Listening to President Obama speak Tuesday at the New Economic School in Moscow, it became completely clear that his intellect is greatly overrated. As Obama proudly proclaimed his commitment to shared international progress and explained his support for ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, it was painfully clear how foolish it is to believe he can be trusted to do the right thing on the international stage. Most Russians already knew that. Only 23 percent have confidence in Obama to do the right thing in international affairs, according to a poll conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org.
“The pursuit of power is no longer a zero-sum game — progress must be shared,” the president said in one breath. But minutes later, he announced that “the arc of history shows us that governments which serve their own people survive and thrive; governments that serve their own power do not.”
Well, which one is it? Is he confused?
Does the leader of the free world not understand that serving his own people will often be in direct conflict with shared international progress? For instance, if the U.S. accommodates the demands of the United Nations in reducing carbon emissions, the cost of energy (and all products made with and transported by using energy) will rise in the U.S. — that much is agreed upon by even the Congressional Budget Office.
Posted by guest blogger tim aka The Godless Heathen.
As fresh reports are coming in of more deaths and bloodshed in Iran we are only left to speculate why our president responds in a weak and pathetic manner. Andrew McCarthy over at NRO has an excellent piece up today that may explain and will make your blood boil.
“As the Iranian government’s murderous repression of the Iranian people continues, critics right and left agitate over the deafening silence of an American president who, as a candidate, derided the Bush administration’s ambitious democracy promotion as too timid. They speculate as to why Barack Obama won’t speak out: Why won’t he condemn the mullahs? Is he daft enough to believe he can charm the regime into abandoning its nuclear ambitions? Does the self-described realist so prize stability that he thinks it’s worth abandoning the cause of freedom — and the best chance in 30 years of dislodging an implacable American enemy?
In truth, it’s worse than that. Even as the mullahs are terrorizing the Iranian people, the Obama administration is negotiating with an Iranian-backed terrorist organization and abandoning the American proscription against exchanging terrorist prisoners for hostages kidnapped by terrorists. Worse still, Obama has already released a terrorist responsible for the brutal murders of five American soldiers in exchange for the remains of two deceased British hostages.
On a related note, the man being celebrated in the streets of Iran is not who we should be rooting for, the brave Iranian people yes, Mousavi, hell no.
“He may yet turn out to be the avatar of Iranian democracy, but three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.
Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran's ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.”
"I know what side I'm on," McCain cut in. "I'm on the side of the people. I'm not on Ahmadinejad's side or Mousavi. I'm on the side of the Iranian people and I'm on the right side of history. And I'm not going to walk on the other side of the street while people are being killed and beaten in the streets of Iran."
McCain said Obama's reaction wasn't equal to the situation. "We can't sit by and watch a film clip on television of a young woman bleeding to death and say that we're worried about the Iranian reaction or our ability to negotiate with them. We have to stand up for those people," he said.
UPDATE (By Rick): By way of Steve Schippert, news of a thuggish masacre:
Steve adds:
An Iranian blogger (whose URL I will not publish) live blogging from Baharestan Square in central Tehran today captures but brief glimpses of the unimaginable horror that took place today. Bus loads of protesters were stopped and unloaded from their buses by "black-clad police" and literally herded. When the massing was sufficient, as the barely controllably distraught Tehran caller to CNN described first hand, hundreds of the regime's Basij thugs poured out of an adjoining mosque and commenced a massacre with axes, clubs, guns and gas.
From the live blogger's eyewitness account:
>More than 10.000 Bassij Milittias get position in Central Tehran, including Baharestan Sq. >Army Helycopters flying over Baharestan and Vali Asr Sq. >The streets, squares and around BAHARESTAN (Approx. South-eastern of Tehran) is swarming with military forces, civilian forces, the security motorists >The croud have moved to the south of baharestan, the situation is bad, the shooting has started >In Baharestan Sq. in the Police shooting, A girl is shot and the police is not allowing to let them help >In Baharestan we saw militia with axe choping people like meat - blood everywhere - like butcher
This is the Iranian regime, wading into its own unarmed people and axing them to death, bludgeoning women (seen as the greatest threat to the regime) and throwing them to their deaths from pedestrian bridges. The same Iranian regime whose embassy officials are invited to American embassies around the world to celebrate on July 4th, of all things, a successful revolution.
The White House announced today that it had withdrawn invitations to Iranian diplomats to attend Fourth of July festivities at U.S. embassies around the world.
