Empty Chair Throws DNI Under Bus

Harry Truman famously had a sign on his desk that said "the buck stops here". Obama should have one that says "the buck stops..."with arrows pointing in every direction but toward him.

The first rule of leadership is that you are responsible for the good and the bad. A true leader humbly passes the credit to those who work for him and accepts the blame when things go wrong. Unfortunately we have Obama so that ain't happening. The man gladly took credit for killing bin-Laden  when he was half a world away but is still blaming Bush for everything that is wrong.

The Libyan terror attack that resulted in the death of the first ambassador killed on duty since 1979 and three others was a serious intel disaster. It may have been the fault of the CIA, DIA, NSA or any other alphabet agency but ultimately it was Obama's fault. So what do you think he did? Did he say, yes, this was an act of terror on a day we should have been prepared and I take full responsibility? Silly you, of course not, he got one of his underlings to take the rap.

This blog and many others knew that it was a terror attack right away but to admit that would mean Obama would take a hit on the whole lame "I killed bin-Laden and I'm the baddest mother on the planet because I got bin-Laden" edifice they built so the administration obfuscated and said it was a mob that got out of control. Anyone with any military knowledge laughed. Our fearless leader even sent his UN Ambassador out to the morning shows well after it was clear to parrot those talking points.

So now that that ridiculous story has been proven to be a lie, Obama needs someone--anyone to take the rap as long as it's not him. Enter the Director of National Intelligence groveling:

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/09/28/170078/intelligence-office-says-it-got.html#storylink=cpy

“In the immediate aftermath (of the assault), there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo,” spokesman Sean Turner said in the statement. “We provided that initial assessment to executive branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly.”

Let's play a game and pretend this is true. We're supposed to believe that the lead intelligence expert in the nation would actually say to the President that it was a mob that formed up and used finely sighted mortars to attack the ambassador in a secret safe-house and used direct and indirect fire to assault the house?

If that's the case, Obama appointed the worst DNI in history and should lose his job for it along with the DNI.

This is an out and out lie and it should be the turning point of the election if--and it's a big if--Romney hits him on it. It occurred on 9/11 and we know that al-Qaeda loves important dates. I have no intel background and I saw it right away.

We need a leader who cares about the country and his people. Obama cares about no one but Obama and it's led us to the abyss. It was also a pussy move to release this on a Friday when it will be glossed over.

Rand Paul: How About We Stop Sending Money to Those Who Hate Us?

It's funny, as much as I despise Ron Paul and his wild band of zealots, I like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY). Sen. Paul is a man of vision and common sense, the kind of man that probably only could have gotten elected in a state like Kentucky during a Tea Party revolution.

Rand Paul gets it. He gets that we spend too much money and it's not just a Democratic ailment. He gets that socialized medicine will destroy the greatest health care system ever and he is one who has had to negotiate that system as an MD.

But more importantly, he knows right from wrong and opts for right all the time. He is not afraid to tussle with anyone if he believes he's in the right and has threatened to bring the Senate to a standstill if he isn't at the very least heard out.

Today, he pens a piece in the Washington Times advocating that we shut off the spigot to Egypt, Libya and Pakistan because, well, they hate us and have been playing us for decades. Here's a portion but of course read the entire essay:

Last week, I requested that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, provide a brief amount of time for debate and a vote on my amendment to end U.S. aid to Pakistan, Egypt and Libya. Yet, Senate Democrat leadership blocked it. I will continue my effort this week and have announced my intentions to stop all Senate business with a filibuster. 

You and I have been reminded that our enemies are relentless, but we were also reminded that our so-called allies are often not acting like allies at all. We send billions of taxpayer dollars abroad and what do we get in return? Disrespect, disdain and, ultimately, violence.  

American taxpayer dollars should not go to Libya until the murderers are delivered to justice. Nor should they go to Egypt until the Egyptians prove that they are willing and able to protect our embassy. Finally, not one more penny of American taxpayer dollars should go to Pakistan until the doctor who helped us get bin Laden is freed.

Amen, brother.

Let's start with Egypt. The Egyptians signed a peace treaty while being lead by Anwar Sadat. Sadat risked a lot and ultimately died for his actions at the hands of Egyptian Islamic Jihad or Muslim Brotherhood gunmen. As a thank you to Sadat who suffered condemnation throughout the Middle East, the US gave about a billion dollars to Egypt. This continued during the time Hosni Mubarak was in power.

Mubarak was overthrown last year and "elections' saw the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood to power. They have set Egypt back decades instituting sharia law and curtailing the rights of women. They also did nothing while our embassy was overrun last week and an al-Qaeda flag was hoisted where ours once had been before it was burned.

Libya is another animal. In the aftermath of the NATO victory over Gadaffi, money was pledged and money was sent. Last week on 9/11, armed militants murdered the ambassador and three other people in a RPG and machine gun attack.

But Pakistan is the real problem. We needed Pakistan to aid us in the War on Terror and our decade-plus conflict against the Taliban. We expected them to be straight shooters but of all the nations in that region, Pakistan is the shadiest character of all. The Pakistani intelligence service ISI was simultaneously smiling at us while hiding bin-Laden. They pledged to be nice and were allegedly behind the deadly attacks in Mumbai. Reports say they've been supporting the Taliban while cashing our checks and, as Sen. Paul notes, have tortured and jailed the doctor who helped us capture bin-Laden (partially because of leaks within the Obama administration).

