Thursday, May 31, 2012
”This is a emergency,we don't have time to think!” #tcot #tlot #aynrand #teaparty
RRD:In 1966,in a review of Capote's In Cold Blood for The Objectivist,the reviewer wrote that if one wished to place a book in a time capsule ,so that future generations could see what led to the Second Dark Age,In Cold Blood would be it.(Or at least one of the books)(fn1)
Frankly the list of what to include grows with each day.
And at times I wonder whether there will be any future generations left,or even any sentient life left,in the universe,to read or care.
Roger Simon's drivel does not reach those depths,but it is nonetheless a beautiful illustration of the mindset which is destroying the GOP.
Arguing that Liberals can be changed(& pointing to himself as a alleged example) Simon then says:
"Meanwhile, the time is late. We all have work to do and it is not bickering with each other or wondering whether our candidate is conservative enough or whether he will betray us. You have already had three and a half years of Barack Obama. Do you have any idea what another four and a half will bring?"
Roger L. Simon » Changing Minds in Crunch Time
http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/05/29/changing-minds-in-crunch-time/?singlepage=true
RRD:This is priceless,seriously.
I am reminded of the character in Atlas Shrugged who said "This is a emergency!We don't have time to think!"
So we must "change liberals" by declaring that whether the Republican candidate--who enacted the prototype for Obamacare--is a conservative,is IRRELEVANT?!? What type of Liberal will be persuaded by the argument that
the candidates ideas & consistency are irrelevant if he is a Republican,but relevant if it is Obama because ”we've got to beat Obama!”
Why?
What has Obama done that is wrong?
In order to answer that question with any degree of seriousness you will have to criticize Obama's ideology,& since--in fact--Romney's is similar in many respects,you must criticize Romney's ideology.
This is precisely why I & others opposed Romney's candidacy. It is at least understandable,(though mistaken in my view)that someone on the right would look at Romney,& look at Obama & say ”Romney is a statist but the practical effect of his presidency will be less destructive than Obama's”
But how on earth do you persuade someone that Romney's statism is good statism,but Obama's is bad statism. It's preposterous. Either the Individual Mandate is a violation of Individual Rights or it isn't.
Either Global Warming is occurring
or it isn't. There cannot be two standards,one for Democrats & one for Republicans. That does not mean that you cannot vote for Romney,but you cannot say:”Who cares about Romney's political ideology,now let me tell you why Obama's political ideology is disastrous”
Simon wants to ”eat his ideas &.then have them after he eats them”.
He wants to somehow win over liberals not by saying ”this is right & this is wrong,& here's why”,but by saying ”this is wrong when a Democrat does it,but it doesn't matter when a Republican does it".
To wage a ideological battle without discussing Romney's ideology(& the ideology of Republicans more broadly), means--in practice--to wage a war of ideas that does not take ideas seriously.
It is a exercise in partisan hackwork. It is a hypocritical,self-defeating joke.
So how do you "change liberals",Robert?
You don't.
People change their own views by their own choice,you can present your arguments but you cannot force someone to agree with you.
Not "you must not" YOU CANNOT.
Except for the clinically insane every individual controls his own mind,& only that individual can change it.
I do know of Liberals who have become Objectivists or Conservatives, but none are idiotic enough to change their views when presented with this kind of nonsensical foolishness.
Yet Simon's worldview is unfortunately quite widespread among the ”beltway/establishment types”(a phrase I use to refer to a particular mindset). Ayn Rand summed this mindset up
perfectly when she wrote: ....”What is the moral stature of those who are afraid to proclaim that they are the champions of freedom? What is the integrity of those who outdo their enemies in smearing, misrepresenting, spitting at, and apologizing for their own ideal? What is the rationality of those who expect to trick people into freedom, cheat them into justice, fool them into progress, con them into preserving their rights, and, while indoctrinating them with statism, put one over on them and let them wake up in a perfect capitalist society some morning? These are the “conservatives”—or most of their intellectual spokesmen”...
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/conservatives.html
Ayn Rand wrote that in the 1960's. It is true,we don't have time;to continue on this ”practical” suicide path. Vote in any way that you wish,the battle will be won,or lost,through reason.
I for one will support anyone tolerable in the House & Senate & fight for the right ideas & leave it to Simon etal to pursue their own ”practical” course. Footnotes: fn1
Note Ayn Rand ended her relationship with the Brandens in 1968 & did not regard any work they published since then to be part of Objectivism.(To put it mildly)
I borrow Barbara Branden's metaphor because I find it apt,& my use of it no more implies a endorsement of her other views or statements than my use of quotes by Nietzsche,Dostoevsky or G.B. Shaw implies a endorsement of their views. The Objectivist Feb 1966/5:2
Review of In Cold Blood by Truman Capote by Barbara Branden
Frankly the list of what to include grows with each day.
And at times I wonder whether there will be any future generations left,or even any sentient life left,in the universe,to read or care.
Roger Simon's drivel does not reach those depths,but it is nonetheless a beautiful illustration of the mindset which is destroying the GOP.
Arguing that Liberals can be changed(& pointing to himself as a alleged example) Simon then says:
"Meanwhile, the time is late. We all have work to do and it is not bickering with each other or wondering whether our candidate is conservative enough or whether he will betray us. You have already had three and a half years of Barack Obama. Do you have any idea what another four and a half will bring?"
Roger L. Simon » Changing Minds in Crunch Time
http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/05/29/changing-minds-in-crunch-time/?singlepage=true
RRD:This is priceless,seriously.
I am reminded of the character in Atlas Shrugged who said "This is a emergency!We don't have time to think!"
So we must "change liberals" by declaring that whether the Republican candidate--who enacted the prototype for Obamacare--is a conservative,is IRRELEVANT?!? What type of Liberal will be persuaded by the argument that
the candidates ideas & consistency are irrelevant if he is a Republican,but relevant if it is Obama because ”we've got to beat Obama!”
Why?
What has Obama done that is wrong?
In order to answer that question with any degree of seriousness you will have to criticize Obama's ideology,& since--in fact--Romney's is similar in many respects,you must criticize Romney's ideology.
This is precisely why I & others opposed Romney's candidacy. It is at least understandable,(though mistaken in my view)that someone on the right would look at Romney,& look at Obama & say ”Romney is a statist but the practical effect of his presidency will be less destructive than Obama's”
But how on earth do you persuade someone that Romney's statism is good statism,but Obama's is bad statism. It's preposterous. Either the Individual Mandate is a violation of Individual Rights or it isn't.
Either Global Warming is occurring
or it isn't. There cannot be two standards,one for Democrats & one for Republicans. That does not mean that you cannot vote for Romney,but you cannot say:”Who cares about Romney's political ideology,now let me tell you why Obama's political ideology is disastrous”
Simon wants to ”eat his ideas &.then have them after he eats them”.
He wants to somehow win over liberals not by saying ”this is right & this is wrong,& here's why”,but by saying ”this is wrong when a Democrat does it,but it doesn't matter when a Republican does it".
To wage a ideological battle without discussing Romney's ideology(& the ideology of Republicans more broadly), means--in practice--to wage a war of ideas that does not take ideas seriously.
It is a exercise in partisan hackwork. It is a hypocritical,self-defeating joke.
So how do you "change liberals",Robert?
You don't.
People change their own views by their own choice,you can present your arguments but you cannot force someone to agree with you.
Not "you must not" YOU CANNOT.
Except for the clinically insane every individual controls his own mind,& only that individual can change it.
I do know of Liberals who have become Objectivists or Conservatives, but none are idiotic enough to change their views when presented with this kind of nonsensical foolishness.
Yet Simon's worldview is unfortunately quite widespread among the ”beltway/establishment types”(a phrase I use to refer to a particular mindset). Ayn Rand summed this mindset up
perfectly when she wrote: ....”What is the moral stature of those who are afraid to proclaim that they are the champions of freedom? What is the integrity of those who outdo their enemies in smearing, misrepresenting, spitting at, and apologizing for their own ideal? What is the rationality of those who expect to trick people into freedom, cheat them into justice, fool them into progress, con them into preserving their rights, and, while indoctrinating them with statism, put one over on them and let them wake up in a perfect capitalist society some morning? These are the “conservatives”—or most of their intellectual spokesmen”...
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/conservatives.html
Ayn Rand wrote that in the 1960's. It is true,we don't have time;to continue on this ”practical” suicide path. Vote in any way that you wish,the battle will be won,or lost,through reason.
I for one will support anyone tolerable in the House & Senate & fight for the right ideas & leave it to Simon etal to pursue their own ”practical” course. Footnotes: fn1
Note Ayn Rand ended her relationship with the Brandens in 1968 & did not regard any work they published since then to be part of Objectivism.(To put it mildly)
I borrow Barbara Branden's metaphor because I find it apt,& my use of it no more implies a endorsement of her other views or statements than my use of quotes by Nietzsche,Dostoevsky or G.B. Shaw implies a endorsement of their views. The Objectivist Feb 1966/5:2
Review of In Cold Blood by Truman Capote by Barbara Branden
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Meet Rabbi Obama!Sage to the Sages!Prophet!Messiah! (In his own mind ) #2012 #tcot #teaparty
Obama’s Absurd Claim About Judaism « Commentary Magazine
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/30/barack-obama-absurd-claim-about-judaism-bible/
”Apparently, Barack Obama told a visiting contingent of Conservative Jewish rabbis that he probably knows more about Judaism than any other president—on the same day that he referred to “Polish death camps.” For that last remark he apologized, but the one about Judaism is far more telling. In the first place, the claim is transparently absurd. We can quickly pass over the fact that John Adams and James Madison, among the most educated men in the world at the time, knew Hebrew as well as Latin and Greek and just say that the president is, to put it mildly, punching above his weight here. So let’s move on to the fact that every president until the modern era knew more about Judaism than Barack Obama because the Bible was the one book every literate person knew, and the Bible includes the books Christians call the “Old Testament,” and a working knowledge of the Old Testament certainly is the best introduction to “Judaism” there is. Earlier presidents did not learn the Talmud, of course, but if Barack Obama ever has, that would come as news to me.”...
RRD:Why did Obama stop at claiming to know more about Judaism than any previous President?Why not more than Maimonides?Or more than Hillel?Or more than Akiva?Why not more than Solomon?
For that matter,why not more than Moses?
Or..perhaps....could it be...that Obama wrote The Torah himself!
For some reason whenever I hear Obama praise himself :praise his own alleged wisdom,& his imaginary accomplishments I think of this scene from Good Will Hunting:
[Great Movie Scenes] Good Will Hunting - Bar Scene - YouTube
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/30/barack-obama-absurd-claim-about-judaism-bible/
”Apparently, Barack Obama told a visiting contingent of Conservative Jewish rabbis that he probably knows more about Judaism than any other president—on the same day that he referred to “Polish death camps.” For that last remark he apologized, but the one about Judaism is far more telling. In the first place, the claim is transparently absurd. We can quickly pass over the fact that John Adams and James Madison, among the most educated men in the world at the time, knew Hebrew as well as Latin and Greek and just say that the president is, to put it mildly, punching above his weight here. So let’s move on to the fact that every president until the modern era knew more about Judaism than Barack Obama because the Bible was the one book every literate person knew, and the Bible includes the books Christians call the “Old Testament,” and a working knowledge of the Old Testament certainly is the best introduction to “Judaism” there is. Earlier presidents did not learn the Talmud, of course, but if Barack Obama ever has, that would come as news to me.”...
RRD:Why did Obama stop at claiming to know more about Judaism than any previous President?Why not more than Maimonides?Or more than Hillel?Or more than Akiva?Why not more than Solomon?
For that matter,why not more than Moses?
Or..perhaps....could it be...that Obama wrote The Torah himself!
For some reason whenever I hear Obama praise himself :praise his own alleged wisdom,& his imaginary accomplishments I think of this scene from Good Will Hunting:
[Great Movie Scenes] Good Will Hunting - Bar Scene - YouTube
Pat Leahy anti-semite #jcot #tcot
Pat Leahy’s Bad Faith | Washington Free Beacon
http://freebeacon.com/pat-leahys-bad-faith/ ...”While debating an amendment sponsored by Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.) that would examine exactly how many Palestinian refugees benefit from U.S. tax dollars, Leahy expressed that the proposal does not put “the United States’ interests first.” “Frankly, Mr. Chairman, as a member of this committee, I always look at what is in the United States’ interest first and foremost, and this would hurt the United States’ interests,” Leahy said, emphasizing the words “United States.” “It may give a momentary advantage to one side or the other after we spend all that money, but it hurts the United States’ interests,” Leahy said.”....
RRD:This is said by a lunatic who literally shouted down another panelist on Nightline,because the other panelist dared to suggest that torture of Al-Qaeda members might sometimes be necessary to prevent a terrorist attack. Leahy,(literally)screamed: ”We are not going to debate torture!”.
The appropriate response to this being: ”brother you are free to NOT debate whatever you want,but this ain't your show & you do not get to decide what the rest of us debate”.
Unfortunately that was not said & this creature was permitted to have his way due to his tantrum.
And no opposing torture is not anti-american,but I find it interesting that his definition of ”putting America first” entails:
prohibiting torture under all circumstances even if it means permitting a nuclear bomb to destroy New York City,even if the only way to prevent the attack was through torture.And yet it also does not permit anything perceived as being critical of the Palestinians.(Though it does permit the use of anti-semitic slogans)
http://freebeacon.com/pat-leahys-bad-faith/ ...”While debating an amendment sponsored by Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.) that would examine exactly how many Palestinian refugees benefit from U.S. tax dollars, Leahy expressed that the proposal does not put “the United States’ interests first.” “Frankly, Mr. Chairman, as a member of this committee, I always look at what is in the United States’ interest first and foremost, and this would hurt the United States’ interests,” Leahy said, emphasizing the words “United States.” “It may give a momentary advantage to one side or the other after we spend all that money, but it hurts the United States’ interests,” Leahy said.”....
RRD:This is said by a lunatic who literally shouted down another panelist on Nightline,because the other panelist dared to suggest that torture of Al-Qaeda members might sometimes be necessary to prevent a terrorist attack. Leahy,(literally)screamed: ”We are not going to debate torture!”.
The appropriate response to this being: ”brother you are free to NOT debate whatever you want,but this ain't your show & you do not get to decide what the rest of us debate”.
Unfortunately that was not said & this creature was permitted to have his way due to his tantrum.
And no opposing torture is not anti-american,but I find it interesting that his definition of ”putting America first” entails:
prohibiting torture under all circumstances even if it means permitting a nuclear bomb to destroy New York City,even if the only way to prevent the attack was through torture.And yet it also does not permit anything perceived as being critical of the Palestinians.(Though it does permit the use of anti-semitic slogans)
Discontent among Florida Jews towards Obama's Israel policy is growing #jcot #tcot
RRD:I have long rolled my eyes at the claim(made by my fellow Jews on the right),that Obama will lose even a statistically significant portion of the Jewish vote over his treatment of Israel. I may have been overly pessimistic. If these reports are accurate,then there is more discontent among the American Jewish community than I thought.
Much more. While these are only a handful of cases,they are from a area where ANY public criticism of Obama & the Democrats by the Jewish community is practically unheard of (& when there is criticism,it is almost never reported.)
I have some familiarity with Florida, & except for the Cuban-American areas it is largely,solidly Democratic.
The Florida Jewish community is so solidly Democratic,that a politically conservative Jewish Floridian would not be surprised to see a photoshopped picture of Obama holding the both the Ten Commandments & a copy ”Dreams of my Father” in his hands,in the home of a Jewish neighbor.(Disgusted,but not surprised) I still believe that Obama will win the majority of the Jewish vote(on average 60-70% of American Jews vote for the Democrat,so there would have to be a MASSIVE shift for Obama to lose the Jewish vote,and I don't see that happening yet),but he may come in with the smallest percentage since Carter if these reports are at all accurate. Note:due to copyright I am paraphrasing some of this content. On to the stories: RRD:Earlier this month a group of Jews critical of Obama's hostility towards Israel,stood up & waved Israeli flags to protest Susan Rice's speech at the B’nai Torah Congregation in Boca Raton.(fn1)
See:
Shame - Obama campaign treats Jews like criminals at Boca Raton synagogue - YouTube
Jewish Protesters Ejected from Amb. Susan Rice Event at Boca Raton Synagogue > New English Review
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/42038 Further the Washington Beacon reports discontent among other Florida Jews. See: Bimah Brawl | Washington Free Beacon
http://freebeacon.com/bimah-brawl/ The Beacon reports:
That Florida Rabbi Sam Intrada, "a self -described lifelong Democrat " said:
“I see a trend here in South Florida where some synagogues of late are only presenting prominent speakers who represent partisan policy perspectives, and other points of view are silenced,” ... “The liberal idea of pluralism is grossly lacking in these situations.”...“This trend to keep out centrist, moderate, mainstream concerns about Israel and stifling discussion about them is very painful to me,” .... “many people in these synagogues are troubled about the situation.”....“I do not know who is applying pressure to prohibit such discussion, but it is a travesty,” The Beacon:
”Wasserman Schultz, known for her aggressive pro-Obama tactics, was originally scheduled to deliver a speech about Israel during a Shabbat service at Temple Israel, a self -described “progressive Reform congregation” (fn2)that boasts a largely liberal membership.
Stanley Tate, a highly regarded philanthropist and Republican activist, objected to the presentation of a one-sided political speech about the Jewish state and proposed to offer a rebuttal. Ben Kuehne, the synagogue’s Democrat -aligned president , refused to give Tate a platform, causing the wealthy member to resign from the temple and take a delegation of prominent members with him.”... See also: Temple Israel cancels Wasserman Schultz speech - Florida - MiamiHerald.com
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/24/2816210/temple-israel-cancels-wasserman.html RRD: Tate also claims about 30 synagogue congregants have quit as a result.
Kuehne,is a Miami defense attorney who served as a legal counsel to former Vice President Al Gore during the 2000 presidential election recount,& is reportedly a Obama surrogate.
Wasserman-Schultz also spoke to a Aventura,Miami Congregation the Aventura Turnberry Jewish Center.(fn3)
The Beacon reports that Eytan Laor,a congregant of the Aventura Turnberry Jewish Center,said that Wasserman-Schultz
.... “spent time talking about the Obama-Israel relationship,”
and that Wasserman-Schultz said that
..“Behind closed doors, Israel has had no better friend then Barack Obama,”
Laor expressed concerns that: “the alternative side is not being given a chance to talk,” and that “There’s not really any debate allowed. The only ones allowed to speak are members of the administration.”
Laor added that he spent months trying to arrange for Rep.Allen West to speak at the Aventura Turnberry Jewish Center.
Wasserman Schultz was also scheduled to speak Tuesday evening at Adat Shalom congregation in Detroit.
This led to criticism by Detroit Jews.
See: Talking Tachlis: Debbie Does Detroit - Tonight 6 PM Adat Shalom Synagogue
http://talkingtachlis.blogspot.com/2012/05/debbie-does-detroit-tonight-6-pm-adat.html Footnotes:
fn1.
Note:Boca Raton is in Palm Beach County,the northernmost of the three counties in the ”Tri-County area" that makes up what is popularly called ”South Florida”; the three counties being Miami-Dade,Broward(home to Ft.Lauderdale),& Palm Beach.The Florida Keys,for some reason,are not considered to be part of what is commonly called "South Florida"even though they are the Southernmost part of Florida,perhaps due to their small population.
fn2.
American Jews are divided into several denominations.
Reform Jews make up the vast majority of American Jews.
The Reform school of thought is known as "Liberal" or "Progressive" in other countries.
This is NOT a political category,(the beliefs of some Reform Jews notwithstanding).
The Conservative denomination--again not a political category--is the second major school,& the Orthodox denomination is the third major school. In addition to the "big three" there are also the Reconstructionists (a new denomination that broke off from the Conservatives,no relation to the Christian Reconstructionists ) and the various Ultra-Orthodox denominations,and assorted other denominations.
While it is true that--statistically --Reform Jews are overwhelmingly politically liberal,(& that the Ultra-Orthodox tend to be more Republican)there is no political oath of allegiance involved in belonging to a denomination.(e.g. Sen.Joseph Lieberman is Orthodox,there are Libertarian Reform Jews & so forth)
fn3.
Aventura is in northernmost Miami-Dade county,bordering the overwhelmingly Democratic Broward County.
Much more. While these are only a handful of cases,they are from a area where ANY public criticism of Obama & the Democrats by the Jewish community is practically unheard of (& when there is criticism,it is almost never reported.)
I have some familiarity with Florida, & except for the Cuban-American areas it is largely,solidly Democratic.
The Florida Jewish community is so solidly Democratic,that a politically conservative Jewish Floridian would not be surprised to see a photoshopped picture of Obama holding the both the Ten Commandments & a copy ”Dreams of my Father” in his hands,in the home of a Jewish neighbor.(Disgusted,but not surprised) I still believe that Obama will win the majority of the Jewish vote(on average 60-70% of American Jews vote for the Democrat,so there would have to be a MASSIVE shift for Obama to lose the Jewish vote,and I don't see that happening yet),but he may come in with the smallest percentage since Carter if these reports are at all accurate. Note:due to copyright I am paraphrasing some of this content. On to the stories: RRD:Earlier this month a group of Jews critical of Obama's hostility towards Israel,stood up & waved Israeli flags to protest Susan Rice's speech at the B’nai Torah Congregation in Boca Raton.(fn1)
See:
Shame - Obama campaign treats Jews like criminals at Boca Raton synagogue - YouTube
Jewish Protesters Ejected from Amb. Susan Rice Event at Boca Raton Synagogue > New English Review
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/42038 Further the Washington Beacon reports discontent among other Florida Jews. See: Bimah Brawl | Washington Free Beacon
http://freebeacon.com/bimah-brawl/ The Beacon reports:
That Florida Rabbi Sam Intrada, "a self -described lifelong Democrat " said:
“I see a trend here in South Florida where some synagogues of late are only presenting prominent speakers who represent partisan policy perspectives, and other points of view are silenced,” ... “The liberal idea of pluralism is grossly lacking in these situations.”...“This trend to keep out centrist, moderate, mainstream concerns about Israel and stifling discussion about them is very painful to me,” .... “many people in these synagogues are troubled about the situation.”....“I do not know who is applying pressure to prohibit such discussion, but it is a travesty,” The Beacon:
”Wasserman Schultz, known for her aggressive pro-Obama tactics, was originally scheduled to deliver a speech about Israel during a Shabbat service at Temple Israel, a self -described “progressive Reform congregation” (fn2)that boasts a largely liberal membership.
Stanley Tate, a highly regarded philanthropist and Republican activist, objected to the presentation of a one-sided political speech about the Jewish state and proposed to offer a rebuttal. Ben Kuehne, the synagogue’s Democrat -aligned president , refused to give Tate a platform, causing the wealthy member to resign from the temple and take a delegation of prominent members with him.”... See also: Temple Israel cancels Wasserman Schultz speech - Florida - MiamiHerald.com
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/24/2816210/temple-israel-cancels-wasserman.html RRD: Tate also claims about 30 synagogue congregants have quit as a result.
Kuehne,is a Miami defense attorney who served as a legal counsel to former Vice President Al Gore during the 2000 presidential election recount,& is reportedly a Obama surrogate.
Wasserman-Schultz also spoke to a Aventura,Miami Congregation the Aventura Turnberry Jewish Center.(fn3)
The Beacon reports that Eytan Laor,a congregant of the Aventura Turnberry Jewish Center,said that Wasserman-Schultz
.... “spent time talking about the Obama-Israel relationship,”
and that Wasserman-Schultz said that
..“Behind closed doors, Israel has had no better friend then Barack Obama,”
Laor expressed concerns that: “the alternative side is not being given a chance to talk,” and that “There’s not really any debate allowed. The only ones allowed to speak are members of the administration.”
Laor added that he spent months trying to arrange for Rep.Allen West to speak at the Aventura Turnberry Jewish Center.
Wasserman Schultz was also scheduled to speak Tuesday evening at Adat Shalom congregation in Detroit.
This led to criticism by Detroit Jews.
See: Talking Tachlis: Debbie Does Detroit - Tonight 6 PM Adat Shalom Synagogue
http://talkingtachlis.blogspot.com/2012/05/debbie-does-detroit-tonight-6-pm-adat.html Footnotes:
fn1.
Note:Boca Raton is in Palm Beach County,the northernmost of the three counties in the ”Tri-County area" that makes up what is popularly called ”South Florida”; the three counties being Miami-Dade,Broward(home to Ft.Lauderdale),& Palm Beach.The Florida Keys,for some reason,are not considered to be part of what is commonly called "South Florida"even though they are the Southernmost part of Florida,perhaps due to their small population.
fn2.
American Jews are divided into several denominations.
Reform Jews make up the vast majority of American Jews.
The Reform school of thought is known as "Liberal" or "Progressive" in other countries.
This is NOT a political category,(the beliefs of some Reform Jews notwithstanding).
The Conservative denomination--again not a political category--is the second major school,& the Orthodox denomination is the third major school. In addition to the "big three" there are also the Reconstructionists (a new denomination that broke off from the Conservatives,no relation to the Christian Reconstructionists ) and the various Ultra-Orthodox denominations,and assorted other denominations.
While it is true that--statistically --Reform Jews are overwhelmingly politically liberal,(& that the Ultra-Orthodox tend to be more Republican)there is no political oath of allegiance involved in belonging to a denomination.(e.g. Sen.Joseph Lieberman is Orthodox,there are Libertarian Reform Jews & so forth)
fn3.
Aventura is in northernmost Miami-Dade county,bordering the overwhelmingly Democratic Broward County.
Jewish Protesters thrown out of Boca Raton Synagogue for criticizing Susan Rice #jcot #2012
Shame - Obama campaign treats Jews like criminals at Boca Raton synagogue - YouTube
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
What Obama could do in #Syria vs what he is doing #tcot #jcot
Rubin Reports » How Can Obama’s Middle East Policy Possibly Get Worse? Answer: Look at Syria
http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/05/29/how-can-obamas-middle-east-policy-possibly-get-worse-answer-look-at-syria/
Excerpt: ”But so what ? It’s still possible to come up with a better policy than this, a policy that would make Obama look good as well as serve U.S. interests. He could call for Assad’s overthrow; back truly moderate oppositionists; subvert Islamist influence; and send arms and money, but only to the moderates. In order to portray himself as decisive, heroic, and a friend of democracy, Obama could take every possible overt and covert opportunity to weaken Assad, even helping at a low cost to create a no -fly zone and safe havens. None of this is going to happen. Instead, though, he turns over dealing with the opposition to an Islamist regime in Turkey and subcontracts dealing with the regime to a pro -regime Russian government. I’d say that Obama’s policy in the region could not easily be worse but who knows what’s next, especially if there’s a second term?”
http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/05/29/how-can-obamas-middle-east-policy-possibly-get-worse-answer-look-at-syria/
Excerpt: ”But so what ? It’s still possible to come up with a better policy than this, a policy that would make Obama look good as well as serve U.S. interests. He could call for Assad’s overthrow; back truly moderate oppositionists; subvert Islamist influence; and send arms and money, but only to the moderates. In order to portray himself as decisive, heroic, and a friend of democracy, Obama could take every possible overt and covert opportunity to weaken Assad, even helping at a low cost to create a no -fly zone and safe havens. None of this is going to happen. Instead, though, he turns over dealing with the opposition to an Islamist regime in Turkey and subcontracts dealing with the regime to a pro -regime Russian government. I’d say that Obama’s policy in the region could not easily be worse but who knows what’s next, especially if there’s a second term?”
Obama campaign urges loyal citizens to report thoughtcrimes against THE ONE #2012 #tcot Obama campaign manager herself fails fact-check
Obama campaign web site lets supporters report criticism of President - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-campaign-sets-up-web-page-to-report-criticism-of-president?CID=examiner_alerts_article ”According to Tapper, Cutter cited a Market Watch blog report claiming that "federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since President Eisenhower."But, Tapper wrote, "the Market Watch item has been refuted by several fact checkers as
severely flawed, notwithstanding its citation by White House press secretary Jay Carney...”
Monday, May 28, 2012
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Imprisoned #Iranian blogger Hossein Ronaghi Maleki denied medical treatment unless he ”confesses” #iranelections #humanrights #tcot #p2
International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran – Deprivation of Medical Care Jeopardizes Political Prisoner’s Life
http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2012/05/maleki-hunger-strike/ ”(25 May 2012) The Iranian Judiciary should immediately provide medical care for political prisoner Hossein Ronaghi Maleki and avoid another human tragedy, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran said today. It should also end its systematic policy of denying medical care to prisoners of conscience, thereby causing them permanent physical harm and disability, the Campaign added. On 19 May 2012, Ronaghi began a hunger strike to protest the denial of his medical furlough. Ronaghi suffers from kidney failure and has been routinely denied medical furlough since his incarceration. “This is the fifth time he is undergoing surgery and all physicians, including the Medical Examiner, have ordered special medical care for him post -operation,” Ronaghi’s father, Ahmad Ronaghi Maleki, told the Campaign. “But they want Hossein to return to prison after his surgery, a prison that has no medical facilities, suitable nutrition, nor kidney specialists.” “Using medical attention as leverage to bring prisoners to their knees is a shameful and inhumane practice, which Iranian intelligence has been using repeatedly,” said Hadi Ghaemi, spokesperson for the Campaign. “Prisoners’ health conditions should not be compromised under any circumstances.” The Campaign has collected firsthand testimonies of purposeful deprivations of urgent medical care for prisoners of conscience. In situations where prisoners are allowed to seek medical treatment at hospitals, prison officials sometimes insist that they remain shackled even during examinations such as x-rays and scans. These shackles render the scans technically impossible, and therefore medical staff often cannot perform proper examinations for these prisoners. “For months, my son underwent torture by his interrogators, until he lost one of his kidneys,” Ahmad Ronaghi told the Campaign. “I have a complaint against my son’s interrogators, the IRGC officials, and Judge Pirabbasi, who issued my son’s ruling,” he added. Ronaghi’s mother told the Campaign in April 2012, “They want Hossein to accept his charges and write a confession letter before they allow him leave. They told us several times that the IRGC does not agree with his release unless he confesses” Warrant Issued for Mother of Jailed Blogger Hossein Ronaghi-Maleki | Persian2English
http://persian2english.com/?p=20216
URGENT ACTION! GRAVELY ILL JAILED IRANIAN BLOGGER HOSSEIN MALEKI ON HUNGER STRIKE! HOW YOU CAN HELP! - CNN iReport
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-794268
http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2012/05/maleki-hunger-strike/ ”(25 May 2012) The Iranian Judiciary should immediately provide medical care for political prisoner Hossein Ronaghi Maleki and avoid another human tragedy, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran said today. It should also end its systematic policy of denying medical care to prisoners of conscience, thereby causing them permanent physical harm and disability, the Campaign added. On 19 May 2012, Ronaghi began a hunger strike to protest the denial of his medical furlough. Ronaghi suffers from kidney failure and has been routinely denied medical furlough since his incarceration. “This is the fifth time he is undergoing surgery and all physicians, including the Medical Examiner, have ordered special medical care for him post -operation,” Ronaghi’s father, Ahmad Ronaghi Maleki, told the Campaign. “But they want Hossein to return to prison after his surgery, a prison that has no medical facilities, suitable nutrition, nor kidney specialists.” “Using medical attention as leverage to bring prisoners to their knees is a shameful and inhumane practice, which Iranian intelligence has been using repeatedly,” said Hadi Ghaemi, spokesperson for the Campaign. “Prisoners’ health conditions should not be compromised under any circumstances.” The Campaign has collected firsthand testimonies of purposeful deprivations of urgent medical care for prisoners of conscience. In situations where prisoners are allowed to seek medical treatment at hospitals, prison officials sometimes insist that they remain shackled even during examinations such as x-rays and scans. These shackles render the scans technically impossible, and therefore medical staff often cannot perform proper examinations for these prisoners. “For months, my son underwent torture by his interrogators, until he lost one of his kidneys,” Ahmad Ronaghi told the Campaign. “I have a complaint against my son’s interrogators, the IRGC officials, and Judge Pirabbasi, who issued my son’s ruling,” he added. Ronaghi’s mother told the Campaign in April 2012, “They want Hossein to accept his charges and write a confession letter before they allow him leave. They told us several times that the IRGC does not agree with his release unless he confesses” Warrant Issued for Mother of Jailed Blogger Hossein Ronaghi-Maleki | Persian2English
http://persian2english.com/?p=20216
URGENT ACTION! GRAVELY ILL JAILED IRANIAN BLOGGER HOSSEIN MALEKI ON HUNGER STRIKE! HOW YOU CAN HELP! - CNN iReport
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-794268
Friday, May 25, 2012
Yemenite herbalist Sharifa Amr beheaded for ”sorcery”[WARNING GRAPHIC pic of head] #tcot #no2sharia
Yemen: Sharia Supporters Behead 'Sorceress' :: Raymond Ibrahim
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/2012/04/yemen-sharia-supporters-behead-sorceress ”According to the Arabic website Al Shorfa, an al-Qaeda affiliated group in Yemen, called Ansar al-Sharia (or the "Supporters of Sharia Law") beheaded a woman on April 11 for "practicing magic and sorcery." Members of the group broke into the home of Sharifa Amr—a local healer who used natural herbs to treat sick people—"beheaded her, and then hung her severed head in front of the home of another popular healer in the region, as a warning that he might share her fate." The remainder of the report notes how several Yemeni officials condemned the attack—not because it is absurd to murder herbalists -deemed -sorcerers, but because the "Supporters of Sharia" ironically contradicted Sharia, at least somewhat. According to Sheik Jabri Ibrahim, general director of Yemen's Ministry of Endowments and Guidance, punishing "sorcerers and magicians" can only be performed after "first summoning the magicians to a council with the ulema [Sharia scholars], who are obligated to advise and persuade him, showing him evidence from Sharia that Islam forbids the practice of sorcery and magic." Google Translate Original source Al Shorfa http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ar&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.al-shorfa.com%2Fcocoon%2Fmeii%2Fxhtml%2Far%2Ffeatures%2Fmeii%2Ffeatures%2Fmain%2F2012%2F04%2F17%2Ffeature-01
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/2012/04/yemen-sharia-supporters-behead-sorceress ”According to the Arabic website Al Shorfa, an al-Qaeda affiliated group in Yemen, called Ansar al-Sharia (or the "Supporters of Sharia Law") beheaded a woman on April 11 for "practicing magic and sorcery." Members of the group broke into the home of Sharifa Amr—a local healer who used natural herbs to treat sick people—"beheaded her, and then hung her severed head in front of the home of another popular healer in the region, as a warning that he might share her fate." The remainder of the report notes how several Yemeni officials condemned the attack—not because it is absurd to murder herbalists -deemed -sorcerers, but because the "Supporters of Sharia" ironically contradicted Sharia, at least somewhat. According to Sheik Jabri Ibrahim, general director of Yemen's Ministry of Endowments and Guidance, punishing "sorcerers and magicians" can only be performed after "first summoning the magicians to a council with the ulema [Sharia scholars], who are obligated to advise and persuade him, showing him evidence from Sharia that Islam forbids the practice of sorcery and magic." Google Translate Original source Al Shorfa http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ar&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.al-shorfa.com%2Fcocoon%2Fmeii%2Fxhtml%2Far%2Ffeatures%2Fmeii%2Ffeatures%2Fmain%2F2012%2F04%2F17%2Ffeature-01
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Heather Wilson is member of #RINO group which wants to keep the "good parts" of #obamacare Her website says she supports "repealing and replacing thee bill but does not say what Obamacare would be replaced with.
FYI:
New Mexico Republican Senator Heather Wilson is member of RINO group in favor of keeping the ”good parts” of Obamacare.She herself favors ”repealing & replacing the bill” but does not explain what Obamacare would be replaced with.She has supported Kyoto-like environmental regs,& TARP & boasts of her bi-partisanship so there is reason to be concerned.
The American Spectator : Greg Sowards Battles Queen RINO http://spectator.org/archives/2012/05/24/greg-sowards-battles-queen-rin/1 ”In an ominous development that may affect conservative support for a second spot on a Romney ticket, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has joined with Murkowski in opposing conservative Sowards. In Christie's case, the endorsement came at a $2,500 a head Wilson fundraiser in New York's primo 21 Club. Christie has been making forays around the country, recently for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in Virginia and a Kentucky Lincoln Day Dinner. New Jersey media believe his actions are designed to help Romney -- and possibly help Christie onto the Romney ticket. Which makes Christie's fundraising for Wilson over her conservative opponent a curious approach.
Perhaps the most glaring indication of the "Queen RINO" tag was Wilson's membership in a group called the "Republican Main Street Partnership." A visit to the group's website shows that it is not devoted to conservatism but rather its chief objective is "to further a centrist, pragmatic Republican agenda." ....
”A startling example of the latter -- the passive acceptance of big government and a watered down leftist agenda -- is the group's opposition to repealing Obamacare. Says this Republican group: "We believe that the provisions of Obamacare that are not working should be repealed, that those provisions that are working should be retained…." Issues | Heather Wilson
http://heatherwilson.com/issues/
HEALTHCARE ”I am running for the Senate because I trust people more than I trust government to make the best decisions for themselves and their families. But that is not what we have today with Obamacare. Obamacare does nothing to control the spiraling cost of care. It raises taxes, cuts Medicare, costs more, and gives people less control over their health care decisions. For the first time in American history, every citizen will be required to purchase a government approved product. If Washington can mandate how people must spend their money, there is no limit to government power. The law is unconstitutional and if it is not thrown out by the Supreme Court, I will fight to make sure it is repealed and replaced.”
New Mexico Republican Senator Heather Wilson is member of RINO group in favor of keeping the ”good parts” of Obamacare.She herself favors ”repealing & replacing the bill” but does not explain what Obamacare would be replaced with.She has supported Kyoto-like environmental regs,& TARP & boasts of her bi-partisanship so there is reason to be concerned.
The American Spectator : Greg Sowards Battles Queen RINO http://spectator.org/archives/2012/05/24/greg-sowards-battles-queen-rin/1 ”In an ominous development that may affect conservative support for a second spot on a Romney ticket, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has joined with Murkowski in opposing conservative Sowards. In Christie's case, the endorsement came at a $2,500 a head Wilson fundraiser in New York's primo 21 Club. Christie has been making forays around the country, recently for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in Virginia and a Kentucky Lincoln Day Dinner. New Jersey media believe his actions are designed to help Romney -- and possibly help Christie onto the Romney ticket. Which makes Christie's fundraising for Wilson over her conservative opponent a curious approach.
Perhaps the most glaring indication of the "Queen RINO" tag was Wilson's membership in a group called the "Republican Main Street Partnership." A visit to the group's website shows that it is not devoted to conservatism but rather its chief objective is "to further a centrist, pragmatic Republican agenda." ....
”A startling example of the latter -- the passive acceptance of big government and a watered down leftist agenda -- is the group's opposition to repealing Obamacare. Says this Republican group: "We believe that the provisions of Obamacare that are not working should be repealed, that those provisions that are working should be retained…." Issues | Heather Wilson
http://heatherwilson.com/issues/
HEALTHCARE ”I am running for the Senate because I trust people more than I trust government to make the best decisions for themselves and their families. But that is not what we have today with Obamacare. Obamacare does nothing to control the spiraling cost of care. It raises taxes, cuts Medicare, costs more, and gives people less control over their health care decisions. For the first time in American history, every citizen will be required to purchase a government approved product. If Washington can mandate how people must spend their money, there is no limit to government power. The law is unconstitutional and if it is not thrown out by the Supreme Court, I will fight to make sure it is repealed and replaced.”
”Optimism” in talks with #Tehran Iran’s lead negotiator preemptively closing the door on compromise, Iran’s military holding war games aimed at P5+1 members #irannuclear #iranelections
Media Hypes Manufactured Iran Optimism « Commentary Magazine
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/24/media-hypes-manufactured-iran-optimism-nuclear-negotiations/
”That’s really what passes for a “constructive atmosphere” these days, isn’t it ? Iran’s lead negotiator preemptively closing the door on compromise, Iran’s military holding war games aimed at P5+1 members, and the West pretending that none of that is true. “Despite little progress,” by the by, the next round of negotiations have been set for mid -June. It’s almost difficult to understand why the Israelis have no confidence in the talks.”
RRD:And no,being pessimistic about the likelihood that negotiations with the IRI will succeed is not the same as wanting a avoidable war,& being ”optimistic” does not mean that you are ”for peace”.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/24/media-hypes-manufactured-iran-optimism-nuclear-negotiations/
”That’s really what passes for a “constructive atmosphere” these days, isn’t it ? Iran’s lead negotiator preemptively closing the door on compromise, Iran’s military holding war games aimed at P5+1 members, and the West pretending that none of that is true. “Despite little progress,” by the by, the next round of negotiations have been set for mid -June. It’s almost difficult to understand why the Israelis have no confidence in the talks.”
RRD:And no,being pessimistic about the likelihood that negotiations with the IRI will succeed is not the same as wanting a avoidable war,& being ”optimistic” does not mean that you are ”for peace”.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Taliban is not even waiting for our 2014 surrender to literally poison schoolgirls #gwot #tcot
Our Shameful Afghanistan Legacy « Commentary Magazine http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/23/our-shameful-afghanistan-legacy/ ”More than 120 schoolgirls and three teachers have been poisoned in the second attack in as many months blamed on conservative radicals in the country’s north, Afghan police and education officials said on Wednesday…. Afghanistan’s intelligence agency, the National Directorate of Security (NDS), says the Taliban appear intent on closing schools ahead of a 2014 withdrawal by foreign combat forces”... RRD:I do not believe that we should stay in Afghanistan solely for the sake of Womens Rights,I believe that we should stay in Afghanistan to prevent innocent American men,women & children from being butchered.While there we should give protection to any seeking refuge from misogynists there.Our purpose there is not to fix the countries ills,but neither can we hand over girls fleeing persecution to their killers. However I must ask,in the midst of some leftist's ”defeat dances”,whether any of those who demand that we intervene militarily in Libya,Syria etal,(ala ”the duty to protect” types ),if any of them feel any qualms at all about leaving girls to be murdered & poisoned,in a country which we occupied?
And if so,do they intend to urge Obama to give these girls asylum? And what if the ”first female/feminist” President does not feel like doing so,for fear that the Taliban will ”perceive” him as being ”imperialistic”?
And since it would anger the Taliban for us to interfere with their ”nationalistic” campaign of restoring their ”sisters” to their ”clothes of dignity”--with the result that they may decide to make our surrender of the country to them more difficult. Contrary to Conservative stereotypes I do know of quite a number of Liberal Feminists(of both genders) who are genuinely concerned with the rights of women & girls in Islamic countries.
But I also know of a number who
are simply concerned with having people THINK that they are good,humane liberals,and when the dilettanti say ”be concerned with the well being of people in country X where OUR PRESIDENT wants us to intervene”,then they will be concerned--for as long as it is faddish to do so-- and then when it is fashionable to say ”It's interesting when people die....”,then they will say that.(Assuming that they even acknowledge the reality of what is going on the world)
And yes Conservatives,there are comparable individuals on the right whose concern for certain issues seems to change depending upon the letter after the Presidents name.
And if so,do they intend to urge Obama to give these girls asylum? And what if the ”first female/feminist” President does not feel like doing so,for fear that the Taliban will ”perceive” him as being ”imperialistic”?
And since it would anger the Taliban for us to interfere with their ”nationalistic” campaign of restoring their ”sisters” to their ”clothes of dignity”--with the result that they may decide to make our surrender of the country to them more difficult. Contrary to Conservative stereotypes I do know of quite a number of Liberal Feminists(of both genders) who are genuinely concerned with the rights of women & girls in Islamic countries.
But I also know of a number who
are simply concerned with having people THINK that they are good,humane liberals,and when the dilettanti say ”be concerned with the well being of people in country X where OUR PRESIDENT wants us to intervene”,then they will be concerned--for as long as it is faddish to do so-- and then when it is fashionable to say ”It's interesting when people die....”,then they will say that.(Assuming that they even acknowledge the reality of what is going on the world)
And yes Conservatives,there are comparable individuals on the right whose concern for certain issues seems to change depending upon the letter after the Presidents name.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Obama overrode Generals on Afghanistan so that America could "absorb" a terrorist attack. #tcot #gwot #jcot
Barack Obama Will Not Defeat The Taliban | RedState
http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2012/05/21/barack-obama-will-not-defeat-the-taliban/
...”The aide told Mr. Obama that he believed military leaders had agreed to the tight schedule to begin withdrawing those troops just 18 months later only because they thought they could persuade an inexperienced president to grant more time if they demanded it. “Well,” Mr. Obama responded that day, “I’m not going to give them more time.
A year later, when the president and a half-dozen White House aides began to plan for the withdrawal, the generals were cut out entirely. There was no debate, and there were no leaks” ”“I think he hated the idea from the beginning,” one of his advisers said of the surge. “He understood why we needed to try, to knock back the Taliban. But the military was ‘all in,’ as they say, and Obama wasn’t.” …”By early 2011, Mr. Obama had seen enough. He told his staff to arrange a speedy, orderly exit from Afghanistan. This time there would be no announced national security meetings, no debates with the generals. Even Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton were left out until the final six weeks. The key decisions had essentially been made already when Gen. David H. Petraeus, in his last months as commander in Afghanistan, arrived in Washington with a set of options for the president that called for a slow withdrawal of surge troops. He wanted to keep as many troops as possible in Afghanistan through the next fighting season, with a steep drop to follow. Mr. Obama concluded that the Pentagon had not internalized that the goal was not to defeat the Taliban.” ”Asked to actually set a meaningful new direction or expend scarce political capital even on an ongoing shooting war, his instinct is to first procrastinate, then kick the can down the road for a while, and ultimately throw in the towel. Rousing the nation to take controversial actions is above his pay grade. The choices before us are indeed difficult. But we have abandoned Afghanistan before, and lived to regret it. Let us hope that we do not again.” From the Washington Post:
Bob Woodward book details Obama battles with advisers over exit plan for Afghan war http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/21/AR2010092106706.html .."Obama rejected the military's request for 40,000 troops as part of an expansive mission that had no foreseeable end. "I'm not doing 10 years," he told Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a meeting on Oct. 26, 2009. "I'm not doing long-term nation -building. I am not spending a trillion dollars."[RRD:Odd,I thought that's what he claimed to be doing here in the U.S.?] Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." ....
RRD:I do not think any of the three thousand Americans who were slaughtered on September 11 are "stronger" for having been killed.
Nor do I feel strengthened by their destruction.
But ”Obama did not mean that”?
What did he mean?
”He meant,well,you see it's sorta like Nietzsche...you see..that which kills some of our civilians makes us stronger as a nation!”
As for ”absorbing” a terrorist attack,if Obama,himself,wishes to personally "absorb a terrorist attack" that is his concern. If he wishes innocent civilians to do so,that is treason. The role of a government is not to treat its innocent men,women and children as bloody sponges and pulverized human sacrifices who exist to ”absorb” attacks.
Oh,you're misquoting Obama,After all,Obama also said that
"We'll do everything we can to prevent it...” Lip service. "I'm not doing 10 years," .... "I'm not doing long-term nation -building. I am not spending a trillion dollars." ..." Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." .... So Obama was told by our Generals that they needed more troops,& he overrode them,he told them that ”HE” was "not doing 10yrs",and then when he was "barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. " he ignored those warnings,and said:
"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." ....
Perhaps it has not dawned on Obama that one is not,in fact, ”doing everything” to prevent a terrorist attack by following the demonstrably disastrous Clinton policy of permitting the enemy establish a safe-haven while you respond to attacks by occasionally flinging cruise missiles at the enemy.
But given Woodward's account of Obama being ”barraged” with warnings about the dangers of such a course, I don't believe for one second that Obama is that ignorant. The Obama/Biden ”strategy” of leaving our enemies in power,while flinging missiles at them,
is quite in line with the Clinton "strategy" that permitted Al-qaeda to murder our troops in Khobar & to butcher our citizens in the first World Trade Center attack.It is the ”strategy” which permitted Al-Qaeda to bomb our embassys in Kenya and Tanzania with impunity;killing 12 Americans,& 200 Kenyans & 11 Tanzanians,it is the ”strategy” which permitted Al-Qaeda to try to massacre civilians at LAX,and to succeed in butchering our sailors who were "safe" and "at peace" on the USS Cole. This suicidal course climaxed in the mass-slaughter of nearly 3,000 Americans,in a attack on the Pentagon--our military command structure,and in a attempt,by "cave dwelling barbarians” who ”cannot really threaten us,with their box cutters” ,to decapitate the government of the most powerful nation on earth;by crashing a jetliner into the White House. This is what Obama refers to when he says that we can ”absorb” another attack,&,when he says that 9/11 made ”us” stronger. Ask yourself again,is this the language of someone who is committed to doing whatever is necessary & just to defend the United States?Or is it someone willing to doing "whatever is necessary" except for what is actually necessary:Wiping out our enemies overseas because a defensive war is doomed to defeat. But you say:
”Robert many conservatives also believe that we should not engage in nation building,are they also anti-american?” Many do,and most of those that I know of who take that position advocate "unleashing hell",and "letting our soldiers fight"(which they are not permitted to do under the suicidal ROE:Rules of Engagement).What they don't do is to speak of the mass slaughter of innocents as making us "stronger" or as something "we" can absorb.
Nor do they have Obama's background as a Alinskite,with "spiritual advisors" like his pet hate-mongers the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ("damn America" ),and Father Pfleger "how dare you insult Farrakhan”....& ”America has done the rape,& America has got to pay the price”(both of these men were initially--officially--part of Obama's political campaign as members of his religious advisory board. fn1)
And does anyone else remember the obscene spectacle of Obama giving ”shout-outs” to his supporters,while the rest of us waited--for 3 minutes--for Obama to get around to addressing the Fort Hood massacre? Obama gives a shout-out before addressing tragedy - YouTube
Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting | NBC Chicago
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html
Obama is a leftist,of the hypocritical breed that loathes the religion of the ”bitter clingers” while ignoring or downplaying the misogyny,& totalitarianism of the Islamists.Hardly surprising,since he has,among his advisors,someone who believes that:"The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance.”(fn2)
(What world?Did you travel to our world from a alternate universe,much like the characters in the TV show Sliders would journey to other worlds?
What's it like?Do rivers of lemonade run uphill?Are their Round-Squares?Do people age backwards like Benjamin Button?)
Footnotes: fn1.
Archived Blog: Obama's Other Pastor Problem http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/obamas_other_pastor_problem.html Obama Says Controversial Pastor Gone From Campaign; Church Fires Back - ABC News
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452990&page=1#.T7vfU-XCsUk ”Rev.Wright was part of the Obama campaign, as a member of the candidate's religious advisory board.
