What would Bush have said about the riots in Iran?
"To the people of Iran: You are rich in culture and talent. You have a right to live under a government that listens to your wishes, respects your talents, and allows you to build better lives for your families. Unfortunately, your government denies you these opportunities, and threatens the peace and stability of your neighbors. So we call on the regime in Tehran to heed your will, and to make itself accountable to you. The day will come when the people of Iran have a government that embraces liberty and justice, and Iran joins the community of free nations. And when that good day comes, you will have no better friend than the United States of America."
"Just having the appearance of someone who might possibly vote for an opponent of Barack Obama could land them on the President's enemies list where proxies do the dirty work. Political appointees in the Justice Department killed a six-month investigation by career DOJ lawyers into the most blatant voter intimidation case in 40 years. Last November, jack-booted, uniformed, baton-wielding thugs from the New Black Panther Party calling themselves "security" obstructed a Philadelphia polling location and behaved in an intimidating manner toward white voters.
Days after dismissing charges against the menacing thugs, the Justice Department moved in the opposite direction by blocking responsible steps to stem voter fraud. The DOJ barred the administrative procedures Georgia authorities put into place – under federal court guidance -- to verify voter registrations. The DOJ claimed the procedures violated the rights of minority voters.
. . . Obama's lawyers are attempting to financially ruin individuals party to the most absurd soap opera involving the 44th president. There is unabated controversy regarding his birth, citizenship and foreign travel. Obama could immediately silence his critics by authorizing the release of his original birth certificate and passport. One has to wonder what could possibly be in either document that has caused Obama to wage a fierce and expensive legal battle to keep the files secreted. Aside from Joan Rivers, nearly every American would willingly make their birth certificate available and Obama's stubborn refusal to do so only adds to the controversy.
. . . The targeting of perceived political enemies by the Obama Administration has grown from mere individuals to entire groups. Evidence emerged that a common thread among the list of 789 Chrysler dealerships ordered closed by the White House is that the owners donated to GOP candidates, Republican-leaning causes or donated to Hillary Clinton or John Edwards during the Democratic presidential primaries.
. . . One fund manager reported being on the receiving end of a profanity-laced tirade by Auto Industry Task Force head Steve Rattner that included threats to use the Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission in gangster-like enforcement roles."
Great!
Read the entire Spectator article, then pass it on to everyone you know. America must quickly move towards removing this un-American punk from office, or the Nation will be reduced to smoldering wreckage before our eyes. Impeachment and removal is the battle cry.
"One in 7 who leave Guantanamo involved in terrorism
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Seventy-four, or one out of every seven, terrorism suspects formerly held at the U.S. detention site at Guantanamo Bay are confirmed or suspected of having returned to terrorism, the Pentagon said on Tuesday.
Of more than 530 detainees transferred from the U.S. base in Cuba, 27 are confirmed and 47 suspected of "reengaging in terrorist activity," according to a written Pentagon summary."
The bumbling fool in the White House, in his stupidity and impulsivity, ordered Gitmo closed without a clue as to what would be done with its sociopathic inhabitants. He has even suggested that some of them will be moved to prisons in the US. In response to that suggestion Congress has adopted a "not in my backyard" stance.
What to do? What to do?
The solution is simple: Since several individuals, including Obama, have worked diligently to vilify the Guantanamo jihadist jail and turn public opinion against it, they should now reap the consequences of their actions. Here's my plan: Two prisons to house the terrorists shall be built. One will be next door to Michael Ratner, the man most responsible for this mess, the other shall be built next door to the Sidwell School, where Obama's daughters attend classes. Perhaps then such leftists will think twice before sympathizing with Muslim terrorists and sociopaths who are intent on killing as many Americans as possible.
". . . The first question I had to resolve was whether the 33 year-old Barack Obama was capable of writing what Time Magazine has called "the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician." The answer is almost assuredly "no."
In his bestselling study of success, Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell painstakingly lays out what he calls the "ten-thousand-hour rule." Gladwell quotes neurologist Daniel Levitin to the effect that "ten thousand hours of practice [in any subject] is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert" and cites example after example to make his case.
Obama appears to have lopped about 9900 hours off that standard. In Dreams, he speaks of writing only the occasional journal entry and some "very bad poetry." He does not sell himself short on the poetry. From his undergraduate poem, "Underground":
Under water grottos, caverns
Filled with apes
That eat figs.
Stepping on the figs
That the apes
Eat, they crunch.
The apes howl, bare
Their fangs, dance . . .
If possible, Obama's early prose showed less promise than his poetry. Although the Obama camp has been notoriously shy about releasing proof of Obama's assumed genius-SAT scores, LSAT scores, transcripts, theses-I was able to unearth three essays in print that predate Dreams.
In March 1983, Obama wrote an 1800-word article, "Breaking the War Mentality," for Columbia University's weekly news magazine, Sundial. Five years later, he wrote an essay titled "Why Organize," which was reprinted in a 1990 book called After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois.
In the Sundial article there are an appalling five sentences in which the subject noun does not agree with the verb. In some sentences, like the following, the punctuation and word selection are as random as the grammar: "The belief that moribund institutions, rather than individuals are at the root of the problem, keep SAM's energies alive."
Although "Why Organize" seems to be better edited, in neither of these two clunky essays does Obama turn a single phrase that is clever, concise, or even vaguely memorable. In 1990, he wrote an unsigned student case comment for the Harvard Law Review. The prose here, although reasonably well edited, is even more dull and leaden.
It was not Obama's style but his election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review in 1990-more of a popularity than a literary contest-that netted him a roughly $125,000 advance for a proposed book. According to a 2006 article by liberal publisher Peter Osnos, Simon & Schuster canceled the contract when Obama could not deliver, despite a sojourn to Bali to help him write.
It was about this time that Bill Ayers entered the picture. "I met [Obama] sometime in the mid-1990s." he would later tell Salon. "And everyone who knew him thought that he was politically ambitious. For the first two years, I thought, his ambition is so huge that he wants to be mayor of Chicago."
Obama needed help, and Ayers had the means, the motive, and the ability to provide it. Unlike Obama, he has a well-established paper trail. He co-authored the 1974 tract, "Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism, in which book, by the way, he misspells Frantz Fanon's first name as "Franz" just as Obama does in Dreams, and nearly twenty books thereafter as writer and editor.
Ayers, we know, provided an informal editing service for like-minded friends in the neighborhood. Aspiring radical Rashid Khalidi attests to this in the acknowledgements in his 2004 book, Resurrecting Empire. "Bill was particularly generous in letting me use his family's dining room table to do some writing for the project." Khalidi did not need the table. He had one of his own. He needed the help. Having no political ambitions, Khalidi was willing to acknowledge it.
Dreams was published in June 1995. That same year, Ayers was busy fueling the ambitions of his young protégé, first with an appointment to the chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant and later with a fundraiser in his Chicago home. Ayers admits that his "imagination ran out of steam." He thought he was launching a mayor that he could exploit, even control, not a president, who would move quickly beyond his grasp.
After Dreams was published in 1995, Obama's typewriter fell silent once again. He contributed not one signed word to any law journal or other publication of note until his unexceptional and conspicuously ghosted 2006 book, Audacity of Hope. Obama was not a writer. As his lame inaugural address proved, he still isn't.
It is possible that Obama actually met Ayers in New York in the early 1980s. In his brief New York sojourn, he often seems to be channeling the thoughts and experiences of the world weary Ayers who lived in New York the same years as Obama. "Like a tourist, I watched the range of human possibility on display," writes Obama in Dreams, "trying to trace out my future in the lives of the people I saw, looking for some opening through which I could re-enter."
Re-enter? This seems more the reflection of a soon to be ex-fugitive than that of a Columbia undergrad. It is in New York too that Obama feels himself living "behind enemy lines," the exact phrase that Ayers uses to describe his life in the underground.
The opening scene of Dreams takes place in the early 1980s in and around Obama's New York City apartment with its "slanting" floors. As the scene unfolds, Obama is making breakfast "with coffee on the stove and two eggs in the skillet." In Fugitive Days, Ayers inhabits an apartment with "sloping floors." He too cooks a lot -- his books are rich with often sensual food imagery -- and uses a "skillet," a southern regionalism.
Obama tells the reader that the buzzer downstairs did not work and that visitors had to call from a pay phone at the corner gas station. There, "A black Doberman the size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws clamped around an empty beer bottle."
Fugitive Days opens at a pay phone. (Unless specified otherwise, all Ayers' references will be to Fugitive Days and Obama's to Dreams). Ayers spent much of his underground years waiting at pay phones. He writes about pay phones with the loving detail art critics reserve for Picassos. The vivid image of the Doberman almost assuredly comes from his experience. Obama had no reason to use that pay phone, if it even existed.
Obama shared his apartment with a roommate, who would scream "with impressive rage" at "white people" whose dogs pooped on their sidewalks. Adds Obama, ""We'd laugh at the faces of both master and beast, grim and unapologetic as they hunkered down to do the deed." Both Ayers and Obama speak of "rage" the way that Eskimos do of snow -- in so many varieties, so often, that they feel the need to qualify it, here as "impressive rage," elsewhere in Dreams as "suppressed rage" or "coil of rage," and in Fugitive Days as "justifiable rage," "uncontrollable rage," "blind rage," "and, of course, "Days of Rage."
Another note of interest is that all of the distinctive words in the sentence above -- "master," "beast," "grim," "unapologetic," and "deed," as well as the phrase "hunkered down" -- appear in Fugitive Days.
In the opening pages, Obama makes an exception to his unlikely New York "solitude" for an elderly neighbor, a "stooped" gentleman who wore a "fedora." In Fugitive Days, it was Ayers' grandfather who is "stooped" and a helpful stranger who wears a "fedora."
One day, Obama's roommate finds his neighbor dead, "crumpled up on the third-floor landing, his eyes wide open, his limbs stiff and curled up like a baby's." Ayers tells of watching his mother die, "eyes half open, curled up and panting." In both cases, the eyes are "open" and the body is "curled up."
On the neighbor's mantelpiece, Obama reports seeing "the faded portrait of a woman with heavy eyebrows and a gentle smile." There are seven references to "eyebrows" in Dreams -- heavy ones, bushy ones, wispy ones, and six in Fugitive Days -- bushy ones, flaring ones, arched ones, black ones.
Who writes about eyebrows? In the lengthy excerpts that I have gathered from a half dozen other contemporary political memoirs -- 150,000 words in all -- there is no mention of "eyebrows" at all. Nor is there anyone or anything "stooped," "curled," "crumpled," "hunkered down," or wearing a "fedora."
At the climax of the opening sequence, Obama receives a phone call. It comes from an African aunt. "Listen, Barry, your father is dead," she tells him. Obama has a hard time understanding. "Can you hear me?" she repeats. "I say, your father is dead." The line is cut, and the conversation ends abruptly.
The opening sequence of Fugitive Days climaxes in nearly identical fashion. This phone call comes from Ayers' future wife, Bernadine Dohrn. "Diana is dead," says Dohrn of Ayers' lover Diana Oughton, killed in a bomb blast. Ayers has a hard time understanding. "Diana is dead," she "repeats slowly." Ayers drops the line, and the conversation ends abruptly.
At the conclusion of Dreams' opening scene, a stunned Obama "sat down on the couch, smelling eggs burn in the kitchen, staring at cracks in the plaster, trying to measure my loss." This passage features Obama's signature rhetorical flourish, the triple parallel without a joining conjunction. There are scores of such examples throughout Dreams, perhaps hundreds: "...the mixed blood, the divided soul, the ghostly image of the tragic mulatto trapped between two worlds."
"Her face powdered, her hips girdled, her thinning hair bolstered, she would board the six-thirty bus to arrive at her downtown office before anyone else."
"...his eyes were closed, his head leaning against the back of his chair, his big wrinkled face like a carving stone."
As it happens, Ayers' signature rhetorical flourish, likely cribbed from Joseph Conrad, is the triple parallel without a joining conjunction. There are scores of such examples throughout Fugitive Days, perhaps hundreds:
"He inhabited an anarchic solitude-disconnected, smart,obsessive."
"We swarmed over and around that car, smashing windows, slashing tires, trashing lights and fenders-it seemed the only conceivable thing to do."
"...trees are shattered, doors ripped from their hinges, shorelines rearranged." More intriguing still, Obama seems to borrow the one girlfriend in the oddly sexless Dreams from Ayers' experience. "There was a woman in New York that I loved," he tells his half-sister years after the fact. "She was white. She had dark hair, and specks of green in her eyes."
The woman of Obama's memory evokes images of Diana Oughton. As her FBI files attest, Oughton had brown hair and green eyes. The two women shared similar family backgrounds as well. In fact, they seemed to have grown up on the very same estate.
"The house was very old, her grandfather's house," Obama writes of his girlfriend's country home. "He had inherited it from his grandfather." According to a Time Magazine article written soon after her death, Oughton "brought Bill Ayers and other radicals" to the family homestead in Dwight, Illinois. The main house on the Oughton estate, a 20-room Victorian mansion, was built by Oughton's father's grandfather.
The carriage house, in which Oughton lived as a child, now serves as a public library. It may have already seemed like one when Ayers visited, an impression that finds its way into Obama's memory of a library "filled with old books and pictures of the famous people [the grandfather] had known-presidents, diplomats, industrialists."
"It was autumn, beautiful, with woods all around us," Obama writes of his visit to his girlfriend's country home, "and we paddled a canoe across this round, icy lake full of small gold leaves that collected along the shore." As can be seen from aerial photos even today, the Oughton estate also has a small lake and is surrounded by woods.
Curiously, Obama tells the story of this past love while cutting "two green peppers." In his 1997 book, A Kind And Just Parent, Ayers specifically links "green peppers" with "saltpeter" and other substances that scare young men with the threat of impotence. Go figure. Ayers lived a considerably more adventurous life than Obama, beginning with his youthful days as a merchant seaman in the North Atlantic. "I realized that no one else could ever know this singular experience," Ayers writes. Yet much of the nautical language that flows through Fugitive Days flows through Obama's earth-bound memoir.
Although there are only the briefest of literal sea experiences in Dreams, the following words appear in both Dreams and in Ayers' work: fog, mist, ships, seas, boats, oceans, calms, captains, charts, first mates, storms, streams, wind, waves, anchors, barges, horizons, ports, panoramas, moorings, tides, currents, and things howling, fluttering, knotted, ragged, tangled, and murky. My own memoir on race, Sucker Punch, offers a useful control. It makes no reference at all, metaphorical or otherwise, to any of the above words save "current" and "tides." Yet I have spent a good chunk of every summer of my life at the ocean and many a day on a boat. Ayers equates the flow of water with that of language. "The debates swam above and around and through us," he writes. "The confrontation in the [Student Union] flowed like a swollen river in to the teach-in, carrying me along the cascading waters from room to room, hall to hall, bouncing off boulders."
In Dreams, Obama makes the very same equation. "I heard all our voices begin to run together, the sound of three generations tumbling over each other like the currents of a slow-moving stream," he writes, "my questions like rocks roiling the water, the breaks in memory separating the currents, but always the voices returning to that single course, a single story."
For the one and only time in his career, Obama writes in the language of postmodernism, a language the academic Ayers has mastered. Ayers describes Fugitive Days as "a memory book," one that deliberately blurs facts and changes identities and makes no claims at history. In Dreams, Obama admits, some characters are composites. Some appear out of precise chronology. Names have been changed.
Ayers seems consumed with lies, lying and what he calls "our constructed reality." The Obama of Dreams says much the same and in much the same language. "But another part of me knew that what I was telling them was a lie," he writes, "something I'd constructed from the scraps of information I'd picked up from my mother."
That they both speak of "narratives," "traps," "contradictions," "intimacies," and "journeys" is not exceptional. That is standard postmodern patois. What is exceptional is their shared use of advanced postmodern slang -- the "fictions" into which they and others force their lives, the "grooves" into which they have fallen, the "poses" they assume, and even the "stitched together" nature of the lives they or their relatives lead.
More convincing still are those complex tropes in Dreams that appear, only slightly altered, in Ayers' books. In his 1993 book, To Teach, Ayers writes, "Education is for self-activating explorers of life, for those who would challenge fate, for doers and activists, for citizens." "Training," on the other hand, "is for slaves, for loyal subjects, for tractable employees, for willing consumers, for obedient soldiers."
In Dreams, these thoughts find colloquial expression in the person of "Frank," the real life poet, pornographer and Stalinist, Frank Marshall Davis. "Understand something, boy," Frank tells the college-bound Obama. "You're not going to college to get educated. You're going there to get trained." Both authors make the point that "training" strips the individual of his racial identity. In To Teach, Ayers recounts the story of an ambitious teacher who takes her students out to the streets of New York to learn about its culture and history. These students ask to see the nearby Hudson River. When they get to the river's edge, one student says, " Look, the river is flowing up." A second student says, "No, it has to flow south-down." Upon further research, the teacher discovers "that the Hudson River is a tidal river, that it flows both north and south, and they had visited the exact spot where the tide stops its northward push."
In Dreams, written two years later, Obama takes an unlikely detour to the exact spot on the parallel East River where the north-flowing tide meets the south-flowing river. There, improbably, a young black boy approaches this strange man and asks, "You know why sometimes the river runs that way and then sometimes it goes this way?" Obama tells the boy it "had to do with the tides."
For the literary left, the fact that Ayers helped Obama would be a less troubling revelation than that Obama needed help at all. They have built a foundational myth around his genius, a genius that can be located only in Dreams. The dark side of the Democrat genius mythology, of course, is the Republican dunce mythology of which Sarah Palin and George Bush are the most recent victims."
I wish I could take credit for the brilliant, foregoing insight, but it is in fact the contribution of Vanishing American, in an essay, “Stranger than Fiction,” in which he draws an analogy from people acting as if race didn’t exist to the Hans Christian Anderson story, ''The Emperor's New Clothes.''
One of the giveaways that race-blindness is a fraud, is that it only goes one way. The same people who insist that "race is a social construct" demand that whites be "race-blind," while encouraging blacks and other non-whites to be race-obsessed, and are themselves that way. That is because they know damned well that race is real, but seek to aid blacks, at whites' expense, in the same zero-sum game racist blacks and, increasingly, other non-whites are playing.
As the saying goes, "Race for me, but not for thee."
In The Year One of Our Messiah, in The Nation Formerly Known as America, we do not quarantine pandemics; however, as Minister of Propaganda David Axelrod, and his deputy ministers, David Letterman, Jon David Stewart, and David Brooks will tell you, we quarantine jokes.
I must be some sort of pervert; I support quarantines for pandemics, but open borders for jokes. The following is my contribution to breaking the comedy blockade. If you don’t like it, do better!
The Top Ten Things to Know about President-for-Life Barack Obama
10. Black politicians have larger teleprompters than white politicians.
9. The New York Times is going to write a bill making it a hate crime to criticize President-for-Life Obama, just as soon as its bailout check clears.
8. Those federal tax refunds? Paid out in Monopoly money.
7. Be careful what you say about his wife: She has bigger shoulders than you do!
6. Don’t speak Austrian? That’s ok, neither does he!
5. He will be having Congress pass a law officially declaring that America has 60 states.
4. Jokes making fun of the President will be permitted, just as soon as Barack and presidents-for-life-in-waiting Michelle, Sasha, and Malia and their descendants are all dead.
3. A black guy, a white guy, and an Asian guy walk into a bar—hey, that’s not funny!
2. David Letterman is his bitch!
1. (This joke has been confiscated by the Obama Cabinet Secretary of Diversity.)
This audio clip, courtesy of the Mark Levin Radio Show, might shock some of you who have bought into the charming persona Obama's handlers and media rumpswabs have cultivated for him. The rest of us, who knew for certain--based on established facts and on his own statements and positions -- that Barack Hussein Obama was an un-American radical leftist before his election, can only weep over what is happening to America. To those of you who voted for this thug, this narcissistic little punk, shame on you.
Of course, had George W. Bush tried such un-American fascist tactics, this story would be front and center across the pages of nearly every American newspaper. Impeachment talk would be in the air.
America, you have elected someone who loathes the Constitution, who loathes middle and White America and who will force you to his will, regardless of your hopes, dreams and desires. If you are an honest, productive American you will soon deeply regret your November choice.
Faced with anti-US hate-speech, Obama sits and listens
The Teleprompter of the United States and his sociopathic accomplice sit and listen to America being insulted for 50 minutes by a minor league, Marxist scumbag and say nothing to defend the country they represent:
"PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago -- President Obama endured a 50-minute diatribe from socialist Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega that lashed out at a century of what he called terroristic U.S. aggression in Central America and included a rambling denunciation of the U.S.-imposed isolation of Cuba's Communist government.
Obama sat mostly unmoved during the speech but at times jotted notes. The speech was part of the opening ceremonies at the fifth Summit of the Americas here.
Later, at a photo opportunity with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Obama held his tongue when asked what he thought about Ortega's speech.
"It was 50 minutes long. That's what I thought."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ignored two questions about Ortega's speech, instead offering lengthy praise of a cultural performance of dance and song opening the summit.
"I thought the cultural performance was fascinating," Clinton said. Asked again about the Ortega speech, Clinton said: "To have those first class Caribbean entertainers on all on one stage and to see how much was done in such a small amount of space, I was overwhelmed."
Let us not forget that Daniel "Sandinista" Ortega is another Marxist hero of the anti-American, American Left. And Barack Hussein Obama, by his choice of friends and mentors, by his ideological positions and by his own public statements, is in general agreement with Ortega's dark view of America.
Sleep tight folks, an enemy of America occupies the White House.
It has struck me as strange that, so far, the Obama-teabagging press has yet to parade merchant Captain Richard Phillips around as living proof of the Usurper-in Chief's military prowess and toughness. I have also been wondering why it took the US Navy four days to rescue Phillips from the grasp of four rag-tag Somali teenagers with rifles. Perhaps the following article, via Flopping Aces, might provide answers:
"Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:
1. BHO wouldn’t authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.
2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn’t do anything unless the hostage’s life was in “imminent” danger
3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction
4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.
5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams.
6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies
7. BHO immediately claims credit for his “daring and decisive” behaviour. As usual with him, it’s BS. So per our last email thread, I’m downgrading Oohbaby’s performace to D-. Only reason it’s not an F is that the hostage survived.
Read the following accurate account.
Philips’ first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn’t worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country’s Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken.
The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage’s life was in clear, extreme danger.
The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution” would be acceptable.
After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the on scene commander decided he’d had enough.
Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage’s life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips’ back was a threat to the hostage’s life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots.
Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe. There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday’s dramatic rescue of an American hostage.
Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put paid to questions of the inexperienced president’s toughness and decisiveness. Despite the Obama administration’s (and its sycophants’) attempt to spin yesterday’s success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.
What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship."
UNITED NATIONS — The United States will soon lose its place as leader of the world, and the United Nations is a broken organization that is beyond repair, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Wednesday.
“The United States empire is on its way down and it will be finished in the near future, inshallah," Chavez told reporters, ending the statement with the Arabic phrase for "God willing."
Thanks to the precise actions of US Navy Special Forces teams, a brave American, merchant ship Captain Richard Phillips, is free today and three of the Somali savages who had taken him hostage are dead. To those Navy men, to Mr. Phillips and to Barack Hussein Obama I say, "well done."
Now, let's get busy obliterating the terrorist pirate's staging ports in Somalia.
Update: It is now being reported that Captain Phillips jumped from the boat he was being held hostage on and then Navy Seals instantly engaged the pirates, shooting three of them to death. It seems that Phillips precipitated his own rescue. I'm sure Obama was caught off guard by this sudden turn of events. Given the facts that he is an un-American, anti-White racist and leftist radical, it is likely that he is saddened by the deaths of the three "oppressed" Somali "fishermen."
It is reasonable to speculate that had Phillips not jumped from the boat, he would likely still be on it as it drifted closer and closer to Somalia's coast and closer to relative safety for the pirates and a prolonged period of captivity, or death in Somalia for him. Instead, Phillips acted like any real American would -- instead of waiting around for "the government" to save him, he sized up the reality surrounding him and then took personal ownership of his situation.
Then the US Navy stepped in and delivered some permanent justice to his former captors.
"The operation, personally approved by President Barack Obama, quashed fears the saga could drag on for months and marked a victory for the U.S., which for days seemed powerless to resolve the crisis despite massing helicopter-equipped warships at the scene.
Negotiations with the three pirates were growing heated, Vice Adm. Bill Gortney said. One of them pointed an AK-47 at the back of Phillips, who was tied up and in "imminent danger" of being killed when the commander of the nearby USS Bainbridge made the split-second decision to order his men to shoot, Gortney said. Navy snipers took aim at the pirates' heads and shoulders, he said. The lifeboat was about 25-30 yards away and was being towed by the Bainbridge at the time, he said.
A fourth pirate had surrendered earlier in the day and could face life in a U.S. prison. "
"NAIROBI, April 11 (Reuters) - Pirates seized a U.S.-owned and Italian-flagged tugboat with 16 crew on Saturday in the latest hijacking in the busy Gulf of Aden waterway, a regional maritime group said.
Andrew Mwangura, of the Mombasa-based East African Seafarers' Assistance Programme, said the crew were believed to be unharmed on the tugboat, which he added was operated from the United Arab Emirates.
He said the tugboat was towing two barges at the time of capture but there were no details on their cargo.
"This incident shows the pirates are becoming more daring and violent," Mwangura told Reuters by phone."
Most of these pirates operate out of the ports of Eyl, Hobyo and Haradheere on Somalia's eastern coast. That being known, the solution to the current hostage crisis, and the preventative to future ones, is extraordinarily simple. I'll lay it all out in the hope that some of President Pantywaist's flying monkeys read this blog post, and relay my clear, decisive strategy to him:
1) Inform the Somali savages holding Mr. Phillips hostage that they have exactly five minutes to release him in order to be granted safe passage back to their ports. Inform them that if they decline this generous offer, the US will instantly unleash a massive barrage of cruise missiles aimed at Eyl, Hoboyo, Haradheere and all coastal areas of Somalia known to harbor pirates or to support their activities.
The pirates will then almost certainly release Mr. Phillips, with no ransom demands or other strings attached.
When Richard Phillips is safely aboard one of the US warships in the area, that same warship is to turn its guns on the lifeboat containing the pirates and, with video cameras rolling, vaporize it and its contents.
Five minutes later, a massive cruise missile barrage is launched on the ports of Eyl, Hoboyo, Haradheere and all coastal areas of Somalia known to harbor pirates or to support their activities.
Minutes later, release video of the pirate's well-deserved deaths to every news outlet in the world.
After these actions, the "International Community" and self-hating leftists everywhere will screech about how the US is a "big bully" using "disproportionate force." They will scream how the poor "Somalian fisherman's" so-called human "rights" were violated. They will wring their hands over the destruction of Somalia's terrorist ports. But terrorists the world over will have been sent a startling, unambiguous message: Play around with the US, and it will instantly unleash hell on you, and your shores.
"The reality is, we have to cleanse the soul of America. Our soul is covered in militarism, economic exploitation and racism. . . We need to acknowledge the obscenity that America is . . . America the beautiful is America the obscene." - Boston City Councilman Chuck Turner, Sept 13. 2005
Hundreds of middle class Americans leapt to their feet and applauded those words as they echoed off the walls of Boston's Faneuil Hall, a place where 263 years earlier Samuel Adams, and other American patriots, fomented the American Revolution.
Other speakers followed, all of them mirroring Turner's horrid disdain for America, including Professor Naseer Aruri of the National Council of Arab Americans who referred to Islamic terrorists as "so-called terrorists" and portrayed the US as the world's biggest cause, and purveyor, of international terrorism. But Aruri's remarks were mild compared to the anti-US tirade delivered by the evening's keynote speaker, British MP George Galloway, a corrupt man who had once licked the bloodstained boots of Saddam Hussein.
The people who cheered Galloway's speech that September evening are now among Barack Obama's core supporters, friends, and promoters. They are not people who will vote for Obama out of ignorance or naivety. They will vote for him because they agree with his friend Jeremiah Wright when he screams, "No, no, no, not God Bless America, God damn America." They do not overlook Obama's collaborations with Bill Ayers because they have bought the tripe that Obama was "only eight years old" when Ayers was throwing bombs, they will vote for him because they agree with Ayers's violent anti-US, anti-capitalist views. Obama's friendship with Ayers, and Obama's other radical alliances are signals of his kinship with them.
Bill Ayers says, "It [America] makes me want to puke." People who cheer a Councilman Turner when he excoriates their country also share Bill Ayers's retching sentiments, just as surely as one who sits in the pews of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ for two decades shares Jeremiah Wright's.
The question is: Are those who hold such views even capable of protecting America from her conventional enemies like Iran and from existential threats like those posed by stateless, dedicated totalitarian groups like Al Qaeda?
Human beings do not protect and secure principles they do not love or ideas they have been taught to hate.
Like those who cheered Chuck Turner's and George Galloway's Faneuil Hall speeches, Obama's ideological signals have not eluded America's external enemies. Through provocation, they will seek to clarify their meaning.
Who will "test" a President Obama?
Obama's running mate Joseph Biden recently said, "Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. . .Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. . . As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen."
With that statement, and perhaps for the first time in his life, Senator Biden made sense. He also prompted a question: Can America afford the results of the test he guarantees will happen? What if ruthless Islamic radicals test Obama? They tested President Carter and he failed. The cost of failure was the radicalization of Iran, the rise of violent Islamist movements, the loss of a strategic ally and the emboldening of America's adversaries worldwide.
Islamic radicals tested President Clinton. They tested him in Somalia and he failed, they tested him in Tanzania and he failed, they tested him in New York City in 1993 and he failed. Finally, they tested him in Yemen by ramming an explosive-filled boat into the USS Cole, killing Americans and nearly sinking that ship. Clinton failed his tests, confirming to Osama Bin Laden his view of America as a paper tiger, and prompting 911.
On September 11, 2001, Islamic radicals tested another US president by crashing airliners into American landmarks, murdering 3,000 people in the process. By responding to those attacks instantly and ferociously, that president passed his "test." The proof of that is irrefutable: America has not been attacked since, and those who administered his "test" have spent the last seven years so occupied by the pursuit of self-preservation, that they have not had the time to test him again.
