Category: Barack Obama

From Russia, With Hate: Sodomy Lobby Now Dictating U.S. Foreign Policy

Posted on Comments

Last month, I wrote about Russia’s harsh backlash against gay-rights activism (“Russia Says ‘Nyet’ to Gay Adoptions“), and it turns out that this explains the cancellation of a scheduled summit:

The Wall Street Journal, among others, reportsthat President Barack Obama has decided to cancel a summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin over Russia’s grant of temporary asylum to NSA leaker Edward Snowden. Yet that cannot possibly be the case. A few weeks ago, when Snowden arrived in Russia, Obamabrushed the issue aside: he was not “scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker,” he said.
Obama also downplayed the Snowden issue on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno on Tuesday, as the Daily Caller notes. But he played up the conflict over gay rights, citing Russia’s insistence that it will enforce its anti-gay laws during the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi (and confusing them with the Summer Olympics in the process). He claimed that he had “been very clear” that gay rights “should transcend every country.” . . .

Read the rest by Joel Pollak at Breitbart News. The astute reader will perceive how the whole “neocon imperialist crusader” philosophy of Bush administration foreign policy, which Obama supposedly was going to reverse, has instead been simply converted to other purposes. Whereas the Republicans were going to spread “democracy” to the Middle East at the point of a bayonet, now the Obama regime aims to spread cultural liberalism by means of diplomatic hardball. This is a further sop to the same vocal minority that supports John Kerry’s recognition of foreign gay marriages for immigration purposes.

Can’t wait to see what the paleoconservatives have to say about this, and expect this may be a rare occasion of paleo/neo agreement.

America Loves You, Sama Elmasry!

 

Real Fall Guy for a ‘Phony Scandal’

Posted on Comments

Charles C. Johnson of the Daily Caller has a nice story about Nakoula (a.k.a., “Sam Bacile”), the guy whose YouTube video provided the Obama administration’s alibi for the Benghazi terror attack.

We have only recently begun to learn more about the CIA’s Libyan gun-running operation that the administration was covering up, and we’ll learn more this fall when Congress returns and begins its next round of hearings on this shabby fraud that the Democrat-Media Complex foisted on the American people last fall.

Nakoula doesn’t seem a particularly heroic person, but the real villains in this story are the journalists who lacked the basic curiosity to ask, “What is the motive for this particular lie?” It was apparent within a few days of last September’s attack on the Benghazi consulate that the administration was just flat-out lying, and the natural question was why? But nowadays most “reporters” in D.C.  (e.g., Alec MacGillis) are just Democrat Party political hacks, and re-electing Obama was Priority One. You can’t possibly hate those people as much as they deserve to be hated.

America Loves You, Sama Elmasry!

Posted on Comments

Finally an Egyptian belly-dancer tells the truth about Obama:

Hey Obama, Hey Obama
Hey Obama, support the terrorism
Traitor like the Brotherhood members

Obama say it’s a coup
That’s not your business dirty man
Obama say it’s a coup
That’s not your father, mother business
And you Patterson, stop messing
Old bitch woman

The “bitch woman” is U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson and, hey, if Obama appointed her, she’s probably pretty bad. The lyrics to Sama Elmarsy’s song also include this:

You want us to release Morsi
Hey Obama, you are stupid, bad man
You want us to release Morsi
Stop this or I will stab you
Why then you told Mubarak
To leave immediately?

You threaten us with the U.S. aid
F–k it and f–k you
You are a jerk

Let’s be honest: Rand Paul couldn’t have said it better. If Karl Rove’s super-PAC had a message this clear, Romney would be president!

 

The Big Benghazi Secret

Posted on Comments

In May, we began to learn the truth about what the Benghazi cover-up was all about: The State Department had a secret program to provide weapons to the Libyan insurgents who overthrew Gaddhafi. Once the dictator was gone and it became apparent that some of the “insurgents” the U.S. had armed were, in fact, dangerous radicals with ties to al-Qaeda, there began an effort to disarm these groups.

