Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton's Candid Reaction To Qaddafi's Capture/Death

Have you ever wanted to be a fly on the wall and see how a major politician responded to an event in U.S. history?  Maybe it would be neat to see how Abraham Lincoln responded to winning the Civil War.  Or maybe you’d like to see Ronald Reagan’s reaction when he first heard about the official fall of Communist Russia.  We don’t have footage of those events, but we do have video of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton reacting to what would ultimately be news of Moammar Qaddafi’s death. (in the video, she mentions “capture”)  Here’s her reaction when finding out, from her Blackberry smart phone, of all places.

Now, I have no idea what Secretary Clinton saw on her Blackberry (and can you believe she found via her cell phone?), but I did notice how careful she was to tell everyone in the room that the news was “unconfirmed”.  For all we know, it WAS confirmed, but she was trying to keep the release of information under control.  Or maybe it really was unconfirmed, and she was still trying to keep the release of information under control.  Either way, it’s very interesting to see a politician’s response to such a major event.  Also… I believe somebody that many of you will “know” made a cameo in that video.  Bonus points to anyone (who’s not a writer at this website) who tells us who made that cameo in the comments below.

And as always, if you would rather place your comments to any of our stories on Facebook or Twitter, we welcome that too.  It’s kind of like my Grandma always said… you can call us anything, so long as you don’t call us late for dinner.  (but please, don’t call us on the clumsy metaphors)

Gadhafi's Death a "Sigh of Relief"?

Reports are Moammar Gadhafi is dead after having been shot in both legs as well as the head. The people of Libya are celebrating across the country, and even Hillary Clinton has called his death ‘a sigh of relief.’ Make no mistake- the fall of his tyrannical regime is a blessing for the Libyan people and lovers of freedom all over the world. But several months ago, when Osama bin Laden was killed by US Special Forces, those who openly celebrated his death were condemned.
So why is the death of Gadhafi different? In many respects, he and bin Laden are similar. They were both ruthless oppressors and murderers. Really, since bin Laden was behind the atrocious September 11th attacks and was an acknowledged US enemy, there is more reason to celebrate his death than the death of Gadhafi. The internal affairs of Libya are really of little concern to the United States. Granted, they do affect this country due to our oil interests, but really what goes on in the national politics of a country, is really none of our business.
So again, why is the death of Gadhafi acceptable to celebrate when the much greater victory to the US, the death of Osama bin Laden, was wrong to revel in? When bin Laden’s death was met with public celebration and fireworks, weren’t people like Hillary Clinton the first to tell us that celebrating death was fundamentally wrong? Should the loss of life ever be a ‘relief’ to anyone?
And actually, if people like Secretary Clinton would practice what they preached, there would be some legitimacy to their statements. This country was founded with strong importance placed on the value of life. For those who believe in this, and believe that life is a sacred gift from God, death is a great sadness and loss. Because of this, the specific death of a person should not be celebrated. The fall of evil should always be celebrated. It is possible to be both saddened by the loss of life, even the life of someone as despicable of Gadhafi or bin Laden, and still rejoice in the recession of evil’s presence in the world. After all, this country does believe in the sanctity of life, as well as the equality of all human beings. This is something that should be kept in mind by all, especially those in positions of public power in this, at times, vicious and tempting world.

Super-Obama Takes Out Al-Qaeda Leader al-Awlaki

The people of Libya heard a dramatic swoosh of air last night, and upon looking up into the darkened moonless sky, started shouting, “look it;s a bird, no it’s a plane, no it’s… Super-Obama! Here to save the world  from the evil American capitalists and the dreaded Senior citizens of the Tea Party . Over at MSNBC, Chris Mathew’s whole body was engulfed in massive electrifying tingles as he cheered on Super-Obama upon hearing of his single-handedly hunting down and killing the Al Qaeda murdering Muslim cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki.   And then the Liberal lefties awoke to the reality that Super-Obama did not in fact kill al-Awlaki in a superhero-style act of bravery and courage. Sorry lefties, Super-Obama did not fly into Libya as pictured here and blast the vehicle that al-Awlaki and company were traveling in at the time with his high-intensity laser-firing super decoder ring. While that scenario may sound pretty far-fetched,  it is not however, too far from the Liberal media tale-telling we are already hearing from the leftists posing as news people today, in their ever-constant fluffing up of  what will go down in history as the biggest fraud to ever get near the White House, Barack Hussein Obama. Now that we have that out of the way, let’s look at the actual facts that brought about the demise of this really nasty-minded coward and a few his cohorts. Unlike the Liberal “journolists” and Josef Goebbel’s-esque students in the art of propaganda and history re-writes over at MSNBC, we will report the facts as best we can here, without adding any fluffy tales of fake Democratic Superheroes. Yes, we all know there is an election for Super-Barack to worry about, but that’s his problem.

First of all let’s get one very important fact straight here. The Global Multi-Culturists and assorted New World Order society manipulators seem to feel the need to label the murdering Muslim terrorist  al-Awlaki and his now dead Jihad-preaching pal Samir Khan,.. as Americans. These two misfits were about as American as another obviously mentally deranged lunatic, the anti-American President of Iran, Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,  period. Just being born here, or spending some time in America simply does not qualify a person as being an American. To be an American is an honor and a privilege to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave, while assimilating to the American culture and the rule of law. These two Muslim Jihadis were anti-Americans at their core, and therefore should not EVER be labeled as Americans.

Samir Khan, a Muslim Terrorist Plotting Murder Openly in America, while Politically Correct Law Enforcement Endangers the Public by Ignoring the Warnings.

Samir Khan was born in Saudi Arabia, and raised in Queens, N.Y. In the beginning of his time in Queens at the age of seven, Khan appeared to be a regular neighborhood child, wearing baggy pants and listening to hip-hop music with his neighborhood pals. As he matured towards adulthood, Mr. Khan then joined two ‘supposedly’ non-violent Muslim groups and was indoctrinated into Sharia law, as is the custom for all Muslims regardless of their host country. [ To worship Sharia law and live by it’s draconian 7th century ideology is in fact, in direct conflict with being an American.]  Mr Khan’s family then relocated to North Carolina in 2004, where he is said to have gravitated towards radicalism after watching videos of Muslim Jihad-inspired suicide bombers blowing themselves up at American checkpoints in Iraq. It was at this time that Samir Khan stated  openly supporting Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda in his online writing. He even went so far as to be interviewed with the N.Y.Times, in which he stated that his favorite video was of  a suicide bomber in Iraq blowing up an American military base. Yes he was still living in America at this time.  Upon explaining his favorite video of Americans being murdered in Iraq, Khan told the Times reporter, ” It was something that brings great happiness to me.”  What kind of a coward can sit there listening to this extreme anti-American statement and not call the police and demand that Samir Khan be arrested immediately?  A politically correct reporter, working for The New York Times, just sat there and took notes while this lunatic basically came right out and said the killing of innocent Americans by Muslim terrorists brought great happiness to him. Mr Khan went on to become the propaganda minister of al-Qaeda’s English-language magazine Inspire, where he wrote articles “inspiring” young Americans to wage war against the infidels in America and other western countries,targeting anyone who does not bow down to Sharia law in what he termed as the non-believers.

Anwar al-Awlaki , The bin Laden of the Internet

Anwar al-Awlaki was born in the United States of Yemeni parents, who then moved him back to Yemen at the age of seven, where he studied at the Azal Modern School for eleven years, until he reached the age of eighteen when he returned to the U.S. to attend engineering college in Colorado. In another apparent failure of our intelligence services and U.S. State dept, al-Awlaki was given a foreign student visa that allowed him to reenter the U.S. while falsely claiming that he was born in Yemen. al- Awlaki received his engineering degree after four years in Colorado, then earned an M.A. in Education Leadership for San Diego State University, and in 2001 ( that year ring any bells?) studied at the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development until the end of 2001, just 3 months after the 911 Muslim terrorist murders of over 3000 innocent Americans.al-Awlaki was an imam of The Denver Islamic Society from1994-1996, and also served as an imam in America from 1996 – 2000 at a mosque on the outskirts of San Diego. He left the Denver imam post after being chastised by an elder for supposedly encouraging other students to wage jihad against westerners. Did said elder report al-Awlaki’s radicalism to the authorities? Of course not, the so-called religion of peace while demanding the good life in America almost never reports the radical Muslims among them.

In 1998 and 1999, al-Awlaki served as the vice-president for lovely sounding Charitable Society for Social Welfare in… San Diego, California. In a page that seems to have eerily taken right out of the American Liberal Social Justice fraudster’s handbook, this “Social Welfare” charity group was founded by one Abdul Majeed al-Zindani of Yemen, who had been designated as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist  by the U.S. gov’t. The FBI also said in sworn testimony that this “Charity ” was nothing more than a front group for terrorist funding. Two of the 911 suicide bombers frequently attended the Mosque in San Diego where al-Awlaki was an imam. al-Awlaki disappeared to parts unknown overseas in 2000 only to be allowed reentry into America again in Jan. 2001, where he settled in Falls Church Virginia, right outside of our nation’s capitol. Again, this shows us just how politically correct morons within our government refused to snatch up this obvious terrorist and American-murder-plotting Muslim that could have stopped the 911 attacks before they happened, all because some politically-connected lawyers say it would somehow violates his civil rights.  Even though al-Awlaki was a proven Muslim terrorist waging war against America and plotting thousands of murders around the world,  certain ass-backwards people think he should not have been killed this week.