The United States and Iran have not had diplomatic relations for nearly three decades, but Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton authorized the invitations as a way of reaching out to the Islamic Republic. But U.S. officials said no Iranian diplomats thus far had responded to the invitations.
"July Fourth allows us to celebrate the freedom and the liberty we enjoy," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. "Freedom of speech. Freedom of religion. Freedom to assemble peacefully. Freedom of the press. So I don't think it's surprising that nobody's signed up to come."
Gibbs added: "Given the events of the past many days, those invitations will no longer be extended."
I'm sure the woman in the video is grateful for Obama finally taking unilateral action.
"It's time to act." she cried.
And so Obama did. No hot dogs for Iranian thugs. That ought to teach them.
If an Obama supporter were to walk up to me at this time and attempt to defend the man, he'd be punched square in the nose.
Posted by guest blogger tim aka The Godless Heathen.
We have two thirds of the Axis of Evil, Iran and North Korea, (Thank You Pres. Bush for eliminating the other - Iraq) doing their best to test the mettle of Pres. Obama. So what has he and his Democrat minions with all of their infinite wisdom decided to do? Yes sports fans, if you guessed ‘cutting the missile defense programs’ you’re the lucky winner of a slap in the back of the head.
Perhaps no part of the Obama administration’s planned Defense Department budget makes less sense than its effort to slash $1.2B from missile defense programs for FY 2010.
In light of the recent behavior of North Korea and the reminder that we face the prospect of a nuclear-armed revolutionary Islamic state in Iran, a group of Republican congressmen on the House Armed Services Committee on Tuesday offered a series of amendments seeking to reverse the proposed cuts.
Sources on the Committee tell Pajamas Media that the Committee Democrats blocked the amendments — seemingly unaware that earlier in the day Obama had deemed North Korea’s nuclear ambitions to be a “grave threat” or that administration officials were reporting that North Korea could have an ICBM capable of reaching the U.S. west coast within five years.
Someone said a few months ago that Obama is like Carter on speed. He’s more like Carter on a 4 day meth bender…after running out of coke…and draining all the neighbor’s liquor cabinets.
This man is gonn’a cause this atheist to start praying.
Posted by guest blogger tim aka The Godless Heathen.
During his campaign and the debates the then Sen. Obama railed against many of the policies of Pres. Bush, most significantly regarding how the War on Terror was handled. Just as many had predicted, once elected and thus exposed to the panic inducing Intel, the daily security briefings and such he would come to the realization that governing and leading is much more difficult than giving flowery speeches from a teleprompter in front of Greek columns and adoring, hyperventilating idol worshipers.
Now for the fine print. You won’t find it on the front pages, but the Obama administration has been walking back its position on many national-security questions. Attorney General Eric Holder has asserted that the U.S. has the right to hold suspected terrorists without charges. Solicitor General Elena Kagan has reiterated that position. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently told Congress that military commissions were “still very much on the table,” and rumor has it that the Obama administration will soon formally reverse itself on Guantánamo. The New York Times reported that “Officials who work on the Guantánamo issue say administration lawyers have become concerned that they would face significant obstacles to trying some terrorism suspects in federal courts. Judges might make it difficult to prosecute detainees who were subjected to brutal treatment or for prosecutors to use hearsay evidence gathered by intelligence agencies.” No kidding? Not only that, but not a single detainee was read his Miranda rights when he was taken into custody. Additionally, Congress is balking at letting Guantánamo’s inmates anywhere near their hometowns. Sen. Dianne Feinstein even put Alcatraz off limits. “It’s a national park and tourist attraction,” she explained.
While I’m glad Pres. Obama has kept intact those methods of keeping us all safe, it’s more than a little upsetting that while he promised to end these methods, it certainly could be argued that in no small way he was elected to the presidency because of those now broken promises.
So, I’m left to wonder, when will the Code Pinkers, the ACLU and the like be marching in the streets, protesting Pres. Obama just like they did when that idiot, war monger, criminal, cowboy ChimpBush and Darth Vader HalliburtonCheney was in office. Any day now I’m sure.
If not, than they must now concede that Pres. Bush wasn’t such a bad guy after all. What else is one left to believe; besides Pres. McCain would’ve done the same?
Oh well, at least they still have *Hope* to fall back on because *Change* has left the building as far as this is concerned. But I do have to give him credit on all the spending, I mean he did promise all that, right?
