Tag Archives: Politics

2008 Election, Iran, Media, Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror

Obama The Pot, Bush The Kettle

Not satisfied that he has made a big enough fool of himself over Bush’s speech to the Israeli Knesset by behaving like HE was the focus of the speech and not the appeasers of 1939 or today, the presidential wannabe and Democrat front-runner Barack Obama is now accusing the President of “dishonest, divisive” attacks, all in the context of that speech. And Democrats are circling the wagons around him.

Obama has now become the pot calling the kettle black. How presidential? The fact that there was no attack on Obama personally or Democrats as a party isn’t going to prevent Obama to flat-out lie to the dumb masses about it. The media doesn’t think Bush was talking about Obama. Just Obama and democrats think this is the case.

The president referred to the leader of Iran, who has called for the destruction of the U.S. ally, and then said some seem to believe that we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals – comments Obama and Democrats said were directed at them.

After lying about Bush’s motivations for that speech, he continues . . .

“They aren’t telling you the truth. They are trying to fool you and scare you because they can’t win a foreign policy debate on the merits,” said Obama. “But it’s not going to work. Not this time, not this year.”

I thought Obama was done with debating? That’s what he told Hillary Clinton a few weeks ago. And someone should tell Barack that Bush is not running. McCain would be the best one to debate with. Or for a real challenge, Sean Hannity. But I digress. . . Who is ‘they?’ And what lies have ‘they’ said? Obama did not say either who was lying or what the lie was. And who is the ‘you’ in ‘fool you .. scare you?’ I don’t think the Knesset felt like Bush was trying to fool them or scare them. They know, more than he, what it is like to have to live with missiles and suicide bombers ruining your day.

So the one who is lying and dividing here is Sen. Barack Obama by taking this speech and telling us that it was directed at him and his party, and that it was done to divide the country. Is this Commander In Chief material?

related links: Seattle Times

2008 Election, Iran, Politics, Uncategorized, War On Terror, Whiners

Obama The Negotiator Has Lots Of Company

So why would Sen. Barack Obama think that President Bush was talking about him? Well, other than to make himself a victim again and rouse up the lemmings. Please find below a short list of some prominent democrats on the subject of negotiating with terrorists or terrorist states. H/T to Kathryn Jean Lopez . . .

The president could have been speaking of any number of Democrats. Say, Jimmy Carter, who in April, 2008 said: “Through more official consultations with these outlawed leaders [Hamas and Syria], it may yet be possible to revive and expedite the stalemated peace talks between Israel and its neighbors. In the Middle East, as in Nepal, the path to peace lies in negotiation, not in isolation.”

Or Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, freelance diplomat, who in December 2007 said: “the road to Damascus is a road to peace.”

Or, perhaps he meant Speaker Pelosi in April 2007: “I believe in dialogue. As my colleagues have said over and over again, unless you communicate, you cannot understand each other. You cannot reach agreement.”

Or maybe he meant recent Obama endorser and former North Carolina senator John Edwards, who, according to his own press release in February of last year, believes “the U.S. should step up our diplomatic efforts by engaging in direct talks with all the nations in the region, including Iran and Syria.”

Or Bill Richardson, who has said, about meeting with Iran and Syria: “They’re bad folks … But you don’t have peace talks with your friends.”

It could have been about Congressman Henry Waxman, who in April said: “A Democratic administration would go back and try to open that possibility up for discussions [with Iran] of a grand bargain of one sort or another … Democrats would certainly have seen that as a missed opportunity.”

Or Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich: “I can go to Syria. I can go to Iran and work to craft a path towards peace. And I will … How can you change peopled minds if you don’t meet with them?”

Or former Democratic presidential candidates and senators Chris Dodd and John Kerry, who met with Syria’s al-Assad and said: “As senior Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee, we felt it was important to make clear that while we believe in resuming dialogue, our message is no different: Syria can and should play a more constructive role in the region … We concluded that our conversation was worthwhile, and that … resuming direct dialogue with Syria should be pursued.”

Or the former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, from April 10: “[Diplomats] can deliver some pretty tough messages … You don’t begin with a president of the country, but you do need to talk to your enemy.”

Those democrats.

related link: Obama And Democrats Demand That The Shoe Fits

2008 Election, Politics, War On Terror

Obama And Democrats Demand That The Shoe Fits

President Bush addressed the Israeli Knesset today as part of his Middle East tour that included Israel’s 60th birthday. In his address, Bush recounts Israel’s history and WWII. Pointing out how, in history, there were (as there always are) some people who thought Hitler could be talked to and negotiated with. With history behind him, Bush points out how that kind of thinking was just as wrong then as it is in dealing with the Islamofascists of today, otherwise called the ‘war on terror.’

