Video: Henry Gates Jr. goes on N-Word Tirad

The Video:

A video has surfaced on YouTube of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. delivering a church speech in which he uses the N-word, rails against “racist historically white institutions in America” and accuses Newt Gingrich of attempting to block blacks from entering the middle class.
Gates became a lightning rod of racial controversy when President Obama defended the professor handcuffed in his home last week by police in Cambridge, Mass.
“We are trying to end what we call the one n-gger syndrome – you know, this place ain’t big enough for more than one of us,” said Gates in the video, which was filmed in 1999 in the All Souls Church in Washington, D.C.
via WorldNetDaily: Shock video: Professor Gates goes on N-word rant.

Very interesting. “Racism for me, but not for thee.”

Typical, So very typical for African-Americans and for Liberals. Notice how he goes off on Clarence Thomas?

Update: HotAirPundit has more on the Story:

“Without affirmative action we would have never been able to integrate racist historically white institutions in American society”

“I taught at Duke for one long painful year, I don’t even like the airplane to flyover North Carolina…Because of racism I never would have been allowed to compete with white boys and white girls”

Contract with America and Newt Gingrich “set up barriers so no more of you all could get in here”
Gates Attacks:
White racist institutions
White racism
Duke (majority white college)
North Carolina
Clarence Thomas
Newt Gingrich
Contract with America
Uses the N-Word…
So much for Dr. Kings vision of a colorblind society
I doubt if most people after watching this would want to go have a beer with him…

This is one of Obama friends. Like Mr. Pundit said here, this guy and Jeremiah Wright most likely were friends. Lord knows, they think much alike. I wonder if President Obama will throw Mr. Gates under the bus too?

Quote of the Day

: Thomas Friedman’s house

Well, obviously, being a renowned expert, Thomas Friedman, like Al Gore and the Prince of Wales, needs a supersized carbon footprint. But you don’t – you can get by beating your laundry on the rocks down by the river with the native women all day long.
“Environmentalism” is a government restraint on economic advance and, therefore, social mobility. In other words, it’s a way to ensure you’ll never live like Tom Friedman.

The Obama White House Tries to Bully the Congressional Budget Office House

This is more of that Far-Left Liberal Politics at work:

Via CNN:

The White House has criticized the Congressional Budget Office’s findings that the Obama administration’s proposal to control Medicare costs would yield a moderate savings of $2 billion over the next decade.
White House Budget Director Peter Orszag said the CBO’s analysis — which it relayed to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Saturday — could feed a perception of the office’s bias toward “exaggerating costs and underestimating savings.”
“The point of the proposal … was never to generate savings over the next decade,” Orszag said in a letter posted on Saturday.
“Instead the goal is to provide a mechanism for improving quality of care for beneficiaries and reducing costs over the long term.”
CBO Director Doug Elmendorf’s letter to Hoyer on Saturday was in response to the Senate Majority Leader’s request for analysis on “possible approaches for giving the President broad authority to make changes in the Medicare program,” Elmendorf wrote.
The Obama administration is touting a proposal to give a medical advisory council the power to help decide the scope of coverage that would be eligible for reimbursement under Medicare.
Administration officials say the proposed “Independent Medicare Advisory Council” would both improve health care quality and control costs. Some health care industry groups object to the proposal, saying such a council would not be qualified to make those judgments.
The CBO’s review of the proposal found that “the probability is high that no savings would be realized … but there is also a chance that substantial savings might be realized,” Elmendorf wrote.
“Looking beyond the 10-year-budget window, CBO expects that this proposal would generate larger but still modest savings on the same probabilistic basis.”
Orszag, a former director of the CBO, pointed out that “it is very rare for CBO to conclude that a specific legislative proposal would generate significant long-term savings so it is noteworthy that, with some modifications, CBO reached such a conclusion with regard to the IMAC (Independent Medicare Advisory Council concept.”
But he also criticized Elmendorf’s findings.
“As a former CBO director, I can attest that CBO is sometimes accused of a bias toward exaggerating costs and underestimating savings. Unfortunately, parts of today’s analysis from CBO could feed that perception,” Orszag said.
“In providing a quantitative estimate of long-term effects without any analytical basis for doing so, CBO seems to have overstepped.”

Just another attack from a worried White House, who wants their agenda passed, no matter the cost to the people or to our Nation.

Some Reactions from the Conservative Blogosphere:

Keith Hennessey:

With this letter CBO has killed the President’s IMAC proposal. It almost certainly would have died even without CBO’s letter. The proposal would have transferred an enormous amount of power from Congress to the Executive Branch. Turf-conscious Congressional committee chairmen would have fought it to protect their power base. Medicare provider interest groups (hospitals, doctors) were starting to lobby against it. They prefer Congress making these decisions because they’re easier to lobby and influence.
The only chance IMAC had was if CBO had said it would save gobs of money, allowing House leaders simultaneously to make Blue Dogs happy for being fiscally responsible, and to remove from their bill other, more politically painful, spending cuts or tax increases. IMAC was drafted so weakly that it became a budget gimmick.
[….]
Yes, the Administration could submit a fundamentally different proposal and call it a “tweak” of their existing one. To achieve the stated goals of bending the government health cost curve down and reducing future deficits, such a proposal would need to actually cut spending in an enforcable and unavoidable way. If they want to throw in a new council to shuffle money around within the mandated lower levels, that’s a separable question. The President’s advisors know, however, that a proposal like this with real teeth would never get off the ground in Congress. That’s too bad, because we desperately need the long-term deficit reduction.
The death of IMAC is a black eye for the Administration and another step backward for the pending health care reform bills. This result was both predictable and avoidable.

Ed Morrissey:

In a Hot Air exclusive, I contacted Chuck Blahous of the Hudson Institute, formerly the deputy director of George Bush’s National Economic Council about the open and aggressive attack on the CBO from Orszag and the White House. Blahous finds it unseemly:

“It’s routine for OMB and CBO to have scoring differences. It’s also routine for the two agencies to separately acknowledge, explain and quantify them. What’s not routine is for each to overtly criticize the other. This is a bad road to go down in any case, but even more so because OMB probably has the glass house here. Institutionally, they’re just different; CBO is purely a referee, while OMB is part referee, part player because they’re part of the President’s policy development team. Moreover, OMB’s February budget presentation attracted a lot of justified criticism for its economic assumptions and for moving various deficit-expanding policies into the budget baseline. Furthermore, most of the claims about long-term cost savings from health care reform have been purely speculative, with no data from the actuaries to back them up. Still, I don’t expect CBO to hit back and to criticize OMB scoring, nor should they. Hopefully folks will walk back and cooler heads will prevail.”
Orszag has been an embarrassment as OMB director, and now he’s becoming dangerous to the separation of powers between the branches of government. Either Obama should put Orszag on a leash, or get rid of him immediately — and find a real budget director, not just a liberal-agenda hack.

Steve Gilbert over at Sweetness and Light:

It’s hard to puzzle it out from this article, but this is an extension of Obama’s efforts to wrest control of Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements away from Congress so that he can call the shots.
And, despite what Mr. Orszag now claims, that was and is touted as a way to bring about tremendous savings.
Congress asked the CBO’s opinion, since they want to keep this power for themselves.
Needless to say, it should be nigh unto impossible for the CBO to predict whether the Obama people would raise or lower the reimbursement levels.
So naturally they tried to have it both ways:
[….]

And still the White House slammed them.

William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection:

What a pathetic joke the Democratic legislative effort has become. Loss of freedom and no meaningful cost savings. The opposite of “you get what you pay for.”
As Rahm Emanuel and Henry Waxman push to have a vote next week, it is clear that neither the Congress nor the White House has any clue as to the consequences of what they are proposing (if they even have read it). All the more reason we need to see the bill, debate it, and let our representatives know how we feel before they vote.
So give double thanks this weekend. First, for the CBO not giving in to political pressure. And second, for the fact that the CBO works on Saturdays.

I cannot say that I honestly disagree with that. This whole thing is a page right out of Saul Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals. It also could be a page out of the old Clinton playbook as well. What you cannot change or control; you contain it by discrediting it. If you cannot do that, then kill it. Just ask Vice Foster‘s family about that. Come to think of it, there are quite a few families that could be asked about that. Conspiracy theories? You decide.

Hope! Change! Intimadation! Discrediting of your Enemies! All just another day in the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.

Secretary Clinton: Iran's Pursuit of Nukes 'Futile'

If you would have told me, a year ago, that I would be praising Hillary Clinton for something she said; I would have asked you what kind drugs you were on and to share some of it with me! (I kid about the drugs, but this still is a very good story.)

First the Video:

Quote:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that Iran will never achieve its goal of obtaining a nuclear weapon, declaring to Tehran: “Your pursuit is futile.”
“What we want to do is to send a message to whoever is making these decisions, that if you’re pursuing nuclear weapons for the purpose of intimidating, of projecting your power, we’re not going to let that happen,” Clinton said.
“First, we’re going to do everything we can to prevent you from ever getting a nuclear weapon. But your pursuit is futile, because we will never let Iran — nuclear-armed, not nuclear-armed — it is something that we view with great concern, and that’s why we’re doing everything we can to prevent that from ever happening. … We believe, as a matter of policy, it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons.”
As a security summit in Thailand earlier this week, Clinton raised the possibility of a “defense umbrella” over the Middle East to protect other nations from a nuclear-armed Iran, marking the first time a senior administration official has publicly broached the prospect of the Persian nation succeeding in building a nuclear weapon.
Clinton said the Obama administration might still engage with Iran’s regime, even though she thinks the people there “deserve better than what they’re getting.”
via Hillary Clinton: Iran’s pursuit of nukes ‘futile’ – Mike Allen and Daniel Libit – POLITICO.com.

The only question that I might have is this; Does President Obama agree with this position? Another concern that I have is that this could be a signal of War drums beating. I am sure that the Secretary knows, that our forces are still fighting in Afghanistan and that we do still have forces in Iraq and that the job there is still not entirely done yet.

However, I do commend Secretary Clinton for her tough stance towards Iran’s terrible President and Islamic Oligarchy.

I just hope that President Obama agrees with Secretary Clinton and does not try and back-peddle that stance and play the role of terrorist appeaser. If he does, it would mean the total discrediting of Secretary Clinton and further more of America’s leadership role in the World.

Update: No Quarter, who is a Pro-Hillary liberal Blogger; links in. Hey, we might not agree on politics. But I’ll any kind of linkie love that I can get! 😛 😀

Update #2: John over at Powerline disagrees:

In other words, negotiating with Iran at this time would indeed betray the protesters, but we’ve done this before and want to do it again now.
Fair enough, perhaps. Our experiences with the Soviet Union and China do establish that we have at times negotiated with repressive regimes. But it doesn’t follow that we should negotiate with Iran at this time.
In any event, this much is certain: our negotiations with the Soviet Union and China did not cause either power to eschew nuclear weapons. Indeed, to my knowledge negotiations have never induced any nation that was aggressively pursuing nukes to change its mind. That kind of persuasion takes a massive show of force (Libya and arguably Iraq) or regime change.
Thus, while the administration may have its own motives for negotiating with Iran, there is no reason for Israel to believe that such negotiations will protect Israel’s interest (potentially a life-and-death one) in preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Clinton’s case that Israel should rely on U.S. attempts to pursuade Iran not to go nuclear, rather than taking matters into its own hands by attacking Iran, is not a powerful one.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley: Obama should have known facts before opening his mouth

The backlash continues:

President Obama should have gathered the facts first before commenting on Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s encounter with Cambridge, Mass. police, Mayor Daley said Saturday, wading into the controversy.
Daley said Obama — who has admitted he used a poor choice of words when he said Cambridge police acted “stupidly” by arresting Gates — should have known “you always have to have the facts” before responding to media questions.
Speaking at an event in Grant Park, Daley also said the city plans to look into the possibility of recording encounters between police and citizens, to avoid the kind of “who said what” problems that have arisen in the wake of the Gate incident.
“We’re going to be looking at this, whether or not police should have recorders when they talk to you on an incident… ” the mayor said. “Many people, unfortunately, just don’t accept the word of a police officer.”
Asked if such a program would be expensive, Daley said, “we’re going to look at it.”
via Daley weighs in on Gates controversy :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Politics.

What further proof do we need that our President was just flat out wrong, when he decided to put himself in a situation that he knew absolutely nothing about?

However, I will concede one point. The Mayor’s idea of recording encounters between the police and citizens is a good idea. I know that patrol cars already have recorders in them; but there are times, when those recorders do not capture what is happening behind the car or away from the car. Thus creates a situation where police officers can lie on reports. Which has happened before. Plus, there are times when there are dirty cops; I have blogged on this site many times about them. I realize that they might be bit more rare, than some liberals like to let on. But they do exist. So, while I am sure there will costs involved in doing such things. I believe in the long run, the recordings would come in handy and would keep everyone involved honest.

While I may be a Conservative and am very much against the socialism of President Barack Obama and his Democratic Party; I am also against any form of Corruption, whether it be on the Federal, State or Local levels or in the area of Law Enforcement. So, this idea, in my opinion is a good one.

However, this writer finds it extremely humorous that Mayor Richard Daley; Obama’s own hometown Mayor, says that Obama was wrong for opening his rather large pie hole, before knowing all the facts. That my friends is pure comedy magic. I just wonder if Saturday Night Live will do a comedy bit on it; I will not hold my breath, least I turn blue and die.

This is what happens when ACORN thugs are confronted by real Americans

This comes via NY Gathering of Eagles:

Quotes:

ACORN and their new front group Act Now were pwned by Tea Party Patriots again on Long Island!
When they couldn’t win their arguments with facts, the ACORN employees tried to intimidate the Tea Party folks. No way that could work with dedicated Patriots! So ACORN cut and run when the going got tough, and repeated that sorry performance twice in one day.
[…]
I’m no reporter so bear with me. Today I felt the same pride inside me matching the feeling I get whenever I read of our Founding Fathers’ activism. It might sound over exaggerated, but it doesn’t change how I feel. Today we scored a victory some may see as trivial, I see as momentous. Either way as a patriot it is overwhelming. Today I witnessed and participated in seeing ‘grass-roots folk’ come together in an instant and square off with, as of yesterday, an unchallenged foe in our cause-ACORN. We arrived at King Kullen this morning in Commack and as planned found ACORN petitioners signing up unaware patrons of the shopping center coming and going. They were asking people to sign a petition favoring Obama’s Health Care plan. We were there to give the other side and people listened.
ACORN produced four ‘workers’ we amassed 40 patriots complete with signs, banners, flyers, stickers, posters and a few loud voices.
ACORN 4 – Patriots 40.
I was told they were ‘workers’ for the organization We-Can(?) We were the people on the street giving up a beautiful warm Saturday morning to be heard.
I once read that 1 man defending his home is worth 20 paid mercenaries sent to destroy it. Believe it.
ACORN being outnumbered, out voiced and literally out debated left the area in a hurry. We followed.
After receiving communication that they fled to Stop and Shop in Bohemia 40+ patriots showed up and overwhelmed them there too. What a sight. Again ACORN took flight. They didn’t know how to react other then demanding we leave. We demanded an equal moment of time to discuss the meat and potatoes of the Obama health Care plan, they refused and retreated. I witnessed many passersby refusing to sign their petition; one even scratched their name off the list after we spoke to them. Almost every person I encountered was interested and I was relieved as almost all agreed with us. There was a little drama when a passerby vehemently argued for the plan, it was contentious but that’s liberty and democracy at work.
The only news agency seen was a local group from Alternative News based here on LI. The police were on scene, but remained out of the way as we did our own policing and respecting of the peace.
Score this a huge victory. I hope this inspires everyone to get up and get off the side-lines. You want change, than be silent no more! Silence is another form of consent, don’t be silent-don’t consent.
Known organizations present and represented: Campaign for Liberty, CSA, 9/11 Glenn Beck group, and resistnet.com by me. Others were ordinary people who heard last night and dropped their plans and showed up. What a moment.

Ever notice what color them liberal acorn thugs were?

The reason I bring this up is because real White Liberals are not the ones who will run out into the trenches and do the dirty work. They let their resident useful idiots get out there do the hard work; African-Americans! Sort of a 21 century plantation operation. Why do they do this? Because the Democratic Party, has been using the African-American vote since the 1960’s. To do this, they employ people like Al Sharpton to keep stirring the waters of Racial hatred toward the white people; to somehow convince them that the “White Man” is keeping them down.

You would think that they could have at least come a bit more prepared than this though.

Hope! Change! Intimidation! The Brave New World under the Faux Post Racial President. President Bambi Teleprompter!

Others: Gateway Pundit

CBO Says Obamacare will save no money over 10 years

Do you think that maybe NOW Obama will understand why the blue dogs revolted?

For the second time this month, congressional budget analysts have dealt a blow to the Democrat’s health reform efforts, this time by saying a plan touted by the White House as crucial to paying for the bill would actually save almost no money over 10 years.
A key House chairman and moderate House Democrats on Tuesday agreed to a White House-backed proposal that would give an outside panel the power to make cuts to government-financed health care programs. White House budget director Peter Orszag declared the plan “probably the most important piece that can be added” to the House’s health care reform legislation.
But on Saturday, the Congressional Budget Office said the proposal to give an independent panel the power to keep Medicare spending in check would only save about $2 billion over 10 years- a drop in the bucket compared to the bill’s $1 trillion price tag.
“In CBO’s judgment, the probability is high that no savings would be realized … but there is also a chance that substantial savings might be realized. Looking beyond the 10-year budget window, CBO expects that this proposal would generate larger but still modest savings on the same probabilistic basis,” CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf wrote in a letter to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Saturday.
via CBO deals new blow to health plan – Chris Frates – POLITICO.com.

The Blue Dog Democrats revolted on this stupid plan, because they know; what the majority of clear-thinking Americans know. That the Nation’s Economy is in the Toilet and is not expected not to get any better anytime soon. The passing of this Health-care Bill and the Nationalization of our Health-care system is going to sooner or later drive America into Bankruptcy. The Blue Dog Democrats know this, they are not under the spell of hope and change, like Obama wants them to be. In other words, they are not drinking the Kool-Aid on the Obamassiah.

One trillion dollars and The economy is at it worst since the 1980’s? Is this President serious?

I think the President and the Democratic Party need to seriously reconsider what they are attempting to do here. Because if they do not, this country may just end with a one party system after the damage is all done. Some Republicans might be thrilled at the prospect of the total and complete destruction of the Democratic Party; but I would not be thrilled at all. Why?

I will tell you why, because, like Bill O’Reilly; believe that a two-party system in this Country is important. I believe, personally, that neither of these parties; Republican Party or The Democratic Party have all of the answers. There is good and bad in both of them, and because of this, I believe that the Democratic Party is about to do one of the stupidest an horrific overreaches in many years. It was attempted in Clinton Administration and it failed, and now it is about to be attempted again. This time, it will be a disaster.

Somebody up there on Capital Hill needs have some clear thinking and really seriously consider what might become of the Democratic Party, should this blow up in their faces. Because I have a feeling that this all is going to get much uglier, before it gets any better.

Others: RedState, Weekly Standard, theblogprof, Betsy’s Page, Cold Fury, Economix, PrairiePundit, Hot Air and The Hill

Grievance-Monger and Liberal Idiot Latino, Rick Sanchez slams Fox News on Twitter

Looks like have another Latino Liberal Whiner on our hands:

Rick Sanchez…
if i didn’t believe in doing right thing, i’d be rich anchoring at fox news
and this…
do u know how much money i’d make if i’d sold out as hispanic and worked at fox news, r u kidding, one problem, looking in mirror
via Tweets of the Day… « Inside Cable News.

Looking in that Mirror is not a very good experience, let me tell you. Hell, even Julie Banderas knows this. This is the same douche nozzle that was involved in a DUI-Related Accident. Which crippled a man and the man died. Not once, did Mr. Sanchez offer to assist this man with his Medical Bills or anything; at all.

So, Mr. Sanchez, I got two words for ya, Taco Boy. Until the day that you send some money to the family of Jeffrey Smuzinick; to help make right the damage you inflicted on that man. You have no moral authority whatsoever.

So, please, spare us the damn “Do the right thing” speech okay? Because you saying that; is like David Duke asking for racial calm or Al Sharpton calling for ethnic equality.

Others: Don Surber, Pajamas Media, Hot Air and NewsBusters.org

Since when is this NOT a Hate Crime?

Oh this is not a hate crime, this is just some idiot negro tossing a brick through a Window.

Via The Austin Texas Statesman’s The Blotter:

Police are investigating a brick with an offensive message thrown into the window of an East Austin home.
The brick, thrown through a 4-year-old boy’s bedroom window, read “Keep Eastside Black. Keep Eastside Strong.”
The homeowner, Barbara Frische, who is white, said she has lived in the home for 10 years.
“
How is this NOT a hate crime?
It’s the first time anything like this has ever happened to me,” she said.
Frische was featured in a Statesman Watch article published in May in which she lobbied for action to be taken on a charred house that posed a safety hazard.
She has not received negative feedback from area residents about the article, she said, and does not believe this morning’s incident is connected to it.
Police have not classified this incident as a hate crime, said Austin Police Sgt. Richard Stresing, because hate crimes target an individual specifically because of an identifying characteristic, like race. Police say the incident has been classified as criminal mischief and deadly conduct.
Incidents found to be based on race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability or gender are flagged as hate crimes, Stresing said, so they can be referred to the Department of Justice.
In Austin, law enforcement agencies notified the Department of Justice of five hate crime incidents in 2007, the most recent year statistics were available in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. Two were based on race, two were based on ethnicity and one was based on sexual orientation.
That is a decrease from 2006, when the city reported 13 hate crimes, eight of which were racially motivated, one was religion-based, two were based on sexual orientation and two were on ethnicity.
The state reported a total of 242 hate crime incidents in 2007.
It’s difficult to count how many hate crimes occur in Austin because people often don’t report them, said Lisa Goodgame, director of the Austin chapter of the Anti-Defamation League. She said many people are too afraid to approach law enforcement officials or human rights agencies about their situations.
“Just because we haven’t heard reports of them doesn’t mean they don’t happen,” Goodgame said.

Oh, no, this is not a hate crime. This just happens to be a brick, that was thrown by a black person into a White Person’s window; with a hateful note on it. Nothing to see here people, move along.

Welcome to post-racial America!

Al Sharpton would be proud. :pissedoff:

I should have titled this entry; another good reason to own a gun. Is because of stupidity like this. I hope the catch them. But we all know that in Post-Obama America, the very worst that they will get is a slap on the hand and maybe even a pat on the back from Al Sharpton himself! :pissedoff:

Others: RedState, Chicago Boyz and Patterico’s Pontifications

President Barack Hussein Obama is now saying, "Victory" not a goal in Afghanistan

What more can we expect from a far lefty liberal who was friends with people like Bill Ayers?

First, The Video:

The Story via FOX NEWS:

President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but “victory” in the war-torn country isn’t necessarily the United States’ goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.
“I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,” Obama told ABC News.
The enemy facing U.S. and Afghan forces isn’t so clearly defined, he explained.
“We’re not dealing with nation states at this point. We’re concerned with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Al Qaeda’s allies,” he said. “So when you have a non-state actor, a shadowy operation like Al Qaeda, our goal is to make sure they can’t attack the United States.”
The United States and Afghanistan are struggling to shore up security in the country, amid increasing violence. The Obama administration this year stepped up U.S. military operations in the country as the U.S. military presence begins to wind down in Iraq.
“We are confident that if we are assisting the Afghan people and improving their security situation, stabilizing their government, providing help on economic development … those things will continue to contract the ability of Al Qaeda to operate. And that is absolutely critical,” Obama told ABC News.

Want to know why Obama feels this way? This might have something to do with it:

Rising casualties in Afghanistan are raising doubts among U.S. allies about the conduct of the war, forcing some governments to defend publicly their commitments and foreshadowing possible long-term trouble for the U.S. effort to bring in more resources to defeat the Taliban.
Pressure from the public and opposition politicians is growing as soldiers’ bodies return home, and a poll released Thursday shows majorities in Britain, Germany and Canada oppose increasing their own troop levels in Afghanistan.
Europeans and Canadians are growing weary of the war — or at least their involvement in combat operations — even as Obama is shifting military resources to Afghanistan away from Iraq.
The United States, which runs the NATO-led force, has about 59,000 troops in Afghanistan — nearly double the number a year ago — and thousands more are on the way. There are about 32,000 other international troops in the country.
The new U.S. emphasis on Afghanistan has raised the level of fighting — and in turn, the number of casualties. July is already the deadliest month of the war for both U.S. and NATO forces with 63 international troops killed, including 35 Americans and 19 Britons. Most have been killed in southern Afghanistan, scene of major operations against Taliban fighters in areas that had long been sanctuaries.
The leaders of the largest contributors to the coalition find themselves having to justify both their reasons for deploying troops and their management of the war effort. Britain, Italy and Australia are among those adding forces ahead of Afghanistan’s Aug. 20 presidential election.
They say a Western pullout at this time would enable a resurgent Taliban to take over the country and give Al Qaeda more space to plan terror attacks against the West. Some emphasize humanitarian aspects of their missions, like development aid and civilian reconstruction.

So, in other words, Obama is now going to begin to try an appease the other Countries. Just like he wanted to appease the terrorists in Iraq as well. This President is nothing more than an appeaser of terrorists. Think it might have something to do with his middle name? Perhaps. Am I racist for say this? I hardly think so. I mean, the man is not a person that believes in going to war against our enemies, he would rather negotiate with them.

Simply put Obama is one of the radical Neo-Liberals who want to forge alliances with those who hate our Capitalistic system. The man was friends with Domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, who was and still is a sworn Communist. What else can we expect from this President?

Now, to be fair, Obama does have one valid point; and that is that we are not fighting actual Nations, but rather a network of Terrorists, that will stop at absolutely nothing to destroy our Nation. You would think that President Obama would love this Country; seeing that he has taken full advantage of our lovely capitalist system and has done very well at it, that he would stand up and tell these other Nations, “You are either with us or against us, in Afghanistan!” However, we are not dealing with a real God-Fearing, American-loving, President. We are dealing with a Far-Leftest Liberal Buffoon, who hates America’s values and hates the principles that this Country was founded upon.

Something tells me, that the next four years in America are going to some of the worst, when it comes to our Foreign Policy. God help us all.

Others: NewsBusters.org, BLACKFIVE, Stop The ACLU, Sweetness & Light, Commentary, Conservatives4Palin.com, THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS, : Mudville Gazette, Don Surber, Clayton Cramer’s BLOG and Weekly Standard