That is further proof of just how denigrated American society has become today, due largely in part to the Globalist agenda of the U.N mandates of  their Social Justice fraud being forced onto the American public. De-fund the U.N. immediately, and kill anyone involved in the murder of innocent Americans. Our very own government is funding anti-American terrorists through many U.N. so-called foreign aid mandates. The country of Yemen was harboring al-Awlaki at the time of his demise on Friday. Yemen is a hotbed of terrorist training camps and has been for decades, and our government still gives them our tax dollars by the billions today. This is in 2010, and Hillary and company have even increased U.S. cash payments to Yemen even more in 2011.

Yemen US aid 2010

Defense relations between Yemen and the United States are improving rapidly, with the resumption of International Military Education and Training assistance and the transfer of military equipment and spare parts. In FY 2010 approximate funding for U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF) for Yemen was $12.5 million, International Military Education and Training (IMET) was $1 million, and Non-Proliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs (NADR) was $5 million. In FY 2010 Yemen also received approximately $5 million in Economic Support Funds (ESF), $35 million in development assistance, and $155 million in Section 1206 funding.

The Obama administration and Hillary Clinton’s state dept. resumed military funding, equipment, and training assistance to the country of Yemen, to the tune of about some 200 million dollars, in addition to all of the direct and indirect foreign aid we were already giving them. Al-Awlaki’s parents were from Yemen, and they took him back there at the age of seven, to be schooled in the Muslim indoctrination into Sharia law and their 7th century ideology of waging war against all infidels who refuse to worship Allah. Then al-Awlaki came back into the U.S. and continued his promotion of Jihad against America unabated, thanks to the incompetence and political correctness of the U.S. government, resulting in the murder of thousands of innocent Americans on American soil and abroad. The ignorant children and teaching professors of Liberal ideology in America today have called for president G.W.Bush to be arrested for war crimes for over a decade now. How about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s proven crimes of funding the terrorists of Yemen ? al-Awlaki was killed in Yemen. The government of Yemen was supporting him and protecting him at the time of his demise, and yet  Barack and Hillary are increasing funding to the Yemeni government even more as we speak. How about it lefties? Will we see you marching outside the White House this week, and calling for the arrest of your Super-hero Barack Obama? They still harass former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and tried to arrest him just this week, so how about Hillary Clinton receiving the same treatment? That simply will not happen due to the fact that the misguided misfits of the left are nothing short of pathetic hypocrites with an agenda, being led around by the nose by the con artists of the fake Democratic Party of today.

The people of Yemen recently saw U.S. drone and fighter-jet strikes swoop down and demolish a convoy of vehicles which carried Anwar al-Awlaki and his fellow jihad propagandist, Samir Khan to their much-deserved fiery death, in an emphatic show of U.S. military might. Chalk one up for the good guys there. Anwar al-Awlaki had been hunted down by the brave warriors of the CIA, FBI, and the U.S. military troops who risk their lives by putting boots on the ground in hostile territories such as Yemen. Meanwhile, Barack Obama and Leon Panetta sat safe and sound back in their luxurious taxpayer-funded offices and simply micro-managed this situation and are not to be designated as being  some kind of ultra-courageous Super-heroes, much to the dismay of the Liberal media propagandists that will try to use this episode in true American warrior heroism, as part of a ploy to get Obama reelected. That  awe-inspiring  attack by  U.S. predator drones and fighter jets that swooped down and blew these anti-American Muslim terrorists to a fiery death was a powerful example of  just what will happen to these types of cowards who decide to attack and murder Americans around the world today. Let’s leave the Barack-the-Superhero- takes-out-Al-Qaeda -leader-Anwar al-Awlaki comic book episode to the propagandists of the Liberal media and the reelection campaign operatives of Super-Obama, shall we?

Jon Huntsman Diagnosis: Delusional

The definition of delusional is: “a false belief held with absolute conviction despite superior evidence.”  

This diagnosis, without a doubt, is accurate for presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, Jr.

From the first moment of his official announcement that he would be running for president on the Republican ticket, the possibility of him winning the nomination has been laughable. Let’s take a look at the evidence against the former governor of Utah, which supports such an extreme diagnosis.

From the moment his name was floated as a serious possible candidate, one of the biggest hurdles he faced was the position he held at the time. On August 11, 2009, he resigned from his position as the governor of Utah to accept an appointment by President Obama as the United States Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China.

He submitted his formal resignation as Ambassador to China on January 31 of this year, and he officially stepped down from the position on April 30. On June 21, he made the formal announcement the he was running for the Republican presidential nomination in the 2012 election.

Since his announcement, Mr. Huntsman has tried to distance himself from the fact that he was part of the current administration. He came out critiscizing Obama’s economic policy, saying it has “failed” and is “in conflict with what he communicated to us in 2009.”

However, David Axelrod, who is now serving on President Obama’s reelection campaign, recently appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union”, and disputes Jon Huntsman’s “conviction” against the president’s policy.  Mr. Axelrod is quite likely more accurate about the situation, when, while discussing a 2009 trip to China, he said :

“If Jon Huntsman disagreed with President Barack Obama’s economic policy, he never voiced it during his time in the administration. If he had suggestions on the economy, he had an excellent opportunity to suggest them then, where we were all together in China. What has changed is not his view of the economy, but his view of his own chances to, perhaps, win the [Republican presidential] nomination. I understand. That’s politics. He’s a politician, and he sees an opportunity.”

President Obama & Jon Huntsman- Photo by Charles Dharapak/AP

Mr. Axelrod is correct: this is politics. Mr. Huntsman is a politician who “sees” an opportunity. Take whatever opportunity you can if it benefits you or advancing your political agenda or your political career. While this is something the American populace has become quite accustomed to: politics as usual, we are also tired of the political games.

Mr. Axelrod went on to discuss other issues that Mr. Huntsman appears to agree with, regarding the Obama policy, saying:

“He was encouraging on health care. He was encouraging on the whole range of issues. He was a little quizzical about what was going on in his own party. And you got the strong sense that he was going to wait until 2016 for the storm to blow over.”

Mr. Huntsman may be trying to distance himself from the current administration in his political games, but his own words of admiration for the very president he now “speaks out against”  has come back to haunt him. In April of this year, a handwritten letter was leaked to the Daily Caller’s Jonathan Strong.  In Governor Huntsman’s own handwriting, he praised the president, writing:

“You are a remarkable leader. It has been a great honor getting to know you.”

In keeping true to the intent of Mr. Huntsman, the actual word “remarkable” was underlined in the handwritten letter just as is depicted in this article. It would be quite difficult for the former governor to imply that it was just a formality , as he made sure to emphasize the depth of his approval for the president by underlining the word “remarkable”, and, the letter was handwritten.

He wrote two other letters- one to former President Clinton, the other to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, where he praised the two of them as well.

Another piece of evidence to add to the argument that Mr. Huntsman is delusional is the recent tweets from his Twitter account, in an apparent back-handed jab at presidential candidate Rick Perry. Governor Perry voiced the fact that he is skeptical of the role humans play in climate change, as well as his view that there are “gaps” in the theory of evolution. In “response” to Governor Perry’s stance, Mr. Huntsman sent out a tweet which read:

“To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.”

OK, Mr. Huntsman, as you wish. You are crazy. Hence, the delusional diagnosis. You most certainly have a false sense of belief that you could ever be the Republican presidential nominee when the evidence is stacked very high against you that you hold any of the values that are most important to Conservatives. Your absolute conviction despite the enormous evidence against you fits the diagnosis of delusional quite perfectly. Do you not realize that you are running on the Republican ticket, not the Democrat ticket?  Sir- with as much respect as can be mustered at this point, the majority of Republicans, Conservatives, and Tea Party folks agree with Governor Perry on one thing, even if they disagree with him on many others. Most of us do not buy into man-made climate change. Yes, we know the earth goes through cycles of climate change. It’s the way God set things up way back in the beginning of time. But, sir- again, as respectfully as possible I say to you- man-made global warming/climate change or whatever new name the progressives care to repackage it the next time around- it’s a money-making scheme! All the proof you need is the father of the global warming/climate change movement himself, Al Gore. If you are at all serious about this whole presidential candidacy thingy you’ve got going here, sending out tweets about believing in evolution and global warming would suit you better if you switched to the more appropriate Democrat ticket. I’m sure the Democrats would be quite pleased to have another option, as many are quite unhappy with the president you felt was doing a “remarkable” job.

