Today, Barack Hussein Obama is inaugurated for a second term. One wonders if the press had done their job, would Mitt Romney be giving a speech today? It’s not that far fetched of an idea. President Obama lost 3.6 million votes and Republicans gained 1 million votes between 2008 and 2012. That equals a 4.6 million (or three percent) swing of the votes cast. Never before in history had such a dramatic swing away from the incumbent resulted in a re-election.
But another two-percent swing, and America would send Obama to his retirement party today and America would be saying President Romney this afternoon. What could have swung the election? Let’s start with fair reporting from the media. It’s no secret that the media has a left-wing bias that strongly supports Democrat causes and continually helps Democrats during times of elections. And never has that been more apparent than over the last four years, where the media promoted how handsome, fit, presidential and stylish Barack Obama is and ignored Obama’s scandals such as the growing national debt, the failure to pass a budget in over 1,500 days, the extended recession, horrible unemployment, the EPA-Lisa Jackson emails, hypocrisies, obfuscation, unconstitutional power grabs, Fast & Furious, Benghazi and so on and so forth.
This media bias has never before been so obvious as when PolitiFact’s “Lie of the Year,” which is awarded to Republicans seventy-five percent of the time, turned out to be the lie of the year.
PolitiFact, known for promoting Democrats and left-wing causes, chose as its 2012 “Lie of the Year” a Mitt Romney quote, they described as “brazenly false,” made during the presidential race… that President Obama “sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China.” Which we now know, ten weeks after the election, is proven 100 percent true. Obama “saved” Chrysler and approved the sale to Fiat only to see Jeep outsource jobs to China.
[vsw id=”Ikkd4Cc03f4″ source=”youtube” width=”425″ height=”344″ autoplay=”no”]
The PolitiFact editors happened to choose the obscure fortuitous Romney quote over the blatant colossal Obama lie broadcast on The Late Show with David Letterman that blamed the 9/11 Benghazi terrorist attacks on an anti-Muslim YouTube video:
“Here’s what happened. Extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya… As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it.”
And even if they couldn’t bring themselves to use that Obama lie, how could they pass up Obama’s lie told during the debate with Romney in which the President claimed that he called the death of four Americans in Benghazi “an act of terror” the day following the attack in his Rose Garden speech, when he clearly did not. Obama called the attack a “terrible act,” a “brutal” act, “senseless violence,” and he called the attackers “killers” He never made mention to the attackers as terrorists, or the attack as terrorism or even as an act of terror. The only reference in his speech that day to an “act of terror” was not in reference to the Benghazi attack, but rather how acts of terror have an impact on American life.
[vsw id=”rDANcaPx1xg” source=”youtube” width=”425″ height=”344″ autoplay=”no”]
To clarify any confusion, Obama taped an interview for 60 Minutes hours after the Rose Garden speech in which he admitted that he did NOT use the word “terrorism” earlier that day during his statement because “it’s too early to know exactly how this came about.”
As we all know now — and many knew at the time — a YouTube video, which barely had 700 hits at the time, had nothing — NOTHING — to do with the 9/11 terrorist attack in Benghazi that resulted in the death of four Americans. Furthermore, we now know that the federal government stood by and watched… even instructed nearby Americans to stand down as the attack continued and Americans died
If ever there was a time to use “died” and “lied” in the same bumper sticker — Benghazi is it.
And if they just wanted to protect Obama, why couldn’t they post the Hillary Clinton “pants on fire” lie?
“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”
Or the Candy Crowley lie?
“He did in fact call it an ‘act of terror.'”
He, in fact, did not call “it” (the 9/11 Benghazi attack) an act of terror. Again, he made reference to acts of terror and how they had an impact on American life.
As a result, the strong Romney momentum, just days before the election, came to a halt. Rather than a massive slam dunk on the President, Romney had to back down appearing defeated. No wonder Obama said, “Can you say that a little louder, Candy?” And the press that was reporting in the next room broke out into a loud applause. There was probably 1 million votes lost for Romney right there.
[vsw id=”WqDXHXs5ryo” source=”youtube” width=”425″ height=”344″ autoplay=”no”]
Why is the media not reporting these — and so many other lies associated with Obama — so that the public can express their collective outrage? The answer is simple. It’s because honest reporting might result in Republicans victory… and the Democrats and their partners in the media surely cannot have that.
@nauguration @PolitiFact #Obama #LieOfTheYear