Barack Obama was taking “selfie” pictures with Denmark’s Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt and David Cameron during the memorial to Nelson Mandela. Michelle Obama looked displeased with her husband’s casual behavior.
On Sunday’s Meet the Press, host David Gregory used the death of former South African President Nelson Mandela to compare Obama’s difficulties to those of Mandela: “Mandela refused to be consumed by hatred and insisted on working toward a common purpose with his political foes.” Gregory continued with “Mandela also faced obstacles. And while Obama only met the South African leader once, Mister Obama clearly understands the meaning of Mandela.” Really? Can anybody cite an example of Obama working toward a common purpose with his political foes?
NASA recently released a report showing that the Earth’s standing record for the lowest recorded temperature has been shattered near -136 degrees Fahrenheit. National Snow and Ice Data Center Scientist Ted Scambos went on to explain that the new record low is “50 degrees colder than anything that has ever been seen in Alaska or Siberia or certainly North Dakota.”
Elected Democrats across the nation have rightfully been inundated over the past year with questions regarding the Libyan embassy attack that killed four Americans in Benghazi. Though one might assume these politicians would at least have a canned response to such inquiries, one New Hampshire congresswoman proved how uninformed representatives can truly be.
During a town hall meeting, Democrat Rep. Ann Kuster fielded foreign policy questions from a number of constituents. When she addressed a question regarding Benghazi, however, her lack of preparedness was palpable.
She read a question pertaining to House Resolution 36, which advocates for the formation of a special committee to investigate the attack and subsequent response by American officials. Despite reading aloud the fact that this resolution originated in her congressional chamber, Kuster responded to the question by claiming it is “a Senate thing” and that she does not believe “we have anything about that in the House.”
While that embarrassingly obtuse assertion should be enough to question her qualifications as a representative, the situation only devolved further as she attempted to evade further questions on the subject.
One attendee pushed her to “address Benghazi,” at which point she said precisely nothing.
“What are you going to do about Benghazi?” the constituent continued. Kuster then began looking through her notes in apparent hopes that a response would somehow materialize out of thin air.
After being asked the same question thrice, Kuster finally provided an absurd answer.
“Well, I’m certainly not here to talk about it,” she confirmed. “We’re here to talk about the Middle East.”
Upon being informed that Libya is considered part of the Middle East, Kuster scrambled further and sought rescue from the nearby moderator.
Though she obviously struggled to form any pertinent response to a question about Benghazi, this congresswoman is not alone in her ignorance. Instead of developing informed opinions based on a study of the facts, leftists tend to address most issues by merely slandering their opponents.
While this tactic might be effective in campaign ads and MSNBC interviews, when confronted with real questions by real voters, these political hacks are exposed as the intellectual lightweights they truly are.
As of this writing, Kuster has not responded to a request for comment.
–B. Christopher Agee
Have an idea for a story? Email us at email@example.com
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)