(via JBS HQ)
(via JBS HQ)
I was away on personal business and I did not have a chance to comment on what’s happening in Iraq.
Here’s the video of the announcement from President Obama: (via The White House)
Now, there are doubters. Via the Daily Beast:
Friday morning, with a humanitarian mission already underway, the United States began airstrikes on ISIS in northern Iraq. What had been the U.S. policy—to rely on local forces to contain ISIS while waiting for a new Iraqi government to reach a political solution—is finished. The new policy is still taking shape, but it may eventually lead to more involvement from the special operations troops who have been in Iraq for weeks.
President Obama said Thursday night he had authorized airstrikes to protect American personnel and the Yazidi minority group stranded by ISIS on top of Mt. Sinjar. A senior administration official later stressed to reporters that U.S. forces were not launching a “sustained campaign” against ISIS in Iraq.
But with the Kurds, America’s closest allies in the fight, recovering from heavy losses, some analysts and military veterans say that airstrikes alone may not be enough to turn the tide. A sustained—if small-scale—campaign may be the only way to achieve that.
…..and, of course, the neocon hawks:
President Obama’s limited strikes on ISIS in northern Iraq are “pinpricks” that are “meaningless” and “worse than nothing,” according to one of his fiercest foreign policy critics, Sen. John McCain.
By committing U.S. military forces to fight again in Iraq while explicitly limiting the mission to protection of American personnel and Iraqi minorities, Obama has failed to come up with a plan that has any hope of stopping the ISIS advances across Iraq and Syria, said McCain. It’s a position that puts him somewhat at odds with other Republicans, who are offering cautious support for the airstrikes in Iraq – and concern that the president doesn’t have a comprehensive strategy to combat the growing threat of ISIS..
McCain, a consistent advocate for the application of American military power around the world, has long pushed for greater U.S. involvement in Iraq. But these strikes Friday were not what McCain had in mind.
“This is a pinprick,” McCain told The Daily Beast in an interview Friday, about the two 500-pound smart bombs U.S. airplanes dropped on ISIS convoys Friday. The vehicles were approaching Erbil, the capital city of Iraqi Kurdistan, were many U.S. diplomatic and military personnel reside.
Now, honestly, I am going to give the President the benefit of the doubt and I am going to hope like heck, that the President knows just what the heck he is doing. As for what the President is doing and whether it will be enough or not — I have one thing to say about it — We will soon find out.
Because if it is not enough and we do kill some of those ISIS members; and it does not wipe them out and only strengthens them, we could very well find ourselves in another protracted battle in Iraq. I would hope that this would not be the case; but I have my doubts. I will say this: I highly doubt that President Obama will be as careless and reckless in his fighting this battle, as Bush was during the Iraq War that lasted for 8 years.
I just hope that I am right; for the sake of America.
Others: The American Conservative, Hot Air, Business Insider, his vorpal sword, Washington Post,National Review, Democracy in America, Informed Comment, The Moderate Voice, The Dish, Saudi Gazette, Spectator, VodkaPundit, Associated Press, Talking Points Memo and McClatchy Washington Bureau (Via Memeorandum)
On CBN News Today, July 21:
(via CBN TV)
…and this guy is a left-winger too.
Predicting the future course of American politics is a lively and flourishing vocation. Guessing how future generations will commemorate present-day political events, however, is not nearly as remunerative. In the interest of restoring some balance to this tragic situation, allow me to kick off the speculation about the Obama legacy. How will we assess it? How will the Barack Obama Presidential Library, a much-anticipated museum of the future, cast the great events of our time?
In approaching this subject, let us first address the historical situation of the Obama administration. The task of museums, like that of history generally, is to document periods of great change. The task facing the makers of the Obama museum, however, will be pretty much exactly the opposite: how to document a time when America should have changed but didn’t. Its project will be to explain an age when every aspect of societal breakdown was out in the open and the old platitudes could no longer paper it over—when the meritocracy was clearly corrupt, when the financial system had devolved into organized thievery, when everyone knew that the politicians were bought and the worst criminals went unprosecuted and the middle class was in a state of collapse and the newspaper pundits were like street performers miming “seriousness” for an audience that had lost its taste for mime and seriousness both. It was a time when every thinking person could see that the reigning ideology had failed, that an epoch had ended, that the shitty consensus ideas of the 1980s had finally caved in—and when an unlikely champion arose from the mean streets of Chicago to keep the whole thing propped up nevertheless.
