Obama's Unilateral Foreign Policy, a far cry from Bush's Multilateral Approach

Yesterday I cited an article from Reuters which stated that the British government had expressed anger over the Obama administration's decision to release 4 Uighur detainees from Guantanamo bay into the Caribbean island of Bermuda, a British overseas territory.

The Reuters piece went on to say that "in a sign of the sensitivity of the issue, the State Department said U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed the matter with British Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Thursday. However, Reuters added "when asked if U.S. authorities had consulted the British government, [a State Department] official said: "We did talk to them before the Uighurs got on the plane."...

Heh...

Today the Guardian UK writes:

Taken by surprise by news of the Uighurs arrival, Britain's foreign secretary, David Miliband, is understood to have had an uneasy telephone conversation with the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, about why London was not told...

A senior Labour MP accused the US of "riding roughshod" over British legal rights in pursuit of its own interests.

"The proper authority here is the British government and the US should have consulted with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office before they did anything of this kind," Mike Gapes, the chairman of the Commons foreign affairs committee, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One.

"I wonder what promises have been given to the Bermudans, potentially about going a bit soft on the tax haven status or something else as a quid pro quo."

Well, Mr Gapes, I'm sure you are aware of the cash handouts that Obama is handing out to Bermuda. If not, you can read my previous post for more information on the whole quid pro quo deal.

Apparently, Mr Obama has decided to take a unilateral approach with regards to his foreign policy decisions, clearly straying from the multilateral approach of his predecessor George W. Bush, who closely coordinated his foreign policy decisions with America's long-time European allies.

Ah yes, but who can forget what Obama said back in April at a town hall speech in Strasbourg, France:

Mr. Obama directly addressed the strain between America and Europe over the past several years, saying the relationship has drifted...

"In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world… there have been times where America's shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive," he said... "I've come to Europe this week to renew our partnership."

"Renew our partnership"? Heh....

Oh, and here's another interesting quote from Obama's speech:

"I think it is important for Europe to understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not president, al Qaeda is still a threat."

Nevertheless, now that Obama is president, the four released Uighurs - who once trained in Osama Bin Laden's camps in Tora Bora - are apparently no longer a threat.

Aren't you glad Mr. Bush is no longer president?

Obama has "rebooted our image" abroad, eh?

Praise the Messiah!

From a March 2008 article in the Telegraph UK, entitled, 'Barack Obama 'will repair image of US in UK':

America needs to work hard to regain the trust of the British public..., a senior adviser to Barack Obama says today.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Samantha Power, who is a key member of the Presidential hopeful's foreign policy team, says... "a restoration of trust will have to occur between the US Government and the British public... People still want to believe in the USA."

The "special relationship" between Britain and America would, she believes become stronger if Mr Obama won the White House because he would make voters in this country warm to the United States.

"Obama reminds people of the better angels of America," she said.

Mr Obama would also try to heal the divisions between Europe and America, caused by the war in Iraq. "Obama can go door-to-door in Europe and say, 'Look like you I opposed the war in Iraq but what are we going to do together about Al Qaeda?'"

Why not send the entire Al Qaeda organization to Bermuda, all expenses paid? [Without informing our British allies, of course.] Eh?

The United States must show more respect for international institutions, she adds. "We have to show that we know we can't do it alone...

Ahem....

If Mr Obama wins the Presidential race [Samantha Power] is likely to remain a powerful force.

"I'd do anything he asked me to do," she said. "It's not about working for the next President of the United States, it's Obama. If he ran General Motors I'd be working for him."

Little did she know at the time, Obama would soon be running General Motors and would eventually become GM's de facto CEO.

Sigh.......

Obama frees 4 Al Qaeda Thugs, but he'll defeat Al Qaeda anyway, so he says

From Reuters:

Four Chinese detainees from Guantanamo Bay arrived in Bermuda on Thursday after being freed by U.S. authorities in the Obama administration's latest move to close the controversial prison camp for terror suspects...

Attorneys for the four Muslim men, who were held for seven years before being cleared by U.S. authorities as terrorism suspects, said they will take part in Bermuda's foreign guest worker program...

What?! These thugs were "cleared by U.S. authorities as terrorism suspects"?

Their lawyers said the four men -- Huzaifa Parhat, Abdul Semet, Abdul Nasser and Jalal Jalaladiny -- never took hostile action against the United States and were sold to U.S. forces by bounty hunters.

Heh. Here's what a Department of Defense memo, has to say about Huzaifa Parhat:

The detainee is associated with al Qaida and the Taliban:

The detainee departed China in May 2001 and traveled to Tora Bora, Afghanistan via Pakistan.

The detainee received training on the Kalashnikov [sic] AK-47 assault rifle and other light weapons at a Uighur training camp in Tora Bora, Afghanistan.

The training camp was provided to the Uighurs by the Taliban.

The East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) operated facilities in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in which Uighur expatriates underwent small arms training.

The camps were funded by Bin Laden and the Taliban.

The detainee lived at the Uighur training camp from early June through mid-October 2001 until the United States bombing campaign that destroyed the camp.

So he was cleared as a terrorism suspect by US authorities, aye? I don't have a good PDF reader with me right now, so I'm not going to look up the info on the other detainees, but I'm sure it's all the same deal.

Click here, if you want to read the PDF file yourselves. Clearly, this administration is outright lying about these thugs. Pathetic! But let's get back to the Reuters' article:

Britain expressed concerns about the move and said it had asked for and would help Bermuda conduct a security assessment of the four men, who do not have travel documents and cannot leave the British overseas territory.

"We have underlined to the Bermuda government that it should have consulted the United Kingdom on whether this falls within their competence or is a foreign affairs or security issue for which the Bermuda Government do not have delegated responsibility," said a spokesperson for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London.

In a sign of the sensitivity of the issue, the State Department said U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed the matter with British Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Thursday.

But if Hillary Clinton did indeed discuss the matter with David Miliband, how come the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London says Britain was not consulted?

Bear in mind that David Milibrand recently conducted a meeting with Hezbollah officials, so we know where he's coming from...

Back to the Reuter's piece:

When asked if U.S. authorities had consulted the British government, [a State Department] official said: "We did talk to them before the Uighurs got on the plane."...

The State Department's got a sense of humor. Cute!

So who knows, maybe Miliband only found about the move right before the terrorists had boarded the plane. But apparently, the rest of the British government only found about it after the thugs had already arrived at their destination.

Perhaps, it was a surprise gift from Hillary to the British government. After all, who doesn't like a nice surprise!

Meanwhile, the UK's Daily Express writes:

Britain has been handed a humiliating snub by US president Barack Obama...

It emerged last night that, astonishingly, the US did not consult the UK government, which is responsible for the island’s security.

Questions: If Obama hasn't already lost favor with the Britsh people - as a result of his previous snubbing of the UK - are the Brits still fawning over him now, even after this latest incident? Has it finally dawned upon them that Obama is actually more concerned with appeasing the enemy than he is in currying favor with Britain, a staunch US ally? Hmmm?

Here's a couple of more interesting tidbits:

The tropical Pacific island nation of Palau said on Wednesday it had agreed to temporarily take the [17] Uighurs as a humanitarian gesture and to help President Barack Obama close the prison. [Now that 4 of the Uighurs have gone to Bermuda] the remaining 13 Uighurs could still go to Palau...

Palau Foreign Minister Sandra Pierantozzi was quoted as saying the United States had promised to pay $85,000 for each prisoner Palau accepts...

Hmmm......

But wait, there's more:

In an interview with the Spiegel Online, Palau President Johnson Toribiong denied that he had agreed to accept up to 17 Uighurs in exchange for a $200 million quid pro quo payment:

SPIEGEL ONLINE: ...Two unnamed State Department officials [claim] Palau's acceptance of the refugees was part of a quid pro quo arrangement in which the US agreed to pay Palau $200 million. This allegation has been widely reported. Is it true?

TORIBIONG: It is completely spurious. We do not link this gesture of good will and humanity to the negotiations over the review of the compact of free association between Palau and the US. If we did, it would undermine the quality of our humanitarian gesture...

In other words, Palau will likely receive $200 million from the Obama administration, but it's not a quid pro quo payment. Obama just happens to have some extra money left over in his stimulus package, so why not give the Palaus some of the dough to help them stimulate their own economy?

So now you know where your tax dollars are going: To help destitute Al Qaeda thugs relocate. Sounds like a most magnanimous and charitable act, indeed.

Oh man, my eyes are tearing. Handkerchief, please....

At least we can all rest assured knowing that when Obama and his minions aren't dolling out cash to ACORN to get out the vote, they're at least dolling out millions to assist the needy. With our tax dollars, of course.

As the venerable Joe Biden is wont to say: Paying taxes is the patriotic thing to do, especially when you're assisting the destitute and the homeless.

I would prefer to call it "empathy", but "patriotic" sounds about right too.

Oh man! My eyes are tearing again...

Obama & Ahmadinejad, Redistributing the Wealth?

Barack Obama and his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have a lot in common, at least in terms of their economic policies.

Both Obama and Ahmadinejad won their respective presidencies - Obama in '08 and Ahmadinejad in '05 - based on a platform of economic justice and wealth redistribution, and both of them have embarked on massive government spending sprees to bring about their promise of economic salvation.

Meanwhile, the Iranian president's fiscal policies have only exacerbated Iran's economic woes. Since taking office Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has engaged in a populist spending campaign that critics say has severely boosted inflation and left the country's budget for the next Iranian year, ending March 20, 2010, with a fiscal deficit of up to $44 billion.

But in spite of this, the Iranian president insists his economic policies are working. Ahmadinejad recently claimed that the rate of inflation [in Iran] was standing at 15 percent. Financial officials maintain that the annual inflation rate is actually standing at 25 percent. [On Tuesday, Ahmadinejad acknowledged that inflation was at 25 percent.]

In 2006, Iran's Deputy Minister of Labor and Social Affairs stated that the government was determined to both cut the unemployment rate to 8.4 percent by the end of 2110 and to create 900,000 jobs each and every year during that period. Unemployment in Iran is now in double figures.

Likewise, the Obama administration has embarked on a massive government spending spree, and just a few months ago insisted that unemployment in the US would top out at 8 percent if congress passed the stimulus ["spending spree"] bill. The unemployment rate now stands at 9.4 percent, the highest in more than 25 years.

And while the US economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs since the stimulus bill was passed, the Obama administration claims the stimulus package "created or saved" over 150,000 jobs. But independent experts say those estimates are merely "based on macroeconomic models and projections", and contend that it is very difficult to measure the number of jobs created.

According to Harvard economist, Greg Mankiw, the expression 'create or save jobs' - a term regularly employed by the Obama administration - is both disingenuous and "an act of political genius."

"You can measure how many jobs are created between two points in time," Mankiw says , "but there is no way to measure how many jobs are saved."

Nevertheless, Barack Obama and his Iranian counterpart have pledged to stimulate their countries' economies and to spread their nations' wealth. But so far they've only managed to spread poverty and unemployment, and to stimulate government spending and deficits.

This would be the perfect time for these two distinguished leaders to meet with one another, not to discuss foreign policy, but to recalibrate their wealth redistribution policies. For indeed, as the old adage goes: "Two heads are better than one". All the more so, when you have two great minds that actually think alike...

European Socialists to rename themselves Democrats?

From the AP:

Right-leaning parties hailed European Parliament victories [on Sunday] as a vote against stimulus spending and corporate bailouts, pledging Monday to forge ahead with conservative approaches to the economic crisis.

The Socialists, who dominated the last vote in 2004, suffered a stinging defeat, barely clinging to the No. 2 spot.

"Tonight is a very difficult evening for Socialists in many nations in Europe," said Martin Schulz, the leader of the Socialists in the European Parliament. "(We will) continue to fight for social democracy in Europe."...

According to the Financial Times, some European socialists are now contemplating "possibly changing their name to 'Democrats'. The thinking is that a different title might help the group..."

Ironically, when Republicans last month proposed that Democrats rename their party the "Democrat Socialist Party", the DNC responded that the Republican proposal reflected a political party so devoid of ideas that it was resorting to "name calling" and "petty politics."

But apparently, European socialists agree with the Republicans' assessment that the Democratic Party and Socialist Party are one and the same - especially, with Obama now running the Democratic Party.

"Name calling"? "Petty politics"? I don't think so.

It's called "Change"!

"Change you can believe in!".....

The Historical Legacy of George Tiller, renowned Abortionist & Obama Campaign Donor

With the sudden demise of the esteemed physician and late-term abortionist, Dr. George Tiller, President Obama has lost not only a staunch ideological ally - who shared his fervent passion for abortion - he lost a valuable campaign contributor too.

