May 18, 2008
Please wait, your request is processed...
ApolloSpeaks
Recent comments by this user
"Appeasement": Guilt-By-Analogy... When Guilt-By-Association Isn't Enough
The mullahs have declared themselves America's number one enemy.They believe that they have replaced the Soviet Union as the world's greatest challenge to US power."Death to America" is the mullahs favorite mantra. And when they chant it they mean it. posted 05/17/2008 at 23:38:36
BLUESHIELD
The mullahs in your head are not the theocratic killers that rule Iran. A decade of economic warfare failed to topple Saddam and is failing, and will continue to fail, with the equally intransigent mullahs. You make the common mistake of conflating the communist Soviets/North Koreans with Islamic Jihadists . The Khomeine Jihadists of Iran are not atheistic materialists, they operate from a radically different belief system based on the soul's immortality and its survival in an incomparably blissful afterlife earned by jihad on earth. The apocalyptic mullahs like bin Ladin and Hamas are committed to jihad unto death. Better to invade Iran now and risk the possible consequences that you list than do it later when they go critical and get the bomb-which they are furiously working on. A nuclear Iran means nuclear jihad. posted 05/17/2008 at 16:30:10
Iran is global enemy number one. Armed with nukes raises the danger tenfold. Why then would we want to leave the Middle East when the greatest Jihadist threat is Iran? As for leaving Iraq it only makes geo-political sense if our forces are redeployed within the region: Qatar, Kuwait, Kurdistan. But to bring them home? That spells disaster. posted 05/17/2008 at 08:34:06
I concede that Iran has benefited from the Iraq War. But the clock can't be reversed. If benefiting Iran is a bad thing why then benefit them even more by removing from the region the army that defeated Saddam Hussein in less than 30 days-Iran couldn't do this in 8 years-and replaced him as the region's only buffer to Iranian ambitions? How can we have "tough" negotiations with Iran by throwing away our greatest bargaining chip? THE THREAT OF A US INVASION.
Moreover, no Iranian can become president of Iran unless he is a Khomeine Jihadist. In Iran Khomeine Jihadists are either moderates or hard liners. Their difference is over means not ends. The end is the restoration of the Islam as a great world power-the revolutionary aim of Iran. The means to victory is either through an accommodating and deceptive approach to international relations, the moderates, or through a more straightforward and confrontational approach, the hard liners. Moderates and hard-liners are essentially the same. Treating them as basically different is a dangerous mistake in a commander in chief-reminiscent of Chamberlain's misreading of Adolph Hitler as a conventional statesman.
Obama is clearly guilty of this sin. LIke Chamberlain with Hitler he believes that the implacable, radical "moderate" and "hardline": mullahs can be appeased and moderated; hence, his unrealistic plan to remove US forces from the MIddle East prior to negotiations. A very very naive policy that is doomed to fail as it did with Hitler. posted 05/17/2008 at 08:26:37
Moreover, no Iranian can become president of Iran unless he is a Khomeine Jihadist. In Iran Khomeine Jihadists are either moderates or hard liners. Their difference is over means not ends. The end is the restoration of the Islam as a great world power-the revolutionary aim of Iran. The means to victory is either through an accommodating and deceptive approach to international relations, the moderates, or through a more straightforward and confrontational approach, the hard liners. Moderates and hard-liners are essentially the same. Treating them as basically different is a dangerous mistake in a commander in chief-reminiscent of Chamberlain's misreading of Adolph Hitler as a conventional statesman.
Obama is clearly guilty of this sin. LIke Chamberlain with Hitler he believes that the implacable, radical "moderate" and "hardline": mullahs can be appeased and moderated; hence, his unrealistic plan to remove US forces from the MIddle East prior to negotiations. A very very naive policy that is doomed to fail as it did with Hitler. posted 05/17/2008 at 08:26:37
After 12 years of sanctions, bombings, weapons inspectors and talks Iraq wasn't being contained. 600,000 pages of Iraqi intell documents tell a story of an Iraq that was massively funding and training terrorists-including Al Qaida affiliates, and had the capability of produing WMD on short notice . As for comparisons with Chamberlain his fatal flaw was to completely misread Hitler's intentions as Barack Obama is doing to the vicious, murdering Khomeine jihadists of Iran. posted 05/16/2008 at 17:59:04
THE OBAMA DOCTRINE OF APPEASEMENT, WEAKNESS AND DEFEAT
What do the terror-masters of Iran consider the greatest threat to their theocratic regime? A US invasion of their country which they would never survive. And what do they want most from the US? The elimination of this threat by the removal of our forces from the region.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will we get from Iran in return? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest existential threat to the mullahs without receiving any concessions from them on either the nuclear issue and their massive funding of terrorism.
And once US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with Ahmadenijad without any real leverage, without a gun to their heads, without the biggest, baddest most threatening stick he can use: the threat of a US invasion.This is kindergarten diplomacy, diplomacy from weakness, not from a position of strength, and shows a serious lack of judgment reminiscent of Chamberlain's complete misreading of Hitler's intentions.
Retreat now diplomacy later! Peace through weakness not through strength! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 17:48:47
What do the terror-masters of Iran consider the greatest threat to their theocratic regime? A US invasion of their country which they would never survive. And what do they want most from the US? The elimination of this threat by the removal of our forces from the region.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will we get from Iran in return? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest existential threat to the mullahs without receiving any concessions from them on either the nuclear issue and their massive funding of terrorism.
And once US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with Ahmadenijad without any real leverage, without a gun to their heads, without the biggest, baddest most threatening stick he can use: the threat of a US invasion.This is kindergarten diplomacy, diplomacy from weakness, not from a position of strength, and shows a serious lack of judgment reminiscent of Chamberlain's complete misreading of Hitler's intentions.
Retreat now diplomacy later! Peace through weakness not through strength! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 17:48:47
Hagee's Lesson Plan for Bush's Appeasement Speech
By the way appeasement talks with North Korea have failed to stop them from being a nuclear arms proliferator. posted 05/17/2008 at 23:55:40
The main purpose of Iran Contra was to free US hostages taken by Hezbollah and to fund the Contras, not to appease Iran. If it could have made Iran friendlier toward us so much the better. If supplying the Iranians with weapons got us nowhere with Iran what on earth could Obama hope to achieve? Obama represents the politics of blind hope triumphing over long hard bitter experience. posted 05/17/2008 at 23:51:32
Swift Boating Comes to Jerusalem
In a predatory world "Peace Through Strength" is an eternal principle of war and peace. posted 05/16/2008 at 18:39:46
War is hell wherever it's fought, so what's your point? posted 05/16/2008 at 18:30:42
Really? It's that simple is it? What was it that Achmadenijad said several weeks ago that "Oil prices are too low." With Iran on the verge of going nuclear and the Persian Gulf states petrified with fear Iran's influence in determing oil output and pricing will be profound. posted 05/16/2008 at 13:06:48
With no leverage over Iran what can Obama expect to achieve with diplomacy? Answer: what Nancy Pelosi achieved in Damascus with Syria and Jimmy Carter with Hamas. NOTHING! posted 05/16/2008 at 13:00:58
And just how do you coexist with an implacable fanatical enemy that is singlemindedly bent on your destruction and given the chance will kill you by the millions? Just how do you do that? What can you offer such an enemy to satisfy his mad religious lust for power and blood? posted 05/16/2008 at 12:58:05
GINSBERG'S 8 POINT PLAN FOR A PEACEFUL AND STABLE MIDDLE EAST.
