OBAMA'S BIG PICTURE

Original Content | 6/16/2013 | by L:az A. Mataz

[Lazamataz]

When looking at Obama and the Administration he leads, it is best to look at the big picture. What we can infer from the Administration's hidden actions is evident most clearly their public actions.

What we see can best be described as "Scandalpalooza", a seeming rock-concert of nonstop scandals. Witness:

• We have the IRS targeting the political opposition, namely the T.E.A. Party, to suppress their ability to fund candidates
• It has been revealed that the NSA tracks the communication habits of virtually all American citizens, creating a large encyclopedia of every citizen's communications
• There is the matter of Benghazi, with the President -- the only man who could have ordered assets to help our Libyan Ambassador -- going to bed during the unfolding events, and the Administration later covering up what they knew about the situation and blaming a blameless amateur filmmaker'
• Then there is the revelation that the Federal Bureau of Investigation, on order from Obama lackey Eric Holder, tapping the communications of, and tracking, various journalists -- including the entire Associated Press corps.
• Lest we forget, there is still the Fast and Furious gun-running scandal, in which so-called 'assault weapons' were allowed to be transferred to intermediaries who then delivered the weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels, in a cynical and obvious attempt to drum up American citizen support for restrictions on those forms of firearms.

This is only a small number of the many burgeoning scandals being committed by these people.

So what are we to conclude, with all the scandals we can see? Like an iceberg, what is visible is only a fraction of the hazard. Like an iceberg, it is what is hidden that kills.

I shall quiz you, dear reader: What was the single most surprising event of 2012, politically? You will probably answer, "Obama's re-election." And you would be wise for selecting this event. Most of America -- Obama included -- was surprised that fateful November 5th, 2012, If you recall, the crowds for Obama's events were sparsely attended, whereas Mitt Romney's events were overflowing. While polls had Obama leading, most of us discounted them due to the perceived (and probably very real) enthusiasm gap that favored Republicans. Even Obama was acting like a man already beaten. his demeanor was hang-dog and depressed in the weeks leading up to the election.

And then the election day happened, and Obama was swept into office, his numbers signalling a very solid victory. While it was short of the "mandate" pundits like to discuss, it was solid.

However, look at the numbers in the Republican voter turnout. They went from 59,948,323 voters in 2008 to 59,134,475 in 2012. While on paper this only looks like a 813,848 shortfall, the fact there was ANY decrease in a growing nation with an energized Republican base is extremely suspicious. One can imagine that the number of votes missing to be more in the order of several million.

No one can convince me that the 2012 Republican turnout count in any way reflected real life. Republicans have never EVER been so energized to get rid of a Democrat president. They may not have been enthusiastic about their candidate, Mitt Romney -- I know I wasn't -- but the desire to rid ourselves of a man who seems to favor Islam at every turn, who has strong socialist tendencies, and took every decision that he could that would harm America, was very strong. No one will ever convince me that the Republican turnout in 2012 was less than the turnout in 2008. It defies all logic.

So what happened? Perhaps this is part of the Obama-iceberg we cannot see at present. It is at least worthy of conjecture, that many Republican votes were 'disappeared' en route to the final tallying location. With electronic voting, such a trick would be child's play.

And even if this is true, this is not the only factor: Obama ran a better 'ground game' in the crucial states, using his vast databases to tap first-time and infrequent voters. Too, we had the IRS suppressing 501-c Political Action Committees. We had, of course, the typical Democrat urban-based voter fraud, whereinwhich people who do not show at the polls still somehow manage to vote, and always for the Democrat.

Nonetheless, the most troubling aspect of the election is the disappearing Republican votes. This, if I am correct, would be the equivalent of a neutron bomb in the Scandalanche we are seeing. This would be the most nefarious and diabolical of all the scandals swirling around the Obama administration.

That is because it would affect elections in the future, most importantly, the midterm election of 2014, in which Obama will be either enabled, or politically castrated.

This is the possible scandal I wish to see most investigated. This is the last deal-breaker in the American Contract. This one must be uncovered.

[Lazamataz]

The Official Lazamataz Sometimes-Funny, Sometimes-Disturbing Ping List
200 Satisfied Customers!™

This is a somewhat speculative editorial, but it is based on inferences from the numbers in the two elections, as well as the now-known tendency of the Obama Administration to willfully engage in scandalous actions.

[Salvey]

This one must be uncovered.

It won't be uncovered by the complicit media, and the Republicans don't appear to have the will to do anything about it, so...

[Lazamataz]

Image posted for thumbnail on Facebook.

[catfish1957]

Make that 201, oh Warped one!!!!!

[OCMike]

The answer is simple:
The Conservative base no-showed and the Low Information Voter® crowd did show.

[Lazamataz]

Don’t be a Debbie Downer. ;)

[Lazamataz]

The Conservative base no-showed

I cannot agree. The conservative base hated Romney, but Obama was so utterly anti-American in thought and deed, that lots of us showed anyways. I know I did.

[Fast Moving Angel]

Not only that, but why were there entire precincts that went for Obama with not a single Romney vote? Not ONE? And why were there precincts that reported 105% votes counted of the total number of voters? And as long as we’re on “why” questions, why didn’t Romney refuse to concede until this was resolved ... and WHY didn’t the GOP loudly demand an investigation? (Never mind the last question ... /rhetorical)

[Lazamataz]

You are the 201st Satisfied Customer!™

[gorush]

[null and void]

Do I have to threaten you or anything to get on your ping list?

[Lazamataz]

It is not a ‘yelling at cloud’ moment, dear sir... it is much more a ‘warning of storms to hit’, in 2014.

[gorush]

I’m more pessimistic than you...but 100% on your side.

[tet68]

I vote for politically castrated.
Heck Barak, it beats being hanged for treason right?

[Lazamataz]

You are on it, twice actually. You complained another time so I added you again (without doing Democrat voter fraud and inflating my Customer Count)... XD

[Lazamataz]

LOL.. be careful...

[null and void]

Oh. Well. Alrighty, then.

[Norm Lenhart]

“I shall quiz you, dear reader: What was the single most surprising event of 2012, politically?”

Answer: Millions of Republicans and conservatives who spent their lives opposing lesser evils of the kind the GOP is famous for, suddenly going 180 and embracing them.

We see the result of that mistake in the current willingness of the GOP to go even FURTHER left and embrace GREATER evils.

Hey, they sold people on the lesser. Why not believe they would buy the greater? After all, Dems are worse right?

[freedumb2003]

I think I was waitlisted when I asked to be on your ping list a while back.

Can you let me know when the slot opens up?

Thanks