A Pattern Develops

If it walks like a cellphone ringtone, talks like a cellphone ringtone, and smells like a cellphone ringtone, it must be one, right (obscure reference to the Obama presser in which a reporter's cellphone began quacking like a duck when somebody called).

Seriously, though, there is a pattern developing in this administration. Can you name one instance in which Obama has sided with freedom against tyranny in his foreign policy statements and decisions? I cannot. Honduras--bring the tyrant back, siding with Castro, Chavez, and the UN. Israel--stop the settlements and recognize Hamas, and don't even consider military action against Iran. Iran--hang the protesters out to dry and quietly support Achmadinajad, at least until the world sees innocent people dying in the streets. North Korea--he's just a crazy, harmless uncle in the spare bedroom of the world, nothing to see, move along. Iraq--we'll just pull back and see how well the Iraqi police force can handle itself. Russia invades Georgia, and he tells them to play nice.

At all of these events, he is "deeply concerned," but nothing more. America's leadership in the world, and our strength in foreign policy, has been dismantled faster than a parking garage in downtown Atlanta. Will it take another 9/11 for us to see the folly of presenting ourselves as weaklings?

Most of us never will see the folly. MTV won't let us.

9/11 was a blip on our radar. Images that should have burned in to our collective memories were deemed unsuitable by the socialists in control of the media and so within weeks of the traumatic events, the media had ceased to even refer to them. By the time the first anniversay rolled around, it had become a footnote. Today it is a distant dream of a time when Big Bad Bush made war on the poor muslims. There was a lot of anger. The media made sure to redirect and pervert it into anger against an administration they loathed. Bush may not have been the ideal president (his big spending was a major problem), but he was definitely the right man for the job when 9/11 rolled around. Can you imagine how screwed this country would have been with a pansy like Gore (or God help us all, Obama) in the White House? I cannot imagine how imbecilic our response would have been. Gore would have probably threatened to launch a few Tomahawks but refrained because Greenpeace was sure they cause cancer in laboratory rats, and Obama would have been 'deeply concerned' but telling the Arab world he was sure it was somehow all our fault and we had it coming. But hey! We always have our Hope and Change, don't we?

Personally our Apologizer In Chief disgusts me. He isn't man enough for the office he holds. Our enemies are loving it.

Scott Sanderson
Cleveland, GA

I fully agree...and they will take great advantage of it too, Scott.

And we will pay for his weakness.

It is actually sad. We continue to play these back and forth games, and innocent Americans end up paying the price when the Democrats upend the military coffers to fund their silly social experiments. You are absolutely right, we will pay for not just Obama's weakness, but the weakness of the entire leftist organization that is currently in power. How many will die when someone sneaks a dirty bomb or biological/chemical agent into one of our cities? I feel a great deal of pity for the families of the World Trade Center victims. They are once again bearing witness to the same failed policies that led to the worst attack on American soil since WWII. 8 years of failed Clinton policy led to that attack. I don't think it will take our enemies nearly as long to mount another horrific attack if Obama has his way. The world is not a hippy commune. Some people hate for the sake of hating and all the 'play nice' in the world won't stop them from trying to kill the ones they hate.

If Obama really knew the 'beautiful culture of Islam' as much as he claimed to, he would know that Western culture and Islam cannot ever peacefully co-exist. They simply cannot abide the level of debauchery they see in our western society (Most Christians can barely tolerate it!). It threatens them, weakens their power structure and steals away their children. Their only recourse is to fight back against it. Even if you remove oil from the equation, there will never be peace between the Middle East and the Infidel.

Scott S

Scott, I think I can speak for more than a few here when I say:



WELCOME ABOARD!

Great post - you and Wilbur, both.


I think I just heard ole Lady LibertyCalls.org breath a deep breath and furrow her brow! There's some fight left in this thing after all!

HUZZAH!

Thanks...I know I am preaching to the choir, but it is nice to meet some like-minded folks who are as fed up with our failed government as I am.

Scott,

Welcome, as Jeff said!

You mentioned the Democrats funding their silly experiments and Obama's weakness, but lets not forget that the Republicans have been doing things almost as bad. I agree that the liberals and Obama are at the fore front of this crap, but there's plenty of Republicans that are participating in silly experiment funding as well. Chamblis had so many pork projects that he backed that it would make your head spin. He wasn't the worst, but stupid spending is stupid spending. I'm pretty sure the money he got for the blueberry research didn't go to help our security any.

I'm at the point now, where I don't care if you're democrat or republican...the moniker means nothing to me anymore. Its all about what you're doing to/for our Country.

Maybe there are some Republicans who aren't doing bad things, but are they almost as bad since they aren't trying to stop the all of this from happening?

I don't know if they are totally not trying to stop it, but I'd give you they aren't trying nearly hard enough.

Now, with a super-majority, there's not much we can do about anything.


Heard today that they are going to tax you if you don't buy healthcare.

Insurance companies are probably all giddy about that one. I bet the ObamaCorp. buys some of those up next.

I understand what everyone says about Republicans being just as bad; but, at this point, they're our only hope. There are definitely some good guys on the GOP side (Jim DeMint, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Tom Coburn, Sarah Palin, etc.). I'd be hard pressed to name any Dems who could be trusted to stand against their own leadership. So, to say it doesn't matter what party label you wear is living a dream. Can you think of any Democrat who would dare stand up to Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi or the anointed one? Joe Liberman did, and you see what happened to him; they just about handed him his head on a platter.

Wish it were possible to actually think a third-party candidate would have a chance in 2012; but, unfortunately, there's little likelihood of creating the necessary groundswell and big $$$ it would take to make it happen. And, you're always faced with the Perot Factor.

I think the most likely successful scenario would be to throw out all members of Congress unless they're rock-solid conservatives. That means all the blue dog democrats. Although you may like them, they do not have the courage to resist the leadership; and if they did, they would be marginalized in their own party. This would send a message to 2012 the citizens are willing to create their own "term limits." This would send a message to the Senate as well. Truly, I would love to see a strong conservative run against Isakson and win. It would also be a shock to Washington if one-third of the Senate, to be seated in 2011, were all new faces!

DonnaC wrote:

I think the most likely successful scenario would be to throw out all members of Congress unless they're rock-solid conservatives. That means all the blue dog democrats. Although you may like them, they do not have the courage to resist the leadership; and if they did, they would be marginalized in their own party. This would send a message to 2012 the citizens are willing to create their own "term limits." This would send a message to the Senate as well. Truly, I would love to see a strong conservative run against Isakson and win. It would also be a shock to Washington if one-third of the Senate, to be seated in 2011, were all new faces!

I tend to agree with Donna. While the Republicans have turned a blind eye to way too much that has gone on, and they have done very little to benefit The People, at this point they are the tip of our spear if we are seriously going to try and reclaim our country via the political process. However, unless I am mistaken there is a fatal flaw in the idea that we are going to run congress out of there on a rail in 2010. The system is designed to prevent that from happening. Unless I am sorely mistaken, the main problem is that Senators are elected to office for 6 years at a time, and their elections are staggered so that no more than a third of the Senate could be removed from office in any single election cycle. We could effectively replace every Representative in a single cycle, if we can build a strong enough grassroots campaign, but we would be extremely hard-pressed to keep up that effort for three election cycles. The attention span of the public simply isn't that long. So, we could get rid of the Lower House, but the Senate, where the real power brokers reside, would keep the core of it's power and corruption intact. Could we weaken or scare them, yes. Can we get them all out of there? I doubt it very much...However, having them remember that We The People doesn't mean We The Lobby, might be enough to turn the tide back towards sanity and away from tyranny and war.

I'm sorry; I knew that! I should have said the House and one-third of the Senate!

I do think, however, the reality of at least 75% of the House being sent home, alone with a good portion of that one-third of the Senate, would put the fear of God in the rest. But, we need to keep up the drumbeat. We got behind the GOP in 1994 and turned them loose thinking that was all we had to do. Now we know we HAVE to stay informed and stay after them to let them KNOW we're informed, and they're not going to be able to do this stuff under the cover of darkness. I went so far as to print out all of the earmarks attributable to Chambliss and Isakson, and it was an eye opener. This is what we need to do...

So much of what we are dealing with today should have been dealt with in 94-98...I just hope that taxpayer indignation is enough to stop the madman and his cronies up there in Washington before they do fatal damage to our country, if they haven't already.