Last Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dealt a crushing blow to national defense. The three-judge panel’s ruling in al Odah v. United States has gotten scarce media attention. Perhaps that’s understandable: It’s a mind-numbing technical dispute over “discovery” in litigation, vying for attention against the socializing of our economy and the consequent collapse of the stock market. But the discovery in question is the most vital kind, namely, that of classified national-defense information. What is in dispute is how much sensitive intelligence we must share with enemies bent on annihilating Americans — enemies against whom the people’s representatives have authorized, by overwhelming margins, the use of force. That is, these “petitioners” are the militants who — along with al-Qaeda’s hierarchy and affiliates — use the intelligence we give them against the soldiers we have dispatched to fight the battles Congress has authorized, under the direction of a president whose first duty is the prosecution of the war.
Most significantly, the issuing court has declared an end to the war. No formal armistice has been announced, of course. Instead, as T. S. Eliot would have it, the judges are ending the war not with a bang, but a whimper. They are declaring it over by failing to acknowledge that it is, or ever was, on. It isn’t even background noise.
Go read the rest if your interested in such things. Can’t imagine who wouldn’t be, besides brain dead Obama voters.
Sleep well tonight good people, there are rough men ready to do violence on our behalf…assuming the Supreme Court will allow it.
The Pentagon will relax its ban on media coverage of returning U.S. war dead by allowing families to decide whether to allow photos and television footage of the flag-draped coffins of their loved ones, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday.
Gates ordered the change after reviewing a 1991 ban that prevents news organizations from recording images of war dead arriving at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, where the Pentagon has its main mortuary.
Let there be no mistake, this is Pres. Obama’s policy change alone. This is him trying to appease the Lefty, anti-war, Cindy Sheehan, Code Pink crowd after announcing that’s he’s sending more troops to Afghanistan. He has decided this, yet cannot bring it upon himself to mention the honor, sacrifice and achievements of our brave warriors in harms way. He treats Iraq like a burden, a place to flee, a campaign promise to fulfill rather than the amazing accomplishment that it is.
I fail to see how pictures of flag draped coffins will now suddenly be a reminder of our troop’s ultimate sacrifice to those who don’t understand already.
But if that is indeed true, that visual effects helps determine one’s perspective or reasoning on an issue, than I can only conclude that those who blame Pres, Bush for “creating” more terrorism or being concerned with the civil liberties of Gitmo detainees have never seen; a jihadi beheading video, the WTC tumbling down, the Pentagon burning, the hole in the side of the USS Cole, our embassies bombed, bodies of our soldiers dragged thru the streets Mogadishu, the Marine barracks in Lebanon in ruins, 444 days of humiliation from Iran…
For those who truly care, there are plenty of reminders that we are at war, that young men are dying, that a nation honors them and their sacrifice. If you need a coffin picture to realize that then you’ll never comprehend it anyways.
It seems it is those that are doing the honoring already have their eyes open, while filed with tears, and their hearts full of respect, though aching for young lives that will never be fulfilled.
Don’t try to tell me what I need Mr. President, because it is you who needs to look in the mirror if this is your answer.
Posted by guest blogger tim also known as The Godless Heathen.
Having witnessed the unadulterated hate and vitriol, better known as Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS), leveled at Pres. Bush while in office, I along with many vowed that we would not sink to their level and become afflicted with the Obama version of the syndrome.
Having said that, I would like everyone’s opinion on this. Does it cross the line of being disrespectful to the office of the President? Or is it merely making the point of disagreeing with Obama and his cabinet member’s outrageous rhetoric and the flawed policies of his first four weeks in office?
While realizing this is subjective, I’d like to hear from you fine people as to whether this qualifies as ODS. I’m just as upset and frustrated as anyone about such things as the ‘Stimulus Package’, the planned closing of Gitmo, cutting the defense budget (did you miss that one?), the overall submissiveness to the Muslim world, etc. But I am left wondering if it isn't ODS?
There are plans for a different acronym – ‘NOBO’, something less offensive to some and potentially more appropriate to stick on a bumper or wear on a shirt. I’ll try to keep you updated on that one.
On a related note, American Digest is giving Obama some great advice on toning down the depressing talk:
Whoa, dude, shut up, already! You've lost that loving feeling. You are bumming us out, harshing our mellow, killing our buzz and, in general, just bringing us down every time you open your mouth.
Here's a hint. Stay in the House. Kick back, take some deep hits on the clue bong, and chill out, dude. You're supposed to be cool, right? Right. So, hey, like be cool okay?
I don't know who's pumping the toxic text into your teleprompter, but get that guy on some pharmaceutical grade meds stat. I suggest 50 grains of Seconal IV twice daily. Anything to get that kid down from his high-grade Acid Flashback involving outtakes from Halloween IX. Too scary for the average American, don't you know?
Posted by guest blogger tim aka The Godless Heathen.
File this under ‘You just can’t make this stuff up’:
The founder of a Muslim TV network whose very inception was to combat negative perceptions of Muslims…wait for it…beheads his wife.
Now for the kicker, his wife is the one who “came up with the idea in December 2001 while listening to the radio on a road trip" (according to a Reuters story at the time).
"Some derogatory comments were being made about Muslims that offended her," (she) told Reuters ahead of Tuesday's launch. "She was seven months pregnant, and she thought she didn't want her kids growing up in this environment."
Let’s see, derogatory comments, mom is beheaded…religion of peace, religion of pieces of dead bodies…yup, same same.
Though to be fair, this could just be an isolated incident. [*Rick - Snark]
Head over to Jihad Watch for the rest, (which you should be doing everyday anyways).
President Obama clearly didn't do his homework before ordering the suspension of military tribunals to try terrorist suspects. We have learned that even his own legal counsel admitted that Mr. Obama erred in discussing details about terrorism with families of victims last week, and that the administration was ignorant of a key point that terrorists exploit to their advantage. In his rush to fulfill a campaign promise to his more fervid anti-war supporters, the president's legal oversights risk the disclosure of some highly classified information to terrorists.
Debra Burlingame, sister of Charles Burlingame III, the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77 that was flown into the Pentagon on 9/11, was present at last Friday's White House meeting of families of terrorism victims. Her impression was that President Obama was saying the right words in general, but when it came to specifics he was uncertain, uninformed, and sometimes just plain mistaken. Ms. Burlingame is an attorney who has followed closely the legal aspects of the terrorism cases, and her detailed, probing questions were met with stammers, stares, and statements that betrayed an understanding of the law that was, she said, "flat out wrong."
Case in point: the president's knowledge of the role of the Classified Information Procedures Act or CIPA. This law governs the way in which classified information is used in trials. The Sixth Amendment guarantees defendants the right to confront their accusers and the evidence against them, but the government has an important interest in cases such as these in keeping sources and methods secret. Under CIPA rules, in cases where classified information is used, the government has the option of sharing the information with the defendant, or not using it.
Posted by guest blogger tim AKA The Godless Heathen.
Victor Davis Hanson goes 'Brutally Honest', if you will, by explaining the many mistakes of the first two weeks of the new administration and offers some sage advice for President Obama.
(A)nyone who cares about the US, at home and overseas, must be worried, very worried, about the disastrous last two weeks. Even the fawning media–that is responsible in some way for the crisis, given that they chose to be Pravda-like in encouraging the messianic style that got a haughty Obama in his present mess–will soon start bailing in efforts to restore their last fides. If a Dick Morris figure does not come to the rescue soon, Obama’s soaring rhetoric of hope and change will become the stuff of Leno/Letterman and general laughter. Bush was unfairly demonized, but no one abroad thought he was predictably soft and would be so-so about protecting US interests, or that his words and his deeds would be so often in direct antithesis.
What happened? Count the ways, and then let us see what might be done pronto!
I. Obama claimed a new moral high ground, and the media seconded that. But nothing in his career—his failed congressional race, the divorce disclosures of his two Senate primary and general rivals, Rezko, Wright, Blago advisor, Ayers, etc.—had ever suggested he had on a single occasion challenged prevailing norms in efforts to raise the ethical bar.
Instead he was allowed to blather on about heaven on earth, while he was by needs governing from the corrupt cesspool of DC lawyers and lobbyists. So we got the worst of both worlds: the most exalted ethical rhetoric ever, and the greatest ethical lapses of any incipient administration in memory. Over 10 lobbyists now appointed. Consider further: Richardson (nuff said), Holder (helped to pardon a most wanted fugitive), Lynn (Raytheon lobbyist now at Defense), Killefer (sloppy taxes; she’s gone), Geithner (tax dodger), Daschle (would have been a tax felon had he been one of us), Rangel (blank check both to write and break our tax laws), Dodd and Frank (exemptions for ethical lapses at the eye of the financial storm).
There are still the Blago tapes and the fears that Prosecutor Fitzgerald short-circuited the investigation in recognition that once Team Obama started turning up horse-trading on tape they had to be warned to desist. The full release of those transcripts will either confirm or belie that fear—and Blago is sinisterly brilliant and eager for revenge.
Recent Comments