Once again the Liberal media lies about those who do not support Obama

This is getting to be about the stupidest bunch of nonsense, that I have ever heard in my entire life.

It now seems that the Communist News Network, also known as CNN is now trying to trump up the possibility of President Obama being assassinated, and in the process smeared David Duke.

Via CNN:

Hate crimes experts and law enforcement officials are closely watching white supremacists across the country as Barack Obama prepares next week to be sworn in as the first black president of the United States.
So far, there is no known organized effort to express opposition to Obama’s rise to the presidency other than a call by the National Knights of the Ku Klux Klan for its members to wear black armbands as well as fly the U.S. flag upside down on Inauguration Day and Obama’s first full day in office.
As Tuesday approaches, when Obama stands outside the Capitol to take the oath of office, experts expect anger about the new president to spike. But they don’t expect it to go away.
“The level of vitriol, I expect, will go up a bit more around inauguration time,” said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University-San Bernardino.
There “is concern” about white supremacist groups during the inauguration, said Joe Persichini, the assistant FBI director who is helping to oversee security during the inauguration. What might the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. have said? »
The inauguration of the nation’s first minority president increases any potential threat, “particularly stemming from individuals on the extremist fringe of the white supremacist movement,” said a recent intelligence assessment by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI.
But law enforcement has the appropriate resources to respond if needed, Persichini said.
“We have seen a lot of chatter,” Persichini said. “We have seen a lot of discussions. We have seen some information via the Internet. But those are discussions. We look at the vulnerabilities and whether or not the groups are taking action.
“You have freedom of speech,” he added. “Anyone in this nation can have a discussion about their beliefs, but we are concerned about whether or not they take that freedom of speech and exercise some act that is against the law.”
Anger, violence and interest in racist ideology did increase in the hours and days after Obama was elected president in November, hate groups experts said.
Three New York men were indicted on charges of conspiracy to interfere with voting rights — accused of targeting and attacking African-Americans in a brutal crime spree soon after Obama was declared the winner on November 4.
And interest in racist ideology was so high right after the election that computer servers for two White supremacist Web sites crashed, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups.
But the violence and interest soon subsided. Leaders within the white supremacist movement are now seeking to capitalize on Obama’s presidency by using his election to help grow their organizations.
“President-elect Obama is going to be the spark that arouses the ‘white movement,’ ” reads a posting on the National Socialist Movement Web site. “Obama’s win is our win. We should all be happy of this event.”
In an interview posted on his Web site on election night, former Louisiana state Rep. David Duke said Obama’s election “is good in one sense — that it is making white people clear of the fact that that government in Washington, D.C., is not our government.”
“We are beginning to learn and realize our positioning,” Duke, a prominent white supremacist, later said in the election night recording. “And our position is that we have got to stand up and fight now.”
Mark Potok, director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project, said the leaders of these groups are frustrated by Obama’s win.
“I think the hate groups are desperately looking for a silver lining in a very dark cloud for them,” Potok said.
While experts said it is difficult to determine how many people belong to hate groups, they do agree with an SPLC estimate that claims there are about 900 operating now, a 40 percent increase from 2000. The vast majority of these groups promote white supremacist beliefs, and range from skinheads living in urban areas to the KKK ,which is based largely in rural settings.
It is difficult to pinpoint how many people subscribe to white supremacist views, because the Internet allows people to follow the movement under the cloak of anonymity. Leaders of the white supremacist movement are able to use their Web sites to reach a new subset of potential followers and push their racist rhetoric to the limit without outright calling for violence.
Levin said one challenge in protecting Obama is that the identity of a potential attacker would likely be unknown — a person who believes in white supremacist ideology, but decides to act as a lone wolf.
Threats of violence are more likely to be found on Web sites that allow posters to remain anonymous.
Most white supremacist leaders have been careful in what is posted on their Web sites, “hyper-aware that they are being watched,” Potok said.
But not all white supremacist leaders are mindful of their actions or care to be. Two months before the election, American National Socialist Workers Party head Bill White posted a magazine cover on his Web site featuring a picture of Obama in the cross hairs of a rifle scope with a headline “Kill This N—–?”
White is now in jail on unrelated charges that he “threatened use of force against” a juror who had helped convict another white supremacist as well as several other charges of making threats to unrelated victims.
Racism in the U.S. “remains a real problem” even though Obama won the White House, Potok said, and he predicted that hate groups will continue to grow during Obama’s presidency.
“I think we are in a very worrisome moment historically,” Potok said. “I say that because there are several things converging that could foster the continued growth of these groups: continuing high levels of nonwhite immigration, the prediction by the Census Bureau that whites will lose their majority in 2042, the tanking economy, and what is seen as the final insult, the election of a black man to the White House.”
Levin noted that it is common knowledge the U.S. Secret Service is taking great measures to protect Obama (who began receiving coverage in May 2007, the earliest point ever for a candidate in a presidential campaign), and emphasized it is a great challenge.
“President-elect Obama is so used to a public presence, and being among people poses some real difficulties for his protection,” Levin said.

I think it is important to note that the Southern Poverty Law Center is a Communist Liberal run organization, who goal and aim is to stifle the free speech of those whom they deem to be hateful.

More after the jump:

Continue reading “Once again the Liberal media lies about those who do not support Obama” →

Quote of the Day

The Coral Reef Alliance believes outgoing President George W. Bush has created his legacy as a President who has done more to protect the environment of the seas than any other President. Somehow, I doubt if former President Ronald Reagan would agree with their assessment.

Obama should, but most likely won't

Before I start this, let me simply say from the outset, that I am not a George W. Bush fan, nor will I ever be. I am not a part of the Conservative wing that believes that George W. Bush is some sort of hero. Having said all Paul Krugman and Rep. John Conyers have both written articles calling for Obama to fully investigate the actions of George W. Bush during his tenure as President.

First off Paul Krugman writes:

Last Sunday President-elect Barack Obama was asked whether he would seek an investigation of possible crimes by the Bush administration. “I don’t believe that anybody is above the law,” he responded, but “we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”
I’m sorry, but if we don’t have an inquest into what happened during the Bush years — and nearly everyone has taken Mr. Obama’s remarks to mean that we won’t — this means that those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.
Let’s be clear what we’re talking about here. It’s not just torture and illegal wiretapping, whose perpetrators claim, however implausibly, that they were patriots acting to defend the nation’s security. The fact is that the Bush administration’s abuses extended from environmental policy to voting rights. And most of the abuses involved using the power of government to reward political friends and punish political enemies.
At the Justice Department, for example, political appointees illegally reserved nonpolitical positions for “right-thinking Americans” — their term, not mine — and there’s strong evidence that officials used their positions both to undermine the protection of minority voting rights and to persecute Democratic politicians.
The hiring process at Justice echoed the hiring process during the occupation of Iraq — an occupation whose success was supposedly essential to national security — in which applicants were judged by their politics, their personal loyalty to President Bush and, according to some reports, by their views on Roe v. Wade, rather than by their ability to do the job.
Speaking of Iraq, let’s also not forget that country’s failed reconstruction: the Bush administration handed billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to politically connected companies, companies that then failed to deliver. And why should they have bothered to do their jobs? Any government official who tried to enforce accountability on, say, Halliburton quickly found his or her career derailed.
There’s much, much more. By my count, at least six important government agencies experienced major scandals over the past eight years — in most cases, scandals that were never properly investigated. And then there was the biggest scandal of all: Does anyone seriously doubt that the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation into invading Iraq?
Why, then, shouldn’t we have an official inquiry into abuses during the Bush years?