So yes, as Paul notes, it's time to shut the tap off. If you can't play nice, we won';t support you. Let's see how long the Muslim Brotherhood survives without American largess.

Of course the Russians will step in and try to reclaim their place on the world stage but the Russians will not abide Chechnyan's training in terror camps in Libya or Pakistani's exporting weapons to Dagestan.

China may try to step in but they have no where near the global reach militarily that we have and it would be a difficult task to offer protection.

I agree with Sen. Paul, it's high time we offer the carrot and whack the hell out of them with the stick if they don't play nice. President Bush needed Pakistan, we don't anymore. Bring the boys home and redirect the funds we give the three nations above into our military resources at home.

More here.

Condi Rice For VP?

By all accounts, Condoleezza Rice impressed many at the Romney pow wow (note: ABC focused on the money aspect and the Condi quote is shoe-horned in but this has been reported many places):

Many of those same attendees said the star speaker of the weekend was former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who received and a standing ovation.  Ambassador Charles Cobb, who served as ambassador to Iceland from 1989 to 1992, said Rice was “spectacular” and described her as a “very bright, sophisticated, articulate lady.”

Not unexpected as Rice, the first African-American woman to serve as Sec State, is highly accomplished and has a strong resume. She served the country well as both National Security Advisor and her last governmental position at State.

Impressively, no books have been written talking of her poor leadership as is often seen after a Republican leaves a liberal bastion such as Foggy Bottom and her story is impressive. Serving under Reagan and Bush 43, Provost at Stanford, an accomplished musician and expert on Russian affairs.

I really want her to get the nod so I can watch her destroy a hugely over matched Joe Biden in the debates.

From a strategy standpoint, Rice is attractive, may tear away some of the African-American vote if she can explain to that particular community that has been devastated by the highest unemployment in the nation that it was Obama's policies that left them behind and shores up Romney's foreign policy credentials.

I previously touted others but Condi is getting a second look from me. The fact that she was at this event shows she's still willing to be a player and even if she's not selected would be perfect to help the Romney campaign as an advisor.

Wikileaks Explodes Obama Foreign Policy Image

It's been awhile since I've posted anything here but the Wikileaks saga has brought me out of my self-induced hiatus.

When Obama came to power, he was the man who was going to undo all the wrongs perpetrated by the Bush administration with regard to our image around the world. He was going to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, stop global warming, stop Iran from producing nukes and get us out of the two wars Bush stupidly got us into. His was going to be a way that placed diplomacy at the top and sneaky tactics at the very bottom.

So much for that empty rhetoric.

When the vile Julian Assange released the first leaked documents concerning the war on terror, Obama did nothing because the documents made the military look bad and by extension the Bush/Cheney junta. Now that Assange is embarrassing the Obama administration, he's on Interpol's wanted list and is an avowed enemy of The One. But that's a discussion for another post.

The Wikileaks cables leaked over the last week and a half paint a picture of a conniving administration that has run amok. From Hillary Clinton ordering essentially a smear dossier on the Argentina leader's wife (now leader herself) to the ham-fisted way they schemed to save face in climate change negotiations, the Obamacons have shown themselves to be petty and way out of their league. Their collective actions have given America a black eye that will take ears to repair.

The list of inadequacy goes on and on with a clear illustration of how the administration operates on a daily basis with regard to our allies and enemies. It paints one ugly picture--especially from the Hillary-led State Department where the embarrassment has been the greatest.

Once all the cables have been leaked, we will have an even clearer picture of an administration that is what those of us who were paying attention said it was; insular, ideological, sneaky and inept. Thank the good Lord that we have at least begun to put a check on their arrogance and incompetence.

Obama's Sham Nuke Summit

The much-hyped nuclear summit crafted by the Obama administration and hailed as the most significant event since Christ walked on water or Moses descended with the Ten Commandments ended up being exactly what everything in the regime has been--farce wrapped in propaganda wrapped in the shiny veneer of "smart diplomacy.

In other words, it was nothing but a chance to get a few photo ops that will be used to their full effect when it comes to claiming Obama has serious foreign affairs street cred.

Mark Steyn dissects the summit, which amounted to nothing more than a circle jerk that produced nothing of substance and left the most-pressing problem with regard to nukes off the table:

In years to come – assuming, for the purposes of argument, there are any years to come – scholars will look back at President Barack Obama's Nuclear Security Summit and marvel. For once, the cheap comparisons with 1930s appeasement barely suffice: To be sure, in 1933, the great powers were meeting in Geneva and holding utopian arms-control talks even as Hitler was taking office in Berlin. But it's difficult to imagine Neville Chamberlain in 1938 hosting a conference on the dangers of rearmament, and inviting America, France, Brazil, Liberia and Thailand ...but not even mentioning Germany.

Yet that's what Obama just did: He held a nuclear gabfest in 2010, the biggest meeting of world leaders on American soil since the founding of the United Nations 65 years ago – and Iran wasn't on the agenda.

Look at Obama greeting these international leaders, he's so smart and looks great. Look at The One bow to his banker and enabler the Chinese. Look at him stick his finger in the face of the Prime Minister of our long-time rival and show that right-winger what's what (but be careful not to offend those who wish us the worse). It was a ridiculous event that amounted to nothing. No approach to North Korea and it's elfish despot, no words spoken about the mad mullahs and their butt boy Ahmadinejad who seek to de-stabilize a region crucial to US and international commerce. We accomplished exactly nothing of consequence but don't fret, the Obama-protecting media dutifully wrote essay after essay espousing the brilliance of The One (even though Obama used them like $5 whores and then dumped them on the curb when he was done).

