Mobs in Egypt and Libya attack our embassies over a movie denigrating Mohammed. In the Libyan attack an American ambassador is murdered. Barack Obama, president of the United States had this to say:
The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing
efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of
Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.
Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks
on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who
serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy.
Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We
firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of
free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.
That's what I wrote this morning. All through the day more information has been shared. Obama and Romney have both made statements. Romney has been roundly condemned by the mainstream media as they continue their eight-year long school girl crush on Obama. Obama, of course, will always get what he wants from them and knows full well he will never have to call them in the morning. They will always worship him, grovel at his feet, and unashamedly lick the sole of his boot.
No matter how Obama's worshipers wish it were otherwise, Romney is right. Obama offers the same unrequited love to Islam in its worst form that the MSM offers him. And that is the book he licks.
Barry Rubin has an excellent analysis of this sorry situation as Obama continues to embarrass our country and offer better men than himself as human sacrifices to . . . himself and to Islam.
Rather than expose the phony excuse for the demonstration and condemn the Egyptian government’s behavior, the U.S. government groveled. It issued statements in English apologizing for the fact that someone had exercised his right of free speech within its country. The tweets it sent out in Arabic were even worse, pitiful pleas of the we-are-on-your-side-against-this-terrible-Islamophobia variety. And will Egypt’s failure to protect the embassy — because it is on the side of America’s enemies — have any effect on the Obama administration’s helping the Egyptian government get two German submarines (against Israel’s efforts), taking $1 billion off Egypt’s debt, and having a nice meeting with the visiting Egyptian president (while refusing to meet Israel’s prime minister, this supposedly super-pro-Israel president)? You know the answer.
Advertisement
This is a policy of institutionalized cowardice unprecedented in U.S. history.
Read the whole thing. Later on he says:
After meeting Egypt’s new president, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said, “I was convinced that President Mursi is his own man,” adding that the new president is committed to democratic reforms and to representing all Egyptians.
It kind of reminds me of when Bush looked into Putin's eyes,
"I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue.
"I was able to get a sense of his soul.
"He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship," Mr Bush said.
If it's true that we get the politicians we deserve, we are in for the roughest ride this country has ever seen.
Or maybe he thinks he is king. Here is the latest royal proclamation from his majesty, the anointed one, he who has visited all 57 states, protector of Islam, friend of the Muslim Brotherhood, the ever-flexible-but-even-more-flexible-after-the-next-election, the one, the only, Barack Obama!
President Obama on Monday issued stern language to the Supreme Court of the United States regarding his health care law, expressing confidence "Obamacare" will not be overturned by the nation's highest court.
"I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld," the president said Monday afternoon at a White House press conference that included Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who are attending the North American Leaders' Summit. The president said overturning the law would be "an unprecedented and extraordinary step" and compared the court's rejection of the law to "judicial activism."
"For years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism," the president said, baiting conservatives who have long complained about justices' political agendas. The president stressed that the judges are "unelected" and noted that the law was passed by a democratically elected Congress.
Monday's comments were the first public warning the president has issued since the justices heard oral arguments last week on the constitutionality of the law, which includes an individual health care mandate.
It remains to be seen how the justices will rule on the matter. On Friday, the court began deliberations, which could last through June. The ruling could significantly impact the president's re-election strategy.
Public warning? What is he planning on doing if the "activist" Supreme Court decides that Obama is wrong? Elected or not, they are the third branch of government and as such have a voice. What Obama doesn't want to understand because he thinks he doesn't have to, is that his is not the only voice in the room, and the other voices are allowed to be heard whether or not they agree with him.
Hooray! Our president, Obama, is going to fix high gas prices - in 2025.
President Barack Obama says vehicle fuel economy standards set under his administration and better cars built by a resurgent U.S. auto industry will save money at the gas pump over the long term, a counterpoint to Republican criticism of his energy policy.
In his weekly radio and online address today, Obama said Detroit automakers are on track to build cars that average nearly 55 miles per gallon by 2025, doubling current mileage standards.
"That means folks will be able to fill up every two weeks instead of every week, saving the typical family more than $8,000 at the pump over time," he said. "That's a big deal, especially as families are yet again feeling the pinch from rising gas prices.
Gosh, Mr. President, I can hardly wait to start saving big money thirteen years from now when gasoline prices are up to $10.00 per gallon, but I only have to fill up half as much. What would we do without you in our corner?