The only problem with this plan is that it is virtually impossible to implement until there is regime change in Iran. As long as Iran is in the hands of Khomeine jihadists Ginsberg's plan is in the same league as the Obama Doctrine of Appeasement, of retreat now and diplomacy later. A doctrine of such staggering naivety that it pales in comparison to Bush's erroneous surge and democratizing dreams. posted 05/16/2008 at 08:12:56
The only problem with this plan is that it is virtually impossible to implement until there is regime change in Iran. As long as Iran is in the hands of Khomeine jihadists Ginsberg's plan is in the same league as the Obama Doctrine of Appeasement, of retreat now and diplomacy later. A doctrine of such staggering naivety that it pales in comparison to Bush's erroneous surge and democratizing dreams. posted 05/16/2008 at 08:12:56
THE OBAMA DOCTRINE OF APPEASEMENT
What is the greatest threat to the terror masters of Iran and their theocratic state? A US invasion of their country which they could never survive. And what do they want the US to do? They want the threat of invasion completely eliminated by removing our troops from Iraq and the region. In other words, the biggest, badest most menacing stick that the US could bring to the table in negotiations with Iran is the massive presence of US troops in the Middle East and the credible threat of invasion.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will he get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with nutcase Ahmadenijad. Negotiations without the biggest, badest most menacing stick.
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 07:47:56
McCain Has Zero Plan to Get Us Out of Mess President Bush Has Created
Redeploy our troops within the region and use them as leverage in dealing with Iran. If negotiations fail to stop the mullahs from building the bomb and funding terrorism then do to them what we did to Saddam. posted 05/17/2008 at 08:50:04
The Iraqi gov't is dominated by Shiite extremists and will not reconcile with Sunnis. Our presence in Iraq is the only thing preventing the country from descending into a full blown sectarian war. posted 05/17/2008 at 08:43:24
THE PROFOUND ONE
Biden calls Obama 'A real and profound choice in November?" The New Republic reports that the "profound one" said in 2004 "That a failed Iraq state would be a disaster." Does the "profound one" then believe he can withdraw our forces from Iraq in 16 months and turn it into a success story? Into a reconciled unified stable pro-Western democracy By what magic will he accomplish this wonder. Will he call down the new Iraq from the heavens? Or will it spring into being by hugging Sunni and Shia leaders until they become peace loving human beings? Is that how the "profound one" will do it with Biden at his side? And within the miraculously short space of 16 months? Surely nothing is too difficult for the "profound one." posted 05/16/2008 at 13:19:53
Biden calls Obama 'A real and profound choice in November?" The New Republic reports that the "profound one" said in 2004 "That a failed Iraq state would be a disaster." Does the "profound one" then believe he can withdraw our forces from Iraq in 16 months and turn it into a success story? Into a reconciled unified stable pro-Western democracy By what magic will he accomplish this wonder. Will he call down the new Iraq from the heavens? Or will it spring into being by hugging Sunni and Shia leaders until they become peace loving human beings? Is that how the "profound one" will do it with Biden at his side? And within the miraculously short space of 16 months? Surely nothing is too difficult for the "profound one." posted 05/16/2008 at 13:19:53
American troops have replaced Saddam as the only regional buffer to Iran's imperial ambitions-ambitions stated in artical 11 of Iran's constitution and in the "holy writings of the Ayatollah Khomeine. And the brilliant profound wonder boy wants to remove them from the region. Good God!
By the way it was Iran's new revolutionary government that provoked the Iran-Iraq war by calling on Iraq's Shites to rise up and overthrow the heretical secular Baathist regime. posted 05/16/2008 at 13:16:05
By the way it was Iran's new revolutionary government that provoked the Iran-Iraq war by calling on Iraq's Shites to rise up and overthrow the heretical secular Baathist regime. posted 05/16/2008 at 13:16:05
OBAMA TO STAY IN IRAQ 100 YEARS
Biden calls Obama 'A real and profound choice in November?" The New Republic reports that the "profound one" said in 2004 "That a failed Iraq state would be a disaster." Then does the "profound one" believe he can withdraw our forces from Iraq in 16 months and turn it into a success story? By what magic will he conjure up this new Iraq? By meeting with its leaders and hugging them into becoming peace loving human beings? Is that how the "profound one" will do it with Biden at his side? Or will Obama stay in Iraq as long as it takes to avoid a catastrophe and make a success out of it? 50 years, 100 years. That isn't a long time compared to 14 centuries of sectarian conflict. posted 05/16/2008 at 11:14:06
Biden calls Obama 'A real and profound choice in November?" The New Republic reports that the "profound one" said in 2004 "That a failed Iraq state would be a disaster." Then does the "profound one" believe he can withdraw our forces from Iraq in 16 months and turn it into a success story? By what magic will he conjure up this new Iraq? By meeting with its leaders and hugging them into becoming peace loving human beings? Is that how the "profound one" will do it with Biden at his side? Or will Obama stay in Iraq as long as it takes to avoid a catastrophe and make a success out of it? 50 years, 100 years. That isn't a long time compared to 14 centuries of sectarian conflict. posted 05/16/2008 at 11:14:06
OBAMA DOCTRINE OF APPEASEMENT
What is the greatest threat to the terror masters of Iran and their theocratic state? A US invasion of their country which they could never survive. And do they want from the US? The threat of invasion completely eliminated by removing our troops from Iraq and the region. In other words, they want us to end the threat of attack and invasion.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will he get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with Ahmadenijad without any real leverage. Negotiations without the biggest, badest most menacing stick to threaten the mullahs: US invasion.This is diplomacy from weakness not strength, and weakness brings war!
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Peace through weakness not strength! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 10:27:03
What is the greatest threat to the terror masters of Iran and their theocratic state? A US invasion of their country which they could never survive. And do they want from the US? The threat of invasion completely eliminated by removing our troops from Iraq and the region. In other words, they want us to end the threat of attack and invasion.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will he get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with Ahmadenijad without any real leverage. Negotiations without the biggest, badest most menacing stick to threaten the mullahs: US invasion.This is diplomacy from weakness not strength, and weakness brings war!
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Peace through weakness not strength! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 10:27:03
THE OBAMA DOCTRINE OF APPEASEMENT
What is the greatest threat to the terror masters of Iran and their theocratic state? A US invasion of their country which they could never survive. And what do they want the US to do? They want the threat of invasion completely eliminated by removing our troops from Iraq and the region. In other words, the biggest, badest most menacing stick that the US could bring to the table in negotiations with Iran is the massive presence of US troops in the Middle East and the credible threat of invasion.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will he get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with nutcase Ahmadenijad. Negotiations without the biggest, badest most menacing stick.
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 08:30:06
What is the greatest threat to the terror masters of Iran and their theocratic state? A US invasion of their country which they could never survive. And what do they want the US to do? They want the threat of invasion completely eliminated by removing our troops from Iraq and the region. In other words, the biggest, badest most menacing stick that the US could bring to the table in negotiations with Iran is the massive presence of US troops in the Middle East and the credible threat of invasion.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will he get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with nutcase Ahmadenijad. Negotiations without the biggest, badest most menacing stick.
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 08:30:06
John McCain Trades Straight Talk for Unadulterated Fantasy
They mullahs quake at the army that toppled Saddam in less than 30 days, where as they failed do it in 8 years of war with a million dead and billions spent. If this weren't so they wouldn't want our troops out of the region.. posted 05/16/2008 at 18:14:19
First rule of war: know the enemy. About the Khomeine jihadists in Iran you don't have a clue. posted 05/16/2008 at 18:07:46
THE OBAMA DOCTRINE OF APPEASEMENT, WEAKNESS AND DEFEAT
What do the terror-masters of Iran consider the greatest threat to their theocratic regime? A US invasion of their country which they would never survive. And what do they want from the US? The elimination of this threat by the removal of our troops from region.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will we get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with Ahmadenijad without any real leverage, without a gun to his head, without the biggest, badest most menacing stick to threaten him and his rogue regime: a US invasion.This is diplomacy from weakness not strength, it is in this respect Chamberlainism and Chamberlainism brings war!
