Sunday, May 18, 2008

Bush Remarks Hit the Mark

Was I the only one who noticed Obama wearing a flag lapel yesterday as he was calling McCain a hypocrite? Listening to his diatribe, I had to wonder why he so vehemently reacted to the President's statements before the Israeli Knesset. The manly Obama openly challenged Bush and McCain to an open debate on foreign policy even though he ducks Hillary's challenge to debate at every opportunity. Are we really on the path to America's first "affirmative action" President?

President Bush touched a nerve yesterday when he went before the Israeli Knesset and criticized those who "believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals" as engaging in a "foolish delusion."

Judging by the outrage from Barack Obama, and many other major Democrats, it looks like Bush's barb hit the mark.

Obama, not surprisingly, immediately declared the president's remarks to have been aimed directly at him and branded them "a false political attack."

The White House insists otherwise and, of course, his words are entirely consistent with the principled position that Bush long ago staked out.

"Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them that they have been wrong all along," said Bush.

"We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.'

"We have an obligation to call this what it is: the false comfort of appeasement," Bush declared.

Well said. And entirely correct.

What exactly is it about those sentiments with which Obama takes issue?

It must be his willingness to sit down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - a man who, as presumptive GOP nominee John McCain put it yesterday, "is the head of a government that is a state sponsor of terrorism, that is responsible for killing brave young Americans, that wants to wipe Israel off the map [and] who denies the Holocaust."

Because while Obama insists that he has "never supported engagement with terrorists" - specifically citing Hamas - he has no problem meeting with those who pull the strings of groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.

There's no disagreement about that.

Last July, during a Council on Foreign Relations-sponsored Democratic debate, Obama was asked directly whether he would be "willing to meet separately, without preconditions, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea." (Emphasis added.)

His response: "I would" - adding that "the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them . . . is ridiculous."

But as McCain rightly asked: "What does he want to talk about?"

Is Obama so convinced of his powers of persuasion that he thinks he can personally turn Ahmadinejad from Hamas' banker into a flag-waving Zionist?

Or does he not understand that to treat with terror is to send the message that bloody-handed murder is a potential path to political success?


Or lack of depth and understanding?

Scant comfort, either way.

No wonder Obama was so reflexively defensive.


At 4:26 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

It seems to me that Obama is trying to appeal to as wide a voter base as possible.

Of course, all politicians pander for votes. But Obama's campaign has a messianic quality to it.

At the least, he's making promises he can't deliver.

IMO, Obama was particularly touchy about the matter posted here because he's been caught in an inconsistency about his "foreign policy."

PS: Great to have you back, AC! Please stay for a while this time--if you can, that is. I know that summer is coming.

At 5:39 PM, Blogger elmers brother said...

AC good to see you posting....missed you

hope all is well

At 10:22 PM, Blogger kevin said...

Welcome back AC.

OB may have been able to pull off his departure from the far left in the age of the old media. But now it looks like he may be the first candidate harpooned by youtube.

At 5:46 AM, Blogger Brooke said...

Hey, you've been missed! I thought you had totally quit.

Obama's reflexive defensiveness speaks a lot to his malignant narcissism, IMO. Everything is automatically about him, even though no names were mentioned.

At 5:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The DNC HAD to attack Bush in order to retain "credibility" with those individuals with whom the DNC is currently conducting illegal negotiations. Ever since Pelosi's violation of the Logan Act in Syria in '07, the DNC has been secretly negotiating with Middle Eastern terrorists (Jimmy Carter's ill-advised "junket" to talk to Hamas being but the most recent example).

The DNC is currently ACTIVELY pursuing their "own" separate and distinct foreign policy, one much different from "official" US policy. This is an extremely DANGEROUS precendent, that could undermine the Union achieved by Lincoln in 1865.

The DNC must be called to account. And since they have NOT been, I can only assume the worst, that our country's leaders no longer feel themselves constrained to follow the central tenets of the US Constitution.

Welcome back to the fray, AC...

At 7:02 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If, during a war, America's politicians cannot "hang together", then most assuredly, ALL Americans will "hang seperately.

At 9:15 AM, Blogger Rita Loca said...

AC, So good to read your post. Your voice has been missed!!!!

At 9:12 PM, Blogger Steve Harkonnen said...

I believe Obama's response was too knee-jerk, because the White House clearly stated that they were addressing Carter.

It sounds to me as if Obama is now shifting his political strategies where he'd be saying he never wants to attack anyone, and immediately is doing so against the President.

Glad to have found you again, Crusader; I hope all is well. This is a very trying election year for everyone.

At 10:04 PM, Blogger nanc said...

the truth hurts?

he's a pander bear. and, he comes in all the wright colors.

the obamanation doth protest too much - unfortunately, millions are buying into his "hope and change" scenario without any proof in the putting.

good to see you out and about, a.c.


At 3:47 PM, Blogger Z said...

I cringe every time I hear Obamanation, nanc! Loved it at first (abomination and all that), but am coming to realize we might BE an ObamaNation soon and I can't bear the thought.

Hello, AC...I don't know you because I'm new to this corner of the blogosphere, but I have heard that a lot of very good people think the world of you. I'm happy to find your blog. Since you've been scarce, allow me to say WELCOME BACK and I hope you stick around!

At 7:46 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Happy Memorial Day weekend, AC! Hope you've got your grilling supplies handy. Semper Paratus!

At 1:55 PM, Blogger Ducky's here said...


At 7:43 AM, Blogger Gayle said...

I welcome you back too, AC! :)

Obama! *sigh* It's gotten to the point where I can't stand to listen to him anymore. I predict though, (an easy predicion, to be sure) that now that he has been given the Primary by the DNC, even more dirt is going to come out on this guy. His Chicago affiliations are just the tip of the iceberg!

At 5:58 PM, Blogger Jeff ( Va. Rebel ) said...

Well , I know you're not going to like this either -

Just because you don't like or can't accept truth , does not diminish its validity . Can't say nobody told ya .

At 6:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like I said before...

At 5:45 PM, Blogger Gayle said...

They can't help it, FJ. They're brainwashed.

At 8:42 AM, Blogger david pasquinelli said...


At 2:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Either the Brits have got some real front in making videos Like This One or they realise that with Obama the U.S. will be in real trouble.

Tongue in cheek?


Post a Comment

<< Home

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket