According to an excerpt from a new book by Bob Woodward (titled "Obama's Wars") , a detached Obama states that the U.S. can absorb a terrorist attack. So which city is he willing to allow to be destroyed? Throughout our nation's history the mistreatment of U.S. citizens abroad was a serious business, but now an attack on one of our cities, and likely the death of millions of citizens, is something Obama has no particular problem with; it can be "absorbed".
So a dirty-nuke attack on Kansas City, Denver or Minneapolis is no problem for Obama, while George Bush is constantly made to appear an ogre and warmonger because he eventually went to war as a result of the (easily absorbed?) destruction of the World Trade Center and the killing of 3000 occupants of those buildings, most of whom were Americans.
Our president is mentally unhinged with his hate for America, and the economic destruction his policies have caused this nation have now led to his willingness to see its physical destruction as well. In fact, I believe Obama would welcome a terrorist attack because this would allow him to declare a military emergency, take absolute military control of the nation and halt the next two elections, thus assuring his total and unopposed control and the forced imposition of his disastrous policies. Remember that his administration works under the philosophy of not letting a crisis go to waste, and a dirty-nuke attack would certainly create a crisis that he could use to his advantage. Obama is an evil, immoral, anti-American man, and the fool liberals in congress who support him and his policies must be defeated in November or it's our death, economically and physically. We need a straight party-line Republican win in November.