Over the years, Mr. Tiller dolled out hundreds of thousands of dollars to various political candidates in his home state of Kansas and in out-of-state races to ensure that his abortion clinic and baby crematoriums remain operative - including $210,000 in campaign contributions in a failed bid to prevent a pro-life candidate, Mr. Phill Kline, from becoming Attorney General in the state of Kansas.

Mr. Kline ultimately won the election and eventually went on to indict Mr. Tiller for performing illegal and late-term abortions on girls as young as 10 years of age. The charges, though, were later dismissed due to technical and procedural reasons.

One of the lucky recipients of Mr. Tiller's campaign contributions, was none other than our current president, Barack Obama.

During the 2008 primary season, Tiller donated $20,000 to Barack Obama's fund-raising arm, the "Committee for Change".

Thus, the pain and agony over the death of such a staunch ideological ally and personal campaign donor - was clearly palpable and evident in Obama's statement on Sunday, when he expressed both "shock" and "outrage" over Mr. Tiller's brutal demise.

But the legacy of George Tiller - including the more than 60,000 abortions that he performed during his lifetime - will forever live on. The myriad of campaign contributions that he dolled out to Barack Obama and other Democrats, so that countless of unwanted fetuses could be cremated and laid to their final resting place, will forever remain etched in the hearts of his political beneficiaries and eternally inscribed in the annals of Democratic Party lore.

P.S. A detailed account of Mr. Tiller's lifetime achievements, including testimonials from his clients, photos of his baby crematoriums and the rest of his wonderful legacy can be found here.

Obama: "Tiller's Murder, an act of 'hopelessness' and 'Despair!"

Upon learning Sunday of the shooting death of Mr. George Tiller - a Kansas physician who performed late-term abortions - President Obama immediately issued a statement imploring the American people to display a bit of empathy toward the killer and to try to understand the motive behind his act of brutality.

"Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved family of Mr. Tiller," the statement read, "I must also hope that we as a nation draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy... We must engage in the difficult task of understanding the source of the murderer's madness."

"Such a failure of empathy... most often grows out of a climate of... helplessness and despair... Thus, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered, anti-abortion vigilantes..."

Okay, okay, I admit, Obama never said that!

Here's what Obama actually said on Sunday:

"I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

Nice, short, and to the point.

However, shortly after the 9/11 attacks - in which thousands of Americans were brutally murdered at the hands of Islamic terrorists - Obama issued a statement almost identical to the bogus statement I had attributed to him earlier:

Here's what Obama said shortly after 9/11:

"Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved families, I must also hope that we as a nation draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy... We must engage in the difficult task of understanding the source of such madness.

"Such a failure of empathy [on the part of the terrorists]... most often... grows out of a climate of... helplessness and despair... We will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe..."

Unlike his statement on Sunday, Obama exudes quite a bit of empathy toward the 9/11 killers. And rightfully so, the Tiller murder was an act of sheer brutality. 9/11, on the other hand - as Obama explained so eloquently - was a simple act of "helplessness and despair"......

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Ultimate Flip-Flopper!

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the flip-floppin', pseudo-Republican, veritable Democrat governor of California, decided to take a jab at Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday, so I've decided to return the favor and post some videos in honor of the Governator.

Schwarzenegger, during the presidential campaign, praised Obama's flip-flops. "I think it is great!" he exclaimed. He also suggested that he'd be willing to serve in Obama's cabinet, if asked to do so. "I'm alway ready to help in any way I can... I'd take his call now and I'd take his call if he [is elected] President, any time!":



Schwarzenegger Mocks Obama at a McCain campaign rally:



The Governator extolls the president's courageous leadership, calling Obama's economic stimulus package, "the greatest package!":



Schwarzenegger derides single-payer and government-run healthcare:



The Governator speaks out in favor of Universal Healthcare [please excuse the graphics]:



Schwarzenegger parody:

A Thanksgiving message from the Governator:



Mitt Romneys son, Matt, employs a few Schwarzenegger sound bites to prank call his dad while hes on the campaign trail. "Let's help Mitt Romney relax a little bit," says Matt:



The End.

Biden Mocks Obama! - Teleprompter Joke

I noticed that some recent visitors of this blog arrived at a particular post of mine after doing a Google search on the words 'Biden Mocks Obama'. However, that particular post was probably not the object of their quest. But I think I found what they were looking for:

Vice President Biden delivered a speech at the Air Force Academy in Colorado on Wednesday. In the middle of the speech, the teleprompter had fallen down due to heavy winds, prompting the Vice President to crack a joke about the "windy air" of Colorado and President Obama's use of the teleprompter:



I suppose the Vice President was getting in his retribution for all the ridicule and scorn that the President has heaped upon him the past several months....

Release the Rashid Khalidi Video now!

President Obama recently backtracked on a promise he had made to release photos showing alleged abuse of terrorist detainees, saying the release of the photos would endanger US troops abroad.

The LA Times promptly criticized the president's decision and called on him to release the photos.

"The Obama administration is wrong in withholding the pictures," the Times wrote, "...Let's not forget Obama's promise, on his second day in office, to 'hold myself as president to a new standard of openness'."

However, the Times' call for "openness" is a bit paradoxical to say the least, considering the following:

During the presidential campaign, the LA Times refused to post a videotape it had obtained of a 2003 banquet where then-state Sen. Barack Obama spoke of his friendship with former Arafat adviser, Rashid Khalidi. Former Weather underground terrorists, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were also in attendance. Several speakers at the event uttered highly inflammatory remarks about Israel, including one speaker who compared Israeli settlers to Osama bin Laden.

Other unconfirmed sources claim that Obama himself had uttered highly inflammatory remarks about Israel.

"It would be really controversial if [the videotape] got out," the source said. "Tha'ts why [the LA Times] will not even let a transcript get out."

Nevertheless, regardless of whether the latter allegation is true or not, the Times clearly suppressed the videotape, knowing that posting it would very likely impact Obama's presidential campaign.

No one but the LA Times and those who attended the dinner know the full scope of what was said at the event, which is why the McCain campaign and others pleaded with the Times to release the videotape. But the Times, rather than fulfill its journalistic obligation, chose instead to protect Obama in order to ensure him a smooth path to the presidency.

But unlike the detainee photos, releasing the Khalidi video would not endanger anyone [although it may hurt the president politically]. Hence, if the Times believes, that in the spirit of "openness", Obama should release the detainee photos, then the Times should also release the Khalidi video, in the spirit of "openness" and in the spirit of not being hypocritical.