It was these negotiations that brought U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens to the Benghazi consulate on Sept. 11, 2012, in what appears to have been a carefully planned trap by the radical groups the U.S. was trying to disarm. It seems quite likely that the ambassador and three other Americans were killed with U.S.-supplied weapons. The fact that Benghazi was crawling with CIA operatives is something the Obama administration doesn’t want to talk about, for reasons that should be obvious enough. Jonathan Tobin writes at Commentary:

If Benghazi is a “phony scandal,” Americans are entitled to ask why the government is behaving so suspiciously. . . .
At this point with so many unanswered questions about Benghazi, the administration should be facilitating the investigation of the attack rather than actually impeding it. We don’t know whether the code of omerta being imposed on CIA personnel is merely a function of bureaucratic inertia or a far more sinister attempt to prevent Congress and the public from finding out more about the failures of both the agency and the State Department. No one should make assumptions about wrongdoing, but given the unwillingness of the administration to apply its supposed belief in transparency to this question, it is, at the very least, reasonable to conclude that something is amiss here.

“Something amiss” is putting it rather mildly. It stinks to high heaven. The administration has been lying since Day One, and what they’re trying to do now is to run out the clock, to delay as long as possible — if they cannot entirely prevent — disclosure of the truth, so that they can then dismiss it as, “old news.” And this is really the scandalous part of it: What if the American people had known in fall 2012 what we know (or at least think we know) now?

The absurd claim that what happened in Benghazi was a “spontaneous” demonstration inspired by a YouTube video was a deliberate lie, part of a cover-up, the initial purpose of which was to deflect blame from the administration during the presidential election campaign. In truth, the Benghazi attack was a direct consequence of President Obama’s embrace of the “Arab Spring,” four Americans died as a result, and the administration is still trying to conceal the facts because Hillary Clinton was deeply implicated in this debacle.

John Hinderaker gives heed to rumors that weapons were being shipped from Libya to Syria. I’ve heard nothing about that, but I was impressed by Joe Curl’s reaction to the CNN item:

Here’s my thing: I don’t really have a problem with shadowy CIA operations. I understand considerations of foreign-policy realism and I know that sometimes it’s hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys. But when you screw up — and I’d say a dead U.S. ambassador counts as screwing up — you can’t stonewall and lie and claim it’s all a “phony scandal.” Not if you’re the president who promised America the “most transparent administration in history.”

 


‘Authentic Frontier Gibberish’

Posted on Comments

The best comedy ever made? That’s a tough call, but if it’s not Animal House, then surely it must be Mel Brooks’ Blazing Saddles — and not just because I first saw it as a 15-year-old with my dope buddies Mike and Dave after we’d toked up some fine Colombian gold bud.

Even without the buzz, it’s one of the zaniest things ever captured on film, but that day in 1974, I quite literally fell in the floor in spasms of painfully hysterical laughter. There was no film tradition Mel Brooks did not mock, nor any taboo he did not violate. The humor was a madcap mix of everything you could possibly imagine — vaudeville innuendo, sight gags, fart jokes — perfectly aimed at an audience that had grown up reading Mad magazine and had more recently graduated to National Lampoon and George Carlin albums.

Kids who see Blazing Saddles today cannot possibly imagine how shocking it was to see it in 1974. Unfortunately, most younger people now have only seen it on cable TV, where it gets chopped to pieces, and younger viewers are jaded by having seen other comedies that followed through the gigantic holes that Mel Brooks punched through the wall of Things You Can’t Say or Do in a Movie.

One of the running gags in the movie is that everybody in the “peaceful town called Rock Ridge,” is named Johnson. After the bad guys have made their first violent raid against Rock Ridge, there is an emergency meeting at the town’s church. One of the speeches — if you can call it that — is given by Gabby Johnson, a grizzled old-timer who jabbers incomprehensibly but with much passion and angry gestures. After Gabby has finished making noises about these sidewindin’ bushwackin’ hornswagglin’ cracker croakers, Olson Johnson then stands up to address the assembled citizenry of Rock Ridge:

“Now who can argue with that? I think we’re all indebted to Gabby Johnson for clearly stating what needed to be said. I’m particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic frontier gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age.”

For some reason, that came to mind today as I was reading President Obama’s statement about the military coup in Egypt. No, it’s not authentic frontier gibberish, but it is certainly as incomprehensible as anything Gabby Johnson said that day in Rock Ridge:

“Core principles . . . universal human rights . . . legitimate aspirations . . .  the democratic process . . .  we are deeply concerned . . . an inclusive and transparent process . . . Given today’s developments, I have also directed the relevant departments and agencies to review the implications under U.S. law for our assistance to the Government of Egypt.”