But, as reported by ABC News' Sunlen Miller, during an interview Friday with MSNBC's Keith Olberman, Sen. Obama confirmed that Rev. Wright is no longer on the Obama campaign spiritual advisory committee.” fn2 Obama adviser says Sharia Law is misunderstood - Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/6274387/Obama-adviser-says-Sharia-Law-is-misunderstood.html
”Miss Mogahed appeared alongside Hizb ut Tahrir's national women's officer, Nazreen Nawaz. During the 45-minute discussion, on the Islam Channel programme Muslimah Dilemma earlier this week, the two members of the group made repeated attacks on secular "man -made law" and the West's "lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism". They called for Sharia Law to be "the source of legislation" and said that women should not be "permitted to hold a position of leadership in government". Miss Mogahed made no challenge to these demands and said that "promiscuity" and the "breakdown of traditional values" were what Muslims admired least about the West. She said: "I think the reason so many women support Sharia is because they have a very different understanding of sharia than the common perception in Western media. "The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance. "The portrayal of Sharia has been oversimplified in many cases." Sharia in its broadest sense is a religious code for living, which decrees such matters as fasting and dressing modestly. However, it has also been interpreted as requiring the separation of men and women. It also includes the controversial "Hadd offences", crimes with specific penalties set by the Koran and the sayings of the prophet Mohammed. These include death by stoning for adultery and homosexuality and the removal of a hand for theft. Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with "maximum criminal punishments" and "laws that... to many people seem unequal to women," but added: "Part of the reason that there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood.”
RRD:
”Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with "maximum criminal punishments" and "laws that... to many people seem unequal to women” Unequal to women?
Poppycock!
The laws favoring the murder of adulterers are somewhat unequal ,but both end up good & dead just the same!
The law is quite fair as regards the murder of apostates.Both are,again,equally dead. But why don't you take it up with the Islamists who were sitting next to you Ms.Mogahed?
Or with the Islamists who are stoning,beheading and beating women throughout the
Medievalist Muslim World?
Why don't you explain to the ”misunderstanders” of the Feminist religion of Islam that adulterers should not be beheaded,that Gays should not be murdered,that apostates should not killed? You could make it a joint tour with Karen ”Mohammed is a prophet for our times” Armstrong.
There are women--like Irshad Manji & Asra Noumani--who consider themselves Muslims,but who believe in a non-literalist interpretation of the Quran.They are willing to confront the Islamists & condemn them,& to acknowledge the reality of what is going on in the Muslim World.
But they must endure death threats as a result.
No it is much safer to attack the American”racists” who will respect your free-speech rights,rights which are denounced by your co-panelists while you remain silent.
Oh,and yes many Muslims DO support murdering adulterers & apostates: Muslim Publics Divided on Hamas and Hezbollah | Pew Global Attitudes Project http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/
http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2012/05/21/barack-obama-will-not-defeat-the-taliban/
...”The aide told Mr. Obama that he believed military leaders had agreed to the tight schedule to begin withdrawing those troops just 18 months later only because they thought they could persuade an inexperienced president to grant more time if they demanded it. “Well,” Mr. Obama responded that day, “I’m not going to give them more time.
A year later, when the president and a half-dozen White House aides began to plan for the withdrawal, the generals were cut out entirely. There was no debate, and there were no leaks” ”“I think he hated the idea from the beginning,” one of his advisers said of the surge. “He understood why we needed to try, to knock back the Taliban. But the military was ‘all in,’ as they say, and Obama wasn’t.” …”By early 2011, Mr. Obama had seen enough. He told his staff to arrange a speedy, orderly exit from Afghanistan. This time there would be no announced national security meetings, no debates with the generals. Even Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton were left out until the final six weeks. The key decisions had essentially been made already when Gen. David H. Petraeus, in his last months as commander in Afghanistan, arrived in Washington with a set of options for the president that called for a slow withdrawal of surge troops. He wanted to keep as many troops as possible in Afghanistan through the next fighting season, with a steep drop to follow. Mr. Obama concluded that the Pentagon had not internalized that the goal was not to defeat the Taliban.” ”Asked to actually set a meaningful new direction or expend scarce political capital even on an ongoing shooting war, his instinct is to first procrastinate, then kick the can down the road for a while, and ultimately throw in the towel. Rousing the nation to take controversial actions is above his pay grade. The choices before us are indeed difficult. But we have abandoned Afghanistan before, and lived to regret it. Let us hope that we do not again.” From the Washington Post:
Bob Woodward book details Obama battles with advisers over exit plan for Afghan war http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/21/AR2010092106706.html .."Obama rejected the military's request for 40,000 troops as part of an expansive mission that had no foreseeable end. "I'm not doing 10 years," he told Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a meeting on Oct. 26, 2009. "I'm not doing long-term nation -building. I am not spending a trillion dollars."[RRD:Odd,I thought that's what he claimed to be doing here in the U.S.?] Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." ....
RRD:I do not think any of the three thousand Americans who were slaughtered on September 11 are "stronger" for having been killed.
Nor do I feel strengthened by their destruction.
But ”Obama did not mean that”?
What did he mean?
”He meant,well,you see it's sorta like Nietzsche...you see..that which kills some of our civilians makes us stronger as a nation!”
As for ”absorbing” a terrorist attack,if Obama,himself,wishes to personally "absorb a terrorist attack" that is his concern. If he wishes innocent civilians to do so,that is treason. The role of a government is not to treat its innocent men,women and children as bloody sponges and pulverized human sacrifices who exist to ”absorb” attacks.
Oh,you're misquoting Obama,After all,Obama also said that
"We'll do everything we can to prevent it...” Lip service. "I'm not doing 10 years," .... "I'm not doing long-term nation -building. I am not spending a trillion dollars." ..." Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." .... So Obama was told by our Generals that they needed more troops,& he overrode them,he told them that ”HE” was "not doing 10yrs",and then when he was "barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. " he ignored those warnings,and said:
"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger." ....
Perhaps it has not dawned on Obama that one is not,in fact, ”doing everything” to prevent a terrorist attack by following the demonstrably disastrous Clinton policy of permitting the enemy establish a safe-haven while you respond to attacks by occasionally flinging cruise missiles at the enemy.
But given Woodward's account of Obama being ”barraged” with warnings about the dangers of such a course, I don't believe for one second that Obama is that ignorant. The Obama/Biden ”strategy” of leaving our enemies in power,while flinging missiles at them,
is quite in line with the Clinton "strategy" that permitted Al-qaeda to murder our troops in Khobar & to butcher our citizens in the first World Trade Center attack.It is the ”strategy” which permitted Al-Qaeda to bomb our embassys in Kenya and Tanzania with impunity;killing 12 Americans,& 200 Kenyans & 11 Tanzanians,it is the ”strategy” which permitted Al-Qaeda to try to massacre civilians at LAX,and to succeed in butchering our sailors who were "safe" and "at peace" on the USS Cole. This suicidal course climaxed in the mass-slaughter of nearly 3,000 Americans,in a attack on the Pentagon--our military command structure,and in a attempt,by "cave dwelling barbarians” who ”cannot really threaten us,with their box cutters” ,to decapitate the government of the most powerful nation on earth;by crashing a jetliner into the White House. This is what Obama refers to when he says that we can ”absorb” another attack,&,when he says that 9/11 made ”us” stronger. Ask yourself again,is this the language of someone who is committed to doing whatever is necessary & just to defend the United States?Or is it someone willing to doing "whatever is necessary" except for what is actually necessary:Wiping out our enemies overseas because a defensive war is doomed to defeat. But you say:
”Robert many conservatives also believe that we should not engage in nation building,are they also anti-american?” Many do,and most of those that I know of who take that position advocate "unleashing hell",and "letting our soldiers fight"(which they are not permitted to do under the suicidal ROE:Rules of Engagement).What they don't do is to speak of the mass slaughter of innocents as making us "stronger" or as something "we" can absorb.
Nor do they have Obama's background as a Alinskite,with "spiritual advisors" like his pet hate-mongers the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ("damn America" ),and Father Pfleger "how dare you insult Farrakhan”....& ”America has done the rape,& America has got to pay the price”(both of these men were initially--officially--part of Obama's political campaign as members of his religious advisory board. fn1)
And does anyone else remember the obscene spectacle of Obama giving ”shout-outs” to his supporters,while the rest of us waited--for 3 minutes--for Obama to get around to addressing the Fort Hood massacre? Obama gives a shout-out before addressing tragedy - YouTube
Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting | NBC Chicago
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html
Obama is a leftist,of the hypocritical breed that loathes the religion of the ”bitter clingers” while ignoring or downplaying the misogyny,& totalitarianism of the Islamists.Hardly surprising,since he has,among his advisors,someone who believes that:"The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance.”(fn2)
(What world?Did you travel to our world from a alternate universe,much like the characters in the TV show Sliders would journey to other worlds?
What's it like?Do rivers of lemonade run uphill?Are their Round-Squares?Do people age backwards like Benjamin Button?)
Footnotes: fn1.
Archived Blog: Obama's Other Pastor Problem http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/obamas_other_pastor_problem.html Obama Says Controversial Pastor Gone From Campaign; Church Fires Back - ABC News
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452990&page=1#.T7vfU-XCsUk ”Rev.Wright was part of the Obama campaign, as a member of the candidate's religious advisory board.
But, as reported by ABC News' Sunlen Miller, during an interview Friday with MSNBC's Keith Olberman, Sen. Obama confirmed that Rev. Wright is no longer on the Obama campaign spiritual advisory committee.” fn2 Obama adviser says Sharia Law is misunderstood - Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/6274387/Obama-adviser-says-Sharia-Law-is-misunderstood.html
”Miss Mogahed appeared alongside Hizb ut Tahrir's national women's officer, Nazreen Nawaz. During the 45-minute discussion, on the Islam Channel programme Muslimah Dilemma earlier this week, the two members of the group made repeated attacks on secular "man -made law" and the West's "lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism". They called for Sharia Law to be "the source of legislation" and said that women should not be "permitted to hold a position of leadership in government". Miss Mogahed made no challenge to these demands and said that "promiscuity" and the "breakdown of traditional values" were what Muslims admired least about the West. She said: "I think the reason so many women support Sharia is because they have a very different understanding of sharia than the common perception in Western media. "The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance. "The portrayal of Sharia has been oversimplified in many cases." Sharia in its broadest sense is a religious code for living, which decrees such matters as fasting and dressing modestly. However, it has also been interpreted as requiring the separation of men and women. It also includes the controversial "Hadd offences", crimes with specific penalties set by the Koran and the sayings of the prophet Mohammed. These include death by stoning for adultery and homosexuality and the removal of a hand for theft. Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with "maximum criminal punishments" and "laws that... to many people seem unequal to women," but added: "Part of the reason that there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood.”
RRD:
”Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with "maximum criminal punishments" and "laws that... to many people seem unequal to women” Unequal to women?
Poppycock!
The laws favoring the murder of adulterers are somewhat unequal ,but both end up good & dead just the same!
The law is quite fair as regards the murder of apostates.Both are,again,equally dead. But why don't you take it up with the Islamists who were sitting next to you Ms.Mogahed?
Or with the Islamists who are stoning,beheading and beating women throughout the
Medievalist Muslim World?
Why don't you explain to the ”misunderstanders” of the Feminist religion of Islam that adulterers should not be beheaded,that Gays should not be murdered,that apostates should not killed? You could make it a joint tour with Karen ”Mohammed is a prophet for our times” Armstrong.
There are women--like Irshad Manji & Asra Noumani--who consider themselves Muslims,but who believe in a non-literalist interpretation of the Quran.They are willing to confront the Islamists & condemn them,& to acknowledge the reality of what is going on in the Muslim World.
But they must endure death threats as a result.
No it is much safer to attack the American”racists” who will respect your free-speech rights,rights which are denounced by your co-panelists while you remain silent.
Oh,and yes many Muslims DO support murdering adulterers & apostates: Muslim Publics Divided on Hamas and Hezbollah | Pew Global Attitudes Project http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/
Monday, May 21, 2012
Islamic Jihad leader says Secular Egyptian candidates will die like Sadat #tcot #jcot
Islamists Threaten Insurgency Should Secularists Win Egypt Election « Commentary Magazine http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/20/islamists-threaten-insurgency-if-secularists-win-egypt-election/
”The victory of former prime minister Ahmad Shafiq or former Arab League chief Amr Musa in the coming presidential elections would lead some Islamic and non-Islamic groups to respond with “armed action.” “Thus, the fate of any of them who reaches the presidency will be like that of former President Anwar al-Sadat, who was assassinated,” Qasim said.”
”The victory of former prime minister Ahmad Shafiq or former Arab League chief Amr Musa in the coming presidential elections would lead some Islamic and non-Islamic groups to respond with “armed action.” “Thus, the fate of any of them who reaches the presidency will be like that of former President Anwar al-Sadat, who was assassinated,” Qasim said.”
Tehran Decided Long Ago on Nuclear Weapons Commentary #tcot #jcot
Iran Decided Long Ago on Nuclear Weapons « Commentary 05/21/2012 4:13 PM http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/21/iran-decided-long-ago-on-nuclear-weapons/ ”Not so – according to documents that the opposition group, Mojaheddin-e Khalq (MeK), recently leaked to the Western Press and first revealed in the German daily, Die Welt. According to the MeK, Iran’s clerical leadership continues to relentlessly seek a nuclear arsenal – their only imponderable being “when,” not “if.” The leaked material challenges the widely held belief that Iran suspended all weaponization activities in 2003. It offers evidence that Iran’s military program has since then only been restructured. It is now more elusive, functioning undercover in university labs and industrial facilities, but it is larger and more comprehensive than ever. Skeptics will doubt the authenticity of these findings. Yet, the MeK has a history of exposing other Iranian critical nuclear facilities – it exposed the then-secret Natanz enrichment facility in 2002 – and its revelations were confirmed by independent sources. A senior official from a Western intelligence organization, speaking anonymously, judged the information as “reliable.” A Vienna -based Western diplomat tracking Iran’s nuclear program confirmed this assessment: the information “coincides with what the International Atomic Energy Agency said in its report about Iran’s clandestine weaponization program.” The diplomat was alluding to an IAEA annex attached to the November 2011 quarterly report on Iran’s nuclear program, which delineated a similar structure to Iran’s military program – with one significant difference. The MeK findings are a “magnifying glass,” adding names, addresses and dates, detailing organizational links, and explaining at length the nature and significance of each department’s area of activity and responsibility. Most importantly, the documents linked a subdivision of the military program as the center in charge of the Fordow site near Qom, whose “size and configuration” as U.S. President Obama said in 2009, “is inconsistent with a peaceful program.” As if the MeK assertions were not enough, leaked imagery of a high explosive compression chamber needed to test nuclear -suitable explosive materials offered further proof of the nature of the Iranian program – one needs not test such explosive or invest in such sophisticated infrastructure if one’s goal is peaceful nuclear energy.”.....
Teacher ”explains” to student that it is illegal to criticize Obama #tcot #teaparty #tlot
RRD:Maybe the fascist witch thinks it's also illegal to vote against Obama?
NC Teacher Screams at Student: It’s Criminal to Criticize Obamahttp://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/20/NC-teacher-screams-student-Obama
”One student says, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?” The teacher says: “Not to my knowledge.” The student then cites the fact that Obama, in Dreams from My Father, admits to shoving a little girl. “Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” screams the teacher. Romney is “running for president. Obama is the president.” The student responds that both are “just men.” The teacher yells -- literally yells -- that Obama is “due the respect that every other president is due … Listen,” she continues, “let me tell you something, you will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom.” She yells over the student repeatedly, and yells at him that it's disrespect for him to even debate about Romney and Obama. The student says that he can say what he wants. “Not about him, you won’t,” says the teacher. The teacher : “Do you realize that people were arrested for saying things bad about Bush? Do you realize you are not supposed to slander the president ?” The student says that it would violate First Amendment rights to jail someone for such sentiments. “You would have to say some pretty f’d up crap about him to be arrested,” says the student. “They cannot take away your right to have your opinion … They can’t take that away unless you threaten the president.” Clearly, the student should be teaching the class, and the teacher should be reading the Constitution more often.”
RRD:”Now Robert don't make too much of this,these crackpots crop up & they're suspended or fired....” No she has not been fired,or suspended,the school board says this is ”a learning experience”.(fn1) Indeed it is;though not quite in the way that the school means.
The school--North Rowan High School in Spencer North Carolina--needs to be sued.Students sue over being told that they must say the pledge,they sue over prayer,they sue over Creationism,they should sue over this. And the School System Administration?It should be wiped out at the ballot box(If at all possible.I don't know the political makeup of Spencer North Carolina,it may be liberal)
But suppose they're Republicans?
RINOS you mean?
Replace them with people with some grasp of the Constitution of the United States.
And if there are any Progressives reading this and brushing it off,reread the exchange and replace the words Obama with Bush and Romney with Kerry and ask yourself whether or not you would respond by brushing off such behavior by a Republican teacher.
I would respond the same way--on principle--to both;would you? (Note:my purpose in posting the photo is not to equate Obama with the murderous thugs of 1984,or to imply that he was behind this,but to illustrate the Orwellian character of the teacher's worldview) Footnotes
fn1. Video stirs debate on teacher's actions in North class Salisbury, NC - Salisbury Post http://www.salisburypost.com/News/051912-North-teacher-on-video-qcd ”After reviewing a video in which a North Rowan High School teacher tells a student he can be arrested for speaking ill of President Barack Obama, the Rowan -Salisbury School System said it can be a learning experience.” ”Although two students provided the name of the teacher, the Post is not publishing it because officials within the school system would not confirm her identity and she could not be reached for comment”
Medieval Islamic art depicting the Prophet Muhammad in scenes from the Quran
With a few exceptions,all are roughly from the period of 1300-1500 a.d.They are illustrations of scenes from the Quran(possibly the Hadith also).They come from countries as diverse as Uzbekistan,Persia & Afghanistan & Turkey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
