Thursday, March 31, 2011

I guess Obama is now in favor of toppling brutal dictators before he was against it.

Amazing what can happen when there is a president with a "D" by his name as opposed to one with a" R" can do in terms of waging "kenetic military action" in other countries. When Barack Obama was still a state senator back in Illinois in 2002, he said that

"using military force to topple a murderous dictator amounted to a “dumb war” and should be opposed

Of course Barack was referring at the time to the Iraq War waged by the other president with the "R" by his name. So is Barack's Obama's Excellent Kinetic Military Action Adventure a "dumb war" as well? Barack once claimed that "deposing Saddam militarily was not necessary, because Iraq posed no “direct threat” to the United State". So are we to suspend disbelief and believe that Gadaffi is a threat to us now? I'm seeing so many parallels with Obama's war of today with Bush's war nine years ago, it's scary. Of course, the true believers of the man who dances with teleprompters will never admit as much.

So what is the objective in Libya?
What is the exit strategy?
How much is this going to cost?
Are we going to "nation build"?

Talk about Deja Vu. These were also the same questions liberals asked Bush about the Iraq War. The questions however this time around aren't nearly as loud nor repeated as back then for some reason, go figure why. I have to wonder, did Obama "lie" about the reasons our military has to fight Gadaffi's forces in Libya? By us being in Libya, are we "creating more terrorists"? Is this all bringing back the good ol days yet? I wonder will John Kerry come out and say to Obama "This is the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time"? I snicker listening to Barry claim the military involvement has to do with "protecting the Syrian civilians". I guess we are suppose to have a nice big red sucker painted on our faces. I have a feeling that the people in Darfur, Uganda and Rwanda know more about oppression, genocide and brutal dictators more so then the people in Libya ever will.

So why aren't these countries on Obama's "liberation radar"? Oh snap, I forgot. These countries don't have oil deposits, never mind. This is what happens when people who are so loyal to Obama try and justify his actions in Libya while still condemning Bush for Iraq. They sound naive and hypocritical.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Whoopi plays the ever predictable race card against The Donald on The View.

Whoopi Goldberg is a disgusting, vile, pitiful, race baiting troll with no self redeeming qualities. Other then her obvious short comings, she's actually an ok person in my book. It never ceases to amaze me that every time she says something stupid out of her mouth, liberals always rally around the half wit to defend her. Whoopi should be presented with a Masters Degree in Race Baiting, because she's definitely a master at it on the subject. Back in 2008, John McCain was a guest on The View, and the topic of abortion and the constitution came up. McCain mentioned he would chose judges for the Supreme Court who would strictly interrupt the constitution if he was elected president. Out of left field, Whoopi injected a racial red herring implying that McCain would have supported her "going back to slavery or something, because he advocates constitutionalist judges being appointed to the Supreme Court. Only an absolute dumb ass or a racial manipulator could come up with a premise that if a person supports the strict interruption of the constitution, he or she must somehow support a return of slavery. Take your pick to what you believe best describes Whoopi Goldberg. Smart definitely isn't an option.

That was then, and this is now. Fast forward to the present. Last week, Donald Trump went on The View. He made some valid statements on the issue of Obama and his refusal to release his birth certificate so the issue can be put to rest once and for all. So once again, leave it to Whoopi to interject race into a topic that wasn't racial in nature.

Donald Trump phoned into the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends a few days later, and they talked about Whoopi's race baiting attempt to deflect the attention off of Trump's comments and make it about him.

Ever since Obama has become president. Obama's supporters have used the tactic of race to attack his opponents. At this point, the tactic is played out. Frankly, people have become immune to it now. It's like antibiotics that are no longer effective against a certain disease. The reason why liberals like Whoopi have to use the race card over and over and over and over is, because they can't dispute the message given by Obama's critics, so they have to tar and feather the messengers. It's as simple as that. This is why liberals call people who question Obama's birthplace as "birthers" in the first place. They can't give a logical answer to why he's going through such measures to keep it hidden. I'm sure all of the potential 2012 Republican candidates would have no problem at all releasing their birth certificates upon request. Donald should have mentioned to Whoopi that John McCain released his birth certificate, when their was doubt whether he was a U.S born citizen, because he was born on a military base in Panama. Donald should have asked Whoopi was racism at play in regards to McCain. I would have loved to see her stutter trying to respond to that question. Using race at this point by Obama loyalist is a clear sign of desperation. Why don't they just ask themselves the same logical question many people are asking and stop being loyal subservient brainless sheep.