What makes this stance by our community-organizer-in-chief even more ridiculous, is that for years, since the 1990s, the Democrats, environmentalists, and the Left in general have been insistent that drilling for domestic oil is the height of foolishness because that oil wouldn't hit the pipelines for at least ten years - since the 1990s - that's what they've been telling us.
I can't be the only person in America catching the faint odor of bovine flatulence from Obama and his pals in the alternative energy business. It seems that electric cars will not be the panacea to our energy problems.
General Motors has told 1,300 employees at its Detroit Hamtramck that they will be temporarily laid off for five weeks as the company halts production of the Chevrolet Volt and its European counterpart, the Opel Ampera.
“Even with sales up in February over January, we are still seeking to align our production with demand,” said GM spokesman Chris Lee.
Translation: even with the huge bribe from the government, not enough suckers went for this electric lemon. Although I do know a fairly wealthy fellow who did accept the subsidy and let the government install a special electrical outlet in his garage to power his Volt. Maybe I'm selfish, but I resent the fact that my cars are 5 and 14 years old, I don't even own a garage, but my tax dollars are subsidizing him. Oh wait, I mean my portion of the debt is subsidizing his electric toy.
While higher gasoline prices might not be the best reason to replace Obama in November, it is certainly one of many reasons to return him to being a private citizen.
Obama gave his speech at AIPAC today. He tried to mollify a room full of Jews and continue to make them believe that he is on Israel's side in their continuous fight for survival. Last year those idiots gave him a standing ovation. Since then it should be even more obvious that it's not that he doesn't care about Israel. He despises Israel. He is firmly on the side of the genocidal Palestinians.
While he doesn't like Israel, and probably doesn't care much for Jews except for the turncoats who aren't very comfortable with the concept of Judaism or with being Jewish, the ones who will sell out Israel and the Jewish community to any powerful political figure who will promise to be their friend and make them popular, he absolutely, one hundred percent, loves that Jewish money. As long as there are enough wealthy Jews who refuse to admit that Obama is endangering not only Israel, a country they may or may not care about, but he is creating a darker future for their children.
With that in mind, I would like to present for your entertainment and information (more for your information) a short movie about Obama's record on Israel. It's long by Internet standards, but it's well worth watching if you care about the future of the United States and Western civilization, because without Israel, the U.S. and the West will fall.
If we weren't currently suffering under our current administration, I'd ask, "Are you kidding?" Unfortunately we know that he's not.
The Taliban must promise to disassociate from international terrorism and affirm their desire to participate in tentative talks on a political settlement to the war in Afghanistan, a senior U.S. official said on Sunday.
The Taliban is only willing to negotiate the terms of our surrender. We are the infidel. The Taliban take the Quranic command to fight the infidel until all men acknowledge Allah as God and Mohammed as his prophet. Don't forget that it is written,
Chapter 9, verse 29 of the Qur'an reads:
"Fight those of the People of the Book who do not [truly] believe in God and the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, who do not obey the rule of justice, until they pay the tax and agree to submit."
I'm sure in lieu of conversion, they will accept the jizyah. Either way, the sacrifice in American lives and bodies has been wasted. Men and women who were beyond the understanding of the petty, spineless schemers in Congress and the White House, have been sacrificed so that the base scum who inhabit the American halls of power can, Scrooge-like, keep their gnarled, morally diseased fingers on their ill-gotten gains.
Gibbon wrote of the Eastern Roman Empire in decline, a time when weak, ineffective, emperors ruled, one after another, watching the remains of a former great empire, built by great men at a time when great men were allowed to rise to the top, slowly get eaten away by foreign and domestic enemies they were too weak to effectively confront. The strong among the Greeks, if there were any, were silenced and ignored by court eunuchs and their followers who were more interested in keeping their plum positions than in doing what was best for their people.
Egad, here he goes again with the videos. Well, just one this time.
Ezra Levant is Canadian, but he is right on in this video. Obama, like the previous worst president in American history, Jimmy Carter has proven that he prefers thugs and dictators over democracies and the American people. We, the American people, have been thrown under the bus.
One of the problems of educating poor children in modern society is that the students who try to learn, to better themselves so that they can move up in society and become a contributor instead of a parasite, is the savage peer-resistance they face. Thomas Sowell has written about this pernicious influence in the United States among black students who accuse high achievers among them of "acting white." But it's not a racial issue. Theodore Dalrymple writes of the same pathology in British schools.
What did they mean by this apparent paradox? They meant that anyone who tried hard at school and performed well was wasting his time, when he could have been engaged in the real business of life, such as truanting in the park or wandering downtown. Furthermore, there was menace in their words: If you don't mend your ways and join us, they were saying, we'll beat you up. This was no idle threat: I often meet people in their twenties and thirties in my hospital practice who gave up at school under such duress and subsequently realize that they have missed an opportunity which, had it been taken, would have changed the whole course of their lives much for the better. And those who attend the few schools in the city which maintain very high academic standards risk a beating if they venture to where the poor white stupids live. In the last year, I have treated two boys in the emergency room after such a beating, and two others who have taken overdoses for fear of receiving one at the hands of their neighbors.
Peer pressure, especially when it's violently negative, as adults know, and as we try to encourage our own children to avoid, has a tremendous effect on a child's education. Study and hard work that leads to beatings and hospitalization is a powerful incentive for giving up. The future parasites do not allow anyone in their domain to rise above that setting. Everybody must remain equal, that is, equally stupid, equally poor, equally miserable, and equally a drain on society.
Among Progressives, we are being taught to abhor differences in wealth among Americans. The distribution of wealth, we are told, is too skewed in favor of the rich. This is something new and dangerous to society. This inequality is bad news. In the name of fairness, wealth needs to be redistributed. If you are too successful, and you make too much money, you can be threatened. If you are an oil executive, you can be hauled before Congress and paraded before the American public in a glorious show trial. And to Progressives, this kind of harassment is not only acceptable, but noble. Because some people are poor, and some work hard for very little money, those who make a lot of money must justify their wealth. Businessmen who have made an honest living and have committed no crimes can be vilified and threatened by our elected officials because they're not equal, because they've used their talents are resources to rise economically above the rest of us. As our president has told us, "I do think at a certain point you've made enough money." How much money is enough? He didn't say. But we can assume that above a certain amount, you qualify for a beat down.
The really perverse part of this mode of thought, is that I'm pretty sure that it's shared among Obama's wealthy supporters. We know though, that as long as they keep funneling a portion of their lunch money to Obama's reelection campaign and other causes that he supports, they can never make enough money. Some capitalist oppressors are more equal than others.
And if it's not the president bullying us into poverty, it's an environmental group. How much bullying does it take before the wealth creators give up and leave the rest of us to sink into equality? Once we have an entire society of parasites though, who does that society feed off of? We only have each other.
It's no wonder the Left sides so adamantly with Islamists. They to want equality, at least their Islamic version of equality, you know, Muslim males most equal, infidel females least equal . . .
I wrote all of the above back in August. And since then, I've ignored my blog. I started posting a comic strip, but once school started, I didn't have time to draw. Between school, tutoring, non-blog pro-Israel activity, and going to the gym, who's got time to draw?
But getting back on topic, the rise of the OWS movement has proven everything I've written. There is a sample here. Make sure you watch the video. My question at the beginning is, what are they so afraid of that they refuse to cooperate with a conservative web-based news service?
Am I back? Who knows? Who cares? If I have time (ha!) I will continue my amateurly drawn comic strip.
Barry Rubin is a pretty good political analyst. That's probably why he's not working for any of the big networks. Here is one of his latest.
The hardcore Obama supporter is not watching unemployment levels, the economy, the mess in Egypt and Libya, or the effectiveness of health care reform, His concern is that if he decides Obama is a terrible president it means he is one of “them.” This is a horror he can never accept. For the Jews among them—which explains their higher membership in this group—these factors are reinforced by the image of becoming the very Nazi Cossack Klu Klux Klan monster that is their worst nightmare.
The left isn’t doing this because it’s on the defensive or desperate. On the contrary, this is its main strategy. How else can you persuade about half the population, liberals and centrists, to support the most left-wing policy in American history? That’s why they need a strategy based on hate, fear, stereotyping, demonization of the “other,” rejection of diversity, and all those other things that supposedly Political Correctness and Multiculturalism supposedly oppose! What’s the response? I’m not going to tell you anything you don’t know but it might be useful to have it all in one place:
1. Avoid playing into these stereotypes whenever possible. Once you lose your credibility by being too extreme or not being able to present facts, it is very hard to regain it in this atmosphere.
2. Word of mouth, have the best arguments and point them out to people. Never doubt that no matter how confident many of these people appear to be they are having severe doubts about their policies and ideas working. Be able to argue on the other side’s own terms in order to show hypocrisy (see point in bold above).
Don't stop here. There are more tips. Collect them all.
You watch. You decide. But make sure you watch. The worrisome part is trying to figure out which Republican can win the next election. So far, pickin's are mighty slim. Me? I'd go along with Ann Coulter in her quest to get Chris Christie to run, but the one I would vote for without holding my nose is Allen West, but he won't run in 2012. He's got this weird idea that he's beholden to his constituents to do the job they elected him to do. Now really, what planet is this guy from?
At their highest this Spring, gas prices around my neighborhood were a bit over $4.00 per gallon. Then they started going down. Last week they were $3.49, better, but still almost double what they should be.
So then, Barack "Smartest Man in the Room" "Don't Drill Here" Obama decided to release 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Oil Reserve, something that other presidents avoided doing even when prices spiked at $4.15 a gallon under the last Bush, but only releasing a few million barrels in response to Hurricane Katrina. Apparently those other presidents simply didn't have the mental agility, the sheer brain power that Mr. "Hope and Change" has when it comes to economic issues. Talking out of both sides of his ass, as always, we read,
Although the impending summer demand clearly has the Obama administration worried, the White House would not make any predictions about the effect that the release will have on prices at the pump.
“We’re not making predictions about market prices, which go up and down,” a senior administration official said. “This is about addressing the supply disruption and the prices will be what they are.”
Well, it's a good thing they didn't make any predictions, because back in my neighborhood, gas prices are now up to $3.79 a gallon. Thank you Barack Obama, Soooper Genius.
Now how about issuing some drilling permits so that the evil, greedy oil companies can get more oil to the market and perhaps knock down prices for us poor, beleaguered, overworked, underpaid, overcharged consumers.
A Major U.S. Policy Shift Toward the Muslim Brotherhood Disguised
This is actually by Barry Rubin. I was going to do the usual blog thing and copy some of it, then offer my own erudite comments. But I decided to show mercy on any readers I may still have and just reprint Rubin's piece. It really says it all.
Here’s the headline: “U.S. to resume formal Muslim Brotherhood contacts.” But that’s not true. In fact, as the Reuters article itself admits there have never been “formal” contacts before but only informal ones. Let’s examine the language, which stems from a “senior U.S. official” to see what the Obama Administration thinks about the Muslim Brotherhood.
“A step that reflects the Islamist group’s growing political weight but that is almost certain to upset Israel and its U.S. backers.”
Note how it is portrayed as an Israel-related issue. Won’t it upset people who care about U.S. interests? Won’t it upset Egyptian Christians? The Saudis and Jordanians and other relatively moderate Arab regimes? Won’t it upset Muslims who oppose revolutionary Islamism?
We are supposed to believe that only Israel and the Jews will be upset about the Obama Administration moving closer to a radical antisemitic, anti-Christian, anti-American, anti-Western, pro-terrorist group that wants to repress women, kill gays, and overturn pretty much every existing government in the region. But just those Jews and their friends will be upset. You know, just like in the 1930s when certain people said that opposition to the totalitarian threat of those years was just coming from the Jews.
Reuters portrays the Brotherhood, as do many, as “a group founded in 1928 that seeks to promote its conservative vision of Islam in society.” Conservative? You mean they are like the Republican Party? You mean they are for the status quo? And of course one of the things they did since 1928 was to ally with Nazi Germany and the Brotherhood continues to voice the same political line toward Jews that it did back then
We are also told that the Brotherhood “long ago renounced violence as a means to achieve political change in Egypt….” This is simply not true. The Brotherhood merely temporarily renounced violence within Egypt because they knew that any resort to it would get them wiped out by the regime and the army. They postponed using violence until the revolutionary era arrived. Of course, if they can take over Egypt without violence they are happy to do so.
But there’s more. Every day for decades the Brotherhood has supported violence against Israel. It has supported violence against Americans in Iraq, and on various other fronts. Why is this so hard to see?
“The result has been a dilemma for the Obama administration. Former officials and analysts said it has little choice but to engage the Brotherhood directly, given its political prominence after the February 11 downfall of former President Hosni Mubarak.”
That is arguably true but by recognizing the Brotherhood and having contacts with it, the Obama Administration also makes a unilateral concession encouraging the Brotherhood. People who know the Middle East understand how this works: Soon many Egyptians will say (as they said in Iran and as they now say in Turkey) that the United States wants the Islamists to win.
But, the article continues:
“U.S. President Barack Obama will surely face criticism for engaging with the Brotherhood, even tentatively.” And who do they go to, Middle East analysts who can explain why this is dangerous? No, to the head of AIPAC in order to perpetuate the theme that this is merely a problem with the Jewish lobby! And who is presented to refute this? Former American diplomats. So it is the people who know versus the Jews.
And what are we told about the Brotherhood’s goals? This:
“The group says it wants a civil state based on Islamic principles, but talk by some members of an `Islamic state or `Islamic government’ have raised concerns that their goal is a state where full Islamic sharia law is implemented. The group says such comments have been taken out of context.”
“Some members” include the leader and deputy leader of the group. It is apparently too much trouble to read and quote what Brotherhood officials say, or their publications openly state, or their political platform calls for. Never are these statements fully quoted. Always they are dismissed as insignificant, like the statements of the late Usama bin Ladin once were.
Moreover, Egypt under Mubarak could be reasonably said to be a “civil state based on Islamic principles.” And since “Islamic principles” are mandated by Allah democracy is ultimately unacceptable since no human vote could alter those principles. How can an elected parliament pass a law limiting a man to one wife, or accepting religious conversion, outlawing amputations, or maintaining peace with Israel—to cite just a few examples—since those are “Islamic principles,” at least under the interpretation of Islam held by the Brotherhood.
So we just can’t tell if the Muslim Brotherhood wants a radical Islamist state before it takes power” Just like it was presumably a mystery about what Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini wanted to do in Iran, the Taliban in Afghanistan, Hizballah in Lebanon, and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
And finally the article doesn’t even mention the most important development in U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood relations during that group’s eighty-year history: President Barack Obama’s explicit (and uninvited) statement accepting the Brotherhood being in government. U.S. policy is paving the way for a radical, possibly Islamist, Egypt. It is a catastrophic strategy.
OK, one quick comment. There are many tactics being used, and many groups dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. I believe Obama is allied with those groups, and he is using a variety of methods to make us slaves to Islamic barbarism. Things were bad enough under the Bush Administration, when it was forbidden to admit that the terrorist thugs who were our declared enemies were Muslim. Now, under Obama, we're set to recognize those terrorist thugs, who are dedicated to our downfall, and negotiate with them. No good can come of this.
So this "war on terror" is a big deal that's been going on ever since 19 Islamic jihadists, who were in our country legally, flew some airliners into some prominent buildings and murdered almost 3000 Americans in the name of Allah. In response, then President Bush sent our armed forces after the perps - well, the ones who didn't sacrifice themselves in the name of the Ummah, rather they went after the brains behind the attack, and thanks to the tenacity, training, and skill of our armed forces, got the suckers.
In addition, we've had troops battling jihadists in Afghanistan and Iraq ever since. Our soldiers have removed tens of thousands of these terrorist scum (or Michael Moore's minutemen depending on the accuracy of your moral compass) from polluting our Earth. So why, oh why, does our government, under both Bush and Obama continue to welcome them into our country?
Before being granted refugee status in the U.S. and settling down in Bowling Green, Ky., Waad Ramadan Alwan was allegedly a sniper and skilled bomb maker targeting U.S. forces who bragged that his "lunch and dinner would be an American."
Alwan is one of two Iraqi refugees who the Justice Department announced Tuesday had been charged for participating in an alleged plot to send cash, explosives and Stinger missiles to Iraq for use against Americans.
The men are among 56,000 Iraqis who took advantage of special programs to come to the U.S. for people who demonstrated they were in danger from militias in Iraq for their religious beliefs or because they were translators for U.S. government or media organizations.
Alwan was admitted into the U.S. even though his fingerprint was found in 2005 on an unexploded roadside bomb that was set to blow up a U.S. convoy in Iraq. The print was loaded into a Department of Defense database, but a search of that database was not then a part of the application process for refugee status in the U.S.
So all the jihadists have to do to survive the onslaught from American forces, is to claim their lives are in danger for proper and politically correct reasons and get relocated to a comfortable American suburb. Once acclimated to life in America and added to local welfare lists, they are free to resume their Jihad against the Great Satan.
Even better, if they're caught committing jihadist activities, rather than facing the business end of a Hellfire missile or a marine's rifle, and ending up as temporary decoration scattered over portions of the landscape, they get a jail cell, three meals a day, a Qu'ran untouched by infidel hands, (probably fan mail and marriage proposals) and a team of lawyers as dedicated to the overthrow of the United States as they are. And if they're convicted, they get a nice long prison stretch where they have years and years of access to the most deranged members of American society who they can convert to Islam in order to spread their poisonous message. Because some of them will get out and will be only too happy to engage in the same anti-social behavior that got them locked up in the first place. But this time, as a special bonus, their violence, any murder or mayhem they wish to engage in, is done in the name of Allah. For them it's win-win. Slaughter to their heart's content, and gain paradise because of the slaughter.
