Iran not a “serious threat”?

posted at 9:15 am on May 19, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama gave an interesting description of Iran and the threat it poses to the United States and our national interests at an appearance in Oregon last night. “They don’t pose a serious threat to us in the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us,” Obama told a cheering audience, explaining why he doesn’t think we need to worry about “tiny” countries like Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran. Obama also displays a weird sense of history when he suggests that the Berlin Wall fell because we engaged Mikhail Gorbachev:

Wow. Where to begin with this silliness?

Let’s start with the Soviet Union. We talked with the Soviet Union because they also had nuclear weapons. Obama seems to forget that the entire point of our Iran policy is to prevent being put in the position of having to cut deals with a terrorist-supporting, radical Islamist non-rational state. When the enemy already has the capability of destroying you several times over, negotiations are needed to keep one side from initiating a war. Only an idiot would think that the negotiations intended on disarming the Soviets, or they us. The same dynamic applies to our engagement with Mao Zedong and Red China; Mao was smart enough to hold himself out as a potential partner in a power balance against the Soviets.

The Soviet Union collapsed economically; they did not just decide to capitulate. The Berlin Wall did not fall as a result of negotiations, but because the regime propping it up ceased to exist. Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Because Ronald Reagan won an economic war with Moscow, forcing it to spend more and more and falling further and further behind. The Strategic Defense Initiative provided the coup de grace to the Soviets, who knew they could never match us in missile defense, and tried negotiating an end to the economic war instead, with disastrous results.

That would be the same SDI that Democrats staunchly opposed, sneeringly called “Star Wars” and proclaiming it a threat to peaceful coexistence. They wanted a decades-long series of summits instead of the end of communism, which sounds strikingly familiar in Obama’s speech. Reagan had to fight the Democrats to beat the Soviets, not through presidential-level diplomacy but through economic isolation and military strength.

Listen to Obama talk about the “common interests” supposedly shared between the US and the Iranian mullahcracy. What interests would those be? The destruction of Israel, the denial of the Holocaust, the financial and military support of Hamas and Hezbollah, or the killing of American soldiers in Iraq? And please point out the presidential-level, unconditional contacts that brought down the Berlin Wall. Our “common interests” didn’t exist between the East German and American governments; they existed between the people of East Germany and America in the promise of real freedom. When the Soviet power structure imploded, it was the people of East Germany who tore down the wall, not Mikhail Gorbachev, who watched it happen impotently.

Furthermore, the danger in Iranian nuclear weapons has nothing to do with the capacity of its Shahab-3 ballistic missiles. Iran’s sponsorship of terrorist organizations will allow them to partner with any small group of lunatics who want to smuggle a nuclear weapon into any Western city — London, Rome, Washington DC, Los Angeles, take your pick. That’s the problem with nuclear proliferation; it doesn’t take a large army to threaten annihilation any longer, which is why we work so hard to keep those weapons out of the hands of non-rational actors like Iran. The Soviets may have been evil, but they were rational, and we could count on their desire to survive to rely on the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction. The Iranians believe that a worldwide conflagration will have Allah deliver the world to Islam, so a nuclear exchange may fall within their policy, and that’s assuming we could establish their culpability for a sneak nuclear attack to the extent where a President Obama would order a nuclear reprisal.

This speech reveals Obama to have no grasp of history, no grasp of strategic implications of a nuclear Iran, and no clue how to secure the nation and handle foreign policy.

Update: Obama suggests that Iran isn’t a real threat because they only spend “1/100th” of what we spend on defense. Not only does that make it sound like the US is a much greater threat to world peace, but it ignores the entire issue of asymmetrical warfare. How much does al-Qaeda spend on its attacks? A lot less than Iran, I’d suspect. Does that make AQ a much lower threat? If so, shouldn’t we be bombing Iran in the next five minutes or so?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Mr. Gorbachev, turn off this fool!

mymanpotsandpans on May 19, 2008 at 9:20 AM

And the scariest part. The masses Cheered him on. The ignorance is maddening.

bridgetown on May 19, 2008 at 9:22 AM

“Change we can believe in”. How stupid! And all of those that vote for this idiot.

MrFreeman07 on May 19, 2008 at 9:23 AM

Oh, Ronald Reagan singlehandedly won the war? Damn, I miss Brian. :((((((

freevillage on May 19, 2008 at 9:25 AM

Obama and the other democrats remind me of the kids who gave the bully their lunch money, in return for maybe not getting beat up during recess. What a great foreign policy model……

Think_b4_speaking on May 19, 2008 at 9:26 AM

65,000 at a rally in Oregon yesterday. As long as the MSM just listens, and doesn’t critique, the people will keep packing the stadiums.

