Saving America From Oblivion (A KJ Op Ed)

Obama-Shrinks-2Conservatives continued to outnumber moderates and liberals in the U.S. population in 2014, as they have since 2009. However, their 14-percentage-point edge over liberals last year, 38% vs. 24%, is the smallest in Gallup’s trends since 1992. The percentage of U.S. adults identifying themselves as politically conservative in 2014 was unchanged from 2013, as was the percentage of moderates, at 34%, while the percentage considering themselves liberal rose a percentage point for the third straight year. – Gallup.com

As I am wont to do, from time to time, this Saturday morning’s post is going to be an Opinion editorial, or an Op Ed.

When did America stop being the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave…and start being the Land of the Restricted and the Home of the Apologetic?

Regardless of what your first thought probably is, this phenomenon did not originate with Barack Hussein Obama, it just intensified with him.

In American Politics, as far as anybody can remember, that is still alive and kicking, you have had those of a political ideology who were Pro-American and Gung Ho about all the things that this country stands for. And, on the other side, you had those of a political ideology who criticized everything that America stood for, and still stands, for to this day.

From those who believed that Communism would be great for America back in the 1950s, to those in the 1960’s, who wanted to “tune in, turn on, and drop out”, and spit on our returning Servicemen, to those of the 1970s who were naive pacifists like their President, Jimmy Carter, to those in the 1980s, who were part of the “Me Generation”, to those whom we call “Progressives” (a misnomer) or “Modern Liberals” in our present generation, there has always been a minority segment of American Society, who despise everything that this land, which was given us by the Almighty and was fought for and died for by those before us, stands for, while they reap all the benefits of America the Beautiful.

Hypocritical, No?

Back in simpler times, a lot of Americans had a bumper sticker that read

America… Love it or Leave it.

I’d love to have a bumper sticker that said,

America… Stand for her or shut up.

I guess that the reason that I’m speaking of this on this crisp March morning before Palm Sunday, is that I am fed up with our first anti-American President and all his sycophantic, unwitting minions, who cannot understand the peril that we are facing. It’s one thing to go around like an ostrich with your head in the sand, but it sure does limit your view of what is happening around you, while showing off your hindquarters to the rest of the world.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening to our nation today.

The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so. – Ronald Reagan

Modern American Liberals, from President Barack Hussein Obama on down the line,  believe intrinsically that they are the smartest people in any room that they walk into, an arrogance which blinds them to reality 99.9% of the time.

…foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Sen. Clinton or Sen. McCain.”- Barack Hussein Obama, April 2008

Uh huh.

Lost in the fog of his own hubris, Obama, in his zeal to form what he believes to be a lasting agreement with the Rogue Barbaric Islamic State of Iran, which includes trusting them implicitly not to use the nuclear bomb, to blow us off the face of the earth, which he is going to allow them to have,  seriously believes that the Iranians will be faithful to this farce of an agreement. His own mistaken faith in his own “superior intellect” will not allow him to believe otherwise. In his quest to leave a legacy, other than the destruction of our country, as we know it,

President Obama’s foreign policy is one of saying, first of all, America’s just another nation with a flag. – Mitt Romney, 11/22/2011

Unfortunately, his domestic policy is no better than his foreign policy, which leaves the overwhelming majority of Americans with no sense of security in Obama’s ability to lead, whatsoever.

78% of Americans are worried about the direction of the nation’s economy in the next year – Fox News 2014 Midterm Elections Exit Poll

That is, those of us who do not have our heads placed firmly in the sand and our hindquarters sticking defiantly up in the air.

Fortunately, the number of Americans we’re walking around without blinders on, with a panoramic world view, and with their hindquarters exactly where they are supposed to be, is growing in number, as proven by the midterm elections of 2014.

Do not allow the members of a minority political ideology, which only comprises 24% of America’s population, convince you that everyone feels about America the way they do.

Liberals truly believe and shriek at the top of their lungs that calling out Obama on his ineptness and incompetency means that you are “against America”.

That is not the case.

Ask “Bubba”:

Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”- “The Amateur”, Edward Klein, May, 2012

As certain as I am about the love of my 7-year old grandson, I possess that same certainty that the overwhelming majority of Americans are becoming very aware of the perilous situation, which this administration has placed us in.

This awareness will manifest itself in the upcoming months as we near the 2016 presidential election.

Whoever winds up as the Republican Presidential Candidate, must not only also possess that awareness, but must possess the oral skills to communicate that awareness and also, a passion to protect and serve the United States of America, a nation which he must love with all his heart.

That is what it will take to stop this “Shining City Upon a Hill”, from becoming a third-world barrio…and to continue our existence as a nation.

Until He Comes,

KJ

On the Eve of Destruction: Obama Gives Iran the Bomb

Peace-our-Time-600-LASince the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America. 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, all these years later, the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is handing the Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction if the United States of America.

Schmuck.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

The Obama administration is giving in to Iranian demands about the scope of its nuclear program as negotiators work to finalize a framework agreement in the coming days, according to sources familiar with the administration’s position in the negotiations.U.S. negotiators are said to have given up ground on demands that Iran be forced to disclose the full range of its nuclear activities at the outset of a nuclear deal, a concession experts say would gut the verification the Obama administration has vowed would stand as the crux of a deal with Iran.

Until recently, the Obama administration had maintained that it would guarantee oversight on Tehran’s program well into the future, and that it would take the necessary steps to ensure that oversight would be effective. The issue has now emerged as a key sticking point in the talks.

Concern from sources familiar with U.S. concessions in the talks comes amid reports that Iran could be permitted to continue running nuclear centrifuges at an underground site once suspected of housing illicit activities.

This type of concession would allow Iran to continue work related to its nuclear weapons program, even under the eye of international inspectors. If Iran removes inspectors—as it has in the past—it would be left with a nuclear infrastructure immune from a strike by Western forces.

“Once again, in the face of Iran’s intransigence, the U.S. is leading an effort to cave even more toward Iran—this time by whitewashing Tehran’s decades of lying about nuclear weapons work and current lack of cooperation with the [International Atomic Energy Agency],” said one Western source briefed on the talks but who was not permitted to speak on record.

With the White House pressing to finalize a deal, U.S. diplomats have moved further away from their demands that Iran be subjected to oversight over its nuclear infrastructure.

