Obama and Democrat incompetence on display in Honduras

President Obama and his party insisted that America’s standing in the world had diminished under George Bush – that we’d lost our moral compass. However, it is Obama and ultimately his own party which bears the responsibility for their backing of the enemies of America in the Honduran affair. Says the NY Post this morning:


It took a week for President Obama to say something of substance against the violent repression of anti-government protesters in Iran. Fear of meddling, he said, was the reason for the delay.

Yet it took just hours for him to publicly denounce the removal of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, an ally of Venezuelan America-hater Hugo Chavez, by that nation’s army and demand his immediate reinstatement.

No fear of meddling this time.

That’s because Barack Obama’s foreign policy is very much a moment-to-moment affair, with no guiding principles.

Certainly, President George W. Bush would’ve understood that what has been portrayed as a “banana republic” military coup was nothing of the sort — that Zelaya’s ouster was meant to preserve Honduran democracy, not suppress it.

Zelaya’s removal, after all, came at the direct order of the Honduran Supreme Court and was approved by both the nation’s attorney general and its Congress.

Replacing Zelaya as president was not a military junta but the head of the Congress, a member of Zalaya’s own political party, which had declared him unfit for public office. And the replacement immediately called for new national elections and vowed to abide by the results.

Some coup.

In fact, the monumentally incompetent Zelaya had tried to follow in Chavez’s anti-democratic footsteps, unilaterally overturning Honduras’ constitution by staging an illegal referrendum to give cover to his plan to sidestep strict term limits and run for re-election indefinitely.

When the head of the army refused to cooperate, Zelaya fired him — a move the Supreme Court quickly declared illegal.

Sad to say, international opinion backed Obama and rallied behind Zelaya.

The UN General Assembly called for Zelaya’s reinstatement (which gives a pretty clear indication of just which side holds the high moral ground here).

And the Organization of American States — which just recently moved to readmit Castro’s Cuba after a 47-year suspension — threatened to suspend Honduras’ membership unless Zelaya is reinstated.

Bad enough that Obama doesn’t seem to know when taking sides constitutes irresponsible meddling — and when it doesn’t.

Even worse that when he does choose teams, he chooses the wrong one.

Is it that he just doesn’t understand what’s happening in Honduras or is he siding with Chavez and the Castro brothers? Either is unacceptable. As we’ve not heard anything from Obama or Hillary in the last few days, I hope they’ve realized their folly and are just waiting for the Hondurans to take care of themselves. We’ve not seen any high level meetings between Zelaya and US officials.

Still a better lesson to be learned is by the actions of the UN and OAS. It needs to be clear to to us now just how leftward leaning the organizations have become. Democrats owe an apology to John Bolton for taking them on to protect American interests and those of our allies. Talk about needing a reset button. It only took Obama and the Democrats 5 months to screw up foreign policy.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

When backed into a corner, the Obamaites tell us, “we won”

Robert Gibbs did so again when asked about former President George Bush’s speech this week.

We kept score last November, and we won,” Gibbs said.

Nice. JC Arenas answers:

I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of the Left hoisting their championship belts from the previous two election cycles. Their presidential campaign was victorious due to an illusory platform left open to interpretation, one that allowed the public to paint a better picture of a “New America” than their candidate could have painted himself. In fact, he had to misrepresent his agenda to reach the Oval Office and now we know exactly what the words hope and change mean. Yes, they won the election, but they’re losing the country.

The problem is the Left believes that this nation is a game or prize to be won and a victorious election cycle is a mandate to do whatever the hell they see fit, the rest of us be damned. We don’t side with them on the radicalization of our economy, national security, healthcare, and foreign policy, but they know better than us common folk so they’re going to continue moving forward anyway.

What the citizens of this nation need is a government that is truly representative of the people, not their own rationalism. I don’t care what the name of that party of representatives is, but as long as they demonstrate a true love for this country and an avoidance to burden our society with the government’s nimiety, then we can all take some advice from the current president.

Don’t boo the Left, vote against them.

Don’t be taken by libertarian foolishness either. Folks are going to have to hold Democrats of all shape and size accountable and throw them out next year.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

Why Obama is wrong on Iran

From Michael Barone:

Obama is said to be following a realist foreign policy. Don’t worry about human rights; propitiate evil dictators and make deals with them. But if the issue is to avoid a nuclear-armed Iran aiming its weapons at its neighbors, what is realistic? It seems to me Obama is giving up a small but nontrivial chance of advancing regime change for a zero chance of achieving a change in regime behavior. That sounds to me like a rigid adherence to ideology—the ideology in this case being opposition to George W. Bush’s rhetorical and sometimes successful drive to advance democracy and freedom—rather than a pragmatic attempt to take advantage of an unexpected development—the demonstrations against an election result morphing into an existential challenge to an evil regime. From the candidate of hope and change we get a commitment of hopelessness and the status quo. What do all our idealists on the left who cheered candidate Obama and are cheering the Iranian demonstrators think of this?

Is that what Obama is about here – just being against George Bush?

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

Another compelling essay that details why it is likely that Bill Ayers penned Obama’s celebrated memoir

Jack Cashill catalogs numerous instances in Dreams of My Father which factually and rhetorically mirror Bill Ayer’s own memoir penned in 2001, Fugitive Days.

These stories and speculations are not new and only add to the amazing mystery that is our President. Dreams is certainly masterfully written, yet in no other work does Obama either write in a similar style or with such obvious talent. The implications of fraud are hard for even conservative American to contemplate. The unrepentant terrorist and enemy to America, Bill Ayers, would never admit to such a deed. No matter what comes of the Obama presidency or revelations of this book, the speculation about who actually wrote Dreams will prove to be one of America’s greatest mysteries.

So as the book itself serves as an almost singular reason for the assumed Obama genious, considering the opposite is too painful for Democrats. Cashill summarizes this here:

For the literary left, the fact that Ayers helped Obama would be a less troubling revelation than that Obama needed help at all. They have built a foundational myth around his genius, a genius that can be located only in Dreams. The dark side of the Democrat genius mythology, of course, is the Republican dunce mythology of which Sarah Palin and George Bush are the most recent victims.

There is thus a logic to the left’s willful blindness. Why the literary right has accepted this charade continues to baffle me.

The search in some circles of Obama’s place of birth, his mystery years and numerous curious relationships remain dark shadows over the president. His radical domestic agendas and stealth moves against Israel do nothing but provide reason for worry.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

Democrats continue their Alinsky tactics against Sarah Palin

Pick the target. Freeze it. Personlize it. Polarize it.

One of many memorable Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals that Americans should find as common place since the Clinton years. The legendary communist still influences they way Democrats make political hay. Alinsky Rules are still at work with another true believer in Barack Obama. But no where do we see this frightening tactic at its zenith but in the continuous Democrat party attacks on Sarah Palin.

If one looks closely its easy to see this Democrat technique is easily transportable and is currently being used on other conservatives and GOP pols whom they consider dangerous. What better explanation is there for the demonization that occurred to George Bush? Or the never-ending assault on Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Have you ever seen an appearance on college campuses by David Horowitz or Ann Coulter?

It works to a large extent as even strong conservatives often find themselves referring to any and all of these communicators of principles as “devisive” or “polarizing” or “controversial”. Said often enough the propoganda works and even conservatives are seeing themselves this way.

They target the one’s with ideas whom communicate like Limbaugh, Hannity and Horowitz. Or the one’s they fear as a potential leader like they do Palin. We should never forget the never ending comparisons to Hitler and snide remarks about George Bush’s intelligence.

If the vast political middle can finally realize that this is the way the Democrat Party rolls, it could help stall the abrupt slide to socialism and its one-party rule they want.

UPDATE: A must read from John Hawkins of Right Wing News on this post in Pajamas Media Here’s some:

Obviously, we don’t have to become liars — in fact, even setting aside the ethics of it, it’s better for our credibility if we don’t. But conservatives do need to stop playing by Marquess of Queensberry rules and futilely hoping that the public will finally start to notice that we’re actually nice guys, even as we are smeared as Nazis, homophobes, and racists every day.

How much credit did John McCain get for refusing to talk about Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama’s lack of patriotism? How many times was George Bush — a moderate on domestic issues who bent over backwards to create a “new tone” — accused of being Hitler? How many times has Fox News, which makes more of an effort to be balanced than any of the other networks and all the biggest newspapers in America, been accused of being as biased as Rush Limbaugh?

Complaining bitterly about the Democrats’ “politics of personal destruction” or bellyaching that the media doesn’t treat us fairly ultimately accomplishes nothing. The public doesn’t care.

Using the exact same tactics against the left that it uses against the right may very well be effective.

Even if it isn’t, it may at least convince them that such tactics ought to be off limits on both sides. We can say, “Gee, what if Bush had done this” or “That’s a cheap shot” all day long, but until our political opponents feel the brunt of the same savage incivility that it dishes out on a regular basis, nothing is going

Recall that a revolution that put the GOP in charge of both Houses took place when the electorate learned the truth about the criminal behavior of Bill Clinton and his wife. It might also be that it is the evidence of the same helped bring down Hillary Clinton’s White House bid.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

The Canadian media sees and says what the American media will not

Two seperate op-eds appeared in the conservative outlet, Canadia Free Press minced no words in their headline: “Tyranny Watch: Obama Begins Process to Remove US Citizens Rights” and “The Birth of American Socialism.” Penned by Sher Zieve and Timothy Birdnow respectively, the two essays signal that the world sees what Americans refuses to come to grips with.

The American media, in their partisan zeal to defeat George Bush and elect a Democrat refused to do their job in telling America about Barack Obama. They were able to make the 2008 presidential election into an American Idol vote, thus giving an uininformed country a man subversive to its own ideals and empowering a Democrat Party who’s primary agenda has always been about placing its own interests first.

The conservative media and its like-minded colleagues in the blogosphere did indeed report on Obama and detailed the concerns that voters should have bee made aware of. While John McCain had to deal with a hit piece by the NY Times over an improper relationship with a lobbyist (the Times is facing a suit on this) and Sarah Palin endured the kind of scrutiny that came in the form of attacks, Obama was fawned over in ways that are an embarrassment to journalist.

The headlines in the Canadian publication shows just how accuarte the concerns the right had for Obama were. The frankness of the headlines also are indications that its even worse than we thought.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

Don’t let Dems name someone as the leader of the conservative movement

Yesterday’s courageous and brilliant performance by former Speaker Newt Gingrich who testified with Al Gore at a House subcommittee meeting regarding “cap and trade” (more apporopriately “cap and tax”) makes me realize that one Alinsky-like technique used by Dems is to anoint a “leader of the conservative movement.”

I fully expect Gingrich at some point soon to be the LOTCM of the week at some point in one of the propoganda techniques to demonize Republicans and their conservative principles. Sean Hannity seemed to be it during Tea Party week. At various times recently, its also been Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Michael Steele, George Bush, Dick Cheney, etc.

You get the picture.

But something Republicans of conservative principles don’t realize – as all of these leaders – is that there really is no leader of the conservative movement (LOTCM). Its a movement, yes. And its a large one that a vast majority of Americans and their families live by. Americans have allowed Democrats to make such principles evil with the likeminded MSM.

Notice there doesn’t ever seem to be a leader of the liberal movement.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

Former Dem Senator agrees with interrogation techniques

Bob Graham…also a former govenor of Florida.

And by the way, Dems. Its not torture. Your guys (ie terrorists) are not harmed in any way, but that doesn’t seem to bother you if real torture happens to Americans. Especially if they are soldiers -men or women. And especially when it gets in the way of your infantile hate for George Bush.

Share

Posted under Uncategorized

This post was written by bobsikes on April 22, 2009

Tags: , , , ,