Here we sit, mired in a recession deepened by Obamanomics. The electorate is incensed and Obama decided to try to dominate the news cycle with an international fashion show that was long on style but woefully short on substance.

Liberals Can't Have It Both Ways on Iran

In the aftermath of 9/11, liberals and Democrats were quick to point out that it was Bush's responsibility because he had been in office for 8-months. They claimed this knowing full-well that the lawsuits pushed by Gore put the Bush transition team way behind when it came to filling key spots. They also brushed aside any conversation that Clinton had some responsibility when he allowed bin-Laden to escape capture or death. Bush had been in office long enough they driveled, he had sole responsibility.

My how times have changed.

Iran has copped to the fact that they have another nuclear facility and to underscore the point launched one of their long-range missiles; one capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe. Now libs are claiming it was Bush's fault for allowing Iran to develop this second site under his watch.

So which is it? Obama has been in office longer than Bush had been on 9/11 and if we go by precedent that was set back then; it's Obama's responsibility for the Ahmadinejad regime's middle finger extension towards both the IAEA and the US.

You can't have it both ways.

The Iranian revelation comes a week after Obama screwed over Poland and the Czech Republic and bowed to Putin by taking away the missile shield that was designed to stop...Iranian missiles carrying nukes.

Perhaps Obama can talk with Ahmadinejad without preconditions and persuade him using his magnetic personality to give up their nuke ambitions. Or he can just ignore the situation and go to Denmark to lobby for his home town with Oprah. I wonder which one he'll select. I mean, one of our oldest allies is now threatened with annihilation and a Mid-East conflagration just became much more likelier but but that's no reason to put off a quick jaunt to Denmark now is it?

Hope & Change Not So Appealing to the Rest of the World

You remember how the Obama approach to foreign policy was supposed to make the world a much happier place? Remember how we were scoffed at when we said he was idealistic at best and dangerously naive at worst when he said he speak to thugs like Ahmadinejad without preconditions?

Well, luxuriate in the schadenfreude me right wing, racist, terrorist friends:

European allies still refuse to send significantly more troops to Afghanistan. The Saudis basically ignored Mr. Obama’s request for concessions to Israel, while Israel rebuffed his demand to stop settlement expansion. North Korea defied him by testing a nuclear weapon. Japan elected a party less friendly to the United States. Cuba has done little to liberalize in response to modest relaxation of sanctions. India and China are resisting a climate change deal. And Russia rejected new sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program even as Mr. Obama heads into talks with Tehran.

That from the left-wing beacon the NY Times. When they have to admit it, things are bad indeed.

They neglected to even mention Obama dissing Gordon Brown over the Lockerbie issue or Poland who The One screwed over (on a day equivalent to their 9/11) last week to appease Russia and received nothing and let us not forget the rest of the EU who aren't exactly feeling the love:

A growing rift between the US and Europe is overshadowing Tuesday’s United Nations climate change summit in New York, further damping hopes for a breakthrough at the Copenhagen talks in December.

Connie Hedegaard, the Danish environment minister, lowered expectations, saying: “Things are looking difficult and too slow, that is the fact.”

The downgrading of expectations comes as relations between the US and Europe, which started the year of talks as allies, near breakdown.

...“So far, we thought the basic problem was the Chinese and the Indians. But now I think the problem appears to lie most clearly with the US,” a European Commission official said. Talks were “not going well”.

So what nations are overjoyed with the presidency of our man Barack? North Korea, Syria, Iran, Libya...

Damn, I just realized I linked to two NY Times pieces and they were both semi-critical of Nobama.

Obama Sells Out New Europe to Appease Putin

It's official; Obama has destroyed any and all good will we have left in Europe.

First he sold out Gordon Brown over the Lockerbie bomber affair and now has made good on his promise to get rid of the missile shield in the Czech Republic and Poland:

The White House is scrapping a Bush-era plan for an Eastern European missile-defense shield, saying a redesigned defensive system would be cheaper, quicker and more effective against the threat from Iranian missiles.

"After an extensive process, I have approved the unanimous recommendations of my secretary of defense and my joint chiefs of staff to strengthen America's defenses against ballistic-missile attack," President Barack Obama said in an announcement Thursday morning.

Obama's military team has become a crutch when it comes to foreign policy initiatives. He has a nice out by saying it was their idea to sell out two nations whose leaders expended enormous political capital in pushing for the shield in the first place.

So who benefits? Only the reddest son of a bitch in the region: Vlad Putin. His cronies are lining up to praise the president for his lapdog stance:

Russia on Thursday welcomed the news but said it saw no reason to offer concessions in return. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called the plan a "responsible move." He threatened last year to station tactical Iskander missiles on Poland's border if the U.S. system was deployed.

"We appreciate this responsible move by the U.S. president toward realizing our agreement,'' Mr. Medvedev said Thursday. "I am prepared to continue the dialogue."

That's great news you commie prick. Obama sells out two nations that languished under the thumb of Soviet oppression for decades. Bush didn't build the missile shield for protection against Iran as is often claimed, it was to let the Russians know that we are paying attention and their shoddily built weapons systems would be shot out of the sky if they got a little cagey. Obama just Lewinskied Putin in front of the entire world and will push wary nations back into the Russian sphere.

Fitting it happened almost 71 years to the day that Neville Chamberlain brought "peace in our time" by selling out Czechoslovakia to Hitler in what has grown to become the very symbol of cowardly appeasement.

Update: In the bad timing department, Iran has the The Bomb. Thanks Obama.

The Real Cost of Global Warming & Deficits

It's all out in the open now. Obama's Treasury Secretary has now let the cat out of the bag with regard to the administration's thinking on China, global warming and what responsibility they believe the American people have in the alleged environmental ailments our planet is suffering:

But yesterday, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said something amazing—U.S. consumers should pay for part of Chinese greenhouse-gas emissions. From Reuters:

“It’s important that those who consume the products being made all around the world to the benefit of America — and it’s our own consumption activity that’s causing the emission of greenhouse gases, then quite frankly Americans need to pay for that,” Commerce Secretary Gary Locke told the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.

And there it is; America is a huge consumer of energy and thus a major polluter in their eyes. That means we have to pay to help clean up the nations we import products from. Forget the fact that China would be an oozing cesspool of chemical and biological waste even if we didn't import a single product from them. Just as the former Soviet Union raped and pillaged the planet from the former Czechoslavakia to the Ukraine, the Chinese are doing the same. Communism and environmentalism are not compatible in the least.

But the real key here is that China holds enormous amounts of our debt. Obama knows that they and the rest of the world are a bit edgy about the state of our economy and we needed to assuage some of their weariness. What better way then to say we'd pay for their pollution? It's a win-win for the Peoples Republic. But truth be told, Obama knows that we will need China to but our paper to pay for socialized medicine and he is flat out bribing them by taking this tack.

The idea that rich-country consumers should pick up the tab for some of China’s industrial emissions has been gaining currency lately—but not from within the Obama administration. The argument is that many of China’s factories churn out cheap stuff for the West, not for domestic consumption, so those consumers are actually responsible for the emissions. China, of course, loves the idea.

When is the Obama administration going to get it? China is a rich country and they got rich by industrial production. They made their own mess and now we're offering to clean it up for them.

I have a shirt made in Vietnam, pants made in El Salvador and numerous product made in Taiwan; are we going to pay for their emissions as well?

This could just be another area for trade tensions with China over the environment. The House climate bill includes a provision for mandatory “carbon tariffs” on dirty imports from countries such as China, which might be illegal under international trade law and which have riled up Beijing. President Obama and Senate leaders have frowned on hardline trade measures.

Of course they have, why should we pressure China to clean up their own mess when the decreasingly affluent Americans can do it for them.

Watch how quickly this sputters out as Obama puts pressure on Nancy Pelosi to strike the provision and essentially gives China the right to pollute at will. The American public has reached a breaking point with Obama and this would be enough to put us over the edge. The Chinese want more latitude in the region and want to control the area from their northern border to Singapore. They have built up their naval forces to do just that and our leadership is cow-towing to them at every turn.

Obama's deficits are going to cost us more than we ever imagined. We need China to support his agenda and if we have to pay for their emissions, it's but a small price in the long run to implement his policies and plans.

Welcome to the new America, welcome to Obamanation.

More here.

Cowboy Diplomacy Vs. Community Organizer Diplomacy

I couldn't go more than one post without reverting back to rebutting the Inquirer.

Today the editorial board tries to explain to us how much better a world we live in with Obama's diplomatic efforts versus Bush's "cowboy diplomacy". They fail miserably:

While the rest of the world is enjoying the refreshing return of diplomacy as the preferred tool for U.S. foreign policy, partisan snipers back at the ranch are pouting for a return to the dangerous cowboyism of the past administration.

If by "rest of the world" they mean Kim Jung-Il, Hugo Chavez and Ahmadinejad, yes, they would correct in that assertion.

President Obama is naïve, they say, for not pointing a judgmental finger in the face of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin when they met two weeks ago. Those critics must have forgotten that it was the previous president who, like a charmed schoolgirl, said he looked into Putin's eyes and got a sense of his soul.

While that was truly embarrassing for Bush, it pales next to Obama's abasement in front of the Saudi king and his backing of an ousted dictator trying to spread communism throughout South America.

Too bad President George W. Bush didn't see the manipulative nature of the former KGB operative whose Stalinist tendencies are increasingly in evidence. Putin technically plays second fiddle to President Dmitry Medvedev. But he handpicked Medvedev, and Putin is believed to be preparing to reassume the presidency in the next election.

There was no naïveté by Obama in Russia. He neither idolized Putin or treated him with disdain. Obama was pragmatic, forging an agreement where one was possible, on nuclear proliferation, while stating clearly his different views on a U.S. missile shield in Europe and Russia's harsh treatment of Ukraine and Georgia.

Pragmatic? He sold out Poland and it's leaders who expended much political capital to push through the missile shield plan. Is Russia now leaving Ukraine and Georgia alone due to the mere words of The One?

A cowboy might have drawn his six-shooter, at least rhetorically, when two American journalists were jailed in March for entering secretive, repressive North Korea. Obama has instead tried to maintain perspective, working to secure the women's release, while keeping open the possibility of future nuclear talks with the wildly unpredictable Kim regime.

The two women are still languishing in a hellish prison for a crime they didn't commit. The Inquirer cites this as proof that Obama's brand of diplomacy is superior. Think about that for a second. Kim Jung-Il will not listen to diplomacy, he laughs at us when we try. He understand one thing: power and the ability to project it. He's a rogue with nukes and one who is playing Obama like a fiddle much as he did Jimmy Carter and Madeline Albright in the 90's.