Exactly what the hell does this mean? Have the White House speech writers been replaced by a Random Platitude Generator, a computer program that automatically cranks out empty rhetoric, glittering generalities and vague diplomatic argle-bargle?

The new sheriff . . . Well, he’s failed to answer the critical question we now face in Egypt: “What are we going to do about these sidewindin’ bushwackin’ hornswagglin’ cracker croakers?”

As for me, I say we work up a Number Six on ’em . . . .

 

 

UPDATE: Linked by The Lonely Conservative — thanks! — and welcome, Instapundit readers!

The latest news out of Egypt is . . . well, it’s not really news: The Muslim Brotherhood hates Jews,  John Kerry is a liar, and President Obama is a Stuttering Clusterf–k of a Miserable Failure.

Meanwhile, in the comments, I notice that some people are claiming Young Frankenstein is funnier than Blazing Saddles, which is proof some people smoked too much weed back in the day. You could have said Airplane or Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life, and I’d have said, “OK, maybe.” But Young Frankenstein? No, sorry.

 


Benghazi: The Unanswered Question

Posted on Comments

Last week, American Spectator editor R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. called and asked me to take a look at a Wall Street Journal op-ed column by Kevin G. Norton, “Benghazi’s Record of Broken Trust.”

Tyrrell asked me to contact Norton, which I did.  Tyrrell explained he was curious about a question: Where was Obama? You may remember Chris Wallace asked this last month on Fox News:

Strange to say, we still have no answer to that question:

Unlike Chris Wallace, most in the press corps have been willing to accept the administration’s non-answers, so that we are left with what Rich Lowry has called “a blank spot” in Obama’s presidency. And to invoke the famous words of the former Secretary of State, what difference at this point does it make? Perhaps not much to civilians stateside, who might be tempted to dismiss the whole affair as another political kerfuffle in Washington, but it means a great deal to those who devote themselves to serving their nation overseas. Just ask Kevin Norton.
“It’s bothered me ever since it happened,” the 36-year-old former Army captain says of the administration’s response to the Benghazi attack. “It makes no sense at all.”
Norton served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Third Infantry Division in 2005, and was reactivated for deployment to Afghanistan as a combat adviser in 2009. Like every other American soldier, Norton was trained to “leave no man behind.” He summarizes the common understanding of troops under fire: “Everybody knows that if the s—t hits the fan, they’re going to do whatever it takes to get you out of there.”
What happened in Benghazi, Norton said in a brief telephone interview, was an “egregious violation” of that basic promise our nation makes to its courageous men and women who put their lives at risk to serve America in potentially hostile foreign countries. Although it appears Ambassador Stevens and State Department aide Sean Smith were both killed before any U.S. forces could have rescued them, the same is not true of two former Navy SEALS, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. Both of them were part of a security detail that tried to save Stevens and Smith at the consulate, and were tasked with evacuating other Americans after the initial attack. Woods and Doherty were killed in a subsequent assault on the CIA annex in Benghazi. More than six hours elapsed between the first alarm from the consulate — “We’re under attack, we need help, please send help now” — and the attack on the annex in which mortar shells killed Woods and Doherty. By 4:30 p.m. Eastern time, Secretary Panetta was told of the desperate crisis in Benghazi and, about an hour later, Secretary Clinton called CIA Director David Petraeus to coordinate a response. Exactly why that response was insufficient to save the lives of Woods and Doherty remains hotly disputed. . . .

Please read the whole thing at The American Spectator.

 


Obama’s Sequel Speech In Berlin Was Really Just An Alice In Chains Reference

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

The Daily Mail carries the story the U.S. news is mostly ignoring:

It was a more muted affair for President Obama in Berlin today as he spoke at Berlin’s iconic Brandenburg Gate before an invite-only crowd of 4,500 guests – a remarkable difference from the rock-star welcome he received five years ago in front of 195,500 cheering supporters.
Then, Obama had it all to play for – the glowing presidential candidate symbolizing America’s revived hope for the future. This time, he arrived back in Berlin under the cloud of NSA surveillance programs which have outraged many Europeans and the ever-growing crisis in Syria.

Some useless sack named Chris Matthews was trying to make excuses for why our Lawd & Savory bombed in Berlin:


The evidence:

However, known grunge fan #OccupyResoluteDesk may just be a Man in the Box, to hear his whining: