In His Interest Only

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Columnist and author of “The Undocumented,” Mark Steyn argued comparing President Obama to Neville Chamberlain is “rather unfair to Neville Chamberlain” on Tuesday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.

Steyn said of comparisons between Obama and Chamberlain, “I think actually that’s rather unfair to Neville Chamberlain, Sean. He got the central question of the 1930’s wrong, but he was an honorable man, who believed he was acting in the interests of his country and the British Empire which he loved. When Churchill became prime minister he kept Chamberlain on and had him chair the War Cabinet in his absence. And Churchill wept over Chamberlain’s funeral casket, and claimed he was an honorable man who just happened to be wrong. I don’t think you can say that about Obama. I think what Obama did is significantly worse than what Neville Chamberlain did. I don’t think, in effect, Obama was negotiating on behalf of the United States. I think what happened at these talks is that he and the Iranians were, in a sense, negotiating together to anoint Iran as the regional power in the Middle East and to facilitate Iran’s reentry, the biggest planetary sponsor of terrorism, to facilitate its reentry into the global community. That’s what Obama was there doing.”

“I think the nuclear issue was a mere pretext, a Hitchcockian McGuffin. Iran will be a nuclear state, and very soon. The joke inspections regime – under which Teheran can block any inspections for the best part of a month – will facilitate the nuclearization of Iran and prevent anyone who objects to it – such as Israel – from doing anything about it. That’s a given.”

But that’s not what the talks were about. Obama’s vision of the post-American Middle East sees Iran as the dominant power, and that’s what the negotiations were there to finesse.

Steyn added, “I think that’s the other difference between Obama and Chamberlain. The horrors of the — of what Germany did were not known to Neville Chamberlain. And in a sense the appeasers of the 1930’s did so because of the horrors of the first World War and the lost generation, and they didn’t want that to happen again. And it’s because we know they got it wrong, that history won’t give us the same opt out card. Because we should have known better because it had happened before. And I think what Obama gets here, i think it does come back to a — to his classic Marxist worldview in which he sees America as the problem on the world’s stage. And if you look at everything he did — he’s done, Sean, what he did with Iran fits into that context. I mean, whether you look at missile defense in Eastern Europe, where he takes the side of Russia over US allies like Poland and the Czech Republic. If you look at little things, like the Falklands Islands, where he takes the side of Argentina over a US ally like United Kingdom. And in the Middle East, he’s taken the side of Iran over US allies like the Sunni monarchies and Israel, because his central view is that America and American power is the problem in the world. And, therefore, American allies are part of that problem. And, therefore, what he does is, in a sense, withdraw from the world, and enhance the position of the enemies of American allies. That’s what he’s done in the Middle East. And it won’t be confined to the Middle East, it’ll spread beyond that.”

Sheldon Filger: In a private meeting with leftwing progressive activists in the Democratic Party held in January 2014, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes, spelled out the administration’s intentions. Unknown to Rhodes, his confidential briefing was secretly recorded, and details would subsequently leak out. The core of what he had to say about the negotiations with Iran:

“So no small opportunity, it’s a big deal. This is probably the biggest thing President Obama will do in his second term on foreign policy. This is healthcare for us, just to put it in context.” He went on to say, “We’re already kind of thinking through, how do we structure a deal so we don’t necessarily require legislative action right away. And there are ways to do that.”

Largely in secret, and based on a belief that the American people lacked the sophistication to fully understand the Iran issue as thoroughly as President Obama and his expert advisors, a policy decision was apparently made to engage in a grand act of appeasement, allowing Iran to maintain intact its illicit nuclear infrastructure designed solely to fabricate fissile materials suitable for ultimately only one purpose — manufacturing nuclear weapons. A fig leaf of a 10-year moratorium on full-scale use of that capacity by Iran, with a supposedly strict inspection regime that is obfuscated by a complex treaty that is so arcane, it allows Iran numerous opportunities to thwart its intent and cheat successfully, has been presented as largely a public relations exercise. The real intent of the Iran deal, as Ben Rhodes suggested 18 months ago, is to transform Iran from an adversary to a regional ally of America’s and serve as the Middle East policeman, allowing the United States to finally extricate itself from military involvement in that region.

Barack Obama, John Kerry and Ben Rhodes apparently believe in a manner similar to Stalin’s that the Ayatollahs’ vehemently anti-American hatred is not a core value of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and will be sublimated by pragmatism. Yet, even as the Iran Deal was being finalized, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei publicly chanted “death to America!” American flags were burning on Iranian streets as Kerry and Zarif exchanged smiles. And the regime’s most militant instrument of power, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, was staging naval exercises that involved the “sinking” of a replica of an American aircraft carrier.

President Obama has apparently convinced himself that Tehran’s hostility is only a passing phase, and that in time it will become the trustworthy guardian of the Middle East, protecting the United States from what the administration seems to regard as the unruly Sunni Arab world. Decades of alliances with the broader Arab world, and especially Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries, along with Israel, are in the process of being abandoned, in what must be regarded as the most reckless crapshoot in American geostrategic planning.

