Image 01 Image 03

Obama says climate summit is “powerful rebuke” to terrorists!

Obama says climate summit is “powerful rebuke” to terrorists!

Obama bitterly clings to climate change ideals.

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul feels the nation is less safe today than ever before in recent memory.

His concerns were validated by the most recent vapid statements from our Commander-in-Chief.  Speaking alongside French President François Hollande at a joint news conference, President Obama stated that next week’s climate change summit in Paris would be a “powerful rebuke” to terrorists.

“Next week, I will be joining President Hollande and world leaders in Paris for the global climate conference,” Obama said during his prepared remarks, which focused mostly on the efforts to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

“What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be, when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children,” he added.

…“I think it is absolutely vital for every country, every leader, to send a signal that the viciousness of a handful of killers does not stop the world from doing vital business, and that Paris … is not going to be cowered by the violent, demented actions of a few,” Obama said about the upcoming climate conference.

Obama has been out of the country extensively since the Paris attacks.  Perhaps, given how angry he gets when Republicans challenge him, he should continue his global tour.


A vast majority – 97% – of Americans don’t believe climate change is a top priority. Rather, it is terrorism.

The contrast between Obama’s view of the Paris massacre and its meaning with that of Hollande’s is stark.

Critics of the president’s IS policies also cite the contrast in words between the two leaders beyond their actions, pointing out that Obama referred to the attacks in Paris as a “setback” while Hollande called the deadly assaults “an act of war.”

The U.S. said it would “step up” its coordination with France by providing more intelligence and additional airlift. Moreover, Obama called on the European Union to implement a policy to allow airlines to share passenger information.

While sharing airline lists may provide useful data, planes are not the only transportation options available to Islamic terror organizers. The ring-leader of the Paris massacre drove attack groups from Belgium into the famed city.

And it was only August when two hero Marines stopped a terror attack aboard a train between the French capital and Amsterdam. More airlines lists are clearly not the answer.

Hollande is taking the security of his nation more seriously in the wake of the recent slaughters, and is looking to work with another head-of-state.

French President Francois Hollande’s new initiative to forge a trilateral coalition – comprised of France, the United States and Russia – to fight Islamic State (ISIS) in the aftermath of the Paris attacks has raised apprehension in Washington that the Fifth Republic is once again, just as it did under General Charles de Gaulle, making overtures to Russia.

Essentially, Hollande’s call for “bringing together of all those who can realistically fight against this terrorist army in a single, broad coalition” is an echo of the words spoken by Russian President Vladimir Putin at the 70th UN General Assembly in New York in September.

Paris seems to have decided to court Moscow in the global fight against the Islamists, who are successfully recruiting followers in Europe, including France and Russia. The first signs of ground and offshore coordination in Syria have been recorded already, while Putin has ordered his military to cooperate with the French, treating them, in his own words, as “allies.”

While Hollande is reaching out to Putin, Obama is bitterly clinging to his climate change ideals.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Churchill and FDR helped Stalin build the Soviet Union.

Are we really going to make that mistake again?

The Iraqis and Egyptians laughed at Ted Kennedy’s notion of “torture” at Abu Ghraib. They’ll more likely cry when they read this.

it’s a powerful rebuke, all right—to sanity.

The man now believes his own b.s. And so do the republican’s in the sense they continually validate that premise with their more than worthless “opposition.” Never has the country with the exception of the Civil war faced such danger from so many quarters ; never have we had such useless & feckless leadership.

    TX-rifraph in reply to secondwind. | November 25, 2015 at 10:54 am

    Do we have leaders? Or, do we have useless & feckless people in leadership positions? I thank the self-righteous “I am not voting in this election” crowd for the unqualified and unethical morons filling these positions because they ended up with more votes than their opponents.

    In the general election, I vote against the worst candidate (Cruz was the exception where I voted for) but the worst candidates won by default thanks to the stay-at-homes. We pay, our children pay, our grandchildren pay the bill. Will the stay-at-home non-voters bring us another round (Hillary?) or will we vote even for a GOPe to block another POS like we have now?

      Radegunda in reply to TX-rifraph. | November 25, 2015 at 12:03 pm

      Voting against the worst candidate is the only sane and responsible choice in a general election. But some people keep saying it’s better to let a Dem win, or even to vote for a Dem, than to vote for a “RINO establishment” Republican.

      They imagine that sitting home will “send a message” to “the GOP” to “nominate a better candidate next time,” or that it will hasten the total collapse of the GOP (or “uniparty”) and the immediate birth of better, purer party. And they congratulate themselves on their integrity while leftists make policy for another four years.

      Someone said that “we dodged a bullet” by not getting a Romney presidency in 2012 because “now we have a chance to get a good president in 2016.” Never mind that we also have a chance of getting a Hillary Clinton presidency, after four more years of the Obama debacle.

        healthguyfsu in reply to Radegunda. | November 25, 2015 at 6:08 pm

        You two do realize that “voting against the worst candidate” can still get that candidate elected if you vote for a marginal independent.

        Your strategy, or what you mean to say, is that you want someone else to win. That can only happen if that person is voted for…voting against someone else but not voting for the next most likely successful candidate is equivalent to not voting at all.

        I disagree with your take, but you should say it like it is.

What a pathetic wussy.

No wonder criminals, terrorists and dictators all over the world feel so empowered.

And regarding what the vast majority of Americans believe is the most important issue facing the country today, his majesty has never ever been into listening to what the vast majority of Americans believe. His majesty knows better.

yes, Obama rebuked them. He said America is not a strong nation (“great Satan”) standing for liberty, we are a weak-kneed country that submits, hiding behind phony issues.

America is not a superpower as long as Obama the Surrenderer is president.

It’s hard for terrorist to plan an attack when they are rolling on the floor with laughter. Smart move.

Global Warming/Climate Change is a Farce, Hoax, Scam, Con.

Obama is a world class liar.

Well, idiots voted for that moron. What did we expect out of all of this? We have an affirmative action POTUS with sealed academinic records,who believes that he can BS his way through everything. We have a media all fired up to cover for him and a bunch of dem operatives more concerned with losing their jobs than having an administration working to protect the country. All need to be fired or tried as traitors.

Sure glad he’s going to get at the root of terrorism by fixing hurricanes, twisters and floods….oh my!

I gave up trying to think of an analogy for this.

So the unarmed American said; “I rebuke thee, I rebuke thee, I rebuke thee!” And the Terrorist said; “Whack! Chop! Stab!”. (Well the Terrorist didn’t SAY that, but that’s the last we heard from either of them.)

I agree with the sentiment of the article. One clarification only peripherally related to the subject. Two Marines did not take down the terrorist on the train. Those involved were an active duty Airman, an Army National Guardsman, their friend, a college student and a Brit civilian.

Additionally, one question. What is the polling source?

Semper Fidelis

He also said that “one of the most potent weapons against terrorism” is to say we’re not afraid. So we should have a specific time when everyone across the country goes outside and yells “I’m not afraid!” Think how powerful that would be! It’s better than the Iron Dome!

Whew! That’s one heck of a rebuke. Guess we won’t be hearing from them anymore.

If people understood how much the environ-wacko policies were costing them in higher fuel, electricity and product costs, they would have something to say.

I must admit I have a new-found respect for Obama. How he is able to stand there and deliver these lies with a straight face takes serious concentration and talent.