But wait, the next example is even more telling:

This practical approach to foreign policy was also seen in Obama's restraint in the aftermath of the disputed Iranian election.

The cowboys were screaming for Obama to encourage a rebellion even though the American people, already eager to quit Iraq, would be loath to support Iranian rebels with more than lip service. Obama instead criticized the way President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected, but left open the possibility of U.S. diplomats one day sitting down with Iran's to discuss its nuclear ambitions.

Obama didn't even offer lip service until he saw that the nation wanted him to say something...anything. This is a bit of revisionism by the Inquirer as anyone paying attention when the events were happening saw Obama as weak and wavering. All that was needed was a word of support and perhaps some basic guidance covertly to opposition organizers to open the floodgates of freedom. Obama likes the status quo because he'd rather deal with an entity that is evil but known than a newly freed nation that may require some American assistance. Freedom is far less important than diplomacy in Obamanation.

Obama's pragmatism was again on display when his administration symbolically assumed the mantle of broker for Middle East peace. In his groundbreaking speech in Cairo last month, Obama argued that the Palestinians should eschew terrorism and follow the nonviolent example of the U.S. civil-rights movement. But he also criticized Israel for continuing to expand settlements.

And that speech possibly was read by the Iranian opposition as a clarion call to uprise. They felt empowered by his speech and he left them at the altar of more freedom. As for the Israel-Palestinian situation, I've not seen one report that would make me believe the situation has improved.

Obama must now let pragmatism take the reins with the very complex situation in Honduras. He, along with the United Nations, and the Organization of American States, quickly decried the June 28 ouster of democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya. But there should be a limit to support for Zelaya, a power-hungry protégé of U.S.-hating Venezuela President Hugo Chavez.

In fact, Honduras illustrates the fallacy in touting democracy as the best gauge of a nation's freedom. Giving people the right to vote must be the goal, but the world has seen too many democratically chosen despots to say that alone is enough. Even Hitler was democratically elected.

"Pragmatism" is another way of voting present. Any tough situation can be solved by taking the easiest rout and calling it pragmatism. You have to be nuanced in diplomatic affairs you see and Obama is the king of nuance.

With regard to Zelaya, the man was attempting to change the constitution of that nation for his benefit ala Chavez. The army may have acted roughly but were well within the constitution to remove him when they did. (Update: Is this the kind of democracy the Inquirer likes?)

As for Hitler being democratically elected, so was Ahmadinejad (according to liberals who feared rebellion) and Chavez. Hell, Saddam got 100% of the vote prior to his untimely removal and subsequent demise.

So in closing it's imperative to note that this is exactly the type of diplomacy liberals love. It's diplomacy in which nothing really ever happens. Nothing except for our enemies growing stronger, more emboldened and feeling no constraints when spreading weapons and ideology.

Thoughts on the Obama Press Conference

I didn't watch it live as I, unlike a great many in the brave, new Obamanation, still have to work. I did read the transcripts and have a few thoughts as to what was and wasn't said.

Iran:
Obama upped his concern level to "appalled and outraged" after being asked a question by the HuffPo that was clearly planted. "It was heartbreaking" he said that Neda Agha-Soltan was gunned down in the street.

This is clearly not enough and much too late. The protests have ebbed and any chance to oust the regime was lost because Obama refused to step up to the plate and paint the scenes on the streets of Tehran as what they really were; the seeds of democracy and freedom. His non-condemnation was mealy-mouthed and the world knows it. He had the opportunity to have a "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" moment and instead opted to let things play out.

Obama clearly does not believe in American exceptionalism and thus has sentenced the Iranian people to another decade of oppression. Add to that the fact that we were blamed for it anyway and we have an emboldened regime instead of a weakened one that will laugh at the amateur politician from Chicago when it comes time to negotiate the mullahs mad quest for nukes.

All in all a lost opportunity to make an historic statement at an historic time. But don't fret libs, the media will have his back.

Afghanistan and Iraq:
Obama continuously said on the stump that we dropped the ball by invading Iraq and turning our back on Afghanistan. It was wrong then but politically worked. But what about now where we have Iraq in check and a clear path in Afghanistan? He said nothing. This on a day where we took out 60 at a Taliban "wedding". (As an aside, it would have been question #1 as the media would have bought the wedding line and hammered Bush with it)

In fact, he did not mention Afghanistan, Iraq, any branch of the military or the War on Terror. All domestic policy, all the time with the exception of noting that he's essentially in "AA" for smoking. You either smoke or you don't dude. You can't be kind of pregnant or kind of a smoker.

North Korea:
The One didn't broach the subject of NoKo at a crucial time where a NoKo ship is being tailed by a US warship and believed to be carrying nuclear weapons hardware or materials. Add to that the fact that Kim Jung-Il has threatened to launch a missile towards Obama's former home Hawaii next week and one would consider it a topic of importance.

I guess he doesn't want to "meddle" in their affairs either.

All in all it was typical Obama trying to connect with the American people and using his alleged eloquence to make us all feel better while ramming through cap and trade and health care. The thing is, he's on the air somewhere every day so yesterday it was just another news day when it could have been a day where he instilled confidence and garnered some goodwill. people are tiring of his narcissistic act and he didn't help that in the least yesterday.