Unfortunately, the administration has lulled itself into sleepwalking with a hegemon whose core ideology, as the leaders of the Islamic Republic have repeatedly stated, is centered on hatred of the United States. Unless other forces can prevent what at this point seems inevitable, the ultimate outcome of the Iran deal is that Americans will one day awaken to the reality of an apocalyptic regime pointing nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles at their shores.

But it makes THEM feel good. It makes THEM feel superior. It MAKES them look “strong” in their eyes. And we know the only opinion that matters to Obama, Is Obama’s.

And in 10-15 years (or less) when Iran is terrorizing the world with Nuclear weapons the Left and Obama will be firmly and resolutely convinced beyond a shadow of any doubt that it will be someone elses fault! 🙂

Somebody Else’s Problem field, or SEP, is a cheap, easy, and staggeringly useful way of safely protecting something from unwanted eyes. It can run almost indefinitely on a torch (flashlight)/9 volt battery, and is able to do so because it utilises a person’s natural tendency to ignore things they don’t easily accept, like, for example, aliens at a cricket match. Any object around which an S.E.P. is applied will cease to be noticed, because any problems one may have understanding it (and therefore accepting its existence) become Somebody Else’s. An object becomes not so much invisible as unnoticed.

“The Somebody Else’s Problem field is much simpler and more effective, and what’s more can be run for over a hundred years on a single torch battery. This is because it relies on people’s natural disposition not to see anything they don’t want to, weren’t expecting, or can’t explain.”

― Douglas Adams, Life, the Universe and Everything

Problem Solved. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Commander-in-Chief PETTY officer

There seems to be no end to the damage President Obama will inflict upon the nation of Israel. While wooing a genocidal regime in Tehran, this administration has treated our staunchest Middle East ally with a mix of pettiness, contempt and rage.

Following Benjamin Netanyahu’s huge election victory, Obama grumbled that it was time to “reassess” America’s relationship with Israel. Monday he began that effort when, for the first time ever, the U.S. delegation refused to speak in defense of Israel at the UN Human Rights Council. The council was adhering to the sinister-sounding Agenda Item 7, which mandates the discussion of “Israeli human rights violations” at every meeting.

Now the administration has shifted from mere rhetoric and diplomatic maneuvers to irreparable harm. The Jewish Press revealed that the U.S. has declassified Top Secret intelligence on Israel’s nuclear program:

The United States has just revealed a stunning amount of information on some of Israel’s the most closely guarded secrets: information about its military cooperation with America and 20 years’ worth of details on Israel’s nuclear technology development, up to the 1980s.

The 386-page report, composed in 1987 by the federally funded Institute for Defense Analysis, (an NGO that operates under the Pentagon), is titled “Critical Technological Assessment in Israel and NATO Nations.”

It was declassified by the Pentagon in early February – but oddly, the report has been redacted so as to black out or withhold everything the Institute wrote on America’s NATO allies – but to reveal all that American experts assembled in Israel.

Interestingly, no one reported the declassification other than two hostile news agencies that apparently were tipped off: Russia’s Putin-funded RT network and Iran’s mullah-funded Press TV. The Weekly Standard explains why this report’s release is such a big deal:

Israel has never admitted to having nuclear weapons. To do so might spark a regional nuclear arms race, and eventual nuclear confrontation.

The declassification is a serious breach of decades’ old understandings concerning this issue between Israel and its north American and certain European allies.

The Pentagon’s February declassification coincided with intense pressure on the Netanyahu government by the Obama administration, trying to force the Israeli prime minister to cancel a planned speech to Congress questioning the wisdom of a highly risky nuclear deal with the Iranian regime.

However, in the past 24 hours several media in the U.S. and elsewhere have now chosen to report on the February declassification by the Pentagon. This coincides with stepped up efforts this week by the Obama administration to weaken Israel’s deterrent capabilities, including leaking to the Wall Street Journal incorrect allegations that Israel directly spies on the U.S.

Consider me unsurprised that the guy who smiled and nodded his way through two decades of anti-semitic sermons and is friends with Israel haters like Rashid Khalidi and Bill Ayers is doing everything he can to undermine that nation. I wouldn’t be surprised by year’s end to see Obama refer to Israel as “the Zionist entity.”

It will be interesting to watch politically savvy Democrats distance themselves from Obama’s intensifying assault on the Middle East’s only democracy. Hopefully they won’t wait for Iran to get nukes before speaking up. (they will, and it’ll be GWB’s fault!)

Question for the comment section: Why should any ally trust the U.S. government now? (Jon Gabriel)

Under Obama, you can’t. Period. Neither can America.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA now matter how narcissistic, petty,dangerous,  or unconstitutional it is no one is safe from THE EGO FROM THE DAWN OF TIME!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

The Frog and The Scorpion

Quote of the Day:

Obama in Burma- “As President, I cannot just impose my will on Congress — the Congress of the United States — even though sometimes I wish I could,” he stated. “The legislative branch has its own powers and its own prerogatives, and so they check my power and balance my power.”