Limerick on May 19, 2008 at 9:26 AM

Obama is not fit to lead because he espouses “a multilateralist foreign policy, patterned after UN leadership, in which we deny rather than confront challenges” (VDH).

Obama is so incredibly naive that it’s actually scary.

Richard Romano on May 19, 2008 at 9:26 AM

Pass the gravitas, please.

whitetop on May 19, 2008 at 9:28 AM

Wow. Where to begin with this silliness?

By pausing in sheer astonishment that this idiot is beating the pants suit off Hillary Clinton.

highhopes on May 19, 2008 at 9:28 AM

Small countries who work together can accomplish big things. A dumba** like Chavez only needs to get it right once, knowhutimean?

gator70 on May 19, 2008 at 9:29 AM

KAMALA OVER HILLARY
One reason that the national board of NARAL, the pro-abortion lobbying organization, endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, and encouraged its state membership to do the same, was a series of behind the scenes conversations between the Obama campaign and NARAL.

“The message was, get on board or risk losing influence,” says an Obama strategist. “We needed one of these [feminist or pro-abortion] groups to step up and walk away from Hillary. NARAL did it, and to its credit under great danger to its credibility with its membership.”

as part of the conversation with NARAL, Obama advisers suggested that Obama was more likely to put in place key feminist and pro-abortion activists than Clinton. “The name that kept popping up was [San Francisco District Attorney] Kamala Harris. The campaign promised she’d become increasingly higher profile with Obama, and the women’s groups love her,” says another Obama strategist.

Harris is viewed as one of the most radical local elective office holders in the country, a district attorney who has refused to seek the death penalty even against cop-killers, and who has won high praise from the homosexual and pro-abortion lobbies that have strong bases in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Harris has been mentioned for high profile jobs in an Obama Administration, with some claiming she could be a dark-horse candidate for Attorney General. “She’s smart, with not a lot of experience, but given where the Senate could be [with 60 Democrats], confirmation of someone this unqualified for that important a job wouldn’t be far-fetched,” says a San Francisco Democratic operative.

It’s not just his naivete that is frightening about Obama

funky chicken on May 19, 2008 at 9:30 AM

Talkers believe that talk will solve all problems. After all, it got them in power in academia, where talk is everything, the media, where talk is everything, and Congress, where talk is everything. Since talk alone has worked so well for them thus far, they expect it to work everywhere. If they had ever had to do instead of just talking, they might understand. Those who cheer them on mostly live on talk as well.

Buford Gooch on May 19, 2008 at 9:32 AM

That would be the same SDI that Democrats staunchly opposed, sneeringly called “Star Wars” and proclaiming it a threat to peaceful coexistence. They wanted a decades-long series of summits instead of the end of communism, which sounds strikingly familiar in Obama’s speech. Reagan had to fight the Democrats to beat the Soviets

That’s because most Democrats are “Democratic Socialists”/Communists.

Seriously.

It’s no surprise that Communists didn’t want the end of Communism.

It’s no surprise that Reagan had to fight the Communists in this country to beat the Communists in the Soviet Union.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 9:33 AM

But he’s bring back hope…

ronsfi on May 19, 2008 at 9:33 AM

I think Obama really does believe he has something in common with Iran, it’s their mutual hate of this country.

4shoes on May 19, 2008 at 9:35 AM

Let’s hope that the United States of America never becomes like the following country, highlighted in a current DrudgeReport link:

In a nation that has not tasted and – with very few exceptions – does not expect or demand justice or freedom, all that matters is stability and security.

You can forget any talk from the new President about “stamping out” corruption. This social and economic disease is insidious and rampant.

In a country where the “separation of powers” has become a bad joke, the law courts are no less corrupt.

The threat of prosecution for tax fraud is the [Government’s] weapon of choice against anyone who dares to challenge its hegemony.

When [citizen], once the richest man in [country], used his oil wealth to promote human rights and democracy, [fascist leader] detected a threat to his throne.

The [citizen] was duly arrested and convicted of fraud. He now languishes in jail where he is in the third year of an eight-year prison sentence.

Almost every national radio and television station is now controlled directly or indirectly by the state, and the same applies to every newspaper of any influence.

That diminishing number who have the courage to investigate or speak out against the abuses perpetrated by the rich and powerful very soon find themselves out of a job – or, in an alarming number of cases, on the receiving end of a deadly bullet.

Some 20 journalists have been killed in suspicious circumstances since [fascist leader] came to office. No one has yet been convicted for any of these crimes.

[fascist leader] calls the system over which he presides “sovereign democracy”. I think a better term is “cryptofascism”

In the absence of any experience of accountability or transparency – the basic ingredients of an open society – even the most thoughtful [citizens] are prone to say: “[We] need a strong man at the centre.”

Any guesses what country that is?

