Intimidating Eyeballs

[Flanders]

I did not watch the debate; so highlighting Hussein’s physical antics comes as a pleasant surprise:

Barack Obama is being criticized for sporting a “vicious” Obamastare during last night’s debate with Mitt Romney, making the president lose his aura of likability.

Eyeballing someone to death is a street punk’s favorite trick. Intimidating eyeballs are usually accompanied by tight jaws.

The motive behind eyeball intimidation is found in the general belief that a liar cannot look anyone in the eye. In fact, I never met a liar who did not look me in the eye. The trick for liars is to lie while looking you in the eye. It’s actually a moral thing. The stare alone implies superior morality. The stare is supposed to convey inferiority to the person being scorched by the starer.

To be fair there is a possibility Hussein sees himself as Foghorn Leghorn “Look me in the eye, boy, I say look me in the eye when I’m talking to you.”

In any event, it comes as no surprise that Hussein had to fall back on his gutter training since he cannot tell the truth about anything. Here again, I want to be fair. Maybe he learned eyeball intimidation at Harvard.

Happily, Romney did not fall for it:

“That was a slam-dunk observation,” radio host Rush Limbaugh said this afternoon. “Just the split screen. Just Obama’s stare.”

“There was a point in this debate where Obama was staring Romney down viciously – you could see it on the split screen – and it did not distract Romney … at all. He was jumping in Obama’s chili at the time and it didn’t stop him, this attempt to intimidate. It didn’t work at all.”

President slammed for vicious 'Obamastare'
'The media can't sell the Obama they saw last night'
Published: 9 hours ago
by JOE KOVACS

President slammed for vicious ‘Obamastare’

Finally, I always related eyeball intimidation to politically correct speech. One is punished for incorrect speech, while eyeball intimidation is not only acceptable it transforms the intimidator into a paragon of virtue. One question: Is it okay for white Americans to use eyeball intimidation on black Americans?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I did not watch the debate; so highlighting Hussein’s physical antics comes as a pleasant surprise:

Barack Obama is being criticized for sporting a “vicious” Obamastare during last night’s debate with Mitt Romney, making the president lose his aura of likability.

Eyeballing someone to death is a street punk’s favorite trick. Intimidating eyeballs are usually accompanied by tight jaws.

The motive behind eyeball intimidation is found in the general belief that a liar cannot look anyone in the eye. In fact, I never met a liar who did not look me in the eye. The trick for liars is to lie while looking you in the eye. It’s actually a moral thing. The stare alone implies superior morality. The stare is supposed to convey inferiority to the person being scorched by the starer.

To be fair there is a possibility Hussein sees himself as Foghorn Leghorn “Look me in the eye, boy, I say look me in the eye when I’m talking to you.”

In any event, it comes as no surprise that Hussein had to fall back on his gutter training since he cannot tell the truth about anything. Here again, I want to be fair. Maybe he learned eyeball intimidation at Harvard.

Happily, Romney did not fall for it:

“That was a slam-dunk observation,” radio host Rush Limbaugh said this afternoon. “Just the split screen. Just Obama’s stare.”

“There was a point in this debate where Obama was staring Romney down viciously – you could see it on the split screen – and it did not distract Romney … at all. He was jumping in Obama’s chili at the time and it didn’t stop him, this attempt to intimidate. It didn’t work at all.”

President slammed for vicious 'Obamastare'
'The media can't sell the Obama they saw last night'
Published: 9 hours ago
by JOE KOVACS

President slammed for vicious ‘Obamastare’

Finally, I always related eyeball intimidation to politically correct speech. One is punished for incorrect speech, while eyeball intimidation is not only acceptable it transforms the intimidator into a paragon of virtue. One question: Is it okay for white Americans to use eyeball intimidation on black Americans?

One question? And that is it, huh?

Idiot.

 

[Flanders]

huh?

To blastoff: The topic is obviously too complex for a dumbbell to come with up more than a “Huh.” I suspect that is the same response you utter in amazement every time you finish counting your toes.

 

[AquaAthena]

I did not watch the debate; so highlighting Hussein’s physical antics comes as a pleasant surprise:

Barack Obama is being criticized for sporting a “vicious” Obamastare during last night’s debate with Mitt Romney, making the president lose his aura of likability.

Eyeballing someone to death is a street punk’s favorite trick. Intimidating eyeballs are usually accompanied by tight jaws.

The motive behind eyeball intimidation is found in the general belief that a liar cannot look anyone in the eye. In fact, I never met a liar who did not look me in the eye. The trick for liars is to lie while looking you in the eye. It’s actually a moral thing. The stare alone implies superior morality. The stare is supposed to convey inferiority to the person being scorched by the starer.

To be fair there is a possibility Hussein sees himself as Foghorn Leghorn “Look me in the eye, boy, I say look me in the eye when I’m talking to you.”

In any event, it comes as no surprise that Hussein had to fall back on his gutter training since he cannot tell the truth about anything. Here again, I want to be fair. Maybe he learned eyeball intimidation at Harvard.

Happily, Romney did not fall for it:

“That was a slam-dunk observation,” radio host Rush Limbaugh said this afternoon. “Just the split screen. Just Obama’s stare.”

“There was a point in this debate where Obama was staring Romney down viciously – you could see it on the split screen – and it did not distract Romney … at all. He was jumping in Obama’s chili at the time and it didn’t stop him, this attempt to intimidate. It didn’t work at all.”

President slammed for vicious 'Obamastare'
'The media can't sell the Obama they saw last night'
Published: 9 hours ago
by JOE KOVACS

President slammed for vicious ‘Obamastare’

Finally, I always related eyeball intimidation to politically correct speech. One is punished for incorrect speech, while eyeball intimidation is not only acceptable it transforms the intimidator into a paragon of virtue. One question: Is it okay for white Americans to use eyeball intimidation on black Americans?

It was a threatening stare for the duration of the debate. Couldn't you just see the primal intimidation behind it? However, "All's fair in love and war?"

Another reason for it could be the bad press he received during the first debate for looking downward most of the time, as if imply, "not listening...don't want or need to be here."

 

[LoneLaugher]

huh?

To blastoff: The topic is obviously too complex for a dumbbell to come with up more than a “Huh.” I suspect that is the same response you utter in amazement every time you finish counting your toes.

Very weak. My condolences.

 

[Flanders]

Even the accomplished liar could not make his intimidating eyeballs look the father of Tyrone Woods in the eye:

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods gave his life in Benghazi. His father called into the Lars Larson radio show to discuss his son's final moments and his concern about the way the Benghazi massacre has been handled by the Obama administration. He expresses that he is not angry, but he wants answers.

XXXXX​

Mr. Woods explained that when the bodies of the murdered victims arrived, President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Colin Powell were there. The families of the victims were all in separate areas, and when President Obama came to him, Woods described the President as saying, "I'm sorry," but not looking directly at him. He said, "It was not a sincere, 'I'm sorry that your son died'; it was totally insincere, more of a whining type, 'I'm Sorry'." He continued to say that shaking Obama's hand was like shaking the hand of a "dead fish."

XXXXX​

Mr. Woods ended the call by explaining that he never called into a talk show before, but when he heard that the White House and some people in the military knew about the attack... that someone had to say, "don't go rescue them." He said, "we need to know who gave that command, 'don't go rescue them'."

As to Hillary Clinton:

Charles Woods described Hillary Clinton's reaction to him. He said that Hillary came over and hugged Woods and shook his hand, but she "did not appear to be one bit sincere at all."

Tyrone Woods' Father Speaks out about His Son
October 24, 2012 10:45 PM EDT
by Renee Nal

Tyrone Woods' Father Speaks out about His Son | Gather

Here’s the avenue of inquiry the MSM should be following: No decision is ever made without first considering the effect it will have on the United Nations. The question is: How much consideration did the Administration give to the United Nations if any? Before dismissing my take watch this video:

Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal Basis' For Action In Syria - YouTube

Admittedly, Senator Sessions was talking about a full scale war; however, based on Panetta’s own words it is fair to say that neither he nor anyone else high up in the chain of command would move to save our people under attack without first getting the UN’s permission.

 

[Flanders]

What a load of crap:

Panetta: Benghazi Attack Was Terrorism - YouTube

Panetta: US lacked early info on Benghazi attack

Panetta admits it was a terrorist attack then explains why he did NOT send military help as soon as the attack began. Perhaps Panetta and Dempsey thought the attack was a trap planned by General Rommel who had heavy armor in reserve:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nXsg_5RxdeQ]Erwin Rommel and his Afrika Korps - YouTube[/ame]​

One thing is abundantly clear from Panetta’s comments. Neither he nor anyone in the Administration believed the military could win the fight; so they went for the political victory at the United Nations. If he says the military could have won easily the question becomes “Then why the hell didn’t you send in the marines?”

I do not care what justification the Administration offers. Nobody can convince me that so-called International law was not the deciding factor for holding the military in check while Americans were being killed on TV.

Parenthetically, in 1993 the United Nations had its filthy hands all over the decisions in Mogadishu (Black Hawk Down).