Thus, I hereby call on the LA Times to release the Khalidi videotape now - in the spirit of "openness" and in the spirit of being true to one's purported convictions!

H/T - Todd Garrick

Gen. Casey: US combat troops to remain in Iraq for 10 years

"I have chosen a timeline that will remove our combat brigades [from Iraq] over the next 18 months... Let me say this as plainly as I can: by August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."
Barack Obama addressing US troops at Camp Lejeune - Feb. 2009

From the AP - May 26, 2009:

The Pentagon is prepared to leave fighting forces in Iraq for as long as a decade despite an agreement between the United States and Iraq that would bring all American troops home by 2012, the top U.S. Army officer said Tuesday.

Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, said the world remains dangerous and unpredictable, and the Pentagon must plan for extended U.S. combat and stability operations in two wars...

He said his planning envisions combat troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade as part of a sustained U.S. commitment to fighting extremism and terrorism in the Middle East...

Casey said... the military was preparing to have a fighting force deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan for years to come...

This scenario, he said, must take into account that "we're going to have 10 Army and Marine units deployed for a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan."

"Let me say this as plainly as I can: by August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."

Chryslergate?

Rush Limbaugh popped the following question last week. The Chrysler corporation recently announced it was shutting down over 700 car dealerships. But many of these dealerships were doing quite well. So why would Chrysler close down highly profitable dealerships?

From RushLimbaugh.com:

Rush: ...I could only hazard a guess here. Do you think that the Obama administration -- "working with" Chrysler, heh, heh, heh; working with the automobile manufacturers, working with the dealers... are targeting dealerships that happen to be run and owned by Republicans? I don't know this.

I'm being led to speculate because Mr. Anderer [a successful Long Island, New York, Chrysler dealer] says he doesn't know why his high-performing dealership was shut down, and he can't find a formula. He can't find a coherent plan to explain why they're shutting down successful dealerships in the Chrysler network...

Rush was only speculating at the time, but according to preliminary research done by several Conservative bloggers, it looks like the overwhelming majority of car dealerships slated for closure are indeed GOP contributors or have donated to Obama's rivals in the democratic primary.

Director Blue expounds on this; Gateway Pundit as well. Check out these 2 blogs for more details.

On May 20, after reviewing the first 5 pages of the Chrysler closings report, the CDCDI blog came up with the following numbers:

During the 2004 Presidential Election, the dealers gave:

$10,500 to President Bush
$1,000 to General Wesley Clark (D)
$500 to Rep. Dick Gephardt (D).

During the 2008 Presidential Election, they gave:

$7,150 to John McCain
$2,300 to Gov. Mitt Romney
$500 to Gov. Mike Huckabee
$1,950 to Sen. Hillary Clinton
$0 to Pres. Obama

Also, since the 2004 Election cycle, the dealers analyzed so far gave:

$113,400 to the RNC and the State Republican Parties
$1,000 to the State Democratic Parties (Arkansas Democrat Party).

And on May 23, after analyzing 3/4 of the dealership closings, CDCDI'S findings reveals once again that the overwhelming majority of dealerships forced to shut down were indeed owned by GOP contributors. Click here for the full list.

Shall we call this latest round of thuggery "Chryslergate"? Why not.

But have no fear Obamalites, leave it to the master prevaricator to extract himself from this mess. He always does........

P.S. There are some who will claim that the overwhelming majority of affluent Americans are Republicans and thus, the majority of car dealers, are likely to be Republicans too. But according to a Nov. 2007 study conducted by the Heritage foundation, "more than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats. This new political demography holds true in the House of Representatives" too. What's more, according to Newsweek Magazine, Americans "making $200,000 or more (6 percent of the electorate) voted for Obama 52-46, while McCain won the merely well-off - $100,000 to $150,000 - by a 51-48 margin and $150,000 to $200,000 by a 50-48 margin). "

'The Axis of Virtue', a Dream Come True!

Intelligence reports coming out of Israel suggest that Venezuela has been supplying Iran with uranium and that Tehran has been setting up Hezbollah terror cells in north Venezuela.

Now, I haven't the foggiest notion who's supplying uranium to Iran, but if Venezuela is indeed the culprit, it really shouldn't be much of a concern to us. On the contrary, we now have a president who's expressed a genuine interest in negotiating with both the leaders of Iran and Venezuela. The president already had an amiable, albeit, brief chat with Hugo Chavez several weeks ago. Thus, the ice has already been broken, at least with regards to Venezuela.

The rest is easy as pie.

Obama need only to meet with Hugo Chavez and appeal to him to stop supplying uranium to Iran. Then he just needs to sit down with Mr. Ahmadinejad and implore him not to accept any more uranium from Mr. Chavez. That's all, it's really quite simple! Perhaps Obama could even borrow a page from Mr. Chavez' playbook and present Mr. Ahmadinejad with a signed copy of his best selling book, The Audacity of Hope. For ultimately, it is these kind of small but significant gestures that have the power to create affectionate and enduring relationships with rogue leaders.

Admitedly, just a few short months ago this all would have been but a chimerical and fanciful illusion. But now, with Obama at the helm, there's a certain sense of audacity and a feeling of hope in the air. What began many years ago as a simple dream from a father has now evolved into reality and has become a vehicle of change that is steadily transforming our past relationships with rogue tyrants.

What's more, if Kim Jong-il ever decides to meet with the president, Iran, Venezuela and North Korea could ultimately become a veritable Axis of Virtue!... How great is that!

Indeed, just a few short months ago this all would have been but an absurd fantasy. But as the Wonder of Obama begins to unfold before our very eyes, it is clear that the Free World has never been safer than it is right now....

"Yes We Can", the Sweet Sound of "Change"!

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday lashed out at his challengers in the upcoming Iranian presidential elections for facilitating a policy of "detente" with the West.

"The previous government (of Mohammad Khatami) which followed a detente policy de facto eradicated the goals of the nation and intended to accept a status which others (West) had planned to impose on us," Ahmadinejad said.

Ahmadinejad blamed his predecessor for having signed what he called the "disgraceful accord" in 2003 in Tehran with foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany, which saw Iran agreed to suspend its nuclear work.

"The nuclear accord at that time was a symbol of helplessness and compromise - the government at that time used detente as pretext for suspending all nuclear works for making our enemies more demanding," Ahmadinejad said.

"Fortunately the people returned to their revolutionary goals and chose the slogan of 'WE CAN' which eventually led to a change in the country's politics." he added.

Similarly, it was the slogan "YES WE CAN", which eventually led to a change in US politics, creating a policy of detente with the "revolutionary" and tyrannical leader of Iran......

"WE CAN, YES WE CAN!" HIP HIP HOORAY!

Related posts:
Ahmadinejad Admits Iran is Developing nuclear weapons, The Facade has been shattered

Ahmadinejad: "Appeasement will only Embolden the Enemy!" - The West

Ahmadinejad: Appeasement will only Embolden the Enemy!

Yep, you read the post-title correctly!

Barack Obama can't seem to comprehend that point, but the Iranian President understands quite well that you can't appease the enemy or make compromises with them:

"Unfortunately, today there are some people who think that compromise with enemies will remove threats," Ahmadinejad said in a speech [on Wednesday], "but experience has shown that whenever Iran softens its stance the enemies are emboldened."

Winston Churchill couldn't have expressed himself more eloquently than that.

A short note to Barack Obama:

Mr. President, you really need to sit down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and chat with him for a while. The Iranian President can teach you a few lessons about compromises, appeasement and life in general. Trust me, you'll learn something from him. I'll even pay your airfare......

Ahmadinejad Admits Iran is Developing nuclear weapons, The Facade has been shattered

From the AP:

Iran's hard-line president criticized as "disgraceful" a 2003 deal his predecessor reached with Europe to freeze the country's nuclear program, saying his own decision to stand up to the West restored Iran's dignity.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been touting Iran's nuclear achievements ahead of the June presidential election, hoping to offset criticism from his opponents that he has spent too much time slamming the West and not enough focused on the country's faltering economy.

Well, well, well, Americans have been criticizing Obama for spending too much time slamming Dick Cheney and the Bush administration, rather than focusing on America's problems [see the recent survey at the end of my previous post], and lo and behold, Obama's Iranian counterpart is receiving the exact same criticism from his fellow countrymen. Heh....

Former President Mohammad Khatami, a reformist who favors 'improving ties with the West', struck a deal with Britain, France and Germany in October 2003 to suspend Iran's uranium enrichment program and give the U.N. nuclear watchdog unrestricted access to the country's nuclear facilities.

Clarification: The Mullahs suspended their uranium enrichment program in October of 2003, not because they wanted "to improve ties with the West", but because the US invasion of Iraq in March of 2003 [7 months earlier] had them shaking in their boots.

The deal, which was signed at Sa'adabad Palace in Tehran, was aimed at easing Western fears that Iran was seeking to build nuclear weapons...

"Enemies have designed colonial policies. When they drew up the disgraceful agreement in their Sa'adabad meeting, they considered the Iranian nation finished," Ahmadinejad was quoted by his Web site as telling a group of Iranians on Wednesday in Semnan, 125 miles east of Tehran.

Iran tested a new missile in Semnan on Wednesday capable of striking Israel, U.S. Mideast bases and parts of Europe, a launch that also burnished Ahmadinejad's hard-line reputation ahead of the June 12 election.

Khatami actually reversed the nuclear freeze and resumed uranium reprocessing activities in August 2005, shortly before Ahmadinejad took office. He acted in response to international demands to permanently halt Iran's nuclear program.

Wrong! Khatami's reversal had nothing to do with international demands, but rather he took notice of how the Dems were ganging up on President Bush, criticizing him for going to war with Iraq and labeling him a warmonger. Consequently, Khatami realized he could now resume full speed ahead with his nuclear program, for the Democrats in congress were now watching his back.

Ahmadinejad said his resistance to caving in to international pressure led to Iran mastering the enrichment process. He said Iran's nuclear abilities prevented the U.S. from invading the country after wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But I thought Iran was only processing low-grade uranium to produce alternative energy! How could Iran's nuclear abilities prevent the U.S. from invading Iran, if it wasn't developing weapons-grade uranium?

Hmmm......

Yes, I know, the Obamalites will respond to this argument, claiming that even if the Iranians were developing nuclear weapons, they don't have them yet, so this must have been mere rhetoric on Ahmadinejad's part.

Perhaps, but one thing seems pretty clear: Ahmadinejad spilled the beans and admitted Iran was indeed developing nuclear weapons, otherwise, its nuclear cabilities could not have possibly prevented the U.S. from invading Iran, as Ahmadinejad had suggested.

So next time the Iranian President insists his country's nuclear program is solely designed for energy purposes, we have his own admission clearly proving otherwise. Which means Ahmadinejad has dropped his facade once-and-for-all. The fake, phony ElBaradei and his IAEA minions can go home now, we really don't need them anymore. [Not that we ever really needed them in the first place.]

The Obama administration has stepped up diplomatic efforts to convince Iran to change its behavior but has received a mixed response from Ahmadinejad...

Mixed response?!! You can't "clench" your fist any tighter than that!

Heck! this wasn't merely fist-clenching! Ahmadinejad gave Obama "the finger", BIG TIME!

P.S. If you haven't seen the following post already, check out what the Iranian President has to say about appeasement and about "compromising with the enemy". A lesson for Obama, indeed. Click here.

Cheney's Poll Numbers are on the rise, Americans want Obama to 'man up' and to 'stop blaming Bush'

From CNN's Political Ticker:

The same day Dick Cheney delivered a major speech on the battle against terrorism, a new national poll suggests that favorable opinions of the former vice president are on the rise...[Cheney's numbers are up eight points] from January when he left office.

In the past two months the former vice president has become a frequent critic of the new Administration in numerous national media interviews.

But of course, CNN couldn't stomach all of that, so they added this spin:

“Is Cheney’s uptick due to his visibility as one of the most outspoken critics of the Obama administration? Almost certainly not,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Former President George W. Bush's favorable rating rose six points in that same time period, and Bush has not given a single public speech since he left office.”

Well, if being an outspoken critic of the administration isn't what lifted up Cheney's poll numbers, might it be that Americans simply don't trust Obama on Gitmo and other security issues, and that's why Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush's poll numbers are on the rise?

It might... And, if that is indeed the case, it stands to reason that Cheney's criticism of Obama is helping Americans understand just how perilous Obama's positions are - on Gitmo etc.

On the flip side, Obama's criticism of both Cheney and Bush appears to be having the opposite effect.

According to a recent survey conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corp., "more than 3-to-1 Americans think it is time for the Obama administration to start taking responsibility (64 percent) instead of continuing to blame the Bush administration for mistakes (21 percent)."