By the way, for a guy who is full of hope and change, he sure seems pissed off quite a bit, doesn't he? Video below:

Monday Iran Update

Things were somewhat calmer over the weekend but threaten to flair up again. Here's today's news:

-Obama says that those feel good invitations he extended to Iranian diplomats still stand and yes, he would be delighted to celebrate the birthday of the worlds greatest democracy with those who are actively oppressing the onset of one.

-26-year old Neda Agha-Soltan is remembered by her family in what has to be the most tragic event of the uprising. She was a bystander essentially and will now go down as the face of the revolution. Senator McCain eulogizes her in a way she greatly deserved. Her picture is at right.

-Christopher Hitchens puts the wood to Obama over his utter failure on Iran. Note to self; never piss off Hitch.

-Obama and Hugo Chavez are of one mind on Iran. Nice company he keeps.

-Rumors have been flying that the Republican Guard is disobeying orders and will not attack protesters, which means it will be hardline thugs doing the dirty work. People are fighting back. Note, all links are to Gateway Pundit who has done fantastic work on this issue.

Alienating Yet Another Ally

And this time on our northern border and the one nation that we simply cannot afford a trade war with:

Ordered by Congress to "buy American" when spending money from the $787 billion stimulus package, the town of Peru, Ind., stunned its Canadian supplier by rejecting sewage pumps made outside of Toronto. After a Navy official spotted Canadian pipe fittings in a construction project at Camp Pendleton, Calif., they were hauled out of the ground and replaced with American versions. In recent weeks, other Canadian manufacturers doing business with U.S. state and local governments say they have been besieged with requests to sign affidavits pledging that they will only supply materials made in the USA.

Outrage spread in Canada, with the Toronto Star last week bemoaning "a plague of protectionist measures in the U.S." and Canadian companies openly fretting about having to shift jobs to the United States to meet made-in-the-USA requirements. This week, the Canadians fired back. A number of Ontario towns, with a collective population of nearly 500,000, retaliated with measures effectively barring U.S. companies from their municipal contracts — the first shot in a larger campaign that could shut U.S. companies out of billions of dollars worth of Canadian projects.

I thought the Obama administration was supposed to fix all the alleged broken relationships we had with our allies. So far he's belittled Britain, France, Israel and now Canada.

This isn't just an embarrassing gift mishap like with Gordon Brown, this is an issue that can cause long-term damage to our relationship with a crucial trading partner. Sure, it may not resonate in DC but it does in states like the Dakotas, Idaho, Wisconsin, Minnesota and the reeling state of Michigan.

Liberals never, ever consider the ripple effect their policies will generate and the lib we now have in the Oval Office is more oblivious than most. Isolationism breeds hatred that cannot be easily turned. We are not hurting Canada by putting tariffs on Molson but actually affecting their job market and business climate. Those are things not easily forgotten and will fester for as long as the isolationist policies continue.

Obama has done more damage to our standing in the world than Bush could have in four terms.

Iran Attacks Inside Iraq; How Will Obama Respond

Seemingly small incidents carry huge clout in the Mideast. When I was in Kuwait after Desert Storm, we were schooled incessantly on the local customs and how generally every action meant something in the local culture. Whether it be the Persians or Arabs, actions and reactions carry weight that western cultures can't even begin to comprehend.

This is one of those moments:

Iranian aircraft attacked three villages inside Iraq over the weekend. The airstrikes — Iran’s first on Iraqi soil since the U.S. invasion — could complicate the Obama administration’s efforts to normalize relations with Tehran.

“The bombardments appeared to have targeted the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK), an Iranian Kurdish separatist group which has launched attacks on Iran from rear-supply bases in the mountains of northern Iraq,” AFP reports. Iran has attacked the Kurdish group before, with artillery. But this is the first time the Iranians followed up, with assaults from the air.

“The incident comes a week after reports of a clash between Iranian police officers and suspected PJAK fighters in the country’s western province of Kermanshah,” Al-Jazeera reports. “At least 10 policemen and 10 fighters were killed in the gun battle.”

This is a direct slap at the Iraqi government and by extension at Obama. His response (or lack of) will have ramifications that could harm our long-term strategies in the region. A non-response will send the signal that we are backing away from our commitment to Maliki and the Iraqi nation in which case Ahmadinejad will be further emboldened.

The only response is to covertly execute a mission that lets Iran know that we will never stand by and allow them free rein to attack within another nations sovereign borders. Something that will embarrass the regime in such a way that they will not even disclose it in the same vein as the Israeli attack in Syria that was covered up by everyone. Perhaps we take out one of their anti-aircraft radar installations or some other such action that will send a clear message.

I can't say I'm even remotely confident that Obama will authorize such a thing but one can hope.

Granted, the Kurdistan issue is one that concerns Iran, Iraq and Turkey but Iran clearly broached Iraq's border and that can't go without some response. As Uncle Jimbo notes, we own the airspace so we may have allowed this to occur but that seems doubtful.

The simple scenario is: today Kurdistan gets attacked, tomorrow the Straits of Hormuz are blocked unless we act quickly and decisively.

Obama's First 100-Days: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

President Obama has been working in the Oval Office for 100 days now--well, he's been on the road for a great many of them but I digress. Let's grade him on his abilities thus far.

First, the good:

-He decided to keep Defense Secretary Robert Gates on to ensure that we have someone with a military background, intelligence and maturity running the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan. I guess he could have made Leon Panetta the SecDef since he knows as much about defense as he does about the CIA--not a damn thing on both counts.

-He released the "torture" memos. This would count as bad or even ugly since it will set back our intel-gathering efforts decades but it did light a fire under Cheney and has forced Obama to make a decision on whether he would release the rest that show that water boarding worked and saved hundreds of lives. Cheney requested them released, now the ball is in Obamas court.

-He hasn't closed Gitmo, we still have enough of a presence in Iraq to sustain our gains and he has beefed up the operations in Afghanistan where the current battle against al-Qaeda is taking place after forcing them out of Iraq.

-He has continued to decapitate the leadership of al-Qaeda in Pakistan using Predator drones. It's an effective strategy developed under Bush and has kept us safe.

The Bad:

-The TARP fiasco. It's a jumbled mess whereby we threw money out, have no idea how it's being spent, it hasn't helped and now the government won't take it back because they like the idea of nationalizing industry.

-The porkulus bill. It was nothing but a sop to Democratic senators and congressmen who could rain down money on their constituencies and hold on in the next election. It was written by Pelosi in concert with the most corrupt congress we've seen in decades. It was woefully short on actually providing any stimulus and is ripe for corruption on a scale that was unfathomable just a half-year ago.

-Cabinet selection madness. He vowed to not have lobbyists working for him and has more than Bush ever dreamed of. He nominated a tax cheat to head Treasury and has had numerous others bail because they had tax problems. If this isn't the epitome of amateurism, i don't know what is.

The Ugly:

-Bowing to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. The press went nuts when Bush held his hand but Bush never showed subservience that would signal to the Arab world that we are truly weakened. Obama did just that.

-The Gordon Brown gift kerfuffle. How pathetic that our greatest ally gives us a pen carved from a anti-slaving ship and Obama gives him DVD's that don't even work in Britain? For crying out loud, he gave the Queen a friggin' I-Pod. Plus, he tossed a bust of the greatest and most-pro-American statesman to ever live out the Oval Office door the day he arrived.

-Glad-handing with despots and thugs. Obama went to a summit featuring such America haters as Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega and sat through diatribes about the evil of America without saying anything. He accepted a book from Chavez that blames the US for all of South America's ills and blamed America for guns in Mexico. Next he'll blame us for AIDS and excessive gas from eating broccoli.

-His European America Suck tour. He wowed the leftist populations and pissed off the leaders. Effective strategy indeed. He made us more of a pariah than Bush ever did.

So all in all, it's been a nightmare 100-days. The honeymoon has been waning and now people will not be so apt to give him the benefit of the doubt. The media has been compliant but we are seeing some break out and point out that the emperor has no clothes on occasion. Let's hope the nation is still standing a hundred days from now.

Obama, Ortega and Chavez

This weekend, President Obama sat through a diatribe about American imperialism from a dictator, made happy talk with a another who insulted our nation and our president and generally belittled our nation in the eyes of our hemispheric neighbors. An all-around successful weekend for the South American region if you happened to be a crackpot socialist or quasi-communist.

So who are these men that Obama allowed to embarrass our nation? Well, we know all about Chavez--a man who is about to make himself President for Life and has supported terrorists in a neighboring nation who were trying to overthrow their democratically-elected leader. But what about Daniel Ortega?

Ortega has a history as brutal as any despot:

The Sandinistas also institutionalized torture. Political prisoners in jails such as Las Tejas were consistently beaten, deprived of sleep, and given electric shocks (but hey, they didn't waterboard--ed). They were routinely denied food and water and kept in dark cubicles known as chiquitas (little ones), that had a surface area of less than one square meter. These cubicles were too small to sit up in, were completely dark, and had no sanitation and almost no ventilation. Prisoners were also forced to stand for long periods without bending their arms or legs; they were locked into steel boxes exposed to the full force of the tropical sun; their wives and daughters were sexually assaulted in front of them; and some prisoners were mutilated and skinned alive before being executed (again, at least they didn't play Barney music loud--ed).

One Sandinista practice was known as corte de cruz: this was a drawing-and-quartering technique in which the prisoner’s limbs were severed from the body, leaving him to bleed to death. The result of all of these horrifying cruelties was yet another mass exodus from a country enslaved by Communism, with tens of thousands of Nicaraguans escaping and settling in Honduras, Costa Rica, or the United States.

This is the guy Obama allowed to berate us without so much as an "er" or an "uh" or a "senor". Because we deserve to be berated by men such as this who we used our full-force to oust because of just such abuses. But it was done by a republican named Reagan so it was unjust and just another example of our imperialism and oppression of other nations.

We have reached the point where we allow torturous murderers to slam America in front of our president and he says nothing. Ortega could have called us a cabron and Obama would have smiled that idiotic smile and nodded and thanked him afterward.

Alright, I can see making nice with Europe, we'll need them someday. But why should we apologize and be nice with a man who killed tens of thousands? Thank the good Lord that the Soviet Union was destroyed by Reagan because Obama would have given our secrets, weapons and country away to them.

Saberi Gets Eight Years on Trumped Up Iranian Charges

An American who went to her ancestral country to try to help and encourage change for the country has been convicted on murky charges of spying:

The US has expressed dismay after a court in Iran jailed an Iranian-American journalist, Roxana Saberi, for eight years on spying charges.

Ms Saberi, 31, was sentenced after a secret one-day trial in Tehran.

President Barack Obama "is deeply disappointed at this news," his spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Correspondents say the case will have serious implications for US-Iranian relations at a time when Mr Obama has reached out to the Tehran.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton earlier expressed her disappointment at the sentence.

I for one am glad that both Obama and Clinton are "disappointed". Their disappointment should go far in making Ahmadinejad see the error of his ways and make the mad mullahs tremble in their turbans.