Yes, Herr Obama, I’m sure you do. 🙂

“We have to double down in 2014. We’ve got to make sure we recruit more women for office, because It’s not just a slogan that when women run, women win. They do, and when women run, Democrats win,” Wasserman-Schultz said.

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said the Republican Party “got whiter and more male” while the Democratic caucus is “majority minority and female.” (CNS)

So do you think the Democrats are going to seed any “minority” ground to Republicans who are fearful they are too white to win?

F*UCK NO! And anyone who thinks so is an idiot. They have their strategy and it works for them so they are going to ramp up the fear, hatred, division, and envy even more! More of a “good thing” in their eyes.

So you thought the hatred, fear and envy was bad in 2012, just wait….

Speaking of hate and fear, How about the coverage of Israel under attack by Hamas?

Heard anything about Israeli’s being killed by hundreds of rockets a day? Or Hamas using women and children as human shields?

UPI: Israeli air raids have pounded Gaza for a sixth successive day, raising to 96 the number of Palestinians killed.

Nothing about the 200+ rockets a day launched AT Israel BY Hamas.

Not relevant to the Ministry of Truth.

When Seal Team Six killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, no one described it as an “assassination.” Why not? Because Osama wasn’t a civilian political leader; he was a terrorist combatant who had declared war on America, and tried to continue his attacks in any way possible.

Why, then, have the New York Times and other media outlets referred to Israel’s killing of Ahmed Jabaari in Gaza as “an assassination?” He was the military commander of a terrorist organization, Hamas, which remains at war with Israel, and takes pride in aiming deadly rockets at Israeli civilian targets every day. There’s a big difference between assassination–the targeting of civilian leaders for political purposes–and striking armed combatants in self defense in the midst of an ongoing war. (Michael Medved)

Because that doesn’t fit the Meme.

A new CNN poll shows only 40 percent of Democrats support Israel’s response to Hamas launching repeatedly rockets into their country.

“Although most Americans think the Israeli actions are justified, there are key segments of the public who don’t necessarily feel that way,” said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Only four in ten Democrats think the Israeli actions in Gaza are justified, compared to 74% of Republicans and 59% of independents. Support for Israel’s military action is 13 points higher among men than among women, and 15 points higher among older Americans than among younger Americans.”

Is anybody really surprised? After all, this is the party that booed Israel and God at this year’s Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. (Katie Pavlich)

My question is, Why are so many Jews hardcore Democrats?

It makes no sense logically. But then again, Democrats almost never make any sense logically. Ideologically, emotionally, yes. Logically, no.

But it is very curious.

In the film “Groundhog Day,” Bill Murray wakes up each morning and relives the previous day.

A similar scenario is playing out in the Middle East between Israel and her enemies. The deadly “movie” always goes like this: Israel is shelled or attacked by terrorists groups, often called “militants” by the media, each one with the same goal: Israel’s elimination. After demonstrating considerable restraint of the kind that would never be tolerated by any other nation, Israel fires back.

Suddenly, the world awakens from its indifference. World leaders, who said little when Israeli civilians were wounded and killed, now urge “restraint” by “both sides,” as if a moral equivalency exists between victim and predator.

In the run-up to confrontation, it has been reported that Hamas placed weaponry among civilians, hoping that when Israeli airstrikes started they could show photos of dead children, bringing condemnation on Israel. What’s more, according to Breitbart.com, “Hamas has a well-established pattern of faking civilian deaths in Gaza, even as it seeks civilian deaths in Israel.” American and foreign TV networks — particularly CNN and BBC — are then brought in to channel the Palestinian line, portraying Israel as the aggressor. (Cal Thomas)

The way in which the New York Times reports good vs. evil is one of the most important stories of our time.

Take the war between Israel and Hamas that is taking place right now.

This war is as morally clear as wars get. Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to annihilating the Jewish state. It runs a theocratic totalitarian state in Gaza, with no individual liberty and no freedom of speech or press. In a nutshell, Hamas is a violent, fascist organization.

Israel, meanwhile, is one the world’s most humane states, not to mention a democracy that is so tolerant that Arab members of its parliament are free to express admiration for Hamas.

Over the past decade, Hamas had launched thousands of rockets into Israel with one aim: to kill and maim as many Israeli citizens as possible — Israelis at work, at play, asleep in their homes, in their cars. Finally, Israel responded by killing Ahmed al-Jabari, the chief organizer of Hamas violence, the Hamas “military commander” as he was known among Palestinians.

The next day, three more Israelis were killed by rockets.

Then Hamas targeted Tel Aviv, Israel’s most densely populated region, and Israel shelled Hamas rocket launching sites.

In other words, an evil entity made war on a peaceful, decent entity, and the latter responded.

How has the New York Times reported this?

On Friday, on its front page, the Times featured two three-column wide photos. The top one was of Gaza Muslim mourners alongside the dead body of al-Jabari. The photo below was of Israeli Jews mourning alongside the dead body of Mira Scharf, a 27-year-old mother of three.

What possible reason could there be for the New York Times to give identical space to these two pictures? One of the dead, after all, was a murderer, and the other was one of his victims.

The most plausible reason is that the Times wanted to depict through pictures a sort of moral equivalence: Look, sophisticated Times readers, virtually identical scenes of death and mourning on both sides of the conflict. How tragic.

If one had no idea what had triggered this war, one would read and see the Times coverage and conclude that two sides killing each other were both equally at fault.

This is the mainstream (i.e., liberal) media’s approach. The Los Angeles Times headline on the same day was: “Israel and Gaza veering down familiar, bitter path,”

Same presentation: two scorpions fighting in a bottle.

I would add the tale of the Frog and the Scorpion:

The Scorpion and the Frog is a fable about a scorpion asking a frog to carry him across a river. The frog is afraid of being stung during the trip, but the scorpion argues that if it stung the frog, the frog would sink and the scorpion would drown. The frog agrees and begins carrying the scorpion, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When asked why, the scorpion points out that this is its nature.

(Sounds like the Republicans (Frog) and Democrats (Scorpion) doesn’t it?)

Hamas and Israel. And which is which depends on your Meme. 🙂

Examples are endless. Here is one more:

In 2002, there was widespread Nigerian Muslim opposition to the Miss World pageant scheduled to take place that year in Nigeria. Defending the pageant, a Nigerian female reporter wrote a column in which she said that not only were the contestants not “whores,” as alleged by the Muslim protestors, but they were such fine women that “Muhammad would probably have taken one of the contestants for a wife.”

That one sentence led to Muslim rioting, the beating and killing of Christians, the burning of churches and the razing of her newspaper’s offices.

How did the New York Times report the events?

“Fiery Zealotry Leaves Nigeria in Ashes Again.”

No group is identified as responsible. “Fiery zealotry,” not Muslim violence, was responsible.

The article then begins: “The beauty queens are gone now, chased from Nigeria by the chaos in Kaduna.”

Again, Muslim rioters weren’t responsible for chasing the beauty queens out of Nigeria; it was “chaos.”

The article concludes that what happened in Kaduna was another example of Africa’s “difficulty in reconciling people who worship separately.” In other words, Christians and Muslims were equally guilty.

As the flagship news source of the left, the New York Times reveals the great moral failing inherent to leftism — its combination of moral relativism and the division of the world between strong and weak, Western and non-Western, and rich and poor, rather than between good and evil. (Dennis Prager)

Bernard Lewis, the renowned scholar and expert on the history of Islam, was recently aboard a Post-Election Cruise sponsored by National Review magazine, as was I.

Lewis noted that the Cold War featured “mutual assured destruction” (MAD), which served as a deterrent for both the United States and the Soviet Union from using their nuclear weapons against each other. Lewis said for Islamic nations like Iran (which sponsors Hamas in Gaza), “MAD is not a deterrent, but an inducement.” That’s because, he said, the Iranian regime believes in the apocalyptic end of days in which the 12th Imam — the Islamic “messiah” — will emerge in the midst of a nuclear war with Israel and “save” humanity with Islam the surviving religion. (Cal Thomas)

In God They Trust. In The Ministry we should not.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Driving The Bus

You wanna know how nuts the Left can be?

I was on Huffington Post about Benghazi and the Libya attack. One ardent liberal said that no Ambassador was killed there (he was CIA, after all so not a real Ambassador- god know what he thought of the other 3 people killed, I didn’t ask) and that there were “no State Department personnel within 100 miles of Benghazi”.

How do you deal with people that have that level of irrational thinking?

You can’t. They are beyond hope. You just have to make sure the insane don’t have the keys to the bus because they WILL drive you over a cliff.

And that’s why the Left must be defeated. Or else.

LIBYA Film Update

CBS News has been told that, hours after the attack began, an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Benghazi, and that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft apparently observed the final hours of the protracted battle.

The State Department, White House and Pentagon declined to say what military options were available. A White House official told CBS News that, at the start of the attack, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta “looked at available options, and the ones we exercised had our military forces arrive in less than 24 hours, well ahead of timelines laid out in established policies.”

But it was too late to help the Americans in Benghazi. The ambassador and three others were dead.

A White House official told CBS News that a “small group of reinforcements” was sent from Tripoli to Benghazi, but declined to say how many or what time they arrived.

And of course The Obama administration removed the highly trained team of security people just weeks before the attack against the recommendations of both Steven and some people at the State Department. Likely because it didn’t fit the liberal meme of how well they were doing on “defeating” Al-Qaeda. (which they aren’t it’s stronger now than ever in North Africa instead of the hinterlands of the mountains in Afghanistan/Pakistan).

Add to the controversy the fact that the last two Americans didn’t die until more than six hours into the attack, and the question of U.S. military help becomes very important.

Sending the military into another country can be a sensitive and delicate decision. CBS News has been told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did seek clearances from Libya to fly in their airspace, but the administration won’t say anything further about what was said or decided on that front.

But why would they need that for a “spontaneous demonstration” to a Film?

On September 11—the day Stevens and three other Americans were killed—the ambassador signed a three-page cable, labeled “sensitive,” in which he noted “growing problems with security” in Benghazi and “growing frustration” on the part of local residents with Libyan police and security forces. These forces the ambassador characterized as “too weak to keep the country secure.”

· Roughly a month earlier, Stevens had signed a two-page cable, also labeled “sensitive,” that he entitled “The Guns of August: Security in Eastern Libya.” Writing on August 8, the ambassador noted that in just a few months’ time, “Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape … The individual incidents have been organized,” he added, a function of “the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes.”

“Islamist extremists are able to attack the Red Cross with relative impunity,” Stevens cabled. “What we have seen are not random crimes of opportunity, but rather targeted and discriminate attacks.” His final comment on the two-page document was: “Attackers are unlikely to be deterred until authorities are at least as capable.”

· By September 4, Stevens’s aides were reporting back to Washington on the “strong revolutionary and Islamist sentiment” in the city.

Scarcely more than two months had passed since Stevens had notified the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and other agencies about a “recent increase in violent incidents,” including “attacks against western [sic] interests.” “Until the GOL [Government of Libya] is able to effectively deal with these key issues,” Stevens wrote on June 25, “the violence is likely to continue and worsen.”

After the U.S. consulate in Benghazi had been damaged by an improvised explosive device, earlier that month, Stevens had reported to his superiors that an Islamist group had claimed credit for the attack, and in so doing had “described the attack as ‘targeting the Christians supervising the management of the consulate.’”

“Islamic extremism appears to be on the rise in eastern Libya,” the ambassador wrote, adding “the Al-Qaeda flag has been spotted several times flying over government buildings and training facilities …”

· In the days leading up to 9/11, warnings came even from people outside the State Department. A Libyan women’s rights activist, Wafa Bugaighis, confided to the Americans in Benghazi in mid-August: “For the first time since the revolution, I am scared.”

From the 166 hellish pages we see a stack of warnings, via multiple cables sent to D.C. from Chris’s own laptop about which diddly was done—and that being after prior bombings of the Red Cross and our own compound and an assassination attempt on the British ambassador. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot. This is gross and inexcusable.

If what happened in Benghazi on 9/11 was not an act of terror, or an act of war, I don’t know what is. What’s the “Religion of Peace” got to do to wake this administration the heck up? Destroy one of Obama’s favorite golf courses?

Oh, BTW: Missing from the extensive documents is any mention of a YouTube video ticking these “peaceful protestors” off. (Doug Giles)

I wonder how  Moderator and Liberal Bob Schieffer will try and cover that up for the President during the debate tomorrow night?

I know I’ll probably be watching the Food Network to prevent me from damaging my big screen TV with my shoe.

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 

 

Rewarding Behavior

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Eric Posner, on the super-liberal site The Slate: This is that Americans need to learn that the rest of the world—and not just Muslims—see no sense in the First Amendment. Even other Western nations take a more circumspect position on freedom of expression than we do, realizing that often free speech must yield to other values and the need for order.

We have to remember that our First Amendment values are not universal; they emerged contingently from our own political history, a set of cobbled-together compromises among political and ideological factions responding to localized events. As often happens, what starts out as a grudging political settlement has become, when challenged from abroad, a dogmatic principle to be imposed universally. Suddenly, the disparagement of other people and their beliefs is not an unfortunate fact but a positive good. It contributes to the “marketplace of ideas,” as though we would seriously admit that Nazis or terrorist fanatics might turn out to be right after all. Salman Rushdie recently claimed that bad ideas, “like vampires … die in the sunlight” rather than persist in a glamorized underground existence. But bad ideas never die: They are zombies, not vampires. Bad ideas like fascism, Communism, and white supremacy have roamed the countryside of many an open society.

Hot air: The positive good isn’t the disparagement of other people’s beliefs, it’s the freedom to “disparage,” a.k.a. criticize, those beliefs without fear of being locked up by the sensitivity police. Savor the irony of this guy hinting that we should go ahead and criminalize some especially dangerous retrograde ideas while he and a few select others on the left are busy reviving the idea of blasphemy laws to appease violent Islamist fanatics. I’m not sure how closely fascist regimes in the Middle East follow left/right debates in America, but if they do, they have every incentive to burn more buildings and kill more ambassadors in the name of avenging insults to the faith. There’s a small but apparently growing movement on one side of the aisle here that’s ready to hear them out and rebalance free-speech principles against, in Posner’s creepy phrase, “the need for order.”

And the President can’t be bothered to meet with these world leader, he has to do “The View”!

“I don’t care how offensive this video was, and it was terribly offensive. And we should shun it. But there’s never an excuse for violence, never an excuse for attacking embassies, never an excuse for killing innocent people, or assaulting our diplomats. In the age of the Internet, and you know, the way that any knucklehead who says something can post it up and suddenly it travels all around the world, you know, every country has to recognize that, you know, the best way to marginalize that kind of speech is to ignore it.”

The clip, though it aired today, was filmed yesterday in New York City. Today, however, the president did not ignore the video.

Instead, President Obama suggested a link between the video and the violence. “[A] crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.  Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity,” said Obama.

“It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well — for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith.  We are home to Muslims who worship across our country.  We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.  We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

…a fine idea that I would take more seriously if he had mentioned it before the movie was condemned by the Cairo embassy, blamed for the Benghazi attack by Susan Rice, apologized for by the State Department via TV ads in Pakistan, and then discussed at length by The One himself in his UN speech today. Scrambling to denounce the film the way the administration did made it that much more lucrative a pretext for Islamists to exploit; the U.S. government can’t ban the film, but attack an embassy or two and by golly they’ll fall all over themselves to reassure you that it’s a wicked, awful, evil piece of expression.

Even the Libyan President doesn’t buy the whole film meme:

In an exclusive interview with NBC News’ Ann Curry, President Mohamed Magarief discounted claims that the attack was in response to a movie produced in California and available on YouTube. He noted that the assault happened on Sept. 11 and that the video had been available for months before that.

“Reaction should have been, if it was genuine, should have been six months earlier. So it was postponed until the 11th of September,” he said. “They chose this date, 11th of September to carry a certain message.”

“It’s a pre-planned act of terrorism,” he said, adding that the anti-Islam film had “nothing to do with this attack.”

DUH!
Even though the Administration has admitted it was terrorist attack they can’t admit to themselves because in paralytic Orwellian liberal reflex they just can’t stop talking about this insignificant video. Their view of reality doesn’t include THEM being attacked. Because they are so morally superior in their multicultural, politically correct, Orwellian “free speech” and are so sensitive that they can’t possible be the problem.

It’s NOT THE VIDEO STUPID! But liberal can’t get past their politically correct mindset. It has to be the video. It can’t be…GASP!…horror! THEIR FAULT!

In no way can that possibly be. Liberals are perfect. They are never at fault for anything. They are far too superior to you mere grubby little people for that!

So the answer is to be even less tolerant and to control people even more. 🙂

As Eugene Volokh recently pointed out, “Behavior that gets rewarded, gets repeated.” If all it takes to earn a White House call for global condemnation of a single piece of expression is some violent protests outside a dozen or two diplomatic missions, then the perpetually aggrieved know exactly what to do the next time they pluck out some bit of cultural detritus to be offended by.

It is not any politician’s job, and certainly not any American politician’s job, to instruct the entire world on which films to criticize.

And Liberals love to reward bad behavior. Especially bad behavior that favors them politically.

Like government dependence. Entitlement greed. Union thuggery. Voter Fraud. Class Warfare. Envy. Childishness. Narcissism.

So they get rewarded for their Class Warfare, “throwing grandma off a cliff” rhetoric. So they repeat it.

And if they get defeated, like 2010, they just come back even more determined. Even more insane.

They want it even more. They don’t learn from their mistakes. They just keep making them because they pay off in very unhealthy ways.

They are addicted to them.

So they can’t stop themselves. And they just get worse and worse.

And so does everything else!

But it’s not their fault! Just ask them. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

Slobber Uber Alles

The Social Security Administration has released new data revealing that 8,786,049 American workers are collecting federal disability insurance payments in September. That sets yet another record for the number of Americans on disability.

Over the past 45 years, the number of American workers taking federal disability payments has increased four-fold relative to the number actually working.

It means there were only 16.2 people working for each person collecting disability. (KFYI)

But what is the Liberal media in a frenzied, zombie like slobber craze over: the Latest “Oh no! did you hear what he said” Romney/Ryan “gaffe” of the minute that is supposed horrify you and make you vote for Obama.
It’s Depressing.
Real actual news is inconsequential, even ridiculous to them. The slobbering will drown this nation.
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”. George Orwell
Was I supposed to be horrified that he said it?
Or was I supposed to be horrified that it’s more likely true than not?
We know which the Liberal Media and the Left thinks. That’s very obvious.
Gallup: About four in 10 Americans (39%) say the government should do more to solve the nation’s problems.

Trend: Some people think the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses. Others think that government should do more to solve our country's problems. Which comes closer to your own view? By party ID

Seeing the correlation? 🙂

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

This had me ROTFL:

Since Obama has taken office ….
[through Q2 2012 for comparative purposes]

–> For every $1 added to the economy, we’ve added more than $3 in debt

–> added $5.23 trillion in debt vs. $1.68 trillion to the economy
–> 50% increase in debt vs. 12% increase in economic output

Total Public Debt:

$10,626T [Jan 20, 2009]
$15,856T [Jun 30, 2012]

–> $5.23 trillion increase in debt

GDP

$13,923T [Q1 2009]
$15,606T [Q2 2012]

–> $1.68 trillion increase in GDP

(Fox)

But you’re supposed to be horrified by Romney’s comments about YOU, you greedy pig. Not the Greedy Pigs in Washington. Or the professionally and morally bankrupt Liberal Media (Ministry of Truth).
It’s more manipulative than the “Islam is burning because of an internet movie.” line.

Leadership: The Mideast is in turmoil, the economy is faltering and the president opts to spend precious time with David Letterman, Beyonce and Jay-Z. Are we the only ones to wonder if Obama’s suited to be president?