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 9:36 AM

It’ll be Dhimmi Carter part two, and maybe even worse than that.

forest on May 19, 2008 at 9:37 AM

Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Because Ronald Reagan won an economic war with Moscow, forcing it to spend more and more and falling further and further behind.

Although it’s not P.C. to say so, the fall was also leveraged with the aid of John Paul II’s fervent prayers for an end to Soviet communism.

whitetop on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

“They don’t pose a serious threat to us in the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us,” Obama told a cheering audience

No kidding! LOL
The USSR did not have terrorist cells in America. Spies, yes. But terrorists with plots to blow up our government, no. A military to do it on contingency, yes. But the USSR and the USA did not equate on ANY comparison with the USA and Islamofascist Iran.

And to hear Obama refered to as “the Constitutional authority”, “the Constitutional scholar”, “the Constitutional specialist” by the MSM yesterday,
HA HA HA HA HA.

HA. In a pig’s eye.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

This is great. At least Obama is not hiding his pacifist views until he gets elected. The voters really will have a choice. That’s what national elections are supposed to be – two diffrent views of the nation and the world. Let’s pray the voters choose the right one.

I will say something else to those who continue to hold out against John McCain – whatever he thinks or may do about illegal immigration or climate change pales in comparison to the damage a President Obama will do to America and our friends around the world. This man is a dangerous fool.

rockmom on May 19, 2008 at 9:39 AM

Limerick on May 19, 2008 at 9:26 AM

BHO would have it said, “As Oregon goes, goes the world.”

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:40 AM

This guy really is not very smart. He should be getting called out more on this, the 57 states and then questioned in an ad about how much he really knows about this country and how if you don’t know history you are damned to repeat it’s mistakes. Is that “real” change?

ikez78 on May 19, 2008 at 9:47 AM

This speech reveals Obama to have no grasp of history, no grasp of strategic implications of a nuclear Iran, and no clue how to secure the nation and handle foreign policy.

80,000 turn out “to watch history in the making.” Obama doesn’t need to know history, he is history to his fans. This shows that the Dems no longer need to run politicians– celebrities will do fine.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:49 AM

Although it’s not P.C. to say so, the fall was also leveraged with the aid of John Paul II’s fervent prayers for an end to Soviet communism.

whitetop on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Since when has the MSM taken up PC arms against John Paul II on communism? Persecuting his old age infirmities and traditional stands on morals and lifestyles and right to life, yes, they were awful bastards. But on Poland and communism, even the MSM allowed his perceived sainthood for their own reasons, or so the MSM news seemed to me. But they DO love revisions. And they DO love communism. Argh. If you’re right, I am not surprised.

To hell with PC.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:49 AM

“These are tiny countries …… they don’t pose a serious threat to us.”

Like Japan, huh dildo?

Ever heard of Japan? Ever look at a map of the world? Ever hear of Pearl Harbor? Ever learn that teeny-tiny Japan had control of a third of China and most of Southeast Asia before we went to war with them.

Shoulda negotiated with ‘em bro. They was tiny. All we had to do was offer them a puppy and a lolipop and they would have capitulated.

Sheeple in kool-aid stupor ….. “Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh”!

fogw on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

Obama’s an icon. That’s all many people want for leader these days, just like they want a designer’s name on their clothes and car, a designer dog, etc. Style over substance.

If they put the Communist Manifesto in a cool font, people would choose it over the Constitution.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

whitetop on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

I agree.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

Keep clapping you sheeple.

I’m trying to figure out which frightens me more, Obama himself with his naive and baseless stance on a host of issues or the fawning worshipers of this guy. The cult of personality this guy has is looking more and more like a cult to me when I look in the eyes of his followers who borderline worship a politician…. a GODD**N POLITICIAN. Are the lives of these people so empty that that’s the best they have to look up to?

Yakko77 on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

You people know that the Supers are just so damned excited about this clown. Oh, just who’s constitution did this idiot claim to study? It sure wasn’t ours.

thekingtut on May 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM

And thanks Ed. You’re a profile in courage and persistence going after his inanities day after day, and even summoning the energy to respond.

Maybe you just should shorten your response to YUCK.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:55 AM

This shows that the Dems no longer need to run politicians– celebrities will do fine.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:49 AM

Ah, the Hollywood and Big Apple organic fertilizer of sophisticated devolvement spawned from Ivy League Marxist Conservatories. Take a whiff of that fresh air from the cattle ground in Oregon.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:56 AM

Did I read somewhere that he thinks Ray Nagin would be a kick ass head of FEMA? Believe I did.

a capella on May 19, 2008 at 9:58 AM

Shoulda negotiated with ‘em bro. They was tiny. All we had to do was offer them a puppy and a lolipop and they would have capitulated.

fogw on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

We DID negotiate all the way through the attack at Pearl Harbor. Fine job negotiations did preventing WWII, USA vs. Japan and England vs. Germany.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM

Yakko77 on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

Everybody likes the idea of an Obama. The man will never be able to live up that idea.

highhopes on May 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM

If they put the Communist Manifesto in a cool font, people would choose it over the Constitution.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

Sad, but so true…

right2bright on May 19, 2008 at 10:00 AM

For Obama to continue to say that Iran is stronger today and that is a failure of Bush policy ignores the reasons it is, temporarily, stronger.