Politically speaking, Barack Obama has far more in common with Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton than he does with George W. Bush.
It is speculative but reasonable to conclude that considering the devastation brought upon them by President Bush, Islamic radicals would be extremely hesitant to "test" him, or someone like him, again.
Not so when it comes to Barack Obama -- since his aversion to the use of force is written on his sleeve. Obama promises to hold non-conditional talks with America's enemies. He and fellow leftist Democrats promise to downsize the military and to walk away from Iraq. Obama spoke about the "tiny" country of Iran and about preemptively invading Pakistan, illustrating a shocking ineptitude in the realms of foreign policy and basic geography. None of his statements or gaffe-prone political posturing has escaped the notice of America's enemies. They will be racing each other to "test" a President Obama. If one of those "tests" is of the magnitude of 911 while America is in a weakened economic state, she might not survive.
Consider the economic destruction caused by the events of September 11, 2001: Lower Manhattan lost 30% of its office space and many businesses there were permanently destroyed. Close to 200,000 jobs were lost or moved out of New York. Direct job losses amounted to $17 billion in lost wages and increased pressure on government social programs. Fourteen billion dollars worth of private business assets were vaporized, as were $2.2 billion worth of federal and local government enterprises. Rescue and cleanup efforts cost around $11 billion. Total losses, including lost tax revenue, lost jobs, cleaning costs and damage and destruction to buildings and infrastructure in New York were approximately $95 billion. Insurance losses related to the attacks were between $30-58 billion, resulting in increased insurance premiums and permanently cutting into the bottom lines of businesses and individuals across America. Airlines, on a weak economic footing prior to the attacks, were devastated. Air travel crashed 8% after 911 and massive, industry-wide layoffs were executed. Consumer spending dropped sharply in the months following the attacks and America's GDP shrank.
The 911 attacks happened during a time of relative economic stability. What will happen to America, indeed to the world, if a similar attack occurs while she is in an economic state like the current one? *** Those who most trivialize the magnitude of the threats posed by totalitarian Islam are squarely in the Obama camp. That is a fact, not a smear. Some of them (John Kerry, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, and Obama himself) toiled to undermine the US-led war against Islamic terrorists in Iraq. They did that while American soldiers were in harm's way.
Those same Democrat Senators and Congressmen will be among Barack Obama's closest advisors. Their dangerous disrespect for America's fighting men and women, their apologetics towards America's enemies, their characterizations of American soldiers as murderers and torturers, their media-abetted crusade to hamstring America's intelligence capabilities have given support and encouragement to those who intend to harm us.
As elected officials they have opposed almost all of the policies that have kept America safe from attack for seven years -- that opposition has not escaped notice by our enemies. The same Democrats who shouted premature proclamations of defeat in Iraq will be controlling US foreign policy and directing the military they seem to loathe. Their treacherous actions during the Bush presidency nearly assure that Senator Biden's prediction of an Obama "test" will come true sooner rather than later in an Obama presidency.
Before stepping into the voting booth on Tuesday, ask yourself these questions: Is Barack Obama suited to deal with violent Muslim theocrats who have sworn "death to America" by any means? Will a Barack Obama presidency invite attacks on our soil by such people? Can America with a President Barack Obama at her helm survive the guaranteed test Joseph Biden speaks of?
Finally, with Chuck Turner, George Galloway, Jeremiah Wright, and Obama's close friend Bill Ayers on your mind, ask yourself this: Does Barack Obama and the Democrats who will govern with him have enough love for America as she is, to protect her by any means necessary? After answering those questions, vote.
It took Jimmy Carter less than three years to create the impression that America was an impotent, paper tiger. It has taken Barack Hussein Obama just a few months.
The most powerful military in the world is now in a standoff with four filthy, Somalian scumbags in a rowboat.
When Captain Richard Phillips, the captain of a US merchant ship attacked by Muslim pirates jumped out of the lifeboat where he was being held hostage, the US Navy ships standing close by should have blown it out of the water, then sent a barrage of cruise missiles into their staging areas along Somalia's coast. Neither order was issued, and an opportunity to quickly end the standoff, and send a clear message to Muslim terrorists around the world, was lost.
Barack Hussein Obama could have given either order. He did not.
Now the situation has spun out of control: More Muslim terrorists are steaming out of Somalian ports with hostages from prior hijackings as their human shields. They are heading to the scene to support and protect their fellow pirates. A Mexican standoff is now nearly a certainty, and it's likely that Obama will order ransom paid giving incentive for more hijackings.
The hijacking of US merchant ships off the African coast will soon become a routine, lucrative business.
The most powerful Navy in the world now looks like a laughingstock. Obama has been tested by four lightly-armed savages in a rowboat, and he has failed. Hiding behind the skirt of a giggling Hillary Clinton, he has yet to issue a statement condemning the hijacking, nor has he said anything about it in public. Why is this so?
"Let's take stock: -He's (Obama) a black, African-born Muslim who made his career as a community organizer activist, shaking down banks, stealing from and intimidating people. -The Somali pirates are black, African-born Muslims who have made a career as maritime community organizer shakedown artists, stealing from ships and intimidating people. Why would he issue a statement or a condemnation against his own people?"
On a more serious note, as I expected, Barack Hussein Obama has miserably failed his first "Global Test." There will be many more such failures, because Obama is a sissified product of leftwing political correctness. Our enemies know he is weak. They see he is a self-absorbed coward. They watched him on his knees last week, apologizing to Europe for America's exceptionalism. They saw him bow deeply in subservience to the King of Saudi Arabia. They are laughing, and praising Allah, as four of their filthy, ignorant brethren shove their bony fingers into Obama's eyes and he collapses into a relativist's classic moral paralysis.
Obama's naked cowardice will provoke another 911 type attack, and soon. And thousands of Americans will once again die because of leftwing political correctness.
Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrat Congress can be best summed up thusly: Narcissistic children directly endangering our lives, and squandering our hard earned money.
"JUDGES should interpret the Constitution according to other nations' legal "norms." Sharia law could apply to disputes in US courts. The United States constitutes an "axis of disobedience" along with North Korea and Saddam-era Iraq.
Those are the views of the man on track to become one of the US government's top lawyers: Harold Koh.