From the transcript, in speaking about the war on terror, here is what Bush said. Look for a reference to Democrats or Obama.

This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.

And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the “elimination” of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant “Death to Israel, Death to America!” That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that “the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties.” And that is why the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. (Applause.)

OK fine. So what does the left do with that statement? They are making an issue out of whole cloth with this, accusing Bush of attacking Obama. Aside from the fact that Bush was talking about Israel and all its enemies, Democrats are circling the wagons around Barack Obama as though protecting him from an ‘unprecedented attack.’ These democrats and the Obama campaign are jumping up and down screaming, YES, the shoe fits just fine, yet they don’t like it.

What is most interesting is that Obama is showing his thin-skin, his amateur and naive approach to world war and peace, and his downright arrogance that anyone who articulates what amounts to his policy beliefs is attacking him. As opposed to suggesting that McCain is ‘loosing his bearings’ I guess. That’s different. What it is, is an attempt to condition you to believe that articulating a policy position is an attack, irregardless of the fact that no names were, or even have to be, given.

related links: Bush Speech Criticized as Attack on Obama | Obama says Bush falsely accuses him of appeasement | President Bush Addresses Members of the Knesset | A Whole Wide World Beyond Obama

afterthought: The last para is the one that is giving Obama and Co. the heartburn, but the preceding para sets up the last one. Does this mean they will demand an apology for being referred to as ‘good and decent’ people?

2008 Election, Media, Politics, Uncategorized

Does McCain-Feingold Work?

Since its inception three years ago, the bill that was supposed to take the corruption out of Washington politics has done everything but. It has done exactly what critics of the bill said it would do. That is, it silenced certain political speech while at the same time giving exponential power to the media in political campaigns.

The ‘unintended?’ consequences of McCain-Feingold are no better explained than Ann Coulter’s column called ‘HOW TO KEEP REAGAN OUT OF OFFICE.’

How did we end up with the mainstream media picking the Republican candidate for president?

What a bizarre coincidence that a few years after the most draconian campaign-finance laws were imposed via McCain-Feingold, our two front-runners happen to be the media’s picks! It’s uncanny — almost as if by design! (Can I stop now, or do you people get sarcasm?)

By prohibiting speech by anyone else, the campaign-finance laws have vastly magnified the power of the media — which, by the way, are wholly exempt from speech restrictions under campaign-finance laws. The New York Times doesn’t have to buy ad time to promote a politician; it just has to call McCain a “maverick” 1 billion times a year.

McCain-Feingold ought to be repealed.

related links: HOW TO KEEP REAGAN OUT OF OFFICE | Questions For John McCain and Russ Feingold | Way More Than The Lincoln Bedroom | FEC Fines Democrat 527’s

Politics, Venezuela

Chavez Nationalizes Steelmaker Ternium-Sidor

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez took over, stole, nationalized the largest steelmaker in Venezuela, Ternium-Sidor. Chavez’s minister of basic industries and mining, Rodolfo Sanz, has been appointed as the new company president, and has given the company until the end of June to hand it over.

In the past two years the Venezuelan state has taken over foreign-controlled companies (Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips) including cement, telecoms, oil, gas and electricity firms, print and broadcast media. Now the hemisphere’s idiot, President Hugo Chavez, is taking over the steelmaker after trade union talks broke down last month. The workers wanted better pay and benefits.

A better example could not be made to highlight the failure of socialism and communism. While sitting on one of the worlds largest supplies of natural resources, the Venezuelan people can’t afford what little food is still on shelves in the grocery stores, some of which have also been nationalized.

And yet, he is still the dictator that Democrats love to coddle.

related links: Venezuela takes over steel firm

Energy, Politics, Uncategorized, Venezuela

Chavez May Thank Democrats for H.R.5351

Yes, he can thank Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) and 36 co-sponsors, all democrats, for passing H.R.5351, to provide incentives as only Democrats can. What they call tax incentives, is actually an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies and oil producers. But not all companies and producers. CITGO, Hugo Chavez’s oil company (as opposed to the other U.S. oil companies that he seized in Venezuela last year) would be exempt.

So this is how Democrats in Washington plan on fixing our energy problem of high prices and oil dependency? You punish the only people here that can help, and you reward the hemisphere’s idiot, Hugo Chavez. And as an added bonus, we continue to be dependent on OPEC, Venezuela, and Russia for resources that we have but are unwilling to get ourselves.

On February 27, the Democrat-led U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 5351 — legislation that increases taxes some $18 billion on American oil and gas producers — guaranteeing higher prices at the gas pump for U.S. consumers — while at the same time leaving intact tax breaks for Venezuela’s state-run oil company CITGO.

That’s right; the House-passed legislation exempts one of the most anti-American dictators in the world, Hugo Chavez, from the massive tax increase.

The Sierra Club, a Democrat special interest group, refers to this bill as ‘climate change legislation.’ No surprise there. The next stop for the bill is the Senate. Now would be the time to let your senators know your objection to this bill.

related link: Center for Individual Freedom

2008 Election, Energy, Politics

National Energy Day

Everybody is talking about energy today. It’s like a tug of war between those that want energy and those that don’t. President Bush is talking about getting some. Using ANWR for its intended purpose, oil & gas drilling, and building more refineries. Without more refineries, all the crude oil in the world won’t help the supply if it can’t be refined. And, thanks to the environmentalist movement, it has been thirty-two years (1976) since a new refinery has been built in the United States. President Bush from the Rose Garden today . . .

I’ve repeatedly submitted proposals to help address these problems. Yet time after time, Congress chose to block them. One of the main reasons for high gas prices is that global oil production is not keeping up with growing demand. Members of Congress have been vocal about foreign governments increasing their oil production; yet Congress has been just as vocal in opposition to efforts to expand our production here at home.

The cost of a gallon of gas has become news, as is the economy, and not so much Iraq. Everyone, and two out of three presidential candidates, would like to see lower gas prices, or so you would think? The fact is the environmentalist lobby and those anti-capitalists that have the ears and wallets of Washington actually like high gas prices. They’d be even happier if the prices keep going up. It is believed that they would reach nirvana when everyone quits buying it.

The logo of the environmental movement seems to be the polar bear. The environmental wackos use polar bear images in all of their propaganda. But I digress. Also in today’s news is this effort, by ‘environmentalists,’ to put a stick in the spokes of oil production, based on whether the polar bear remains on the endangered species ‘list.’ Polar bear populations are growing, have been for years.

Whether the polar bear remains means this . . .

If it is listed, campaigners will argue that anything that might impinge on the creature’s habitat, such as recently announced plans for oil and gas exploration off the Alaskan coast, must either be cancelled or put under much more rigorous scrutiny.

And if it is not listed? They lawyer up . . .

[t]o keep it off the list entirely – an option which would immediately lead to further legal action from the conservation coalition.

You like the high cost of gas, and food? Thank the environmental ‘movement’ and spineless politicians that refuse to stand up to them.

related links: ANWR 101 | ANWR | US ordered to act on polar bear | The White House

2008 Election, Media, MRIOTD, Politics

Olbermann, Rush Calls For Riots

1 Comment

What happens when people who don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh criticize him? It can manifest itself in the person of Keith Olbermann who last night accused Rush of trying to start rioting at the Democratic national convention.

If Olbermann listened to Rush enough to get to know him, he wouldn’t have shown us just how shallow he is in this characterization of Rush. The context is that Rush was playing his CinC USOC role, based on what ‘democratics’ would do if the super delegates went contrary to the popular vote. Obama had the popular vote at the time. It is not a stretch to think that the convention would degrade just like it did in 1968. Especially since there is an activist group in Denver called ‘Recreate ’68.’

The Most Ridiculous Item Of The Day award goes to Keith Olbermann at pMSNBC.

video link

related link: Maggie’s Notebook

Politics

Pelosi's Religious Act

In typical Liberal fashion, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) exhibits her religious roots by fabricating what she claimed were quotes from the Bible.

You have to ask yourself, does this performance portray deeply held religious beliefs, or was it a political act meant to appeal to religious voters? You know, those bitter and out of touch Americans.

When you consider that she has used this ‘quote’ in several communications and appearances on ‘Earth Day’ and for similar liberal conservationist audiences, what she is actually doing is trying to give the environmentalist wackos some religious creds, no matter how fake it is.

On Earth Day, Nancy Pelosi quoted the Bible: “The Bible tells us in the Old Testament, ‘To minister to the needs of God’s creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.’ On this Earth Day, and every day, let us honor the earth and our future generations with a commitment to fight climate change.”

There’s a problem with her quote. It does not exist in the Bible. No surprise. Liberals see things in the U.S. Constitution that are not there either.

h/t Michelle Malkin