Tag: Foreign Policy

Putin Invades Ukraine. Obama Wags Finger. Palin Says, “I Told You So!”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

palin-newsweekAs I was traveling home from work yesterday, I tuned the car radio to Sirius XM 114 to catch “The Five” on the Fox News Channel. Instead, I heard Bret Baier telling me that President Pantywaist…err…Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) was about to address the nation on the subject of Russia Invasion of the Ukraine.

And, sho’ nuff’, our Petulant President came on, and preceded to warn Russian Leader Vladimir Putin not to do what he had already done.

In other words, Obama told him,

Stop! Or, I’ll say “Stop!” again!

Political Pundit Dr. Charles Krauthammer explains, per national review.com…

As reports are coming in that Russia has placed 2,000 troops in Crimea, within the borders of Ukraine, President Obama said that “the United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine.”

Charles Krauthammer responded on Special Report tonight saying, “The Ukrainians, and I think everybody, is shocked by the weakness of Obama’s statement. I find it rather staggering.”

Krauthammer thinks Obama’s statement is about “three levels removed” from actual action. He explained: Obama said “we will stand with the international community — meaning we are going to negotiate with a dozen other countries who will water down the statement — in affirming that there will be costs — meaning in making a statement not even imposing a cost, but in making a statement about imposing a cost — for any military intervention.”

“What he’s saying is we’re not really going to do anything and we’re telling the world,” Krauthammer said.

Over in the UK, The Guardian summarizes Putin’s reaction to Obama’s “stern warning”…

Fears of conflict in Crimea have intensified after Ukraine accused Russia of taking over two airports there, the day after gunmen seized the local parliament buildings. Here is a summary of the latest developments:

• Interior Minister Arsen Avakov said Russian forces have taken over two airports in Crimea, accusing them of “an armed invasion and occupation in violation of all international agreements and norms”.

• About 50 armed men in military uniform, without signs of identification, took over Simferopol airport in the early hours of Friday. Interfax Ukraine reported that a group of people with Russian navy ensigns also gathered at the airport’s building.

• Armed men, described by Avakov as Russian naval forces, have also taken over a military airport near the port of Sevastopol where the Russian Black Sea fleet has a base.

• The airport seizures come the day after pro-Russian gunmen took over the Crimean parliament.

• Russia has continued military drills in the west of the country and said more than 80 helicopters More than were being re-deployed to emergency airfields. A Russian defence ministry spokesman told Interfax the move was “part of a continuing inspection of the combat readiness of forces deployed in the western and central military districts.

• Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered his government to continue talks with Ukraine on economic and trade relations and to consult foreign partners including the IMF and the G8 on financial aid, a statement on the Kremlin’s website said.

Allow me to translate President Putin’s actions for you, boys and girls…

Oh, yeah? Come over and MAKE ME!

And, with that, Obama will pull his pants up to his chest, a la Steve Urkel, and stomp away.

In an article posted on April 10, 2009, columnist Gerald Warner of telegraph.co.uk coined the title President Pantywaist for Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).  He gave him this nickname after Obama:

…recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you’d notice. 

Given the way America’s enemies, such as Vladimir Putin, are laughing at America and spitting in our face, the way that Obama has arrogantly alienated our foreign allies, and the President’s Steve Urkel-esque naiveté as exhibited by his Smart Power Foreign Policy, I would say Mr. Warner hit the nail on the head.

Back in 2008, a certain Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate warned that, given Senator Obama’s indecision and moral equivalence, Putin might decide to go ahead and invade Ukraine, as he did Georgia.

After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.

According to Tony Lee at Breitbart.com,

For those comments, she was mocked by the high-brow Foreign Policy magazine and its editor Blake Hounshell, who now is one of the editors of Politico magazine.

In light of recent events in Ukraine and concerns that Russia is getting its troops ready to cross the border into the neighboring nation, nobody seems to be laughing at or dismissing those comments now.

Hounshell wrote then that Palin’s comments were “strange” and “this is an extremely far-fetched scenario.”

“And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine’s pro-Western government without firing a shot, I don’t see why violence would be necessary to bring Kiev to heel,” Hounshell dismissively wrote.

Palin made her remarks on the stump after Obama’s running mate Joe Biden warned Obama supporters to “gird your loins” if Obama is elected because international leaders may test or try to take advantage of him.

Y’know, given the Liberals’ penchant from labeling Sarah Palin as a “chillbilly”, I would wpould say the not-so-“smartest people in the room” owe the Arctic Fox a huge apology.

But, I’m not holding my breath, waiting on it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

If I Were a Socialist U.S. President…

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics7 Comments

obamamywork

**In respectful honor and memory of the late, great Paul Harvey, an American Original, (September 4, 1918 – February 28, 2009)**

If I were a Socialist U.S. President…

I would begin to plant seeds during my Inaugural Address, concerning the disparity between the Haves and the Have-nots. In other words, I would intentionally begin to divide the nation through the use of Class Warfare.

Also, during that address I would push for a National Healthcare System, regardless of the fact that such a monstrous entity has never worked, anywhere it has been tried.

I would preach about hope and change, but like all Marxists, I would be hoping to bring subjugation and looking to “radically change” a nation, all in the name of “Fairness and Equality”.

The first thing I would do, when I took office, would be to send money around the world, to finance abortions. In this way, I would show the world that there is a new boss in the United States, who wants to radically change the Shining City on a Hill into just another country.

Next, I would push for the passage of an outrageous spending bill that would actually be a cover for paying back political favors.

I would invite the already-sycophantic Main Stream Media to come to the White House for closed-door meetings, where I would tell them to “get with the program”, if they wanted to receive any news stories from this White House at all.

I would makes speeches about how marvelous a Government-run National Healthcare  System would be, making hollow promises like,

If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

all the while knowing that I was lying my hindquarters off.

Once I got my slaves in the Congress to pass this nation-changing National Healthcare Law, I would put the pedal to the metal and continuously push for other outrageous and expensive programs designed to grow the central government.

I would convince Americans that growing the central government is the only solution to a rapidly failing economy and that being unemployed and unable to provide for your family is actually a “fun-cation”.

And, while Americans were suffering through this Economic Depression, I would rant and rave about “Income Inequality”, while my family and I would take frequent vacations, costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and throw lavish private parties at the White House, in a manner reminiscent of the old Soviet Union’s Politburo.

Realizing that the Heartland of America was still Conservative in nature, I would reach out to those Americans who believe themselves to be a mistreated minority. I would reach out to those on the fringes of society. Those Americans, who because of poor upbringing, poor education, or simply making bad decisions concerning their lives, now consider themselves deprived of the American Dream.

These people would compose about 47 percent of the population. They would be my core supporters, much like Nikolai Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

Having done a miserable job in my First Term as President, I would promise these Bolsheviks that if reelected, I would be their Santa Claus.

And, I would continue to blame my predecessor for the wretched state of the economy, even though, by now, it would be my responsibility.

Once I was reelected, there would be no stopping me. It would not matter to me what the popularity polls said, I would continue to claim that those who provide Americans with jobs were “the evil 1%” and identify their success in creating the Greatest Economic System in the World, as the “real reason” for the Economic Depression that America was in.

I would change the Moderate political stances which I “supposedly” held during the campaign for my first election as President, and show my true colors, following a political path pursuant to my true Far Left Radical Political Ideology.

I would alienate Conservative Christians living in America’s Heartland by vilifying them as “Bitter Clingers”, marginalizing them throughout my presidency.

I would push for “gay marriage” and the legalization of marijuana. Through redefining the definition of the family unit, and eliminating Christianity from everyday American Life, I will eliminate the “backbone” of the nation…the two main barriers that will keep me from radically changing America into a socialist nation. By legalizing marijuana, I will succeed in dumbing down the population and eliminating their desire to succeed as individuals, making them even more subservient and reliant on the Almighty State for their very existence, thus creating a new “Proletariat”.

Regarding Foreign Policy, I would bow in deference to other world leaders, demonstrating to them and the rest of the world, that I do not believe that the United States of America, whom I am supposed to be the Biggest Advocate for, is exceptional in any way.

I would not negotiate with America’s Enemies from a position of strength. Instead, I would blindly trust those who have sworn to kill us, even if they are on the threshold of building a nuclear bomb, simply because I identify with their Political Ideology, which masquerades as a religion.

In other words, I would embrace America’s Enemies, and alienate America’s Friends.

I would use the finest military in the world as a subject for Social Engineering Experiments, ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and moving women into combat positions, even though their lack of physical strength would endanger the American Soldiers they are fighting beside.

I would remove God from the Air Force Oath and forbid soldiers from speaking about Christ to others. I would also begin Military Training which would identify Evangelicals as “Terrorists”.

While I am at it, I would allow my wife to place the military on a diet plan that is similar to the one which would already be failing in America’s Public Schools.

I would use the Judicial System, The Department of Justice, the NSA, and  Internal Revenue Service as my Palace Guard, using Activist judges to overturn the will of the people and harassing political opposition through uncalled-for Tax Audits.

I would use unmanned drones and blimps for unwarranted surveillance on American Citizens.

I would imperiously announce that if Congress did not pass the laws that I wanted them to pass, I would go around them and rule by Executive Order.

Finally, if I were a Socialist U.S. President, I would blame others for my incompetency. I would portray myself as a victim of a Capitalist System and a Racist Ideology that was still prevalent in a nation that was too narrow-minded to allow me to lead them to a Socialist Paradise.

Of course, that could never happen HERE, could it?

Norman Matoon Thomas (1884-1968) was a six-time Presidential Candidate  representing the Socialist Party of America.  In a campaign interview in 1948, he said the following:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Have Americans Finally Figured Out Obama?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

obamaobliviousI was just reading an opinion piece by CBS New’s Rebecca Kaplan, in which she holds out hope that President Obama can at least get some of his foreign and domestic plans accomplished during his second term as President.

Unfortunately for Ms. Kaplan, the rest of the Obama Worshipers in the Main Stream Media, both sides of the political aisle in Congress, and the President and his Administration, judging by his rapidly-tanking poll approval numbers, Barack Hussein Obama is already a lame duck.

I feel that there are several factors which have lead to Obama’s political demise:

1. Obamacare – As I have well-documented, the passage and launch of Obamacare was done against the wishes of the average American. It was an arrogant, socialist move, designed to lead to a Single Payer Healthcare System, which is what Liberals have wanted for decades.

The experts tell us that up to 80,000,000 Americans will lose their Health Insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Obama and his those who wrote the law counted on the young and dumb to buy these un-affordable plans, thereby providing the money necessary to fund Obamacare and take care of older Americans, before they are cut off from Obamacare, due to a “Quality of Life” decision (i.e., Death Panels).

These same experts did not count on the fact that young adults do not need, nor want extensive, over-priced Health Insurance Plans. They also did not count on the huge blow-back against the law by Americans, who have now seen what is actually in the plan.

Even if Obama had not given the construction of the website to a Canadian Company who had already failed in Canada, the impact of Obamcare would have been enough to put the President in the situation he finds himself in now.

2. Siding With Our Enemies – As the recent proposed “agreement” with the Radical Mullahs of Iran has proven, Obama, as British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain before him, so desperately wants to be known as a leader who brought us “peace in our time”, that he is willing to unconditionally trust our enemies, regardless of the danger to our Allies, and the country he is supposed to place above all others, the United States of America.

This Nuclear Proposal has been universally panned as weak and dangerous, doing nothing to restrict the Iranians’ bomb-making capabilities.

It is basically an extension of the policy which allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to attempt to take over Egypt as a part of “Arab Spring”, a policy of trusting murderous Radical Muslims, which lead to the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East and 4 braver Americans at the U.S. Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya.

The word “feckless” does not even begin to cover it.

3. “It’s still the economy, stupid!” – Americans are still losing their jobs. The American Economy under Barack Hussein Obama remains stagnant because entrepreneurship is not encouraged.

Now is about the time when a Liberal would ask, “Well what about the Stock Market? It’s gaining everyday!”

The answer is a fairly simple one, according to Farrokh Langdana, Director, Executive MBA Program & Professor of Finance and Economics, Rutgers Business School,

When designing the Fed, we took care to ensure that a “firewall” existed between the money creating people (The Fed) and the government spending people (the Treasury). This was , of course, to prevent runaway spending from being simply monetized by money creation; which would of course lead to hyperinflation, and who wants that?

But there should have been another firewall that is now conspicuous by its absence – a firewall between the Fed and the private banks that own each Federal Bank. The Fed is owned by the banks in each district—it is a private institution. There is nothing “Federal” about the Fed—it is as “Federal” as Fedex, or Federal Pizza. By not building a firewall between the Fed and the banks that own it, we left the door open for the Great Betrayal.

The Fed under Ben and Greenspan before him, simply “looked out” for the private banks by having taxpayers hold the bag on all the questionable subprime loans that they had made—QE1 and QE2, unbelievably huge monetization incurred by simply buying up the toxic debt and creating money, were the result of this giveaway. Regular working people, “Granny,” endured zero percent on her savings account for several years, while rogue financial institutions got this Fed-created money and lent it out at 6% and then rewarded themselves with bonuses—welcome to the Great Betrayal and the ensuing collapse in confidence in main street USA compounded by depressed housing and low employment.

Just like this entire Presidency, the Wall Street Surge is a sham.

4. Judge a President by the Company He Keeps – During the Presidency of George W. Bush, he was known for spending Thanksgiving with America’s Brightest and Best, our Armed Forces. Without telling anyone where he was going, He and the First Lady would travel to one of our bases overseas and assist in serving Thanksgiving Dinner to our troops. Dubya actively sought no publicity for it. It was just something he felt was his duty as Commander in Chief.

The present president thanked America’s Armed Forces during his Thanksgiving Address, and said that the First Family was going to spend the day at the White House “watching football”.

However, the Obamas did get out of Our House the next day, visiting some activists, camped out in a tent on the National Mall, who have only drank water since November 12th, in support of “Immigration Reform”, i.e., amnesty for those who have entered our country illegally. President Obama told them that the “whole country was behind them”.

Really? And “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”

Back on November 8th, a Pew Poll showed that 60% of Americans oppose Obama’s plans for “Immigration Reform”.

Conservatives have been pointing out for years that Obama’s viewpoint and political philosophy does not represent the majority of average Americans.Judging from the direction in which his approval poll numbers are trending, I would say that more Americans are beginning to fell that way, as well.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Russian Spy Towers in America? This is “Smart Power”?

On By kingsjesterIn Uncategorized2 Comments

obama and putinIf you see an innocent-looking structure with a dome-topped tower, behind a security fence, as you are traveling through America, it won’t be a cell tower.

It will be here “From Russia With Love, courtesy of the same bureaucratic buffoons who brought us “Smart Power!”

In recent months, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon have been quietly waging a campaign to stop the State Department from allowing Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, to build about half a dozen of these structures, known as monitor stations, on United States soil, several American officials said.

They fear that these structures could help Russia spy on the United States and improve the precision of Russian weaponry, the officials said. These monitor stations, the Russians contend, would significantly improve the accuracy and reliability of Moscow’s version of the Global Positioning System, the American satellite network that steers guided missiles to their targets and thirsty smartphone users to the nearest Starbucks.

“They don’t want to be reliant on the American system and believe that their systems, like GPS, will spawn other industries and applications,” said a former senior official in the State Department’s Office of Space and Advanced Technology. “They feel as though they are losing a technological edge to us in an important market. Look at everything GPS has done on things like your phone and the movement of planes and ships.”

The Russian effort is part of a larger global race by several countries — including China and European Union nations — to perfect their own global positioning systems and challenge the dominance of the American GPS.

For the State Department, permitting Russia to build the stations would help mend the Obama administration’s relationship with the government of President Vladimir V. Putin, now at a nadir because of Moscow’s granting asylum to Mr. Snowden and its backing of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

But the C.I.A. and other American spy agencies, as well as the Pentagon, suspect that the monitor stations would give the Russians a foothold on American territory that would sharpen the accuracy of Moscow’s satellite-steered weapons. The stations, they believe, could also give the Russians an opening to snoop on the United States within its borders.

The squabble is serious enough that administration officials have delayed a final decision until the Russians provide more information and until the American agencies sort out their differences, State Department and White House officials said.

Russia’s efforts have also stirred concerns on Capitol Hill, where members of the intelligence and armed services committees view Moscow’s global positioning network — known as Glonass, for Global Navigation Satellite System — with deep suspicion and are demanding answers from the administration.

“I would like to understand why the United States would be interested in enabling a GPS competitor, like Russian Glonass, when the world’s reliance on GPS is a clear advantage to the United States on multiple levels,” said Representative Mike D. Rogers, Republican of Alabama, the chairman of a House Armed Services subcommittee.

Mr. Rogers last week asked the Pentagon to provide an assessment of the proposal’s impact on national security. The request was made in a letter sent to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Secretary of State John Kerry and the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr.

The monitor stations have been a high priority of Mr. Putin for several years as a means to improve Glonass not only to benefit the Russian military and civilian sectors but also to compete globally with GPS.

The kicker is, of course, we have no satellite towers located within Russia.

President Ronald Reagan, gave a speech, concerning our relationship with Russia, on March 8 1983, which has since come to be called “The Evil Empire Speech”. His words ring as true today, as they ever have.

During my first press conference as President, in answer to a direct question, I pointed out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas—that’s their name for religion—or ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.

Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates an historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.

This doesn’t mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial gain and which now proposes 50-percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom.

…It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable “Screwtape Letters,” wrote: “The greatest evil is not done now in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.”

Well, because these “quiet men” do not “raise their voices,” because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, they’re always making “their final territorial demand,” some would have us accept them at their word and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.

So, I urge you to speak out against those who would place the United States in a position of military and moral inferiority.

While America’s military strength is important, let me add here that I’ve always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith.

…Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western World exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism’s attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, “Ye shall be as gods.”

The Western World can answer this challenge, he wrote, “but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism’s faith in Man.”