President Obama has nominated Koh -- until last week the dean of Yale Law School -- to be the State Department's legal adviser. In that job, Koh would forge a wide range of international agreements on issues from trade to arms control, and help represent our country in such places as the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
It's a job where you want a strong defender of America's sovereignty. But that's not Koh. He's a fan of "transnational legal process," arguing that the distinctions between US and international law should vanish."
Why aren't patriotic Americans screaming about this? Write, call, email or fax Republican and moderate Democrat legislators now. Tell them that for the sake of America, this nomination must end in defeat for America-averse Obama, and his America-hating colleague, Harold Koh.
"Before its portfolio of bad loans helped trigger the housing crisis, mortgage giant Freddie Mac was the focus of a major accounting scandal that led to a management shake-up, huge fines and scalding condemnation of passive directors.One of those board members was Rahm Emanuel, now chief of staff to President Obama. Emanuel earned at least $320,000 for his 14-month stint at Freddie Mac.
Emanuel plays a critical role in addressing the nation's mortgage woes and fulfilling the administration's pledge to impose responsibility on the financial world -- the type of responsibility that appeared to be absent at Freddie Mac."
After fourteen fraud and failure-filled months, Mr. Emanuel was rewarded with $320,000?
Guess--who--funded--that--check?. . . (Hint: You did!)
I look forward to the Obama Administration's coming public demand that Rahm Emanuel return that money to the good citizens of the US or else!
"Barack Obama, the World's Greatest Orator (™all news organisations), didn't exactly cover himself in glory when the BBC's political editor Nick Robinson asked him a question about who was to blame for the financial crisis. Normally word perfect, Obama ummed, ahed and waffled for the best part of two and a half minutes. Here, John Crace decodes what he was really thinking ...
Nick Robinson: "A question for you both, if I may. The prime minister has repeatedly blamed the United States of America for causing this crisis. France and Germany both blame Britain and America for causing this crisis. Who is right? And isn't the debate about that at the heart of the debate about what to do now?" Brown immediately swivels to leave Obama in pole position. There is a four-second delay before Obama starts speaking [THANKS FOR NOTHING, GORDY BABY. REMIND ME TO HANG YOU OUT TO DRY ONE DAY.] Barack Obama: "I, I, would say that, er ... pause [I HAVEN'T A CLUE] ... if you look at ... pause [WHO IS THIS NICK ROBINSON JERK?] ... the, the sources of this crisis ... pause [JUST KEEP GOING, BUDDY] ... the United States certainly has some accounting to do with respect to . . . pause [I'M IN WAY TOO DEEP HERE] ... a regulatory system that was inadequate to the massive changes that have taken place in the global financial system ... pause, close eyes [THIS IS GOING TO GO DOWN LIKE A CROCK OF SHIT BACK HOME. HELP]. I think what is also true is that ... pause [I WANT NICK ROBINSON TO DISAPPEAR] ... here in Great Britain ... pause [SHIT, GORDY'S THE HOST, DON'T LAND HIM IN IT] ... here in continental Europe ... pause [DAMN IT, BLAME EVERYONE.] ... around the world. We were seeing the same mismatch between the regulatory regimes that were in place and er ... pause [I'VE LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT AGAIN] ... the highly integrated, er, global capital markets that have emerged ... pause"
Read the rest, and laugh your ass off realizing that Bush sounded like a genius compared to this guy.
"Brazil's President, while meeting with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown Thursday, said the global financial crisis was caused by "white people with blue eyes."
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silvamade made the comments after talks with Brown to try to forge a global consensus on how to save the worldwide economy.
During a press conference, da Silva, a socialist who told Brown poor countries should not have to suffer because of the mistakes of the rich, suddenly pointed his finger at Brown and said, "This is a crisis that was caused by white people with blue eyes. And before the crisis, they looked as if they knew everything about economics."
Can anyone imagine the international outrage if Gordon Brown had said something like, " The violence, poverty, savagery and disease that has been Africa's norm since anyone can remember, was caused by Black people with brown eyes?" At the very least, every so-called human rights group, the UN, the European Left, the American Left, including the leftist Establishment Press, would be screaming for Mr. Brown's head -- or at least for him to grovel apologetically.
There has been little, if any, criticism of the racist da Silva's remarks by the aforementioned groups. We on the Right know that that silence equals agreement with da Silva's position; we know that the Left equates "whiteness" with oppression, slavery, injustice and pure evil. Unfortunately, many White, non-leftist people do too -- they will be overjoyed to hear that their new Master, Barack Hussein Obama, by expressing praise for and kinship with Lula, also thinks they suck:
Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, March 27, 2009:
"This is a crisis that was caused by white people with blue eyes. And before the crisis, they looked as if they knew everything about economics."
"During a lunch at the Group of 20 summit in London, Obama shook hands with President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and said: “This is my man, right here. I love this guy.”
If you were the President of the United States, would you under any circumstances consider negotiating with people who do things like these?:
Mr. Obama, please explain to those of us not as slick and oh-so-sophisticated as you what exactly a "moderate" Taliban member is?
Perhaps a "moderate" Talibani only chops off one hand instead of two? Perhaps a "moderate" Talibani only whips a woman 20 times, instead of forty? If a Talibani murders only one woman out of two, will your Administration, filled to the brim with its self-loathing, putrid moral relativism, declare him a "moderate?"
Are there really such things as "moderate" murderers, "moderate" rapists, "moderate" child abusers, "moderate" woman-beaters or "moderate" hyper-religious, violent sociopaths?
A sane person would not consider "negotiating" with the men beating and murdering those women in the videos. A sane, reasonable man would not "negotiate" with a man who beat and raped a twelve year old girl who he called his "wife."
A clear-headed, moral man would not negotiate with any of them -- he would seek to kill them all, as quickly and as painfully as possible.
Update: Perhaps instead of being killed off, the Taliban could be put to good use cleaning up Nancy Pelosi's neighborhood. Given the fact that it is highly likely that the Obama Administration will soon be releasing ex-Gitmo Islamic purists into America's general population, why not turn this "minus" into a "plus?" (Just a thought. . .)