An American has been sentenced to 8-years in an Iranian prison on trumped up charges and was tried in a kangaroo court and all we hear is that it's disappointing from the President and SecState. My Lord, we have fallen farther and faster than even I dared to fear.

Update: Wait, he's now "gravely concerned". That's escalation, baby. But don't worry, we have Ahmadinejads assurance that her appeal will fair so that makes me feel better...or not.

Obama Throws America Under the Bus

It's all coming clear now. President Obama truly believe what his wife once said about not being proud of America until now. Liberals scoffed at us when we defended this nation as one of opportunity, freedom and hope versus the idea that America as was a nation that had a great many things to apologize for as espoused by Michelle Obama.

Case in point:

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago -- President Obama endured a 50-minute diatribe from socialist Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega that lashed out at a century of what he called terroristic U.S. aggression in Central America and included a rambling denunciation of the U.S.-imposed isolation of Cuba's Communist government.

Obama sat mostly unmoved during the speech but at times jotted notes. The speech was part of the opening ceremonies at the fifth Summit of the Americas here.

Later, at a photo opportunity with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Obama held his tongue when asked what he thought about Ortega's speech.

...A senior administration official declined to criticize Ortega, saying the president wanted to focus on the future.

And so you have it. A thug socialist leader of a nation that is so poor the citizens leave in droves and trek thousands of miles to sneak into America is telling us that we are terrorists. Nicaragua is a nation that uses torture and violence to sway elections and they are belittling us? Obama sits there and takes it and then doesn't even speak to rebut the slander. Why? Because he agrees with it. America is evil--or was until January 20th of this year.

Obama is on a tour that has taken him from Europe to the Caribbean with the only goal to apologize for America's supposed past misdeeds. The 2009 America Sucks tour is in full-swing and Obama is the star of the show (along with his teleprompter) disparaging a country that allowed him--the son of an African immigrant--to attend an Ivy League university, make millions of dollars and rise to become its most powerful politician.

The shining city upon a hill has always been a ghetto according to Obama and the world is eating it up. They like America as a blubbering, feminized wimp. They are licking their chops to take us down as many pegs as possible and Obama is helping them to do so.

Hope and change my ass.

Update: I neglected to post this earlier:



That picture says more than I ever could. A socialist dictator who has fomented terror who has wished nothing but ill-will to our nation is enjoying a nice moment with the new prez. I want to friggin' puke.

Update: Gateway Pundit (with a spiffy new look) has some thoughts and notes that Obama did "mildly rebuke" Ortega. If someone slams my country the way Ortega did, they'd receive more than a mild rebuke.

Continuing to Vote "Present"

You may recall that during the period between the election and the inauguration in January that Joe Biden said:

"It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. "And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

Turns out that for the first time in his career, Biden was right. We are being tested and it's from Iran, North Korea and Somalia.

So how's Obama reacting? Not so well. He has not said a peep about any of those being held and the media has effectively buried the stories. The American people are ready to stand with him but Obama has chosen to sit on his hands.

Here we have Americans being held--two by nations that President Bush named as part of the Axis of Evil--and he has opted to do nothing. In other words, he's doing what he always has done when a difficult issue faces him, he is voting "present".

We are seeing our enemies try to get a measure of the man and he's not measuring up at all. First it was arresting reporters under dubious charges and now it's escalated to attempted high jacking and kidnapping--a tactic that never would have been used when Bush was in office as those who perpetrated the act knew we would respond forcefully.

Now we respond by not responding, by ignoring what is happening and hoping things will get better. So I say to Biden that we are ready to stand with Obama if he would actually say something--anything--about the fate of our fellow citizens.

The World Disrepects Obama

The liberals told that Obama would change the way the world thinks of us. It appears they were more right than even they could have envisioned, the world now not only hates us but has no respect for us either.

It started over the weekend when Obama was talking about disarmament and Kim Jung Il launched a nuke-capable missile. It may or may not have been successful but our lack of response (read: shooting it down) speaks volumes. It continues today with two incidents. First, the Iranians have charged Iranian-American Roxana Saberi with espionage:

The lawyer, Abdolsamad Khorramshahi, says Roxana Saberi has been informed of the charges against her.

"Her case has been sent to the revolutionary court. She, without press credentials, was carrying out spying activities under the guise of being a reporter," AFP quoted deputy prosecutor Hassan Haddad.

The real "crime" is that Saberi wrote about th repressive regime in Tehran. Don't expect Obama to act to quickly as--judging by the way he treats free speech in America (attacking Rush, etc), it doesn't seem to be a priority.

Even more telling is the fact that Somali pirates tried to take over an American ship, the Maersk-Alabama. Fortunately for us (and Obama), the crew is also American and managed to fight the pirates off and retake the vessel. I guess they figured it was a better risk to fight the pirates than surrender and await a feckless Obama response while they languish for months while he dithered, negotiated and generally embarrassed himself and us. Note that a Saudi ship was also high jacked and the crew of that vessel succumbed without a fight and it took a ransom to get them freed. God Bless America and God bless the crew of that ship.

So what have we learned about Obama? He's a great when he's touring the world or the country and speaking to adoring lefties, but is utterly clueless when he actually has to make hard decisions in the Oval Office. He has not only perpetuated the hatred our enemies feel for us but has also shown them that trifling with us will bring no return action or consequences. Kind of how Clinton was with al-Qaeda.