Friday, March 25, 2011

When feeding time at the zoo "Burger King" goes wrong, the animals get nasty.

A black female and her friends decided to act like a bunch of monkeys in a zoo at a local Burger King in Panama Beach earlier this week. I guess you can take a person out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the person.The lady in the bikini standing on top of the counter is Kimesa Smith who attacked a Burger King employee with the Charity Jar from the counter, because "her Whooper Jr wasn't ready fast enough".

It's bad enough that Kimesa Smith and her friends were behaving like a bunch of shiftless monkeys, but Ms Smith isn't even a college student on Spring Break. She is a 31 year old mother of four children! I can almost expect drunken teenagers on spring break to act like this, but this is a mother acting like this. I've been to fast food places where my food wasn't ready in a timely manner, but it never dawned on me to ever act in the fashion these people acted. The real losers in all of this are Ms. Smith's kids. With her as their "parental role model" , their futures really aren't looking very bright. If you all are wondering whether Ms. Smith regretted acting like an ignorant fool, this is what she had to say. "We tore the Burger King up "I don't play no games."This is the Police report of the incident. I'm surprised she didn't blame the police for her being arrested due to her own actions. I have a gut feeling that her four children are from different fathers. Gee, I wonder what would make me come to that conclusion?

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Hopefully this is a sign for Obama in 2012

Call Security, we have an intruder trying to gain re entrance to the White House.

Did Hillary Clinton set up Obama for a historic foreign policy blunder?

Trusting the Clintons is like trusting a snake that has teeth that it won't bite you. You do so at your own risk. Obama's true believers believe Barry is the smartest person ever to become president. Of course, that should be taken at face value then laughed at. If I was running for president, I wouldn't be stupid enough to pick someone I knew who hated me and make him or her my Secretary of State. Well, that is of course what Barry did. Now it looks like that decision has come back to hunt him. Just as liberals claimed that Saddam Hussein was isolated and wasn't a threat in Iraq, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya prior to three weeks ago was the same situation. It wasn't until these so called rebels in Libya started protesting against Gaddafi that he started acting out against them. Hillary Clinton stressed the point that Gaddafi was killing his own people, and that he needed to be removed. Actually to Obama's credit, he wasn't concerned with removing Gaddafi at that time. He had to have known that any use of military action by him to try and remove Gaddafi would make him look like the biggest hypocrite around for his then blasting of former president Bush over the use of the military in Iraq. Somehow Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and the Office of Multilateral and Human Rights Director Samantha Power convinced Barry to take the lead in enforcing a "no fly zone" over Libya. There's a difference between taking advice on doing something and being pressured into doing something. Obama clearly was pressured into launching air strikes. So much for the Commander In Chief having a spine of steel. Because of his actions in Libya, Obama may have caused himself irreversible damage next year in his re election bid. He's lost the majority support of independent voters, but now he has lost a certain percentage of his die hard core kook supporters as well. I still have to wonder did Hillary set this up. Hillary came out last week and said that she wouldn't be serving a second term as Secretary of State. I know she isn't planning on challenging Obama next year, but who knows what she is thinking about possibly 2016. Prior to the situation in Libya, Obama's foreign policy could be described as pathetic. Now, it can definitely be described as weak to clueless. Hillary has painted Obama into such a corner, there aren't enough words on Obama's teleprompter that can correct the situation for him. He was so concerned with getting the UN's approval for the air strikes, he didn't even bother briefing congress on what he was planning. That has gotten members of both parties ticked off at him. This is what Democratic Congressman Dennis "The Red Menace" Kucinich of Ohio had to say.

Dennis of course stopped short of calling for Obama's impeachment, surprise, surprise. As I said, a lot of the true believers are very upset over the air strikes. The best person to speak out against Obama actions in Libya should be "himself".

Even if Obama is able to sucker NATO, the French or Great Britan into taking the lead in this "operation". The ultimate outcome could lead to one of if not the biggest foreign policy misjudgments in a century, even surpassing Carter and Iran. When the riots first started in Egypt, progressives didn't really ask themselves the question of "who really are the protesters"? All they cared about was that they were against Mubarak, so they had to be just seeking freedom. There are stories coming out that are showing that Islamic hardliners had a role in the organization of the protests. With Libya, there are growing concerns that Al Qaida is embedded to an unknown degree into the rebel movement if not in charge of the movement fighting against Gaddafi forces. So lets say that the rebels defeat Gaddafi, and it turns out that Al Qaida was behind the rebel movement. Obama would be responsible for the Islamic terrorist organization gaining a stronghold in an oil producing country bordering Saudi Arabia. Al Qaida has come out in support of the rebels. Gaddafi isn't a Muslim extremist. Yes, he is a kook but not a Muslim fanatic one. Al Qaida didn't dare try and face off against Gaddafi out in the open, because support would be on the side of Gaddafi due to the people seeing Al Queda as being the bigger threat then Gaddafi ever could be. So Al Qaida decides to use the Trojan horse approach of dressing themselves up as Libyan rebels who only are looking for" freedom" from the oppressive rule of Gaddafi. The old saying goes that sometimes the cure can cause more pain and suffering to a person then the actual illness. Way to go Barry. I said Obama was the second term of Carter for a reason.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Obama isn't loved around the world as much as our media would have people believe.

Liberals told us that with the election of Barack Obama, our nation was going to be "respected" once again. As with most things liberals say, it turned out to be a lie. Obama wasn't warmly received back in 2008, when he visited Germany as a presidential candidate. Our media reported otherwise. The media made it appear that if the entire German population was united and chanting "Yes We Can". The media has done a fairly good job of presenting the illusion of Obama as being loved by most of the citizens in our country and around the globe. There is a reason why many people are turning away from the mainstream media. The national media has lost all credibility. Back in August, Gallup conducted a poll that showed that most Americans do not trust their Television News nor the content in the newspapers. Journalism has been replaced with "activist journalism". Here's an example of what I mean. The media in our country has reported that Obama and his family are going to visit Rio De Janerio Brazil tomorrow. This is yet another vacation by Obama which he is calling a "business trip". Obama was schedule to give a public speech in the historic plaza known as Cinelandia in the heart of Rio. The speech by Obama has been canceled the U.S Embassy in Brasilla said. The reason why it was canceled is due to reports Thursday that Anti Obama flags were hanging along the roadside Obama was going to be traveling. The real story was that it was canceled due to more then just "anti Obama" banners being hung.

Contrary to Obama's own hype, "he isn't the one the world has been waiting for".
If anyone has seen this footage on the network news, please let me know.

Our media had no problem at all showing the protests from people from other countries protesting then President George Bush. The media hated Bush, so it was a pleasure for them to report it. Obama is a different story. They have a vested interest in protecting him, so anti Obama videos like these will never be shown on the ABC, NBC and CBS Nightly News. You can also forget about them ever seeing the light of day on MSNBC and CNN. It's just another reminder why our media can't and shouldn't be trusted. Most Americans have figured that out. To further illustrate my point, here's the Associated Press reporting on Obama playing Soccer with some kids in Rio instead.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Two Michigan Democrats Indicted For Election Fraud for trying to get fake Tea Party Candidates on Ballot.

This is just too priceless! I remember back in 2000, liberals loyal to Al Gore swore up and down that George Bush stole the national election via Florida. Of course, there was never any proof of "voter intimidation" or fraud. There is proof however of voter intimidation that occurred in Philadelphia last year by the New Black Panthers aka Obama supporters.

The claim of voter intimidation did make for one of the most effective tools by Democratic leaders and strategists to rally up their bases in future elections. We can not have the voters "disenfranchised" again. "Every vote must count". Disenfranchised became a household word. The factual history of voter fraud has been rooted in the Democratic Party for decades. From the Richard Daley machine in Chicago to the ballot stuffing in New Jersey by union operatives, Democrats know how to win election by "hook and by crook", more so by crook. We've seen how Al Franken "won" the U.S Senate seat in Minnesota over Norm Coleman. Norm Coleman was screwed by the state Democratic machine.

