Obamination: State of the Union: Foreign Policy?

In this installment on the STOTU we turn to foreign policy.  [Click this link for the Prepared Remarks.]

" Just as jobs and businesses can now race across borders, so can new threats and new challenges. No single wall separates East and West; no one rival superpower is aligned against us."

    In modern times, we face threats from multiple sources, large and small. We must not drop our guard because weakness invites predators.

" And so we must defeat determined enemies wherever they are, and build coalitions that cut across lines of region and race and religion. America’s moral example must always shine for all who yearn for freedom, justice, and dignity. And because we have begun this work, tonight we can say that American leadership has been renewed and America’s standing has been restored."

    Against Hitler, Russia and America had a common enemy but when the war was over, Russia replaced Germany as an oppressor in much of Eastern Europe.  Then we had a long cold war with constant threat of nuclear attack. That threat is not entirely eliminated today.

    At present, the primary enemy is Islam. What makes any fool think that we can make coalitions with the enemy against itself?  The second sentence in the quoted paragraph is code for giving the enemy undeserved privileges which rightly belong to citizens.   When you take prisoners on the battlefield, you imprison them for the duration of the war.  There is no need to try them in court. 

    Common sense dictates that you do not reveal to the enemy your methods, materials and sources of intelligence.  Common sense dictates that you not hold the army and Cia to the same procedural standards imposed on the police & FBI. There is nothing immoral about capturing and detaining enemy combatants. There is noting immoral about capturing and detaining those who plot & perpetrate terrorist attacks.  There is no good reason why they should not be imprisoned at 'Gitmo' and there is no good reason why they should be brought here for trial in civilian courts.

    America under Obamination is not leading, it is pleading.  America under Obamination is not standing tall, it is bending over to osculate Islam's anus.

" Look to Iraq, where nearly 100,000 of our brave men and women have left with their heads held high; where American combat patrols have ended; violence has come down; and a new government has been formed. This year, our civilians will forge a lasting partnership with the Iraqi people, while we finish the job of bringing our troops out of Iraq. America’s commitment has been kept; the Iraq War is coming to an end."

    If the people of Iraq "yearn for freedom, justice, and dignity" they have a funny way of seeking those values.  They instituted a constitution that makes the Qur'an the primary source of legislation. A book which sanctifies corporal punishment including limb amputation is a fine basis for justice & dignity.

    The new government which was formed took months to organize its parliament after the recent election. Violence may be reduced, but it is not eliminated, and it will escalate as our forces evacuate the area.

    The majority of Iraq's citizens are Muslims.  The Qur'an forbids Muslims from  forming friendship, partnership or alliance with disbelievers.  Any such partnership is null and void. Only an ignorant fool or a traitor would take any stock in it. 

    America's commitment is a fool's errand, a mirage over hot desert sand.  We have not liberated Iraq from slavery to Allah; it remains Muslim. While it remains so, it remains at war against us.

    Iraq was not a war, it was one theater in a much wider war which Obamination, like Shrub, fails to recognize and fight. It is a war which will never end so long as Allah's slaves believe that he will reward them with eternity in Paradise if they wage war against us or condemn them to everlasting fire if they refuse.

" Of course, as we speak, al Qaeda and their affiliates continue to plan attacks against us.  Thanks to our intelligence and law enforcement professionals, we are disrupting plots and securing our cities and skies. And as extremists try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with respect for the rule of law, and with the conviction that American Muslims are a part of our American family."

    "Al-Qaeda and their affiliates"?  No! Muslims!! It is Muslims, who believe Allah's promises and threats and obey his demonic imperatives  by waging war against disbelievers. 

    You have secured nothing; you got lucky the last few times. Sooner or later there will be another successful mass casualty attack.  There is only one way to prevent that: remove the enemy fifth column from our soil and exclude it from re-entry.  If you want security, expel the Muslims. Subjecting us to embarrassing and intrusive searches is no substitute for the only  common sense measure that has a chance of success. 

    "Extremists": the big lie.  Jihad is the rule, not the exception. It is ordained for Muslims [2:216].  Waging war against Jews & Christians is a demonic obligation. [9:29]  Acts of terror are inspired by the demon's imperatives, threats & promises.  [8:39, 9:38, 9:120, 61:10]. It is what believers do; [9:111]  their reason for existing.

    If they were Americans, they would not be Muslims.  Muslims are Allah's slaves, who fight in his cause, killing others and being killed. [9:111]  Where they can not conquer by force on the battle field, they stage a demographic invasion, breeding like rats to take over by sheer numbers. Do Americans  wage war against their neighbors?  When Muslims become sufficiently numerous, they will because it is what they are commanded to do. [9:123]

 "We have also taken the fight to al Qaeda and their allies abroad. In Afghanistan, our troops have taken Taliban strongholds and trained Afghan Security Forces.  Our purpose is clear – by preventing the Taliban from reestablishing a stranglehold over the Afghan people, we will deny al Qaeda the safe-haven that served as a launching pad for 9/11."

    Most of pur casualties in Iraq & Afghanistan are caused by IEDs & shaped charges supplied by Iran.  What did Shrub do about it?  What has Obamination done about it?? "Taken the fight to their allies". Yeah, right. Show me. 

    Traines security forces... yeah, right. Security forces that shoot  their trainers by surprise.  They are Muslims, you traitor!  Why do we train and arm our enemy? 

    While you are pretending to secure Afghanistan, they are operating terrorist training camps in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia & Lebanon.  If we had a President instead of a traitor, those camps would be smoking ruins.

"In Pakistan, al Qaeda’s leadership is under more pressure than at any point since 2001. Their leaders and operatives are being removed from the battlefield. Their safe-havens are shrinking. And we have sent a message from the Afghan border to the Arabian Peninsula to all parts of the globe: we will not relent, we will not waver, and we will defeat you."

    Every Muslim satrapy on the face of the earth is their safe-havens. Which of them is shrinking?  Which of them is depopulated?  Brig. SK. Malik told us exactly what must be done to defeat them: we must break their faith. We must cause them to recognize Allah as Satan and Moe as the devil incarnate. While our leaders refuse to take that first step, we will continue to lose this war, wasting precious blood, flesh and treasure in the process.

" American leadership can also be seen in the effort to secure the worst weapons of war. Because Republicans and Democrats approved the New START Treaty, far fewer nuclear weapons and launchers will be deployed. Because we rallied the world, nuclear materials are being locked down on every continent so they never fall into the hands of terrorists."

    The start treaty is likely to be the end. Russia can not be trusted and their adherence to the treaty can not be effectively verified.  No treaty is better than the good faith of the parties to it.  Any treaty that limits our right to develop defenses against missile attacks is an act of treason.

    Pakistan is terrorism. Pakistan has nukes.  You are a traitor. Brig. S.K. Malik wrote Pakistan's terror manual. Everyone should read pages 59 & 60 of The Quranic Concept of War.
   

" Because of a diplomatic effort to insist that Iran meet its obligations, the Iranian government now faces tougher and tighter sanctions than ever before. And on the Korean peninsula, we stand with our ally South Korea, and insist that North Korea keeps its commitment to abandon nuclear weapons."

    When someone believes that he has a divine mission to conquer the world; that he will be rewarded by eternity in the celestial bordello if he tries and punished in an eternal fire pit if he does not, no damn fool diplomatic sanction will stop him or even slow his progress.  If you voted for the traitor who spewed the feces quoted above, you are too stupid to participate in the electoral process; burn your voter registration card and hang your head in shame.

"Around the globe, we are standing with those who take responsibility – helping farmers grow more food; supporting doctors who care for the sick; and combating the corruption that can rot a society and rob people of opportunity."

    How are you combating corruption in Afghanistan & Pakistan?  How are you combating corruption in Washington D.C.?

" We saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: the United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people."

   
    What I see is another Muslim takeover, another civil war, and another international involvement fighting on the side of slavery, Not all people have democratic aspirations. Democracy without limited government is mob rule. 

Sphere: Related Content

Bye-bye Vice President Biden?

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

That is the speculation and prediction of Liz Peek.

Joe Biden has been a liability to the Obama Administration Regime since he was put on the ticket in 2008.  It seems the Vice President has Foot-in-Mouth Disease.  He opens his mouth and inserts his foot.  He has become an embarrassment and a political liability to this regime. Therefore he must go!

Ms. Peek predicts that Obama will cut loose Joe Biden in favor of Hillary Clinton.

Here’s a prediction: the Obama administration will bounce Joe Biden off the 2012 ticket, and invite Hillary Clinton to run in his stead.

The move will aim to bolster Obama’s standing and provide some excitement among core Democrats – something that Biden fails to provide. Hillary will agree, because just four years later she will be superbly positioned to run for president – ever the rainbow on her personal horizon.

At present, her polls are high, with 58% of voters viewing her at least somewhat favorably.

Wistful Dems who wonder these days what could have been will tout her hard work and pragmatic diplomacy as she chases one impossible Obama pipe dream after another to all corners of the globe.

Certain wishful Dems are hoping she will challenge Obama in a primary. I don’t think so. As Ted Kennedy found when he tried to pick off Jimmy Carter in 1980, even an unpopular incumbent is still an incumbent.

If the White House political team brings Clinton on board over the next year, they can remove whatever threat exists from that quarter. Meanwhile, Hillary can bide her time and husband her resources, eventually running against Obama’s legacy.

She will have better answers on health care, a subject she has studiously avoided discussing, and could adopt her husband’s centrist approach to trade and taxes to win over independents.

Up until President Eisenhower, the position of Vice President on a political ticket was easily changed.  FDR had 3 different VPs (John Nance Garner, Henry A. Wallace, and Harry S. Truman.).  So it isn't out of the question or against historical precedent.


Joe Biden was originally chosen for his experience in foreign affairs.  A skill it seems, judging from the last 2 years of this regime, neither Joe Biden or Barack Hussein Obama have or ever has aquired.

Nor has Hillary Clinton showed her great skill in foreign policy and foreign affairs in her tenure as Secretary of State.

In fact the trio remind on of the bumbling antics of the 3 Stooges.  It would be funny, but the price to our security is too high for such jokes or jokers.

I have always wondered why Joe Biden was brought onto the ticket.  He brought no electoral votes, no region of the nation to swing towards Obama, he is a bumbler, a fool at times, yet he and not Hillary was chosen to be the VP.  Could it be that the idea of President Biden is so horrible to the nation that the Congress will allow Obama to do anything to prevent that from happening?  Does Joe Biden make Obama safe from impeachment?  If so, why the change of heart?

This is all speculation and will not matter if Obama's polls continue to drop.  Who is going to vote for a President with a 20% or less approval rating?  Pretty much no one.  So regardless of who is on the ticket in 2012, as things look right now, Obama is a one-term President and should be considered a lame duck.

America's Foreign Policy Leaders!

Sphere: Related Content

Is There a Candidate Seriously Addressing ANYTHING Right Now?

Ladies and gentlemen, I've been on hiatus for my Christmas, spending time with my family, dealing with some personal crisis and whatnot. However, I've been keeping an eye on the news and the blogs and, frankly, I'm disgusted with our crop of candidates--both democrat and Republican.

Coming into the Iowa caucus, a perfect opportunity has presented itself for someone to step forward from both packs and distinguish themselves as the man we need to lead this country.

Yes, I purposely stated "Man"...I do NOT believe HRC is in any way qualified, now or ever, to lead this country, and frankly, would not be able to withstand her nails-on-chalkboard voice for any length of time.

If you want a torture method, tape an endless loop of her screechings and use that on detainees. While you're at it, superimpose pictures of Pelosi, Reed, Soros and the mushroom cloud over the screechings--the subliminal images alone should cause even the most insane jihadi to self-implode.

However, I digress.

Earlier this week, former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. Each of the candidates gave their obligatory condolence speeches, and some flubbed their message. Most "got it" right in that this is one more example of the extremism we are currently engaged in fighting (at least the Republicans did), while the democrats continued their whining about negotiations and discussions.

Now, the only attention I see is how Huckabee flubbed his message.

Okay--he flubbed his message. Big whooping deal.

Let's cut to the chase and reality here.

Since that day, not one candidate (that I can see or find) has addressed with any kind of seriousness, what actually HAPPENED and what that reality MEANS to us here in the US. And, yes, it DOES mean something here to us. Pakistan is a nuclear power. Bhutto was affiliated with the Taliban (Google it guys, before you start in on me--I'm not going to do your work for you). Pakistan, while shaky, IS an ally of the US.

So, how are these candidates going to handle something like this should they be elected? What are their plans? Surely they must have SOMETHING laid out for such an eventuality?

Like I said, the perfect opportunity to distinguish themselves from the pack. And not one, NOT ONE, has even made the effort. Instead, we're being treated to the same song and dance that's been force-fed to us throughout this disgustingly long campaign period.

Well, guess what?

I'm not voting for anyone on the democrat ticket because they're all a bunch of godless, power crazed loons who would offer up their grandmother's necks for the chopping block if it would further their agenda--or their children's necks. In a heartbeat.

I'm not voting for a former first lady who can't clarify her position as anything other than a spurned wife while in the White House, who believes in the Communist Manifesto, who has mastered the art of concealment and shredding while taking illegal money and who whines when she's asked a "difficult" question regarding policy--all before stripping both the Arkansas governor's mansion and the White House of furniture and goods at the taxpayer expense. A thief and liar. And someone who claims she didn't know about her husband's peccadilloes, someone so clueless, is not someone who has the necessary "instincts" to run a country.

I'm not voting for a closet muslim who refuses to give proper respect to either our flag or our national anthem, wants to "prove" his patriotism by this lack of respect, has no experience beyond a few years in Washington and editing the Harvard Law Review and who has no substance to fill his suit. However, he's become very good at land scams and insider trading.

I'm not voting for a metrosexual who has to hide behind his sick wife's skirts to fight his battles for him, who pledges to help the poor while indulging in spa days and $400 haircuts--and who pretends to channel the voices of distressed infants in their mother's wombs to juries.

I'm not voting for a man on his 3rd marriage who registers as a Republican yet acts like a liberal while bragging about his Catholicism and flaunting his disregard for his own faith--I don't care how he acted during 9/11--his personal life is a train wreck and if he can't get control of his personal life, how the HELL can he run a country?

I'm not voting for a man who claims to be a Christian minister, who again registers as a Republican yet taxes people outrageously and would give tax/college tuition breaks to illegals while ignoring the needs of American citizens, one who also dipped into public funds for his private spending. What IS it about that Arkansas water?

I'm not voting for a man who claims he's conservative--but his record shows it's only a "recent" conversion--after allowing same sex marriages in Massachusetts and flip-flopping on the abortion issue. Yes, he balanced the budget there. Yes, he ran the SLC Olympic games (under tremendous scandal). However, now he's decided to "parse" what he's "seen" as far as who marched with whom in the civil rights marches--and sounds much too Clintonian in his justifications (define "IS"). And, while trying to be all things to all people, he's decided to emulate another democrat, JFK, in his "belief" statement.

Well, people, I have many mormon relatives and friends. If the above weren't enough, I find, deep down, against all open-mindedness I thought I had regarding religion, I find I am indeed offended by the mormon belief system and can not, in good conscience, vote for THIS particular mormon. Most mormons are well meaning people--very family and community oriented, they pull together with each other during good times and bad. However, those who have reached a certain point in the hierarchy? I don't now nor will I ever trust them, whether they be named Romney or Reid.

I haven't ruled out voting for McCain--he was in fact my choice when he ran against Bush.

Time changes things, though. While McCain is an admirable man with many admirable traits, he isn't presidential material. His stance on immigration is wrong and he is intractable in that area. McCain-Feingold didn't do him any favors, either. Faced with the enemy we are facing--and will be facing for a very long time--he is not the hard-core leader we need because of his personal experiences as a POW. He would simply be ineffective and we need leadership, not ineffectiveness.

I haven't ruled out Thompson yet either; however, he needs to get off his butt and DO something. He has not shown the dynamics needed--dynamics we know are there--to convince people he would be an effective leader in this time of need.

Paul is a loon and Kucinich is right there with him--they need to take up residence together on that spaceship. Needless to say, neither is getting my vote. I MAY have considered some of Paul's policies before he showed his complete screwiness, but his simple isolationism in the face of the extremism we're fighting is completely disingenuous and guaranteed to put this country into instant third-world country status.

Then we have the wanna-be's, those who want to rule by proxy.

Those like Gore and his global warming hysteria. How can someone so blatantly anti-American, so blatantly broken by living in his father's shadow, so utterly spoiled and whiny, have such an impact on America? How is he able to pull the wool over so many people's eyes? Two reasons--one, they want to be fooled and two, they are just as spoiled, idiotic and whiny as he is and want to believe the world revolves around them. Unfortunately, he is dangerous to the economy of this country by his short-sightedness, hypocrisy and greed.

Get it through your heads, people--global warming is a scam--period. The earth has been going through warming and cooling periods since time immemorial. There's not a damn thing man can do to change it, short of sanctioning the sun, the axis tilt, etc. And that, realistically speaking, isn't going to happen. So, pull your heads out of your asses and instead of buying those carbon offsets to enrich Gore even further, invest in some common sense.

Now that's not to say you can't do things yourself to save yourself some money and help keep things nice--weatherstrip your home (saves on power bills), if you can afford it and you live somewhere it's feasible, invest in solar heating and cooling (I can't afford it or I would--living in the Southwest, we have an average of 300 sunny days a year), perform periodic maintennance on your vehicle, plan your trips to save gas--all of that is good and helps save money in the long run protecting YOUR resources while doing your part. But for heaven's sake, what's being advocated by Gore and his rabid, frothing band of fools is ridiculous at best.

Oh and along those lines? Who's going to disband the EPA? Because in order to wean ourselves off foreign oil, as all you libtards are screaming for, we're going to have to upset some caribou in Alaska, some fish in the Gulf and some deer in the Rockies. You plain can't have it both ways. Then we can be independent of foreign sources. While we're at it, who's going to monitor the mercury levels in the landfills when all those mercury filled lightbulbs (those we're going to have to use instead of incandescents) hit those landfills? Hmmm? Did y'all think about that?

All part of the rule by proxy greed of Gore and you lemmings have fallen for it.

All that being said, who is going to distinguish themselves by facing the situation in Pakistan? Who is going to address this issue? Who has a plan? Who will be the leader we need?

Who, then, will distinguish themselves as the "Leader of the Pack"?

Below is a link I happened to find while searching for an appropriate picture. It revealed to me my ideal candidate is none other than.....Duncan Hunter. Take a visit, take the survey. You may surprise yourself.

In the meantime, start demanding some seriousness from the candidates regarding foreign policy in the wake of the Bhutto assassination, the craziness of global warming, the issues of independence from foreign oil and the mercury alone in the landfills against the screeching of the church of gore--real issues, real answers.

Not this pablum you're insisting on force feeding us.

www.selectsmart.com/PRESIDENT

Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell here.

Sphere: Related Content