ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

So What Is A "Smidgen"

Updated on February 4, 2014

The definition of the word must be very different in Chicago than it is anywhere else. Yesterday Obama, right in front of the whole nation, told Bill O'Reilly that there wasn't even a "smidgen of corruption" involved in the IRS scandal everyone but him seems to know exists. Nope not even a smidgen. That whole interview consisted of Obama again failing to answer direct questions with direct answers.

Listen to the video and compare it to reality concerning everything we know and that Obama stated as fact. If this isn't definitive proof that he is a pathological liar I don't know what would be. He consistently lied again throughout the entire interview, not just the IRS segment.

The biggest mistake this country has made was electing the biggest political fraud to ever attempt to run a country.

Obama kept citing the "numerous hearings" that he contends clears his administration from any wrong doing. First of all, the hearings aren't over by any stretch of his imagination. O'Reilly didn't ask the 64K dollar question that should have been his follow on once Obama uttered that "not a smidgen" nonsense. Know what it is? It's so simple even a 5th grader would know. The next question should have been:

If that is true why did Lois Lerner take the 5th amendment before the Congressional hearing that resulted once the corruption surfaced?

That remains to be answered and I am sure will have to be answered ultimately. She is working on some sort of immunity deal evidently and people who aren't guilty of anything shouldn't need immunity. Obama, having gone through law school, has to know that too.

So off i went to Merriam-Webster to get the full definition of a "smidgen" and here it is:

a small amount : bit <a smidgen of salt> <a smidgen of common sense>

So anyone who has followed this particular scandal, with even a smidgen of common sense, knows Obama was evading answering the question and lying through his teeth.

Rather than tell the truth, which many people of this nation expect any President to do, Obama then reverted back to blaming FOX News for the continued coverage they provide as he continues to attempt to bury the scandals in more tap dancing lies to bury those scandals his own administration. created. Fox News didn't cause those 4 Americans in Benghazi to die. It didn't compel Obama to tell his numerous Obamacare lies. It didn't sic the IRS on conservative political groups and remain trying to do the same thing using a different methodology. Nor did FOX News run guns across our southern border which resulted in the death of Brian Terry.

Obama pulled out his convenient whipping boy to deny his own created scandals and blamed "O'Reilly and his news channel" for his continued problems telling the truth. Obama attributed the IRS's unlawful conduct to "bone headed mistakes" so let look at some facts.

Ever heard of ProPublica Obama? They lean to the left as a group of journalists and have admitted that the IRS had harassed conservative tax-exempt groups during the 2012 election cycle. How were they aware of that? They were given nine (9) confidential applications from conservative groups who were pending tax exempt status. ProPublica noted that what was turned over to them "not supposed to be made public." It further noted at the time that "no unapproved applications from liberal groups were sent to the group.

Here's What He Said At The Time. We Haven't Arrived There Yet Barack.

Not even a smidgen huh? Obama deals in "I'm the president and I said it's so." I deal in FACTS.

Obama figures the passage of time and his continued mishandling of the executive branch will make it all better rather than worse. I would suggest to him that he come clean. O'Reilly gave him and opportunity and he blew it.

Obama has a future as a shape shifter I know. The story seems to change as the continued lies are formulated in his twisted narcissistic brain. A question was posed by one citizen and it was again interesting how selective Obama's memory is and how he is a master at pathological lying. A woman in California asked why Obama thought it was necessary to fundamentally change America. He must have forget he made the statement in the video below so take a listen again and we'll go on.

I keep asking myself the same question as I've gone about watching him run this country into the ground..

He Never Said This Either I Suppose?

Even Though Those Were His Words Here's His Dodge...

Obviously Ms. LaMaster, I and more and more people have paid attention to Obama "fundamentally changing" this country. Those were his words so he's changed his mind? His actions don't display that change of mind or attitude. The fact, Ms. LaMaster, is that Obama hates this country and despises everything it has stood for and should continue to stand for.

Smidgens to Obama must be different from common folks out here in America. There were no smidgens? There's not a "smidgen" of truth that he was told that Benghazi was a terrorist attack? Also not smidgen of truth that the NSA is listening in on Americans? There certainly is not a smidgen of truth that he heard one word that Rev Wright preached for 20 year? He was a sleep in church we're to believe? Probably not a smidgen of corruption about the gun running going on during Fast & Furious huh? FOX News just made all of those things up.

