Obama is weak

[Jim Colyer]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 5:32pm

Obama is weak. The Middle East and North Africa are exploding. 4 of our people were murdered in Libya. Obama cannot deal with this situation. He is The Great Apologizer. We need Ronald Reagan. But Reagan is gone. Mitt Romney will have to fill his shoes.

[tazber]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 5:38pm

Write a song about it!

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 5:42pm

Make sure it is set in Lebanon. Reagan would like that.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 5:48pm

An what pray tell would Romney do? Go over and tell the rioting Islamists about Jesus Christ and the Later Day Saints? Maybe gather them all in a group and lead them in a rousing chorus of "Who let the dogs out?"

[Kad]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 5:56pm

Well, he'd give them a common enemy.

And what, pray tell, would Reagan have done in this situation, Jim? Have our people secretly sell arms to someone?

And what would you have Obama do, anyway? Start a war? You've been in Peru! You're worldly! You've been waited on hand and foot by lesser races! ENLIGHTEN US.

[romantico]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:15pm

Jim Colyer is a terrible song writer with no talent. The most idiotic thread of the year. Congratulations!

Updated On: 9/14/12 at 06:15 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:21pm

Obama is weak.


You want a politician with muscles?



Go to Russia.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:22pm

RUSSIA?! OUR GREATEST THREAT?!??

[Kad]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:26pm

Pal Joey is a commie, we all know this.

If you want a politician with muscles, here's congressman Aaron Schock.

[Playbilly]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:26pm

McCain AND Romney were complaining that we weren't arming the rebels. Funny they aren't saying that now. Again, Obama did the CORRECT thing by not jumping into the fray too soon. NeoCons never learn. What will the Republicans do when the Ron Paul people take over the party?

Updated On: 9/14/12 at 06:26 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:27pm

Isnt he also really anti-gay?

[Kad]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:29pm

Yeah, he is. He's a hard-line conservative. He made himself into a sex symbol and then will vote against your right to think so!

[Playbilly]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:47pm

Schock is the new breed of closeted Republican.

[Kad]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:51pm

Cut off his head and he's a Grindr profile.

[D2]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 6:58pm

Kad wins.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 7:53pm

I think Jim's a pretty good songwriter but as a lyricist? Even worse than late-stage Madonna.

[thetinymagic2]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 8:08pm

The inane life and times of JIM. lol.

http://jimcolyer.blogspot.com/

[strummergirl]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 8:49pm

Because exchanging hostages for weapons is the great American way, apparently.

'Our 4 people' who died in the Middle East likely would have not been recognized as people to send as diplomats in the Romney administration. Why? Because he is a man who has no clue about diplomacy. If his campaign advisors on foreign policy are any indication, he wants more John Boltons than people like Chris Stevens.

Your boy Romney piggy-backed after the death of Sean Smith blaming the twitter feed of the embassy at Cairo for what happened in Libya around the same time, attacking the president and not the state department officials who were in the embassy. It is dishonest and lack of any humanity, as the deaths of the other three people that included Ambassador Stevens had not been reported yet. It was a Bagdhad Bob kind of move than any move from a Commander in Chief. It is insanely irresponsible and many levels and heartless. Even Reagan kept a tight lip than grandstanding to the press about the failed hostage rescue attempts done by Carter.

How is Mitt Romney more qualified on foreign policy? He somehow wants the US to still maintain a defense budget despite two wars ending. How is that possible? We are supposedly entering a time of peace and he still wants that fat budget that is full of true government waste while gutting education, the arts, entitlements, and Medicare and Medicaid.

So Jim, do you want a war in Iran? What is the endgame in that? Turning the most pro-American populace against you in the name of getting rid of some figurehead for the Ayatollah? Well you have a lot of Generals against you if you say 'Yes' (even Dubya didn't followed that advice). Do you want to engage in Syria to put in our own personal leader that does not really correspond with what Syrian citizens want, and have fought and died for, as a leader? Great. You have Iran, 1953 on your hands and it is only a matter of time when your pro-American leader will get toppled by the populace and then you have a power struggle between revolutionaries who want democracy and extremists.

The Arab Spring is not perfect but this within a year of regimes toppling and there are power struggles between extremists and people who do genuinely believe in democracy, it is understandable there is still power struggles and violence (these revolutions were just not on Twitter feeds but truly violent shifts in power). The extremists are a small minority who are piggy-backing off a film that has actually not been widely seen (and thanks to the geniuses at Google it can no longer be seen on the web in some of these countries so people just 'hear' about it) but has been twisted in a game of telephone that have people thinking this was US gov't sponsored this film and also funded by Jews and made by Israelis. I am still not sure how this is Obama's fault.

At this point I would love for Obama to give a speech directed to people in these countries and break down the BS behind this stupid film. People have largely gotten the wrong info and need to learn the truth about it. And if this speech is seen as an apology, by the likes of people like Mr. Hump the Cactus and Fox News, just eat it. It is only less ridiculous than Obama having to speak on behalf of his faith, his church, his race, and that damned birth certificate. Saying that a 14 minute trailer on a film directed by a porn director about Muhammad made to incite violence and sponsored by right-wing American and Egyptian Christians does not represent the views and ideals of America has toward the prophet Mohammad is fine by me. Being a leader does mean taking responsibility for the debauchery done by your own people that caused an international incident.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 9:16pm

Cut off his head and he's a Grindr profile.

[Playbilly]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 9:22pm

He's much smarter in Joey's picture.

[Yawper]

Posted: 9/14/12 at 10:12pm

4 of our people were murdered in Libya

and how many in Chicago?

[Kad]

Posted: 9/15/12 at 1:25am

Now he looks really familiar. All that's missing is "MASC FOR MASC- no bottoms please".

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 9/15/12 at 10:43am

MASC FOR MASC - no bottoms please in gay speak means: I'm the BOTTOM, you be the TOP.

Posted: 9/15/12 at 3:05pm

I'm old. I can remember when the rule was you don't second guess the president in a foreign policy crisis- even if you're running against him. Even Ronald Reagan (who was a despicable scum who did indeed conspire with our enemy and trade arms for hostages) put forth a phony smile and backed up the president for the sake of a unified foreign policy.

This week, Mitt Romney took to the airwaves to attack the President in the midst of a foreign crisis LITERALLY before the bodies of four Americans were cold- with bad information that was quickly disproved. It is shameful. I am somewhat comforted that at least SOME of the Republicans took a moment to apologize for his tasteless and UN-American behavior.

And Oh yeah I forgot the funny part! After attacking the president and undermining his foreign policy Mitt Romney had the sense of humor to say Obama can't be president because he sends "Mixed messages" to our allies. Good one!

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 9/15/12 at 3:14pm

Maybe Mittens really thinks they are just going to hand him the Presidency, like they did with GW Bush.