http://townhall.com/columnists/humbertofontova/2012/09/15/che_guevara_in_chicago You just knew Che Guevara would show up as an icon of the union demonstrators in Chicago. Why? Well, let’s consider the factors in this demonstration by union-educators who were mostly educated by other union-educators. *Che Guevara outlawed trade unions. Then– at Soviet gun-point– he herded all recalcitrant Cuban union-members into forced-labor camps and […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/320823/mummy-walks-mario-loyola Writing in The New Republic, Leon Wieseltier recently unleashed an attempted decapitation strike on Representative Paul Ryan. But the bombs land all over the place: on his own magazine, on President Obama, on Walter Lippmann, on Daniel Patrick Moynihan — on people and positions he had no intention of criticizing. As a hit piece, […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/320283 So, on a highly symbolic date, mobs storm American diplomatic facilities and drag the corpse of a U.S. ambassador through the streets. Then the president flies to Vegas for a fundraiser. No, no, a novelist would say; that’s too pat, too neat in its symbolic contrast. Make it Cleveland, or Des Moines. The president […]
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ “The events that are shaking the pillars of the world would have happened anyway, because Obama and his administration have over and over again by actions and by words, from his first speech abroad as president in Cairo in 2009 to Hillary Clinton’s speech yesterday, impressed on Muslims the world over that they have […]
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ THE LIBYAN ROUNDUP Copts are worried for their safety in California, two American universities have been evacuated and there are cries of “We Are All Osama” across the Muslim world. The media is sticking to the movie narrative even when it makes no sense, as in a Sudanese attack on the German embassy or […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/321039/obama-vs-first-amendment-andrew-c-mccarthy
Democrats and their sharky Obamedia defense lawyers are in a snit. For three dreamy convention days in Charlotte, they told themselves that, for the first time in decades, it was their guy who had the upper hand when it came to national security. Now that bubble has burst, the way contrived narratives do when they crash into concrete challenges. At that point, an airy president of the world won’t do; we need to have a president of the United States, a job that has never suited, and has never been of much interest to, Barack Obama.
Defense against foreign enemies is the primary job of the president of the United States. The rationale for the office’s creation is national defense — not green venture capitalism, not rationing medical care, not improving the self-image of the “Muslim world,” not leaving no child behind, not blowing out the Treasury’s credit line. Yet, though we are entering the late innings, foreign policy and national defense have not been factors in the 2012 campaign.
That is worth bearing in mind when we hear the laugh-out-loud narrative of Obama as foreign-affairs chess master. The president badly wants to win reelection. If there were anything to his alleged prowess, we’d not have heard the end of it. What we’ve heard, instead, is a bumper-sticker: “Obama killed Osama.” The Left hoped to paste it over the president’s generally dreary record. Even with the Obamedia in coordinated overdrive, the plan can work only if Mitt Romney lets it work — and, thankfully, it looks like he won’t.
Give the president his due: In 2008, he said he would go hard against terrorist havens, no matter how upset this made John McCain’s cherished “allies” in Pakistan, and he has. But even the welcome slamming of jihadist redoubts is undermined by the mess Obama has made of terrorist detention — so our forces kill in situations where they could capture, drying up the intelligence reservoir that has been vital to thwarting new cells and plots.
Moreover, any president would have given the order to take bin Laden out, and just about any post-9/11 president would bomb jihadist hideouts. What’s extraordinary about Obama’s performance in this regard is that he’s one you might have wondered about — he gets graded on a curve. But, thankful as we may be, this is thin camouflage for the rest of Obama’s agenda, which is post-American, anti-constitutional, enabling of the ideology that spawns terrorism, faithless toward our real allies, and feckless in the face of menacing Iran.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/14/president-obama-stop-blaming-victim-for-mideast-violence/
GOOD FOR POWERS WHO IS A LIBERAL DEFENDER OF OBAMA…..RSK
“Disgusting and reprehensible.” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “Truly abhorrent,” an outraged White House official told an international conference. Were they talking about the murder of four Americans in Libya? Or perhaps the hoisting of an Islamist flag over the U.S. Embassy in Cairo?
No. For that they stuck to diplomatic speak. For the president, the harshest language was: “I strongly condemn the outrageous attack.” For Clinton it was that the US is heartbroken and she condemned “this senseless act of violence.” But “disgusting and reprehensible” and “truly abhorrent ” were reserved for an amateurish and silly film by someone nobody has ever heard of.
In fact, what is “disgusting and reprehensible” is that there are people in the world who think they are justified in attacking and killing people because someone hurt their feelings or offended their sensibilities. The US government should not act as a validator or enabler of this upside down worldview, which is exactly what the Obama administration has done repeatedly as they have responded to these abhorrent attacks against the United States.
I have defended the Obama administration against the complaints from the right that they have run an “apology tour” in the Middle East because I believe the US should admit when we make mistakes, such as the accidental burning of Korans. But what we shouldn’t do is affirm the wrongheaded view that people should be protected from the free speech of others.
Worse, our leaders shouldn’t let our enemies know that when they kill our people and attack our embassies that the US Government will act like a battered wife making excuses for her psychotic husband. Wake up: we weren’t attacked because of a movie made by an American. We were attacked because there are crazy religious fanatics who hate the United States. We didn’t ask for it.
Egypt’s President Morsi reportedly asked Obama “to put an end to such behavior”—presumably freedom, constitutional rights and the like — as it led to the making of, in his eyes, the offensive movie.
Obama has no legal recourse but our president seems to be acquiescing to Morsi’s request by trying to silence the movie-maker through verbal intimidation, including a call from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Dempsey who asked Pastor Terry Jones to withdraw his support for the film. Additionally, The Hollywood Reporter reveals that the FBI was dispatched to Hollywood to uncover the identity of the filmmaker. (Don’t they have real terrorists to catch? I’ll be looking for the administration’s condemnations next for the selling of the DVD of “The Da Vinci Code,” the blockbuster American movie that claims Jesus had sex with Mary Magdalene.)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/09/14/Colonel-Says-Hillary-Clinton-Made-Decision-to-Have-No-Marines-at-Benghazi
In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, Fox News military analyst Colonel David Hunt laid the blame for the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans at the Benghazi, Libya American mission on Hillary Clinton and the State Department:
The State Department just allowed our guys to get killed. If you approve no bullets in guns for the mission security guards and an outhouse for a mission, you’re inviting it.
Earlier, on Howie Carr’s radio show Thursday, Colonel Hunt said that the American mission at Benghazi “was like a cardboard building, there wasn’t even bullet proof glass.” In addition, Hunt said the security guards inside the mission didn’t have bullets:
Howie Carr: They weren’t allowed to have bullets, is that correct?
Colonel Hunt: That’s true. They were private security. The rules of engagement were ridiculous.
Hunt told Breitbart News that the new State Department Rules of Engagement for Libya, approved and signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton since the 2011 fall of Khadafi’s regime, severely compromised the safety and security of murdered Ambassador Stevens and all American diplomatic staff in Libya.
He also stated that the decision not to staff Benghazi with Marines was made by Secretary of State Clinton when she attached her signature to the State Department Rules of Engagement for Libya document. Breitbart News has subsequently learned that under those rules of engagement, Secretary Clinton prohibited Marines from providing security at any American diplomatic installation in Libya.
Hunt told Breitbart News that “the rules of engagement have been changing drastically over the last 10 years. . . The reason the surge in Iraq worked was we had another 40,000 soldiers and the rules of engagement were changed to allow our guys to shoot. What’s happened in Libya is the final straw of political correctness. We allowed a contractor to hire local nationals as security guards, but said they can’t have bullets. This was all part of the point of not having a high profile in Libya.”
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=285044 My broken promise I know that last week I promised to elucidate the mechanisms of the humanitarian alternative to the two-state solution (TSS) and to respond to an array of reservations from readers regarding the proposal. However, I find I cannot convey all that was promised adequately in a single column. I request your […]
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3915005
the most formidable display of leadership with respect to the war being waged against us by shariah-adherent Muslims since the latest attacks began this week.
Michele Bachmann has taken more grief for her leadership in this fight than any other legislator. And yet she has demonstrated it all over again with her marvelous speech today to the Value Voters Summit: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/3915005.
Not only are Michele’s insights, analysis and recommendations dead on, her delivery — especially her timing and her ad libbed statements — was superb.