Ballots just kept mysteriously appearing for Franken after the election. I'm not even going to get into the mischief of ACORN. Their actions are well known at this point. This story in Michigan takes the cake, which is hard to believe. The former Oakland County Charmian of the Democratic Party and another high up Democratic official are facing felony charges for trying to place fake tea party candidates on the ballot last year in order to dilute the Republican vote.

These are the people who never want the military votes counted, and these are the people who run to other states like little children acting out, when they don't get their way. I never want to ever hear a Democrat spew on about the issue of voter fraud. Unless they are talking about their own, they need to just sit in the corner and be quiet. Based on their long history of voter fraud, they have zero credibility on the matter.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Eric Holder and the National NAACP believes blacks are too stupid to pass entrance tests in order to become police officers and firefighters.

If a white supremacist said to a black person that the black person is intellectually inferior to him and wasn't qualified for the job that the black person is currently holding, would the white supremacist have a valid point? Most people more then likely would say no. Unfortunately thanks to the actions of certain people who claim to be "looking out" for best interests of blacks, that answer isn't so cut and dry anymore, and here's why. Liberals believe that blacks and other non white ethnic groups are incapable of doing for themselves. They believe that these groups will always need their "help" in order to have an "even playing field". The way liberals "help" blacks and other groups really doesn't help them. It only gives more fuel for white racists to promote their non whites are inferior propaganda. It helps to strengthen and embolden their claims. In Ohio, the Dayton Police Department was ordered by Eric Holder's Department of Justice to "lower" the percentage points allowed to pass the Dayton Police Entrance exam.

Lowering the bar does nothing to help blacks. All it does it give the impression that mediocrity is a substitution for excellence. In the real world, a failing grade isn't a passing grade! Once again under liberal logic, the concern is about "QUANTITY OVER QUALITY". So by the Department of Justice ordering the passing grades on the civil entrance exams across the country be lowered, is this an admittance by Eric Holder and his DOJ that blacks are intellectually inferior to white candidates? From my perspective, I can't come to any other conclusion. What's sad and despicable is that the National NAACP has come out and defended Eric Holder's actions in ordering the lowering of passing scores. It appears that the only person that wants blacks to rightful earn their positions on the Dayton Police on merit is the Dayton NAACP President Derrick Foward.

I'm scratching my head trying to comprehend how exactly can a test or exam be "racist". Does the exam wears a Klan hood or something? It's one of the dumbest comments I've ever heard, and I've heard a lot of dumb comments in my time by liberals. Once again it comes back to the core argument that they are saying but won't say out loud. They believe that blacks can not comprehend the same information that whites can, period. So are we to believe that learning is discriminatory? The NAACP is suppose to stand for the National Association for the ADVANCEMENT of Colored People. Where is the advancement part in all of this? I've been verbally challenged by liberals, when I say that liberalism has done more harm to blacks in this country then what KKK could have only have hoped of doing. The actions by Eric Holder and his support by the National NAACP completely justified my claim 100%. How could it not? Let's say that black applicants for the Dayton Police Department still can't pass the test even with the lower passing requirements, will Holder demand the passing mark be lowered even more? I haven't even addressed the ramifications of police departments across the country being staffed with unqualified personnel that were hired on affirmative action mandates. The goal is to always have the "best and the brightest" who can do the job not the other way around. Should public safety be jeopardized for the sake of Affirmative Action? The Dayton story is why I oppose Affirmative Action based on race. With A.A, it's always about the skin color of the person rather then the person's qualifications for the job. The exams for the Dayton Police previously required a 66% on Part 1 and and 72% on part 2. In a nutshell, an applicant could pass with the equivalence of a D grade on Part 1 and a C grade on Part 2!! The passing requirements were already low to begin with! Once again, the wizards of smart in an attempt help blacks have actual not only hurt them by not wanting them to reach their fullest potential in learning, they have given the perfect propaganda to use by white racists who believe blacks and other minorities are already dumb to begin with. As usual with liberalism, no good deed goes unpunished.

Sunday, March 13, 2011

When did Muslims become classified as a race?

Apparently to some liberals like Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC and NBC News, A Muslim and dark skinned Middle Eastern person are interchangeable. I hear this claim a lot by libs. If a person is against Islam, the knee jerk reaction by them is to call that person a racist. Andre Mitchell had on her show Friday Republican Congressman Dan Lungren from California. They were talking about Congressman Peter King's hearing on radical Islam in America. Andrea's initial statement during the interview made herself look very stupid, but Congressman Lungren response just really made her look even that much worse. Since this interview took place on MSNBC, the damage to Mitchell will more then likely be minimum due to so few people who actually watch MSNBC. This interview still however highlights just how clueless this woman really is.

I guess it must have escaped Andrea that there are white Muslims in the world also. It was funny how Andrea brought up the names of all the racially segregated caucuses in order to some how make a point about an issue that had nothing to do about race. For the racially segregated caucuses to come out and speak out against King's hearing should speak more in the negative about them, then it ever could about the hearing itself. The true story that went right on pass Andrea's nose is the fact that there is open racial segregation going on in 2011 in America in congress. So much for journalistic awareness on Mitchell's part.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

Your public sector unions at work!

Friday, March 11, 2011

Senator Rand Paul cleverly shows the hypocrisy of the left on the issue of being "pro choice".

Liberals claim that on the issue of abortion conservatives want to "limit the freedom of women". It's funny how liberals claim to be about freedom when it comes to killing the unborn, but they don't embrace "consumer freedoms". Consumer freedoms are the freedoms of citizens to have a choice in what they buy. These same people only want us using mercury filled, curly shaped light bulbs, they don't want us to have the freedom to buy SUVs, they want us to use only low pressure shower heads, low flow toilets etc. Yesterday at a hearing of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Senator Rand Paul explained to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy Kathleen Hogan how hypocritical the Obama administration is when it comes to being "pro choice".

The limiting of consumer choices has nothing to do with saving the environment. It has everything to do with the government creating a fake premise in which they can use in order to control the people. If you think I am wrong, answer me this question please. What right did the federal government have in ordering the discontinuing of the manufacturing of the incandescent light bulb? Was the incandescent light bulb a public safety issue? No it wasn't. Now however, the federal government just made the buying of light bulbs a public safety issue going forward. If I had the "choice", I would buy the incandescent light bulbs proven not to have the ability to harm me if they break. I guess I don't have the choice anymore now do I?

Tuesday, March 08, 2011

Palin can see $ 5.00 a gallon gasoline all the way from Iowa.

The people who suffer from "SPODS" aka Sarah Palin Obsession Disorder Syndrome may become a little bit more deranged after what I am about to say. I remember back in 2008, when oil was over $4.50 a barrel and gasoline prices were well over $4.00 a gallon for regular. Sarah Palin said three words that sent liberals running around in circles like a dog chasing it's tail.

Those words were "drill baby drill". When stupidity mocks common sense, one has to stand back for a moment and scratch his or her heads in bewilderment. What Palin said on the campaign trail made absolute sense. The average person doesn't need to have a college degree in economics in order to understand the ultra simplistic equation of "supply and demand". Palin like most people with common sense knew back in 08 that if the supply of oil on the market was increased higher then the demand for it, PRICES WOULD DROP and vice versa. Well they dismissed what she said then, but now they might have a problem. The perfect storm that ushered Obama into the White House may be forming to do the same for her in 2012 via Iowa in February of 2012 and high gasoline prices. I read an intriguing story by Scott Conroy over at Real Clear Politics yesterday. The title of the story is "Could $5 Per Gallon Gas be what Palin needs". Scott's main theme is that out of all the potential 2012 GOP candidates, she is the the best potential candidate to benefit from the high gas prices and most qualified to speak about the solutions on energy price stability and policy . Romney, Cain and Trump all are successful private sector business people, but energy isn't their expertise. If oil prices continue to be rise at nose bleed, wallet draining levels going into January of 2012 one month before the February 6th Iowa Caucus, I don't see how Palin could be stopped from that point forward. I'm sure the other candidates will echo similar sentiments, but Palin would have more credibility, because she was making the claim for domestic drilling ever since she came onto the national. There is a statement from Obama back in 2008 in which he said that he was alright with gasoline being at $ 4.00, he just had a problem with how fast it got there. If a candidate Palin was to ever ask Obama what did he mean, when he made that statement, Obama would be finished. Also, media tabloid attacks against Palin would have little impact on her with five dollar gasoline then it would if it was at or below $ 3.00. At five dollars a gallon, people are more concerned about who can give them relief, that's it. I did a internet search just for kicks, and I used the keywords, oil prices and sarah palin, and I cam across similar stories like the one Scott Conroy wrote about how high gas prices potentially benefiting Palin. Obama is now talking about releasing some oil from the Strategic Oil Reserves. Palin has come out and said that it wouldn't work in bringing down the prices, and she is right. Contrast what Palin's position on energy exploration to increase supply to bring down gas prices versus Obama's idea of "inflating your tires and getting tune ups"?

Palin versus Obama on the issue of energy, who sounds like they have the best solution?

Sunday, March 06, 2011

The Hail Mary pass by Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton in trying to smear Governor Walker as a "racist".

Almost every tactic by the left has been used in trying to demonize Governor Scott Walker. The one tactic that hasn't been used by the left on Walker up until now is to call him a "racist". Well now their predictable smear tactic has finally been levied against Governor Walker by the two monkey grinders Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton. Apparently, the misfits are upset that Scott Walker wants to make funding available to help impoverished kids in Wisconsin to be able to afford to attend private schools. Al & Ed believe that this would harm black children, because those children would never attend those schools and funding would be taken away from their "education".

I believe that children who have the potential to excel shouldn't be shackled and held prisoner in, failing and dangerous public schools. I understand how progressives think better then they do. What Sharpton and Schultz REALLY are upset about is the thought of public money not circulating from the Wisconsin education budget to the public teachers then to the teacher unions in dues then finally into the Democratic party pockets in contributions. As always, follow the money. The only way a person could buy into this conspiracy is if he or she was high on Charlie Sheen. Let's remove reality for a moment and say that Scott Walker's budget is somehow racist toward blacks in Wisconsin, there is just one small problem with the assertions by Ed and Al. I did some research on the black population of Wisconsin, and I discovered that the black population is only 6.2%!!!!! The population of Wisconsin that is white is 89.4! Anytime the race card is used, it is a clear sign of desperation by liberals. Ed and Sharpton can't defend to the American people the actions of the Public Employee Unions, so they decided to use the Saul Alinsky tactic of trying to deflect the argument away from the public unions and make the target about Scott Walker in an attempt to polarize and isolate him as a racist, anti union, conservative bad guy. Of course their attempt failed big time, because only a liberal minded lemming would buy into it. It's still fun to watch though.

Saturday, March 05, 2011

Public Sector Unions vs We the People.

This new divide doesn't have anything to do with what a rich CEO is given as compensation at a private publicly traded company. This has nothing to do with what the compensation packages are for the executives who work at an average fortune 500 corporation. This has nothing to do with the "wealthy 2% of Americans supposedly exploiting the other 98% in order to make and retain their wealth. This has to do with a certain percentage of Public Sector Employees and their unions believing that they are entitled to make more, have more and retire with more then the average tax payer private sector employee.

This is what Ronald Reagan said about the Air Traffic Controllers who put Americans at risk by striking in August of 1981. The government isn't like the private sector. He made that point known.

Tuesday, March 01, 2011

Congressman Allen West educated a Muslim from CAIR about the religion of peace

Congressman Allen West is without a doubt a rising star within the conservative movement. He has a strong understanding of the constitution, and he has a great command articulating his thoughts. I said before that I would pay money to see a one night only debate between Allen West and Barack Obama. It wouldn't be pretty for Obama for obvious reasons. Awhile back, Allen made some comments about Islam and the Koran that rubbed the Islamic advocacy group CAIR "Council on American-Islamic Relations" the wrong way. West didn't say anything derogatory about Islam, he merely presented the facts about the faith and some of the people who practice it. Well anyways, the other day a member of CAIR with his Koran in hand decided to show up at an event where congressman West was speaking in an attempt to try and embarrass him. Lets just say that the person from CAIR picked the wrong person to try and wage a verbal jihad against.

A few weeks prior, Congressman West was on the the Lawrence O'Donnell show on MSNBC. Allen had Lawrence on the defensive throughout the entire interview over recent comments Allen made about Obama. It appeared that Lawrence was actually offended, and he asked West to apologize. Congressman Allen West is definitely the real deal!!!