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Peace through weakness not strength! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 14:28:18
What do the terror-masters of Iran consider the greatest threat to their theocratic regime? A US invasion of their country which they would never survive. And what do they want from the US? The elimination of this threat by the removal of our troops from region.
Now what is the Obama Doctrine for dealing with Iran? First, Obama has pledged to remove most if not all US troops from Iraq and the region within 16 months of his administration. And what will we get from Iran in return? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Obama is going to eliminate the greatest exisitential threat to the mullahs without first receiving a single concession from them on ending their nuclear weapons program and their massive funding of terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
And when US troops are gone from the Middle East and Iran is breathing a sigh of relief what then does Obama plan to do? He's going to hold "direct tough presidential negotiations" with Ahmadenijad without any real leverage, without a gun to his head, without the biggest, badest most menacing stick to threaten him and his rogue regime: a US invasion.This is diplomacy from weakness not strength, it is in this respect Chamberlainism and Chamberlainism brings war!
Retreat now diplomacy latter! Peace through weakness not strength! Can someone tell me how the Obama Doctrine differs in any respect from appeasement, or just plain stupidity? posted 05/16/2008 at 14:28:18
Bush Uses Holy Land Pulpit to Launch Smear Campaign
Bush received a standing ovation from the Knesset for his wise and worthy remarks; and I salute him for reminding us of the consequences of trying to appease implacable murderous bloodthirsty evil which describes the pitiless genocidal killers that rule Iran. The monsters that Obama naively believes he can humanize with the power of his soft, gentle magnetic personality. posted 05/15/2008 at 16:27:21
IT'S CALLED APPEASEMENT, STUPID!
Obama has pledged to remove our troops in Iraq from the Middle East within 16 months of his administration without any concessions from the mullahs then afterwards hold direct unconditional talks with them. Why? It's called appeasement stupid. Iran will be so grateful to Obama for keeping his pledge and withdrawing our regional forces that they will kill their nuclear weapons program, stop the massive funding of terrorism and grant Obama unconditional PEACE IN OUR TIME! It's all so simple only a blockhead like Bush couldn't figure it out. posted 05/15/2008 at 16:13:50
Obama has pledged to remove our troops in Iraq from the Middle East within 16 months of his administration without any concessions from the mullahs then afterwards hold direct unconditional talks with them. Why? It's called appeasement stupid. Iran will be so grateful to Obama for keeping his pledge and withdrawing our regional forces that they will kill their nuclear weapons program, stop the massive funding of terrorism and grant Obama unconditional PEACE IN OUR TIME! It's all so simple only a blockhead like Bush couldn't figure it out. posted 05/15/2008 at 16:13:50
McCain's New Iraq Fantasy
BOOKDESIGNER
Not even close you say? Your study of history is incredibly shallow: the democratic South Vietnamese were conquered by the totalitarian communist North and did not willingly join them. posted 05/15/2008 at 16:33:35
Not even close you say? Your study of history is incredibly shallow: the democratic South Vietnamese were conquered by the totalitarian communist North and did not willingly join them. posted 05/15/2008 at 16:33:35
The ambitions cited by Ahmadenijad on August 28th of last year: "When America leaves the region we will fill the power vacuum." This is the same Ahmadenijad who said last week that "oil prices are way too low." posted 05/15/2008 at 13:59:54
We stop it by destroying the mullahs. posted 05/15/2008 at 13:54:44
Dominoes did fall: Not as many as first feared. But history proved the theory essentially correct. posted 05/15/2008 at 13:52:20
Ho Chi Minh like Kho-mei-ne were revolutionaries, not nationalists, with regional aspirations. Shia Iraq is to Shia Iran what South Vietnam was to the North. The analogies are very striking if not precisely exact. By the way Mr. Historian why don't you tell us what the North Vietnamese army was doing in Laos and Cambodia? Answer: same as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Sadrists in Iraq. posted 05/15/2008 at 13:50:09
THE IRAQ QUAGMIRE
LIke it or not when we overthrew Saddam Hussein US troops replaced him as the regional buffer to Iranian ambitions. Right now Iraq is a Vietnam quagmire for our country. And all it would take to turn the quagmire into an Indo-China catastrophe-to regionalize the horrors of Darfur-is the 60s born Barack Obama removing our troops from the region. posted 05/15/2008 at 10:40:40
LIke it or not when we overthrew Saddam Hussein US troops replaced him as the regional buffer to Iranian ambitions. Right now Iraq is a Vietnam quagmire for our country. And all it would take to turn the quagmire into an Indo-China catastrophe-to regionalize the horrors of Darfur-is the 60s born Barack Obama removing our troops from the region. posted 05/15/2008 at 10:40:40
Barack Obama and Israel: More GOP Lies
mm posted 05/14/2008 at 15:11:19
Obama/McCain: Kennedy/Nixon or Eisenhower/Stevenson?
American exceptionalism" carries no weight with the Afrocentric Obamas. In that respect they are miles apart from the America-centric JFK, as is today's leftist Kennedy clan. posted 05/14/2008 at 15:08:21
Nor for that matter is he another Martin Luther King. posted 05/14/2008 at 11:58:56
Obama has absolutely nothing of JFKs national optimism and faith in American exceptionalism. Nothing of JFK's unconditional commitment to bear any burden, pay any price and make any sacrifice for the defense of liberty. His youthfulness is all that he has, behind which there is a staggering naivity about our predatory enemies that would have made JFK's hair stand on end. posted 05/14/2008 at 06:47:45
Arianna Huffington is Correct: McCain Has Changed
mm posted 05/12/2008 at 12:27:35
Beirut Is Burning
And where are "Imperial America's" colonial conquests and possessions, Durango? Name me one American overseas colony. Just one to prove your point. And you accuse me of having a feverish mind? By the way, are you a member of Barack Obama's Afrocentric church? If not I'm sure you'd feel right at home there listening to its firebrand America-hating preachers. posted 05/12/2008 at 17:03:15
Pure and simple Islamic jihadists of all stripes are driven by the ideology of imperial restoration and hoiy war. There is only one peace for them, one answer, one truth: its called ISLAM and its truth, its imperial vision of world history, is non-negotiable. Compared to jihadists my imagination is ice cold. posted 05/12/2008 at 04:57:59
I'm gripping reality with both hands, friend. posted 05/11/2008 at 12:24:36
IT'S WAR TO THE DEATH, GET USE TO IT
Talking to Nazrallah and Khamenie would be the equivalent of negotiating with Hitler and Tojo in the middle of World War II. Get use to it: we are in a war to the death with our jihadist enemies. Those who think otherwise will come to their senses sooner or later. posted 05/11/2008 at 06:04:31
Talking to Nazrallah and Khamenie would be the equivalent of negotiating with Hitler and Tojo in the middle of World War II. Get use to it: we are in a war to the death with our jihadist enemies. Those who think otherwise will come to their senses sooner or later. posted 05/11/2008 at 06:04:31
The Fierce Urgency of Now
REMEMBER KERRY'S SECRET PLAN FOR IRAQ?
As I recall, Kerry-like Nixon-had a "secret plan" for winning the war, for turning the "disasterous mistake" of Iraq into a resounding victory. Kerry's secret plan wasn't credible and he was defeated by Bush..