Today, on CBS’ “Face the Nation”, Mr. Hunstman said that “the early polls are absolute nonsense at this point in the game.” He may be right when looking at the big picture, but when it comes to looking in the mirror he needs to face reality: he is delusional to think he would ever be the Republican presidential nominee. That is reality, no matter how the polls look.

__________

Sources:

Politico
The Daily Caller 
NewsMax Article 1
NewsMax Article 2 

 

Hillary Clinton Secures $1.5 Billion for Libyan Rebels

The Secretary of State’s office released a statement on Libya Friday morning. In Clinton’s statement she announces that $1.5 Billion in funds previously frozen by the United States would be made available to the transitional government – the TNC or Transitional National Council.

Today, the Libya Contact Group held a meeting in Istanbul to demonstrate our continued commitment to Libya and to focus on the urgent financial needs of the TNC. The Contact Group called for an expedited process to lift sanctions on Libyan assets. The United States supports this call.

Today, we have secured the release of $1.5 billion in Libyan assets that had been frozen in the United States. This money will go toward meeting the needs of the people of Libya. We urge other nations to take similar measures. Many are already doing so.

 

 

Tim Pawlenty Releases Middle-East Foreign Policy Statement

Governor Pawlenty gave these remarks in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations:

Tim PawlentyI want to speak plainly this morning about the opportunities and the dangers we face today in the Middle East. The revolutions now roiling that region offer the promise of a more democratic, more open, and a more prosperous Arab world. From Morocco to the Arabian Gulf, the escape from the dead hand of oppression is now a real possibility.

Now is not the time to retreat from freedom’s rise.

Yet at the same time, we know these revolutions can bring to power forces that are neither democratic nor forward-looking. Just as the people of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria and elsewhere see a chance for a better life of genuine freedom, the leaders of radical Islam see a chance to ride political turmoil into power.

The United States has a vital stake in the future of this region. We have been presented with a challenge as great as any we have faced in recent decades. And we must get it right. The question is, are we up to the challenge?

My answer is, of course we are. If we are clear about our interests and guided by our principles, we can help steer events in the right direction. Our nation has done this in the past — at the end of World War II, in the last decade of the Cold War, and in the more recent war on terror … and we can do it again.

But President Obama has failed to formulate and carry out an effective and coherent strategy in response to these events. He has been timid, slow, and too often without a clear understanding of our interests or a clear commitment to our principles.

And parts of the Republican Party now seem to be trying to out-bid the Democrats in appealing to isolationist sentiments. This is no time for uncertain leadership in either party. The stakes are simply too high, and the opportunity is simply too great.

No one in this Administration predicted the events of the Arab spring – but the freedom deficit in the Arab world was no secret. For 60 years, Western nations excused and accommodated the lack of freedom in the Middle East. That could not last. The days of comfortable private deals with dictators were coming to an end in the age of Twitter, You Tube, and Facebook. And history teaches there is no such thing as stable oppression.

President Obama has ignored that lesson of history. Instead of promoting democracy – whose fruit we see now ripening across the region – he adopted a murky policy he called “engagement.”

“Engagement” meant that in 2009, when the Iranian ayatollahs stole an election, and the people of that country rose up in protest, President Obama held his tongue. His silence validated the mullahs, despite the blood on their hands and the nuclear centrifuges in their tunnels.

While protesters were killed and tortured, Secretary Clinton said the Administration was “waiting to see the outcome of the internal Iranian processes.” She and the president waited long enough to see the Green Movement crushed.

“Engagement” meant that in his first year in office, President Obama cut democracy funding for Egyptian civil society by 74 percent. As one American democracy organization noted, this was “perceived by Egyptian democracy activists as signaling a lack of support.” They perceived correctly. It was a lack of support.

“Engagement” meant that when crisis erupted in Cairo this year, as tens of thousands of protesters gathered in Tahrir Square, Secretary Clinton declared, “the Egyptian Government is stable.” Two weeks later, Mubarak was gone. When Secretary Clinton visited Cairo after Mubarak’s fall, democratic activist groups refused to meet with her. And who can blame them?

The forces we now need to succeed in Egypt — the pro-democracy, secular political parties — these are the very people President Obama cut off, and Secretary Clinton dismissed.

The Obama “engagement” policy in Syria led the Administration to call Bashar al Assad a “reformer.” Even as Assad’s regime was shooting hundreds of protesters dead in the street, President Obama announced his plan to give Assad “an alternative vision of himself.” Does anyone outside a therapist’s office have any idea what that means? This is what passes for moral clarity in the Obama Administration.

By contrast, I called for Assad’s departure on March 29; I call for it again today. We should recall our ambassador from Damascus; and I call for that again today. The leader of the United States should never leave those willing to sacrifice their lives in the cause of freedom wondering where America stands. As President, I will not.

We need a president who fully understands that America never “leads from behind.”

We cannot underestimate how pivotal this moment is in Middle Eastern history. We need decisive, clear-eyed leadership that is responsive to this historical moment of change in ways that are consistent with our deepest principles and safeguards our vital interests.

Opportunity still exists amid the turmoil of the Arab Spring — and we should seize it.

As I see it, the governments of the Middle East fall into four broad categories, and each requires a different strategic approach.

The first category consists of three countries now at various stages of transition toward democracy – the formerly fake republics in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya. Iraq is also in this category, but is further along on its journey toward democracy.

For these countries, our goal should be to help promote freedom and democracy.

Elections that produce anti-democratic regimes undermine both freedom and stability. We must do more than monitor polling places. We must redirect foreign aid away from efforts to merely build good will, and toward efforts to build good allies — genuine democracies governed by free people according to the rule of law. And we must insist that our international partners get off the sidelines and do the same.

We should have no illusions about the difficulty of the transitions faced by Libya, Tunisia, and especially Egypt. Whereas Libya is rich in oil, and Tunisia is small, Egypt is large, populous, and poor. Among the region’s emerging democracies, it remains the biggest opportunity and the biggest danger for American interests.

Having ejected the Mubarak regime, too many Egyptians are now rejecting the beginnings of the economic opening engineered in the last decade. We act out of friendship when we tell Egyptians, and every new democracy, that economic growth and prosperity are the result of free markets and free trade—not subsidies and foreign aid. If we want these countries to succeed, we must afford them the respect of telling them the truth.

In Libya, the best help America can provide to these new friends is to stop leading from behind and commit America’s strength to removing Ghadafi, recognizing the TNC as the government of Libya, and unfreezing assets so the TNC can afford security and essential services as it marches toward Tripoli.

Beyond Libya, America should always promote the universal principles that undergird freedom. We should press new friends to end discrimination against women, to establish independent courts, and freedom of speech and the press. We must insist on religious freedoms for all, including the region’s minorities—whether Christian, Shia, Sunni, or Bahai.

The second category of states is the Arab monarchies. Some – like Jordan and Morocco – are engaging now in what looks like genuine reform. This should earn our praise and our assistance. These kings have understood they must forge a partnership with their own people, leading step by step toward more democratic societies. These monarchies can smooth the path to constitutional reform and freedom and thereby deepen their own legitimacy. If they choose this route, they, too, deserve our help.

But others are resisting reform. While President Obama spoke well about Bahrain in his recent speech, he neglected to utter two important words: Saudi Arabia.

US-Saudi relations are at an all-time low—and not primarily because of the Arab Spring. They were going downhill fast, long before the uprisings began. The Saudis saw an American Administration yearning to engage Iran—just at the time they saw Iran, correctly, as a mortal enemy.

We need to tell the Saudis what we think, which will only be effective if we have a position of trust with them. We will develop that trust by demonstrating that we share their great concern about Iran and that we are committed to doing all that is necessary to defend the region from Iranian aggression.

At the same time, we need to be frank about what the Saudis must do to insure stability in their own country. Above all, they need to reform and open their society. Their treatment of Christians and other minorities, and their treatment of women, is indefensible and must change.

We know that reform will come to Saudi Arabia—sooner and more smoothly if the royal family accepts and designs it. It will come later and with turbulence and even violence if they resist. The vast wealth of their country should be used to support reforms that fit Saudi history and culture—but not to buy off the people as a substitute for lasting reform.

The third category consists of states that are directly hostile to America. They include Iran and Syria. The Arab Spring has already vastly undermined the appeal of Al Qaeda and the killing of Osama Bin Laden has significantly weakened it.

The success of peaceful protests in several Arab countries has shown the world that terror is not only evil, but will eventually be overcome by good. Peaceful protests may soon bring down the Assad regime in Syria. The 2009 protests in Iran inspired Arabs to seek their freedom. Similarly, the Arab protests of this year, and the fall of regime after broken regime, can inspire Iranians to seek their freedom once again.

We have a clear interest in seeing an end to Assad’s murderous regime. By sticking to Bashar al Assad so long, the Obama Administration has not only frustrated Syrians who are fighting for freedom—it has demonstrated strategic blindness. The governments of Iran and Syria are enemies of the United States. They are not reformers and never will be. They support each other. To weaken or replace one, is to weaken or replace the other.

The fall of the Assad mafia in Damascus would weaken Hamas, which is headquartered there. It would weaken Hezbollah, which gets its arms from Iran, through Syria. And it would weaken the Iranian regime itself.

To take advantage of this moment, we should press every diplomatic and economic channel to bring the Assad reign of terror to an end. We need more forceful sanctions to persuade Syria’s Sunni business elite that Assad is too expensive to keep backing. We need to work with Turkey and the Arab nations and the Europeans, to further isolate the regime. And we need to encourage opponents of the regime by making our own position very clear, right now: Bashar al-Assad must go.

When he does, the mullahs of Iran will find themselves isolated and vulnerable. Syria is Iran’s only Arab ally. If we peel that away, I believe it will hasten the fall of the mullahs. And that is the ultimate goal we must pursue. It’s the singular opportunity offered to the world by the brave men and women of the Arab Spring.

The march of freedom in the Middle East cuts across the region’s diversity of religious, ethnic, and political groups. But it is born of a particular unity. It is a united front against stolen elections and stolen liberty, secret police, corruption, and the state-sanctioned violence that is the essence of the Iranian regime’s tyranny.

So this is a moment to ratchet up pressure and speak with clarity. More sanctions. More and better broadcasting into Iran. More assistance to Iranians to access the Internet and satellite TV and the knowledge and freedom that comes with it. More efforts to expose the vicious repression inside that country and expose Teheran’s regime for the pariah it is.

And, very critically, we must have more clarity when it comes to Iran’s nuclear program. In 2008, candidate Barack Obama told AIPAC that he would “always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel.” This year, he told AIPAC “we remain committed to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.” So I have to ask: are all the options still on the table or not? If he’s not clear with us, it’s no wonder that even our closest allies are confused.

The Administration should enforce all sanctions for which legal authority already exits. We should enact and then enforce new pending legislation which strengthens sanctions particularly against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards who control much of the Iranian economy.

And in the middle of all this, is Israel.

Israel is unique in the region because of what it stands for and what it has accomplished. And it is unique in the threat it faces—the threat of annihilation. It has long been a bastion of democracy in a region of tyranny and violence. And it is by far our closest ally in that part of the world.

Despite wars and terrorists attacks, Israel offers all its citizens, men and women, Jews, Christians, Muslims and, others including 1.5 million Arabs, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the right to vote, access to independent courts and all other democratic rights.

Nowhere has President Obama’s lack of judgment been more stunning than in his dealings with Israel.

It breaks my heart that President Obama treats Israel, our great friend, as a problem, rather than as an ally. The President seems to genuinely believe the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lies at the heart of every problem in the Middle East. He said it Cairo in 2009 and again this year.

President Obama could not be more wrong.

The uprisings in Tunis, Cairo, Tripoli and elsewhere are not about Israelis and Palestinians. They’re about oppressed people yearning for freedom and prosperity. Whether those countries become prosperous and free is not about how many apartments Israel builds in Jerusalem.

Today the president doesn’t really have a policy toward the peace process. He has an attitude. And let’s be frank about what that attitude is: he thinks Israel is the problem. And he thinks the answer is always more pressure on Israel.

I reject that anti-Israel attitude. I reject it because Israel is a close and reliable democratic ally. And I reject it because I know the people of Israel want peace.

Israeli – Palestinian peace if further away not than the day Barack Obama came to office. But that does not have to be a permanent situation.

We must recognize that peace will only come if everyone in the region perceives clearly that America stands strongly with Israel.

I would take a new approach.

First, I would never undermine Israel’s negotiating position, nor pressure it to accept borders which jeopardize security and its ability to defend itself.

Second, I would not pressure Israel to negotiate with Hamas or a Palestinian government that includes Hamas, unless Hamas renounces terror, accepts Israel’s right to exist, and honors the previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements. In short, Hamas needs to cease being a terrorist group in both word and deed as a first step towards global legitimacy.

Third, I would ensure our assistance to the Palestinians immediately ends if the teaching of hatred in Palestinian classrooms and airwaves continues. That incitement must end now.

Fourth, I would recommend cultivating and empowering moderate forces in Palestinian society.

When the Palestinians have leaders who are honest and capable, who appreciate the rule of law, who understand that war against Israel has doomed generations of Palestinians to lives of bitterness, violence, and poverty – then peace will come.

The Middle East is changing before our eyes—but our government has not kept up. It abandoned the promotion of democracy just as Arabs were about to seize it. It sought to cozy up to dictators just as their own people rose against them. It downplayed our principles and distanced us from key allies.

All this was wrong, and these policies have failed. The Administration has abandoned them, and at the price of American leadership. A region that since World War II has looked to us for security and progress now wonders where we are and what we’re up to.

The next president must do better. Today, in our own Republican Party, some look back and conclude our projection of strength and defense of freedom was a product of different times and different challenges. While times have changed, the nature of the challenge has not.

In the 1980s, we were up against a violent, totalitarian ideology bent on subjugating the people and principles of the West. While others sought to co-exist, President Reagan instead sought victory. So must we, today. For America is exceptional, and we have the moral clarity to lead the world.

It is not wrong for Republicans to question the conduct of President Obama’s military leadership in Libya. There is much to question. And it is not wrong for Republicans to debate the timing of our military drawdown in Afghanistan— though my belief is that General Petreaus’ voice ought to carry the most weight on that question.

What is wrong, is for the Republican Party to shrink from the challenges of American leadership in the world. History repeatedly warns us that in the long run, weakness in foreign policy costs us and our children much more than we’ll save in a budget line item.

America already has one political party devoted to decline, retrenchment, and withdrawal. It does not need a second one.

Our enemies in the War on Terror, just like our opponents in the Cold War, respect and respond to strength. Sometimes strength means military intervention. Sometimes it means diplomatic pressure. It always means moral clarity in word and deed.

That is the legacy of Republican foreign policy at its best, and the banner our next Republican President must carry around the world.

Our ideals of economic and political freedom, of equality and opportunity for all citizens, remain the dream of people in the Middle East and throughout the world. As America stands for these principles, and stands with our friends and allies, we will help the Middle East transform this moment of turbulence into a firmer, more lasting opportunity for freedom, peace, and progress.

Obama Sides With Communists / Turns Back on UK in Falklands Issue

Just when Americans are realising that Barack Hussein Obama is in fact an anti-American Socio-Marxist at heart, Mr. Obama shows us that he has deep Communist sympathies in an announcement from the UK Telegraph:

Another slap in the face for Britain: the Obama administration sides with Argentina and Venezuela in OAS declaration on the Falklands.President Obama was effusive in his praise for the Special Relationship when he visited London recently, but his administration continues to slap Britain in the face over the highly sensitive Falklands issue. Washington signed on to a “draft declaration on the question of the Malvinas Islands” passed by unanimous consent by the General Assembly of the Organisation of American States (OAS) at its meeting in San Salvador yesterday, an issue which had been heavily pushed by Argentina. In doing so, the United States sided not only with Buenos Aires, but also with a number of anti-American regimes including Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela and Daniel Ortega’s Nicaragua. (emphasis mine)

While many South American and Central American history experts that Socialism is indeed once again creeping into the region just south of the American border, many also agree with the theory that this is indeed Soft Communism. For many readers uninformed with the aspects of Communism, its history, and it’s true meaning, please DO NOT IGNORE that very informative link. This gives us some very deep insight into some of Barack Hussein Obama’s actions. Socialism is in fact, the basis for the injection of stealth Communism and despot dictatorships onto unsuspecting or uninformed citizens throughout world history. This is also the root anti-Americanism that now threatens America from within. Socialists/Marxists.Communists hate capitalism, the very same capitalism that has made America the freeest, greatest, most prosperous nation on earth for over 200 years!

For the doubters out there that do not see this as Obama siding with South American  Communists like Hugo Chavez against our main ally in Europe as a pattern that shows Obama’s true ideology, I point you to his recent trip to Brazil, where I wrote about another Marxist Rebel, the newly installed President of Brazil:

Obama should feel right at home with the new president of Brazil, as she is an extreme form of community organizer in which she was a Rebel, a left of center politician, is a former guerrilla, who was reportedly a torture victim, and also somehow considered to have been an economist. First and foremost, she is a hand-picked Lulu President and his former chief of staff, and there is no valid reason to think this isn’t just an extension of Lulu’s rule.

There is a South and Central American pattern emerging and it is not good for America. During Obama’s trip to Brazil, the media played up the economic partnership theme and largely ignored just who the Barack Obama’s new adoring friend, the President of Brazil really is. Concerned Americans from what the Liberal media constantly calls “the right wing extremists” such as Glenn Beck and citizen writers like myself did in fact report on the Marxist Rebel, Dilma Rousseff, who was imprisoned for trying to overthrow the government of Brazil, and who has now been inserted as the new President by the previous dictator LuLu.  President Rousseff also has a past that mirrors a long-time American terrorist, Weather Underground leader and Marxist, one Bill Ayers, who just like Rousseff, bombed buildings and robbed banks, while all the time calling for the overthrow of their respectvie governments. Bill Ayers is also a long-time pal and mentor of Obama, whether either of them admit it or not today. Obama’s first run for big-time political office within the U.S. Senate was announced from… Bill Ayers living room! There is an undeniable pattern developing here of proven Marxist ideology worship being proven to be the core beliefs of the President of the United States.