The removal of Saddam – with UN unanimous support with a 15 – 0 vote in UNSC for a Chapter VII resolution that included “serious consequences” – was, inherently, going to cause that kind of imbalance of power on the ground. As Iraq regroups under representative democratic gov’t that will not last.

I wonder if the largest reason Iran is “stonger” is because of how successfully, and without any effective challenge, they have been able to jerk the UN around regarding its nuclear program(s)? Talk, talk, talk, blah, blah, blah, jaw, jaw, jaw… and the next we know, Arachnid is in NYC getting big publicity/street cred.

Also, our successful defenstration of AQ over the past years is another part of reason. Who else is gonna carry the ball for Imperial Islam? It’s tough to lead a successful takeover of world from a cave. Iran is now more seen as that voice; a voice enhanced by its beating UN in the nuclear game it plays.

Frankly, there is so much time – and so much progress occuring in Iraq – that the dynamics could change one last time before the election. A unified Iraq, with US support, offers a neutralizing bulwark against Iran. The exemplar of the success in Iraq, over time, will create the antiseptic necessary to clean out the Hez’s and Hamas’ of the neighborhood. 5 years ain’t no time in any part of our world; certainly not in the septic tank we call the Middle East. [Dems seem to view real time history as if it should develop like Jiffy Pop, placed in a microwave, set on Turbo is cooked.]

Or, would someone please force feed a little historical perspective on Obama… so that his little bird minions, mouths open, looking for pre-digested revisionism, will have enough knowedge to deal with the silliness he’s offering.

[Is it fair to say that the success of 9/11 in taking down the WTC has also increased Iran's "strength". We are talking about Muslim devotees creating that strength, aren't we? If so, then it seems to me that one act did as much to unify Islam agaisnt us as anything evah... you know, everyone loves a winner?? I guess it's not strange that Obama never mentions this. Should "we"?... ;-]

Shivas Irons on May 19, 2008 at 10:00 AM

fogw on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM
You are right, I’m saying.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:00 AM

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:49 AM

You’re on fire today…

right2bright on May 19, 2008 at 10:01 AM

freevillage, I think Ed’s point was a little more nuanced than that. Reagan took point on foreign policy and defense policy because that was his role as President. He did have the prescience to recognize the vulnerabilities that Soviet economic performance presented, in contrast to what a lot of analysts believed (e.g. the CIA, many mainstream economists such as Paul Samuelson). I think he deserves credit for thinking that destabilizing the Soviets economically was even an achievable policy goal.

DrSteve on May 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM

And to hear Obama refered to as “the Constitutional authority”, “the Constitutional scholar”, “the Constitutional specialist” by the MSM yesterday,
HA HA HA HA HA.

HA. In a pig’s eye.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

It would be funny if he weren’t a serious threat to our Constitution. Obama and the MSM are tools of the Communist Party, USA. They would like to replace our Constitution with this constitution.

Obama, “the Constitutional scholar”, couldn’t even properly quote our Constitution in his “A More Perfect Union” speech. Instead of starting with

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,

he started with

We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union,

That’s not change I can believe in.

Obama’s “We the People” is “Workers of the world unite!”.

Obama’s “We the People” is “Sí, se puede!”

Can we trust a man who so blatantly distorts the Constitution of the United States to then fulfill the Presidential Oath of Office?

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Can we trust this man?

No, we can’t.

NO, WE CAN’T!

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM

It really is scary that he’s literally blind about world affairs, but what’s even scarier is the thousands of sheep that follow him around and will cast a vote in November. The dems didn’t think Bin Laden was much of a threat either, and he wasn’t even a “tiny country”.

scalleywag on May 19, 2008 at 10:09 AM

You seriously have to wonder who is filling B.O. with all this hoohaa. Someone on his campaign staff is either very unclear on just how serious a threat Iran presently is, or they have a laddie-da care-less attitude on the whole subject . Which is why it is very important to not only listen to what B.O. is saying these days, but to pay attention to the type of people he is now surrounding himself with. This is now getting to be very scary if they are looking at dangerous places like Iran and pretty much shrugging their shoulders on the subject.

pilamaye on May 19, 2008 at 10:09 AM

Obama is an example of what an Ivy League education looks like these days, producing what Rush calls “a glittering jewel of colossal ignorance”.