Ah yes, "responsibility", but it's much easier to "Blame Bush", isn't it?.......

Mosque Members Refused to assist bombing suspect because "they didn't want more legal trouble"

Get a load of this one!

The assistant imam of a Newburgh mosque, Hamin Rashada, said that one of the men suspected of plotting to bomb targets in the US, Mr. Laguerre Payen, "had been going around" the last few days "asking people where he could gain access to heavy weapons and a dependable driver."

According to Rashada, the people did not help him because they didn't want more legal trouble. He found all this out when he asked around today and yesterday after hearing of the arrests, he said.

They didn't help him because "they didn't want more legal trouble."

Heh. How nice of them!

Gibbs 'Gitmo' Reply a bit "Hasty" - Flip-Flop

From the White House press briefing - May 20 - H/T - Gateway Pundit:

QUESTION: This is a President who has not been afraid to admit that he made a mistake in the past when he made one. If you say Congress deserves a plan [concerning the closing of Gitmo] before we ask them for resources [$$$], was it a mistake to ask for the resources before you give them a plan?

ROBERT GIBBS: ...I think [the president will] say this tomorrow -- that we've made some hasty decisions that are now going to take some time to unwind. And closing Guantanamo Bay obviously is one of those decisions.

Later on, a reporter asks Gibbs a follow up question, requesting a clarification on his previous reply:

Get a load of this exchange!:

Q: You said hasty -- you talked about hasty decisions tomorrow, that it's going to take some time to unwind. Are you talking about the President's hasty decisions or the previous administration's hasty decision as it regards Guantanamo?

GIBBS: No, no, no, I'm sorry, let me be -- good question. My boss might want to know the answer to that. (Laughter.) No, no, I'm discussing decisions that were made in the previous administration --

Q: You were not referring to the executive order --

GIBBS: No, no, no --

Q: -- as a hasty decision.

GIBBS: No.

Q: Absolutely not?

GIBBS: Thank you for letting me clarify that before I go see the boss later this afternoon....

GIBBS: You just saved us a series of phone calls. Let me explain a little bit of what I meant by that....

Gibbs goes on and on and on. But, ultimately he fibbed on that one, or perhaps he was only kidding. Who knows....... But I think Gibbs made an egregious error in responding so "hastily" to the original question. He should have allowed himself "some time to unwind" before giving his reply - which would have "saved him a lot of phone calls" and shielded him from his boss' wrath......

Update: The aforementioned flip-flop was noted by David Paul Kuhn over at Real Clear Politics. Gateway Pundit - who I cited earlier - linked to Kuhn's post, but did not mention the flip-flop. I did not see Mr. Kuhn's post till now and only took notice of Gibbs' reversal because I had perused the complete White House briefing. But if it's any consolation to Mr. Kuhn: I offer him a somewhat belated hat tip.

ACORN Logo on 'Obama Dollar Bill'?

From Berman Post - H/T - Gateway Pundit:

Walking through Union Square (NYC) today, I noticed something. On the 'Obama 44 dollar bill', instead of the United States Treasury Seal, they put the ACORN logo. I can understand wanting to put something more exciting on the Treasury Seal, and thinking it is best to put something else there, just to make extra sure no one thinks it is any sort of legal currency. Still, the ACORN logo?

Oh well, considering Obama dolled out about $800,000 to ACORN to register voters during the presidential campaign, it seems only natural to place the ACORN logo on Obama's dollar bill......

Obama's Proposed Mileage Standards Would Kill More Americans than Iraq War

From CNS News - H/T - Gateway Pundit:

The Obama administration’s proposed mileage standards that will be announced today may kill more Americans at a faster rate than the Iraq War — his signature issue in the 2008 presidential campaign.

Obama’s standards will require automakers to meet a 35 miles-per-gallon standard by 2016 — four years earlier than the same standard imposed by the Energy Security and Independence Act of 2007. As discussed in my new book “Green Hell,” the only way for carmakers to meet these standards is to make smaller, lighter and deadlier cars.

The National Academy of Sciences has linked mileage standards with about 2,000 deaths per year. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that every 100-pound reduction in the weight of small cars increases annual traffic fatalities by as much as 715. In contrast in the more than six years since the Iraq war began, there have been 4,296 deaths among American military personnel...

Read the rest.

Will Limbaugh be forced to register as an Independent?

Conservative radio host, Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday tendered his resignation as "titular head of the Republican Party."

Limbaugh told his audience that he'd been anointed head of the GOP against his will "by the mainstream media and the Obama White House" - not by the GOP. The popular Conservative icon asserted that this was not a title he had sought, but because so many people believe he is the "titular head" of the GOP, he was tendering his resignation. "No mas, no mas," he proclaimed, "no more, no more, I quit!"

Limbaugh went on to say, tongue in cheek, that "there frankly is someone far more qualified... and more in tune with today's republican party than I, to be not only its titular head, but it's real head. And that would be General Colin Powell. So I now pass the the baton to General Colin Powell...."

Unfortunately, when many, who are seen as emblematic of the GOP, are spurning creationism, adapting moderate positions on abortion and embracing other Liberal ideologies, it may be just the right time for Limbaugh to resign.

"I’d accept legal abortion in the very, very early stages of pregnancy, before the embryo can feel pain..."

That's nice of you....... But what about the old adage, "no pain, no gain?" Hmmm?

But one question still remains: Will Limbaugh ultimately be forced to part ways with his party altogether and register as an independent?

With the winds blowing left inside the GOP, you just never know....

More verbal exchanges between Limbaugh and Powell, here.

A Clarion Call: "No More Caricatures! Both Sides Must Stop Demonizing Each Other!"

Breaking News from the Carbolic Smoke Ball! Read the shocking story HERE!

Background material....

• Obama: Abortion foes caricature each other
• Obama: Stop demonizing each other

Dowd & Pelosi, Birds of a Feather?

From the Huffington Post:

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, in an email to the Huffington Post, admits that a paragraph in her Sunday column was lifted from Talking Points Memo editor Josh Marshall's blog last Thursday. Dowd claims that she never read his blog last week, but was told the line by a friend of hers.

Likewise, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - during a News Conference on May 14 - defended herself against allegations she had been briefed about the CIA's waterboarding program, saying she had never been briefed about the program and had only heard about it from others who'd been briefed about it:

"My assistant told me that the committee had been briefed [about waterboarding]... but I did not [personally] get the briefing......"

Dowd & Pelosi, 'birds of a feather'?

Obama Snubs Jim Gibbons

From the Las Vegas Sun:

Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons released the following news release on Monday:

The Office of Governor Jim Gibbons was notified today that President Barack Obama has refused to meet with the Governor and key business leaders from Nevada.

Governor Gibbons requested the meeting in a letter to President Obama so the President could address statements he made that were critical to Nevada and have caused economic damage to convention business and tourism business in the Silver State.

Earlier this year, the President told an audience in Elkhart, Indiana, “You can’t get corporate jets. You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayer’s dime.” That quote was seen by many as an insult to Las Vegas and as a message to companies across the Nation to stay away from Las Vegas for corporate meetings and conventions.

The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority reports over 400 conventions and business meetings scheduled to take place in Las Vegas recently have cancelled. These cancelled events translate into 111,800 guests in Las Vegas and over 250,000 “room-nights”. The cancelled conventions and meetings have cost the Las Vegas economy over $100-million, not including gaming revenue.

“I am disappointed at the hypocrisy shown by this Administration,” Gibbons said, “President Obama is coming to Las Vegas later this month for a political fundraiser, but he will not help the struggling families in Las Vegas and Nevada who are out of work because of his reckless comments.” Governor Gibbons noted.

“President Obama is coming to Las Vegas to raise campaign cash for Senator Harry Reid, apparently our money is good enough for the President, but our tourism, jobs, and economic future are not.” Gibbons added, “This is politics, pure and simple, President Obama stood for change, but all he has done is brought negative economic change to Nevada.”

Governor Gibbons is calling upon Senator Reid to use any influence he might have to ask President Obama to encourage Americans to visit America during their summer vacations this year.

“Sometimes Washington politicians forget that the people of Nevada are Americans,” Governor Gibbons said, “This President needs to repair the damage he has done.”

Obama: 'Freedom of Choice Act' is, and isn't, my Highest Legislative priority

During the presidential campaign - while addressing a Planned Parenthood conference - Barack Obama was asked: "What would you do at the federal level not only to ensure access to abortion, but to make sure that the judicial nominees that you will inevitably be able to pick are true to the core tenets of Roe v. Wade?"

Obama replied: ""Well, the first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act, that's the first thing I'd do!"

However, at a news conference on April 29 - in the midst of the firestorm surrounding the president's then-upcoming commencement speech at Notre Dame - Obama was asked: "Mr. President. In a couple of weeks, you're going to be giving the commencement at Notre Dame. And, as you know, this has caused a lot of controversy...

"As a candidate, you vowed that one of the very things you wanted to do was sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which, as you know, would eliminate federal, state and local restrictions on abortion.... Do you still hope that Congress quickly sends you the Freedom of Choice Act so you can sign it?"

Toward the end of his response, the president remarked: "The Freedom of Choice Act is not my highest legislative priority."

Bear in mind that this wasn't your typical Obama flip-flop. In this instance, the president was asked specifically about his statement to Planned Parenthood, namely, that the first thing he'd "do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act". And without blinking an eye, he brazenly contradicted himself and replied: "The Freedom of Choice Act is not my highest legislative priority."

No hesitation, no compunction, just political expedience..... at its worst.

With the Notre Dame controversy swirling around him and his soon-to-be-delivered commencement address awaiting him, the president responded in typical Obama fashion - being the master prevaricator that he is.

Nevertheless, pro-choicers have absolutely nothing to fear since the aforementioned flip-flop was nothing more than political expedience. The Freedom of Choice Act will soon be inscribed into law. For indeed, this piece of legislation is sacrosanct, and it is unquestionably, one of Obama's highest legislative priorities.....

Obama Flip-Flops on Afghanistan

From the Financial Times - Feb 28, 2009:

Afghanistan yesterday warned Barack Obama's administration not to downgrade its goals for the country or jettison the idea of Afghan democracy, in comments that highlighted the intensifying debate over international strategy in the region...

Afghanistan's foreign minister, said it would be "very, very dangerous" to adopt "reductionist" goals that gave up on the idea of a democratic Afghanistan.

Mr Spanta's remarks are the latest sign of tension between Afghanistan and the Obama administration...

Mr Obama has already set out the clear direction of his new administration. "We are not going to be able to rebuild Afghanistan into a Jeffersonian democracy," the president told NBC News this month.

"What we can do is make sure that Afghanistan is not a safe haven for al-Qaeda. What we can do is make sure that it is not destabilizing neighboring Pakistan."

Mr Spanta argued against any suggestion that "we have to reduce our expectations [in Afghanistan or that] we have to remove only al-Qaeda." Insisting such a policy would not bring long term stability, he said that he and his colleagues had used "every occasion here in Washington" and elsewhere "to defend ourselves, to articulate our claim for democracy for us and our children".

And CNN reported likewise on Feb. 7, 2009:

When U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban after the 9/11 attacks, then-President Bush said the goal in Afghanistan was "to build a flourishing democracy as an alternative to a hateful ideology."

Seven years, billions of dollars and hundreds of U.S. casualties later, the goals are more pragmatic and modest....

Defense Secretary Robert Gates cautions that goals have been too broad and need to be need to be more "realistic and limited," or the U.S. risks failure.

"If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose, because nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience and money, to be honest," Gates told senators...

Obama [also] seemed to signal a more modest approach, defining the mission as limited solely to stabilizing Afghanistan.

"What we can do is make sure that Afghanistan is not a safe haven for al Qaeda...," Obama told NBC News. "We are not going to be able to rebuild Afghanistan into a Jeffersonian democracy."

Well, that was then, but now the president has decided to change his philosophy and adapt Mr. Bush's strategy. In an interview with Newsweek Magazine on Saturday, Obama stated that a Democratically elected government in Afghanistan was indeed necessary to prevent the Taliban from taking over:

We are not going to succeed simply [in Afghanistan] by piling on more and more troops....," [Obama said]. "We have to see our military action in the context of a broader effort to stabilize security..., allow national elections to take place in Afghanistan and then provide the space for the vital development work that's needed so that a tolerant and open, democratically elected government is considered far more legitimate than a Taliban alternative....

Hmmm....

Let's read the first couple of paragraphs from CNN again:

When U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban after the 9/11 attacks, then-President Bush said the goal in Afghanistan was "to build a flourishing democracy as an alternative to a hateful ideology."