The Obama team, as the president once announced to a delegation of investment bankers, was “the only thing between you and the pitchforks,” and in retrospect these words seem not only to have been a correct assessment of the situation at the moment but a credo for his entire term in office. For my money, they should be carved in stone over the entrance to his monument: Barack Obama as the one-man rescue squad for an economic order that had aroused the fury of the world. Better: Obama as the awesomely talented doctor who kept the corpse of a dead philosophy lumbering along despite it all.
I know that he is making the case that Obama was not progressive enough; still it is shocking to see the left turn on him in this way. He does have some good points though. Especially about the jobs part; Obama did not do nearly enough to create a climate for job creation. The article is an interesting read, check it out.
The former employee at US National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden, has revealed that the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Snowden said intelligence services of three countries created a terrorist organisation that is able to attract all extremists of the world to one place, using a strategy called “the hornet’s nest”.
NSA documents refer to recent implementation of the hornet’s nest to protect the Zionist entity by creating religious and Islamic slogans.
According to documents released by Snowden, “The only solution for the protection of the Jewish state “is to create an enemy near its borders”.
Leaks revealed that ISIS leader and cleric Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech..
1) ISIS leader Al-Baghdadi was once a super-high level prisoner of the US government. Despite the fact that the US had offered a ten million dollar reward for him, the Obama regime ordered his release in 2009.
2) The Obama regime, with major support from Senate neo-cons John McCain and Lindsey Graham, gave hundreds of millions in military aid to Sunni Jihadists in Syria. Thousands of individuals receiving US aid are now members of ISIS. In fact, ISIS has even posted pictures of ISIS fighters with US Senator John McCain on the internet.
3) Israel has directly aided Sunni Jihadists in Syria by bombing Syrian military assets during Jihadist attacks.
4) The Israeli Prime Minister has reacted to the ISIS spearheaded Sunni/Shia Civil War in Iraq with borderline glee. The president of Israel has also suggested that a Sunni/Shia war is beneficial to the future of Israel.
5) The US and Britiain provided Sunni Jihadists with Toyota trucks in Syria. When, an army of ISIS fighters rolled over the Syria/Iraq border it looked like a commercial for Toyota.
Very interesting…. do you see why now that I simply do not trust this Government?
They act like this is a shock. It really shouldn’t be.
Democrats face serious obstacles as they look to the November elections, with President Obama’s approval rating at a new low and a majority of voters saying they prefer a Congress in Republican hands to check the president’s agenda, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Obama’s approval rating fell to 41 percent, down from 46 percent through the first three months of the year and the lowest of his presidency in Post-ABC News polls. Just 42 percent approve of his handling of the economy, 37 percent approve of how he is handling the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and 34 percent approve of his handling of the situation involving Ukraine and Russia.
Obama’s low rating could be a significant drag on Democratic candidates this fall — past elections suggest that when approval ratings are as low as Obama’s, the president’s party is almost certain to suffer at the ballot box in November.
Another thing too is this:
The Affordable Care Act is expected to be a major issue in the midterm elections. Obama recently urged Democrats to defend the law energetically, particularly after the administration announced that 8 million people signed up for it during the initial enrollment period. Republicans are confident that opposition to the new law will energize their supporters.
The Post-ABC poll found that 44 percent say they support the law while 48 percent say they oppose it, which is about where it was at the end of last year and in January. Half of all Americans also say they think implementation is worse than expected.
Last month, a Post-ABC poll found 49 percent of Americans saying they supported the new law compared with 48 percent who opposed it. That finding was more positive for the administration than most other polls at the time. Democrats saw it as a possible leading indicator of a shift in public opinion, but that has not materialized.
I hate to break it to the Washington Post; but it has materialized and in a big way. Many people have been tossed off their insurance plans and the ones that they ended up getting through Obamacare are costing them more money. Most of these people are not what people would call wealthy; these are working class people who struggle to pay their bills, like everyone else. These people were directly told, by the President that they could keep their plans and that their healthcare costs would go down. This was a direct lie and the President knew it from the beginning. This is why his approval ratings are down from what they were.
Not only that, but the President’s leadership, when it comes to foreign policy; has been utterly piss poor. The man is leading from behind and that simply does not impress the majority of Americans. When confronted about this, the best thing that this President can do is either blame or talk about President Bush’s foreign policy. It’s been a long time since Bush was in office; and I think the American people are actually expecting a bit more than blame shifting, and subject shifting, when it comes to the President.
I think it goes without saying, that the Democrats chickens are coming home to roost.
Others from both sides of the aisle: The New Republic, Firedoglake, Pew Research Center …, The Moderate Voice, No More Mister Nice Blog, NewsBusters, Real Clear Politics, Outside the Beltway, Independent Journal Review,Politico, Power Line, Mediaite, Daily Kos, The Daily Caller, Business Insider, CNN, The Other McCain, Hot Air, ABC News, Washington Examiner, Washington Free Beacon, The Lonely Conservative, The PJ Tatler,Patterico’s Pontifications and NationalJournal.com – More here
There are no depths or limits that these progressives jerks will not go to, just to defend that marxist moron in the White House.
Via Gateway Pundit, who I rarely, if ever, link to anymore for some very good reasons. But this one warrants mentioning:
Josh Marshall, the editor and publisher of the leftists media site Talking Points Memo, attacked former CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson in an article published Monday morning that reeks of sexism.
Attkisson is in the news for her interview with CNN on Sunday in which she revealed that the Democratic Part front group Media Matters for America helped produce news reports for CBS News.
Attkisson also speculated that Media Matters is being paid by donors to wage an attack campaign against her over her reporting that was critical of the Obama administration.
Marshall’s article is headlined How To Make Yourself Sound Nuts 101.
As every feminist knows, the quickest way for a man to dismiss an inconvenient woman is to question her sanity in public.
Marshall insinuates that Attkisson is paranoid because she claimed her computer was hacked. Then after noting her speculation about Media Matters, Marshall says she has,“serious temperament issues.”
Ah, yes, the woman doesn’t know that her place is being subservient to the Soviet States of Obama.
Marshall closes his sexist hit piece with a sneering reference to the Ingrid Bergman film, Gaslight, in which Bergman is slowly driven crazy by her murderous husband by his surreptitious adjustment of the gaslights in their home, among other devices he employs to drive her around the bend.
“Again, if Media Matters’ intention was to gaslight her, they appear to have succeeded in spades.”
This, my friends, is how far the left has gone amuck. If they cannot win the argument against the Conservatives, they stoop to attack them and try to discredit them. I ought to know; I was once among that crowd, and I once did this very sort of a thing towards the right, when I ran my first blog.
I knew it would happen; back in 2007, when I saw Barack Obama jumping ahead in the primary and when I saw how the others were being taken off the ballots, due to some of the stupidity in the State of Michigan, I knew it was coming. I knew that the media was going into the tank for Obama and I knew that the left wing blogosphere would follow and they did.
The Democrats and the progressive blogosphere knew that they could not stop the Iraq War. So, they did the next best thing. They got behind a black man and used that to win the White House. They will do anything to defend him from any sort of a legitimate attack. if playing the race card does not work. They will use this sort of demeaning attack towards women. Because this how the progressive left works, this is their game. The problem is, you have neoconservative bloggers, who do the same very thing. Which is sad, because the right is supposed to be different.
This goes well beyond right versus left; this is about the left protecting something that they worked hard to get; and defending it has no boundaries. What will be interesting to see, is if Hillary gets the nomination; how these same people will cry “Sexist!” if someone goes after Hillary during the primary and/or the general election in 2016.
UPDATE: I just wanted to add some more to this post. There was a time when I actually respected Josh Marshall. His work during the Bush administration era was excellent. However it seems now that Obama is in office, Josh Marshall has taken to writing partisan hit pieces.
I also want it be known, that I normally don’t go around tossing the sexiest card. Because I’m not much into identity politics when it comes to females, nor do I believe in special treatment of the fairer sex. However, this piece by Josh Marshall goes well beyond that. This piece was nothing more than a slander piece against a professional journalist, who happens to be a female.
Josh Marshalls wordage in this piece was nothing more than a flagrant slam against someone of whom he disagrees with politically. It was juvenile, it was uncouth, it was libelous, and it could very well get him sued. Again, I am NOT into tossing around entitlement cards or using wordage like sexist, racist, or anti semetic. However, this piece went overboard in a big way and I think Josh Marshall should be ashamed of himself and apologize to this woman for what he wrote.
God Bless Him for daring to speak the truth:
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Sam Clovis, a firebrand northwest Iowa conservative, says he believes many congressional Republicans want to impeach President Obama. The only thing standing in their way, Clovis said in an interview, is the color of the president’s skin.
“I would say there are people in the House of Representatives right now that would very much like to take the opportunity to start the process,” Clovis said of impeaching the nation’s first African-American president. “And I think the reason that they’re not is because they’re concerned about the media.”
In an interview with the Daily Times Herald, Clovis, who did not provide reasons for why the president would be vulnerable to impeachment, said the media would cover the issues surrounding such proceedings differently with a black president than a white one with the same record.
He is correct, of course. If the House tried to impeach President Obama, there would be a full-on race-riot in this Country and you can guess which race would be targeted — and I do not mean Latinos either! Every white man who lived in the cities and in the suburbs would be a target. This is why the Republicans in the House have not decided to do this; because it would cause chaos.
It sure does seem so.
Check out this video, by Susan Duclos who blogs over at Wake Up America.
Now the story via Susan Duclos over at Before It’s News:
If this is true and since the hacker group Anonymous is famous for hacking into high level documents and emails, it most likely is true, then this is a blockbuster bombshell!
Hacked emails to and from US Army Attache Assistant in Kiev Jason Gresh with Ukrainian General Staff Igor Protsyk, discuss plans to arrange a massive attack on transport hubs and Ukrainian military bases in order to “frame-up the neighbor,” and “create favorable conditions for Pentagon to act.”
The emails from Igor are in Russian, so the link is here for anyone that reads Russian but the email from US Army Attache Assistant in Kiev Jason Gresh is in English and the ramifications of it are enormous.
Events are moving rapidly in Crimea. Our friends in Washington expect more decisive actions from your network.
I think it’s time to implement the plan we discussed lately. Your job is to cause some problems to the transport hubs in the south-east in order to frame-up the neighbor.
It will create favorable conditions for Pentagon and the Company to act.
Do not waste time, my friend.
Jason P. Gresh
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Assistant Army Attaché
U.S. Embassy, Kyiv
Tankova 4, Kyiv, Ukraine 04112
(380-44) 521 – 5444 | Fax (380-44) 521 – 5636
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States General Martin Dempsey has claimed that in the case of an escalation of unrest in Crimea, the U.S. Army is ready to back up Ukraine and its allies in Europe with military actions.
According to the Web site of the Atlantic Council, Dempsey said that “he’s been talking to his military counterparts in Russia, but he’s also sending a clear message to Ukraine and members of NATO that the U.S. military will respond militarily if necessary.”
“We’re trying to tell [Russia] not to escalate this thing further into Eastern Ukraine, and allow the conditions to be set for some kind of resolution in Crimea. We do have treaty obligations with our NATO allies. And I have assured them that if that treaty obligation is triggered [in Europe], we would respond,” Dempsey said.
According to the General, the incursion of Russian troops into the Crimea creates risks for all the countries of Europe and NATO allies.
“If Russia is allowed to do this, which is to say move into a sovereign country under the guise of protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine, it exposes Eastern Europe to some significant risk, because there are ethnic enclaves all over Eastern Europe and the Balkans,” Dempsey said.
If I were the MSM, I would be all over this one. I would hate to think that the Obama Administration would pull something this bone-headed; seeing that his popularity, even among liberal Americans is not that great. But, then again, stranger things have happened with this President.
No, this isn’t a joke.
This story comes via TopConservativeNews.com, who notes the following:
Notice that it is perfectly acceptable for black people to oppose the demographic change of their neighborhood. If the races had been reversed, the national media would be screaming “RACISM!”
Consider this statement from the Portland African American Leadership Forum. They “remain opposed to any development in N/NE Portland that does not primarily benefit the Black community.” This would be a national controversy if the races were reversed. They would be denounced as the Ku Klux Klan.
The story via AP:
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The Trader Joe’s grocery-store chain has dropped a plan to open a new store in the heart of the city’s historically African-American neighborhood after activists said the development would price black residents out of the area.
The grocer, whose stores are found in urban neighborhoods across the nation, said Monday it wouldn’t press its plan, given community resistance, The Oregonian (http://bit.ly/1n7Jyqb ) reported.
“We open a limited number of stores each year, in communities across the country,” it said in a statement. “We run neighborhood stores, and our approach is simple: If a neighborhood does not want a Trader Joe’s, we understand, and we won’t open the store in question.”
The Portland Development Commission had offered a steep discount to the grocer on a parcel of nearly two acres that was appraised at up to $2.9 million: a purchase price of slightly more than $500,000. The lot is at Northeast Alberta Street and Northeast Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and has been vacant for years.
So, why did Trader Joe’s decide not to build there, well for two reasons:
Critics said the development would displace residents and perpetuate income inequality in one of the most rapidly gentrifying ZIP codes in the nation.
…and the biggest reason? This:
The Portland African American Leadership Forum said the development commission had in the past made promises about preventing projects from displacing community members but hadn’t fulfilled them.
It sent the city a letter saying it would “remain opposed to any development in N/NE Portland that does not primarily benefit the Black community.” It said the grocery-store development would “increase the desirability of the neighborhood,” for “non-oppressed populations.”
Mayor Charlie Hales and the urban renewal agency’s executive director, Patrick Quinton, signed a letter in January that described what they said was the commission’s contributions “to the destructive impact of gentrification and displacement on the African American community.“
We don’t want no honkeys in our neighborhood! If you ain’t black, we don’t want your business here!
Now, could you imagine, if a business, who was owned by a black man, wanted to open a store, say in like Troy, Michigan or Rochester Hills, Michigan; which are, for what it is worth, predominantly upper middle class/wealthy class, white neighborhoods and a group of white people starting complaining about it and starting saying that it would cause the neighborhood to go into decline? Man, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would be all over it!
There would huge protests and it would be all over the media. However, because this is a black thing, and the company is white owned; it is no big deal, nothing to see here, move along.
This is why I continue to run this blog; regardless of the fact that I make little or nothing on this blog at all, despite the fact that I make little or nothing on this blog, since Google Adsense dropped me. Because this sort of stuff is NOT reported by the national media; least of all by MSNBC and CNN. Fox News most likely will not touch it either, because of the taboo subject.
Furthermore, I believe that the Conservative right just will not touch this one; because they are afraid of being called racists. I do not have such issues. I simply do not care what blacks really think of me; least of all black liberals. Considering what happened to my cousin and myself; I think I’ve earned the right to point this stuff out.
By the way; these are Obama’s people and don’t you ever forget it.
I found this to be interesting. As most of you know, I am a paleoconservative. Which means, I am an economic populist and that I am highly opposed to the practice of globalism.
So, I thought this little story in The New American was quite interesting:
Socialist luminaries and international bureaucrats at various outfits funded primarily by U.S. taxpayers are seizing on a “devastating” new American taxation scheme, known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, to help foist a radical tax information-sharing regime on the world. The repercussions for Americans and people around the globe — especially when it comes to financial privacy and economic freedom — will be crushing, experts argue. Analysts say the end goal, meanwhile, is the creation of a planetary taxation authority.
Leading the charge to create the new global tax regime is the Group of 20 (G-20), a coalition of governments and brutal dictatorships that are in the process of building what virtually every major media outlet recently described as a “New World Order.” Top officials in the outfit, which includes the ruthless Communist regime ruling mainland China, among other barbaric autocracies, publicly announced a plot in recent years to share financial data and more on all citizens with each other. The goal, for now: extract as much wealth as possible.
I would quote more of that; but there is just too much to try and whittle it down to a few paragraphs. Needless to say, I highly recommend you go read this rest of that. I remember in 2008 and also in 2012; when Mitt Romney and John McCain both told America that if Barack Obama was elected President of the United States that the Government would be coming after the wealth of those who rightfully earned it. When this happened, the media laughed the Republicans and Conservatives to scorn.
Well, it turns out that the Conservatives, of all stripes; were correct and this is proof of that. This is one of the biggest reasons why I loathe President Obama. He is not an “America” first type Democrat. He is nothing more than one of the many globalist Democrats or “Internationalist Democrats” who see America through the lens of the international community. Obama made all of these moronic promises of fixing the economy and creating jobs. What has he delivered? Not much to this part of the Country. I am still unemployed. There are no news businesses opening up around here. If anything, most of them are closing.
This is a part of the globalists plan. Keep everyone on the Government dole or worse; broke. So, that the Government can control you. I know it sounds like I am channeling Alex Jones here and I hate making it sound like that. But, in this case; Alex Jones is quite correct. Their plan, that being the Democrats is, keep everyone broke or on the Government dole, all the while distracting the people, by blaming the Republicans for breaking the system.
It is a classic globalist, socialist tactic and it seems to be working well with the masses.
It is very telling about the mentality of the progressive left towards anyone, who has any sort of money or success.
I see the New York Times has published yet another article about very privileged people whining about the ACA.
In this case, said article features a couple making $100,000 a year who, under the ACA, will be paying $1,000 a month for health care covering themselves and their two sons. Take it away, Dean Baker:
Here they are with a front page story telling us about the tragic situation of the Chapmans, a New Hampshire couple making $100,000 a year who will have to spend $1,000 a month for insurance with Obamacare. This would come to 12 percent of their income. The piece tells readers:
“Experts consider health insurance unaffordable once it exceeds 10 percent of annual income.”
That’s interesting. If we go to the Kaiser Family Foundation website we find that the average employee contribution for an employer provided family plan is $4,240. The average employer contribution is $11,240. That gives us a total of $15,470. Most economists would say that we should treat the employers payment as a cost to the worker since in general employers are no more happy to pay money to health insurance companies than to their workers. If they didn’t pay this money as health insurance then they would be paying it to their workers in wages.
A couple of years ago, when my ex-husband and I were paying for health insurance under COBRA, we were shelling out something like $1,200 a month for just the two of us — and we were making far less than 100K a year. In fact, we were earning more like half that.
Enough already. In the real world we live in, $1,000 a month for good health insurance for a family of four in the top quintile of U.S. household income is pretty damn good. Upper middle class people, quitcher whining already — and New York Times, please stop enabling this nonsense.
I say it is telling, because it is the flawed mentality of the progressive left. Anyone who does not accept the idea that Obamacare is the perfect solution the problems of our Nation’s healthcare system are derided as whiners. Which is, in my opinion, a bunch of bullcrap.
This healthcare fix, was nothing short of a disaster. But, to this Obama apologist, the “yuppies” or those who actually work for living; ought to just shut and take what they’ve gotten. It is a flawed mentality and it will cost the Democrats votes in 2014 and 2016; I can assure you of that one.
I think it goes without saying; but this Democratic Party of my grandparents, and even of my parents era — is not the Democratic Party of today. Heck, this modern post-2008 Democratic Party is not even the same party that I voted for in 2000 and in 2004. Needless to say, I will not voting for that party any longer. Because the Democratic Party and the progressive movement as a whole, have proven to me, that they really do not give a darn about those of us, who usually want to work and those of us, who would like our own personal freedoms. It is a sad thing to say about a party, that Ronald Reagan once called the honorable party.
Needless to say, that honor left that party long ago.
This is a very interesting article and it is written fairly, I believe:
Claiming a mandate he never had, the newly reelected president foisted a bold agenda upon Congress and the public, then watched it collapse within months—a victim of scandal, cynical opponents, and his own hubris. One despairing adviser declared, “This is the end of the presidency.”
That was George W. Bush in 2005. Or was it Barack Obama this past year? Reading Peter Baker’s extraordinary account of the Bush-Cheney era, Days of Fire, I found a striking number of parallels between Bush’s fifth year in office and the atrocious first 12 months of President Obama’s second term.
My takeaway: Obama needs to shatter the cycle of dysfunction (his and history’s) or risk leaving office like Bush, unpopular and relatively unaccomplished.
I suggest you go give that one a read. It is very interesting; and almost eerie to read.
Now the partisans on both sides will object to the piece and that is to be expected. But those of us, who do not suffer from such illness, will read it and agree.
What astounds me is that the American people actually allowed themselves to be fooled by the President who promised a change of business with his new Presidency. Only to find out that it was the same old Washington business as usual. For that, America is a less great Country. Sad how our Nation has become a people of useful idiots.
On CBN Newswatch, Dec. 13:
(Via CBN TV)
In real life, the guy who looks you in the eye and promises that “if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan, period” can be expected to tell you, cross his heart, the Benghazi massacre was caused by an anti-Muslim video, and that everything possible was done to save Americans under siege. He can also be expected to run an administration that assures you, even as things fall apart, that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate, largely secular organization committed to democracy; that Obamacare is not a tax and will dramatically reduce your premiums while cutting spending; that we are experiencing the most transparent administration in history; that the criminally reckless Fast and Furious program was begun by the Bush administration; that the president has cut spending and debt even as he piles trillions more on our tab; that he has excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs; or that an “interim agreement” that explicitly allows Iran to enrich uranium — and that anticipates a final accord establishing a permanent uranium “enrichment program” for Iran — somehow does not recognize an Iranian right to enrich uranium and so portend a revolutionary jihadist regime possessed of nuclear bombs.
Though never desirable, presidential fraud might be tolerable if this were 1995 again. But it is not — our times are grave. Unlike the days of the Clinton bender, the question is not how the president is going to survive another fine mess he’s gotten himself into. The question is how we are going to survive this president.
Someone has to say it; so, it might as well be me.
Now, why do I say this? Because this steaming pile of idiocy here, the money part comes at 5:26:
The quote from the JPost:
NEW YORK – During a panel at Yeshiva University on Tuesday evening, Sheldon Adelson, noted businessman and owner of the newspaper Israel Hayom, suggested that the US should use nuclear weapons on Iran to impose its demands from a position of strength.
Asked by moderator Rabbi Shmuley Boteach whether the US should negotiate with Iran if it were to cease its uranium enrichment program, Adelson retorted, “What are we going to negotiate about?”
Adelson then imagined what might happen if an American official were to call up an Iranian official, say “watch this,” and subsequently drop a nuclear bomb in the middle of the Iranian desert.
“Then you say, ‘See! The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business. You want to be wiped out? Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development. You want to be peaceful? Just reverse it all, and we will guarantee you that you can have a nuclear power plant for electricity purposes, energy purposes’,” Adelson said.
“So a tremendous demonstration of American strength?” Boteach clarified. “So that they would get the message?”
“It’s the only thing they understand,” Adelson said.
“And do you see the current negotiations as a sign of weakness?” Boteach asked.
“Absolutely,” Adelson said.
Adelson, who donated tens of millions of dollars to defeated Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney during the most recent campaign, criticized the Obama administration’s willingness to engage the Iranians diplomatically.
“[It’s] the worst negotiating tactic I could ever imagine, my entire life,” he said.
“Because you can’t get anything. He’s not saying to them, Roll back your entire program and show that you’re willing to be peaceful. So, roll it all back… and we’ll roll back the sanctions…. What is that, a game of chicken, who’s going to blink first?”
Okay, now that is a good deal of stupidity to unpack; but I shall do my best here.
If the United States of America pulled something as stupid as that, the fallout would be chaos of Biblical proportions.
First off, if we dropped a nuke in the Iranian desert, the radioactive cloud from that sort of a bomb would go over into Iraq, and possibly kill half of the population. Not to mention that it would most likely kill half of the Iranians too. This would be the last thing we would need, seeing we just left that Country and our invading it, was based on some seriously bad information.
Second of all, if we did something like that; Al-Qaeda would order every last sleeper cell in the United States to activate and the result of that would be many terrorist attacks in this Country, that would make 9/11 look like a walk in the park. Furthermore, the entire arab community, would turn on us, like a rabid dog and begin attacking our interests overseas. You think things are chaotic in the middle east now? You let something like that happen; it would be utter bedlam.
This right here is why I have such an issue with neoconservatives, and basically Zionism in general. Because they simply do not think past the idea that Israel should be defended to the death. Sheldon Adelson does not give two flips about the security of the United States and the effect that doing something as stupid and reckless as this, would have on the United States. All he and his neoconservative friends care about, is Israel.
Daniel Larison is correct in his assessment that the GOP should rid themselves, of the idiots like this man, and people like Rick Santorum; who have this sort of thug mentality, when it comes to Israel, Foreign Policy and the United States of America. It is reckless, it is irresponsible and it will only cause more instability in the middle east.
Make no mistake, Iran is a Country that I would not trust further than I can throw them. However, this sort of foreign policy is what gave us Iraq twice, Korea, Vietnam and World War I. Pursuing this sort of foreign policy is a fool’s errand. We cannot afford it either. Ronald Reagan dealt with the Soviet Union in a peaceful way and brought down the iron curtain without firing a shot. I believe these reports of Iran having the bomb; to be bogus, manufactured by those who wish to take us to war with Iran. I treat them with the skepticism that I do all the neoconservative, Wilsonian propaganda.
If Israel and the Saudi’s want to go after the Iranians; let them. But keep the United States out of it. We have had enough war to last us a good lifetime. What did we get out of Iraq? A mountain of debt, that President Obama added to; and an middle east that is a powder keg ready to blow.
Enough is enough, the Wilsonians have to go. Period, end of story.