Now we have Barack Obama going to the opposite extreme saying that the Iraq war is unwinnable; that we must withdraw our troops ASAP from Iraq and the region and leave both to its fate. Compared to Barack's solution for Iraq, and his utopian faith in diplomacy with Jihadists, McCain's stay the course policy looks sane and reasonable. posted 05/12/2008 at 06:13:39
As I recall, Kerry-like Nixon-had a "secret plan" for winning the war, for turning the "disasterous mistake" of Iraq into a resounding victory. Kerry's secret plan wasn't credible and he was defeated by Bush..
Now we have Barack Obama going to the opposite extreme saying that the Iraq war is unwinnable; that we must withdraw our troops ASAP from Iraq and the region and leave both to its fate. Compared to Barack's solution for Iraq, and his utopian faith in diplomacy with Jihadists, McCain's stay the course policy looks sane and reasonable. posted 05/12/2008 at 06:13:39
McCain to Me in 1999: Bush "As Dumb as a Stump"
MK posted 05/10/2008 at 07:20:59
Hillary's Chances: Growing Chorus Says It's Not Going To Happen
What Hillary knows is that the nation healing messiah with the third world name is the second coming of George McGovern. posted 05/10/2008 at 05:00:29
Rasmussen To Stop Polling Clinton Questions
Not when Barack loses in November. When that happens Democrats will become a party of Monday morning quaterbacks eating out their hearts for backing such a badly flawed candidate. A man whose skin color and dazzling newness made them lose their minds.Hegel had a name for it:: the cunning of history. The gods blinding men with illusion. posted 05/10/2008 at 05:28:32
Hillary's belief that Obama isn't electable isn't insane. What is driving her to distraction is the question why Providence intervened with Barack Obama to deny her the Presidency and give it to McCain. posted 05/10/2008 at 05:19:42
Secretary Rice Blames Iran, Syria For Lebanon Violence
If every nation were roguish like America we'd have universal prosperity and peace posted 05/09/2008 at 23:16:45
Since when does a phony reformer and charlaton who hides the old sour politics of grievance and victimization behind a false politics of hope and change have integrity? Obama is a gentle soul who gently lies, whose mask is slipping off. posted 05/09/2008 at 23:12:01
Obama Vice President Picks: Who Are The Frontrunners?
You're right about image and reality. There is the image of Barack and the reality. And you needn't go far to see the reality, just look at his embittered angry unhinged wife. Michelle Obama is Barack unveiled. Barack couldn't have a more suitable mate to seal his losing fate. posted 05/10/2008 at 06:23:32
Why would HIllary risk destroying her chances for the presidency by being Obama's VP? Would she chance being the VP of a man so astonishingly naive and inexperienced? A man who is Neville Chamberlain's soul mate and is wedded to a world view that is a winning plan for our deadliest enemies? Besides, Obama is so delusional, so blinded by his charismatic powers and high opinion of himself that he probably believes he can do without Hillary on the ticket. posted 05/10/2008 at 06:11:16
Obama's Clinton Dilemma
Hillary I believe is dead certain that Obama can't beat McCain. He's been too badly damaged by the Wright controversary to persuade a majority of Americans that he's not a liberal leftist. The Wright and Ayers controversaries are not going away and will fully rip Obama's moderate mask from his face. Like Mike Huckabee Hillary's going to take her campaign to the bitter end and do as much damage to Barack as she can as Barack has commited the unpardonable sin of denying her the nomination. I never thought I could be in love with this woman but her campaign has won my heart. And I think I speak for a lot of astonished conservatives, Ann Coulter apart. posted 05/07/2008 at 18:55:50
Hezbollah Is in Iran, Michael Gordon Says American Officials Say
With the theocratic Sadrists aping Hezbollah in turning their organization into a fully armed state within a state who could better help them reach their goal than the terror masters of Lebanon and their sponsors in Tehran. When it comes to Iran's imperial designs on Iraq and its vast oil reserves Bromwich makes simple Simon look like a genius. posted 05/07/2008 at 08:56:16
McCain and Me: Hero Worship Dies Hard (But When It Does...)
McCain says he intends to stay the course in Iraq until victory is achieved.,But why should we trust him about this when he has a long history of denying things that were actually true.like not voting for Bush? Or not talking with Kerry about leaving the GOP? Or denying that he said that he didn't know much about economics, etc., etc., As one who wants to end the Iraq occupation yesterday but understands the strategic necessity of keeping our troops in the Middle East as leverage for dealing with Iran (John Kerry's plan) McCain's denials give me hope that he's unserious about sticking it out in Iraq. posted 05/07/2008 at 18:34:10
McCain didn't vote for Bush in 2000? My God! how could I ever trust him to continue the Bush presidency into a third term? How could I trust him to continue the surge? He may give us a radically different adminstration than his predecessor. He may even remove our troops from Iraq and send them marching to Iran. Thank you, Arianna; in raising questions about McCain's credibility you've given me new reasons to support him. posted 05/07/2008 at 11:43:11
What John McCain Told Me, and What it Says About How Far He's Fallen
You're right about John McCain falling. Except that he's falling upwards. posted 05/05/2008 at 17:32:21
Should Democrats Talk About Invading Iran?
With the Ayatollah Khomenie cheering it on and backing the reinstatment of the Shah. Our long history of blunders with Iran has brought it to the present state of becoming a nuclear power threatening nuclear jihad, and meaning it! posted 05/05/2008 at 17:46:03
Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks
KNOW THYSELF
How would you know that my knowledge of the Buddha Nature is posing? What do you know about me, friend? The great Apollonian maxim KNOW THYSELF underlies all Eastern mystical philosophies of self realization and "enlightenment". In fact, the name Apollo in Greek means the negation "A" of "POLLOS" plurality which psychologically (not metaphysically) means: the negation of plurality or withdrawal of consciousness into the indivisible, indestructible essence of one's being. The reducing of the many to one. If we replace the words Buddha Nature with Apollo Nature on the psychological level it means exactly the same thing, and I challenge anyone to show me differently. posted 05/08/2008 at 06:16:24
How would you know that my knowledge of the Buddha Nature is posing? What do you know about me, friend? The great Apollonian maxim KNOW THYSELF underlies all Eastern mystical philosophies of self realization and "enlightenment". In fact, the name Apollo in Greek means the negation "A" of "POLLOS" plurality which psychologically (not metaphysically) means: the negation of plurality or withdrawal of consciousness into the indivisible, indestructible essence of one's being. The reducing of the many to one. If we replace the words Buddha Nature with Apollo Nature on the psychological level it means exactly the same thing, and I challenge anyone to show me differently. posted 05/08/2008 at 06:16:24
Friend, what you call "Buddhist Enlightenment" is known to the Platonic, Aristotelian and Pythagorean Tradition as the lesser mysteries of gnosis. posted 05/06/2008 at 06:47:53
One's navel?
THE BUDDHA NATURE IS NOT CORPOREAL CONTEMPLATING YOUR NAVEL WON'T AWAKEN IT FROM SLEEP.
But regarding "...From Sam's viewpoint all religion and belief in a God is a form of warfare and aggression against truth..." You think not? Like the Copernican Revolution?
COPERNICUS DERIVED THE IDEA OF HELIO CENTRICITY FROM ARISTARCHUS OF SAMOS A PYTHAGOREAN/PLATONIC MATHEMATICIAN AND MYSTIC. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH PTOLEMY, THE FATHER OF GEOCENTRIC ASTRONOMY, DIDN'T GIVE A FIG ABOUT THE REAL ORDERING OF THE HEAVENS. HIS WORKS WERE A PURELY INTELLECTUAL DISCIPLINE FOR ELEVATING CONSCIOUNESS TO PLATO'S VISION OF THE GOOD, THE SOURCE OF THE BUDDHA NATURE AND ALL ELSE.