Last week, Michelle Bachmann had it partly right when she said that “President Obama needs to get his priorities straight.”

There’s no question that Obama should, as Bachmann recommended, cancel his appearance on the Letterman show and agree to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But the idea that Obama’s problem is a mixed-up priority list is giving the president more credit than he deserves. Time and again, Obama has proved that he is simply incapable of taking the job of president seriously. And the repercussions of this grow by the day.

Let’s review last week’s evidence. Netanyahu asked for a meeting with Obama to talk about the rapid approach of a nuclear-armed Iran. Obama said no. Even the liberal press admitted this was a “highly unusual rebuff to a close ally.”

The White House excuse for skipping Netanyahu? “The president’s schedule will not permit that.” But that same day, Obama announced that he will be on the David Letterman show — his second guest appearance as president — to talk about what?

Ah, but who wants to deal with those dreary Middle East problems when you can be scoring likability points with undecided late-night-watching voters.

This is par for the course for our current president. With global unrest on the rise, we learn that Obama has skipped more than half of his intelligence briefings.

With unemployment stuck at about 8% for more than 40 months, we learn that Obama has spent more time golfing than in economic meetings of any kind, according to the Government Accountability Institute.

With the nation’s debt crisis spiraling out of control, Obama’s only solution was to offer a set of talking points he called a “balanced approach,” while labeling a detailed, serious GOP plan un-American.

Then, earlier this year, Obama produced a budget that would add more than $6 trillion to the nation’s debt pile over the next decade.

With gas prices soaring, Obama decided to cancel the Keystone oil pipeline to appease his environmentalist base, and then gave a speech to some college kids wherein he promised that the nation’s energy problems could be solved by tapping into our abundant supply of pond scum.

We could go on. And on. And on.

If all Obama wants to do in life is golf, take fancy vacations, crack jokes on late-night TV and offer meaningless policy proposals, he should go run a nonprofit and leave running the country to someone who’ll take the job seriously. (IBD)

But don’t pay attention to this, focus on what Liberal Media’s “Shock” of the Minute is and be appalled by it.

Be a zombie. Be Mindless. Be Happy. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

The Leader or The Boss

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Obama, who prefers posturing and meaningless sanctions, has repeatedly snubbed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who knows Obama has Israel’s back the way Brutus had Caesar’s.

On the 11th anniversary of 9/11, the Obama White House snubbed a requested meeting by Netanyahu, accepted an invitation from the more important David Letterman and apologized to Islamists upset over a film that mocks Islam and Mohammed — something “artists” in America do to Christianity with our tax dollars on a fairly regular basis.

Typically, the administration’s first response was not directed at the apology-spawned attacks that left one U.S. ambassador and two U.S. Marines dead. Rather, it took umbrage with the GOP presidential candidate’s justified condemnation of the embassy apology.

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi,” Romney said in a spot-on response. “It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

“We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Gov. Romney would choose to launch a political attack,” Obama campaign press secretary Ben LaBolt said in a response as disgraceful as the initial apology.

Save your shock and disapproval for the murderers of American ambassadors and Marines.

The attacks in Libya and Egypt are more evidence that Obama’s foreign policy of appeasement and apology leaves us with friends that don’t trust or respect us and enemies that do not fear us. Obama has led from behind on Libya, Syria and Iran. Rather than an “Arab Spring,” we face a region dominated by Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood, and governed by Shariah law — while Iran patiently builds its Islamic nuclear bomb. (IBD)

So what happened after the latest apology…they attacked other American Embassies in the Middle East. Gee, what a shock that was.

He not only shows weakness, he then attacks anyone who questions it. That’s the mark of a very immature person who doesn’t lead.

Chef Robert Irvine on last night’s “Restaurant Impossible” (yes, I am a foodie and find Food Network better TV than most things) read the usual riot act to a single mother who’s restaurant was failing because she was treating her employees like “her friends” so they were running over her like a freight train.

They took complete advantage of her. And when asked what was wrong with the Restaurant they said a lack of leadership! She WAS the problem and they just took advantage of the vacuum.

But what he said to her that I thought was the most damning was that she wanted to be the Boss not the Leader.

She just wanted to be the Head of “the family” and not a Leader. She wanted to rule, not lead. And that’s Obama. He wants to be your boss, rule over you, to tell you what to do. For you to fear him.

But Leadership. Nope, sorry, he checks out every time it comes up. Look at ObamaCare, his signature piece, he lead from the back and let Pelosi and Reid run amok and have a food fight in front of the customers (the american people) and then when it was going down pulled out every dirty trick and every Boss-laden trick he could to get his way or the highway.

This is why he is so poor at Foreign Policy because it requires leadership.

Let’s see, The Prime Minister of your only Middle Eastern Ally or David Letterman?

One is important for a Leader, the other is just important to Me, The Boss. :0

He chose Letterman.

“My opponent and his running mate are new to foreign policy,” Obama said at the Democratic convention last week. “But from all that we’ve seen and heard, they want to take us back to an era of blustering and blundering that cost America so dearly.”

Better an era in which we won the Cold War than one full of whining and whimpering, where our embassies are stormed and diplomats murdered with impunity.

A little more than four years ago, Hillary Clinton suggested then-Democratic primary opponent Barack Obama was so naive on the world stage he’d need a “foreign policy instruction manual” should he win.

She produced the now-famous “3 a.m. phone call ad” that questioned his expertise and readiness for the top job. History has proved her right.

At the convention, Obama and his supporters reminded us that “Osama is dead, and GM is alive.” Well, now Amb. J. Christopher Adams and two U.S. Marines are dead too, and that phone is still ringing. (IBD)

Oh, and there’s more to come.

AP: Chanting “death to America,” hundreds of protesters angered by an anti-Islam film stormed the U.S. Embassy compound in Yemen’s capital and burned the American flag on Thursday, the latest in a series of attacks on American diplomatic missions in the Middle East.

American missions have been attacked in three Arab nations – Yemen, Egypt and Libya – that have faced persistent unrest and are struggling to restore law and order after last year’s revolts deposed their authoritarian regimes.

Protesters smashed windows as they breached the embassy perimeter and reached the compound grounds, although they did not enter the main building housing the offices. Angry young men brought down the U.S. flag in the courtyard, burned it and replaced it with a black banner bearing Islam’s declaration of faith – “There is no God but Allah.”

Then  you have this: Foreign Policy Crisis Vs. Campaign Rally (where sycophants tell me how great I am)…

President Barack Obama’s Wednesday afternoon speech in Las Vegas is being delayed by about 45 minutes, according to the White House. Obama had been scheduled to speak at 5:25 p.m. at a campaign rally at the Cashman Center in downtown Las Vegas. He will now deliver his speech at 6:10 p.m., according to an updated schedule released Wednesday morning. The president was forced to alter his schedule to comment on a Tuesday attack on the American Embassy in Libya that killed four people, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, the White House Press Office said. No other event details have changed, and doors will still open to the public at 3 p.m., according to an Obama campaign official. Wednesday’s visit will be Obama’s eighth trip to Nevada this year.

A 45 minute speech delay.  That’s it.  Carry on, Mr. President! a mINOR INCONVENIENCE!

Now that’s Leadership for you!

What’s the Boss going to do with Libyans who kill Americans? Talk to them sternly,discipline them (sanctions), fire them?

They aren’t his employees.

Then Acclaimed Restauranteur Willie Degle (“Restaurant Stakeout”)  was called into a Restaurant where the Leader had turned into a lazy Boss.
They had a food fight in the kitchen that spilled over into the dining room and one server actually served customers with chocolate sauce on her face!

Seriously!

But both of these Boss are shown the hard truth and they become Leaders again and business get better, more efficient, more profitable.

Marina (the owner of the restaurant in Michigan where Robert Irvine visited) is happy to report that since the transformation, sales at Paliani’s have increased. In June and July, the restaurant saw year-over-year growth of 46 percent and 32 percent, respectively.

But they had to recognize where they went wrong, admit it, and then do something about it. Obama is far too arrogant for that. Far too narcissistic.

Leadership is much harder than being a Boss.

The Chicago Way is being a Boss and a Thug. Leadership is something else entirely and Obama lacks that quality.

And still does. So expect more of this to come; the attacks by Muslims and him attacking Romney because of it- not that he wouldn’t attack anyhow because that’s all he knows.

Weak Leadership breeds it.

He took credit for the Arab Spring, now it’s sprung back in his face and the best he can do is blame the “old ways”. That’s it?! That’s all you got?

I’m certain the president is mortified by what happened — but I am holding a mirror up to the press.  If they’re experiencing fainting spells over Mitt Romney’s response to the first round of last night’s dreadful news, they might show some interest in the behavior, decisions, and policies of the person currently presiding over the United States government.  Just a thought. (Guy Benson).

Nah, the Press is too busy sucking up to the Boss or running around having their own food fights to care about doing their job in a professional and responsible manner.

Americans are murdered by Islamists, and sovereign American soil is violated, on the anniversary of September 11, and the first word from the administration to reach the world is an apology. So naturally, the mainstream media are focusing on what they in their considered wisdom have determined is Mitt Romney’s crass and ill-timed response to the crisis, even as the Obama campaign found itself in a foot race with the Obama administration to see whether the former could condemn Romney before the latter condemned the terrorists.

But Romney was right to call the Cairo embassy’s obsequiousness “disgraceful,” which is why the White House eventually followed Romney’s lead in disavowing it. Romney was also right to defend his statement against charges that he had “jumped the gun,” saying it is “never too early . . . to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values.” Although the press acted as if Romney’s performance at the press conference was laughably unpresidential, what he said was appropriate and true: “It breaks the hearts of all of us who think of these people who have served during their lives for the cause of freedom and justice and honor,” and “the attacks in Libya and Egypt underscore that the world remains a dangerous place, and that American leadership is still sorely needed.” (NRO)

Leadership or Partisan Food Fight!

Your Choice.

NOVEMBER IS COMING!