A New Era of U.S. World Leadership Begins.

A New Era of U.S. World Leadership Begins.

A New Era of U.S. World Leadership Begins

Friday, January 30, 2015

No More Mitt

A lot of deadwood left to prune before we get to the main event!

No doubt you already saw the news: Mitt's out for 2016. I want to thank the former GOP Presidential Nominee for saving me the trouble of putting together my planned post suggesting he not run.

Romney made two fundamental mistakes in 2012, one messaging and the other tactical. By shying away from the fight with Obama over foreign policy when the press started to howl in Obama's defense he gave away one of the GOP's strongest issues. And by failing to counter Obama's massive spending on paid staffers and offices in key states he ceded the critical get out the vote effort in the handful of key states that determined the race.

We need new blood and new faces at the top of the GOP ticket and Mitt's withdrawal makes that possible. But it also helps Jeb Bush who is now the favorite for the moderate/establishment wing of the party. This will make it harder on conservatives whose vote and fundraising will be split unless they coalesce soon around a single candidate.

Scott Walker anyone?

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Obama Violates Constitutional Checks and Balances, Disrespects Ally; Then Complains About Congressional Protocol Breech

For the way he has behaved in office it takes some nerve to complain about Boehner's invitation for Israeli P.M. Netanyahu to speak!

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) reminded us last week that the Obama Administration had promised "full consultation — with the real meaning of the word consultation," in regard to any changes in Cuba policy then weeks later went right ahead and announced normalization of relations without ANY consultation with the Senate. Rubio and others on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, including Democrat Robert Menendez(NJ) are concerned the Administration will ignore their responsibility to consult again in any dealings with Iran.

In a hearing with Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken Rubio reviewed the problem:


Senator Rubio: “Secretary Blinken, much of this debate here today has been about the role of Congress and our need to trust in the ability of the administration to craft a good deal, and in the fact that we are going to be consulted. That was the question that you asked. So I want to take you back to the last time you were before this committee, and I asked you a question at that time, during your nomination, about whether there would be any unilateral changes or changes in Cuba policy.

“And your answer, and I want to quote it for you. It said, quote, ‘Anything that in the future might be done on Cuba would be done in full consultation, with the real meaning of the word consultation that I just alluded to, with this committee.’ You told me that the last time you were before this committee. Who did it consult with on this committee? Or who did the administration consult with on this committee before it announced the changes on the 17th of December?”

Secretary Blinken: “Senator, I regret that I did not live up to the standard I set during that hearing and in the remarks that you just quoted. I think that I could have done a better job in engaging with you and consulting with you in advance. And I regret that.”
Does anyone really believe that the Obama Administration will fully consult with the U.S. Senate, even Democrats on any deal on Iranian nuclear development?

Yet Obama and his aides get quite indignant if any of their prerogatives get stepped on. Witness the outpouring of bile when Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu accepted an invitation to speak to a Joint Session of Congress:
“He spat in our face publicly, and that’s no way to behave,” one Obama aide told an Israeli newspaper. “Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price.”
To paraphrase New York Post columnist Michael Goodwin, Obama is one to talk:
It is pointless to say petty threats do not become the Oval Office. Trying to instruct this White House on manners recalls what Mark Twain said about trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Still, the fury is telling. It reminds, as if we could forget, that everything is always about Obama.

How dare Israel be more concerned with the existential threat of Iranian nukes than with Obama’s feelings? And what do members of Congress think they are, a separate branch of government or something?

Yes, the presidency deserves respect, even when the president doesn’t. Although Obama routinely ignores lawmakers and their role in our constitutional system of checks and balances, there is an argument afoot that Congress should have taken the high road and consulted him before inviting Netanyahu.

The argument has a point — but not a compelling one. To give Obama veto power over the visit would be to put protocol and his pride before the most important issue in the world.
Obama's deliberate snubs and petty slights to our ally Israel and it's Prime Minister are numerous. Going back to a White House meeting in 2010 where Obama abruptly left the meeting to have dinner with Michelle while Netanyahu was forced to wait. In 2011 there was the open mic conversation between French President Sarkozy and Obama with Obama complaining about Netanyahu.

For Obama to be indignant at what he perceives as a breach in protocol when he regularly disregards his own constitutional responsibilities would be laughable if the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons was not such a dangerous threat to world peace. Sadly, Obama seems to be taking the side of the Iranians and again ignores the concerns of our ally Israel!

Friday, January 23, 2015

Obama Mid East Policy Collapses While He Interviews w/ Glozell

Why does he always seem to be doing anything BUT his job?

In his State of the Union Address Obama claimed that we have had "turned the page" after 15 years of terrorism and war. He was right about that. We've turned the page from a bad situation to one that is much worse due to his failure to lead.

You need look no further than Yemen as a an example of Obama's failed foreign policy. It was just four months ago that Obama touted the U.S. Yemeni alliance as a success story in the war on terror:
OBAMA: This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years. And it is consistent with the approach I outlined earlier this year: to use force against anyone who threatens America’s core interests, but to mobilize partners wherever possible to address broader challenges to international order.
Now that the government of Yemen has collapsed and ceded power to Iranian back radicals there is no question but the alliance that was so pivotal to Obama's lead from behind strategy in Yemen is shattered as well as the counter terrorism strategy (1,2).

Remember also that Obama just released five Yemeni terrorists from Gitmo. Just in time to supply reinforcements!

Note that Obama never mentioned Yemen in his State of the Union Address.

Obama did mention ISIS (or ISIL):
OBAMA:In Iraq and Syria, American leadership -- including our military power -- is stopping ISIL’s advance. Instead of getting dragged into another ground war in the Middle East, we are leading a broad coalition, including Arab nations, to degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group. (Applause.) We’re also supporting a moderate opposition in Syria that can help us in this effort
Really? Is this what success looks like?

OBAMA: “In Iraq and Syria, American leadership—including our military power—
is stopping ISIL’s advance.”

Throughout the Middle East things are getting worse, not better. The only bright spot may be the relative stability of Egypt whose military leaders defied the Obama Administration and tossed the Muslim Brotherhood from power.

Bi Partisan Opposition to Obama's Incompetence, Indifference and Misguided Policy

Writing at Commentary Magazine Pete Wehner runs down the list. Remember Obama's brag about freeing Libya? Then the Benghazi attack came along. And things with Iran just keep going backward:
Our percipient president also declared in his State of the Union speech, “Our diplomacy is at work with respect to Iran, where, for the first time in a decade, we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material.” That assertion is so reality-based that (a) the Washington Post fact-checker declared “there is little basis” for the president’s claims and (b) the highest ranking Democratic member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Menendez, said the more he hears from Mr. Obama and his administration about Iran, “the more it sounds like talking points that come straight out of Tehran.” Oh, and the president made his announcement on the very day that we learned that Russia and Iran are more aligned than ever, having signed an agreement on military cooperation between the two nations.
Russia signing a military cooperation agreement with Iran? Anyone remember 1939? Also, Russian tanks and troops continue to roll across the border into Ukraine. Does that sound like a success story for Obama?

And note that Sen. Bob Mendez (DEMOCRAT-NJ) says that Obama's talking points on Iranian nukes sound like they "come straight out of Tehran." For those who were looking for more bipartisanship in Washington, we just found some!

With all this going on you would think that Obama would be busy huddling with his foreign policy team. Instead, on Thursday he was giving interviews to You Tube stars. You know, the kind of people who gain fame and notoriety by doing stupid stuff. One interviewer was Glozell Green famous for bathing in Fruit Loops and milk [full video].

Obama Interviewed by Glozell Green famous for this scene on You Tube.
Obviously Obama has his priorities and it's clear that dealing with the collapse of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East isn't one of them. The consequences for his indifference and incompetence will pay out in blood with tens of thousands of innocent lives lost and a more dangerous world for all of us!

UPDATE: Washington Post Editorial
IN DEVOTING 250 of the 6,800 words of his State of the Union address to the fight against “violent extremism,” President Obama offered a boilerplate description of his policy. “Instead of sending large ground forces overseas,” he said, “we’re partnering with nations from South Asia to North Africa to deny safe haven to terrorists who threaten America.” As he spoke, his strategy was crumbling in a nation he failed to mention: Yemen, home to the branch of al-Qaeda that claimed credit for the recent attacks in France and has repeatedly attempted to strike the U.S. homeland.
...
The Yemen mess reveals the weaknesses of Mr. Obama’s “partners” strategy, which has been too narrowly focused on drone strikes and training of specialized units, and not enough on providing security for the population, institution-building and support for moderate political forces. Unfortunately, the president’s cursory and formulaic description of his counterterrorism policies this week, following a year in which jihadist forces and terrorist attacks expanded across the world, suggested that he remains uninterested in correcting his mistakes.

Thursday, January 22, 2015

Contrast Bush's Gracious Recognition of Dem Victory in 2007 State of the Union Speech to Obama

Bush is a class act. Obama never misses an opportunity to be small and petty!

Tuesday's State of the Union speech was attended by the largest number of Republican legislators in both houses of Congress since the 1920's. You might have thought that deserved some mention from Obama. Instead, all he did was make a snarky remark about how he had won two elections.

Contrast that with these opening lines from George W. Bush's State of the Union speech in 2007. Dems had just won control of both houses of Congress in the 2006 election.


BUSH: And tonight, I have the high privilege and distinct honor of my own, as the first president to begin the State of the Union message with these words: "Madam Speaker."

In his day, the late congressman, Thomas d'Alessandro, Jr., from Baltimore, Maryland, saw Presidents Roosevelt and Truman at this rostrum. But nothing could compare with the sight of his only daughter, Nancy, presiding tonight as speaker of the House of Representatives. Congratulations, Madam Speaker.
...
Some in this chamber are new to the House and the Senate, and I congratulate the Democrat majority.
The 2006 midterm election was an astounding political defeat for Bush but he bore it graciously and without rancor. Obama on the other hand always seems to have an over-sized chip on his shoulders as if he suffers from some deep seated inferiority complex!

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Obama Delivers a State of the Union Speech Designed to Divide Rather than Unite

Once again, he proves that true leadership is the last thing on his mind. Politics always comes first!

Did we really need another speech [text] by Obama to remind us that his solution to nearly every problem is more spending and to raise taxes? Yet that's pretty much what we got in Tuesday's State of the Union Address. Writing at the Washington Post Jennifer Rubin summarizes the speech this way:
If you were looking for signs the president learned anything from his 2014 thumping, you were disappointed. If you had hopes he had a coherent foreign policy they were dashed. If you expected the president to double down and emphasize areas where impasse is certain you were prescient.
It didn't surprise me that Obama delivered another left wing address. Despite saying "we are still more than a collection of red states and blue states; [] we are the United States of America," Obama's speech was directed at cheering on his liberal base which clearly was demoralized after the November election. The speech itself ranked only slightly behind his other SOTU addresses for it's hardcore left wing ideological appeal. Here's the key graph from a study at Real Clear Politics showing how extreme Obama's SOTU speeches are in relation to other recent presidents:
The speech was less memorable for what it said. Not even a Democrat controlled Congress would pass much of what he proposed. It was significant in that it demonstrates that Obama intends to continue pursuing left wing policies and playing hardball politics the way he has now for six years. Despite his promise that he will "commit to every Republican here tonight that I will not only seek out your ideas, I will seek to work with you to make this country stronger," there is nothing in his past, or this speech that suggests that he is any more serious about that than the dozens of other times he has said it.

Also, he added the obligatory plea for civility:
OBAMA: Understand, a better politics isn’t one where Democrats abandon their agenda or Republicans simply embrace mine. A better politics is one where we appeal to each other’s basic decency instead of our basest fears. A better politics is one where we debate without demonizing each other; where we talk issues and values, and principles and facts, rather than “gotcha” moments, or trivial gaffes, or fake controversies that have nothing to do with people’s daily lives.
Wouldn't it be nice if Obama lived up to that promise. Yet demonizing Republicans is what he does best. There are so many examples of Obama using the most extreme, partisan rhetoric to attack Republicans (1,2,3,4,5...) It's a staple by now that anyone disagreeing with him is either racist, stupid, evil or all three.

Middle Class Flim Flam

Seven times Obama reference the Middle Class in his speech. It's another staple of Obama's speeches. But like all the others his concern for improving the lot of the Middle Class evaporates once the camera is turned off. It's no secret that the rich have gotten richer under Obama. It's also no secret that the Middle Class is worse off now then when he was elected.

As a recent Reuters story points out:
Barack Obama enters the final two years of his presidency with a blemish on his legacy that looks impossible to erase: the decline of the middle class he has promised to rescue.
Michael Snyder documents 27 facts that show how much worse off things are for those in the Middle Class. But perhaps we need to put the issue in perspective with a few charts:



Foreign Policy An Even Bigger Hot Mess

When it comes to foreign policy it would appear that the speechwriters simply cut and pasted old soundbites. Nothing new. Obama declared that we are "stopping ISIL’s advance" In Iraq and Syria and repeated the pledge to "destroy" ISIL "ultimately" whatever that means. Yet facts on the ground remain stubborn. True, ISIL (I prefer ISIS but I'll go with ISIL for now) hasn't totally overrun Iraq and have been pushed back in some places. But they continue to expand in others. The Pentagon lists thousands of vehicles, tanks and other targets destroyed or damaged. But after months of limited strikes it's hard to see how the effort will succeed in the goals Obama has laid out at this rate.

Obama also claimed that his policy to punish Russia for invading Ukraine was a success:
OBAMA:Second, we’re demonstrating the power of American strength and diplomacy. We’re upholding the principle that bigger nations can’t bully the small -- by opposing Russian aggression, and supporting Ukraine’s democracy
Yet Russia still holds Crimea and large chunks of eastern Ukraine. Can he really claim to support democracy in Ukraine when it's being dismembered by force?

He also claimed success in forestalling Iran's nuclear ambitions when he said "we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material." Yet by all accounts all Iran has to do to build a nuclear weapon is flip a switch and the program resumes.

The Good News

One bright spot and prime achievement for Obama was that this State of the Union was witnessed by the most Republican and fewest Democrat legislators to witness such an event since the late 1920s. Obama has managed to unmake all the legislative gains that have lasted for generations until his time.

More good news comes as we learn from a recent study that Obama's record for enacting State of the Union promises is the worst among all two term Presidents since Lyndon Johnson. Only Gerald Ford, who only served two years had a worse record.

And as we all know by now, after Obama completes his latest campaign swing that's likely to be the last time we hear of these promises. Obama's habit is to make a speech, declare problem solved then move on to the next "fake controversy."

Still better news is that we only have to endure one more of these speeches until Obama leaves office!

Friday, January 16, 2015

What Signal Does Obama Send When He Releases Yemeni Terrorists One Week After Paris Attack by Yemeni Terror Cell?

Whose side is he on?

So, sending 5 terrorists from Gitmo to Oman, which borders Yemen to which they can easily return is a good idea?

Last September Obama cited Yemen as a success story in combating terrorism and a model for his strategy to defeat ISIS. That's worked well hasn't it? Yemen is the source of the terror cells that struck in Paris and ISIS is bigger than ever.

So, naturally Obama wants to reward Yemeni terrorists by sending back five of the worst from Gitmo. That follows on from earlier terrorist releases, his refusal to attend the March in Paris and continued refusal to link Islam with terrorism. Obviously even Obama can't be this stupid so something else must be going on.

Roger Simon wonders whose side Obama is on:
I started this post thinking it was kind of funny. I liked the hed — “Is the White House a ‘Sleeper Cell’?” It reminded me of, um… Charlie Hebdo. But actually it’s not so funny. And it’s not impossible. We know something close already happened during the communist era (Alger Hiss), and the Israelis famously planted an agent, Eli Cohen, at the highest echelons of the Syrian government until he was caught via the KGB and hanged in the central square of Damascus. They say it was Cohen’s reports that were responsible for the rapid Israeli success against the Syrians in the Six-Day War.

But a “sleeper cell” in the White House? It would certainly explain Obama’s not going to France, which was a decision that hurt the USA, hurt the effort against Islamic terror and hurt the president’s already tarnished reputation into the bargain. There are so many other things that the existence of a White House “sleeper cell” would explain that I couldn’t even begin to count them. And as you know, a cell doesn’t have to be violent to be active. There are many ways to do damage.

But who would be a member of this cell? Is it one or all of them? Well that, I am sorry to say, I cannot tell you. I do not have the proper clearance. You are, however, free to guess. Who would stop you?
You are free to draw your own conclusions but actions speak louder than words and thus far Obama's actions don't seem to be doing much to dent the expansion of terrorism. Quite the opposite!


ISIS Continues to Expand Despite Obama's Promises to Defeat

Nothing succeeds like success and Obama's failure to use military power effectively invites more terrorism and death.

Did you see the 10 year old ISIS boy executing two prisoners?  Or the killing homosexuals by tossing them off high buildings and stoning women? Then, there's the recent successful attack in Paris which is bound to encourage more ISLAMIC RADICALS to take up the jihad.

And why not? Air strikes in Syria and Iraq have done very little to clip the wings of the monsters who continue to inflict their blood lust on the people living in large swathes of Syria and Iraq.

Here's the latest report:



Remember when this was front page news? But the time tested Obama technique of replacing one scandal with another one has worked again. Besides, Obama gave a speech promising action and that was supposed to be the end of it right?

Do the Saudis Know Something About Border Fences That Obama Doesn't?

Saudis to build 600 mile fence to keep out jihadis!

With Obama's failure to counter the growth of ISIS in Iraq and Syria the war continues to spread as Muslim terrorists (the phrase Obama refuses to use) are extending their reach even further. Now, they are probing with attacks against Saudi Arabia. In response the Saudis are building a fence. But not just a fence....

From Business Insider. Full Size image here.
If it's good enough to keep terrorists from crossing the Saudi border do you think it would help to keep tens of thousands of children from crossing the U.S. southern border? But no, Obama thinks a border fence is a bad idea. Remember when he mocked requests for more border security?
OBAMA: They said we needed to triple the Border Patrol. Well, now they're gonna say we need to quadruple the Border Patrol or they'll want a higher fence. Maybe they'll need a moat. Maybe they'll want alligators in the moat. They'll never be satisfied.
The Saudi fence has everything but the alligators. Maybe they know something Obama does not!

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Remember When Obama and the Dems Mocked "Drill Baby Drill" and Suggested $2/gallon Gas Was a Fantasy?

Despite Obama's best efforts to keep energy prices higher American ingenuity in the private sector came through!

In Detroit a week ago Obama bragged about the lower price of gas: "America is the number-one producer of oil, the number-one producer of gas. It’s helping to save drivers about a buck-ten a gallon at the pump over this time last year."

But a few years back when gas prices were high and Republicans insisted we could drill our way to lower prices and energy independence Obama laughed. At a speech in Miami in February 2012 Obama mocked GOP energy plans.
OBAMA: You can bet that since it’s an election year, [Republicans are] already dusting off their 3-point plan for $2 gas. And I’ll save you the suspense. Step one is to drill and step two is to drill. And then step three is to keep drilling.  (Laughter.) We heard the same line in 2007 when I was running for President. We hear the same thing every year. We’ve heard the same thing for 30 years.

Well, the American people aren’t stupid. They know that’s not a plan, especially since we’re already drilling. That’s a bumper sticker. It’s not a strategy to solve our energy challenge. (Applause.) That’s a strategy to get politicians through an election.

You know there are no quick fixes to this problem. You know we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices.
...
Over the last three years my administration has approved dozens of new pipelines, including from Canada. And we’ve opened millions of acres for oil and gas exploration. All told we plan to make available more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources from Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico.
Interesting that three years later and Obama is still blocking the Keystone pipeline.

And where are those millions of acres of new oil and gas exploration? Certainly not offshore. In response to high oil prices President Bush opened offshore areas to exploration. Obama slammed the door shut.


When it comes to onshore production Obama's record isn't any better. Oil production on federal lands continues to fall while production on private lands increases:


The revolution in oil and gas has nothing to do with Obama:



Obama has waged a "War on Energy" so his rich friends who invest in green energy can make more money to funnel into Democrat campaigns. Fortunately, there's still enough freedom left in the private sector to fuel America's energy needs. So naturally, Obama has announced new plans to choke that off too!

Such an Embarrassment! State Dept. Spokeswoman Cannot Name Terror Other Than Islam But Refuses to Say Islamic Terrorism

These the people who were supposed to make the U.S. more respected in the world?

While French leaders have no problem saying the words "Islamic radicals" or jihadis or terrorists somehow it's impossible for leaders in the Obama Administration to make that connection. At times the effort to twist around the issue gets downright ridiculous. Take for example this report by Martha MacCallum. Following the clip with White House Spokesman Josh Earnest insisting there are many forms of violent extremism MacCallum interviews State Department Spokeswoman Marie Hart. She asks Harf to name other forms of extremism that are a problem. Watch....


MARTHA MACCALLUM, "KELLY FILE" GUEST HOST: Every time we see this exchange it seems like the answer is so tortured. Like it's so difficult to say what everybody around the world seems to feel so clearly it is. And what the leaders have said in Canada and Australia and Paris where they have felt it potently and personally, they've all said quite clearly the battle is against Islamic extremism. Why is that so hard to say?

MARIE HARF, STATE DEPARTMENT: Well, it's not hard to say, but it's not the only kind of extremism we face. I would recommend folks looking at this administration's counter-terrorism record. I would remind people that more terrorists who claim to do acts of violence in the name of Islam have been taken off the battlefield in this administration than other any previous one because of our counterterrorism operations and our efforts that we put in place. But that's not the only way you counter this kind of extremism. Much of it Islamic, you're absolutely right. But some of it not. So we're going to focus on all the different kinds of extremism with a heavy focus on people who do this in the name of Islam, we would say falsely in the name of Islam, but there are other forms of extremism --

MACCALLUM: Tell me, what other forms of extremism are particularly troubling and compelling to you right now?

HARF: Well, look, there are people out there who want to kill other people in the name of a variety of causes. Of course, Martha, we are most focused on people doing this in the name of Islam. And we've talked about with ISIL, part of our strategy to counter this extremism is to have other moderate Muslim voices stand up and say they don't represent our religion. They speak for their religion more than we do certainly and we need those voices to stand up. In addition to all the other efforts we're undertaking.
Notice she could not name ONE EXAMPLE of others committing acts of terror. I guess the danger of Methodists beheading people isn't as real as some might think!

Also, note that Harf says "ther moderate Muslim voices stand up and say they don't represent our religion." But did we hear one word of support from the State Department when the President of Egypt gave his remarkable New Year's speech condemning radical Islam? NO. And we didn't hear a word of praise from the White House either.

Hark looks like an idiot here. True, she's an Obama campaign flack, but her bio might lead you to believe that she's got to be smarter than she comes off. Obviously the problem here isn't with Harf or Josh Earnest but Obama.

Charting the Historic Path of Islamic Radicalism

In the Daily Mail Yasmin Alibhai-Brown describes the emergence of radical Islam as a recent phenomenon and one that imposes great fear on Muslim women in particular. One wonders why Democrats, who constantly accuse Republicans of waging a "war on women" are so silent when there is a real war waged on women in the Islamic world?

Sunday, January 11, 2015

French Prime Minister Takes Stronger Stand on Terror Than Obama

What does it say when the French talk tougher than we do? The FRENCH!

Here's the report from the New York Times:
PARIS — Prime Minister Manuel Valls declared Saturday that France was at war with radical Islam after the harrowing sieges that led to the deaths of three gunmen and four hostages the day before. New details emerged about the bloody final confrontations, and security forces remained on high alert.

“It is a war against terrorism, against jihadism, against radical Islam, against everything that is aimed at breaking fraternity, freedom, solidarity,” Mr. Valls said during a speech in Évry, south of Paris.
Note that you will rarely hear Obama use the word "terrorism" let alone a "war" against it. You'll never hear Obama use the words jihad or radical Islam. No, Obama is planning a "Summit on Countering Violent Extremism" no doubt filled with the usual politically correct whitewash that prevents us from actually directing attention to where the problem truly lies.

When even the French have a better understanding of our enemy when we do it spells trouble!

Obama AWOL as World Leaders in Paris Lead Largest Demonstration in Nation's History Against Terrorism

Even the Palestinians marched with the Israeli Prime Minister but no top U.S. official!

United: European Commission President President Jean-Claude Juncker, Mr Netanyahu, former French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Mr Keita, Mrs Merkel, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Italy's Prime Minister Matteo Renzi as they attend the march

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2905307/One-million-people-prepare-march-Paris-terror-attacks.html#ixzz3OY5qt0xN 


The only representative from the United States was our Ambassador to France. Attorney General Eric Holder, who at least is a high ranking Cabinet official was in the country on other business but did not attend.

Over three million people took to the streets on Sunday to support democracy and freedom:

\

As it seems world leaders are moving without him Obama is scrambling to stay relevant. The White House suddenly announced a "Summit on Countering Violent Extremism." The center left news site Politico seems to suggest that the summit is little more than a P.R. stunt. Another Politico article reveals that the White House has no strategy to deal with domestic Islamic terrorism. No surprise there.

The world is moving to confront Islamic terrorists while the U.S. becomes sidelined by Obama's failure to lead. That can only spell trouble!

UPDATE: Cover from Monday edition of the New York Daily News. Accompanying story is highly critical of lack of top U.S. presence.


"You let the world down." Not for the first time!

UPDATE: Media reaction sharply critical of Obama refusal to attend

Opinion makers are scratching their heads trying to figure out why the Obama Administration had no high level representatives at the march with world leaders on Sunday. I'm not surprised. Do you recall how Obama had to be dragged kicking and screaming to denounce the Iranian government as they slaughtered their citizens in the streets? Or, how the Obama Adminstration sent three official representatives to the funeral of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri yet sent NONE to the funeral of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher?

Readers may also recall that Obama flew to Copenhagen, Denmark at the drop of a hat to lobby the International Olympic Committee to accept a bid by the City of Chicago to host the 2016 Olympic games. It didn't work! And recall that Obama had no problem going to Nelson Mandela's funeral.

Yes, the man who won the Nobel Peace Prize did not go to Paris and stand with 44 other world leaders. He didn't bother to send ANYONE of any stature. Even the Attorney General, who was IN Paris did not attend.

Here's additional reaction:
  • Jake Tapper CNN: I'm ashamed by U.S. leaders' absence in Paris.
  • Lupica NY Daily News: America betrays its values by not sending top U.S. officials to Paris unity rally.
  • Edward-Isaac Dovere Politico: Barack Obama’s French kiss-off
  • Secretary of State John Kerry thought it was more important to be in India where he suggested that global warming was the real problem the world needs to address.
POLITICO: “It’s stunning, truly stunning,” said Aaron David Miller, who among other responsibilities during his time at the State Department under both Republican and Democratic administrations, helped deliberate over which officials to send to which events. “It’s a poster child for tone deafness.”
Ah, but at least the Obama Administration sent out a Tweet:
Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken tweeted — in French.
“En solidarité avec #ParisMarch, la France, les Français et tous ceux qui dénoncent la haine,” he wrote Sunday morning. “In solidarity with #ParisMarch, France, the French and all those who denounce hate.”
Could there be any bigger evidence of the incompetence, indifference and sheer stupidity of the Obama Administration than sending out a Tweet when the rest of the world's leaders put themselves at the front of the march?

This isn't just another example of Obama "leading from behind." It's an example of Obama not leading AT ALL!

Saturday, January 10, 2015

President of Egypt Gave Speech Obama Should Have Delivered in Cairo

Sadly, Obama was too busy apologizing for America and continues to refuse to link Islam with terrorism!

I previously posted text from this speech but it is so important that when I found the video I decided to post it separately and not as an update. It's the New Year's Day address delivered by Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, President of Egypt to a group of the nation's Islamic clerics and scholars.

Many of us have been waiting a very LONG time for leaders in the Muslim world to stand up and forcefully denounce the corruption of Islam that is the direct inspiration for terrorist violence around the world. The following is a short clip, two minutes and 48 seconds and well worth your time. There is a passion and an compelling quality that comes through despite the language barrier that no plain transcript can deliver:



al-Sisi: Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live? Impossible!

I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema—Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now.

All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.

I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.
This is the speech Obama should have delivered in Cairo in 2009 where he bent over backwards to apologize to Muslims for America. And this speech by al-Sisi should be trumpeted by the Obama Administration. Instead, Obama is still punishing the Egyptian government for answering the call of millions of Egyptians who demanded the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical organization with direct historic ties to Al Queda.

It is only by recognizing the problem within Islam and it's linkage to terrorism that we can work to defeat the evil ideology that corrupts this religion. Sadly, Obama and so many on the left continue to refuse to admit the reality as presented by al-Sisi. Until they do, the problem will get worse, not better!

Friday, January 09, 2015

NY Times Sanitizes Connection to Islam From Statement by Eyewitness to Paris Massacre

The left's attempt to delink Islam from terrorism is so widespread. Is it any wonder we can't get a grip on the real nature of the terrorist threat?

A woman on the scene of the Paris massacre at the newspaper Charlie Hebdo gave her firsthand account of the horror in a report first printed in the New York Times. Initially, the report described how the woman was told by the gunman that he would not kill her but demanded she convert to Islam, read the Koran and cover herself (women are not supposed to show their faces in Islam).

But, in later editions the Times deleted the portion describing the terrorists demands. The Daily Caller has the full story. Just another example of the left wing media hiding the true motives for terrorism from their readers.

Can you imagine the Times omitting such a detail if a killer demanded a woman convert to Christianity? That would be the top headline on the front page. Not so with Islamic terrorists.

Is it any wonder why so many on the left do not understand the real nature of our enemy? 



Thursday, January 08, 2015

Contrasting Views on Islam: Appeasement and Delusion Vs. Reality

Why is it so difficult for Obama and the left to understand that violence and terror in the name of Islam is the problem?

Obama would not use the word Islam in connection with the Paris massacre. Never mind that the terrorists shouted Islamic slogans just as they have in so many other attacks including those in the U.S. For some reason the left refuses to connect Islam with the violence. This despite the President of Egypt in a New Year's day address in which he declared that it is the responsibility of Islam to correct the ideology that inspires these acts. It's unlikely you will hear Obama endorsing President al-Sisi's remarks.

No, the left seems stuck on seeing bogeymen everywhere but Islam. To Secretary of State John Kerry global warming is a bigger problem. And in the wake of the Paris killings what did the New York Times have to say? On their front page, following news reports of the attack a column declaring a "‘Dangerous Moment’ for Europe, as Fear and Resentment Grow." But the danger here was less from violent terrorists but more from an anti-Muslim backlash that might also include growing strength for right wing movements. Just like the U.S. Tea Party was a greater danger than terrorists the right in Europe apparently represents a greater danger than those who kill dozens in the street.

The lengths the left will go to avoid dealing with the reality of Muslim terrorism is staggering. Take the example of Aayan Hirsi Ali whose invitation to speak at Brandeis University was withdrawn after Muslims complained. Brandeis acted as the enabler to terrorists with their cowardly act. Fortunately, there are a few places where freedom of speech is still valued and Ms. Ali wriote an op-ed appearing in Thursday's Wall Street Journal. She begins by taking on the line that violence is un-Islamic. Certainly the killers who do these acts do not think so and they have plenty of scholarly Islamic allies to back them up.

Ali goes on to note that while we allow Muslims to believe what they want, we don't enforce our own views on them. And those belonging to other religions don't go around killing people who offend their religious beliefs. Finally:
How we respond to this attack is of great consequence. If we take the position that we are dealing with a handful of murderous thugs with no connection to what they so vocally claim, then we are not answering them. We have to acknowledge that today’s Islamists are driven by a political ideology, an ideology embedded in the foundational texts of Islam. We can no longer pretend that it is possible to divorce actions from the ideals that inspire them.

This would be a departure for the West, which too often has responded to jihadist violence with appeasement. We appease the Muslim heads of government who lobby us to censor our press, our universities, our history books, our school curricula. They appeal and we oblige. We appease leaders of Muslim organizations in our societies. They ask us not to link acts of violence to the religion of Islam because they tell us that theirs is a religion of peace, and we oblige.

What do we get in return? Kalashnikovs in the heart of Paris. The more we oblige, the more we self-censor, the more we appease, the bolder the enemy gets.
While Obama, the left and many in power continue to deny the link between Islam and terrorism and refuse to support those who understand, the problem continues to grow. We've tried it Obama's way but appeasement does not work. How many more will die before we try something else?

P.S. France has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world yet the terrorists had assualt weapons and a rocket propelled grenade. Even the cops were unarmed. Where are the gun grabbers who wag their finger at every shooting in the U.S.?



Dems Obstruct Majorities in New Congress. Obama Issues Three Veto Threats, Senate Dems Filibuster Keystone Pipeline

The Congress was only sworn in on Tuesday and already Obama and Dems seek to block what voters want!

How many times did Obama and the Dems claim the GOP was obstructing needed legislation? It was a spurious charge since Dems controlled the Senate and never allowed votes on dozens of House passed bills. The Washington Post Fact Checker even awarded Obama Four Pinocchios for falsely claiming that the GOP had filibustered "500 pieces of legislation." Of course Obama has gotten so many Pinocchios over the years that hardly anyone notices a new whopper.

But apparently hypocrisy was the last thing on minds of Obama and the Dems when they began making threats to halt legislation in the new Congress. Obama has issued three veto threats in two days. That must be a record. Senate Dems have launched their first filibuster against the Keystone pipeline.

While Obama continues to say he will work with the new GOP majority his actions continue to contradict his words. The last two years of his term he will be dubbed President No!

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

Terrorists Kill 12 in Paris, Obama Talks Tough. Finally. Sort of.

At least Obama had the courage to call the attack what it was and not "workplace violence" or a "spontaneous protest" gone wrong!

The terrorist attack by Islamists shouting "Allahu Akbar" as they killed writers at a magazine which had published cartoons satirical of the Prophet Mohammed has appalled and horrified the people of France and those around the world who still value free speech.

In a statement Obama called this "an attack on journalists, attack on our free press, also underscores the degree to which these terrorists fear freedom -- of speech and freedom of the press." But once again, Obama could not use the word "Islamic" in describing the terrorists. Did he think the Tea Party did this?

Still, his statement is quite a different tune then when he had the maker of a You Tube video jailed after terrorists attacked our diplomatic compound in Benghazi in which he blamed the video, and free speech, for the attack.

Remembering that at the time Obama spoke to the United Nations and said "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." And who can forget when he said in separate remarks "we reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." Except of course no one can remember him standing up for Christians who are under constant assault from members of his own party.

Readers may also recall the dozens of times Obama claimed that al Queda was on the path to defeat. Yet terrorists in today's attack identified themselves as belonging to al Queda in Yemen.

While Obama's words today are welcome they are years late. It's impossible to escape the consequences of his delusion over the evil nature of Islam and years of attempting to appease those who threaten violence in order to limit the freedoms (or lives) of others. To paraphrase Rev. Wright, Obama's chickens are coming home to roost and the world is a far more violent and deadly place as a result!

Monday, January 05, 2015

Prediction: Mini Revolution Against Speaker Boehner Not Enough to Unseat Him

There just isn't a significant and credible conservative alternative to Boehner!

A number of conservatives both inside the Congress and out are mad at Speaker Boehner. He's compromised with Obama a number of times and gotten burned in return. The latest flap involves the failure of the House to take any real action in opposition to Obama's unconstitutional action legalizing millions of aliens. Instead, the House under Boehner's leadership passed a spending bill giving Obama and the Democrats virtually everything they wanted with few crumbs thrown to the right. Newly elected members of the House were given no chance to have their say on spending and other actions which will effect their constituents during the year.

Boehner has always promised to fight when the time is right and yet that time never seems to come. Still, I have been patient over the years. Not so much with this list of conservative GOP members of Congress appearing in the Washington Post.

It would take 29 GOP defectors to throw the vote for Speaker to a second vote which would seriously undermine Boehner's position. The vote is to be held on Tuesday.

It's unlikely the effort will succeed. The Speaker has the power to control committee assignments and other goodies that members want. Opposing him has a definite downside. The other fact against success of this move is that none of those who are putting their names forward as a replacement would have the same support among House members that Boehner does.

Despite the outcome, it's good for conservatives to remind Boehner who brought him to this party!

Sunday, January 04, 2015

Big News in Ideological War Against Islamic Terrorism: Major Address by Egypt's President

What a shame he doesn't get more support from the Obama Administration!

At the time it seemed that the Obama Administration really wanted the radical Muslim Brotherhood (with close ties to terrorists) to stay in power in Egypt. After helping to throw out Mubarak after many years as a U.S. ally, the U.S. slapped the new government under President al-Sisi with huge cuts in aid after the Brotherhood was overthrown.

What a shame we didn't do more to maintain ties with al-Sisi. He gave a remarkable speech on New Year's Day that is exactly the kind of message we have been begging Arab leaders to make for years. In it he called for a "revolution" to defeat the message of radical Islam that has brought so much bloodshed and fear to the world.

Here's an excerpt:
I am referring here to the religious clerics. We have to think hard about what we are facing—and I have, in fact, addressed this topic a couple of times before. It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma [Islamic world] to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible!

That thinking—I am not saying “religion” but “thinking”—that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It’s antagonizing the entire world!

Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live?
Impossible!

I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema—Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now.

All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.

I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.
Now, if you were Obama and you REALLY wanted to defeat radical Islam would you not embrace this message and support al-Sisi? What does it say if Obama does not?

Thanks Obama. In the Wake of Giving Cuba Everything the Communists Wanted, They Crack Down Harder on Democracy Activists!

And now,with the further legitimacy and financial support Obama brings the Cuban Secret Police can crack down even harder!

In his first column of the new year Charles Krauthammer writes on the lopsided deal Obama got in re-establishing ties with Cuba:
If Obama insisted on giving away the store, why not at least do it item by item? We relax part of the embargo in return for, say, Internet access. And tie further normalization to serial relaxations of police-state repression.
...
From Cuba, Obama didn’t even get a token gesture. Not even a fig leaf such as, say, withdrawal of secret police support in Venezuela. Or extradition of American criminals now fugitive in Cuba, including a notorious cop killer. Did we even ask?

Obama seems to believe that the one-way deal was win-win. A famous victory — the Cuba issue is now behind us. A breakthrough.

Indeed it is. You know how to achieve a breakthrough in tough negotiations? Give everything away. Try it. You’ll have a deal by noon. Every time.
It's the same negotiating tactic Obama is trying with Iran. Lovely!

But I have to disagree with Krauthammer. This deal is worse than nothing. It may actually set back the slow course of human rights and democracy in Cuba. Here's the latest from an editorial in the Miami Herald:
Last week, a few courageous Cubans decided to test the intentions of the regime by attempting to carry out an “open mic” performance in Havana's Revolution Square. Led by Cuban artist Tania Bruguera, who splits her time between Havana and the United States, the plan was to ask citizens to speak about their visions for the country.

It was plainly a basic act of self-expression, the sort of thing that wouldn’t raise an eyebrow elsewhere —but is disallowed in police states like Cuba.

The plan never got off the ground. Ms. Bruguera and some 50 like-minded Cubans were arrested before the event could take place. Some, like journalist Reinaldo Escobar, husband of prominent dissident blogger Yoani Sánchez, were stopped by state security before they could leave their homes.

Two days later, Ms. Bruguera was arrested (again) along with several other dissidents after they went to a jail demanding the release of government opponents rounded up in the earlier crackdown.
I can't wait to see what fresh new hell Obama dreams up in negotiations with Iran!

Sharpton Shakedown: How Obama's Race Guru Makes Money

If a white guy did this he'd be prosecuted for blackmail!

It's no secret that Obama works hand in glove with Al Sharpton. But how does the king of the racebaiters, the guy who can be counted on to inflame any racial incident, make a living? The New York Post has the report. Here's an excerpt:
“Al Sharpton has enriched himself and NAN for years by threatening companies with bad publicity if they didn’t come to terms with him. Put simply, Sharpton specializes in shakedowns,” said Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal & Policy Center, a Virginia-based watchdog group that has produced a book on Sharpton.

And Sharpton, who now boasts a close relationship with Obama and Mayor de Blasio, is in a stronger negotiating position than ever.

“Once Sharpton’s on board, he plays the race card all the way through,” said a source who has worked with the Harlem preacher. “He just keeps asking for more and more money.”
...
Sharpton raised $1 million for NAN at his 60th birthday bash in October, with donations rolling in from unions and a corporate roster of contributors including AT&T, McDonald’s, Verizon and Walmart.

Companies have long gotten in line to pay Sharpton. Macy’s and Pfizer have forked over thousands to NAN, as have General Motors, American Honda and Chrysler.

NAN had repeatedly and without success asked GM for donations for six years beginning in August 2000, a GM spokesman told The Post. Then, in 2006, Sharpton threatened a boycott of GM over the planned closing of an African-American-owned dealership in The Bronx. He picketed outside GM’s Fifth Avenue headquarters. GM wrote checks to NAN for $5,000 in 2007 and another $5,000 in 2008.

Sharpton targeted American Honda in 2003 for not hiring enough African-Americans in management positions.“We support those that support us,” Sharpton wrote to the company. “We cannot be silent while African-Americans spend hard-earned dollars with a company that does not hire, promote or do business with us in a statistically significant manner.”Two months later, car-company leaders met with Sharpton, and Honda began to sponsor NAN’s events. The protests stopped.Sharpton landed a gig as a $25,000-a-year adviser to Pepsi after he threatened a consumer boycott of the soda company in 1998, saying its ads did not portray African-Americans. He held the position until 2007.
That's just a few of many examples. And it doesn't matter to Sharpton whether any of these companies actually change their hiring or other policies. He just cashes the check. The same goes with each of these racially charged incidents he inserts himself into. Once he milks the situation for all the publicity he can he moves on and those who claim to be aggrieved are left to fend for themselves.

And you thought Rev. Wright was a charlatan? Sharpton is the very worst sort of racial demagogue. The fact that Obama embraces him so closely is all we need to know about Obama's approach to racial issues!
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator