Video:Do You Feel Safer?

Via the GOP.gov Conference blog:

House Republican Leader John Boehner (OH) and Ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee Pete Hoekstra (MI) released a web video asking Americans, “Do you feel safer?” :

In answer to the question….no. …no, I do not feel safer.

Neither does Ralph Peters, writing in the NY Post, yesterday about the Obama Doctrine; Hugging Foes, Hurting Friends:

AFTER a mere 100 days, the “Obama Doctrine” for our foreign and security policies has emerged. And it’s terrifying.

The combination of dizzying naivete, dislike of our allies, disdain for our military, distrust of our intelligence services and distaste for our own country promises the worst foreign policy of our lifetimes.

That includes President Jimmy Carter‘s abysmal record of failure.

The core tenets of the Obama Doctrine to date would make a charter member of the Weather Underground cheer:

Read on if your stomach can take it.

Some days I wish I didn’t take such a keen interest in politics, and current events. It would be so nice to be ignorantly bliss.

UPDATE:

Like this for instance:

uighurterrorist

Why did I have to read this latest bit of news from Jed Babbin at Human Events?:

Moving quickly to release Chinese Uighur terrorists into the United States, Obama administration officials have — for the second time — overridden objections of federal agencies responsible for national security.

The first time — as I reported on April 20 — the White House overrode the inter-agency panel it created from all the national security agencies to review all the cases of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners.  That panel found that the seventeen Uighurs — members of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement captured at an al-Queda training camp in Pakistan — were too dangerous to release in the United States.

Now — according to a federal agency source who requested anonymity — the White House has also overridden opposition to the release from both the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.

This may happen as early as next week.

No doubt, they will be receiving public assistance, too.

Oh, and thanks to the Astute Bloggers, I now am subjected to this:

NYTIMES: Hints That Detainees May Be Held on U.S. Soil

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates suggested on Thursday that as many as 100 detainees at the prison at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba would end up held without trial on American soil, a scenario he acknowledged would create widespread if not unanimous opposition in Congress.

The estimate from Mr. Gates was the most specific yet from the Obama administration about how many of the 241 prisoners now at Guantanamo could not be safely released, sent to other countries or appropriately tried in American courts.

In January President Obama ordered the prison closed by the end of year, but his administration is still working on what to do with the detainees.

It’s all cool, though. Obama says these policies will make us more safe because al-Qaeda won’t be able to recruit any more Jihadis when word gets out about how nice we are.

One problem with that, though, (dammit, why do I have to be so informed!):

Obama plans to release 44 photos of Abu Ghraib interrogators abusing detainees by May 28; moreover, FrontPageMagazine’s sources report the administration will release a “substantial number” of other images, and up to 2,000 photos in all. An inconvenient truth:

John McCain revealed four months ago that “a former high-ranking member of al-Qaeda” told him “‘the greatest recruiting tool we had – we were able to recruit thousands of young men,’ he said – ‘was Abu Ghraib.’”

And Obama wants to release even more photos.

Taken together, it becomes clear Obama seeks to elevate his image by turning the Bush administration into a moral pariah. However, his decisions are undoing the edifice that protected this nation for seven years – and even his administration publicly fears his latest move alone will supercharge al-Qaeda recruitment. As a whole, his Homeland Security policy is either a stunning series of unmitigated naivete, megalomania, spite for President Bush, or hatred of his own country.

MORE:

Robert Spencer at Human Events counts the ways that Obama is Busily Appeasing Jihadists

Selling us out for nothing in return.

And finally:

If you read nothing else, today, read Andrew McCarthy’s letter to Eric Holder. It says it all.

Obama Enchanted

Still having fun with my new photoshop skilz:

obama-enchanted2

Bill O’Reilly and Bernard Goldberg discuss the “enchanted” question from last nights press conference on the O’Reilly Factor:

Hat tip: Hot Air

For You Slow Learners Who Still Haven’t Figured Out The Tea Parties

lm151

Matt Kibbe at Reason magazine has the best explanation for the protests that I have yet seen in print:

What were the tea parties about? Reading the signs and talking to people (unlike CNN’s incredibly hostile Susan Roesgen, I actually let folks answer my questions in their own words), the “agenda” was crystal clear. Tea party activists were worried and angry about government bailouts for the irresponsible, about spending that “stimulated” record growth in government and not much else, and about government borrowing that will place unconscionable burdens on future generations of Americans. My favorite sign of the day: “Give Me Liberty, Not Debt.”

Some tried to diminish the tea parties as misguided tax protests. In reality, the protestors demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of economics that went well beyond objections to higher tax rates. You can’t spend money you don’t have, the tea party attendees understood, and government spending above current revenues must be paid for with higher taxes, more borrowing (to be paid for with higher taxes in the future), or artificial government expansion of money and credit, which can only debase the currency and make everyone poorer through inflation.

Read on as Kibbe describes the “stages of denial” the left has experienced as it’s grappled with the revolt.

Unlike lefty protests which are usually organized by unions and Communist front groups, attracting assorted whack jobs, anarchists and conspiracy theorists, these tea parties really were “grass roots” events that brought every day Americans out of their comfort zones in the world of “normal”, out into the streets to put their collective feet down. These are people who pay attention.

This is why the left is so unnerved. This is why they’re trying so hard to paint us all as racists, and rednecks who don’t know what we’re talking about. The fact of the matter is, we *do* know what we’re talking about…..and the more people are able to see past the Obama “razzle dazzle” the more  his radical agenda is exposed, and endangered.

Hat tip: Instapundit

Video: Obama’s First 100 Days

They left a lot out, but you get the point.

Hat tip: IOWNTHEWORLD

Obama First 100 Days Linkfest

OBAMA/

I thought it would be interesting to compare Obama’s first 100 days to Bush’s first 100 days, back when he was riding high with a 60% approval rating.  The panelists at News Hour With Jim Lehrer considered Bush a refreshing change from the chaos of the Clinton administration. The Wall Street Journal’s Paul Gigot said:

It’s a more business-like atmosphere after the chaos, often, of the Clinton years. I mean, the first three months with Bill Clinton, you had gays in the military; you had the tax increase; you had the travel office shortly therefore, and it was great for us, great for our business.

There were no widespread protests of his policies this early in his presidency.

Conversely, The Obama administration’s first 100 days has been marked by gaffes, debacles, and protests, and well…once again, chaos.

Newsmax has a good rundown of  Obama’s gaffes and gimmicks, thus far.

So does Michelle Malkin.

The best of the rest:

Babalu: The 100 days are in the can

Blatherings: The One’s first 100 days

The Astute Bloggers: First 100 Days: Worst POTUS Ever

Gateway Pundit: After 100 Days… Obama Is the Second Most Reviled President in 40 Years

Flopping Aces: Obama’s 100 Days of Disappointment, Double Talk andDeception

IOWNTHEWORLD celebrates its own first 100 days: iOwnTheWorld.com 1st 100 Days

NRO Symposium: 100 Days Later

The Obama File: Day 100

Obama Targets Teabaggers At Town Hall

Well, well, well! Looks like a certain somebody doesn’t appreciate the *unserious* tea parties that have sprung up all across the country. Look at what he had to say at his big 100th day town hall meeting in Arnold, MO:

“Those of you who are watching certain news channels on which I’m not very popular, and you see folks waving tea bags around, Obama said, “let me just remind them that I am happy to have a serious conversation about how we are going to cut our health care costs down over the long term, how we are going to stabilize Social Security.”

“But,” Obama continued, “let’s not play games and pretend that the reason [for the deficit] is because of the Recovery Act.”

First of all, unless I’m mistaken, all of the news channels covered the tea parties on April 15th, although some less respectfully than others. Second of all, the tea parties weren’t about health care. They were about his out of control spending. Third, WTF? “let’s not play games and pretend that the reason [for the deficit] is because of the Recovery Act.”?!  Who does he think he’s kidding?

obama-bush-debt

The reason people have taken to the streets in the large numbers they have, is precisely because of how the massive spending bills he’s pushed through in his first wretched, nightmarish 100 days, have quadrupled the deficit.

Speaking of which, I’m still waiting for media reports on the protest that was being organized for his Arnold town hall. Keep an eye on Gateway Pundit for coverage later today, as he will surely have it.

MORE at Villainous Company

Video at Newsbusters.

UPDATE:

And here’s Gateway Pundit’s post:

Hundreds of Tea Party Protesters Greet Obama In St. Louis

Video of protest, here.

UPDATE II:

The rhetorican has a wager for the President:

Let’s play a game in which we bet which – your agenda or the Tea Party movement – will outlast the other.  My money is on the big crowds.

UPDATEIII:

When even the AP calls Obama out on his b.s., you know it’s egregious.

Obama Tells Cardinal He’s Not Pro-Abortion

obama-pp-speech

Barack Obama,  Champion of the Unborn

I’m assuming he means that in a very loose, interpretive way, meaning, for instance,  that if a baby is born as a result of a botched abortion, it’s okay to stick the baby in a soiled linen closet and let it die, and even though it would have been preferable for the baby to have died during the abortion, he’s not, strictly speaking,  for either of those things.

He may also have just figured Cardinal George for a chump.

CNS reports:

The president of the national conference of Catholic bishops recently elaborated further on the meeting he had in March with President Barack Obama. Cardinal George told a recent gathering of Catholic priests that Obama says he is not pro-abortion and will eventually work to reduce abortions.

For most pro-life advocates, Obama’s extensive pro-abortion record of executive orders and key political appointments proves otherwise.

According to a Catholic News Service report, Cardinal Francis George discussed the conversation he had with Obama at a March 18 meeting at the White House.

“I think on the life issue he’s on the wrong side of history,” the cardinal said, but he added that Obama wants to make pro-life advocates appear as if he is on their side.
“It’s hard to disagree with him because he’ll always tell you he agrees with you,” he said, according to CNS. “Maybe that’s political. I think he sincerely wants to agree with you. You have to say, again and again, ‘No, Mr. President, we don’t agree (on abortion).'”

It’s a very creepy feeling you get when someone tells you a bold faced lie, a ridiculous lie, an unbelievable lie right to your face, isn’t it? One that you both know isn’t true, and you don’t want to embarrass the person by telling him you know he’s lying, so you just nod your head as your face turns red. Poor Cardinal George for having to put up with that, and kudos to him for calling Obama out on his lies, “Um… no, Mr President…we don’t agree on this, mmmkay?”

The Catholic News Service indicates Cardinal George said he told Obama he is concerned with the president’s decision to overturn the Mexico City Policy and opening the door to funding groups that promote and perform abortions in other nations.
“He said we weren’t exporting abortion,” the cardinal recounted. “I said, ‘Yes we are.’ He would say, ‘I know I have to do certain things here. … But be patient and you’ll see the pattern will change.’ I said, ‘Mr. President, you’ve given us nothing but the wrong signals on this issue.’ So, we’ll see, but I’m not as hopeful now as I was when he was first elected.”

“I think he has his political debts to pay, and so he’s paying them,” Cardinal George said of the impression he was left with after the Obama meeting.
Ultimately, the Catholic pro-life leader cast a pessimistic view of the situation under Obama and the long-term outlook.

And anyone who is surprised by it, didn’t do due diligence during the election season.

Hat tip: Weasel Zippers

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,624,655 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 520 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: