In the
2004 election,
the Democrats decided to run as weaker on national security
in a time of war.
Around the world, all the people who wanted America to lose the war,
or who didn't care,
preferred the Democrats.
The Democrats lost,
and I wondered if they would
learn the lesson of 2004
- that they needed to move to the right,
and propose someone who would take the war seriously.
Sadly, no, is the answer.
In 2008, for some reason,
the Democrats decided the answer was to move further left.
Again,
as in the 2004 election,
all the people who want America to lose,
or who don't care,
prefer the Democrats.
Again, it seems that
the Republicans are far more committed than the
Democrats are
to victory in the global War on Islamism.
This is a bad situation for the Democrats to be in,
but they have got themselves into it again.
The result, I suspect, is that they will lose again.
"It's clear that
the Democratic Party believes a radical left candidate is their best chance to win the White House
this year."
-
Charles Johnson, 31 May 2008, on the Democratic Party's decision to risk everything
and nominate a far leftist rather than a centrist.
Hillary Clinton
would not have been the worst president.
She has an inner steel.
My fear would have been of
the team she would bring in with her - people like
Madeleine Albright,
Richard Holbrooke
and
Sandy Berger
- the same group
that allowed the global Islamist threat grow under Bill Clinton.
She also promised to organise American defeat and withdrawal
in Iraq
as soon as she got into office.
I doubt she would have honoured that promise, though,
whereas Obama, I fear, will.
But McCain has a good record on the War on Islamism.
He understands totalitarianism
(having been its tortured captive
for half a decade).
He understands Islamism.
He understands the need for victory in Iraq.
He supported (indeed called for) the unpopular
2007 troops surge
that may, it seems, be bringing about a stunning victory.
Between McCain and the naive leftist Obama, for me there is no contest.
McCain's torture by the communist Vietnamese war criminals.
McCain sums up the choice on Iraq:
McCain wants victory, an end to casualties,
and then it doesn't matter if troops stay on as in Germany and Korea.
He wants the troops home after winning,
and he argues that we are winning.
Obama, on the other hand, just wants the troops home.
He doesn't care if that means America loses the war.
He doesn't care if that makes a waste of all their sacrifice.
He doesn't care if that means Iraq descends into genocidal hell
and becomes a radical Al Qaeda state.
He doesn't care if that means the jihad is emboldened all around the world,
and millions flock to join a winning cause.
He just wants the troops home.
Obama's pathetic reaction to 9/11, printed 19 Sept 2001:
"We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers
...
It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, 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 — children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores."
Of course, this is all nonsense.
The 9/11 attackers were driven by oil wealth, Islamism and hope,
not by poverty and despair.
And they are not "children" or animals who cannot help what they do.
They are adults - moral agents responsible for their own evil actions.
In 2001, Bush understood 9/11 far better than Obama did.
Some funny comments on Obama's theories
here,
including:
"I guess we should just kill the poor."
Australian Prime Minister
John Howard,
Feb 2007,
on Obama's plan to quit Iraq by Mar 2008:
"I think that will just encourage those who want to completely destabilize and destroy Iraq,
and create chaos and a victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory.
If I were running al Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008
and be praying as many times as possible for a victory, not only for Obama
but also for the Democrats."
Obama responds
by ridiculing Australia - one of America's only allies in the world.
Like John Kerry, he only has contempt for countries that are fool enough
to support America and fight with it.
Comment:
"You gotta love the Democrats. 'We should have more friends! We need allies!'
'Except the ones we have now -- they can fuck off!'"
Obama, Sept 2007, wants to surrender to the jihad in Iraq immediately.
"There is no military solution in Iraq, and there never was. The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year -- now."
Obama's foreign policy adviser
Zbigniew Brzezinski
visited the enemy state of Syria in Feb 2008 and idiotically said that
Syria shared with America
"a common desire to achieve stability in the region".
Criticism of Obama:
Obama: Old Wine, New Bottle, Mona Charen, February 15, 2008.
"He is clearly the most gifted speaker to grace American politics since Ronald Reagan. And as with Reagan, there is a basic decency to Obama that blunts dislike.
...
But when you get past the music and really focus on the lyrics, Obama emerges as an utterly conventional, down-the-line liberal Democrat. He claims to be all about the future, but his policy ideas are about as modern as disco and the leisure suit.
...
The war on terror scarcely exists in the world Obama traces for his audiences.
Instead, he focuses relentlessly on what he regards as the misguided war in Iraq. "We need to do more than end the war," he intones, "we need to end the mindset that got us into war." We know which mindset Sen. Obama will bring to foreign policy -- the "diplomacy only" style last employed to such great effect by Jimmy Carter."
Barack Obama and Israel, Ed Lasky, January 16, 2008
- on Obama's foreign policy (such as it can be worked out).
The Next Great Awakening: Obama 2008's messianic fervor won't last, Charles Krauthammer, February 15, 2008:
"Obama has an astonishingly empty paper trail. He's going around issuing promissory notes on the future that he can't possibly redeem. Promises to heal the world with negotiations with the likes of Iran's Ahmadinejad.
...
My guess is that he can maintain the spell just past Inauguration Day. After which will come the awakening. It will be rude."
The "Yes We Can" song
illustrates the problem with Obama's campaign (and perhaps all "youth" politics).
It is entirely content free.
It never even tries
to explain what this "change" is all about.
So Obama is young, sexy and black. So what?
What's important is his policies, not what he looks like.
What's important is, for example, how he will deal with the global Islamist enemy.
And since all the people who don't want to fight the global Islamist enemy
(like the makers of this song,
who are anti-Iraq War)
seem to like Obama,
it's obvious that this "change" is about nothing good.
This anti-McCain song,
based on "Yes We Can",
is very funny
(even though I would vote for McCain).
The Wit & Wisdom of Barack Obama, Andrew Ferguson, Mar 2008, points out that Obama's speeches are nothing new
but just the standard meaningless boilerplate of presidential campaigns,
both Democrat and Republican:
"Onward they plod, these old warhorse phrases, until Obama climbs to the climax of his stump speech. Head bowed, brow furrowed, eyes flashing, he announces that we "will choose unity over division [Jesse Jackson, 1992]. We will choose hope over fear [Bill Clinton and John Kerry, 2004]. And we will choose the future over the past [Al Gore, 1992]." In so doing, we will overcome our "moral deficit [Bush, 2000; Gore, 2000; Newt Gingrich, 1994]" by "bringing people beyond the divisions of race and class [Clinton 1992]" because the "story of our country [Ross Perot, 1992]" or the "genius of our country [Bush 2000]" or the "wonder of our country [George H.W. Bush, 1988]" is, as Obama says in 2008, "ordinary people doing extraordinary things [Perot, Bush, Bush, and Ronald Reagan, 1984]."
Talk like this is the elevator music of politics, soothing and inoffensive and unavoidable. Obama has had the unbelievable luck to attract listeners who seem to think he's minted it fresh."
Obama is a far left-winger who claims to be able to "unite" the country:
As Mark Steyn puts it:
"He wants to waft us upward on a great uniting bipartisan marshmallow of "hope" and "change" so he can implement down-the-line by-the-book highly partisan hopeless unchanged liberal policies."
Or
as
Rich Lowry
says, it is hard to ignore
"the central contradiction of Obama's campaign - an orthodox liberal politician who rose to prominence in a left-wing milieu in Chicago and has never broken with his party on anything of consequence is campaigning on unifying the country. There is nothing particularly unifying about Obama's past and his voting record."
Thomas Sowell, April 15, 2008:
"Senator Obama's election year image is that of a man who can bring the country together, overcoming differences of party or race
...
There is, of course, not a speck of evidence that Obama has ever transcended party differences in the United States Senate. Voting records analyzed by the National Journal show him to be the farthest left of anyone in the Senate. Nor has he sponsored any significant bipartisan legislation"
The "Yes We Can" song.
The Reagan version.
From here:
And other mix:
From Cuban-American Pundits.
Libertas:
"Obama's no Reagan. Reagan inspired talking about the greatness of America
not the greatness of "change,"
Reagan talked about the promise of America,
not the promise of "hope."
But the biggest difference is that Reagan was always talking to us as fellow Americans not as his followers. Reagan was about America. Obama's above wearing a lapel flag. Reagan was an optimist about America. Obama's a doom and gloomer."
Castro lover
Alice Walker
supports Obama.
"I want an end to the war immediately, and I want the soldiers to be encouraged to destroy their weapons and drive themselves out of Iraq."
And she thinks Obama is the man to support.
Damning words indeed.
Baraka said in a
"poem"
that the Jews of New York knew about 9/11 in advance:
"Who the Beast in Revelations;
Who 666;
Who decide;
Jesus get crucified;
...
Who told 4000 Israeli workers at the Twin Towers;
To stay home that day;
Why did Sharon stay away?"
In response to this, the Governor of New Jersey ..
abolished the NJ Poet Laureate title! (Yes!)
John Derbyshire reviews Baraka's "poem".
And replies with a hilarious poem of his own:
"Who praises despots, wreckers of nations;
Murderers, despoilers of innocence - Kabila, Lumumba, Lenin, Che;
...
Who believes the most transparent driveling anti-Semitic lies about 9/11;
...
Who put one over on the guilty white liberals at those fool Art Councils;
Who's an illiterate moron".
Who!
More quotes:
"Most American white men are trained to be fags. ... The average [white person] thinks of the black man as potentially raping every white lady in sight. Which is true, in the sense that the black man should want to rob the white man of everything he has. But for most whites the guilt of the robbery is the guilt of rape. That is, they know in their deepest hearts that they should be robbed, and the white woman understands that only in the rape sequence is she likely to get cleanly, viciously popped."
He glorified crime:
"[The white man] owes you anything you want, even his life. All the stores will open if you say the magic words. The magic words are: Up against the wall mother fucker this is a stick up! ... Let's get together and kill him my man.""Rape the white girls. Rape their fathers. Cut the mothers' throats.""We [blacks] must eliminate the white man before we can draw a free breath on this planet".
Anyway, we discover that (of course) this brain-dead hate-monger supports Obama.
"Obama's entering in a different fashion to Rice and Powell and we hope that there can be enough influence by progressives, and by the Afro-American people, to see that his course is somewhat different."
An Al Aqsa Brigades terrorist says Obama's rise is
"an important success. He won popularity in spite of the Zionists and the conservatives."
Another Al Aqsa Brigades terrorist said Democrat candidates' anti-Iraq war positions
"prove that important leaders are understanding the situation differently and are understanding the price and the consequences of the American policy in Iraq and in the world."
The unelected dictator
and butcher of Americans
Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi likes Obama:
"Along came a black citizen of Kenyan African origins, a Muslim, who had studied in an Islamic school in Indonesia. His name is Obama. All the people in the Arab and Islamic world and in Africa applauded this man. They welcomed him and prayed for him and for his success".
This vile dictator, in between mocking democracy,
seems to indicate that everyone else in the Middle East who hates democracy
likes Obama.
The flag of communist Cuba,
with a picture of communist killer
Che Guevara,
on the wall of a Barack Obama campaign office, Texas, Feb 2008.
From here.
It's not that Obama supports foreign totalitarianism.
It's more that people who appease or support foreign totalitarianism
support Obama.
Interview with Maria Isabel who hung the flag:
No apologies.
"I hope that the new presidency in the United States... I pray for the safety of Barack Obama, and I pray that he can shift the United States attitude to this question.
...
So as we come towards the November elections, and the real prospect of a significant victory for Obama, everyone will have to re-find their footing, and these puppet presidents and corrupt kings may discover that the ground has moved under their feet, Allah willing."
- The disgusting jihad supporter
George Galloway
supports Obama.
See transcript.
Obama, being young, sexy, black, and left-wing
(it would never have happened if he was right-wing),
got a free ride from the media for most of his
campaign.
But finally, in March 2008, the media (both "old" media and "new" media) did their job,
and we got a proper look at Obama's background.
It turns out that for 20 years he has been attending
a radical, anti-American church,
where the most appalling hard-left, black separatist, political vitriol against America
has been spewed from the pulpit on a regular basis.
The preacher at Obama's radical anti-American church,
Rev. Jeremiah Wright
(and search),
who married him, baptised his children,
who seems to have brought him to Christianity in the first place,
and who he has credited many times
in print
and in
speeches
as an inspiration,
turns out to be a nasty, hard-left, America-hating fanatic.
Wright says the U.S. government invented AIDS to kill black people.
"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color."
He says the U.S. government sells the drugs that destroy black communities.
He says the U.S. had 9/11 coming
because of its terrorist policies.
"and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."
He says America is responsible for world terror, wars and poverty:
"America is still the No. 1 killer in the world".
"We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty."
He says the U.S. and Al Qaeda are the same thing"under a different color flag".
He says the U.S. government knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen.
He calls the USA "an oppressive society" against blacks.
He tells his audience (including children) to regard the police as corrupt.
And on and on, with endless grievance against the whites,
as if Obama isn't richer than most of the whites in the world
(Obama is far richer than me,
for example).
Wright himself
drives a Porsche
and is moving into a
10,000 square foot mansion.
Wright says about America:
"Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run. No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body."
Rather ignoring:
(a) that Obama is being seriously considered for president,
and: (b) that the Republicans appointed
a black woman
as Secretary of State.
Apart from all the anti-white whining,
Wright is just so obviously stupid and poorly read
it makes you wonder about the intelligence of anyone who would follow him.
It is very sad.
Obama was meant to be the post-racist candidate,
the one who was over the past and wanted to move on.
The one who was grateful for his privileged
Ivy League
education
and his wealthy millionaire
status.
The one who had no interest in the whining grievance culture, victim mentality
and race confrontation
of previous black Democrat candidates like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
And now we discover that Obama's mentor is exactly that type of person.
And Obama exposes his family to precisely that type of mentality week after week.
In my opinion,
no one who attends Wright's church is fit to be US President.
And most Americans will agree with me.
Obama's presidential run is probably doomed.
God Bless New Media
- Libertas on the breaking of the
Obama preacher story.
"Anyone old enough to remember life under the regime of ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, and CNN knows how frustrating it was to watch the liberal media continually circle the tanks for left-wing candidates and causes.
...
Today, the media's finally been democratized by blogs, cable news, and talk radio
- and listen to the left howl."
Now,
"the Obama/Wright story exploded, Obama's chances of becoming President took a dramatic hit, and Anderson Cooper was forced to do practically a full-hour examining the story ... But none of this would've happened 15 years-ago. None of this would've happened without New Media. Without New Media John Kerry would probably be President and Dan Rather still a network anchor with a notch on his gun for taking down George W. Bush."
Criticism of Obama
Mark Steyn
(and here)
is unimpressed by Obama's denials that he knew about the
America-hating sermons of his long-term pastor and mentor.
As Steyn says:
"It seems hard to believe you could spend 20 minutes in this pastor's company, never mind 20 years (as the Obamas have), without figuring he's a race-baiting loon."
Comment:
"Obama is going to go on national TV tomorrow and ask US ( US here specifically ) to believe that after 20 years being a member of Rev Wright's church, WE knew before he did that his Rev is an ignorant, bigoted, racist. Yeah a man with that kind of judgement is just who I want with his finger on the button!"
The Dishonesty of Hope, Rich Lowry, March 18, 2008.
"Are we to believe that the Rev. Wright had the ushers scan the crowd at every service and, if Barack Obama and his family were present, reverted to a mainstream Christianity and colorblind calls for love and mercy? ...
When Wright loosed his broadsides against the United States, members of the congregation didn't look at each other awkwardly because their pastor had said something uncharacteristic and embarrassing. Instead, they erupted in paroxysms of affirmation; they were used to such statements and enjoyed them."
And if you think I, and the writers above, are just "racists",
read the black conservative
Thomas Sowell:
"The bad news is that Barack Obama has been leading .. a double life
...
Equality means that a black demagogue who has been exposed as a phony deserves exactly the same treatment as a white demagogue who has been exposed as a phony."
Amy Holmes:
"What this may actually prove is the old, pre-Obama conventional wisdom that the first black president will more likely be a conservative - someone who has already grappled with, and rejected, victim based politics. Can you picture Michael Steele, Shelby Steele, Thomas Sowell, John McWhorter, Condoleezza Rice or any number of thoughtful black conservatives listening to Pastor Wright's sermonizing for one afternoon let alone years on end?"
"A More Perfect Union" (and here),
Barack Obama, Mar 18th, 2008 - Obama's vague, dodgy, platitudinous speech
tries to weasel out of his long association with Rev. Wright. (Well what else could he do?)
"Did I ever hear him make remarks that
could be considered controversial
while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed."
As if any normal American ever
hears such anti-American hatred spewed in their church or synagogue.
About Wright, Obama says:
"I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can
my white grandmother
- a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."
Amazing. He compares the vile Rev. Wright, with his rants of hatred against America,
with his loving, elderly white grandmother, who raised him and loved him
after his black father abandoned him.
Obama is a fraud. It's very sad.
Because I initially thought he wasn't.
The real story about his grandmother:
"isn't it amazing that Mr. Obama is happy to call his sainted grandmother who raised him a racist, but he still can't bring himself to say that Mr. Wright is one?"
Criticism of Obama's dreadful speech:
Charles Krauthammer:
"The question is why didn't he leave that church?
...
Obama's 5,000-word speech ... is little more than an elegantly crafted, brilliantly sophistic justification of that scandalous dereliction.
His defense rests on two central propositions: (a) moral equivalence and (b) white guilt."
Melanie Phillips:
"Yes, Obama is a person who would trash his own grandmother to gain the American presidency!"
This post has a great comment:
"After twenty years in that church what positive affect did Obama have on the thinking of parishioners, on the bigoted pastor? The answer is - none. So why should we believe he would help heal our country?"
And another:
"If Obama cannot ask a bigoted preacher whom he's known for donkeys' years to change his views what is he going to do when dealing with people like Putin and all of the other bullies he'll face?"
Mark Steyn:
"The Reverend Wright believes that AIDS was created by the government of the United States ... for the explicit purpose of killing millions of its own citizens.
...
Does he really believe this? If so, he's crazy,
and no sane person would sit through his gibberish, certainly not for 20 years."
On Obama's unworthy remarks about his grandmother:
"When the British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan dumped some of his closest cabinet colleagues to extricate himself from a political crisis, the Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe responded: "Greater love hath no man than to lay down his friends for his life."
...
Asked about the sin of racism beating within Gran'ma's breast, Obama said on TV that "she's a typical white person."
Which doesn't sound like the sort of thing the supposed "post-racial" candidate ought to be saying, but let that pass. How "typically white" is Obama's grandmother? She is the woman who raised him - that's to say, she brought up a black grandchild and loved him unconditionally. Burning deep down inside, she may nurse a secret desire to be
Simon Legree
or Bull Connor, but it doesn't seem very likely."
Christopher Hitchens:
"You often hear it said, of some political or other opportunist, that he would sell his own grandmother if it would suit his interests. But you seldom, if ever, see this notorious transaction actually being performed
...
Mark my words: This disappointment is only the first of many that are still to come."
Newt Gingrich destroys Obama's speech:
Victor Davis Hanson, March 15, 2008, thinks this could be the beginning of the end for Obama:
"I think this will not go away, and ultimately damage Obama beyond repair ... This was precisely why Hillary stayed in the race, and mirabile dictu, perhaps what she imagined would eventually transpire."
Victor Davis Hanson, March 24, 2008:
"For some bizarre reason, Obama aimed his speech at winning praise from National Public Radio, the New York Times, and Harvard, and solidifying an already 90-percent solid African-American base - while apparently insulting the intelligence of everyone else.
...
Over the past four days, I asked seven or eight random
.. Americans in southern California what they thought of Obama's candidacy ... The answers, without exception, were essentially: "Forget the speech. I would never vote for Obama after listening to Wright.""
He thinks the Democrats are heading towards a situation where they will be explaining
"all autumn long that the party masthead really does not like Rev. Wright, whose massive corpus of buffoonery no doubt is still to be mined."
Like John Kerry and the Swift Boat veterans,
this issue is not going to go away.
Too late.
Way too late.
After defending him in March
("I can no more disown him than .."),
after listening to him for 20 years,
Obama only finally acts once it becomes clear Wright could end his run for president.
But it's too late.
Nothing Obama does now can save this situation.
This issue will never end.
This issue will (and rightly so) end his run for president.
Blog:
"Obama claims he found Wright's racial rhetoric "appalling" and "that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate." For some reason it took the man who would be Messiah 20 years to figure out what it took the rest of us 20 seconds to figure out."
Richard Baehr:
"Many Americans did not have to wait for Wright's talk to the National Press Club to have taken offense. In fact, there is nothing the Reverend said Monday or with Bill Moyers on PBS, or at the NAACP dinner in Detroit (to thunderous ovations) that was in any substantive way different from what he has been saying over and over again for decades (to thunderous applause among the thousands packing Trinity Church). We had already heard about the US government bringing AIDS into the black community, and how Louis Farrakhan was a great American.
So why did this particular performance by Wright finally create the need for Obama to speak up more forcefully? That answer is simple: falling poll numbers in Indiana, North Carolina and nationally, and to that, we can safely conclude, Barack Obama takes great offense."
The 'Race' Speech Revisited, Charles Krauthammer, May 2, 2008,
is amused that Obama, having said he never would, now disowns Wright.
"Obama decided to cut off Wright not because Wright's words or character or views had suddenly changed. The only thing that changed was the venue in which Wright chose to display them -- live on national TV at the National Press Club. That unfortunate choice destroyed Obama's Philadelphia pretense that this "endless loop" of sermon excerpts being shown on "television sets and YouTube" had been taken out of context."
The bottom line remains that this story is hugely important, and will never end:
"This 20-year association with Wright calls into question everything about Obama: his truthfulness in his serially adjusted stories of what he knew and when he knew it; his judgment in choosing as his mentor, pastor and great friend a man he just now realizes is a purveyor of racial hatred; and the central premise of his campaign, that he is the bringer of a 'new politics' "
Obama leaves the church, May 2008.
After 20 years!
After 20 years you only leave this church when the rest of us attack it!
After donating thousands of dollars to it!
Do you really suddenly disagree with this stuff?
Or is this just a cynical, tactical, sleazy political move?
See his resignation letter.
Attack ads:
Proposed 30 second ad:
"What does Barack Obama really believe in? His spiritual teacher for 20 years has been Jeremiah Wright. Wright wedded Obama & his wife. Obama named his book from a sermon of Wright's. [Insert video of favorable comment about Wright by Obama]. What has Jeremiah Wright taught Obama? [Insert rabid clip of Wright capped by "God Damn America!! God Damn America!!"] We need a solid patriot to lead our nation. Someone we can trust. Vote John McCain 2008."
"Is Obama Wright?"
Clips
of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's appalling sermons.
Obama on the cover of his own church's
(Rev. Jeremiah Wright's)
appalling
Trumpet magazine, Mar 2007.
See
extracts
from this radical, hard left magazine.
Image from here.
See full size.
Nation of Islam
crackpot and hate-monger
Louis Farrakhan
on the cover of Trumpet, 2007.
See full size.
Image from
this roundup of covers,
which says:
"Besides Wright himself ... I found only one person who put in as many cover appearances as Obama in the bulletins I currently have available. ... That person would be 'The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan' "
Hate-monger
Al Sharpton
also
appeared on the cover
in October 2006.
Syrian pro-democracy reformists are horrified by Pelosi, Apr 04, 2007:
"A Hijab is NOT a confirmation of the rights of women in the Middle East but rather a symbol of their suppression.
...
Pelosi just reversed the work of the Syrian civil society and
those who aspire for women's freedom in the Muslim countries
many years back with her visual statement.
...
Assad could not have been happier because Syrian women, seeing a US official confirming what their husbands, the Imams in the Mosques tell them, and the society at large imposes on them through peer pressure will see in her wearing a Hijab as a confirmation of the societal pressures they are constantly under.
...
The damage Speaker Pelosi is causing with her visit to Syria will be felt for many years to come."
The Trouble With Islam by ex-jihadi Tawfik Hamid, April 3, 2007
- "it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals
... have become obstacles to reforming Islam.
Political correctness among Westerners obstructs unambiguous criticism of Shariah's inhumanity.
...
The tendency of many Westerners to restrict themselves to self-criticism further obstructs reformation in Islam.
...
When Westerners make politically-correct excuses for Islamism,
it actually endangers the lives of reformers
and in many cases has the effect of suppressing their voices."
Syrians bolstered by 'good American' Pelosi, May 2, 2007.
Of course by "Syrians" they don't mean the Syrians that support democracy and human rights.
They mean the Syrians that support the regime.
One said her trip
- "bolsters the regime with the Syrian people, and it shows that isolating Syria won't work.""She was enormously popular here, a hero.
This is the best thing that has happened here,
if it proves [Assad] was right not to give concessions."
The idiot Nancy Pelosi "urged"
Syria to stop supporting the jihad in Iraq,
release the Israeli soldiers held captive in Syria,
and end Syria's support for terrorism.
Why would Syria do any of that?
After Pelosi's Syria Visit, Dissidents Cower, Katherine Zoepf, May 15, 2007
- "perverse as it may seem to some American liberals,
it is the Syrians who are most sympathetic to their progressive values
who have been most critical of Ms. Pelosi's attempts to begin a dialogue with Syria's government."
Islamic Jihad enemy fighter
expressed hope that the Democrats will continue winning elections:
"If the Democrats want to make negotiations with Syria, Hamas, and Hizbullah,
this means the Democratic Party understands well what happens in this area
...
I hope she wins the next elections"
This enemy fighter is
hopeful that the Democrats will bring about American defeat in Iraq:
"Al-Batch expressed hope Pelosi and the Democratic Party will pressure Bush
to create dialogue with Syria and Middle East "resistance movements"
and prompt an American withdrawal from Iraq."
"Bush and Dr. Rice made so many mistakes in the Middle East.
...
But I think some changes are happening for the Bush administration's foreign policy
because of the hand of Nancy Pelosi. I think the Democratic Party can do things the best.
... Pelosi is going down a good road by this policy of dialogue"
says this enemy totalitarian who hates democracy and human rights.
High praise indeed.
A Hamas enemy leader shows how the Democrats encourage the jihad to keep going
and even escalate:
"Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' military wing in the Gaza Strip,
said the willingness by some lawmakers to talk with Syria
'is proof of the importance of the resistance against the US'."
So step it up, is the obvious conclusion.
"The plan Mr. Edwards presented ...
calls for a 10,000-person "Marshall Corps" to deal with issues ranging from worldwide poverty and economic development to clean drinking water and micro-lending. He said investing in those areas would shore up weak nations and help ensure that terrorism does not take root there. That, he said, would allow the country to stop potential terrorists before they even join the ranks."
Someone with a brain responds:
"The president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Clifford May, said he was "skeptical" of Mr. Edwards's proposal.
"Humanitarian aid is a good thing. I approve of that. But it doesn't really have much to do with the causes of terrorism," Mr. May said. "Mohamed Atta, the lead terrorist on 9/11, was based in Germany, was well-educated. The causes of terrorism are several, but poverty is not one of them.""
Democrat
Harry Reid, Apr 2007, says about Iraq:
"I believe ... that this war is lost".
Articulate and eloquent soldiers reply to Harry Reid.
"I am a US Army Reservist.
...
I
certainly hope you can sense the pride I have in my unit and my service.
That pride will soon be stripped from me in defeat.
...
The Democrats have wanted Iraq to become a Vietnam for George Bush from
the start. You, sir, finally have your Vietnam parallel. This war has
been pure politics for you and the Democrats. You have now conceded
defeat when the Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and Airmen
have not.
...
From the beginning you and your ilk have sat on the sidelines, our
sidelines, declaring the immorality, illegality, and the futility of
your country's efforts. In emergency medicine there is an old saying; if
your patient believes he is dying, he probably will. Your stance on Iraq
will prove to be just that sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.
...
We are winning this war. Just look at the signs. The enemy cannot safely
wear uniforms, they cannot confront us directly, and instead they hide
amongst and target unarmed civilians. When they succeed in blowing up an
unsuspecting marketplace, they can count on you to dutifully deliver the
big sound bite about how the civilian body count is direct evidence that
the war is lost. Then you tell the same enemy that all they need to do
is kill more civilians and wait, kill more civilians and wait, kill more
civilians and wait."
Al Qaeda in Iraq are pleased.
They follow the western news, and they
quote Harry Reid approvingly:
".. This comes on the heels of an important statement by House Majority Leader Harry Reid
who previously said,
"The Iraqi war is hopeless and the situation in Iraq is same as it was in Vietnam."
...
This is how the cross worshipping occupiers and their henchmen live. Their morale continues to collapse as the result of the increasing strikes of the Mujahideen, carried out by the grace of Allah.
...
The signs of victory can be seen and the cross worshipper's defeat is obvious and progressive, all praise be to Allah."
Bush vetos it,
but Bush will be gone soon,
and the resolution sends a message to the Iraqi jihadi "resistance"
to keep going,
and even escalate.
If only they can hang on for another year or two,
the Democrats will give them victory.
As
Charles Johnson
says:
"all they have to do is hang on for another year and a half.
That's nothing, compared to 14 centuries of jihad."
Trailer for
One Bright Shining Moment,
documentary about George McGovern's anti-war presidential run in 1972.
McGovern lost the election in a landslide,
but his side ultimately won on the war.
America gave up, abandoned its allies to communist darkness,
and the communists killed millions of people.
"Where is the audacity of hope when it comes to backing the success of our troops all the way to victory in Iraq? What we heard last night was the timidity of despair."
-
John McCain, Feb 2008, on Obama's plans for Iraq.
"I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the war — only of ending it. But if we don’t win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president."
-
John McCain, 21 July 2008, on Obama's plan for "ending" the war in Iraq.
Also here.
Obama finally tries to disown Wright, Apr 2008.