“Instead of ensuring that Iran answers all the outstanding questions about the past and current military dimensions of their nuclear work in order to obtain sanctions relief, the U.S. is now revising down what they need to do,” said the source.  “That is a terrible mistake—if we don’t have a baseline to judge their past work, we can’t tell if they are cheating in the future, and if they won’t answer now, before getting rewarded, why would they come clean in the future?”

The United States is now willing to let Iran keep many of its most controversial military sites closed to inspectors until international sanctions pressure has been lifted, according to sources.

This scenario has been criticized by nuclear experts, including David Albright, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

Albright told Congress in November that “a prerequisite for any comprehensive agreement is for the IAEA to know when Iran sought nuclear weapons, how far it got, what types it sought to develop, and how and where it did this work.”

“The IAEA needs a good baseline of Iran’s military nuclear activities, including the manufacturing of equipment for the program and any weaponization related studies, equipment, and locations,” Albright said.

One policy expert familiar with the concessions told the Washington Free Beacon that it would be difficult for the administration to justify greater concessions given the centrality of this issue in the broader debate.

“The Obama administration has gone all-in on the importance of verification,” said the source, who asked for anonymity because the administration has been known to retaliate against critics in the policy community. “But without knowing what the Iranians have it’s impossible for the IAEA to verify that they’ve given it up.”

A lesser emphasis is also being placed on Iran coming clean about its past efforts to build nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic continues to stall United Nations efforts to determine the extent of its past weapons work, according to the Wall Street Journal.

By placing disclosure of Iran’s past military efforts on the back burner, the administration could harm the ability of outside inspectors to take full inventory of Iran’s nuclear know-how, according to sources familiar with the situation.

It also could jeopardize efforts to keep Iran at least one year away from building a bomb, sources said.

On the diplomatic front, greater concessions are fueling fears among U.S. allies that Iran will emerge from the negations as a stronger regional power.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies…and, more concerned about reaching out to Muslim Radicals than demanding the release of Christian American Pastor Saeed Abedina, who has been held captive by Iran since the summer of 2012.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is now blowing up in his face, and placing our very nation in imminent danger..

And, they are not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naivete or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 
 
 
 

Netanyahu Wins Re-election…Despite Obama

 

americanisraelilapelpinAs the votes were being counted last night, both Israeli and American Politicians and Political Pundits had to admit the inevitable.

The Jerusalem Post reported that

After six years of testy relations, US President Barack Obama may have to resign himself to the likelihood that he has not seen the last of Benjamin Netanyahu.

A better-than-expected showing by the Israeli prime minister in Tuesday’s closely fought election raises the prospect that he could remain a thorn in Obama’s side, with the two men increasingly at odds over Iran diplomacy and Middle East peacemaking.

US officials responded cautiously as they waited to see whether Netanyahu or his center-left challenger, Isaac Herzog, would get the nod from Israel’s president to begin the long and messy coalition-building process.

Clearly the result that many of Obama’s supporters had hoped for – a repudiation by Israeli voters of Netanyahu’s hard-line approach – was not to be. Exit polls showed that his Likud party had erased its rival’s pre-election lead, putting the two sides in a dead heat.

“Looks like the White House will need to let the champagne chill a bit longer,” Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations, tweeted about the election outcome.

The election came just two weeks after Netanyahu defied Obama with a politically divisive speech to Congress attacking US-led nuclear talks with Iran. The final days of campaigning only served to deepen tensions between the right-wing leader and Washington.

Even as they insisted publicly on non-intervention in the Israeli campaign, Obama’s aides were taken aback by Netanyahu’s reversal of his previous declaration of support for creating a Palestinian state, a longstanding cornerstone of US policy.

Netanyahu also drew a rebuke from the US State Department for suggesting on election day that left-wingers were trying to get Arab-Israeli voters out “in droves” to sway the election against him.

“Netanyahu has managed an uphill climb in the last few days,” said David Makovsky, a former member of Obama’s team in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks that collapsed last year.

“The way he has survived was to cannibalize part of the right and also adopt policy positions that are bound to create further friction with Washington,” said Makovsky, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “He’s going to be in the next government one way or another.”

Netanyahu could have the easier path to forming a cabinet, which would put him on course to becoming Israel’s longest serving leader.

That prospect may not bode well for repairing US-Israeli ties after Netanyahu’s congressional speech, which he delivered at the invitation of Obama’s Republican opponents despite strong objections from the president and many of Obama’s fellow Democrats.

US officials had left little doubt of their hope for an election outcome that would create a new ruling coalition more in sync with – or at least less hostile to – Obama’s agenda, especially with an end-of-March deadline looming for a framework nuclear deal in negotiations between Tehran and world powers.

As a prime minister, Zionist Union leader Herzog would be expected to take an Obama-friendlier course less confrontational over Iran and more open to renewed peacemaking with the Palestinians.

It would also be a chance to get past six years of slights, mutual suspicion and even antipathy at the top of the US-Israeli relationship and return to traditional bipartisanship in Congress on the issue of Israeli security.

That will not be easy if Netanyahu remains in office – though some analysts suggest that tensions with Obama could be eased along with the threat of international isolation if the rivals decide to form a broad-based national unity government.

Efforts already were under way in Washington to lower the temperature.

“People say a lot of things during campaigns,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told CNN when asked about Netanyahu’s apparent reversal on Palestinian statehood.

“What we’re focused on is the Israelis moving forward, forming a government and we will work with whoever is prime minister to see if we can make progress in what is a very tough and difficult area to do so,” she said.

Nancy Pelosi, the House of Representatives Democratic minority leader, said that as someone who loves Israel, she was “near tears” during Netanyahu’s March 3 address, calling his remarks an “insult to the intelligence of the United States.”

But on Tuesday, she said the US-Israeli relationship would stay strong, whoever won, and declined to weigh in before the result on whether Netanyahu’s speech hurt him.

“It’s a very, very … intellectual relationship, security relationship and an emotional one as well,” she told reporters.

Underscoring the partisan divide over Netanyahu, Republican US Senator Ted Cruz said: “His electoral success is all the more impressive given the powerful forces that tried to undermine him, including, sadly, the full weight of the Obama political team.”

What may have have been a harbinger of the opposition party’s was actually a prophetic poll from January of 2014 which showed that most Israelis trusted “The Leader of the Free World” about as far as they could throw Moochelle.

According to new poll, a huge majority of Israelis do not trust President Obama with regard to Iran, and believe Obama will allow Iran to go nuclear. Only 22 percent of Israeli voters believed that Obama would “ensure that Iran does not achieve a nuclear weapon.”

Almost two-thirds of Israelis thought that statement was untrue, and 15 percent gave no answer. President Obama has just a 33 percent favorable rating in Israel, as opposed to a 50 percent disapproval rating. Even those who favor Obama are split evenly on whether or not he will prevent Iran from going nuclear.

After over a year of Petulant President Pantywaist pussy-footing around with the Mad Mullahs of Iran, it is a certainty that those numbers in that poll would be even more skewed today against Barack Hussein Obama.

And, rightfully so.

Barack Hussein Obama, despite his protestations to the contrary, is not a friend of Israel.

In fact, the entirety of Obama’s Foreign Policy Efforts, over both terms, have been nothing but a series of back-handed insults to God’s Chosen People.

From his meeting with Hamas before he was even elected, to his unwavering insistence that Israelis give up half of their country to the Middle Eastern Gypsies, know as Palestinians, “citizens” of a country that never existed, except as a vaguely-defined British Territory, eons ago, the first anti-American President has thumbed his nose at the country of Israel.

From his unwavering support of “Arab Spring” to his entertaining the barbaric Muslim Brotherhood repeatedly in OUR White House, Obama has embraced our sworn enemies and alienated our staunchest ally.

From their birth as a Nation in 1948, Israel and the United States of America have been united against the forces of Radical Islam.

…That is, until Barack Hussein Obama took office, and he and his Administration decided that Muslim Terrorist Acts were just “man-caused disasters”.

Obama has intentionally derided and snubbed Prime Minister Netanyahu over the years, once, even leaving a serious discussion with him, to go have dinner with Mooch and the girls, because Bibi was schooling him, as usually happened, every time they met.

And, of course, who can forget the hissy fit which Obama and all of his Liberal sycophants threw over Netanyahu speaking to Congress about the Iranian Situation, at the request of Speaker John Boehner.

And, now, with Congress beginning the process of investigating whether the president used OUR money in an attempt to have Prime Minister Netanyahu voted out of office, Bibi has once again made Obama look like the petulant dhimmi wuss that he is, by being re-elected.

Hey, Israel…we’ll trade ya!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama WH Sucks Up to Iran, Celebrates Iranian National Holiday

 

 

Peace-our-Time-600-LAPresident Barack Hussein Obama, who, in the name of “diversity”, once declared that we were no longer just a Christian Nation, last week, practiced what he preached, by celebrating the National Holiday of…IRAN!

TheHill.com reports that

The White House this week celebrated Nowruz, the Persian New Year most often observed by Iranians.

The festivities come amid tense negotiations between the White House and Tehran. President Obama hopes Iran will slow or stop its nuclear weapons program in exchange for removing economic sanctions.

First Lady Michelle Obama praised the holiday in remarks at the executive mansion Wednesday. The event featured a Persian dinner and a dance troop’s performance.

“I think it’s so fitting we’re holding this celebration here today,” Michelle Obama said. “One of the things I love about the White House is how it truly is the people’s house. It is a house that reflects the diversity of culture and traditions that make us who we are as a country. Nowruz is one of those traditions.”

The U.S. is targeting a tentative outline of the deal by the end of the month.

Britain, France, China, Germany and Russia are aiding America’s efforts, with talks resuming in Lausanne, Switzerland, next week.

A group of 47 GOP Senators revolted against President Obama’s strategy Monday, sending Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, an open letterpromising Congress will end any agreement it finds harms American interests.

Obama on Friday said he was “embarrassed” by the lawmaker’s actions. Khamenei, meanwhile, criticized it Thursday as proof of Western “tricks and deceptions” in the negotiations.

The first lady made no mention of Iran in Wednesday’s speech. She did praise the ancient festival as one of “family and community.”

“For more than 3,000 years, families and communities in the Middle East, Asia and all around the world — including here in the United States — have celebrated this holiday to mark the renewal of the Earth in springtime,” she said. “It’s to reflect on the year before and make new commitments to good health and prosperity in the year ahead.”

Nowruz marks the start of both spring and the beginning of the Persian calendar each year.

A central facet of Nowruz celebrations are “Haft Sin,” or “the seven S’s” in Persian. Participants display seven items (all beginning with “S” in Persian) as symbols of new hopes for the next year.

The first lady said Wednesday the White House has its own Haft Sin display this Nowruz. Example she cited included an apple for beauty, grass for rejuvenation and crushed berry spices for “the spice of life.”

Instead of negotiating from a position of strength, as Ronald Reagan did with Iran in 1980, Obama is sucking up to them.

Again, per TheHill.com,

Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton said Saturday that President Obama is negotiating “an unprecedented act of surrender” with Iran in discussions over its nuclear weapons program.

“This deal is fundamentally flawed,” Bolton said at the South Carolina National Security Action Summit in West Columbia, S.C. “There really is no deal I’d trust Iran with. It is a regime determined to have nuclear weapons and this deal will give it to them.”

The Obama administration is hoping Iran will slow or stop its nuclear armaments research in exchange for removing economic sanctions. Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia are aiding U.S. efforts to bargain with Iran. The two sides will resume talks in Lausanne, Switzerland, next week.

… “The president coddles the Iranian ayatollah and attacks his own countrymen and our closest allies over this deal,” Bolton said Saturday. “The danger we hope to avoid is now imminent. This is just one example of how the President doesn’t care about America’s national security.”

…Bolton said Saturday that Obama’s eagerness for a deal would give Tehran a “free pass” for nuclear arms. He said American voters should thus make national security the central issue of 2016’s presidential elections.

“The gravest threat to our national security sits in the Oval Office,” Bolton said. “The next two years can’t pass swiftly enough. For God’s sake, let’s not make the same mistake in 2016.”

So, let me get this straight: President Pantywaist, dhimmi that he is, has not only, as I reported a while back, been secretly writing love letters to our sworn enemy, Iran, a Radical Muslim Rogue State, who is building a nuclear bomb, in order to wipe us off the face of the Earth, in an effort to recruit them to join us in our fight against ISIS, an Organization of Radical Muslims, who stated that they were going to plant their flag on top of the White House, last week, he authorized OUR Government to celebrate a National Holiday of our mortal enemy, Iran.

My Dear Lord.

Right now, in our nation, the political winds have shifted in an ugly direction for President Pantywaist and his political party, 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 between the parties, a “Civil War”.

Instead of seriously attempting to unite the country he is supposed to be serving and protecting, Obama, as exhibited by his behavior toward those 47 Congressmen, is acting like a petulant child, insisting that everybody play by his rules, or else, he will take his ball and go home, in defense of a country who sponsors Islamic Terrorism, with whom we have not had diplomatic relations since the Radical Muslims took over, after they revolted against the Moderate Government of the Shah in 1979.

What does he think that he is accomplishing through this Chamberlain-esque Negotiation Strategy? That is, other than helping 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.

Some observations…

1 The Iranian Government is not secular. It is the product of a fanatical political ideology, disguised as a “faith. The Ayatollahs rule Iran. The president and “secular Government” carry out their wishes, and are simply figureheads.

2. Nowhere in Obama’s Negotiations with Iran has he or Secretary of State John Kerry called for the halt of Uranium Enrichment in Iran. Infact, now, they’ve given them a timeline in which to complete it.

3. A Christian American Pastor, Saeed Abedini, has been held in jail by the Iranian Government, since the summer of 2012m as I recently reported. Why does the Obama Administration care more about negotiating appeasement with a hostile, barbaric Foreign Government, than securing the freedom of an American Christian Pastor?

Wars have been started for less than that.

President Reagan advised to “Trust, but Verify”.

Evidently, Obama’s message is to “Trust Islam…Limit American Christianity”.

As I have written before, this has the potential of not ending well.

He truly is our first Anti-American President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Petulant President, the Iranian “Negotiations”, and the Forgotten American

 

AFBrancoTerroristAhoy252015I believe that America has a Petulant Presidential Priority Problem.

Back on December 30, 2014, Reuters News – Canada reported the following…

Iran could become a “very successful regional power” if Tehran agrees to a long-term deal to curb its nuclear program, President Barack Obama said in an interview with NPR News.

“They’ve got a chance to get right with the world,” Obama said in the interview, which was taped at the White House on Dec. 18 and is set to air this week.

More than a year ago, Iran agreed to an interim plan to halt higher-level uranium enrichment in exchange for a limited easing in financial sanctions pending negotiations on a long-term deal. Those talks have now been extended to next June.

Iran has said its nuclear program is for peaceful energy use, but the United States and five other powers want to make sure that Tehran cannot quickly develop nuclear weapons.

Obama told NPR that Iran should seize the chance of a deal that could lift crippling sanctions.

“Because if they do, there’s incredible talent and resources and sophistication inside of Iran and it would be a very successful regional power that was also abiding by international norms and international rules – and that would be good for everybody,” he said.

Obama insisted a nuclear deal was possible, although Vice President Joe Biden earlier this month said he thought there was a “less than even shot” of an agreement.

Obama said he recognized that Iran has “legitimate defense concerns” after it “suffered from a terrible war with Iraq” in the 1980s. But he criticized Tehran for its “adventurism, the support of organizations like Hizbollah, the threats they’ve directed at Israel.”

Asked whether he would use his last two years in office to help rebuild war-torn countries, Obama said it was up to countries like Libya, Syria and Iraq to take the lead.

“We can help, but we can’t do it for them,” Obama said. “I think the American people recognize that. There are times here in Washington where pundits don’t; they think you can just move chess pieces around the table.

“And whenever we have that kind of hubris, we tend to get burned,” he said.

Are you old enough to remember the Iranian 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.

As I write this blog post, on Saturday morning, March 14th, the Year of Our Lord 2015, an American sits in an Iranian Jail, while the man who is supposed to be his president, protector, and advocate, praises and plays “footsie” with his Radical Islamic captors.

Christianpost.com reports that

Naghmeh Abedini, wife of imprisoned Iranian-American Pastor Saeed Abedini, gives remarks at a vigil for her husband held at Lafayette Square near the White House, Washington, Thursday, September 25, 2014.

U.S. Pastor Saeed Abedini, who has now been in an Iranian jail for his Christian faith for nearly two-and-a-half years, is “shaken” as six of his fellow prisoners were executed around him this week, his wife, Naghmeh, says.

“Saeed was quite shaken as he had to witness 6 fellow prisoners being beaten and taken to be executed (hanged) that day,” Naghmeh was quoted as saying in a report by American Center for Law and Justice on Saturday.

“It was a hard and dark day having witnessed that and seeing life being taken. The prison visit was also very hard as the families of those who were executed were crying and wailing,” she added.

Naghmeh learned about this after Pastor Saeed’s family members in Iran were able to have a short visit with him at the prison.

“It was also an emotional visitation as it is getting closer to Jacob’s 7th birthday. Last time Saeed saw Jacob he was 4 years old,” she said, urging Christians to continue to pray for her husband “to have the strength to endure in that harsh prison and that Jesus would continue to meet him there and give him hope.”

“Please pray that this will be the year that Saeed is released,” she said.

Pastor Saeed remains in an incredibly dangerous situation, ACLJ says, explaining that summary executions, inmate violence and beatings are commonplace.

Saeed has also sustained prolonged internal injuries due to beatings in the prison.

“The Obama Administration must do all within its power to bring this wrongfully imprisoned U.S. citizen home to his family in America,” ACLJ says.

Obama raised the issue of the pastor’s detention during his first phone conversation with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in September 2013, but authorities in Iran have not responded.

Saeed grew up in Iran before converting to Christianity at the age of 20. He later traveled with his family back and forth between Iran and the U.S. to meet other members of his family and for Christian work.

During one such trip in 2009, Saeed was detained by Iranian officials and interrogated for his conversion. While he was released with a warning against engaging in underground church activities, he was once again arrested in 2012 while working on a non-sectarian orphanage project.

Saeed was sentenced for endangering “national security,” but the ACLJ believes the punishment has more to do with Saeed’s Christian faith.

While the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Secretary of State John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry continue to acquiesce…err…negotiate with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, seeking an “agreement” in defiance of Article 6 of the United Stated Constitution, there is a Forgotten American Man of Faith, being held in the squalor of an Iranian Jail.

I have watched in bemused revulsion this past week, as the holier-than-thou Liberal sycophantic pundits in the Main Stream Media and on the Internet, called the 47 Congressman, led by American Veteran Tom Cotton, “treasonous”, for sending a letter to the Mad Mullahs in Iran, informing them that any “agreement” enacted by Obama and Kerry, would not be worth the paper it may or may not be written on, as the next United States President could declare it null and void, as it would not be a Formal Treaty.