It's not so great for the rest of us, but I don't think that's of any concern to the DHS or State Department weasels who are supposed to be working in the interest of the American people, not phony Islamic refugees who are invited into Dar al-Harb to wreak havoc.
The Bin Laden backlash: Angry Muslims demonstrate outside Downing Street as Obama visits Britain
Yeah, religion of peace misinterpreted by a few twisted lone individuals. That hypothesis is once again proven by this article in Great Britain's Daily Mail.
Muslim activists descended on Downing Street today in protest at Barack Obama's state visit to London.
As the president met David Cameron in Whitehall, an angry crowd of burka clad women as well as protesters from Muslims Against Crusades gathered on the streets outside.
They were joined by a number of prominent campaigners, including Anjem Choudary.The radical cleric said that President Obama has made himself a 'legitimate target' for Muslim extremists after the killing of Osama bin Laden.
He called for Mr Obama to be dragged before a sharia court over his role in the war in Afghanistan.
For a real treat, and to check out some of these lone defilers of Islam, make sure you follow the link and view the photos. Their numbers are small, and infidel Britons still have most of their rights, but they haven't fought back yet in response to any of the demands their Muslim overlords have placed upon them. Chances are they won't. I hope I'm wrong, but their yellow streak seems to get wider at every provocation.
Netanyahu Schools Obama - and Lord Knows Obama Needs to Learn Something About How the World Works
Obama gave a speech. Here is an analysis of one of Obama's unnoticed bone-headed errors, not one of the big bold ones, but a tiny, telling one, that passed under most people's radars.
In doing his balancing act on Israeli and Palestinian fears and hostility, he says this:
“I'm convinced that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would rather look to the future than be trapped in the past….We see it in the actions of a Palestinian who lost three daughters to Israeli shells in Gaza. `I have the right to feel angry,’ he said. `So many people were expecting me to hate. My answer to them is I shall not hate. Let us hope,’ he said, `for tomorrow.’"
That’s genuinely touching. But in the specific case Obama cites—that of Izzedin Abuelaish on January 16, 2009-- there is strong reason to believe that the three girls were killed because of Hamas, that is Palestinian, actions.
But what's a bit of misrepresentation of the truth when "evenhandedness" is at stake? Truth be damned in the name of moral equivalence, a favorite tactic of Israel bashers and enemies of Western Civilization. Netanyahu begins talking about 7 minutes in, and he politely fills Obama in on some relevant facts surrounding Israel and its neighbors.
But there's more. Obama either doesn't understand, or doesn't want to understand what the Israelis and by proxy, we in the United States, are facing. The Muslim world suffers from an "inner Nakba", a hatred so deep and so all consuming that it's the focus of their lives. We see it in the behavior of Hamas and Fatah in their refusal to stop the violence and the incitement, and we see it in the rest of the Islamic world in their war against Israel, in their overt Jew-hatred, and in their covert (or maybe not so covert, just not as pronounced as their Jew-hatred) hatred of Christians. For video evidence of the inner Nakba, watch this:
The lady is being honest, and a lot of people accept the fact that Muslims around the world are taught to hate Jews. When not accepted, it's rationalized. But if anyone even questions the claim that Islam is a religion of peace there are charges of racism and islamophobia. It's also accepted that Palestinians should get their Jew-free state. Ask for an Islamic-free state, and again, get ready for the name calling. Anyway, I'm rambling. The fact remains that when it comes to Israel, Obama is guided by ideology rather than facts. Israel should make no more concessions. Netanyahu needs to continue standing up to Obama. He needs to demonstrate loudly and clearly that the survival of the Jewish people is not open to compromise or concessions.
Read the following article, and you may agree that yep, something is absolutely wrong here. Here is a large portion of the article.
In the case of at Jose Guerena, the Marine who served two tours of duty in Iraq, a Pima County, Arizona SWAT team were serving a narcotics conspiracy warrant at his home earlier this month. Guerena, who had been sleeping just two hours after working his shift at a local mine, was awakened by screams from his wife when she observed an unidentified man with a gun outside of their home. She grabbed her baby and hid in a closet as Guerena grabbed a rifle and proceeded to investigate. He was shot dead inside the sanctity of his own home, in the U.S. and not by some sniper in Iraq. In total, seventy-one rounds were fired at Guerena.
To make matters worse - much worse, medical treatment was withheld by the SWAT team, according to his widow and verified by police and medical logs. At this point, it would appear that Guerena was startled awake and thinking he was protecting his family from a possible home invasion, stumbled onto a police raid. He never had a chance.
As a result of the lax border security at the hands of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, there has been a sharp rise in home invasions in Tucson over the last few years. Of course, one would not know that by the “cocky football spiking” Obama from his recent speech in El Paso, where he mocked and ridiculed anyone who dared to question the state of U.S.-Mexico border insecurity.
Now, consider the raid on a south Florida Mosque at about 6:00 a.m. Saturday, by dozens of heavily armed federal agents. They pounded on the door of the Masjid Jamaat Al-Mumineen mosque in Miami-Dade county, armed with warrants for Muslims who are suspected of a long-running conspiracy to murder, maim and kidnap people overseas in support of the Taliban. As morning prayers were in progress inside the mosque, the armed agents respectfully waited until the prayers ended, and then entered the mosque only after removing their footwear.
So how far are we supposed to bend over for the Islamofascists? And are we expected to also make whatever sound a goat makes? Will that be enough to show sensitivity?
So Obama has officially announced his reelection bid for 2012. We know his campaign really began back in January 2008. Got to start that reelection cash flowing. He's going to need it.
I'm also starting a campaign for 2012. I'm calling it my HOPE FOR CHANGE campaign.
In the midst of the Obamacare debate, an astounding and possibly racist, imperialist discovery has been made. Capitalism is responsible for lowering medical costs. Can you believe it?
In some of the most significant changes in decades, hospital systems are beginning to post their prices publicly and offer a range of help, including big discounts to uninsured and underinsured people with limited household incomes.
Health insurers also have embraced the trend. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, Health Alliance Plan, Priority Health and Aetna are among those with improved Web sites that provide the average cost of a procedure. Some sites even zoom in on local prices when visitors type in their ZIP code.
"It's a fundamental shift" in how health care prices are set and publicized, said Stephen Hathaway, chief revenue officer for the Detroit-based Henry Ford Health System.
The changes come as Michigan's uninsured population has grown to 1.35 million, an increase of 200,000 between 2007 and 2009, the latest year of information available from the state health department.
Didn't Obama and his progressive minions assure us that only the government can bring down health care costs? And they insisted that only their preferred method, strong government intervention to the point of forcing all citizens to buy health insurance from from a government insurance provider )as private insurance companies are to be driven out of business) would insure that we Americans continue to enjoy some of the world's best medical care. This, of course, doesn't apply to the over 700 organizations (including labor unions who fought long and hard to encourage the passage of Obamacare) who have been given waivers so that they do NOT have to participate in Obamacare because it's driven up their health care costs. Huh? What? Driven costs up?
Wait. Did up become down, and down become up? Have I not been informed of Progressive changes in the English language? Or is somebody not being honest with the American public?
But seriously folks, now that it has been demonstrated once again that Capitalism and free markets are responsible for lower costs, greater wealth creation, greater freedom, increased innovation, a better standard of living by just about any honest measure you can choose, and that increased government control over the economy leads to the opposite, why are some people still clamoring for more government spending to "create jobs."
“It’s an industry that’s going through the roof,” said Mark Semple, president of Vancouver-based Passport Medical. “It’s wait times, it’s cost, it’s price, it’s quality and accessibility.”
Retired accountant Gary Davidge of Calgary started looking into hip replacements two years ago when they cost $45,000 U.S. in Arizona. When the arthritis pain in his hip intensified in December, a medical broker found him a price of $18,800 in Montana.
Although Mr. Davidge’s preference would have been to have his operation at home funded by Canada’s public health system, the average wait was a year to 18 months, and no one could tell him with certainty when the surgery would take place.
So, as others before me have asked, where do the Canadians go (and where do we go) to escape socialized medicine?
A friend of mine emailed me the following video: "Colonel Allen West Answers a Marine's Question". By today's standards, at 3 minutes, 42 seconds, it's a pretty lengthy video. At my age though, I can keep my attention focused for extended periods of time. On really good videos, I've been known to watch uninterrupted for five or six minutes. But like I was saying, watch the video. I had never heard of West before, but now, I would give him my vote for president.
Here. Look.
Notice, if you will, that the man is (dare I say it?) honest. He pulls no punches in order to pander to the Islamic, or the progressive, or the delusions of peace vote. He understands the problem with Islam and isn't afraid to state it in public, on camera, without the cover of weasel words or quibbling politically correct speech. Honesty. From a congressman. It shouldn't be that surprising or unexpected. It's a shame that it is.
But wait! There's more. Read his Wikipedia page.
While serving in Taji, Iraq, on August 20, 2003, West was in charge of the interrogation of Yahya Jhodri Hamoodi, a civilian Iraqi police officer suspected of having information about attacks on American troops in the area.[citation needed] Interrogators had been informed the detainee knew about a planned ambush. When the detainee refused to talk, LTC West was asked to assist. Hamoodi continued to withhold information, and West was accused of firing his pistol past the prisoner's head, frightening him into talking. According to West's sworn statement,[5] the detainee told West:
[The attack] was to occur Friday morning in Saba al Boor vicinity of the police station by positioned snipers supposedly being brought in from Fallujah. [The detainee] was to ID my vehicle and myself for these rooftop firers. We took this information and the following day established flask CPs and used AH-64s overhead. There was no attack and no further attacks have emanated from the town since the apprehension of [the detainee] and his named associates.
At least one suspect was arrested as a result of the information obtained through the detainee's information. The suspect's home was searched, but no plans for attacks or weapons were found. West testified he did not know if "any corroboration" of a plot was ever found. He added: "At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It's possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi."[8]
West, who had completed almost 22 years of active service, was charged with violating articles 128 (assault) and 134 (general article) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was processed through an Article 32 hearing in November 2003, where he stated "I know the method I used was not right, but I wanted to take care of my soldiers" and was fined $5,000. LTC West accepted the judgment and retired with full benefits in the summer of 2004. Asked if he would have act differently if under similar circumstances again, West testified, "If it's about the lives of my soldiers at stake, I'd go through hell with a gasoline can."[9]
So along with honesty, we can add loyalty, bravery, fortitude, and fearlessness.
Of course, not everybody likes West. While I was watching this video again, I noticed a video with Keith Olberman and another with Ed Schultz, both denouncing West. These are denunciations that are easily expected. Schlutz has a history of respecting Al Sharpton, whom he has interviewed on a few occasions. And Olberman? I've read and listened to things that this hateful, hypocritical, pompous twit has said about his political opponents. He is everything that Leftists claim the Rush Limbaugh is. Both of these wise guys adore Obama, who embodies none of the qualities exhibited by West.
When it comes to honesty, we have documented examples of Obama lying about the deficit, the costs of Obamacare, his support for Israel, and other policy decisions he's made. I don't know if West has lied to get to where he is. If so, Olberman, and Schlutz, and Moveon.org, and the rest of the "Progressive" noise machine will ferret out any dishonesty. So far, from the few videos I've seen, the only thing they have is character assassination.
Rep. West was loyal enough to his troops to put his career in danger in a situation where he had to think fast to possibly save American lives. In hindsight, he may have been a bit heavy handed, but he didn't have the luxury of hindsight nor did he have weeks, months, and years to reexamine the situation from every possible angle in order to come up with the perfect solution that would please everyone and harm nobody.
Judging by the way Obama threw friends and family "under the bus" when they became hindrances, one would think that he and his supporters see loyalty as a character flaw. Under loyalty, I would include loyalty to one's country, you know that old fashion concept, the former virtue known as patriotism. West put on a uniform and trained to fight for his country against his countries enemies, both foreign and domestic. Obama can't even summon the fortitude to name our country's enemies, even when those enemies proudly declare themselves.
This is not to say that Obama or those on the Left are the only politicians I don't trust. I don't trust politicians in general, and chances are that if he were elected president, he would do something either during the campaign or during his administration to set me off. The difference with West is, that he's starting from a position of strength when it comes to his basic moral character and stance. It appears that he's putting his own personal power and status behind his need to do what's best for the country. And that's something admirable in anybody.
I catch two minutes of the State of the Union speech (strictly by accident, this is not something I ever watch no matter who the president is), and what do I hear? Blame Bush: "this deficit spending began a decade ago." And then there is the famous trick of talking out of both sides of the mouth. You know, we MUST and WILL cut spending (paraphrasing), but not if it hurts vulnerable people. Yeah, right.
"No one can find a safe way out for himself if socety is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. None can stand aside with unconcern; the interests of everyone hang on the result." -- Ludwig von Mises
War's legitimate object is more perfect peace. Flavius Vegitius Renatus
This is an optional footer. If you want text here, place it inside these tags, and remove this comment.
CHALLAH AKBAR