Barry just opened the door very wide for Hillary. Let’s see if she uses her lawyerly skills to pounce on this mouse.

Buy Danish on May 19, 2008 at 10:10 AM

Buy Danish 10:10
On that rat, go cat, go!

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:13 AM

You people know that the Supers are just so damned excited about this clown. Oh, just who’s constitution did this idiot claim to study? It sure wasn’t ours.

thekingtut on May 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM

Obama is an expert on this constitution.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:13 AM

Not serious threats huh? God help us if this dude gets elected. Ok, Iran spends 1/100th of what we do on their military. We could probably decimate their conventional forces no problem. But, what about the asymetric threat they pose via Hezbollah, et. al., Senator? What does al-Qaida spend on their operations as compared to ours? Are they not a serious threat either? Just words?

CP on May 19, 2008 at 10:14 AM

And to hear Obama refered to as “the Constitutional authority”, “the Constitutional scholar”, “the Constitutional specialist” by the MSM yesterday,
HA HA HA HA HA.

HA. In a pig’s eye.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

It would be funny if this man wasn’t a serious threat to our Constitution.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:14 AM

Buy Danish on May 19, 2008 at 10:10 AM

Maverick Muses’ (not to be confused with Maverick) Marxist conservatories.

Also, isn’t this where we get to see if Hil wants VP?

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 10:14 AM

“Good morning, Senator.”

“Did I have any calls?”

“Yes, Ron Paul called and he wants his foreign policy back. And RuPaul called and he wants his act back.”

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:16 AM

Germany is a small country also and look what Hitler managed to do. Ahmanutjob has aspirations just like Hitler, to invade and conquer nearby countries like Lebanon and to “wipe Israel off the map”

Hussein is a complete clueless idiot, in addition to being a racist, anti American marxist.

If the harridan were as smart as everyone claims she is, she would use these speeches to roast him.

dogsoldier on May 19, 2008 at 10:17 AM

Obama is an expert on this [US communist] constitution.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:13 AM

Funny. (laughing: “mother may I”)

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM

And RuPaul called and he wants his act back.”

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:16 AM

Wicked.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM

Barry just opened the door very wide for Hillary. Let’s see if she uses her lawyerly skills to pounce on this mouse.

Buy Danish on May 19, 2008 at 10:10 AM

She got her nuttiness in the same place as Obambi. But she’s feckless enough to pretend she didn’t.

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM

Don’t mind me; I’m cranky.

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:19 AM

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:16 AM

LOL.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM

It’s tiresome, their asking so often for us to explain the obvious to them. In fact, I have a hard time thinking that supposedly intelligent, alert adults like Obama (and Pelosi and Reid) actually believe the preposterous denials they put out for left wing consumption.

The Berlin Wall fell because Reagan “engaged’ Gorbachev? “Engaged?” Really.

Iran doesn’t pose a serious threat to us in the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us? A serious threat? “Serious?”

Get real.

What drives such incredible denial? Could it be a Machiavellian imperative to redirect defense spending to domestic social programs? After all, in a multiculturalist zero-sum game, there’s little expedience in defending the state when social programs buy identity-group votes and engineer the transformation of Neanderthal America into a socialist, collectivist, transnational utopia.

petefrt on May 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM

Obama deliberately misquoted the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States in his “A More Perfect Union” speech:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,

That’s not change I can believe in.

Barack’s “We the People” is “Workers of the world, unite!”

Barack’s “We the People” is “Sí, se puede!”

Can we trust a man who so blatantly alters the Constitution of the United States of America to honor the Presidential Oath of Office?

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

No, we can’t.

NO, WE CAN’T!!!

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:21 AM

I have come to believe that we are all misjudging Obama. I think that he is very street smart, in that he is saying what he knows the sheeple want to hear – whether it is his own conviction or not. He wants power, the sheeple want a message of hope (not reality), and he is quite capable of figuring out which chains to pull to get their votes.

In sum, he is another P.T.Barnum, giving the folks a show, in return for reward.

OldEnglish on May 19, 2008 at 10:23 AM

Sorry for the double posts. My 10:07 AM comment didn’t show up for a long time, so I thought it had been tossed in the bit bucket. I repeated the same message in smaller comments.

It’s important enough, though, that I’m glad I repeated it. People need to get this message.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:24 AM

Obama’s an icon. That’s all many people want for leader these days, just like they want a designer’s name on their clothes and car, a designer dog, etc. Style over substance.

If they put the Communist Manifesto in a cool font, people would choose it over the Constitution.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM

Bing. Everyone out there this morning – ask yourself what percentage of the people that you know are ever willing to even casually discuss public policy issues with you? In my case, I’m guessing less than 5%.

The other 95% are almost all registered voters, and I say they are using JiangxiDad’s “celebrity method”, or at best the traditional banker’s appraisal system, The WAG Method (Wild Ass Guess).

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:26 AM

Obombem, needs to really understand the enemy we face. He is dreaming the impossible dream. If he thinks he can talk them into changing their hatred for U.S. or anyone that does not think, act, or believe in their view of how the world must submit to their good ol’ days of the 7th century-he should consider providing us a sample.

Finally, when he and his campaign list demands what is off limits for discussion by his opponents or anyone confirms his elitism. It also indicates we are getting closer to the truth that he does not have the nations best interest at heart.

He wants U.S. to follow him to “Never, Never Land” (Obombems version of Camalot). But I have been there in the 60′s and it was not pretty.

can

MSGTAS on May 19, 2008 at 10:29 AM

Hussein big heepum dork.

saved on May 19, 2008 at 10:30 AM

petefrt on May 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM
It’s tiresome,
What drives such incredible denial?

It strikes bullseye dead center with today’s liberals, as seen in Oregon, and CA and elsewhere.

You are correct and not alone. The repetition of “teaching” good lessons to students who refuse the lesson seems futile. Hence, sabbaticals to provide new research and rejuvination from a new setting. But the responsibility of the mature is to teach the youth who have been indoctrinated already to be liberal, the natural thing to be at that age. So it may be an exercise in futility to “prove” the case for conservative responsibility to the immature. To a point, teaching remains an act of charity–if not for them, for our own children’s sake.

I’m signing off.
Good day, folks.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Jaibones on May 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM

IMO, Hil’s elitism and liberal credentials were acquired through learning, a desire to not be the (uncool) conservative Midwesterner she is, and by falling under her used-car-salesman-of-a-husband’s spell who outlined an alternative route to power–using minorities to get there. Ironically, with her intelligence and drive, she may have had even more personal political success if she had stayed true to her conservative roots.

Obama acquired his elitism and liberalism through his mother’s milk. He was already the liberal product before he entered the marxist seminaries– he merely got polished there. He is truly the manchurian candidate, but even more so, having been brainwashed at birth.

Not sure if these differences I see between them matters much now, but I do think it explains why Hillary is much the better candidate and fighter. Obama can rely on similarly brainwashed minions to support him. Hillary, I think, has to fight for support.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 10:31 AM

This true breach was not an isolated event.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:32 AM

I have a feeling that “The Big Owe©” will be your next president.

Frankly, if that does occur I’m somewhat fascinated by what will happen.

Trainwreck?
Jimmuh Mk. II?

Or, perhaps, an opportunity for true conservatives to rally and have a cohesive message with real answers for 2012.

True conservatism has lost its way. It’s time for us to reorganize and get the message out.

Perhaps a “Big Owe©” presidency will be the “call to arms” needed for conservatives to finally get their acts together instead of being nothing more than watered-down “neo-comms©”

MT

BTW – “The Big Owe©” and “neo-comms©” are copyright 2008 MistahTibbs and can only be used with his express, written permission. ;-)

Mistahtibbs on May 19, 2008 at 10:32 AM

In sum, he is another P.T.Barnum, giving the folks a show, in return for reward.

OldEnglish on May 19, 2008 at 10:23 AM

Barker Obama

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:34 AM

Senator Joe McCarthy was right.

Drawing on primary sources—including never-before-published government records and FBI files, as well as recent research gleaned from Soviet archives and intercepted transmissions between Moscow spymasters and their agents in the United States—Evans presents irrefutable evidence of a relentless Communist drive to penetrate our government, influence its policies, and steal its secrets. Most shocking of all, he shows that U.S. officials supposedly guarding against this danger not only let it happen but actively covered up the penetration. All of this was precisely as Joe McCarthy contended.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:35 AM

Even some of Reagan’s own advisers thought he was “crazy” when he told them at the beginning of his presidency that his vision of the Cold War was “we win, they lose.” Obama is obviously one of those who would have called Reagan crazy.

And Reagan DID NOT talk to the Soviets during his entire first term in office. I clearly remember Walter Mondale screaming about this in the 1984 campaign. The liberal foreign policy establishment pounded Reagan endlessly for refusing to talk to them.

rockmom on May 19, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Comrade freevillage, who do you want to see win the United States Presidential election?

Since your blog is in Russian (and I can’t read Russian), I don’t know if you are pro-Gorbachev or pro-Putin…

…but I would hope that the “free” in “freevillage” means you are one of the good guys…

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM

Obama’s foreign policy is dangerous and naive.

Dixit Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Repeat until election of John McCain. PLEASE!!!