For you see, boys and girls, in order for any agreement with any foreign country to be binding, it MUST be ratified by Congress.

Our Founding Fathers, in their brilliance, set up a System of Checks and Balances, so that American would not become an oppressive monarchy, such as the one they had just left, seeking to practice their Christian Faith, however they saw fit.

I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of a President who seeks to allow one of our mortal enemies the means by which to annihilate us, while this same enemy continues to hold captive an American, simply because he is a Christian Pastor?

They probably would not think very highly of him…at all.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Congress Defies Obama. Warns Iran.

 

image

 

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. The Constitution of the United States of America, Article VI

The preceding article gives the power to ratify treaties with other nations, to Congress.

As you know, President Barack Hussein Obama, has been ignoring Congress, in his zeal to broker a “Nuclear Arms Agreement” with the Radical Islamic Nation of Iran.

Yesterday, the Republican – led Congress made sure that both Obama and Iran knew that our government consists of 3 co-equal branches.

Fox News reports that

Forty-seven Republican senators warned Iran’s leaders on Monday that any nuclear deal needs congressional approval in order to last beyond President Obama’s term, in a stark letter aimed at re-asserting lawmakers’ role as talks near a key deadline. 

In an open letter to Iranian leaders, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and 46 other Republicans said they wanted to educate Iran about the U.S. Constitution. Namely, they pointed out that without congressional approval on a deal, all Tehran would be left with is a “mere executive agreement” between President Obama and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 

The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen,” they wrote, “and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.” 

They added: “We hope this letter enriches your knowledge of our constitutional system and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress.” 

Though the letter is addressed to leaders in Tehran, it seems as much aimed at delivering a message to Obama. 

Republicans and some Democrats want Congress to vote on any agreement, and are pushing a bill that would give Congress a say despite resistance from the White House. 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., though, has agreed to ease off a short-lived effort to fast-track that legislation, amid some Democratic concerns. 

Notably, the Republican co-sponsor of that bill, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., did not sign the most recent open letter to Iran’s leaders. No Democrats signed the letter, either. 

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday that a congressional vote is not what Obama envisions. 

“The fact is the president does not envision substantial sanctions relief for Iran right at the negotiating table,” Earnest said during the daily White House briefing. 

The nuclear pact negotiators are working on does not require congressional approval because it is not a treaty, which would require a two-thirds majority Senate vote to be ratified. However, as the 47 Republicans noted in their letter, approval from a congressional majority would give the deal the force of a “congressional-executive agreement.” 

The U.S. and other nations are seeking a pact that would let Western powers verify that Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon. 

The next negotiations are scheduled for March 15, and wide gaps remain between the two sides. The deadline for an outline of a U.S.-Iranian deal is at the end of March. 

Iran has said its nuclear program is peaceful and is aimed at producing energy. 

There was no immediate Iranian government reaction to the letter or any discussion of it in Iranian media. 

Cotton is a freshman senator who serves on the Senate’s Armed Service and Intelligence committees.

The BBC reports that Obama said in response, that

I think it’s somewhat ironic to see some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran. It’s an unusual coalition. 

In the “Irony” Department,

In his book “The Audacity of Hope,” President Barack Obama praised the Constitution and the federalism it enshrines, including the “three coequal” branches of government and checks on power that “prevent tyranny by either the few or the many.”“The outlines of Madison’s constitutional architecture are so familiar that even schoolchildren can recite them: not only rule of law and representative government, not just a bill of rights, but also the separation of the national government into three coequal branches, a bicameral Congress, and a concept of federalism that preserved authority in state governments, all of it designed to diffuse power, check factions, balance interests, and prevent tyranny by either the few or the many,” Obama, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School, said in the 2006 book.

In just 9 short years, Obama has forgotten everything he ever knew about US Civics.

On purpose.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Bubba Defends Hil’s Mid East Campaign Donations. By the Way, Obama Had ‘Em in 2008.

 

BBerry-Grandma-NRD-6002Money makes the world go ’round.

And, in the cause of Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s possible Candidacy for the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States, that money has literally come from around the world.

The Wall Street Journal reports that

Former President Bill Clinton defended his foundation’s decision to accept money from foreign governments in an appearance Saturday, saying the charity does good work and that people can judge for themselves since the contributions are disclosed.

“You got to decide when you do this work whether it will do more good than harm if someone helps you from another country,” he said at the closing session of a Clinton Global Initiative event at the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla. “My theory about all this is disclose everything and then let people make their judgments.”

When Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the foundation agreed to limit contributions from foreign governments. The Wall Street Journal reported last month that the foundation, now called the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, resumed accepting these contributions after Mrs. Clinton left her post in 2013.

Mr. Clinton made his remarks in an onstage interview with comedian Larry Wilmore, who asked about the matter at the top of the session but didn’t press him on it. Outside observers have questioned the practice, saying foreign governments could be making contributions in hopes of currying favor with Mrs. Clinton, who is widely expected to run for president in 2016.

Mr. Clinton didn’t address that point. Rather, he said that he doesn’t have to agree with every policy of a country to accept contributions.

“We do get money from other countries and some of them are in the Middle East,” he said. “For example, the U.A.E. gave us money. Do we agree with everything they do? No, but they are helping us fight ISIS, and they built a great university with NYU.” Similarly, he said, “Do I agree with all the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia? No.” But he said that country is making advances in education for women and girls.

He said the money will be used for an endowment to provide for the foundation’s future support. “The money that we raise for next couple years for an endowment so all these programs will run forever even when I get to the point when I can’t raise the money every year,” he said. Some of it, he added, is from “people who have helped us before.”

The Journal reported that the foundation has set a goal of establishing a $250 million endowment, aimed at decreasing reliance on the former president’s personal fundraising efforts.

If Hillary Clinton chooses to run and is nominated as the Democrat Party’s Presidential Candidate, she will be the second candidate in a row to have accepted possibly illegal, certainly influence-peddling, anonymous Middle Eastern Campaign Money.

Back on December 18, 2008, judicialwatch.org gave background details on The Clintons’ then-Secret Donor List…

As expected, Bill Clinton’s foundation has accepted millions of dollars from numerous governments, companies and private parties that have obvious interests in U.S. foreign policy.

How convenient for the wealthy benefactors that the former president’s beloved wife is about to become the nation’s secretary of state. The list of more than 200,000 donors to the William J. Clinton Foundation has for years been top secret, but the commander-in-chief turned philanthropist gave into Barack Obama’s condition of disclosing it before Hillary’s confirmation.

The idea, according to Camp Obama, is to eliminate any conflict of interest concerns created by an unprecedented situation; the spouse of the cabinet member in charge of foreign policy has raked in hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign interests.

The list’s disclosure doesn’t necessarily accomplish Obama’s goal, but rather accentuates that there is indeed a rather large conflict. Of the $500 million the Clinton Foundation has raised over the last decade, big chunks came from the governments of Saudi Arabia, Norway and Oman as well as a variety of shady individuals with business abroad.

Among them is a Vancouver businessman (Frank Giustra) that donated more than $31 million to Clinton’s foundation after the former president helped him seal an unheard of uranium deal with the communist dictator of a former Soviet Republic (Kazakhstan).

A Ukrainian tycoon, Victor Punchuk, who is the son-in-law of that country’s former authoritarian president (Leonid Kuchma) has also given Clinton several millions dollars as has an Israeli media mogul (Haim Saban) who donates big bucks to pro-Israel politicians. 

Of course, as the first article stated,whenHil accepted the Cabinet Position as Obama’s first Secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation “decided to limit contributions from foreign countries”.

Uh huh. Suuure, they did.

Back on April 26, 2010, in a blog I posted, titled, “Obama’s Money Motivations”, I reported that

…Obama has numerous donors who have contributed well over the $4,600 federal election limit.

Many of these donors have never been contacted by the Obama campaign to refund the excess amounts to them.

And more than 37,000 Obama donations appear to be conversions of foreign currency.

According to a Newsmax analysis of the Obama campaign data before the latest figures were released, potential foreign currency donations could range anywhere from $12.8 million to a stunning $63 million in all. With the addition of $150 million raised in September, this amount could be much more.

Talk about your “tangled web”…

Well, from my computer desk down here in Dixie, it appears that the entire premise of “Smart Power” Foreign Policy, in which the Obama Administration has alientated our friends and embraced our enemies, grew out of the generosity of Hillary and Obama’s mutual campaign donators, those “not-so-anonymous” benefactors in the Middle East who donated to both their campaigns.

also. in a possibly related story, there are now big gaps in the timeline of the e-mails which Hillary’s staff has turned over for review.

Hmmm…

I wonder if any of those missing e-mails originated in Saudi Arabia, Oman…or…maybe…Iran? 

Until He Comes,

KJ

Majority of Americans Believe Obama is Dishonest.

 

Peace-our-Time-600-LAI have never been a good liar.

Number 1…I wasn’t raised that way. Number 2…when I tried to get by with it as a kid, my mother whupped me (Southern colloquialism for “delivered disciplinary punishment”) on the back of my legs with a yardstick. I swear, to this day, the back of my legs read 4…5…6…

However, the President of the United States does not have that problem.

According to foxnews.com,

Most voters believe the United States is the best country in the world.  Far fewer of them believe Barack Obama agrees, according to a Fox News poll released Thursday. 

The new poll also finds the numbers saying Obama is patriotic, honest or a strong leader have all declined in the past few years. 

More Americans feel they love the United States than think Obama does: 83 percent think the U.S. is the greatest country in the world. Just 64 percent believe Obama feels the same way.

The difference in the two perceptions is mainly partisan: 90 percent of Republicans think the U.S. is the best, while only 42 percent believe the president agrees. Among Democrats, 82 percent feel this is the greatest nation, and even more — 88 percent — believe Obama feels that.

Those who are most likely to feel the U.S. is the best nation in the world include voters over age 65 (93 percent) as well as Republicans (90 percent).  Those least likely to feel that way include voters who identify with the Tea Party movement (79 percent), self-identified independents (73 percent) and voters under age 35 (71 percent).

Overall, 54 percent of voters say Obama is patriotic, yet that’s down from 60 percent who felt that way in 2011.  Again, party identification matters:  the number of Republicans today who think the president is patriotic is down six percentage points from 2011, among independents it’s down four points and for Democrats it’s down one. 

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani caused an uproar in February by questioning whether Barack Obama loves America.  The poll shows 42 percent of voters nationally think there are “legitimate reasons to doubt” whether Obama loves America.  That includes 66 percent of Republicans, 42 percent of independents and 17 percent of Democrats.

Fewer voters than ever before see Obama as honest: a record-low 43 percent.  And for the first time since 2007, a majority, 54 percent, disagrees that the president is “honest.”

Three-quarters of Democrats currently think Obama is honest (75 percent), while just 39 percent of independents and 15 percent of Republicans say the same.

For comparison, in 2011 some 57 percent of voters described Obama as honest.  That included 86 percent of Democrats, 53 percent of independents and 26 percent of Republicans. 

The poll also finds 43 percent of voters think Obama is a “strong leader.”  That’s down from a high of 60 percent who said he was a “strong and decisive” leader in 2009.

Of the four traits tested, Obama does best on “caring,” as 60 percent of voters feel that describes him.  Although there’s been a decline here too: 68 percent said Obama was “caring” in 2011.

The Fox News poll is conducted by telephone with live interviewers under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R).  The 1,011 registered voters were reached via landline and cell phone numbers randomly selected for inclusion in this nationwide survey from March 1-3, 2015.  The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Americans have noticed that there is a great disconnect between the citizens of the United States and their president. It’s not just his stand-offish behavior. There’s something else going on. He was not raised like the majority of Americans.

He didn’t have rubber dart gun wars in the neighborhood backyards. He didn’t play Nerf football in the front yards. He didn’t go to Vacation Bible School. I don’t know if he was ever told to stand with his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.

It is this disconnect that is at the heart of the trouble with Obama’s presidency. Hope and Change have turned into despair and disbelief. Obama has never understood the shared values of average Americans, because the people who raised him did not share those values, either. It is the concern that we feel for one another, that shared American value system, that is causing a great awakening. One of the main reasons Obama wants control of the internet is so we can’t communicate with each other and he can control the message.

His obvious affinity for and trust of the Radical Followers of Mohammed is another reason that he has earned Americans’ distrust.

Have you ever wondered why they have kept the president’s early days of childhood and growing up so secretive?

If you will read what has gotten out to the public, you will understand. He wasn’t raised like you and me. His mother, shall we politely say, was a free spirit. After young Mr. Obama’s dad ran away, his mom married a fellow by the last name of Soetoro, who took them home with him to Indonesia, where young Barry attended a Muslim school for wealthy citizens’ children.

While at the Madrassa, Barry learned a great many things, including the Muslim practice of Taqiyya.

The word “Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking.

It is currently employed in fending off and neutralizing any criticism of Islam or Muslims.

To summarize, in approximately 240 years of existence, the United States of America has gone from having a president who could not tell a lie to having a president who cannot tell the truth.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Aftermath: Netanyahu Rocked. Obama Got Rolled.

Take-Cover-600-LIWell, as we say in Dixie…

It’s all over but the shouting.

Washington…heck, the entire country, is still buzzing about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unprecedented speech before  a Joint Session of Congress, yesterday.

Needless to say, Obama and his minions are having a World Class Temper Tantrum.

The Washington, DC CBS Affiliate reports that

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in his address to Congress that there would be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East if a deal is signed with Iran.

“We must all stand together to stop Iran’s march of conquest, subjugation, and terror,” Netanyahu said to applause.

In a speech that dozens of Democrats skipped, the Israeli leader warned that a nuclear deal “paves Iran’s path to the bomb.”

“So you see my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one leaving Iran with a vast nuclear progam, and two, lifiting the restrictions on that program in about a decade,” Netanyahu said. “That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb, it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.”

The Israeli prime minister touched on the major concessions he believes will happen in a nuclear deal with Iran.

“Absent to dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran: the first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short breakout time to the bomb. Breakout time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb,” Netanyahu said. According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected but not destroyed. Because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largly intact, Iran’s breakout time would be very short — about a year by America’s assessment, even shorter by Israel.”

Calling it a “very bad deal,” Netanyahu said that Iran will always be an enemy to the U.S.

“The ideology of Iran’s revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that’s why this regime will always be an enemy of America. And don’t be fooled, the battle between Iran an ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America,” he said. “Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic, the other calls itself the Islamic State, both want to impose a militant Islamic empire — first on the region and then on the entire world.”

Netanyahu believes the deal could lead to a “potential nuclear nightmare.”

“If anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a MIddle East littered with nuclear bombs, and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare,” he said.

Netanyahu also touched on Iran defying United Nations inspectors.

“I know this won’t come as a shock to many of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, but it also plays a pretty good game of ‘hide and cheat’ with them,” he said.

Netanyahu said that Israel is no longer passive in the face of threats to its country and people.

“I can guarantee you this: The days when the Jewish people remain passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over,” he told lawmakers. “We are no longer scattered among the nations powerless to defend ourselves, we restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend ourselves have boundless courage. For the first time in a hundred generations, we the Jewish people can defend ourselves.

“Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”

Netanyahu added that Iran’s founding document calls for the “pursuit of jihad.”

During his speech, Netanyahu stated that he deeply regretted that some perceived him being in Washington as political.

“We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel,” Netanyahu said. “I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.”

Netanyahu thanked Congress for their support to build Israel’s “Iron Dome.”

“This Capitol dome helped build our ‘Iron Dome,’” Netanyahu said. “Thank you, America. Thank you for everything you’ve done for Israel.”

Fox News reports that Netanyahu’s speech was interrupted by applause nearly 40 times.

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, opened up his program yesterday, with the following on-point observations…

Nothing focuses the mind and heart like moral, ethical, and legal clarity.  And today in the House of Representatives chamber at the United States Capitol, the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, gave an historically important speech. A speech that any previous American president could have and maybe would have made, a speech to rally and save Western civilization. 

We are talking about thwarting a plan that gives the world’s leading terrorist state, we’re talking about thwarting a plan being brokered by our administration that gives Iran a certain path to produce nuclear weapons. Iran, the world’s leading exporter of terrorism, the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East.  And Benjamin Netanyahu came to the United States today in a desperate plea for the world to focus, to get serious, and take notice of what is happening.  It was stunning. I don’t know how many of you in the audience here had a chance to see it.  We will have audio sound bites of it coming.  We’re still putting those together now.  But I’m gonna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, it was powerful, and the Drive-By Media is underselling this.  As I watched the post-speech commentary on the cable news networks, never has it been more clear that the world in which they live is not the world in which we live.  To them it’s just another hum-ho speech that happened to be delivered by a foreign leader.

They’re all engaged in post-speech analysis as they would engage in the post-speech analysis of anybody who happened to give a speech about anything.  They’re looking at it through the political prism of how does it help or hurt Obama?  How does it help or hurt the Democrat Party, and what is Obama going to do?  Will this hurt the Democrats who boycotted this speech? 

They are missing the full impact and importance of what this speech was.  So we will try during the program today to tell you what that was, explain to you the importance of this speech.  The optics of this speech were just so overwhelmingly powerful.  When I say “what could have been,” this was leadership.  This was leadership in full force. 

Benjamin Netanyahu today was everything Barack Obama is not.  Everything.  This speech today even featured Netanyahu turning to a guest in the gallery, much like presidents who deliver State of the Union speeches.  Netanyahu’s guest, Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor.  This speech, as I say, historically important, moral, ethical, and legal clarity.  Nothing like that combination to focus the mind.  And this speech was all about rallying and saving Western civilization, which is what is under assault.

There was a time, not too long ago, when the President of the United States would have taken it upon his shoulders to lead the charge to “save Western Civilization” Now, it has fallen upon the broad shoulders of the Prime Minister of Israel, one of our staunchest allies, to “save Western Civilization” from the failed, amateurish Foreign Policy efforts of the President of the United States of America.

What is wrong with this picture?!!!

That “singular moment in history” yesterday was not just mind-blowing…it was embarrassing.

It was embarrassing that somehow a morally, spiritually, and diplomatically challenged, un-vetted lightweight of a Collegiate Guest Lecturer, like Barack Hussein Obama, was allowed to be elected President of the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth and to be thrust into the position of “Leader of the Free World” and “Guardian of Western Civilization”.

I was listening to Fox News on Sirius XM 114 in my car yesterday, while Obama was reacting to Netanyahu’s speech. The petulance and barely-hidden vitriol coming out of the President’s mouth made me want to stop my car, get out of it, and hurl.

Petulant President Pantywaist sounded like a 12 year old, just back for getting spanked in the Principal’s Office, trying to convince his school buddies that “it didn’t hurt”, when, in fact, his behind was as red as Rudolph’s nose.

Just like that youngster’s buddies, Americans aren’t buying Obama’s bravado, either.

You got schooled, Mr. President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Today’s the Day. Bibi’s ‘Bout to Burst Barry’s Bubble.

Shifty-600-LI (2)Today is a very historic day in the history of our nation.

The Prime Minister of one of America’s most steadfast allies will speak to a Joint Session of Congress…without the invitation or the blessings of The President of the United States of America…who is defending a Rogue Nation who continues its quest to build a nuclear bomb, which it plans to use to annihilate both the United States and Israel.

Grab your popcorn. This is gonna be good.

Reuters News on Yahoo.com reports that

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu clashed over Iran nuclear diplomacy on Monday on the eve of the Israeli prime minister’s hotly disputed address to Congress, underscoring the severity of U.S.-Israeli strains over the issue.

Even as the two leaders professed their commitment to a strong partnership and sought to play down the diplomatic row, they delivered dueling messages – Netanyahu in a speech to pro-Israeli supporters and Obama in an interview with Reuters – that hammered home their differences on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Neither gave any ground ahead of Netanyahu’s speech to Congress on Tuesday when he plans to detail his objections to ongoing talks between Iran and world powers that he says will inevitably allow Tehran to become a nuclear-armed state.

Netanyahu opened his high-profile visit to Washington on Monday with a stark warning to the Obama administration that the deal being negotiated with Tehran could threaten Israel’s survival, saying he had a “moral obligation” to sound the alarm about the dangers.

He insisted he meant no disrespect for Obama, with whom he has a history of testy encounters, and appreciated U.S. military and diplomatic support for Israel.

Just hours after Netanyahu’s speech to AIPAC, the largest U.S. pro-Israel lobby, Obama told Reuters that Iran should commit to a verifiable freeze of at least 10 years on its most sensitive nuclear activity for a landmark atomic deal to be reached. But with negotiators facing an end-of-March deadline for a framework accord, he said the odds were still against sealing a final agreement.

The Reuters interview gave Obama a chance to try to preemptively blunt the impact of Netanyahu’s closely watched address to Congress.

Previewing his coming appearance on Capitol Hill, Netanyahu told a cheering audience at the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC): “As prime minister of Israel, I have a moral obligation to speak up in the face of these dangers while there’s still time to avert them.”

At the same time, Netanyahu said the relationship between his country and the United States was “stronger than ever” and not in crisis.

EASING TENSIONS

Obama also sought to lower the temperature by describing Netanyahu’s planned speech to Congress as a distraction that would not be “permanently destructive” to U.S.-Israeli ties and by saying the rift was not personal.

Obama refused to meet Netanyahu during the visit, on the grounds that doing so could be seen as interference on the cusp of Israel’s March 17 elections when the prime minister is seeking re-election against a tough center-left challenger. On Monday, the president said he would be willing to meet Netanyahu if the Israeli leader wins re-election.

But he said Netanyahu’s U.S. visit gave the impression of “politicizing” the two countries’ normally close partnership and of going outside the normal channels of U.S. foreign policy in which the president holds greatest sway. Netanyahu’s planned speech has driven a wedge between Israel and congressional Democrats. Forty two of them plan to boycott the address, according to The Hill, a political newspaper.

Netanyahu, who was given rousing bipartisan welcomes in his two previous addresses to Congress, is expected to press U.S. lawmakers to block a deal with Iran that he contends would endanger Israel’s existence but which Obama’s aides believe could be a signature foreign policy achievement.

The invitation to Netanyahu was orchestrated by Republican congressional leaders with the Israeli ambassador without advance word to the White House, a breach of protocol that infuriated the Obama administration and the president’s fellow Democrats.

The partisan nature of this dispute has turned it into the worst rift in decades between the United States and Israel, which normally navigates carefully between Republicans and Democrats in Washington.

Netanyahu wants Iran to be completely barred from enriching uranium, which puts him at odds with Obama’s view that a deal should allow Tehran to engage in limited enrichment for peaceful purposes but under close international inspection.

Obama said a final deal must create a one-year “breakout period” for Iran, which means it would take at least a year for Tehran to get a nuclear weapon if it decides to develop one, thereby giving time for military action to prevent it.

Netanyahu has said such a deal would allow Iran to become a “threshold” nuclear weapons state, that it would inevitably cheat on any agreement and that the lifting of nuclear restrictions in as little of 10 years would be an untenable risk to Israel. He has hinted at the prospect for Israeli military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities as a last resort, though he made no such threat in his AIPAC speech on Monday.

So, today, the Prime Minister of Israel, who, unlike the present occupant of our White House, actually excelled on his own at Harvard University, addresses a Joint Session of Congress to speak about the plans of the current American Administration to allow Iran to, after a 10 year waiting period, develop a nuclear bomb.

By the way, how in the world does Obama believe that they can stop the Mad Mullahs of Iran from working on developing a nuclear bomb, while his flimsy proposed sanctions are in in place, anyway?

Obama is acting positively Chamberlain-esque in his naiveté, as regards the true intentions of the Religious Leaders of the Barbaric Muslim Rogue Nation of Iran.

Why have Obama and his minions been so relentless in their attack of Prime Minister Netanyahu?

It is well known, through his words and actions, that America’s current (P)resident Barack Hussein Obama, cares more for Israel’s enemies, than he does for God’s Chosen People. If it were up to Obama, Israel would be forced to give the nomadic people known as Palestinians, half of the land that the nation of Israel sits on. Not only that, but he and his talking horse, (at least he has the face of one) Secretary of State John F. Kerry,”are negotiating”, and I use the term loosely, an agreement with the Mullahs of Iran, to stop building a nuclear bomb, in exchange for allowing them to continue their Uranium Enrichment, an agreement which makes about as much sense as Pee Wee Herman starring in the title role in the next “Terminator” movie.

Obama is indeed making the same mistake that Neville Chamberlain made in dealing with Adolph Hitler’s Nazi-led German Occupation of Europe.

Obama believes that his superior intellect, combined with his acceptance of the word of blood-thirst Radical Islamists. will cement this ill-conceived agreement with Iran and his Presidential Legacy.

Today, Bibi is about to burst his bubble and tell the American people just how badly both of our nations are being screwed by “The Leader of the Free World”.

And, that is what ol’ Scooter is afraid of.

Until He Comes,

KJ