President Reagan knew that, one day, the struggle against Marxist Ideology would not just be waged externally, against foreign enemies, but internally, against domestic ones, as well…bureaucrats who would give away our very sovereignty for perceived political expediency. As we have seen in the ongoing Middle East Islamic Fundamentalist Revolution, known as Arab Spring, and, more recently, President Obama and Sec. Kerry’s bungling of Syria and Iran, our enemies, like Vladimir Putin, love this present administration, who are more than willing to “negotiate” with their new-found “friends”.

And, much like the small town fellow, who gets conned into a three-card monte game on the sidewalks of New York, the deck is stacked against us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Cheney: “I Think Our Friends No Longer Count On Us, No Longer Trust Us and Our Adversaries Don’t Fear Us.”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

obamabowWhile Obama’s second term circles down the porcelain receptacle, let us take a moment to review his Foreign Policy.

Former Vice-President Dick Cheney is still shooting straight from the hip. In an interview yesterday…

He expressed skepticism that the Obama administration would be able to force Iran to comply with demands that it show its nuclear program is peaceful. Asked if military action against Iran was “inevitable,” Cheney said he had “trouble seeing how we’re going to achieve our objective short of that.”

Cheney faulted the Obama White House’s handling of Middle East politics, saying the U.S. presence in the region had been “significantly diminished” in recent years. “I think our friends no longer count on us, no longer trust us and our adversaries don’t fear us,” he said.

As opposed to the before-mentioned wuss,..

On June 17, 1982, President Ronald Wilson Reagan spoke before the United Nations General Assembly Special Session Devoted to Disarmament…

…The record of history is clear: Citizens of the United States resort to force reluctantly and only when they must. Our foreign policy, as President Eisenhower once said, “is not difficult to state. We are for peace first, last, and always for very simple reasons.” We know that only in a peaceful atmosphere, a peace with justice, one in which we can be confident, can America prosper as we have known prosperity in the past, he said.

He said to those who challenge the truth of those words, let me point out, at the end of World War II, we were the only undamaged industrial power in the world. Our military supremacy was unquestioned. We had harnessed the atom and had the ability to unleash its destructive force anywhere in the world. In short, we could have achieved world domination, but that was contrary to the character of our people. Instead, we wrote a new chapter in the history of mankind.

We used our power and wealth to rebuild the war-ravaged economies of the world, both East and West, including those nations who had been our enemies. We took the initiative in creating such international institutions as this United Nations, where leaders of good will could come together to build bridges for peace and prosperity.

America has no territorial ambitions. We occupy no countries, and we have built no walls to lock our people in. Our commitment to self-determination, freedom, and peace is the very soul of America. That commitment is as strong today as it ever was.

The United States has fought four wars in my lifetime. In each, we struggled to defend freedom and democracy. We were never the aggressors. America’s strength and, yes, her military power have been a force for peace, not conquest; for democracy, not despotism; for freedom, not tyranny. Watching, as I have, succeeding generations of American youth bleed their lives onto far-flung battlefields to protect our ideals and secure the rule of law, I have known how important it is to deter conflict. But since coming to the Presidency, the enormity of the responsibility of this office has made my commitment even deeper. I believe that responsibility is shared by all of us here today.

On our recent trip to Europe, my wife, Nancy, told me of a bronze statue, 22 feet high, that she saw on a cliff on the coast of France. The beach at the base of the cliff is called Saint Laurent, but countless American family Bibles have written it in on the flyleaf and know it as Omaha Beach. The pastoral quiet of that French countryside is in marked contrast to the bloody violence that took place there on a June day 38 years ago when the Allies stormed the Continent. At the end of just one day of battle, 10,500 Americans were wounded, missing, or killed in what became known as the Normandy landing.

The statue atop that cliff is called “The Spirit of American Youth Rising From the Waves.” Its image of sacrifice is almost too powerful to describe.

The pain of war is still vivid in our national memory. It sends me to this special session of the United Nations eager to comply with the plea of Pope Paul VI when he spoke in this chamber nearly 17 years ago. “If you want to be brothers,” His Holiness said, “let the arms fall from your hands.” Well, we Americans yearn to let them go. But we need more than mere words, more than empty promises before we can proceed.

We look around the world and see rampant conflict and aggression. There are many sources of this conflict — expansionist ambitions, local rivalries, the striving to obtain justice and security. We must all work to resolve such discords by peaceful means and to prevent them from escalation.

In the nuclear era, the major powers bear a special responsibility to ease these sources of conflict and to refrain from aggression. And that’s why we’re so deeply concerned by Soviet conduct. Since World War II, the record of tyranny has included Soviet violation of the Yalta agreements leading to domination of Eastern Europe, symbolized by the Berlin Wall — a grim, gray monument to repression that I visited just a week ago. It includes the takeovers of Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Afghanistan; and the ruthless repression of the proud people of Poland. Soviet-sponsored guerrillas and terrorists are at work in Central and South America, in Africa, the Middle East, in the Caribbean, and in Europe, violating human rights and unnerving the world with violence. Communist atrocities in Southeast Asia, Afghanistan, and elsewhere continue to shock the free world as refugees escape to tell of their horror.

…Eleanor Roosevelt, one of our first ambassadors to this body, reminded us that the high-sounding words of tyrants stand in bleak contradiction to their deeds. “Their promises,” she said, “are in deep contrast to their performances.”

My country learned a bitter lesson in this century: The scourge of tyranny cannot be stopped with words alone. So, we have embarked on an effort to renew our strength that had fallen dangerously low. We refuse to become weaker while potential adversaries remain committed to their imperialist adventures.

My people have sent me here today to speak for them as citizens of the world, which they truly are, for we Americans are drawn from every nationality represented in this chamber today. We understand that men and women of every race and creed can and must work together for peace. We stand ready to take the next steps down the road of cooperation through verifiable arms reduction.

Agreements on arms control and disarmament can be useful in reinforcing peace; but they’re not magic. We should not confuse the signing of agreements with the solving of problems. Simply collecting agreements will not bring peace. Agreements genuinely reinforce peace only when they are kept. Otherwise we’re building a paper castle that will be blown away by the winds of war.

Now, compare that to President Barack Hussein Obama’s speech before the General Assembly of the UN, on September 25,, 2012, after the massacre of 4 brave Americans by Muslim Terrorists at the U.S, Embassy Compound in Benghazi on 9/11/12…

…In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as 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.

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.

I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video. And the answer is enshrined in our laws: Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. As President of our country and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day — (laughter) — and I will always defend their right to do so. (Applause.)

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.  But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.  (Applause.)

Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims and Shiite pilgrims.  It’s time to heed the words of Gandhi:  “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.”  (Applause.)  Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them.  That is what America embodies, that’s the vision we will support.

Of course, the story Obama told about a stupid Youtube Video causing the Benghazi Massacre was nothing but a lie, told to cover up the incompetent Foreign Policy of Obama and his Administration.

Twice now, Barack Hussein Obama has taken an oath to protect us from “enemies foreign and domestic”.

As we have painfully found out, all of Obama’s promises have expiration dates…usually the moment he makes them.

I miss having an actual American President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Calls the President of Iran, Refuses to Negotiate With Republicans

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

michelleobama2Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith-based upon the persuasion of the mind and the heart and the soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it’s being challenged in many different ways. – President Barack Hussein Obama, “A New Beginning”, Speech to the Muslim World at the University of Cairo, Egypt

Since the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America.

As a Radio News Director in College, I covered the Iranian Revolution and the resulting Hostage Crisis from start to finish.

Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

 On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

And now, with America at her most vulnerable, with our economy in horrible shape and about to get worse, thanks to the implementation of a National-run Healthcare System which nobody wants, and with an ineffectual Foreign Policy,which is as big a global joke as the President behind it, that self-same wuss of a United States President is now looking to negotiate with the before-mentioned Islamic Terrorist State.

President Obama proudly announced yesterday that he had talked on the phone with the new “Moderate” Iranian President Rouhani.

“Just now I spoke on the phone with President Rouhani of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he said. “The two of us discussed our ongoing efforts to reach an agreement over Iran’s nuclear program.”

This is the first time leaders from America and Iran have spoken since 1979.

“I reiterated to President Rouhani what I said in New York. While there will surely be important obstacles to moving forward and success is by no means guaranteed, I believe we can reach a comprehensive solution.

“I’ve directed Secretary Kerry to continue pursuing this diplomatic effort with the Iranian government. We had constructive discussions yesterday in New York with our partners, the European Union, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China, together with the Iranian foreign minister, and going forward, President Rouhani and I have directed our teams to continue working expeditiously in corporation with the P-5 plus one to pursue an agreement. And throughout this process we will stay in close touch with our friends and allies in the region, including Israel.

“Now we are mindful of all the challenges ahead. The very fact that this was the first communication between an American and Iranian president since 1979 underscores the deep mistrust between our countries.”

Obama said that “Iran’s supreme leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, President Rouhani has indicated that Iran will never develop nuclear weapons.”

This, from the same guy who will go down as the most partisan President in United States History, whose Administration has become notorious for calling Republicans everything but “children of God”.

And, who now, refuses to negotiate with Republicans about the Debt ceiling, Obamacare, or anything else.

So, what is the explanation for this? Naiveté? Stupidity? Ego? Yes, indeedy. However, there is something deeper behind this bonehead move by Obama. In fact, it’s soul-deep.

It goes back to a young Barack Hussein Obama, who, in one of his two books, written by Bomber Bill Ayers, “Dreams of my Father”, said,

Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.

Right now, in our nation, the political winds have shifted in an ugly direction, thanks to Obama’s lack of leadership. Political Partisanship has intensified to such an extent, that political pundits on both sides of the aisle, have labeled the situation a “Civil War”

Instead of seriously attempting to unite the country he is supposed to be serving and protecting, Obama is acting like a petulant child, insisting that everybody play by his rules, or else, he will take his ball and go home.

Now, on top of that, he reaches out to a country who sponsors Islamic Terrorism, and with whom we have not had diplomatic relations since their revolution in 1979.

What is he going to do? Help them with their “Nuclear Enhancement Program”, so they can launch one at us quicker?

He negotiates with those who want to kill us, and gives ultimatums to his own countrymen.

He truly is our first Anti-American President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Syria Situation: Style Over Substance

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

ObamaSyriaOptionsWell, it’s 1…2…3 what are we fightin’ for?

Don’t tell me, I don’t give a da!@,

The next stop might be Iran.

Telegraph.co.uk reports that

Opposition forces battling Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria now number around 100,000 fighters, but after more than two years of fighting they are fragmented into as many as 1,000 bands.

The new study by IHS Jane’s, a defence consultancy, estimates there are around 10,000 jihadists – who would include foreign fighters – fighting for powerful factions linked to al-Qaeda..

Another 30,000 to 35,000 are hardline Islamists who share much of the outlook of the jihadists, but are focused purely on the Syrian war rather than a wider international struggle.

There are also at least a further 30,000 moderates belonging to groups that have an Islamic character, meaning only a small minority of the rebels are linked to secular or purely nationalist groups.

The stark assessment, to be published later this week, accords with the view of Western diplomats estimate that less than one third of the opposition forces are “palatable” to Britain, while American envoys put the figure even lower.

Fears that the rebellion against the Assad regime is being increasingly dominated by extremists has fuelled concerns in the West over supplying weaponry that will fall into hostile hands. These fears contributed to unease in the US and elsewhere over military intervention in Syria.

Charles Lister, author of the analysis, said: “The insurgency is now dominated by groups which have at least an Islamist viewpoint on the conflict. The idea that it is mostly secular groups leading the opposition is just not borne out.”

That goes against the narrative that Obama, Kerry, McCain and all of the rest of the new “Warhawks” have been issuing , about how “noble” the Syrian “Rebel Forces” are.

Another bit of rhetoric from Obama and his supporters has been their denial that, if we get involved in Syria’s Civil War, there will be no need for our servicemen to put their “boots on the ground”.

…Defense Department officials were less certain Thursday on whether U.S. military personnel might be sent to help secure or destroy Syria’s chemical weapons.