Seven years, billions of dollars and hundreds of U.S. casualties later, the goals are more pragmatic and modest....

But lets read Obama's revised strategy again and see if those goals have really changed:

We have to... stabilize security in the country..., allow national elections to take place...and then provide the space for the vital development work that's needed so that a tolerant and open, democratically elected government is considered far more legitimate than a Taliban alternative...."

Exactly what President Bush had said.

Another Flip flop from Obama?

Sure looks like it........

Pelosi Deserves a Medal!

Yes, you read the post-title correctly! Rush Limbaugh made that declaration on his radio program on Monday.

"And why," you are probably asking yourselves, "does Nancy Pelosi deserve a medal?"

Answer: Because - as it has recently been revealed - she knew about the CIA's waterboarding/ harsh interrogation techniques, and yet, she kept it all under wraps because she knew these procedures were keeping America safe from terrorist attacks.

Of course, she now disavows this noble and patriotic gesture. But regardless of her current denials and prevarications, she still deserves credit for keeping her mouth shut at a time when American lives were in jeopardy. That's why Rush Limbaugh believes the eminent House Speaker is deserving of a medal.

Here's a few excerpts from Rush Limbaugh's website - transcript:

RUSH: Folks, do you remember that line you learned when you were a little kid -- the philosophy question, logic question -- "If a tree falls in the forest and no one's there, does it make a sound?" Remember that question?

Well, there's a new version of this that I, ladies and gentlemen, would like to put forth: "If a liberal tells a whopper of a lie and no one reports it, is it a lie?" ...

Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats were as on-board as Dick Cheney was with waterboarding... She is lying through the teeth about being unaware of this. If a liberal tells a whopper of a lie and nobody reports it, is it a lie?...

But I think Nancy Pelosi actually deserves our praise -- and she might even deserve a medal. She was the guardian of waterboarding... When all of these techniques were being used against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the others at Guantanamo Bay, Nancy Pelosi knew they were being used. She was in on the briefings! She stayed silent. Nancy Pelosi was the guardian of waterboarding. Her silence permitted us to gain valuable intel. She deserves a medal.

Perhaps we should all write to the president and beseach him to give Nancy Pelosi a medal . After all, it's the least we can do to thank her for helping to keep this country safe - isn't it?.....

Wanda Sykes Overlooks Obama's Drug Use

I think most people would agree that there's a huge difference between an individual who develops a temporary addiction to pain killers - as a result of taking these medications for a specific ailment - and someone who spends two years of his life in a daze, trying out drugs and smoking reefers.

Which is why Hot Air Pundit makes a great point when he/she says: "Correspondents Dinner's... Wanda Sykes Overlooks Barack Obama's "Enthusiastic" Drug Use."

Several years ago, Rush Limbaugh developed an addiction [for a period of time] to pain medications, which prompted comedienne Wanda Sykes, to take a jab at him, saying she thinks Mr. Limbaugh was the 20th hijacker but he was so strung out on pain killers that he missed his flight. [Sykes also said she hopes Mr. Limbaugh's kidney's fail him.] The president sat back in his seat and laughed hysterically at Ms. Syke's joke, while choosing to ignore his dubious past, specifically, his rarely publicized pot-smoking sprees.

From Dreams from my Father:

I spent the last two years of high school in a daze, blocking away the questions that life seemed insistent on posing. I kept playing basketball, attended classes sparingly, drank beer heavily, and tried drugs enthusiastically.

I discovered that it didn’t make any difference whether you smoked reefer in the white classmate’s sparkling new van, or in the dorm room with some brother you’d met down at the gym, or on the beach with a couple of Hawaiian kids who had dropped out of school, and now spent most of their time looking for an excuse to brawl. Nobody asked you whether your father was a fat cat executive who cheated on his wife, or some laid-off Joe who slapped you around whenever he bothered to come home. You might just be bored or alone. Everybody was welcome into the club of disaffection.

And if the high didn’t solve whatever it was that was getting you down, it could at least help you laugh at the world’s ongoing folly, and see through all the hypocrisy and bullshit and cheap moralism.

But Obama no longer smokes reefers, and that's why he can't see through his own "hypocrisy" - or Wanda Sykes "bullshit", for that matter.

Yesterday, I expressed confidence that Obama would publicly condemn Ms. Sykes for wishing ill upon Mr. Limbaugh and saying she hoped his "kidneys fail" him etc. - as he had done last year when comedian Bernie Mac uttered a string of distasteful remarks [at an Obama fundraiser]. However, my confidence in the president's niceties is slowly dissipating each and every hour.

Nevertheless, I wonder why the mainstream media hasn't noted the aforementioned hypocrisy. Might it be that they've also ceased to smoke reefers and can no longer see through Obama's "hypocrisies" and Wanda Sykes' "bullshit"?

That would indeed explain the mainstream media's constant double standard. But it's difficult for me to believe these journalists were any different back in their college, pot-smoking days. After all, it was precisely during those years that they received their indoctrination and became both permanently brainwashed and brain-dead for life.......





H/T Hot Air Pundit

Obama & Biden mock each other with Dogged Determination

At the White House Correspondence dinner on Saturday, Barack Obama made the following joke:

“All this change hasn’t been easy,” he said, reflecting on his early days in the White House. “Change never is. So I’ve cut the tension by bringing in a new friend to the White House. He’s warm, cuddly, loyal, enthusiastic, and you have to keep him on a tight leash because every now and then he goes charging off in the wrong direction and gets himself in trouble.”

Pause…..

“Enough about Joe Biden,” he deadpanned.

This wasn't the first time that Obama addressed the Vice president in such fashion, as evidenced by the following video:



However, Mr. Biden - not one to take such jabs sitting sitting down - made sure to return the president's barbs.

On Sunday, after delivering the commencement address at Syracuse University, Mr. Biden stopped by to chat with students at Bellevue Elementary School:

During the intense question and answer period between Biden and the students, one child asked the vice president if he had ever petted a dog.

“Yeah, but guess what? I’ve got a dog that lives with me,” Biden replied. “The smartest, coolest dog in the world.”

“The new dog I have is only five months old and his name is Champ,” Biden told the schoolkids.

“My dog is smarter than Bo, his [Obama's] dog,” he jabbed.

“I think so,” he taunted. Yeah, I do!”

Perhaps Mr. Biden is correct, but I'd first like to hear Bo's opinion on the matter........

Related Post: Biden Mocks Obama! - Teleprompter Joke