Is Barack Hussein Obama answering his Saudi master's call? Given the likelehood that B. Hussein's Harvard education was arranged and funded by the Saudis through his friend Khalid al Mansour, an Islamist with deep ties to the Saudi royal family, that is a distinct possibility.
Do you feel as sickened as I do watching a so-called President of the United States bow deeply at the feet of a head of state who presides over one of the world's most repressive nations? Do you feel grossed-out watching the man who calls himself the President of the United States bow down to a man whose dysfunctional nation was a wellspring of the 911 attacks? Do you feel enraged watching your so-called President kiss the ring of a man who heads a nation shackled by ultra-repressive Islamic sharia law; which treats women as second-rate citizens.
Your so-called President groveled at the feet of a so-called king who governs a country where basic human freedoms are non-existent.
Saudi Arabia is home to the violent, repressive Sunni Wahabbi sect, whose adherents shout "Death to America," as they work toward a totalitarian dream of one planet, under Islam.
Your so-called President payed respect to that misogynist dream when he bowed down for all the world to see.
George W. Bush often infuriated me. I disagreed with with him on many issues, including his overall take on the 15 million illegal immigrants in the country, his expansion of government and his profligate government spending. But I never doubted for a moment that he had America's best interests at heart and that he considered the protection of America from her foreign enemies to be his highest priority, especially after 911. He kept us safe after that horrific day, a fact that even the hardcore Left cannot credibly deny.
On the personal side, I have several friends who have spent significant time with Mr. Bush. They tell me he is warm, genuine, self-deprecating and classy. Though Bush was generally a lousy public speaker, I have no doubt that he is a good, honest and decent man who truly loves his country for what it is, not what it could be.
That being said, I have several questions for you: Now that he is no longer President, do you feel safer now? Do you get the sense that the man who currently calls himself "President" has America's best interests at heart? Do you think he is doing everything in his power to protect you from Islamist wolves who even as I write, are poking and prodding, circling and sniffing for a weakness in order to attack America again? Does the current individual in the White House project an air of competency, compassion and toughness or does he strike you as flippant, vulgar, narcissistic, barely in control of things and personally vindictive? Does the stench of corruption and odor of incompetence envelope him and his staff?
Does he seem smaller than the Office he inhabits?
Those who voted for Barack Hussein Obama, driven by hatred of George W. Bush, I am addressing you.
Either Dubya, or Poppy Bush, it doesn’t really matter at this point. Obama has a way of making us miss Nixon.
For all of his faults — which, we note, the man always admitted and took personal ownership of — George W. Bush never allowed anyone in his Cabinet to lie as shamelessly and poorly as Tim Geithner has been doing all week.
In 8 years, we cannot honestly recall a single instance of anyone claiming they were personally mistreated by Bush or offended by something he said. We also don’t remember him having to apologize for making fun of the mentally and physically disabled by telling insensitive jokes about the Special Olympics (or anything similar).
Can you remember Bush ever doing anything like that?
Yes, Bush did some bizarre, jokey things in office, especially at the beginning of his first term (like nicknaming everyone who came in contact with him, frat house style, and often jumbling his own nicknames so few in a room, including himself, knew who he was talking about after awhile). But, he never made jokes about the disabled. He didn’t tolerate talentless liars in his administration.
And the man, for better or worse, could in fact interact well with people when TelePrompTers were nowhere in sight.
A flawed man, to be sure.
A complicated and controversial presidency, definitely.
But, a good man, who spoke in his own words, from his heart, who believed in and loved America and truly seemed to make everyone in a room with him feel relaxed and at ease — by poking fun at himself, and never at others, if he wanted to get a laugh.
We, as moderate Democrats, might have disagreed with 70-80% of what Bush did while in office, but Obama certainly makes us miss Dubya on days like yesterday."
Selected reader comments:
. . .I agree. I had issues with Bush, as I do with all presidents, as it should be. The current president is an “issue”, and a complete embarrassment.
. . .There is a level of professionalism that should be present in the white house, and the administration. This white house has definitely lowered the bar. . .
. . . A lot of moonbats sure yelled long and loud over how W took away their “civil rights.” Funny thing is, I never could get a moonbat to name a civil right that W had taken away from them. Crickets every time. . .
. . . At a point two or three months ago I thought Bush was a painful public speaker, he often said ridiculous things, he spent money like creezy, and he didn’t defend himself or his policies well. But he kept the country safe, and at no time did I feel like a sugar crazed pack of pre-teens were yanking on the levers of governmental power.
Flash forward to now- we have a stuttering muttering donkey in office who governs via late night talk show, who mocks special needs children and insults 100 year allies with his moronic babble, who has taken the 400 billion deficit he whined about for his first 3 weeks up to 1.8 FREAKIN’ TRILLION DOLLARS in two months, who has a cabinet of barely functional subliterate goons flinging pooh through the halls of government.
Across the world, we have Iran calling his so-called “diplomacy” evidence of our weakness, Russia mocking his secret letters, North Korea warning us about interference and kidnapping our journalists, and China in a position to buy our country.
But like, he filled out a mean March Madness bracket- so that’s somethin’. Again, yeah I miss Bush. . .
. . . When Bush was president, I did not actively fear for my country. Yes, I was annoyed and even angry at times when Congress or the President did things I disagreed with. But deep down, I always knew that the U.S. would remain free and safe. (And after 9/11, that really was an accomplishment.) With Obama in charge, I don’t have that feeling of security. I really do think this country will change in a serious way, either through suicidal economic/social policies or some kind of terrorist attack. The only good news is that we can replace Congress in 2010 and this President in 2012. Can’t wait. . .
Are you ashamed of the vile things you said about this decent, flawed, patriotic man; George W. Bush? Are you proud of the vile "art" you created to insult and deride him and his family? Are you proud of your stance equating him with Adolf Hitler. Do you still feel that your accusing him, and not our enemies, of carrying out the 911 terror attacks is justified? Do you still fear George W. Bush more than you fear Al Qaeda? Do you look back in admiration of yourself and your unjust, vile characterizations of him when he was President?
Have you ever considered doing something decent like silently thanking this man for keeping you, your friends and your family safe for the seven years following 911?
If you haven't, then you have no decency -- you have a small heart, and you lack conscience. And you likely adore the man who currently calls himself "President" because he is just like you.
