Back in August, a team of Italian scientists announced that a complete head transplant is now possible. Of course, the donor and recipient must have compatible minds. My suspicion, however, is that those mad scientists have already secretly transplanted the head of one world leader onto the shoulders of another. The result of that operation is our current President, George W. Obomber. On what do I base my suspicion?
Think back to 2008. George Bush was winding down his second term as the most reactionary warmonger to ever occupy the Oval Office. One of his critics was candidate Barack Obama, who said he would have voted against the Iraq War, and, if elected, he would bring all of our troops home. In fact, Obama’s campaign pronouncements of peace based on diplomacy netted him a Nobel Prize. So Bush the hawk was succeeded by Obama the dove. But over the past six years, the dove has morphed into a hawk of the worst kind.
Earlier on in Obomber’s first term, I referred to him as George W. Obama because he had embraced his predecessor’s propensity for bombing and invading. Increasingly, however, it has become evident that my morphing moniker joke has proved to be grossly unfair … to Mr. Bush. As New Yorker columnist Ryan Lizza recently reminded us, Bush only bombed four countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia) while Obama the peace candidate has bombed seven countries (the previous four plus Libya, Syria and Yemen). And it gets worse. Bush was a simple-minded religious zealot who confessed to at least one foreign head of state that the Bible justified his aggression toward Saddam Hussein. But Obomber is an intelligent constitutional law professor who justifies his military aggression by lying about his intentions, and breaking promises with striking regularity. They are character flaws that have particularly manifested themselves in recent months.
On Sept. 10, Obomber spoke about the ISIS threat, saying, “I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.”
But just eight days later, Obomber announced he was sending troops to Iraq. Said the President, “The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission. Their mission is to advise and assist our partners on the ground.”
On Nov. 7, the previous lie bore out as Obomber announced he was sending another 1500 combat troops to Iraq. Then two days later, CBS newsman Bob Schieffer cornered the President for a clarification.
Schieffer: Should we expect more troops may be needed before this is over?
Obama: As Commander in Chief, I’m never going to say never.
OK, so let’s review. First, candidate Obama promises he’ll bring all of the troops home, then as President he redeploys troops to the region, and bombs seven different countries. Then he promised no more boots on the ground, then sent in more boots on the ground, but said they’re advisers. Then he increased the number of combat troops to fight ISIS and told Bob Schieffer he might send more. The question is, just how many more might that be? According to Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it will require 80,000 more combat troops to take back the ground gained by ISIS. At best, President Obomber is a serial promise breaker who gets away with daily deflections and deceptions. Given that, it’s hard to believe that we once ousted Bush 41 just for breaking one promise not to raise taxes.
It’s also hard to believe that a man like Obomber can actually believe that his continuous interferences in the Middle East can or will ever make a difference. I know the President is a fan of the “Daily Show,” so he must have missed the episode in which Jon Stewart interviewed General Tony Zinni, former Commander in Chief of CentCom (US Central Command).
Zinni: Ever since the end of the Cold War we just keep stumbling into these armed conflicts and actually making the situation worse. What we’ve inherited today is largely because we intervened in places without a strategy and clear understanding of what we needed to do, if we needed to do anything at all.
Stewart: So by destabilizing the Middle East through our intervention, we have destabilized it.
Zinni: Yes, masterfully.
It’s really sad that Mr. Obomber’s latest deception came on the heels of Veterans Day, a day in which we celebrate the bravery of soldiers who intended that their sacrifices would make it unnecessary for any president to create more veterans in the future. It is also ironic that the so-called peace candidate himself has attacked more nations than any other president in history.
Mr. Obomber, Mr. Nobel wants his prize back.
Barack Obomber Should Return Nobel Prize
Back in August, a team of Italian scientists announced that a complete head transplant is now possible. Of course, the donor and recipient must have compatible minds. My suspicion, however, is that those mad scientists have already secretly transplanted the head of one world leader onto the shoulders of another. The result of that operation is our current President, George W. Obomber. On what do I base my suspicion?
Think back to 2008. George Bush was winding down his second term as the most reactionary warmonger to ever occupy the Oval Office. One of his critics was candidate Barack Obama, who said he would have voted against the Iraq War, and, if elected, he would bring all of our troops home. In fact, Obama’s campaign pronouncements of peace based on diplomacy netted him a Nobel Prize. So Bush the hawk was succeeded by Obama the dove. But over the past six years, the dove has morphed into a hawk of the worst kind.
Earlier on in Obomber’s first term, I referred to him as George W. Obama because he had embraced his predecessor’s propensity for bombing and invading. Increasingly, however, it has become evident that my morphing moniker joke has proved to be grossly unfair … to Mr. Bush. As New Yorker columnist Ryan Lizza recently reminded us, Bush only bombed four countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia) while Obama the peace candidate has bombed seven countries (the previous four plus Libya, Syria and Yemen). And it gets worse. Bush was a simple-minded religious zealot who confessed to at least one foreign head of state that the Bible justified his aggression toward Saddam Hussein. But Obomber is an intelligent constitutional law professor who justifies his military aggression by lying about his intentions, and breaking promises with striking regularity. They are character flaws that have particularly manifested themselves in recent months.
On Sept. 10, Obomber spoke about the ISIS threat, saying, “I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.”
But just eight days later, Obomber announced he was sending troops to Iraq. Said the President, “The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission. Their mission is to advise and assist our partners on the ground.”
On Nov. 7, the previous lie bore out as Obomber announced he was sending another 1500 combat troops to Iraq. Then two days later, CBS newsman Bob Schieffer cornered the President for a clarification.
Schieffer: Should we expect more troops may be needed before this is over?
Obama: As Commander in Chief, I’m never going to say never.
OK, so let’s review. First, candidate Obama promises he’ll bring all of the troops home, then as President he redeploys troops to the region, and bombs seven different countries. Then he promised no more boots on the ground, then sent in more boots on the ground, but said they’re advisers. Then he increased the number of combat troops to fight ISIS and told Bob Schieffer he might send more. The question is, just how many more might that be? According to Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it will require 80,000 more combat troops to take back the ground gained by ISIS. At best, President Obomber is a serial promise breaker who gets away with daily deflections and deceptions. Given that, it’s hard to believe that we once ousted Bush 41 just for breaking one promise not to raise taxes.
It’s also hard to believe that a man like Obomber can actually believe that his continuous interferences in the Middle East can or will ever make a difference. I know the President is a fan of the “Daily Show,” so he must have missed the episode in which Jon Stewart interviewed General Tony Zinni, former Commander in Chief of CentCom (US Central Command).
Zinni: Ever since the end of the Cold War we just keep stumbling into these armed conflicts and actually making the situation worse. What we’ve inherited today is largely because we intervened in places without a strategy and clear understanding of what we needed to do, if we needed to do anything at all.
Stewart: So by destabilizing the Middle East through our intervention, we have destabilized it.
Zinni: Yes, masterfully.
It’s really sad that Mr. Obomber’s latest deception came on the heels of Veterans Day, a day in which we celebrate the bravery of soldiers who intended that their sacrifices would make it unnecessary for any president to create more veterans in the future. It is also ironic that the so-called peace candidate himself has attacked more nations than any other president in history.
Mr. Obomber, Mr. Nobel wants his prize back.