But you were stupid enough to believe that "if you want to keep your health insurance you can" were you? I have to admit that O'Reilly had more patience than I have listening to Obama move his lips in lie after lie.

I know this last video will be new for some and a refresher for others. Tonight on FOX O'Reilly will reveal more of the interview that we weren't able to watch yesterday. He had some time constraints due to the Super Bowl but since that wasn't really a game maybe the entire interview would have been a good idea. The Factor airs tonight.

Mind sharing this? I didn't think so...

As Always,

The Frog Prince

What Was Aired Yesterday Prior To The Super Bowl


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Stu 3 years ago

      Frog - regarding impeachment, a year ago I would have said it's a waste of time, because the Senate would never convict. Now I'm not so sure. If the House indicts, Senators that vote to acquit might lose their seats at reelection time because Obama is becoming so toxic in the public view. As you say, Obama runs a risk no matter how careful he is with his words, because his actions are starting to catch up with him.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      TSAD 3 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

      Well, I bin thinkin 'bout this an y'all got it all wrong.

      Our beloved President, he couldn't have meant there wasn't a smidgen of corruption, Dat dare mean ole'reilly, he is always interruptin. He didn't let'm finish. If he did I'm sure Obama wudda said "there ain't a smidgen of evidence, it's more like a waterfall, a sunami, an avalanche of dem dar corruptions" but he can't say that caws of da ongoin investigasheon.

      Besides what's he know 'bout smidgens? Why he's a big thinker, look at the money he spends on vacations, golf, parties the debt his elections...why he wouldn't know a smidgen if it was smaller than a jolly rancher and bigger than a paper clip.

      Sorry, that was redneck Tsad Jatko, he comes out sometimes, I just can't control him. :-)

    • teaches12345 profile image

      Dianna Mendez 3 years ago

      Just a smidgen, reminds me of when the doctor tells you, "this may hurt a bit." Ouch! Words can be easily said, the meanings are sometimes unclear. Great reflection, Frog Prince.

    • The Frog Prince profile image

      The Frog Prince 3 years ago from Arlington, TX

      Stu - He runs that risk one way or the other.

    • profile image

      Stu 3 years ago

      Obama simply has to lie. He is up to his neck in so many scandals, if he told the truth he'd run the risk of impeachment and/or criminal prosecution. He's worse than a mafia Don; at least so-called "men of respect" don't make any bones about what they are. But Obama wants us all to believe he is honest. This voter isn't fooled a bit.

    • Minnetonka Twin profile image

      Linda Rogers 3 years ago from Minnesota

      He really does lie easily which is pretty scary. He wont take any accountability and has no problem lying about it. Things can't get any worse in America.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      TSAD 3 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

      Well seems comments are slow today - how about this

      Benghazi's on topic, right?

    • tsadjatko profile image

      TSAD 3 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

      oh...and he can't. :-) start with himself that is, so he can't hold anyone accountable even if he wanted to. Catch 22.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      TSAD 3 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

      Will It's not "admission of his own incompetence in hiring such people" that he's afraid of. They're all in cahoots with him, cohorts in crime. There is ineptitude but that is what you get with criminals, liars cheats and thieves. What he he will not admit to is any corruption because he is the architect of the corruption and he'd be eaten by his own if he gave them up. Frog has it right - to hold anyone accountable he has to start with himself.

    • breakfastpop profile image

      breakfastpop 3 years ago

      This man does not possess a smidgen of integrity. He uses lies and misinformation to keep his train wreck of an administration on track to the fundamental transformation of what was once a great nation. Up, interesting and awesome.

    • The Frog Prince profile image

      The Frog Prince 3 years ago from Arlington, TX

      Will - He could start by firing himself. Just a thought.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      He will not admit to any corruption or ineptitude in his administration, and he refuses to fire anyone, even if they have proven to be corrupt or extraordinarily incompetent like Kathleen Sebelius or Hillary Clinton.

      Why is that? Would doing so be an admission of his own incompetence in hiring such people?

      He would not answer that question.