Liar, Liar! Liberal Pants On Fire!

Tsk, tsk. Didn’t Hillary’s father teach her to tell the truth? Didn’t Obama’s mother teach him about honesty? Apparently that is one lesson the Obama’s and Rodham’s did not instill in their children (Maybe they were “Cool Parents”). They have been lying their liberal butts off!

We have all told ‘little white lies’ (Things like: “I did not eat the last cookie”; “My mother loves you”; “It’s not you, it’s me”). Everyone has fibbed once or twice in their lives. Stretching the truth is downright human. The problem arises when ‘little white lies’ become complete fabrications deserving the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.

In the 1990’s, we learned that Bill Clinton was a professional liar (“I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” Yeah, we know how that one came out). Considering that Democrats (still?) love Bill, maybe what they are looking for is another blatant liar in the White House. Boy, do they have themselves two over – qualified nominees!

******
Hillary

Hillary is your candidate if dense is one of the qualities you are looking for in your President.

She has told little white lies. For example, she told Sir Edmund Hillary- the guy who climbed Mt. Everest in 1953- that she was named after him… the only problem is that she was born five years before he ever became famous for climbing Mt. Everest. Maybe she did it to flatter him. Who knows? But this is not the kind of thing people are going to lose sleep over.

Last week, Hillary was reminiscing about the time she went to Bosnia on a relief mission with Chelsea. They were about to get off the plane, when suddenly the Secret Service told them that it was dangerous; they had to take cover and run with their heads down… they were under sniper fire!

Except that is not what happened. Instead Hillary and Chelsea were greeted by a little girl with flowers and took pictures with soldiers.

Help me out here, guys… why would she say she was under sniper fire when she clearly was not? Did she not remember that CBS was filming the whole thing?

Hillary tells Democratic voters that she is the candidate who has the ‘experience’ to be President. Really? People gain ‘experience’ by living through an event and learning through direct observation what to do in the future. She says that being in the White House as First Lady makes her better qualified to be in the White House as President. Given what happened to Bill when he chose to lie about “that woman”, you would think Hillary would have the common sense to know that lying is not such a good idea. If she did not gain that basic experience, what experience did she gain?

Obama

Obama has a list of lies all his own. Obama is the candidate for you if you are willing to accept a thin resume (who knew that being a ‘community activist’ was the yellow brick road to the White House?) in exchange for reliability. Yes, Obama is a reliable liar (Note: Lies told by Obama are called “nuanced” or “taken out of context” by the Obamedia, i.e. MSNBC, CNN, the NYT’s, etc.).

Robert Kennedy once said that the March on Selma created “ripples of hope”. And Obama loves to say that he is a product of the March on Selma. According to Obama, his father came to America as a result of the Kennedy Airlift circa 1960. His parents then met at the March on Selma and he, Barack Obama (the personification of hope itself), was born!!

Wow. That’s powerful stuff. Except it is not the truth. Barack Obama was born in 1961 in Hawaii, the March on Selma was in 1965. Ok, so maybe he just wanted to make a powerful speech and twisted the truth to be more poetic. No harm done, right?

But a few weeks ago, we were all introduced to Obama’s Pastor of the Century: the Reverend Jeremiah Wright (the guy who says white Americans invented the HIV virus to kill black people; that “God [should] damn America!”; that America should be referred to as the “US of KKKA”; and, my personal favorite, that America deserved 9/11 because “the chickens [had] come home to roost!”).

Obama has attended Reverend Wright’s sermons for over 20 years. When people saw video evidence of Wright’s racist, anti- American hate speech, they expected Obama to denounce Wright. But he did nothing of the sort. Instead, he said that in the 20 years he had been attending the Reverend’s sermons, he never heard him say anything resembling what the video showed. Maybe in 20 years he just happened to be at the church on those Sundays when the Reverend chose to speak about Christianity and loving thy brother… Yeah, I don’t buy it either.

Obama has based his campaign on his ability to bring ‘change’ and his ‘judgment’. Reverend Wright’s hateful rhetoric sounds like the racial baggage this country has been trying to move away from for decades. Obama refused to distance himself from it; he listened to it for 20 years! Is he really the candidate that can bring change and unite this country when he cannot even denounce hate speech?

If Obama sat and listened to Reverend Wrong’s rants without objecting, what kind of judgment is he displaying? If Obama does not have the common sense to distance himself from a man who says that America invented HIV as a biological weapon against blacks, does he have judgment at all?

******
There is no doubt that they both deserve the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. Who gets it? And is that who you want to be your President?