Pentagon Press Secretary George Little gave a vague answer when asked if U.S. troops were prepared to assist should an international agreement allow Russia to take control of the tons of chemical weapons believed to be in the stockpiles of President Bashar al-Assad.

“I’m not going to speculate on who may or may not be participating in a process that may or may not take place,” Little said. “We’ve got to see where the process goes” before the U.S. military considers involvement, he said.

The first steps in the process were taking place in Geneva, where Secretary of State John Kerry was meeting for a second day with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Moscow’s proposal to have international teams take control of the chemical weapons.

Syria has tentatively agreed to the Russian initiative and also agreed to join the international ban on chemical and biological weapons.

Lavrov has urged the U.S. to speed the negotiations by dropping the threat to launch strikes on Syria, but Little said “the threat of military action is driving the process forward.”

To back up the threat, the U.S. was keeping four destroyers off the Syrian coast and the Nimitz carrier strike group in the Red Sea, though some of the ships may be replaced if the negotiations are drawn out, Little said.

God’s gift to American Foreign Policy, the Lightbringer himself, appeared on ABC’s “This Week”, yesterday, where he said

“Folks here in Washington like to grade on style,” he said during an interview with ABC’s “This Week.” “Had we rolled out something that was very smooth and disciplined and linear they would have graded it well, even if it was a disastrous policy. … We know that because that’s exactly how they graded the Iraq War until it ended up blowing [up] in our face.

…“I’m less concerned about style points. I’m much more concerned about getting the policy right,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in which he talked about Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon and criticized House Republicans’ approach to fiscal negotiations, including an upcoming talk on increasing the federal debt limit.

Obama said the United States’ approach to Syria should show Iran that there’s the potential for diplomatic solutions to arms standoffs.

But he says Iran shouldn’t assume that his preference for diplomacy means the U.S. won’t strike Tehran.

Obama said Iranians understand that their pursuit of a nuclear weapon is “a far larger issue for us” than the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

The president also said he has exchanged letters with Iran’s new president, but the two have not spoken directly.

Obama said he believes Iranian President Hasan Rouhani understands the potential for a diplomatic solution to his country’s disputed nuclear program but will not “suddenly make it easy.”

Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

On June 4, 2009, in his “Speech to the Muslim World, titled “A New Beginning”, given at the University of Cairo, United States President Barack Hussein Obama said,

It’s easier to start wars than to end them. It’s easier to blame others than to look inward. It’s easier to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There’s one rule that lies at the heart of every religion — that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. (Applause.) This truth transcends nations and peoples — a belief that isn’t new; that isn’t black or white or brown; that isn’t Christian or Muslim or Jew. It’s a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the hearts of billions around the world. It’s a faith in other people, and it’s what brought me here today.

When Obama became President, Britain and Israel were our allies, and the Islamic Terrorists Organizations, the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda, were our sworn enemies.

Now, in 2013, Britain and Israel have been cast aside and the Muslim Terrorists have been invited to our White House, wined and dined, and supported in their efforts to take over the Middle East by our Administration.

Oh, these Terrorist Groups still want to kill each and every one of us infidels, but that doesn’t matter to Obama. He has another Nobel Peace Price to win.

Until He Comes,

KJ

State of the Union Address 2013: An Empty Suit Making Empty Promises

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

taxesTonight, in front of a standing room only audience on Capitol Hill, President Barack Hussein Obama will deliver his fifth annual State of the Union Address.

This  year, he is supposed to “be more aggressive”.

TRANSLATION:

The Republicans are the ones keeping you down. They will not co-operate with my grand plan for turning the United States of America into just another Democratic Socialist Country. If they would just “shut up and know their roles”, I could finish my Socialist Utopia.

You can bet your bottom dollar that ol’ Scooter will be all over the place tonight, touching on a myriad of subjects, with all the phony sincerity he can muster.

He will probably put another tingle up Chris Matthew’s leg.

So, what happens if the Republicans actually grow a collective spine, and stand up to the Marxist plans of the Manchurian President?

No problem. He’s making a list…and checking it twice.

According to the George Soros-funded Liberal Website, ThinkProgress.org, the Prevaricator-in-Chief is contemplating bypassing our Constitutional System of Checks and Balances, and issuing the following Executive Orders:

1. Cybersecurity: President Obama appears likely to “establish a voluntary program where companies operating critical infrastructure would elect to meet cybersecurity best practices and standards crafted, in part, by the government.” These voluntary minimum security standards are supposed to ward against an escalating pattern of cyber intrusions on “critical infrastructure.” It’s hard to say exactly what the standards in this order would be with any precision.

2. Housing: Housing is perhaps both the most significant and most ignored problem facing the United States today — 11 million Americans currently are “underwater,” meaning they owe more in mortgage than their house is worth. The executive order under consideration would extend super-low refinancing rates to people who have private mortgages, a helpful move that’s nonetheless insufficient without Congressional action.

3. Climate Change: The Post reports that the President is thinking of expanding two first term climate change executive actions; emission standards for power plants imposed under the Clean Air Act and the Better Buildings Initiative. The former standards currently only applies to new power plants; after these are finalized, the President is “considering moving beyond that effort toward regulating carbon emissions from existing power plants.” The latter is an initiative to improve buildings’ energy efficiency. These two moves, however, only scratch the surface of potential executive actions on climate change.

4. Equality for federal LGBT workers: Congress has been recalcitrant about passing the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which extends full non-discrimination protection to all Americans on the ground of sexual orientation and gender identity. Until recently, President Obama had used the legislative effort as a shield against issuing an executive order that would extend said protections to federal contractors. It now seems likely that an order protecting contractors is forthcoming.

5. Fair payment for home care workers: Roughly two million Americans work in the in-home medical care sector but, due to a legal exemption, can be paid under the minimum wage and generally don’t receive standard overtime wages. These workers are almost all women, and large percentages are poor and/or racial minorities. While the White House initially announced plans to end the minimum wage and overtime exemptions in 2011, it has yet to finalize them — but may well soon.

It was announced today that Americans are paying the highest price they ever have, for gas. What is Obama going to do about that? Nothing.

Millions of our countrymen are out of work. Other Americans are underemployed, forced to work 2 and 3 jobs, and still living paycheck-to-paycheck. What is Obama going to do about that? Nothing.

American Children, who cannot read and write, are still being socially promoted, while teachers’ unions have the temerity to go on strike for fatter paychecks. What’s Obama going to do to help America’s children? Nothing

(Although, he and the First Wookie did start an anti-bullying campaign and make their school lunches smaller.) Biiiig help.

America’s Foreign Policy is a massive failure under The Manchurian President. He sent Crazy Uncle Joe to negotiate with the Muslim Barbarians in Iran, and they refused to talk to him. 4 brave Americans, including our Ambassador were slaughtered on the 11 Anniversary of the worst-ever Terrorist Attack on American Soil. What has Obama done to seek justice for these men? Nothing. He went to the United Nations and apologized for a Youtube video, which no one has seen, claiming it as the reason that Muslims rioted in the Middle East on 9/11/12.

Obama fully intends to continue with his quest for National Gun Confiscation. What will taking away law-abiding citzens’ guns do to protect the children in his Hometown of Chicago, from the cowardly thugs who are murdering them? Nothing.

Our Federal Government, under Obama,  has grown to gargantuan proportions. In order to fund Obamacare, which will grow government even more, Obama is going to tax the He@@ out of Americans. What will that accomplish? Nothing.

In summary, tonight’s State of the Union Address  is going to reflect the accomplishments and substance of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

In other words…an empty suit making empty promises…a big bag of nothing.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The 3rd Presidential Debate: The Petulant President Vs. the Grown-Up Contender

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Going into last night’s debate, all you heard from the MSM, and all the Obama sycophants (but, I repeat myself) was that Obama was just cotton-picking brilliant in the area of Foreign Policy

Of course, I’m sure that Ambassador Chris Stevens would have a different opinion.

Foxnews.com describes the opening of the debate:

Mitt Romney ripped President Obama’s foreign policy at the start of Monday night’s debate, claiming the president’s strategy has not quelled the Al Qaeda threat.

“It’s certainly not on the run. It’s certainly not in hiding,” Romney said. “This is a group that is now involved in 10 or 12 countries.”

Obama, though, countered that “Al Qaeda’s core leadership has been decimated.”

And he sought to portray Romney as someone who would be an unsteady leader on the world stage. He accused Romney of having a strategy that is “all over the map.”

Obama was tough on Romney from the outset, accusing him of having poor judgment and antiquated views on the world stage.

“I’m glad that you recognize that Al Qaeda is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia, not Al Qaeda,” Obama said. “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.”

Obama went on to say that, on foreign policy, “every time you’ve offered an opinion, you’ve been wrong.”

Romney fired back, “attacking me is not an agenda.” He accused Obama of looking at countries like Russia through “rose-colored glasses.”

Per businessweek.com:

President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney accused each other of failing to have clear foreign policy visions as the two met for their third and final debate.

“I know you haven’t been in a position to actually execute foreign policy, but every time you’ve offered an opinion, you’ve been wrong,” Obama said tonight at the faceoff in Boca Raton, Florida. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, has put forth strategies that are “all over the map,” Obama said.

Romney began the debate by criticizing Obama for what he described as growing threats in Syria, Libya, Mali, Egypt and Iran. While he congratulated Obama for the raid that killed terrorist leader Osama bin Laden, he said, “we must have a comprehensive strategy” to reject extremism.

“We can’t kill our way out of this mess,” Romney said. Later, he said, “nowhere in the world is America’s influence in the world greater than it was four years ago.”

Obama stressed his commander-in-chief credentials while trying to paint Romney as out of his depth. He criticized Romney for once saying Russia was the biggest geopolitical foe facing the U.S.

“The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War’s been over for 20 years,” Obama said.

Later, Obama told Romney that a complaint he frequently makes on the campaign trail about lower U.S. navy ship levels was misplaced because the military has changed.

“We also have fewer horses and bayonets” than in the past because of differing national security demands, Obama said.

And that’s the way the evening went.

Mitt was acting mature and presidential, and Obama was petulant and rambling like a six year-old, who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

As I alluded to earlier, if you look at all the usual suspects this morning, CBS, NBC, ABC, Huffington Post, USA Today, et al, you would think that President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) was absolutely brilliant.

If he is, then, so was Neville Chamberlain.

Investigativeproject.org reports:

A year-long investigation by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) has found that scores of known radical Islamists made hundreds of visits to the Obama White House, meeting with top administration officials.

Court documents and other records have identified many of these visitors as belonging to groups serving as fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and other Islamic militant organizations.

The IPT made the discovery combing through millions of White House visitor log entries. IPT compared the visitors’ names with lists of known radical Islamists. Among the visitors were officials representing groups which have:

Been designated by the Department of Justice as unindicted co-conspirators in terrorist trials; Extolled Islamic terrorist groups including Hamas and Hizballah;

Obstructed terrorist investigations by instructing their followers not to cooperate with law enforcement;

Promoted the incendiary conspiratorial allegation that the United States is engaged in a “war against Islam”— a leading tool in recruiting Muslims to carry out acts of terror;

Repeatedly claimed that many of the Islamic terrorists convicted since 9-11 were framed by the U.S government as part of an anti-Muslim profiling campaign.

Individuals from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) visited the White House at least 20 times starting in 2009. In 2008, CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist money laundering case in U.S. history – the trial of the Holy Land Foundation in which five HLF officials were convicted of funneling money to Hamas.

U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis later ruled that, “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the association” of CAIR to Hamas, upholding their designations as unindicted co-conspirators. In 2008, the FBI formally ended all contact with CAIR because of its ties to Hamas.

As I reported Sunday, Obama appointed a Jihadist to the OCSE, the UN Committee, who has been invited by someone (with no sense whatsoever) to monitor our National Election on November 6th. To remind you,

Salam Al-Marayati is the founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a Los Angeles-based Islamic advocacy group that defends Muslim extremist violence. MPAC has condemned the anti-terrorism measures of both the U.S. and Israel, and has called for a repeal of the Patriot Act.

This is Smart Power?

Obama’s Domestic and Foreign Policies both stink on ice. We cannot afford 4 more years of the Manchurian President. 

I know how I’m going to vote on November 6th. How about you?

The Presidential Debate on Foreign Policy: Another Time For Choosing

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Tonight President Barack Hussein Obama and Republican Challenger Mitt Romney will square off for the final Presidential Debate, which will be on Foreign Policy.

According to the New York Times:

When President Obama and Mitt Romney sit down Monday night for the last of their three debates, two things should be immediately evident: there should be no pacing the stage or candidates’ getting into each other’s space, and there should be no veering into arguments over taxes.

This debate is about how America deals with the world — and how it should.

If the moderator, Bob Schieffer of CBS News, has his way, it will be the most substantive of the debates. He has outlined several topics: America’s role in the world, the continuing war in Afghanistan, managing the nuclear crisis with Iran and the resultant tensions with Israel, and how to deal with rise of China.

The most time, Mr. Schieffer has said, will be spent on the Arab uprisings, their aftermath and how the terrorist threat has changed since the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. No doubt the two candidates will spar again, as they did in the second debate, about whether the Obama administration was ready for the attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed J. Christopher Stevens, the American ambassador, and three other Americans. Mr. Romney was widely judged to not have had his most effective critique ready, and this time, presumably, he will be out to correct that.

The early line is that this is an opportunity for Mr. Obama to shine, and to repair the damage from the first debate. (He was already telling jokes the other night, at a dinner in New York, about his frequent mention of Osama bin Laden’s demise.)

I’ve heard Former Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, who is also Mitt Romney’s Foreign  Policy Adviser, state that Romney’s approach to Foreign Affairs with be like that of President Reagan: “Peace Through Strength”.

Amb. Bolton explained that concept further in an interview he did in September with The Washington Times:

It is central to successful U.S. foreign policy that we achieve the overwhelming preponderance of our key objectives diplomatically, without the use of force. But as the Romans said, si vis pacem, para bellum: If you want peace, prepare for war. George Washington used the maxim in his first State of the Union address, and in our day, Ronald Reagan characterized his policy as “peace through strength.” The point is clear.

Unfortunately, too many mistake resolve for belligerence. President Obama, for example, acts as if American strength is provocative, that we are too much in the world, and that a lesser U.S. profile would make other nations better disposed toward us. This is exactly backwards. It is not our strength that is provocative, but our weakness, which simply emboldens our adversaries to take advantage of what they see as decline and retreat.

…When our opponents sense a weak, inattentive U.S. administration, they are obviously motivated to seize the opening before a Reagan-like president appears. So, when Mr. Obama pleads with Russian President Medvedev to give him “space” before our election so Obama can be more “flexible” afterward, our adversaries take careful note. And when China’s official news agency scoffed last week that, “U.S. power is declining and it hasn’t enough economic strength or resources to dominate the Asia-Pacific region,” China’s neighbors shudder.

The perception of U.S. weakness can certainly be reversed, as Reagan did, but the costs are inevitably high. Today, debilitating cuts in the national-defense budget, with more to come if the sequestration provisions kick in, only make the task of rebuilding harder. International leadership is undeniably a burden, and many other countries benefit as free riders, but we cannot forget we are not leading out of altruism but because of the sustained economic and political benefits that accrue to America. We cannot have one without the other.

…George H.W. Bush correctly assessed his 1988 opponent Michael Dukakis by saying, “He sees America as another pleasant country on the U.N. roll call, somewhere between Albania and Zimbabwe.” This is essentially Mr. Obama’s view, that of a self-described “citizen of the world.” It rests on two elements. One is “moral equivalency,” seeing all nations as fungible, no one having a higher claim than another, including our own. Iran, North Korea, America — it’s just too parochial to treat them differently. The other is “mirror imaging,” the fallacy of seeing other nations as operating according to our same incentives and disincentives, our rationality and our same ranking of outcomes. While we can overcome these failures, we must first be aware how pervasive they are within the American Establishment.

…Beyond question, our gravest threat comes from the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical and biological) and the means to deliver them, including ballistic missiles. Whether in the hands of terrorists, rogue states or increasingly from a re-surging Russia and a rapidly advancing China, the WMD threat is growing. It has been so long since nuclear testing, above or below ground, that I worry too many Americans have lost sight of the power of nuclear weapons, seeing them as something from grainy black-and-white films from 1940s testing in Pacific atolls.

The consequences, however, are terrifying, whether we contemplate the loss of even one American city held hostage to nuclear blackmail by terrorists, or the prospect of Israel vaporizing in a nuclear holocaust. There is more to defending the United States than just the military assets we deploy. More fundamental is our basic attitude: Do we acknowledge, or not, the possibility — even the likelihood — that there are ideologies, religions or nations that wish us ill, even to the point of our destruction?

Amazingly, having just concluded a century where vicious ideologies like Nazism and Communism caused slaughter and torment beyond description, we find many political leaders — like President Obama (“the tide of war is receding”) — essentially prepared to declare “peace in our time.” No war on terror, no radical Islam, no geopolitical competitors, no nothing. This is a prescription not for peace ahead, but for imminent danger.

…Contrary to what its critics, including many in this country, say, American exceptionalism simply recognizes the reality of our distinct history. After all, a Frenchman, Alexis de Toqueville, first characterized us as “exceptional,” and he didn’t mean it entirely as a compliment! Mr. Obama once compared U.S. exceptionalism to Britain and Greece, and he easily could have listed the other 190 United Nations members. If everyone is exceptional, no one is, leading almost inexorably to believe that the United States has no special role to play internationally, even on its own behalf. It leads to a “come home, America” approach that inevitably weakens the United States, its friends and allies, and the values and interests we should be advancing.

Tonight, as you watch this last, and possibly, most important of the Presidential Debates, the question you need to decide for yourself is very simple: 

Which Foreign Policy will keep Americans safer from our enemies?

A return to Peace Through Strength and American Exceptionalism?

or

A continuance of the naive acquiescence, the alienating of our allies and embracing of our enemies,  that got Ambassador Chris Stevens murdered by Islamic Terrorists?