Rejection of evolution?
EVOLUTION DOESN'T EXPLAIN HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS OR ITS SOURCE: THE BUDDHA NATURE
The sending of missionaries into other countries with different religious majorities?
GREAT FOR MORAL PROGRESS. BETTER TO EAT THE BODY OF CHRIST THAN FEED ON HUMAN FLESH
The requirement of John Kennedy to promise his religious beliefs would not affect his policy decisions?
PERFECTLY REASONABLE IN A PREDOMINENTLY PROTESTANT COUNTRY THAT NEVER HAD A CATHOLIC PREZ.
The present crop of politicians promising their religious philosophy *WILL* control their policy formation in order to be considered for election?
AMERICA IS A RELIGIOUS NATION WITH A RELIGIOUS PUBLIC EXPECTING ITS LEADERS TO BE MEN AND WOMEN OF FAITH. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT STOP BITCHING AND WORK TO CHANGE IT. IF THE CHALLENGE IS TOO GREAT FOR YOU CONTEMPLATE YOUR NAVEL. posted 05/05/2008 at 20:05:06
THE BUDDHA NATURE IS NOT CORPOREAL CONTEMPLATING YOUR NAVEL WON'T AWAKEN IT FROM SLEEP.
But regarding "...From Sam's viewpoint all religion and belief in a God is a form of warfare and aggression against truth..." You think not? Like the Copernican Revolution?
COPERNICUS DERIVED THE IDEA OF HELIO CENTRICITY FROM ARISTARCHUS OF SAMOS A PYTHAGOREAN/PLATONIC MATHEMATICIAN AND MYSTIC. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH PTOLEMY, THE FATHER OF GEOCENTRIC ASTRONOMY, DIDN'T GIVE A FIG ABOUT THE REAL ORDERING OF THE HEAVENS. HIS WORKS WERE A PURELY INTELLECTUAL DISCIPLINE FOR ELEVATING CONSCIOUNESS TO PLATO'S VISION OF THE GOOD, THE SOURCE OF THE BUDDHA NATURE AND ALL ELSE.
Rejection of evolution?
EVOLUTION DOESN'T EXPLAIN HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS OR ITS SOURCE: THE BUDDHA NATURE
The sending of missionaries into other countries with different religious majorities?
GREAT FOR MORAL PROGRESS. BETTER TO EAT THE BODY OF CHRIST THAN FEED ON HUMAN FLESH
The requirement of John Kennedy to promise his religious beliefs would not affect his policy decisions?
PERFECTLY REASONABLE IN A PREDOMINENTLY PROTESTANT COUNTRY THAT NEVER HAD A CATHOLIC PREZ.
The present crop of politicians promising their religious philosophy *WILL* control their policy formation in order to be considered for election?
AMERICA IS A RELIGIOUS NATION WITH A RELIGIOUS PUBLIC EXPECTING ITS LEADERS TO BE MEN AND WOMEN OF FAITH. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT STOP BITCHING AND WORK TO CHANGE IT. IF THE CHALLENGE IS TOO GREAT FOR YOU CONTEMPLATE YOUR NAVEL. posted 05/05/2008 at 20:05:06
From Sam's viewpoint all religion and belief in a God is a form of warfare and aggression against truth. I have a question for this God denying Buddhist : Where did the Buddha Nature come from? posted 05/05/2008 at 18:00:42
Arianna's New Book Cuts Kristol!
In one of his most sober moments Ted Kennedy said: "Ronald Reagan won the Cold War." posted 05/04/2008 at 16:43:58
The last thing the mullahs wanted to do was contend with Ronald Reagan while embroiled in a savage war with Saddam Hussein. posted 05/04/2008 at 16:40:37
The jeers you got were well deserved as Reagan's economic war against Russia caused the implosion. As Gorbachev said of St. Ronny he "spent the Soviet Union into bankruptcy."
Indeed. when St. Ronny became President in 1981 Russia was awash in oil money and its economy was thriving. On a trip to Russia in 1982 Arthur Schlesinger Jr. marveled at the robustness of SU's economy and thought St. Ronny's plan to bust the Bank of Moscow was dangerously naive. posted 05/04/2008 at 16:36:13
Indeed. when St. Ronny became President in 1981 Russia was awash in oil money and its economy was thriving. On a trip to Russia in 1982 Arthur Schlesinger Jr. marveled at the robustness of SU's economy and thought St. Ronny's plan to bust the Bank of Moscow was dangerously naive. posted 05/04/2008 at 16:36:13
I lived through the Carter years of malaise, stagflation and weakness in dealing with enemies, and the Reagan years of restored national optimism, greatness and patriotic pride that led to the collapse of international communism and the Soviet Empire and I can tell you on the authority of first hand experience that you are dead wrong. As for Camp David, whoever was President when Sadat made his heroic visit to Jerusalem would have closed the deal. posted 05/03/2008 at 20:50:18
Can We Not Threaten to Obliterate Anyone Today?
ISRAEL'S DANGER TO ISLAM
A distinction must be made between a Jewish nation established on lands once ruled by Moslems and a minority Jewish population in a Moslem country. The former's existence is in violation of Islamic Law and its destruction is a Moslem duty. This is because its existence is a painful challange to and refutation of "Islamic truth," while a powerless Jewish minority in a Moslem country harmlessly poses no challenge to Islam. Iran by ideological necessity must seek Israel's destruction in order to fulfill its regional and global ambitions. When Ahmadinejad calls for wiping Zionist entity from the map he is dead serious and Israel knows it. That is why Israel cannot allow Iran to weaponize its nuke program. That is why regime change in Iran is a regional necessity. posted 05/03/2008 at 17:27:14
A distinction must be made between a Jewish nation established on lands once ruled by Moslems and a minority Jewish population in a Moslem country. The former's existence is in violation of Islamic Law and its destruction is a Moslem duty. This is because its existence is a painful challange to and refutation of "Islamic truth," while a powerless Jewish minority in a Moslem country harmlessly poses no challenge to Islam. Iran by ideological necessity must seek Israel's destruction in order to fulfill its regional and global ambitions. When Ahmadinejad calls for wiping Zionist entity from the map he is dead serious and Israel knows it. That is why Israel cannot allow Iran to weaponize its nuke program. That is why regime change in Iran is a regional necessity. posted 05/03/2008 at 17:27:14
Mr. Obama Goes to Washington
WRIGHT GIVETH AND WRIGHT TAKETH AWAY:THE END OF BARACK'S PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN
Barack Obama's March 18th speech was the beginning of the end of his quest for the Presidency. In fact, the speech was ominously given in Philadelphia, the birthplace of his nemesis Jeremiah Wright who is out for Barack's blood.. Indeed, the man who gave Barack his spiritual identity and start in politics holds the fate of his campaign in his hands. All that Wright need do to exact revenge for Barack's ingraditude and cowardrice is utter two dreaded words to the press: BARACK LIED. All he need do is tell the press about the long hours he spent with his disciple discussing in depth his radical views and Obama is through. posted 05/02/2008 at 16:16:53
Barack Obama's March 18th speech was the beginning of the end of his quest for the Presidency. In fact, the speech was ominously given in Philadelphia, the birthplace of his nemesis Jeremiah Wright who is out for Barack's blood.. Indeed, the man who gave Barack his spiritual identity and start in politics holds the fate of his campaign in his hands. All that Wright need do to exact revenge for Barack's ingraditude and cowardrice is utter two dreaded words to the press: BARACK LIED. All he need do is tell the press about the long hours he spent with his disciple discussing in depth his radical views and Obama is through. posted 05/02/2008 at 16:16:53
Clinton's "Obliteration" Remark is Genocidal, Requires Apology
For the mullahs obliteration equals the highest degree of happiness in an exquisitely blissful afterlife. For the old materialistic atheistic Soviets nuclear obliteration meant the eternal extinction of life and consciousness. Nuclear deterrence or MAD belongs to the Cold War era not to the age of Islamic Terror. MAD is virtually useless with a jihadist regime that extolls martyrdom as the highest religious virtue earning the sublimest spiritual rewards. posted 05/02/2008 at 07:51:19
The NIE Report on Iran's nuclear program is contradicted by the intelligence findings of Germany, France, Great Britian and the entire EU. That is why the EU is prepearing to impose their own set of economic sanctions on Iran apart from the UN. If Iran didn't have a hidden nuclear weapons program why are they building the missiles to deliver nukes? No body is fooled by the politicized NIE Report except those whose heads are deeply buried in the sand. posted 05/02/2008 at 07:41:43
I came away from Hillary's interview with O'Reilly with the distinct impression that she doesn't have a clue on what to do about Iran's nuclear weapon's program and its imperial designs for the Middle East in post-occupation Iraq when our military presence is removed from the region. For that matter neither does her rival whose naivity is as stupifying as his pastor's racist tongue. posted 05/02/2008 at 07:33:40
On Bush, On Baseball and Iraq: "He's 0 for 2"
IRAQ AND CATASTROPHIC PROGRESS
In her essay in today's Townhall.com Diana West asked: What did Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and others think the United States would ultimately get out of Iraq in exchange for our massive investment of blood and treasure?
I will answer the question with a question: What did France get out of its failed and very costly Napoleanic invasion of the Middle East in 1799? Answer: NOTHING! What did history get out of it? The beginning of the region's "catastrophic" journey to modernity. The word is "catastrophic:" social, political and economic progress in the sick, dysfunctional, inert Middle East can not occur in any other way. posted 05/02/2008 at 10:46:11
In her essay in today's Townhall.com Diana West asked: What did Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and others think the United States would ultimately get out of Iraq in exchange for our massive investment of blood and treasure?
I will answer the question with a question: What did France get out of its failed and very costly Napoleanic invasion of the Middle East in 1799? Answer: NOTHING! What did history get out of it? The beginning of the region's "catastrophic" journey to modernity. The word is "catastrophic:" social, political and economic progress in the sick, dysfunctional, inert Middle East can not occur in any other way. posted 05/02/2008 at 10:46:11
Reading The Pictures: American Bombing Of Sadr City: Like Qana, But Without The Attention?
Being that the Sadrists are aspiring to become the Hezbollah of Iraq there is little real difference. Killing Hezbollah jihadists or their Sadrist counterparts its all the same to me. posted 05/01/2008 at 10:51:38
Charisma and Leadership
Joseph Nye, who has written an excellent book, asks a perfectly good question about the origins of charisma. He asks:
Does charisma originate in the individual, in the followers, or in the situation?
In the case of Obama the answer is none of the above. His charismatic gifts are mostly borrowed and are not his own. They do not belong to him though he wants us to think otherwise. He is not a Churchill or a Reagan or an FDR. He is not a JFK or Martin Luther King. He is a one dimensional Music Man, a holy rolling politician fooling the shallow, the weak, the empty and unaware. posted 05/04/2008 at 22:43:01
Does charisma originate in the individual, in the followers, or in the situation?
In the case of Obama the answer is none of the above. His charismatic gifts are mostly borrowed and are not his own. They do not belong to him though he wants us to think otherwise. He is not a Churchill or a Reagan or an FDR. He is not a JFK or Martin Luther King. He is a one dimensional Music Man, a holy rolling politician fooling the shallow, the weak, the empty and unaware. posted 05/04/2008 at 22:43:01
WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF OBAMA'S CHARISMA?
I'll give you a hint: It's a secret that Obama learned from his pastor and that his pastor, whose energy and chrisma is greater, is now turning against him with great effect. Without this secret Obama could not have gotten so far in politics in such a short time. If Obama were to suddenly lose this secret his campaign would quickly die.. posted 05/04/2008 at 16:24:29
I'll give you a hint: It's a secret that Obama learned from his pastor and that his pastor, whose energy and chrisma is greater, is now turning against him with great effect. Without this secret Obama could not have gotten so far in politics in such a short time. If Obama were to suddenly lose this secret his campaign would quickly die.. posted 05/04/2008 at 16:24:29
Wrighteous Indignation
OBAMA KNEW
Reality is this: it's war between Obama and the pastor of disaster. The pastor is out for blood and he's not going away. Right now he's planning his next move to worsen the damage to Obama's campaign. This is a cruel and vicious man, a deeply flawed and failed Christian, bloodthirsty and mentally deranged. The fate of Obama's presidential hopes is in the pastor's hands. The worst is yet to come. The pastor is determined to have his pound of flesh and will get it. All it will take are two simple words: OBAMA KNEW, and it's over. posted 05/01/2008 at 05:33:14
It's too late for Obama; he's a falling star. The magical mystery tour is permanently derailed and out of hope.. Sooner or later reality will clobber you. posted 04/30/2008 at 19:52:21
Obama didn't turn against Wright until he became a serious embarrassment and political liability. Not very admirable, not very courageous, but very very expedient and way too late. posted 04/30/2008 at 17:25:16
It follows from your argument that in rejecting the "prophet" Jeremiah Wright, Obama was rejecting God; or that in using His prophet to damage Obama's campaign God was visting judgement on Obama.
Nevertheless, this all seems to me very symbolic that Obama's candidacy was doomed from the start and that providence used this black Jeremiah, the preacher from hell, to wreck Obama's campaign and benefit McCain and the political (W)RIGHT. posted 04/30/2008 at 15:34:43
Nevertheless, this all seems to me very symbolic that Obama's candidacy was doomed from the start and that providence used this black Jeremiah, the preacher from hell, to wreck Obama's campaign and benefit McCain and the political (W)RIGHT. posted 04/30/2008 at 15:34:43
Obama has proved himself to be a man of stupendous naivity and very poor judgement. Yesterday he looked like a weak and beaten candidate overwhelmed by events. This is not very admirable, not presidential, not even senatorial. posted 04/30/2008 at 13:47:55
Can Obama Appeal to White Rural Men?
REVEREND WRIGHT'S POWER PLAY
Barack Obama's pastor is making a shambles of his candidacy. What's worse this pastor from hell knows what he's doing and doesn't give a damn. Why? Because the pastor is making a power play. While Obama is running for his party's nomination Wright is seizing the moment and running his own campaign to become a powerful figure in the black community. Obama is a God send for Wright. In Wright's mind Obama is running for the presidency so that he can fulfill his destiny; a destiny more important than Obama's since the president heads the evil, racist, Christ-killing imperial US/Roman state. In short, a President Obama will be on the side of anti-Christ an enemy of the church and black social justice-this is what Wright meant when he said: "I will be just as critical of a President Obama as I am of the U.S. government." In damaging his disciple's campaign and possibly destroying it Wright is doing Obama a favor and saving him from sin. posted 04/29/2008 at 11:12:23
Barack Obama's pastor is making a shambles of his candidacy. What's worse this pastor from hell knows what he's doing and doesn't give a damn. Why? Because the pastor is making a power play. While Obama is running for his party's nomination Wright is seizing the moment and running his own campaign to become a powerful figure in the black community. Obama is a God send for Wright. In Wright's mind Obama is running for the presidency so that he can fulfill his destiny; a destiny more important than Obama's since the president heads the evil, racist, Christ-killing imperial US/Roman state. In short, a President Obama will be on the side of anti-Christ an enemy of the church and black social justice-this is what Wright meant when he said: "I will be just as critical of a President Obama as I am of the U.S. government." In damaging his disciple's campaign and possibly destroying it Wright is doing Obama a favor and saving him from sin. posted 04/29/2008 at 11:12:23
Why Jeremiah Wright Is Willing To Destroy Barack Obama; This Campaign Really Is Generational
WRIGHT'S SURGE FOR POWER
Barack Obama's pastor is making a shambles of his candidacy. What's worse this pastor from hell knows what he's doing and doesn't give a damn. Why? Because the pastor is making a power play. While Obama is running for his party's nomination Wright is seizing the moment and running his own campaign to become a powerful figure in the black community-his last chance for superstardom. Obama is a God send for Wright. An answer to his prayers. Heaven's reward for years of serving the Cross.
In Wright's mind Obama is running for the presidency so that he can fulfill his destiny; a destiny more important than Obama's race for the White House because as president he will head an evil, white racist imperial government, a government that differs little from the Christ-killing Roman State of old. It's bad enough that Obama is a senator of this sinister, warmongering state; as president he would have crossed the great divide and joined the side of the anti-Christ-an enemy of the church, moral principle and black social justice.This is what Wright meant when he said: "I will be just as hard and outspoken in criticizing a President Obama." In damaging his disciple's campaign and possibly destroying it Wright is doing Obama a huge favor and saving him from the infection of an evil government and crime of being president. posted 04/29/2008 at 14:24:16
Barack Obama's pastor is making a shambles of his candidacy. What's worse this pastor from hell knows what he's doing and doesn't give a damn. Why? Because the pastor is making a power play. While Obama is running for his party's nomination Wright is seizing the moment and running his own campaign to become a powerful figure in the black community-his last chance for superstardom. Obama is a God send for Wright. An answer to his prayers. Heaven's reward for years of serving the Cross.
In Wright's mind Obama is running for the presidency so that he can fulfill his destiny; a destiny more important than Obama's race for the White House because as president he will head an evil, white racist imperial government, a government that differs little from the Christ-killing Roman State of old. It's bad enough that Obama is a senator of this sinister, warmongering state; as president he would have crossed the great divide and joined the side of the anti-Christ-an enemy of the church, moral principle and black social justice.This is what Wright meant when he said: "I will be just as hard and outspoken in criticizing a President Obama." In damaging his disciple's campaign and possibly destroying it Wright is doing Obama a huge favor and saving him from the infection of an evil government and crime of being president. posted 04/29/2008 at 14:24:16
America May Owe Reverend Wright a Debt of Gratitude
WRIGHT IS A MAN OF CONVICTION
As detestable as Rev. Wright is he at least has the courage of his convictions and is never in denial of his statements and controversial positions. As it turns out Wright has more character than Obama and was right in branding him an ordinary dime a dozen politician. Obama's politics of change and hope and lofty rhetoric about turning the page of history is nothing more than an election year gimmick that is wearing very thin. posted 05/04/2008 at 08:47:58
As detestable as Rev. Wright is he at least has the courage of his convictions and is never in denial of his statements and controversial positions. As it turns out Wright has more character than Obama and was right in branding him an ordinary dime a dozen politician. Obama's politics of change and hope and lofty rhetoric about turning the page of history is nothing more than an election year gimmick that is wearing very thin. posted 05/04/2008 at 08:47:58
McCain Camp Is Neocon Redux: It's Official
You've got it wrong: Iran is the revolutionary power that wants to impose its oppressive theocratic government on Islam and the world. Don't take my word for it, read the works of Ayatollah Khomeine and article 11 of Iran's constitution that calls for the unification of Islam under Iran's evil flag of sacrifice, martyrdom and death. posted 04/30/2008 at 06:35:51
And here to stay! posted 04/29/2008 at 21:01:41
Sunday Roundup
It's a date, Jack. posted 04/27/2008 at 15:38:41
Obama is on record as saying that military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities may be necessary to cripple their nuclear weapon's program. If this is too hawkish for you then vote for Ralph Nadar. posted 04/27/2008 at 12:08:33
BARACK'S GLARING INCONSISTENCIES
In response to his endorsement by the sick, twisted genocidal killers of Hamas Barack said that a necessary precondition for negotiating with them would be accepting Israel's right to exist. Yet an Obama administration will set no preconditions for high level talks with the mullahs, Hamas's fanatical sponsors in Iran, who have joined Hamas in its genocidal jihad to eradicate the Jewish state. It is glaring inconsistencies like these-and their are many-that make nonsense of Barack's bold claim to be a mastermind in foreign policy towering above Hillary and McCain. It is inconsistencies like these that doom his candidacy. posted 04/27/2008 at 05:55:36
In response to his endorsement by the sick, twisted genocidal killers of Hamas Barack said that a necessary precondition for negotiating with them would be accepting Israel's right to exist. Yet an Obama administration will set no preconditions for high level talks with the mullahs, Hamas's fanatical sponsors in Iran, who have joined Hamas in its genocidal jihad to eradicate the Jewish state. It is glaring inconsistencies like these-and their are many-that make nonsense of Barack's bold claim to be a mastermind in foreign policy towering above Hillary and McCain. It is inconsistencies like these that doom his candidacy. posted 04/27/2008 at 05:55:36
Iraq: Whose Ox Is Gored?
mmmm posted 04/26/2008 at 15:45:48
Bush's Washington Moves to Off-Off Broadway on Middle East Peace
THE ONLY WAY TO ARAB-ISRAELI PEACE.
Mr. Levy,
The obstacle to peace between Arabs and Israel is no different today than it was in 1948 when George Bush was two years old: Arab racism, cultural imperialism and religious intolerance. The historical dynamic driving the conflict is summed up as follows: tyranny verses freedom, regression verses progress, the past verses the future. What is removing this obstacle-and it is being removed-is great and terrible suffering. After Egypt suffered four humiliating and costly defeats by Democratic Israel Anwar Sadat saw the light that Israel was here to stay. He then heroically and courageously broke with the past, accepted Israel's right to exist and made peace with her. Sadat is the model for all future progress between Israel, the Arabs and the Palestinians. There is no other way. And I defy anyone to show me differently. posted 04/26/2008 at 08:52:41
Mr. Levy,
The obstacle to peace between Arabs and Israel is no different today than it was in 1948 when George Bush was two years old: Arab racism, cultural imperialism and religious intolerance. The historical dynamic driving the conflict is summed up as follows: tyranny verses freedom, regression verses progress, the past verses the future. What is removing this obstacle-and it is being removed-is great and terrible suffering. After Egypt suffered four humiliating and costly defeats by Democratic Israel Anwar Sadat saw the light that Israel was here to stay. He then heroically and courageously broke with the past, accepted Israel's right to exist and made peace with her. Sadat is the model for all future progress between Israel, the Arabs and the Palestinians. There is no other way. And I defy anyone to show me differently. posted 04/26/2008 at 08:52:41
The Toxic Thinking of the Right Infects the Body Politic
And what other economy compares to the US? Who has a stronger and more prosperous middle class? Where are the poor better off? Where are the poor richer? Where do the poor have more opportunities for advancement? WHERE? Not in Obama's view of America and shallow idealism which have nothing to do with reality and why his magical mystery tour is running out of magic and steam. posted 04/23/2008 at 09:58:59
OBAMA CAMPAIGNING IN WRONG COUNTRY
Last night I saw Robert Redford's Havana on HBO. At one point in the story the character played by Alan Arkin turned to Redford and said "There's a rebel leader in the hills promising to bring change to Cuba." If America were an impoverished third world country Obama with his meaningless message of hope and change, and third world sounding name, would have a chance at beating McCain and becoming president. But not in superwealthy, opportunity rich, 21st century America. Not in a country where the American Dream is powerfully alive and thriving. In short, Obama is campaigning for president in the wrong country and doesn't have a ghost of a chance in succeeding. posted 04/23/2008 at 06:56:12
Last night I saw Robert Redford's Havana on HBO. At one point in the story the character played by Alan Arkin turned to Redford and said "There's a rebel leader in the hills promising to bring change to Cuba." If America were an impoverished third world country Obama with his meaningless message of hope and change, and third world sounding name, would have a chance at beating McCain and becoming president. But not in superwealthy, opportunity rich, 21st century America. Not in a country where the American Dream is powerfully alive and thriving. In short, Obama is campaigning for president in the wrong country and doesn't have a ghost of a chance in succeeding. posted 04/23/2008 at 06:56:12
Al-Sadr's followers refuse to disband militia in Iraq
Start with the 9/11 Report. posted 04/21/2008 at 20:31:52
Building on that cooperation wasn't remotely possible. No sooner were the Taliban routed than Iran sent their agents into Afghanistan to kill our troops. Now it is believed that they support the Taliban against us. With their proven operational ties to Zarqawi and Al Qaida it wouldn't surprise me that this is true. Get use to it friend: the mullahs are our uncompromising enemies. posted 04/21/2008 at 12:25:47
After Bush failed to get support from Sunni Arab states to form an anti-Iran coalition he then attempts to curry favor with them by building a Sunni army in Iraq. Truth is the Arab's fear of Iran exceeds their confidence in us to protect them. With Bush kissing Maliki's butt in Iraq and his weakness in confronting Shiite Iran who can blame them? Our warrior president has dropped the sword in his struggle with Iran and the Arabs have understandably lost their respect for him.
Go to my website ApolloSpeaks at Townhall.com and read my essay The Rise of Nuclear Iran. Or contact me at bstarz700@aol.com and I will send you a copy. It explains everything. posted 04/21/2008 at 12:17:38
Go to my website ApolloSpeaks at Townhall.com and read my essay The Rise of Nuclear Iran. Or contact me at bstarz700@aol.com and I will send you a copy. It explains everything. posted 04/21/2008 at 12:17:38
SEE BELOW MAJORKONG posted 04/21/2008 at 12:05:15
OVER THE TOP?
The Bush administration has bent over backwards trying to accomodate and moderate the pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah Maliki gov't, and what do we have to show for it? 4000 dead and billions spent, and an intransigent, sectarian shiite government that has more respect for Ahmedinejad than the fawning, craven, brown nosing George Bush.
The problem with you sir is that my comments are waaaaaay over your head, a head so buried in the sand that you mistake the darkness for light. If you want a strong dose of reality go to my website ApolloSpeaks at Townhall.com and read my essay The Rise of Nuclear Iran. Or contact me at bstarz700@aol.com and I will send you a copy. After you read it you won't be accusing me of being over the top in my criticism of Bush. posted 04/21/2008 at 12:03:23
The Bush administration has bent over backwards trying to accomodate and moderate the pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah Maliki gov't, and what do we have to show for it? 4000 dead and billions spent, and an intransigent, sectarian shiite government that has more respect for Ahmedinejad than the fawning, craven, brown nosing George Bush.
The problem with you sir is that my comments are waaaaaay over your head, a head so buried in the sand that you mistake the darkness for light. If you want a strong dose of reality go to my website ApolloSpeaks at Townhall.com and read my essay The Rise of Nuclear Iran. Or contact me at bstarz700@aol.com and I will send you a copy. After you read it you won't be accusing me of being over the top in my criticism of Bush. posted 04/21/2008 at 12:03:23
AL SADR, MALIKI AND IRAN
Al Sadr is now identified with evil Iran and defeating al Sadr means beating Iran when the U.S. supported Maliki gov't is complicit with Iran in the funding of Hamas and Hezbollah through the Baghdad branch of Iran's Melli Bank-blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury Department as funneling money to terrorists. No sooner was Melli blacklisted by the Feds then Maliki allowed branches of the bank to be opened in Iraq. It is shameful to see the Bush Administration allowing US troops to be used in a purely political operation to benefit the irredeemably, irreversibly sectarian pro-Iran Maliki gov't. If one wants an example of kowtowing, butt kissing Chamberlainism look no further than the Bush Administration. posted 04/21/2008 at 08:05:41
Al Sadr is now identified with evil Iran and defeating al Sadr means beating Iran when the U.S. supported Maliki gov't is complicit with Iran in the funding of Hamas and Hezbollah through the Baghdad branch of Iran's Melli Bank-blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury Department as funneling money to terrorists. No sooner was Melli blacklisted by the Feds then Maliki allowed branches of the bank to be opened in Iraq. It is shameful to see the Bush Administration allowing US troops to be used in a purely political operation to benefit the irredeemably, irreversibly sectarian pro-Iran Maliki gov't. If one wants an example of kowtowing, butt kissing Chamberlainism look no further than the Bush Administration. posted 04/21/2008 at 08:05:41
Anti-US cleric al-Sadr threatens new uprising in Iraq
mmm posted 04/20/2008 at 10:13:01
MALIKI/HAKIM=ANTI-DEMOCRACY
Maliki and Hakim are Shiite extremists who ardently support the destruction of democracy in Isreal and Lebanon by Hamas and Hezbollah. Maliki/Hakim have as much regard for democracy as Hilter when he used the democratic process to destroy freedom in Germany. posted 04/20/2008 at 10:11:41
Maliki and Hakim are Shiite extremists who ardently support the destruction of democracy in Isreal and Lebanon by Hamas and Hezbollah. Maliki/Hakim have as much regard for democracy as Hilter when he used the democratic process to destroy freedom in Germany. posted 04/20/2008 at 10:11:41
US FORCES USED BY SHIITE GOV"T IN CIVIL WAR
U.S. forces are being used by the irredeemably pro-Iranian Shiite gov't of MalIki and Hakim in a civil war against Al- Sadr. What isn't being reported is that Maliki's Dawa Party and Hakim's SCIRI have been rivals of the Sadrists for decades. The Malaki gov't is not a U.S. puppet, in reality it's the other way round. posted 04/20/2008 at 05:56:55
U.S. forces are being used by the irredeemably pro-Iranian Shiite gov't of MalIki and Hakim in a civil war against Al- Sadr. What isn't being reported is that Maliki's Dawa Party and Hakim's SCIRI have been rivals of the Sadrists for decades. The Malaki gov't is not a U.S. puppet, in reality it's the other way round. posted 04/20/2008 at 05:56:55
Popular Stories on HuffPost
From the AP: Democrat John Edwards endorsed former rival Barack Obama on Wednesday, a...
*** UPDATED BELOW *** President Bush has said repeatedly that he would not insert himself into the...
Utterly insane goings-on tonight on...
It's a pretty well known fact that most women - attractive women -...
Just off the House floor today, the Crypt overheard House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers tell two...
Tonight, Keith Olbermann unleashed what may well have been his...
The AP reports on Obama's swift and forceful response to Bush and McCain's criticism of...
The Tennessee GOP hasn't yet had their fill of Obama dirty tricks. A few months ago,...
***UPDATE*** Roughly five hours after making comments about...
Sixteen tips for getting good sleep. There's a lot of advice out there about getting good...
George W. Bush is unworthy of the presidency. He is a disgrace to himself,...
A lot is being said right now to the effect of, "What took him so long?" Some people...