The answer to this question is very simple. Obama simply does not want the political firestorm. As much as it is great thing to see an African-American man for President, I think it would be counter-productive to Obama’s term in office to do something like this. Because you just know; that the Neo-Conservative political machine would swing into action against Obama, if he did try and do something like this. I mean, I might have many reservations about Neo-Conservatives, but their organizational and fund raising abilities is not one of them. If Obama went for a full blown investigation against the Bush Administration, the Podhoretz and Kristol funded minions would be out in full force.

So, while the idea of a full blown investigation with charges being filed is a noble idea; I just highly doubt that it will ever materialize. Obama just does not want to be viewed as a vengeful partisan President.

John Conyers writes basically the same thing, and I can understand his feelings. But again, what is very important; is how this sort of thing will be perceived by the rest of America. Would be it perceived as justice, or would it perceived as a partisan witch hunt? Sure, if your a partisan or a liberal ideologue it would be viewed as justified, but what about those who are not? What they think; matters greatly.

One thing that all Democrats and all Liberal-minded people must remember is, that not all of America is of a Liberal mindset. Just because Congress is of a Liberal majority, does not mean that all of America is. Some just voted for Obama, because he represented a change from George W. Bush, not because they wanted to see a Liberal witch hunt trial.

Others: The Moderate Voice, JustOneMinute, The Huffington Post, Los Angeles Times, No More Mister Nice Blog, Washington Monthly, Washington Post, Matthew Yglesias, Right Wing News, The Seminal, Democrats.com, The Sideshow, Comments from Left Field, The Note, The Immoral Minority, Riehl World View, Gateway Pundit, American Street, Hullabaloo, Seeing the Forest and The Impolitic

(via Memeorandum)

The Farewell Address of the President of the United States

Here we go with, what was supposed to be the top story of tonight. But wasn’t. (Thank God for Canadian Geese! 😉 )

The Video: (via MSNBC)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Transcript: (via LA Times)

Fellow citizens: For eight years, it has been my honor to serve as your President. The first decade of this new century has been a period of consequence – a time set apart. Tonight, with a thankful heart, I have asked for a final opportunity to share some thoughts on the journey that we have traveled together and the future of our Nation.
Five days from now, the world will witness the vitality of American democracy. In a tradition dating back to our founding, the presidency will pass to a successor chosen by you, the American people. Standing on the steps of the Capitol will be a man whose story reflects the enduring promise of our land. This is a moment of hope and pride for our whole Nation. And I join all Americans in offering best wishes to President-elect Obama, his wife Michelle, and their two beautiful girls.
Tonight I am filled with gratitude – to Vice President Cheney and members of the Administration; to Laura, who brought joy to this house and love to my life; to our wonderful daughters, Barbara and Jenna; to my parents, whose examples have provided strength for a lifetime. And above all, I thank the American people for the trust you have given me. I thank you for ….
…the prayers that have lifted my spirits. And I thank you for the countless acts of courage, generosity, and grace that I have witnessed these past eight years.
This evening, my thoughts return to the first night I addressed you from this house – September 11, 2001. That morning, terrorists took nearly 3,000 lives in the worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor. I remember standing in the rubble of the World Trade Center three days later, surrounded by rescuers who had been working around the clock.
I remember talking to brave souls who charged through smoke-filled corridors at the Pentagon and to husbands and wives whose loved ones became heroes aboard Flight 93. I remember Arlene Howard, who gave me her fallen son’s police shield as a reminder of all that was lost. And I still carry his badge.
As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before Nine-Eleven. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our Nation. And I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe.
Over the past seven years, a new Department of Homeland Security has been created. The military, the intelligence community, and the FBI have been transformed. Our Nation is equipped with new tools to monitor the terrorists’ movements, freeze their finances, and break up their plots. And with strong allies at our side, we have taken the fight to the terrorists and those who support them.
Afghanistan has gone from a nation where the Taliban harbored al Qaeda and stoned women in the streets to a young democracy that is fighting terror and encouraging girls to go to school. Iraq has gone from a brutal dictatorship and a sworn enemy of America to an Arab democracy at the heart of the Middle East and a friend of the United States.
There is legitimate debate about many of these decisions. But there can be little debate about the results. America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil. This is a tribute to those who toil night and day and night to keep us safe – law enforcement officers, intelligence analysts, homeland security and diplomatic personnel, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces.
Our Nation is blessed to have citizens who volunteer to defend us in this time of danger. I have cherished meeting these selfless patriots and their families. America owes you a debt of gratitude. And to all our men and women in uniform listening tonight: There has been no higher honor than serving as your Commander in Chief.
The battles waged by our troops are part of a broader struggle between two dramatically different systems. Under one, a small band of fanatics demands total obedience to an oppressive ideology, condemns women to subservience, and marks unbelievers for murder. The other system is based on the conviction that freedom is the universal gift of Almighty God and that liberty and justice light the path to peace.
This is the belief that gave birth to our Nation. And in the long run, advancing this belief is the only practical way to protect our citizens. When people live in freedom, they do not willingly choose leaders who pursue campaigns of terror. When people have hope in the future, they will not cede their lives to violence and extremism.
So around the world, America is promoting human liberty, human rights, and human dignity. We are standing with dissidents and young democracies, providing AIDS medicine to bring dying patients back to life, and sparing mothers and babies from malaria. And this great republic born alone in liberty is leading the world toward a new age when freedom belongs to all nations.
For eight years, we have also strived to expand opportunity and hope here at home. Across our country, students are rising to meet higher standards in public schools. A new Medicare prescription drug benefit is bringing peace of mind to seniors and the disabled. Every taxpayer pays lower income taxes.
The addicted and suffering are finding new hope through faith-based programs. Vulnerable human life is better protected. Funding for our veterans has nearly doubled. America’s air, water, and lands are measurably cleaner. And the Federal bench includes wise new members like Justice Sam Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.
When challenges to our prosperity emerged, we rose to meet them. Facing the prospect of a financial collapse, we took decisive measures to safeguard our economy. These are very tough times for hardworking families, but the toll would be far worse if we had not acted. All Americans are in this together. And together, with determination and hard work, we will restore our economy to the path of growth. We will show the world once again the resilience of America’s free enterprise system.
Like all who have held this office before me, I have experienced setbacks. There are things I would do differently if given the chance. Yet I have always acted with the best interests of our country in mind. I have followed my conscience and done what I thought was right. You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made. But I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions.
The decades ahead will bring more hard choices for our country, and there are some guiding principles that should shape our course.
While our Nation is safer than it was seven years ago, the gravest threat to our people remains another terrorist attack. Our enemies are patient and determined to strike again. America did nothing to seek or deserve this conflict. But we have been given solemn responsibilities, and we must meet them. We must resist complacency. We must keep our resolve. And we must never let down our guard.
At the same time, we must continue to engage the world with confidence and clear purpose. In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger. In the 21st century, security and prosperity at home depend on the expansion of liberty abroad. If America does not lead the cause of freedom, that cause will not be led.
As we address these challenges – and others we cannot foresee tonight – America must maintain our moral clarity. I have often spoken to you about good and evil. This has made some uncomfortable. But good and evil are present in this world, and between the two there can be no compromise. Murdering the innocent to advance an ideology is wrong every time, everywhere.
Freeing people from oppression and despair is eternally right. This Nation must continue to speak out for justice and truth. We must always be willing to act in their defense and to advance the cause of peace.
President Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past.” As I leave the house he occupied two centuries ago, I share that optimism. America is a young country, full of vitality, constantly growing and renewing itself. And even in the toughest times, we lift our eyes to the broad horizon ahead.
I have confidence in the promise of America because I know the character of our people. This is a Nation that inspires immigrants to risk everything for the dream of freedom. This is a Nation where citizens show calm in times of danger and compassion in the face of suffering. We see examples of America’s character all around us. And Laura and I have invited some of them to join us in the White House this evening.
We see America’s character in Dr. Tony Recasner, a principal who opened a new charter school from the ruins of Hurricane Katrina. We see it in Julio Medina, a former inmate who leads a faith-based program to help prisoners returning to society. We see it in Staff Sergeant Aubrey McDade, who charged into an ambush in Iraq and rescued three of his fellow Marines.
We see America’s character in Bill Krissoff, a surgeon from California. His son Nathan, a Marine, gave his life in Iraq. When I met Dr. Krissoff and his family, he delivered some surprising news: He told me he wanted to join the Navy Medical Corps in honor of his son. This good man was 60 years old – 18 years above the age limit.
But his petition for a waiver was granted, and for the past year he has trained in battlefield medicine. Lieutenant Commander Krissoff could not be here tonight, because he will soon deploy to Iraq, where he will help save America’s wounded warriors and uphold the legacy of his fallen son.
In citizens like these, we see the best of our country – resilient and hopeful, caring and strong. These virtues give me an unshakable faith in America. We have faced danger and trial, and there is more ahead. But with the courage of our people and confidence in our ideals, this great Nation will never tire … never falter … and never fail.
It has been the privilege of a lifetime to serve as your President. There have been good days and tough days. But every day I have been inspired by the greatness of our country and uplifted by the goodness of our people. I have been blessed to represent this Nation we love. And I will always be honored to carry a title that means more to me than any other: citizen of the United States of America.
And so, my fellow Americans, for the final time: Good night. May God bless this house and our next President. And may God bless you and our wonderful country. Thank you.”

I will not offer commentary. Because I do not think it is fair to the man. Anyone who reads this blog, knows my feelings about George W. Bush and his foreign policy. It is will stated on this Blog of which stripe of Conservatism that I reside in. So, I just present this as is.

All I will say is, Thank God it is finally over.

However, there is more commentary out there, both left and Right at Memeorandum

RedState Update on Gay Priest for Obama's Inauguration

Exit Full disclosure: I snorted loud on the “Obama likes it both ways” crack. 😛

RedState Update HQ

Zo Breaks it down about Bill O'Reilly's Question

Zo’s Website

Case Study Example of living in absolute denial

Via The Swamp:

President Bush has fessed up some of his mistakes, several in fact, in his final press conference.
But Vice President Dick Cheney is sticking to his story: The only mistake he can think of, in an interview airing on PBS this evening, was his “underestimating” the difficulty of standing up a new government in Iraq.
Bush, in his confessional presser, joked that the press corps had sometimes “mis-underestimated” him.
But Cheney isn’t one for confessionals. Cheney, asked by anchor Jim Lehrer of the Newshour if the Iraq war has been worth the 4,500 Americans lost in the effort, says:
“I think so.”
That’s one of those lines he might have preferred rehearsing – a mistake perhaps. He explains his answer, however: “Given the track record of Saddam Hussein, I think we did exactly the right thing. I think the country is better off for it today.”
When Lehrer asks Cheney about being the most powerful vice president in one of the most failing presidencies ever, Cheney says, “I don’t buy that.”
What doesn’t he buy? The failed presidency. – Read the rest

It is that blind arrogance that I and many other Independent Conservatives have a serious problem with. It’s that whole Nixonian attitude of “I am right and screw you”; is what will be a black mark on the history of America. I, for one, am extremely happy that this Administration’s tenure is over.

I was not very thrilled about Barack Obama being elected President, but anything is better, than that type of blind arrogance. It will be a welcome relief to have a President that will admit when he makes a serious mistake. The problem is that the realization that Bush’s style of leadership was not the right way to go, may have come too late for the Republican Party. Obama’s election was not a endorsement of Liberalism, it was a denunciation of the Neo-Conservative arrogance and Bush Doctrine style of rule.

The real question people should be asking is……

Why are Conservatives even wanting to dine with Obama?

Jonathan Chait opines as to why Liberals aren’t flipping out about the dinner date last night:

I actually don’t find it terribly surprising that liberals haven’t shown any outrage over Barack Obama’s dinner party with George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, and David Brooks. I’ll get to my hypothesis why liberals aren’t upset in a moment. But first imagine this counterfactual: George W. Bush (or maybe a victorious John McCain) sat down before his first inauguration with Paul Krugman, E.J. Dionne, and Frank Foer. Would conservatives have reacted with the same equanimity? No, I think they’d have gone nuts. And the reason is that they wouldn’t have confidence in Bush or McCain to be surrounded by liberal ideas without being deeply influenced by them. I don’t think they’d have reacted this way if, say, a President Mitt Romney did the same thing.
And that’s why liberals aren’t having a cow. They know that Obama understands far more about policy than any of his right-wing dinner companions, is used to being exposed to opposing ideas, and won’t come out of that dinner telling his staff, “Hey, did you know we cut half the capital gains tax and raise more revenue?”

A separate issue is why Obama didn’t pick some conservatives with a bit more intellectual integrity than, say, Kristol and Krauthammer. The problem, of course, is conservatives like that tend not to rise to positions of high influence.

As for his question, except for the idiot line at the end about high influence, I pretty much agree.

However, I feel, as a Paleo-Conservative, that the difference between a Democrat and a Neo-Conservative is about hair’s breadth. This is the reason for the Neo-Con’s relationship with Hillary. I mean, they all but sucked up to her.

Perhaps the Neo-Conservatives are trying to suck up, in order to save face in 2010 and 2012.

You notice though that on that guest list, Pat Buchanan or anyone from “The American Conservative” or “Reason” magazine was not there? Just Neo-Conservative talking heads.

It’s going to be a long four to eight years.

Update – Related Video: (H/T to AP)

Exit Comment/Question: I wonder if the Liberal watchdogs will make a big deal about the basketball playing comment? She was being funny, but it was a bit mean. I was shocked she said it. 😮

Others: The Daily Dish, Kevin Drum and Washington Monthly (Via Memeorandum)

BlogAds is an Anti-Conservative Owned Business

I haven’t had a good fight in a while, so, I decided to bring something up on this Blog.

Many of you know, that I use BlogAds on this Blog for Advertising. You’ll also notice that not many people have used the service for their advertising needs. I think I might have an idea why.

I was nosing around over on the official BlogsAds Blog and quite frankly, I was quite horrified to what is on that “Company Blog“. There is a great deal of Anti-Conservative, Pro-Obama screed over their Blog.

You can see examples of what I am referring to by going Here, Here, Here and Here.

What I find utterly amazing is the fact that Conservatives even use this service at all. I mean, I am part of the Conservative Hive on BlogAds.

My question is this, how is it, that Conservatives are using a Blog Advertising service who’s owner, (I presume that is who wrote those entries) partakes in the bashing the Republican Party and Conservative values in General?

Quite frankly, I’m sickened by what I read over on that Blog, the owner of BlogAds ought to ashamed of himself and should either remove the postings of Political Nature or close the business down, or at best only accept Liberal Advertising, because quite frankly, taking the money of Conservatives and bashing them on a Company website or Blog is totally hypocritical in this writers opinion.

I am almost sure that the owner of Blogads will most likely delete my account, as a result of bringing this to light. I am sure I will see an e-mail shortly tell me to get lost. But I will not pull this entry. Business owners who partake in this sort of Anti-Conservative rhetoric ought to be exposed and ran out of business.

Trackposted to Nuke’s, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Woman Honor Thyself, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, DragonLady’s World, The Pink Flamingo, Democrat=Socialist, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Guest Voice: An Unreflective Man By Patrick J. Buchanan

An Unreflective Man
By Patrick J. Buchanan
January 13, 2009

With his public approval where Harry Truman’s stood when he left office, George W. Bush gave his last press conference yesterday.

And like that predecessor he often identifies with, Bush showed a Trumanesque defiance of his critics — and a Trumanesque failure to understand what ruined his presidency.

He denounced protectionism, as he has with dismissive contempt since he went to New Hampshire a decade ago. But nowhere in his defense of free trade was there any explanation for how Middle America lost 3 million manufacturing jobs in his first term and a million more in the last year.

Nowhere does there seem an awareness that the ideas he absorbed at his father’s knee and the Harvard Business School had resulted in the de-industrialization of his country, an enormous and growing dependency on Japan, China and Asia for the essentials of our national life, and, now, for the borrowed money to pay for them.

Someone once defined tragedy as what happens when a beautiful theory collides with a fact. And this is what has happened every time a great empire — be it the Spanish, British or American — embraced free trade as its salvation.

President Bush says it was freedom that prevailed when he rejected the pleas of weak-sister Republicans and backed the surge. But what spared us a debacle in Iraq was an infusion of 30,000 combat troops, an uprising against the murderers of al-Qaida and a U.S. decision to buy off the Sunni tribes, a strategy besieged empires have pursued for centuries.

Nor does there appear in Bush’s self-assurance any awareness of the cost of his Freedom Agenda. In Iraq, it is 4,000 U.S. dead, 30,000 wounded, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead, millions of refugees, a pogrom against an ancient Christian community, and a strategic victory for Iran and its Shia allies across the Middle East. When last heard from, the Ayatollah Sistani — the chief Shia cleric in Iraq, who has welcomed Iranian but not American visitors — was calling for Muslims to stand up against Israeli criminality in Gaza.

Like Woodrow Wilson before him, Bush appears to believe that the nobility of his goals — expanding freedom and bringing an end to tyranny in our world — validates and will sanctify his decisions.

Like Wilson, he is a utopian. He fails to understand that idealism has its delusions and disasters.

The war Wilson led us into “to make the world safe for democracy” gave us Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and 70 years of the most barbaric empire in all history. The peace Wilson brought home led straight to Adolf Hitler, the Third Reich and a second world war far worse than the first.

The West’s road to hell has been paved with good intentions.

President Bush rightly denounces Europeans who see Israel as always wrong. Yet he behaves as though Israel can do no wrong. Sixteen days into the Gaza war, with the Palestinian dead and wounded near 5,000, and a humanitarian catastrophe at hand, has our “compassionate conservative” president uttered one word of compassion for those whose losses outnumber the Israelis’ 100 to one?

In defending his rejected immigration reform, President Bush clearly sees himself as in the vanguard of decency, and admonishes his party against being perceived as anti-immigrant.

But is this president oblivious to what is happening in his country because of his and his father’s failure to secure the border? Even in rich, liberal Montgomery County, Md., one reads over the weekend that there is a hardening of attitudes toward illegal immigration after a spate of crimes and killings. Working-class Americans pay the price of the idealism around the dinner table at the Crawford ranch.

In his first five years, Bush himself has admitted, 6 million aliens were arrested at the border, breaking into this country. One in 12 — 500,000 — had criminal records. Is it anti-immigrant to demand a halt to this invasion, even if it means troops on the border? Is it truly compassionate, or an act of cravenness, to insist that the answer is amnesty for 12 million to 20 million illegals and absolution for the businesses that hired them?

Choleric and cocky Harry Truman may be Bush’s role model. But it was Dwight D. Eisenhower who had to clean up the mess Harry left behind.

Six months into office, Ike had ended the Korean War. He had the courage no president has since shown to tell the Israelis they must get off occupied land. They did.

While surely repelled by Nikita Khrushchev, especially for the Hungarian bloodbath of 1956, Ike had him up to Camp David in 1959 because, wicked as the Bolsheviks were, they had nuclear weapons, and one must talk to them.

Prudence is the mark of the true conservative. Ike and RonaldReagan had it. Neither Bush nor Truman did. And that is why the former left the country so much better off than did the latter.

Goodbye, Mr. President, and God bless.

Original Article here

Pat Buchanan’s Website