Steve Z on May 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM

Obama is clearly advocating Appeasement here, so the shoe fits.

The fact is every weak response to terrorist acts emboldens the terrorists. President Clinton responded weakly to terrorist acts – how many times? – until 9/11 made terrorism too personal to be ignored any longer. Obama is wrong. This is not the time to reduce the pressure on Iran.

Iranian gays need endangered species status more than the polar bears do. Square that one, California.

Bacchus on May 19, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Barker Obama

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 10:34 AM

Heh.

OldEnglish on May 19, 2008 at 10:48 AM

“Change we can believe in”

We’ll, of course this makes sense.

They’re going to change all the history they don’t believe in.

Keith_Indy on May 19, 2008 at 10:52 AM

Even some of Reagan’s own advisers thought he was “crazy” when he told them at the beginning of his presidency that his vision of the Cold War was “we win, they lose.” Obama is obviously one of those who would have called Reagan crazy.

rockmom on May 19, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Obama’s vision is “Sí, se puede!”

Obama’s vision is Communist Revolution, USA.

Obama’s vision is “Communists win, Americans lose.”

Which “Empire” did Obama’s UCC church “inspire” him to “bring to its knees”?

But my journey is part of a larger journey – one shared by all who’ve ever sought to apply the values of their faith to our society. It’s a journey that takes us back to our nation’s founding, when none other than a UCC church inspired the Boston Tea Party [a revolution] and helped bring an Empire to its knees.

A Politics of Conscience
Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
Hartford, CT | June 23, 2007

ANSWER: The U.S. “Imperialist Empire”, of course!

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:55 AM

Keep clapping people. Keep eating it up. This [i]cult[/i] of personality thing Obama has going for him is working well for him to his credit. I’ll give him that much. I can see it in his followers eyes even. There are many people I look up to, politicians are NOT among them. Even the ones I support on enough issues to vote for are not the kind of people I’ll go out of my way for to cheer and fawn over. I don’t put so much trust in them that I’ll buy every line they spew promising to make my life better for me. I don’t need politicians to give me hope. In a way I think I feel sorry for Obama supporters in that their lives must be so without purpose that they’ll put so much faith in a politician of all people to make things better for them.

Yakko77 on May 19, 2008 at 10:56 AM

65,000 at a rally in Oregon yesterday. As long as the MSM just listens, and doesn’t critique actively promotes Obama, the people will keep packing the stadiums.

Limerick on May 19, 2008 at 9:26 AM

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 10:56 AM

Well said, Captain Ed!
.
That’s an extremely articulate column and the summary paragraph is…what’s the word?…pithy.

DavePa on May 19, 2008 at 11:03 AM

The USSR did not have terrorist cells in America. Spies, yes. But terrorists with plots to blow up our government, no.

maverick muse on May 19, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Blowing things up is Al-Qaeda’s specialty. But direct conflict with us awakens the sleeping giant. It’s much slyer to quietly take over all three branches of our government. If Obama were to win, and Kennedy replaced on the Supreme Court, the victory would be complete. All done without firing a shot, while the giant remains asleep.

Wake up, Neo…

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 11:06 AM

Oh right, common interests. I bet Iran is really only upset about how the subprime mortgage situation affects their banking system. Yeah, that’s it.

Or is it that he’s using Saul Alinksky’s precepts in how to organize a (socialist) community to apply to global nuclear politics?

Nah…..

PattyJ on May 19, 2008 at 11:07 AM

And thanks Ed. You’re a profile in courage and persistence going after his inanities day after day, and even summoning the energy to respond.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 9:55 AM

Ed is a patriot.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM

Or is it that he’s using Saul Alinksky’s precepts in how to organize a (socialist) community…?

PattyJ on May 19, 2008 at 11:07 AM

Bingo.

So is Hillary.

And, unfortunately, I believe McCain is, too.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 11:14 AM

The Soviets may have been evil, but they were rational, and we could count on their desire to survive to rely on the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction. The Iranians believe that a worldwide conflagration will have Allah deliver the world to Islam, so a nuclear exchange may fall within their policy, and that’s assuming we could establish their culpability for a sneak nuclear attack to the extent where a President Obama would order a nuclear reprisal.

Apparently the perpetrators indoctrinators professors in Columbia’s political science program cannot impart genuine analytic skill. Or maybe BHO’s head was impervious. (In the Air Force’s technical training courses, we called people like this ‘rocks’ Therefore, to ‘rock out’ in that context was something you did not want to do.)

baldilocks on May 19, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Everytime Obama speaks he sounds more and more unintelligent. Why do people consider him smart–college?
He sounds like a fool. The not knowing the number of states in the US was scary but to think that Iran isn’t a threat because of size is idiotic and his audience bobs their heads in agreement–unbelievable.

Conservatives R Us on May 19, 2008 at 11:24 AM

The time to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities is rapidly drawing to a close. If Obambi’s legions of kiddies and moonbats manage to put him over the top in November (thanks doubtless to the conservatives who stay home rather than voting for John McCain), that option will be off the table.

Then it’ll be up to Israel to defy the Obambi Moonbat Secretary of Peace (who will that be—Wesley Clark?) and go it alone.

No, it’s up to George W. Bush. Let’s hope he is just waiting to see if Obambi really wins the nomination.

MrLynn on May 19, 2008 at 11:26 AM

I heard a guy on the John Boy and Billy radio show (redneck morning drive, very funny) call him Barracks Obomber.

Just a bitter typical white person, of course

funky chicken on May 19, 2008 at 11:31 AM

I highly recommend that you order and listen to this CD:
America – The Truth You Need to Know

It is a 2004 recording of Bob McEwen, who served 12 years as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives (1981–1993, from Ohio’s 6th district) and who was a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence.

The CD addresses the history of appeasement in Europe building up to World War II, as well as the current world situation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_McEwen says this about McEwen:

In Congress, McEwen, who “had a reputation as a man who thinks about politics every waking moment,” claimed Congressional Quarterly, was a staunch conservative…

A vehement anti-Communist, he visited Tbilisi in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia in 1991 to help tear down the hammer-and-sickle iconography of the Communist regime. That year he also called for the House to establish a select committee to investigate whether any soldiers declared “missing in action” in the Vietnam War and other American wars were still alive, by sponsoring H. Res. 207.

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 11:32 AM

Barack “Neville” Obama, Jr. will end up signing another ‘Munich Agreement’, but instead of Czechoslovakia being given to Hitler, it’ll be Israel being given to Ahmadinejad…

KarmiCommunist on May 19, 2008 at 11:33 AM

The more I hear from Obama the more he sounds like a know-it-all teenager just back from his first year in college. He has no experience with reality, but he thinks his parents are stupid and that he could solve all the world’s problems.

Socratease on May 19, 2008 at 11:33 AM

The more I hear from Obama the more he sounds like a know-it-all teenager just back from his first year in college. He has no experience with reality, but he thinks his parents are stupid and that he could solve all the world’s problems.

Socratease on May 19, 2008 at 11:33 AM

He’s way too late. I solved them all when I was a teenager :)

OldEnglish on May 19, 2008 at 11:42 AM

Iran is probably less of a threat to the Republic than is this dolt.

rplat on May 19, 2008 at 11:43 AM

Roosevelt, for whatever reasons (Alger Hiss, possible Soviet sympathies of his own, and the fact that he was practically demented by the time of Yalta being a few) dismissed those plans at every turn and pretty much shanked Churchill at Yalta. FDR wasn’t exactly the great statesman he’s made out to be by liberal academics.

Personally, I think he was a little more than a pale reflection of the dictators he clashed with and cozied up to during the war. An analysis of Roosevet’s implementation of The New Deal and his vow to pack the bench in order to make the many unconstitutional measures within it constitutional via judicial fiat (going so far as enlarge the SCOTUS to NINE justices) could fill an entire thread all it’s own.

But that’s a discussion for another time.

SuperCool on May 18, 2008 at 4:35 AM

Roosevelt was a Socialist.

The Federal Reserve intentionally created the environment that led to massive speculation and the Great Depression.

The Great Depression was necessary to achieve their Socialist ends (via FDR).

Look where Social[ist] [In]Security came from.

Look where the IRS came from.

Wake up, Neo…

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 11:44 AM

MrLynn on May 19, 2008 at 11:26 AM

Olmert may not survive much longer. Netanyahu looks like the next Prime Minister. I surmise that Pres. Bush had more to say to the Israelis the other day than happy birthday. If McCain wins, the immediacy of the problem lessens somewhat. If Obama looks strong, Bush and Israel will have to act. When? August, September?

Did Bush meet with Netanyahu last week? The news is that he didn’t. When they met in Jan.’08, Netanyahu “leaked” to Israel radio that Bush had promised to join Israel in a nuclear strike on Iran.

Don’t sell your oil stocks just yet.

JiangxiDad on May 19, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Why is my entire post changing color? This is my writing, not a quote.

Ragnell on May 19, 2008 at 11:43 AM

You probably never closed your “link” tag…

Red Pill on May 19, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Obama also forgot to explain how us paying more taxes isn’t really taking money out of our pockets.

These speeches need to be broadcast on the news with whats going on in these countries so the whole country can see how stupid this man really is.

Still assuming he wears slip on shoes….

Rbastid on May 19, 2008 at 11:51 AM

Comment pages: 1 2