit-to-kill technology and velocity at burnout information, may be on the table as negotiating leverage for your reset with Russia,” Turner said, noting that the president said he may treat the limit as nonbinding when he signed the defense bill into law.
The comments in Seoul, in addition to the signing statement, “suggests that you and your administration have plans for U.S. missile defenses that you believe will not stand up to electoral scrutiny,” Turner said.
***
House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Tuesday that “the American people should be very afraid” after hearing President Barack Obama’s accidentally recorded remarks to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Monday that after the election he would have more “flexibility” in dealing with the Russians.
“I judge that in fact he’s going to sell out our national defense after the election,” said Issa.
***
President Obama’s Treacherous Deals With The Russians
[…] the sane have already come to the conclusion that something is amiss in the Oval Office. After all, if you had taken a vodka shot for every time the president double-crossed America, you’d be drunker than a Russian sailor on payday.
***
Obama’s secret plan: National security takes a back seat to president’s re-election
There is only one thing scarier for the future of America than all of the debt and bad policies President Obama has built up since his 2008 election: It’s what the prospect of an Obama second term would bring. And the president isn’t being honest about what his secret plans are.
***
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, with [John] Holdren on the board of directors from 1984 until recently, has long petitioned for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear stockpiles. According to Pavel Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, this kind of work by the magazine editors was for the benefit of the Soviet Union.
Holdren is assistant to the president for science and technology, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and co-chairman of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists began publishing regularly in 1945, when it was founded by former physicists from the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bomb.
Two of the magazine’s founding sponsors, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer, were accused of passing information from the Manhattan Project to the Soviets. Both were also key initiators of the Manhattan Project.
In 1994, Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, identified Szilard and Oppenheimer as key sources of crucial atomic information to the Soviet Union.
“The most vital information for developing the first Soviet atomic bomb came from scientists engaged in the Manhattan Project to build the American atomic bomb – Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard,” wrote Sudoplatov.
The regime of Barack Hussein Obama (or whatever his real name is) doesn’t deserve four more years—it doesn’t deserve four more minutes.
See also: Obama Chides America as Only Country to Ever Use Nuclear Weapons via Maggie’s Notebook
Reblogged this on Boudica BPI Weblog and commented:
“The regime of Barack Hussein Obama (or whatever his real name is) doesn’t deserve four more years—it doesn’t deserve four more minutes.”
It didn’t deserve the first four years.
Amen.
Thank Heaven for the hot mike.
Just one more hole in the pseudo ‘transparency’ Barry promised.
Rove: Obama’s Open-Mic Russia Comment Could Sink Re-election
“By telling Mr. Medvedev and his patron, the once-and-future Russian President Vladimir Putin, that he will have ‘flexibility’ after the American election on Russian demands opposing a U.S. missile defense for Europe, Mr. Obama is in effect saying he is ready to do something the Russians will like but that the American people won’t.”
Rove added that Obama’s remarks in Seoul, South Korea, could confirm to voters that he’s “not shooting straight with the American people.”
“Is Mr. Obama also concealing unpopular domestic policies he’ll spring on the country in a second term? What the president calls ‘flexibility’ with Russian autocrats, American voters will likely view as a lack of candor with them,” Rove wrote on the Fox News website. “If that’s the case, it could seriously undermine the president’s chances for re-election.
I was amazed this morning to read that new ABC poll shows Obama with a 53% approval rating. Was that poll taken in Russia?
Propaganda to the ignorant masses.
PRAVDA endorses Obama. So does ABC. Rasmussen tells a different story:
Reblogged this on A Lot Of Coffee and Sleepless Nights.
Pingback: Wednesday Afternoon Grumpy Daily Headline News | Grumpy Opinions
How much more will it take to make ALL Americans see Obama for what he is??
We’ve only got 6 more months to convince ’em…
I caught this on Fox last night
Nice find, BUNKER. But then again, Obama doesn’t seem to agree with any kind of a defense system—unless it’s theirs.
Sorry to take up so much space– I thought I was just sending the link!
Pingback: Saturday Afternoon – Recovering From Stupidity – Laundry Time , An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
Pingback: Obama Medvedev Hot Mic: Obama Promises Russia More Accommodation After Elections: Obama Chides America as Only Country to Ever Use Nuclear | Maggie's Notebook
It just boggles the mind to think that Obama doesn’t mind putting his daughters through a war… Oh, wait. He and his family would be sent off to a safe haven. Mind unboggled~
Maybe the safe haven is in Moscow, SHERRY.
Great coverage on this important story, Bob. I hope our “candidate” will pound it home often. Love the title:-)
Thanks, MAGGIE. I don’t have much faith in Romney—he’s flexible too.