Well, two apology tours under his belt and the apologies and scraping continue. At some point he has to go to the Orient - what could await us there? Apologize to the Phillipines for propping up their economy, to Vietnam for attempting to liberate half their country...perhaps to Japan for fighting a needless war with them sometime in the last century because of our arrogance? The mind reels at the possibilities! What BHO fails to realize in his incredible lightness of being is that when the President travels overseas, or speaks to foreign leaders, it's not a popularity contest! He is supposed to speak as the voice of the nation, not as the global messiah. * We are also dealing with a psychological condition that has created a two part theorem that I would call "The Premise of O." If this theory were not being tested on the world stage with real lives and fortunes at stake, it would be funny but, alas, here we are.
The premise is in two parts:
I. By apologizing for anything and everything from Harry Truman dropping the bomb to our cultural "arrogance," we will get a fresh start with everyone.
II. By making ourselves weak, we become strong.
The first part of the premise has a corollary to it which is closely connected to a rather frightening messianic complex that BHO seems to exhibit and it is that ALL was bad before the O. In fact, why don't be change our annual numbering system and allow this to be the first year of O, or AO1. Last year, would be the Bad Before O or BBO1. Our nation was founded not in 1776, but in BBO232. But now, with the sweetness and light of Obama's smooth talk, the rest of the nations swoon! The Iranians put down their bombs, Al Queda turns itself in - comforted that they will not longer be tortured or prosecuted, Kim Jong Il tears down the fences singing Kumbaya with his disarmed soldiers at the border and Hugo Chavez and Fidel now say that the United States is a great nation that should strengthen and prosper instead of being destroyed.
Well, that's the vision anyway...how's it playing so far? Hmm, not like the dream. That's because it is just that - a dream, a fantasy. With his messianic complex going before, this guy really believes he can make the "ice stop melting" and can talk to the animals. The only evil that exists in this tormented world is that of "right wing extremists." The sad reality is that evil does exist - sadder still, is that the folks who keep that evil away from our shores and call it for what it is , are the targets of this administration. What we saw on 9/11 was not caused by regular nice guys who just couldn't take America's arrogance anymore. No, what we saw was evil incarnate. We saw people who believed they could do what they did because we had done nothing to respond to prior aggressions like the U.S.S. Cole and the embassy bombings in Africa. They thought we were finished, kaput, afraid to fight. Thank God we showed them they were wrong. And like or hate George W. Bush, after 9/11, in 8 years we were not attacked again on our soil. Given the direction this administration is taking, I have serious doubts that another 8 will pass without an attack. And this leads me to the falacy of the second part of the "Premise of O."
Christ is the only figure in history who created strength because of his weakness and he paid a gruesome price for it. Of course, that he was also God, as Christians believe, might have had something to do with it too. And his message was compelling and noble. To turn the other cheek when you have been wronged as an individual is a noble thing to do that advances society. To turn the other cheek when you are a nation is a path to destruction and termination as a society. Does BHO really believe he can pull off at a national level in AO1, what Christ could barely do for a ragged population in BBO2009?
Let's take the notion of "torture," as a prime example. As I am sure you already know, BHO has declassified portions of the CIA memoranda on "torture" in the aftermath of 9/11. They are carefully leaving out the parts of the memos that spell out what we gained from these "tortures," and how many lives were saved. When we talk of "torture" though, we really need to ask five questions:
1. Who is being "tortured?"
2. How are we "torturing?"
3. Why are we "torturing?"
4. Did it work?
5. Are we safer moving forward now that we have exposed our methods?
Question number one - umm, yes you in the back...do you have the answer?
"Yeah, we are torturing murderous, suicidal, maniacal Muslim extremists who believe that their God calls on them to kill people who don't subscribe to their religion. These people would gladly impose a tyranical theocracy on the whole world where women would be sent back to a caste lower than farm animals. They have murdered thousands upon thousands of their own people and believe that no one is off limits as a target."
Very good! You obviously are not a memer of the Obama administration! I would only add to that fine answer that these are the same people that like sawing off live people's heads on YouTube for fun. Now this is not to get into a moral equivalency argument, but it should serve to remind people that the prisoners that were "tortured" were not members of the Vienna Boys Choir.
Question number two...yes, you with your hand up on the right there...
"The worst thing we are doing to these folks is submitting them to a treatment that makes them feel they are drowning - scary stuff I am sure - same stuff that anyone who went through the military's SERE (Search Evasion Resistance Escape) school would experience. It's not as bad for those folks though because they know they are not going to be killed...oh wait, the bad guys know that too now...but anyway, some sleep deprivation, maybe a little humiliation in the mix."
Wow, this is a good class! Let's take a break and watch a referesher video:
OK - on to question three - WHY are we torturing? Let's see, you in the red shirt with the beagle logo...
"Torture is used to gather actionable intelligence. Our problem after 9/11 was particularly difficult because we didn't have knowledge of any specific plots, we just knew there was a good chance we would get hit again. There is a particularly useful discussion on this over at Stratfor."
Whoa, how did you get a hyperlink into your verbal answer? Yes, the Stratfor piece is very useful in understanding this issue and you are right. In no way is it indiscriminate, common or rampant...we are still very much the good guys. Shame that the left can't bring themselves to look at us that way, but compared to the enemy, our guys are saints.
Q4 - did it work? Yes, the nice looking gentleman with bald pate and glasses...are you Dick Cheney?
"No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. The short answer is 'yes, it worked.' We don't know the details yet because those portions of the memos have not been de-classified. But we had eight years of no attacks on US soil and numerous hints of plots that were foiled. In short, American lives were saved."
Now the biggy - who would like to answer question number 5 - are we safer without them? Yes, the lady with the "Texas Longhorns" t-shirt -
"Hell no. I mean, time will tell, but the odds are not good. Does BHO REALLY believe that by telling the Islamokooks what to expect if they end up in one of our 'hotels,' that they are now not going to join the Jihad? This guy is dumber than soap..."
Ma'am - please, he is the President of the United States...let us not stoop to the hatred that the left vented on Mr. Bush for eight long years.
Well, that wraps up this portion of our class on why being weaker does not make you stronger!
So, to sum up and restate the Premise of O - we have a leader who through naivete or lack of intelligence beleives that he can make the lion lie down with the lamb...or better, he can be the lamb that lies down with the lion? Either way, he has set us on a path that was last attemted by Jimmy Carter. Carter is arguably the reason we are where we are now as it was under his "watch" that the first major blow of the Muslim world was landed on us with no response - the taking of our Embassy in Tehran. We tried talking then too and it didn't get us very far. The world is a much more dangerous place now. Let us pray...
Rumble on!
*Dorothy Rabinowitz has an excellent column on this here.
The premise is in two parts:
I. By apologizing for anything and everything from Harry Truman dropping the bomb to our cultural "arrogance," we will get a fresh start with everyone.
II. By making ourselves weak, we become strong.
The first part of the premise has a corollary to it which is closely connected to a rather frightening messianic complex that BHO seems to exhibit and it is that ALL was bad before the O. In fact, why don't be change our annual numbering system and allow this to be the first year of O, or AO1. Last year, would be the Bad Before O or BBO1. Our nation was founded not in 1776, but in BBO232. But now, with the sweetness and light of Obama's smooth talk, the rest of the nations swoon! The Iranians put down their bombs, Al Queda turns itself in - comforted that they will not longer be tortured or prosecuted, Kim Jong Il tears down the fences singing Kumbaya with his disarmed soldiers at the border and Hugo Chavez and Fidel now say that the United States is a great nation that should strengthen and prosper instead of being destroyed.
Well, that's the vision anyway...how's it playing so far? Hmm, not like the dream. That's because it is just that - a dream, a fantasy. With his messianic complex going before, this guy really believes he can make the "ice stop melting" and can talk to the animals. The only evil that exists in this tormented world is that of "right wing extremists." The sad reality is that evil does exist - sadder still, is that the folks who keep that evil away from our shores and call it for what it is , are the targets of this administration. What we saw on 9/11 was not caused by regular nice guys who just couldn't take America's arrogance anymore. No, what we saw was evil incarnate. We saw people who believed they could do what they did because we had done nothing to respond to prior aggressions like the U.S.S. Cole and the embassy bombings in Africa. They thought we were finished, kaput, afraid to fight. Thank God we showed them they were wrong. And like or hate George W. Bush, after 9/11, in 8 years we were not attacked again on our soil. Given the direction this administration is taking, I have serious doubts that another 8 will pass without an attack. And this leads me to the falacy of the second part of the "Premise of O."
Christ is the only figure in history who created strength because of his weakness and he paid a gruesome price for it. Of course, that he was also God, as Christians believe, might have had something to do with it too. And his message was compelling and noble. To turn the other cheek when you have been wronged as an individual is a noble thing to do that advances society. To turn the other cheek when you are a nation is a path to destruction and termination as a society. Does BHO really believe he can pull off at a national level in AO1, what Christ could barely do for a ragged population in BBO2009?
Let's take the notion of "torture," as a prime example. As I am sure you already know, BHO has declassified portions of the CIA memoranda on "torture" in the aftermath of 9/11. They are carefully leaving out the parts of the memos that spell out what we gained from these "tortures," and how many lives were saved. When we talk of "torture" though, we really need to ask five questions:
1. Who is being "tortured?"
2. How are we "torturing?"
3. Why are we "torturing?"
4. Did it work?
5. Are we safer moving forward now that we have exposed our methods?
Question number one - umm, yes you in the back...do you have the answer?
"Yeah, we are torturing murderous, suicidal, maniacal Muslim extremists who believe that their God calls on them to kill people who don't subscribe to their religion. These people would gladly impose a tyranical theocracy on the whole world where women would be sent back to a caste lower than farm animals. They have murdered thousands upon thousands of their own people and believe that no one is off limits as a target."
Very good! You obviously are not a memer of the Obama administration! I would only add to that fine answer that these are the same people that like sawing off live people's heads on YouTube for fun. Now this is not to get into a moral equivalency argument, but it should serve to remind people that the prisoners that were "tortured" were not members of the Vienna Boys Choir.
Question number two...yes, you with your hand up on the right there...
"The worst thing we are doing to these folks is submitting them to a treatment that makes them feel they are drowning - scary stuff I am sure - same stuff that anyone who went through the military's SERE (Search Evasion Resistance Escape) school would experience. It's not as bad for those folks though because they know they are not going to be killed...oh wait, the bad guys know that too now...but anyway, some sleep deprivation, maybe a little humiliation in the mix."
Wow, this is a good class! Let's take a break and watch a referesher video:
OK - on to question three - WHY are we torturing? Let's see, you in the red shirt with the beagle logo...
"Torture is used to gather actionable intelligence. Our problem after 9/11 was particularly difficult because we didn't have knowledge of any specific plots, we just knew there was a good chance we would get hit again. There is a particularly useful discussion on this over at Stratfor."
Whoa, how did you get a hyperlink into your verbal answer? Yes, the Stratfor piece is very useful in understanding this issue and you are right. In no way is it indiscriminate, common or rampant...we are still very much the good guys. Shame that the left can't bring themselves to look at us that way, but compared to the enemy, our guys are saints.
Q4 - did it work? Yes, the nice looking gentleman with bald pate and glasses...are you Dick Cheney?
"No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. The short answer is 'yes, it worked.' We don't know the details yet because those portions of the memos have not been de-classified. But we had eight years of no attacks on US soil and numerous hints of plots that were foiled. In short, American lives were saved."
Now the biggy - who would like to answer question number 5 - are we safer without them? Yes, the lady with the "Texas Longhorns" t-shirt -
"Hell no. I mean, time will tell, but the odds are not good. Does BHO REALLY believe that by telling the Islamokooks what to expect if they end up in one of our 'hotels,' that they are now not going to join the Jihad? This guy is dumber than soap..."
Ma'am - please, he is the President of the United States...let us not stoop to the hatred that the left vented on Mr. Bush for eight long years.
Well, that wraps up this portion of our class on why being weaker does not make you stronger!
So, to sum up and restate the Premise of O - we have a leader who through naivete or lack of intelligence beleives that he can make the lion lie down with the lamb...or better, he can be the lamb that lies down with the lion? Either way, he has set us on a path that was last attemted by Jimmy Carter. Carter is arguably the reason we are where we are now as it was under his "watch" that the first major blow of the Muslim world was landed on us with no response - the taking of our Embassy in Tehran. We tried talking then too and it didn't get us very far. The world is a much more dangerous place now. Let us pray...
Rumble on!
*Dorothy Rabinowitz has an excellent column on this here.