Secretary of State, Liberal Democrat Hillary Clinton, also sided with Ortega and Chavez, who also have direct ties to Iran, Russia, and China,  in this issue in 2010, in a speech in Buenos Aires as The Heritage Foundation reported upon here:

Washington backed a similar resolution last June, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made it clear in a joint press conference with Kirchner in Buenos Aires in March 2010 that the Obama Administration fully backs Argentina’s calls for negotiations over the Falklands, handing her Argentine counterpart a significant propaganda coup. The State Department has also insultingly referred to the islands in the past as the “Malvinas Islands,” the Argentine name for them. (emphasis mine)

Back in 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands and captured 1800 British citizens. That is a lot of people considering that the population was said to be 1813 in 1980. The citizens themselves want nothing to do with Argentina, and yet the propaganda machines in the U.N. Human rights divisions along with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are slapping the U.K., the U.S. ally right in the face over this issue. What could possibly be behind this push to let Argentina take over the Falkland islands? This just might blow some Liberal minds here, along with the rest of the world that isn’t aware of the facts behind the current attempt to take over the Falkland Islands. Wait for it…. the Liberal Democratic party’s much hated big oil! That’s right, there have recently been big oil deposits discovered off the coast of the Falklands said to contain 60 Billion barrels of oil under the seabed surrounding the Falklands islands!  So there we see the truth.   Liberal Socialist Big-Oil hating Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama are in bed with South American Despots Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega to enable them to steal the oil around the Falkland Islands! There in fact, was a signed agreement between Argentina and the U.K. all the way back in 1995 that Argentina unilaterally withdrew in 2007, once they realised how much oil was really there.

A 1995 agreement between the UK and Argentina had set the terms for exploitation of offshore resources including oil reserves[97] as geological surveys had shown there might be up to 60 billion barrels (9.5 billion cubic metres) of oil under the sea bed surrounding the islands.[98] However, in 2007 Argentina unilaterally withdrew from the agreement.[99] In response, Falklands Oil and Gas Limited has signed an agreement with BHP Billiton to investigate the potential exploitation of oil reserves.[100] Climatic conditions of the southern seas mean that exploitation will be a difficult task, though economically viable, and the continuing sovereignty dispute with Argentina is hampering progress.[101] In February 2010, exploratory drilling for oil was begun by Desire Petroleum,[102] but the results from the first test well were disappointing.[103] Two months later, on 6 May 2010, Rockhopper Exploration announced that “it may have struck oil“.[104] On Friday 17 September 2010 Rockhopper Exploration released news that a flow test of the Sea-Lion 1 discovery was a commercially viable find.[105] In February 2011 Rockhopper Exploration commenced an appraisal programme of the Sea-Lion discovery. An update of the first appraisal drill were released on Monday 21 March 2011 indicating a significant reservoir package with a downhole mini Drill Stern Test flowing oil at better rates then the September 2010 flow test: confidence in the commerciality of the Sea Lion discovery has been increased by this first appraisal.[106]

If you will notice the dates I have emphasised above, we see the direct correlation between the uptick in bigger oil deposit discoveries and Hillary Clinton’s announced support for Hugo Chavez to take over the Falkland islands, and then again in March of this year when Barack Obama’s administration announces adoring support for Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega’s blatant attemp to steal the oil from the citizens of the Falklands. So there we have it, Liberals that basically stopped American oil extraction and production for the past three years, in bed with Communist-Socialist South American dictators to allow them to effectively steal another country’s oil deposits!  Is this what the Liberals mean when they chant, “This is what Democracy looks like ?”  Some people may try to spin this escapade into saying that Obama and Hillary just want to be a “good customer” of Daniel Ortega’s and Hugo Chavez’ future oil exports, just like he announced in Brazil recently. Yet one has to wonder just how that would fit in with Obamas constant statement of reducing our dependence on foreign oil? Could it be that Obama and company are finally realising that alternative energy currently can not even supply a meager 10% of America’s energy? Maybe the Liberal eco-terrorists finally realised that the electric cars they say will save the world actually have to have oil and coal based electricity to charge them up? Where are all the liberal hypocrites demanding a moratorium on oil drilling around the Falkland Islands ? What is that I hear? Crickets.

Is This What “Democracy” Looks Like ?

COLD-blooded murder and assassinations, the bombing of a country that attacked no one, and the U.S. participation in three wars that have no defined mission. Is this what Democracy looks like ? Americans seem to have severe cases of selective memory loss when it comes to the very same war crimes that many people have accused George Bush of committing years ago with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. In Iraq, people seem to forget the freedom that was won for the Iraqi people from the murdering dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime that they enjoy today, mainly because of the war in Iraq. They were freed from Hussein’s oppression and brutal dictatorship, yet many people still call this a war crime today.

While leftists around the world and even Republican RINOS in DC today have called the Iraqi war an illegal action, I,d like to point out that we are still there losing brave Soldiers lives. What say you Obama,and your radical Liberal mouthpieces? Where is the cry to pull out of Iraq today? There isn’t one, simply because leftist ideologues are nothing but pathetic hypocrites pushing an anti-American Socialistic agenda, period ! War is only illegal when a Republican is waging it.

How about explaining to the nation how we waged an illegal war on the leader of Libya, all based on your fake cries of Democracy there?  Leftist Democrat Hillary Clinton gave the ragtag radical rebels in Libya 25 million dollars of our tax payers hard earned money, all the time saying it wasn’t for “lethal military equipment.” Well just yesterday the Rebel spokesman was demanding more money to fund the civil war in Libya. We are simply giving aid and comfort to a group of people to topple their government. Of course the leftist propagandists in the media, who get their orders from the Obama regime, seem to have missed this little fact, as there has not been one word written, or one report on TV asking where in the hell did the Libyan Rebels get all the new military equipment from?  Obama and company do not want the American public asking that question. One minute the Libyan Rebels are a ragtag group of 15 – 20 men without uniforms, guns, radios, rockets, etc., and the next thing we see after Hillary gives them 25 million dollars, is that they have all of the afore-mentioned military equipment, including radios, guns, shoulder fired rockets, uniforms, etc. Here is some new information on the illegal funding of the Libyan rebels to promote the overthrow of their government, even though no one knows exactly what kind of government the rebels intend to install if they succeed. Is this what Democracy looks like? From BBC News Africa:

The international contact group on Libya has agreed to create a temporary fund  to assist rebel groups, during talks in Rome.

The rebels’ Transitional National Council says it needs $2bn-$3bn (£1.2bn-£1.8bn) in the coming months for military salaries, food, medicine and
other basic supplies.

Anyone thinking that this money will not be used to buy weapons is in denial of reality here. The propagandists just do not want anyone to be held accountable when it gets proven that NATO and Hillary Clinton in particular, are funding the weapons that will be used to overthrow the Libyan government here. Notice the cutsey name being used for the group funding the rebels now ? ” The International Contact group.” When the U.S. and the U.K, along with NATO are proven to be funding weapons for the rebels, who will be held accountable for it? Nobody, thus the fake “group” mantra being used.  Again, the U.S and the U.K. are funding the rebels to overthrow the government in Libya, as we see again in the above-mentioned BBC article:

British Foreign Secretary William Hague insisted that any financial assistance to the rebels would not be spent on weapons.

Do you mean just like the idiots that “monitored” the pathetic U.N. Oil for Food scandal that you jackasses enabled back in the early 90’s that let Saddam Hussein swindle billions of dollars from you incompetent, Socialist globalists ? Oh yes, we believe you will “monitor all that cash” to make sure it doesn’t buy weapons. It isn’t like your types have been proven to be incompetent buffoons before is it? Oh wait, the Oil for Food thing…

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (far left) and the foreign ministers and representatives of countries and organisations in the Libya Contact Group meeting in Rome - 5 May 2011 The Libya Contact Group has been looking at ways to fund the Libyan uprising against Col Gaddafi

“This [money] will help them to keep basic services going… because in the east of Libya they still need to be educating people, to keep public services
moving and they have to meet the expenses of all that and they don’t have much tax revenue at the moment,” he said.

Just like U.S Liberals, the rebels in Libya have picked a fight that has caused a disruption in their tax revenue, and now the rest of the world is being asked to fund their fight. Ever hear of actions have consequences ? People are now seeing the ignorance of the illegal war in Libya with no stated mission or plan, and now they want others to fix the problems they created. Zero personal responsibility, just like the liberal ideology of the Global Socialists. Is it any wonder the Liberal Nanny-State worshipper Hillary Clinton is right in the middle of this fiasco ? Maybe Hillary and Bill can buy some property in Libya and stay there for the rest of their pathetic lives, instead of continuing to infect America with their Socialistic ideology. One minute it is a war crime to invade another country that hasn’t attacked us, the next it is U.S. policy to have the Secretary of State over there to fund the uprising. Is this what Democracy looks like?  Damn hypocrite fake Democrats disgust me more every day.

In conclusion, we have learned that Libyan President Gaddafi’s son and three grand-kids, all under the age of fourteen were blown to pieces by a NATO bomb. Innocent bystanders murdered in cold blood and no one can be held accountable because they are now hiding under the NATO umbrella. Is this what Obama and Hillary’s Democracy looks like? After all, this is their stated reason for waging an illegal war on Libya. Looks more like murder and war crimes to me.

Is the Next Libyan Dictator Mahmoud Jibril?

Pictured at left is interim Prime Minister of Libya, Mahmoud Jibril (courtesy of Vincent Kessler/ Reuters.)  He was originally educated in Egypt and then later received his PhD  from The University of Pittsburgh. He is also a former member of Khadafy’s  regime who was working with his son Saif on economic reforms in Libya. While in college Jibril studied under a former U.S. intelligence official in Iran, one Richard Cottam, who later on became a political scientist who’s specialty was the Middle East.  That is a very interesting combination of skills we see there, politics, intelligence, and science. At this point one has to wonder if the intelligence agency employing Mr. Cottam wasn’t the infamous CIA.

When looking at the volatile situations across the Middle East and North Africa today, we hear very little about CIA involvement, but make no mistake, these types of situations have always involved the CIA, in one way or another. Therefore, I find it very interesting how a former Khadafy regime member who was schooled by a U.S, intelligence operative and political-science master has become the  *Interim Prime Minister of Libya* today with obvious American Leftist support.  At least we now know who our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was talking to, when she stated she was in serious talks with the Libyan rebels who had yet to be identified by the rest of the world.  While this guy appears to come out of nowhere, his background proves that he has deep ties to certain American factions, most notably our most left-leaning politicians. Take note to date, that Mr. Jibril has yet to meet with the third most powerful representative of the American people,  the Speaker of the House, Republican John Boehner.  Thus the numerous serious questions about our true agenda in engaging in the Libyan civil war illegally.  To get  Congressional approval for the Libyan war action, it would have to go through the Republican controlled House of Representatives, so President Obama just bypassed that Constitutional mandate completely.  So much for real democracy in America today.

Another interesting fact is that while studying in the United States, Mr. Jibril, who in fact went by the name Mahmoud Gebril ElWarfally when he lived in the United States, is in many ways an unlikely leader of rebellion. Also of note is that Mr. Jibril has problems spelling his own name properly or consistently, as in his own company in which he is the President, ” Gebril for Training and Consultancy.” Americans do not trust people who change their identities  in an attempt to hide their past actions, just look at Barry Seotoro, AKA  Barack Hussein Obama, for a good example of that.  Add in the fact that he has been mentored by a U. S.  intelligence operative, and had initially only been talked to by leftist Democrats John Kerry and Hillary Clinton when this whole charade started, and we see a distinct pattern emerging in the Libyan Civil War scenario.

Mr. Jibril , aka Mr. ElWarfally, has some interesting plans for Libya, which include nationalizing the oil industry, drafting a new Libyan constitution, and starting a new Central Bank, similar to what Mr. Hugo Chavez has done in Venezuela. Mr. Jibril also has visions of  installing a new television station in rebel-held territory,  while calling for the dismantling of Khadafy’s own television stations.  To deny anyone, even a ruthless dictator, the right to defend himself in the free speech arena is a very troubling sign indeed. Those plans are more  in line with installing a Socialistic Dictatorship than a true Democracy.

We also see what happens when the United States enters into a Civil war that is none of our business and becomes responsible for meeting the demands of the ragtag rebels seeking to overthrow Khadafy. To keep the rebellion afloat, opposition members are seeking aid including heavy artillery, cash, and the jamming of Khadafy’s television channels. Gene Cretz, the US ambassador to Libya, said his team is still deliberating what kind of support to offer the rebels as it tries to figure out exactly who all the people on the interim council are.

Will Libya end up being a true Democracy when this all plays out, or will it still be in the hands of just another Dictator similar to Khadafy?

Update 1: If you thought it was a conspiracy theory in the connection of Jibril/Libya war to the CIA here, check this out: Covert action coming.

Update 2:  NATO takes over air operations as CIA works the ground in Libya http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/31/libya.war/

Clinton/Gates Prep Nation for Obama’s Libya Spin Tonight: Fox left out again

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made the rounds on the Sunday talk show circuit in a seemingly weak attempt to explain to the nation our unexplained involvement in the Libyan Civil War of 2011.  Let’s see here, they were on ABC’s ” This Week, ” NBC’s ” Meet the Press ,” and CBS’s ” Face the Nation. ”  Wait a minute, isn’t there a Sunday show on Fox ? Isn’t our Government supposed to be accessible to all major media networks ?  Then why would they refuse to go on Chris Wallace’s ” Fox News Sunday ” show ?

To say the least, Chris Wallace was somewhat surprised at the blatant unfairness in the Obama administration’s decision in not making Clinton/Gates available to ” Fox News Sunday, ” and its millions of viewers.  I personally caught the slight right away, and refused to give my viewership stat to the MSM Obama puppet propagandist stations, instead I was relegated to reading about it on the internet. However I did catch the following video clip from Fox News, explaining it :

This is typical of the Obama administrations pattern of picking and chosing  just who gets access to the important governmental officials of the last two years. How the entire American population can sit around criticizing other nation’s dictatorial treatment of the press, while allowing this kind of  denial of access to Fox News is beyond rationalizing. This also goes against the promise that this administration will be the most open and transparent in our history. Apparently that open government, now means open, only to those who fail to hold this administration’s feet to the fire for engaging in an illegal war in Libya without the permission of Congress. Open only to those who get all tingly when Obama speaks, while ignoring the blatant lies and misinformation coming out of the Whitehouse today.

These kinds of  pathetic manipulations of our media should not only be condemned by all Americans today, but also by the cronies that Obama is favoring here. Think about this after we take over the U.S. Senate and Whitehouse in 2012:  How about our new Republican President denying all the Obama media puppets access to anyone in our government for four straight years and only letting them go on Fox News ?  Maybe we will let  ABC, CBS, and NBC show reruns of all the Fox News  Sunday interviews during the following week, when it is already yesterday’s news. Think about that.

Air Traffic Controller Not the Only One Asleep in the Tower

An air traffic controller has been suspended for having fallen asleep in the tower on Wednesday night. At least two planes were forced to land at Reagan National Airport as if it were an uncontrolled airport. Perhaps we should treat the White House the same way.

President Obama started another war, I mean overseas contingency oper.. oh.. wait, now it’s kinetic military something or other.. whatever – he started a damn war, but he did it without consulting Congress and still has not fairly addressed the American people. In fact, all appearances are that Hillary Clinton has actually built the coalition, hammered out the U.N. resolution, organized the NATO handover, and even handled the press conference that finally told Americans some of what’s going on.

It could be a mistake, maybe the President got locked out of the White House again. Perhaps he just has jet lag after the long vacation he took right after unilaterally declaring war on Libya and fell asleep in the oval office?

Nope, not there.

In a surprising statement today, Obama actually admits he’s not all that aware of what’s going on in his administration.

Under fire for an operation that allowed smuggling of U.S. weapons across the nation’s border with Mexico, President Obama said in an interview that neither he nor Attorney General Eric Holder authorized the controversial “Operation Fast and Furious.” [1]

Another serious international matter and the President is where? Doing what? Well, a tweet from the White House official twitter account tells us that he’s going to be doing some warm fuzzy talk on Univision  (the spelling mistake is theirs).

@whitehouse: Bacck from Latin America this week, the President does Hispanic education town hall on Univision Monday night at 7EDT [2]

The air traffic controller got suspended, any chance we can suspend Mr. Obama? Would we notice the difference if we did?


Sources:
[1] http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/03/25/obama-claims-he-didnt-know-about-operation-fast-and-furious#ixzz1HcZADUdf
[2] http://twitter.com/#!/whitehouse/status/51273934489927680

Democrats Discover that One-World Government Doesn’t Include Them

One-World Governance Caution SignThe new World order and One-World governance: all countries participating in and living by the policies and rules of a single global government body. Recent history suggests that the United Nations is intended to be that governing body and Democrats in Congress just found out what that really means .. to them

In considering the Presidents decision to attack Libya, several Democrats  questioned the process Obama used in a Saturday conference call.

Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part.

Source: Politico

With the ultra-left well-represented on the call, this was a call between the Dem-ist of the Dems and one would not have expected to hear requests for the impeachment of President Obama. As the Politico article makes clear, the reason for their anger is not the disregard of the Constitution – they got side-stepped and aren’t happy about it.

“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”

One-World government is happening and the Democrats in Congress can’t believe they would be unnecessary in the New World Order. Did they not understand the implications of decades of cow-towing to the U.N.? Have they only just now understood the vision of their great President? Have they finally grasped the fact that their Liberal Utopian fantasy would first require them to become useless and all governing power ceded to the U.N.?

Hillary certainly has no qualms with it. Congress is in the way of her and Bill’s dream of a “new world order” and the U.N. is the gateway.

Mrs. Clinton has been trying to get the United States to abide by the U.N. Small Arms treaty as a way to disarm our populace and Bill was Mr. U.N., global governance, new world order ..

The U.N. is just one more global body for Obama to bow to and Congress is finally seeing that perhaps it is not the best course of action for them – but as far as Congressional Democrats are concerned, the affect on the country is irrelevant.

 

Sources:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51595.html#ixzz1H9pWJtmv

State Dept. Spokesman Crowley Resigns After Comments

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today accepted the resignation of the State Department Spokesman, P.J. Crowley.

Crowley had been critical of the Pentagon on the detention of Private Manning, the service member that illegally delivered thousands of United State secrets to WikiLeaks.  While attending an MIT event, Crowley responded to an audience question on the treatment of the accused traitor:

[O]ne young man said he wanted to address “the elephant in the room”. What did Crowley think, he asked, about Wikileaks? About the United States, in his words, “torturing a prisoner in a military brig”? Crowley didn’t stop to think. What’s being done to Bradley Manning by my colleagues at the Department of Defense “is ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid.” He paused.

A few minutes later, I had a chance to ask a question. “Are you on the record?” I would not be writing this if he’d said no. There was an uncomfortable pause. “Sure.” So there we are.[1]

During the Egyptian overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, Crowley used twitter to say that Mubarak’s proposed actions were nothing more than a “reshuffle the deck chairs” – a reference to a popular Titanic euphemism. The White House expressed displeasure with the Spokesman as his comments had not been approved and were not appreciated.

P.J. Crowley seems to have misunderstood the role of a Spokesperson. It is not a role of one that wishes to affect policy or disseminate  opinion. The spokesperson is the mouthpiece of the entity which they represent – nothing more.

Mr. Crowley, what went down in your head.. [2]


Sources:
[1]- http://philippathomas.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/the-state-department-spokesman-and-the-prisoner-in-the-brig/
[2] – Lyrics – “Mr. Crowley” – Ozzy Osbourne

Political Infighting ripping Obama Administration apart at the Seams

The White House has mostly kept its internal turmoil under wraps in recent weeks but the lid is starting to come off the pressure cooker that is boiling at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Obama set in stone

President Barack Hussein Obama faces a rocky future, which appears to be set in stone.

It is another sign that Obama has lost control not only of the public narrative but that of his inner circle as well. It is common for senior political appointees at the White House to stay for at least until the end of the president’s first term in office. There is usually a natural turnover at the end of the first term. Old hands fade back into the woodwork and new blood is brought in to kick-start the administration’s second term.  However that is not the case in the Obama Administration. Indicative of a sinking ship, the rats are fleeing the ship as fast as the can – some voluntarily and others not so willingly. The mass exodus is well underway as evidenced by the following:

  • Larry Summers, the Director of the National Economic Council has announced his resignation, which will take effect following the midterm elections.
  • Christina Romer, who was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors resigned back in September of 2010.
  • Retired Admiral Dennis Blain, the former Director of National Intelligence, resigned in May 2010.
  • Peter Orszag resigned in June, 2010. He was the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). It is likely he felt pressure early on as he learned that the Democrats in Congress had no intention of even passing a budget for the current fiscal year.
  • Greg Craig, the White House Counsel, was forced to resign nearly a year ago, in November of 2009.
  • David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, resigned in February, 2010.
  • Mark Lippert, a Deputy National Security Advisor, left the White House in October 2009. A member of the United States Navy Reserve, he chose to move to Active Duty status. This is a telling move because Lippert was particularly close to President Barack Obama as evidenced by the fact that he was a regular pick-up basketball player with Obama during the course of his presidential campaign.
  • Van Jones, Special Advisor for Green Jobs, resigned in September, 2009 after Fox News commentator Glenn Beck skewered Jones for his ties to radical leftists and leftist organizations.
  • Ellen Moran, White House Communications Director, left in April 2009. She started it all off in the resignations game since she lasted barely three months on the job.
  • Retired General James Jones, the National Security Advisor, resigned on October 8, 2010. There is ample evidence that he was forced out of his position.
  • Rahm Emanual, Chief of Staff. Emanual held the most powerful position in the White House, but it wasn’t enough to save him. There is evidence that he was forced out by Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett.
  • David Axelrod has announced that he will leave the White House early in 2011, ostensibly to return to Chicago and work on Obama’s re-election campaign.
  • Robert Gibbs – White House Press Secretary may very well be on the short list. There are rumors circulating within the Washington D.C. elite circles that Gibbs has been told to look for another job.

The Wayne Madsen Report, (WMR) a political operation in the spirit of the legendary Jack Anderson’s Merry-Go-Round,  reported two months ago that Obama is under extreme pressure from many heavy-hitting Democratic financial donors, to change his economic policies or else they will withhold future funding in the next presidential election – choosing instead to back a different candidate – presumably Hillary Clinton.

“Informed sources in Washington, DC have told WMR that President Obama has been personally told by a delegation of top Democratic Party financiers that unless he radically changes his economic policies they will bolt from him for another Democratic candidate in 2012. The Democratic money moguls conveyed the warning to Obama in Martha’s Vineyard, where the president and his family are spending their vacation. There are various factions within the Democratic Party that see different scenarios to bail out what many Democrats see as an administration in deep trouble with the electorate. One would have Secretary of State Hillary Clinton move up to replace Vice President Joe Biden on the 2012 ticket with Senator John Kerry becoming Secretary of State. However, WMR has been told that Clinton personally loathes Obama and his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and may not want to be part of the 2012 president ticket playing second fiddle to Obama. WMR has also learned that Obama’s reported ‘severe narcissism’ has a number of his cabinet officials and top Democratic fundraisers perplexed. Obama’s refusal to change course because of his ego was discussed at the recent annual Bohemian Grove conclave in northern California, which brings together influential businessmen and politicians from both parties. Top U.S. business leaders openly complained about Obama’s economic policies, with some stating that Obama is, for the business community, the worst president in anyone’s lifetime. They also complained about White House gatekeepers like Emanuel and policy advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod who are preventing access to the Oval Office.” – Wayne Madsen Report

This development has got to be exerting great pressure on Obama since he is a fanatical ideologue in terms of the economy – religiously adhering to Keynesian economic theory that decrees economic growth comes only through increased spending. It appears that these large Democratic financiers, though also ideologically to the left, are also pragmatic businessmen. It could be that they clearly see the effect that Obama’s economic policies are having on (1) their own bottom line, and (2) the public’s reaction to Obama’s destructive policies, which is going to manifest itself on November 2 in the midterm elections. If predictions of the Tea Party’s tsunami come true, the power of the behind-the-scenes Democratic financiers could be severely curtailed.

WMR is also reporting that Obama has chosen to ignore the demands of the aforementioned financiers who represent the leftist money machine. That is why we see Obama stubbornly pressing full ahead with his redistributive agenda, including both proposed legislation and anticipated Executive Orders which will further damage the economy. Obama has even let it be known to the Republicans that if they take one or even both chambers of Congress that they, the GOP, will be forced to deal with him. Obama blithely ignores the fact that the GOP will be perfectly happy to play a stalling game – preventing any more of Obama’s Marxist agenda to be passed through Congress while simultaneously preparing Obama’s downfall in the 2012 elections. The Republicans are perfectly aware that Obama would veto any legislation they attempt to pass that would curtail or repeal his signature achievements. Therefore, they are already planning a repeat of the midterms of 2010 in 2012. Due to the nature of the Senate, with only 1/3 of the senators up for election in any given election cycle, the Republicans are already calculating that it will take at least two election cycles to fully regain control. Furthermore, the Republications are calculating that the public also realizes this fact. Therefore, they are expected to trumpet their firewall against any further Obama legislation, willing to endure the darts and arrows from the mainstream media who will surely label them as obstructionists.

Speaking of the media, the Obama White House, according to WMR, is seeking revenge for media criticism.

WMR has also learned that rather than change course, the White House staff, who is keenly reading anything that is critical of the president, are more interested in exacting revenge for criticism than in changing course. ‘The White House staff are voracious readers who are obsessed with favorable coverage,’ one source said. – WMR

If that be the case, the White House public relations flacks, led by Axelrod, must be up in arms over the recent firing of Juan Williams from National Public Radio (NPR).

Juan Williams

Juan Williams

Convinced that they did the right thing to muzzle Williams, who is also a liberal, the executives of NPR and their bosses in the White House, have got to be beside themselves with the news that Williams has just signed a contract with Fox News. In effect, the White House flacks have done nothing but shoot themselves in the foot – having given Williams a much bigger platform from which to criticize the Obama Administration. This will have the effect of furthering the political infighting within the White House as the buck gets passed, people run for cover, and Obama is left, once again, with trying to find a scapegoat.

With the swift removal of Emanual, the Crisis Management team in the White House, i.e., Obama’s inner circle, now consists of Michelle Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Axelrod (though his influence is on the wane), and Vice President Joe Biden’s circle of Thomas E. Donilon (the incoming National Security Advisor) and Peter M. Rouse, the interim White House Chief of Staff. But given the news report from WMR that Obama now considers Biden to be a rival, this inner circle, with members already divided into two camps: (1) The Obama Camp – Michelle Obama, Valerie Jarrett and Axelrod, and (2) The Biden Camp – Biden, Rouse, and Donilon – is already set up for some viscous infighting.

And then there’s the Joker in this political house of Cards. Hillary Clinton is patiently sitting on the sidelines, enjoying the destruction of the man who denied her the presidency.

Political rivals

Obama offered Hillary Clinton the Vice Presidency...but Hillary has other plans.

She is dangling the possibility that she might oppose Obama in the 2012 Democratic primaries. And she is well-positioned to do just that. She would be the beneficiary of those redirected campaign funds that have been threatened to be removed from Obama’s stash of cash. She has remained virtually silent on Obama’s major agenda items – leaving her open to fashion popular campaign planks once the chips fall on November 2nd. It very well could be that once the midterms are history Hillary Clinton will consider all of the chips to have fallen and thus Obama’s buffalo to be empty. If Hillary Clinton is going to make another run at the presidency, she is going to have to make her move early next year. So she has from November 3, 2010 (when the results of the midterms are known) until about the February to April of 2011 timeframe to make the announcement. Expect Hillary Clinton to continue to torment Obama with the uncertainty of her intentions. Obama, it has been reported, attempted to short-circuit any such primary challenge by Hillary Clinton by offering to dump Biden and ask her to join him on his 2012 ticket as the Vice Presidential candidate. Reportedly, Hillary Clinton has already declined that invitation. This move on the part of Clinton will have to be tormenting Obama because it is a pretty good sign that Hillary intends to oppose him in the Democratic primaries of 2012. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Joe Biden has got to be feeling rather bitter since Obama chose to throw him under the bus in favor of Hillary Clinton.

Newsflavor.com reported earlier this month that Obama did indeed offer Hillary the Vice Presidency.

In an attempt to deal with increasing concerns over a possible Hillary Clinton run for President in 2012, the Obama White House has quietly made overtures to Clinton to replace Joe Biden as Obama’s Vice President:

There has been speculation of just such a deal for some time now.  The speculation has proved to be accurate.  The Obama White House is very concerned with the possibility of Hillary Clinton seeking the nomination in 2012.  Very-very concerned, and for good reason.  Democratic Party supporters – I’m talking some very deep pockets and very considerable influence, have been engaging in some speculative chatter of that nature for a while.  When that happens, it’s a warning shot at the White House that says to them you better get things back on track or we are going to try and replace you.  And Hillary Clinton has done nothing to diminish that chatter.  The opposite in fact.  She is considering the possibility herself. – Newsflavor.com

In typical Clinton fashion, Hillary outmaneuvered Obama on this issue. The combination of Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton is an extremely powerful combination in liberal political circles. It appears that the Clintons have determined not to tie themselves closer to what they perceive as damaged goods. Hillary has somewhat of an albatross around her neck since she is the Secretary of State in Obama’s Administration. But she has done a very good job of distancing herself from Obama simply through her inaction and her silence.

The progressives are about to have their Come-To-Gaia moment on the morning of November 3, 2010. There isn’t going to be any more guessing about Obama’s coat-tails. Obama’s weaknesses will be all too visible to both professional politicians and the public alike. And members of the public are waking up to that fact. One reader, commenting on a Mediaite story concerning Obama floating the possibility of Hillary Clinton joining his ticket, said:

“After the November election, the Left won’t be able to remain in denial. They will start exploring alternatives to Obama in 2012. Obama’s smartest move would be to try to create a real alliance with Hilary Clinton. But as even Woodward has admitted, Obama and Clinton are not on the same page, and she is not one of his trusted advisers. So this would be a move of pure political expediency. And probably not enough to save an administration that the vast majority of Americans now see as incompetent and extremist.” – felixw

All of these factors are intertwined into the maelstrom that is the Obama White House. Alliances are being sought; supposed friends are being stabbed in the back (i.e., Biden vs. Obama); and lone wolves are circling Obama, looking for a weakness and an opportunity to strike. And there are plenty of lone wolves. One of them is Nancy Pelosi. Rumor has it that White House staffers asked Pelosi, to her face, to keep quiet until after the midterm elections were over. She was apparently told that she was a political liability. Pelosi apparently complied for a matter of weeks since she generally disappeared from view. But recently, with it becoming increasingly apparent that she would face a fight for the Speakership on the House floor in the event the Democrats retained control of the House, Pelosi has become vocal once again. Pelosi is in a battle for her own political survival and apparently she considers Obama to be a liability – just as he apparently considers her to be the same. It has been said that there is no honor among thieves – and Pelosi vs. Obama vs. Biden vs. Clinton, vs. Axelrod vs. Jarrett, vs. Michelle Obama is evidence that this contention could very well be true. The infighting is growing. It is spilling out into public view. Hangers-on are being pressured to take sides – which makes for a perilous choice for assorted low-ranking Democratic members of the House, political consultants, and members of the professional left.

Pelosi has indeed become a political liability for the Democrats, as evidenced by the liberal Guardian newspaper story out of Great Britain earlier this week:

“Republicans have put Pelosi front and centre of their campaign, trying to turn her into a rallying cry and a hate figure. Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, is on a “Fire Pelosi Bus” that is touring the country from coast to coast. Pelosi has been used in Republicans attack adverts in an incredible 47 different congressional seats, most of them many miles away from San Francisco. She has been portrayed as extreme, out-of-touch and elitist; a sort of uncaring liberal ogre forcing unwanted legislation down the throats of ordinary Americans. “She is the featured devil this year,” said Republican pollster and political consultant Adam Probolsky “She is solid in her hometown, but outside of that it is a very different picture.”

“That is Pelosi’s problem in a nutshell. Her home district voted 85 per cent for Barack Obama in 2008. Pelosi herself romped home in her last election with 72 per cent of the vote. But that will not matter if the Democrats lose the House. She will be ousted as Speaker, after being hailed only four years ago as the most powerful woman in American politics. If that happens, it will be a spectacularly swift fall from political grace. “Her career will be over. At that point she will have no political future,” said Jack Pitney, a politics professor at Claremont McKenna College in Los Angeles.” – Paul Harris

So Pelosi has no choice but to return to the stump. It is do or die for Pelosi. But Pelosi is between a rock and a hard place.

Pelosi between a rock and a hard place

Pelosi and friends - all dressed up and nowhere to go.

Told by Obama to shut up, she has ignored his command and is pressing forward, regardless. So even if she wins her fight to retain the Speakership of the House of Representatives, she has strained, if not outright broken her relationship with Obama and his cohorts within the White House.

The infighting within the inner circle of the White House, the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives, and with various party hacks and financiers, threatens to completely unravel what is left of the Obama Administration. Less than two years ago Obama was cheered on as the new Messiah, come to save the planet. Oh, how the mighty have fallen – and they can’t get up. Allowed to run amok with the Republican Party in no position to rein in the revolutionary element of the Democratic Party – the Democrats have totally imploded – in a manner kind of like inserting a straw into a pile of JELL-O© and sucking. The JELL-O© implodes upon itself, quivering from the internal pressure until it collapses and disappears into the straw – never to be seen from again. Such is the fate of the Democrats in general and the White House in particular. The American voters have shoved in the straw, guided by the massive Tea Party rebellion. Every poll showing the Democrats losing ground in the resurgent conservative tsunami is tantamount to another suck on the straw. White House staff is getting sucked up through firings and resignations. Wolves such as Clinton are circling the bowl, waiting to lick up whatever quivering bits remain behind. And there, at the bottom of the bowl, are the midterm elections.

The Democrats are also kind of like a football team. Less than two years ago the Democrats won the political Super Bowl. They reigned supreme over the universe. Winning does that to a team. But so does losing. Now the Democrats can’t get a first down. Coaches are being fired. Players are on the chopping block. Everyone is looking for a scapegoat. The fans are depressed. Advertising revenue is way down. The momentum is with the other team. Dissension is destroying the team from within itself.

The game is almost over, White House Democrats. The rats are abandoning the ship.

Tea minus 11 and counting.

T-minus 11 Days and counting until the Tea Party takes off in the 2010 midterm elections and a mission of rediscovery, going where no liberal has ever gone before - back to sanity.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »