president Obama bends over, drops his pants, and lets Putin "put it in".

[Marshmallow Diplomacy]

By PETER BAKER

WASHINGTON — President Obama woke up Monday facing a
Congressional defeat that many in both parties believed could
hobble his presidency. And by the end of the day, he found
himself in the odd position of relying on his Russian
counterpart, Vladimir V. Putin, of all people, to bail him out.

The surprise Russian proposal to defuse the American
confrontation with Syria made a tenuous situation even more
volatile for a president struggling to convince a deeply
skeptical public of the need for the United States to respond
militarily in yet another Middle Eastern country, this time in
retaliation for the use of chemical weapons. It could make the
situation even more precarious. Or it could give Mr. Obama an
escape from a predicament partly of his own making.

In effect, Mr. Obama is now caught between trying to work out a
deal with Mr. Putin, with whom he has been feuding lately, or
trying to win over Republicans in the House who have made it
their mission to block his agenda. Even if he does not trust Mr.
Putin, Mr. Obama will have to decide whether to treat the
Russian proposal seriously or assume it is merely a means of
obstructing an American military strike.

“Putin knows that everyone wants an out, so he’s providing one,”
said Fiona Hill, a former national intelligence officer and co-
author of “Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin.” “It seems like
a bold idea that will get everyone, including Obama, out of a
bind that they don’t want to be in.”

But, she said, it may be an idea that derails a strike for now
without solving the underlying problem. Indeed, the Senate
quickly postponed plans for a vote authorizing an attack.

“It just adds to the uncertainty and makes a vote soon a little
more difficult,” said Howard Berman, a Democrat and former
chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “It just gets
dragged out and causes the Congress to say let’s wait to see
what happens with this before they vote.”

All of which had White House speechwriters revising their drafts
before Mr. Obama addresses the nation Tuesday night in what is
shaping up as one of the most challenging moments of his
presidency. He hoped to explain why it was necessary to
retaliate for a chemical weapons attack that, according to
United States intelligence, killed more than 1,400 in Syria, but
also reassure Americans the result would not be another Iraq war.

Now Mr. Obama needs to also explain why Congress should still
vote to authorize such a strike in the face of a possible
diplomatic solution and what if any conditions would satisfy him
enough to order American destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean
Sea not to act, at least for now. And he has to win over a
public that by significant margins opposes American military
action.

“Their path to success is really, really tough,” said Joel P.
Johnson, who was a counselor to President Bill Clinton. “I don’t
think there’s any question that they went into this eyes wide
open, knowing how tough this was going to be, and volatile and
unpredictable, and probably will be hour to hour until there’s a
vote.”

The twists and turns in the Syria debate have whipsawed the
nation’s capital and by some accounts imperiled Mr. Obama’s
presidency. Democrats are mystified and in some cases livid with
Mr. Obama for asking Congress to decide the matter instead of
simply ordering one or two days of strikes and getting it over
with.

By most estimates, the Republican-controlled House would reject
authorizing such an attack if the vote were held now, and it is
not clear whether the Democrat-led Senate would approve it. Few
presidents have lost such a major vote on war and peace in the
almost century since the Senate rejected Woodrow Wilson’s League
of Nations.

In their private moments, Mr. Obama’s allies said even the
argument that his presidency would for all intents and purposes
be over did not sway some unsympathetic Democrats, frustrated
over how few victories there have been to hang on to in Mr.
Obama’s fifth year in office.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/middleeast/surprise-
russian-proposal-catches-obama-between-putin-and-house-
republicans.html?pagewanted=all

   

[unknown]

n Fri, 25 Oct 2013 08:03:10 +0200, "Marshmallow Diplomacy"
PURGING OUR MILITARY COMMANDERS

Nine Senior Commanding Military Leaders have recently been fired by
the Barack Hussein Obama regime. According to active and retired
members of our military, the purge is continuing. Retired generals and
current senior commanders say that Barack is not only purging our
military of commanders that do not agree with his agenda but he is
striking fear in the hearts of those still serving. The timing comes
as he has ordered the U.S. Armed Forces to retreat from Afghanistan
next year. He is using this maneuver to purge those who don't agree
with him or don't tow the Party Line. As his former White House chief
of staff Rahm Emanuel says, "Never waste a crisis."
A senior retired general who fears possible further retribution says:
"Even as a retired general, Barack can make life miserable for us. If
we're working with the government or have contracts, he can just rip
that out from under us," he said. Retired U.S. Army Major General Paul
Vallely, an outspoken critic of the Obama Regime says while Barack
blocks actions or investigations of his own minions, he finds it easy
to fire military commanders who have devoted their lives to the
service of our country. "Barack will not purge his civilian political
appointees because they have bought into Obama's socialist ideology.
He protects his own. That's why he is blocking investigations into the
Fast & Furious gun walking scheme, the Benghazi terrorist attack, IRS
abuse of power, and his Obamacare fiasco, etc.
Barack is intentionally weakening our military, reducing us as a
superpower while vastly expanding his 'Homeland Security' Forces to
all suppress domestic dissent. Anyone in our military ranks who
disagrees or speaks out is being purged. Pentagon officials say "Young
officers, down through the ranks have been told never to criticize
Barack or his political cronies. He is purging everyone who does, so
if you want to keep your job - keep your mouth shut."
Some of our Senior Military Leaders Fired by Barack Hussein Obama
include:
Gen. Carter Ham, Army
Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, Navy
Maj. Gen. Ralph Baker, Army
Brigadier Gen. Bryan Roberts, Army
Maj. Gen. Gregg A. Sturdevant, Marine Corps
Maj. Gen. Charles M.M. Gurganus, Marine Corps
Lt. Gen. David Holmes Huntoon Jr, Army
Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, Navy
Major Gen. Michael Carey, Air Force

"LIVE FREE OR DIE"

WASHINGTON — President Obama woke up Monday facing a
Congressional defeat that many in both parties believed could
hobble his presidency. And by the end of the day, he found
himself in the odd position of relying on his Russian
counterpart, Vladimir V. Putin, of all people, to bail him out.
The surprise Russian proposal to defuse the American
confrontation with Syria made a tenuous situation even more
volatile for a president struggling to convince a deeply
skeptical public of the need for the United States to respond
militarily in yet another Middle Eastern country, this time in
retaliation for the use of chemical weapons. It could make the
situation even more precarious. Or it could give Mr. Obama an
escape from a predicament partly of his own making.
In effect, Mr. Obama is now caught between trying to work out a
deal with Mr. Putin, with whom he has been feuding lately, or
trying to win over Republicans in the House who have made it
their mission to block his agenda. Even if he does not trust Mr.
Putin, Mr. Obama will have to decide whether to treat the
Russian proposal seriously or assume it is merely a means of
obstructing an American military strike.
“Putin knows that everyone wants an out, so he’s providing one,”
said Fiona Hill, a former national intelligence officer and co-
author of “Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin.” “It seems like
a bold idea that will get everyone, including Obama, out of a
bind that they don’t want to be in.”
But, she said, it may be an idea that derails a strike for now
without solving the underlying problem. Indeed, the Senate
quickly postponed plans for a vote authorizing an attack.
“It just adds to the uncertainty and makes a vote soon a little
more difficult,” said Howard Berman, a Democrat and former
chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “It just gets
dragged out and causes the Congress to say let’s wait to see
what happens with this before they vote.”
All of which had White House speechwriters revising their drafts
before Mr. Obama addresses the nation Tuesday night in what is
shaping up as one of the most challenging moments of his
presidency. He hoped to explain why it was necessary to
retaliate for a chemical weapons attack that, according to
United States intelligence, killed more than 1,400 in Syria, but
also reassure Americans the result would not be another Iraq war.
Now Mr. Obama needs to also explain why Congress should still
vote to authorize such a strike in the face of a possible
diplomatic solution and what if any conditions would satisfy him
enough to order American destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean
Sea not to act, at least for now. And he has to win over a
public that by significant margins opposes American military
action.
“Their path to success is really, really tough,” said Joel P.
Johnson, who was a counselor to President Bill Clinton. “I don’t
think there’s any question that they went into this eyes wide
open, knowing how tough this was going to be, and volatile and
unpredictable, and probably will be hour to hour until there’s a
vote.”
The twists and turns in the Syria debate have whipsawed the
nation’s capital and by some accounts imperiled Mr. Obama’s
presidency. Democrats are mystified and in some cases livid with
Mr. Obama for asking Congress to decide the matter instead of
simply ordering one or two days of strikes and getting it over
with.
By most estimates, the Republican-controlled House would reject
authorizing such an attack if the vote were held now, and it is
not clear whether the Democrat-led Senate would approve it. Few
presidents have lost such a major vote on war and peace in the
almost century since the Senate rejected Woodrow Wilson’s League
of Nations.
In their private moments, Mr. Obama’s allies said even the
argument that his presidency would for all intents and purposes
be over did not sway some unsympathetic Democrats, frustrated
over how few victories there have been to hang on to in Mr.
Obama’s fifth year in office.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/middleeast/surprise-
russian-proposal-catches-obama-between-putin-and-house-
republicans.html?pagewanted=all
   

[Siri Cruz]

Post by unknown
Nine Senior Commanding Military Leaders have recently been fired by
the Barack Hussein Obama regime. According to active and retired
members of our military, the purge is continuing. Retired generals and

So the President serves at the pleasure of the military instead of vice versa.