I just read a collection of bumper-stickers sent me by one of my comrades-in-arms.

It’s got a bunch of ‘keepers’, but I like this one the best….

Don’t blame me. I voted for the American.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[But soft, what light through yonder bumper sticker breaks?]

This is a great deal of back and forth for two people basically in agreement.

(shrug) Good conversation goes that way, sometimes.

Our president belongs to the Democratic Party but he is not generically a democrat.

I’ll assume the small d on democrat is by intent, in which case, I’ll agree with you. If, on the other hand the lack of capitalization is an oversight on your part, I will stoutly disagree. I will suggest to you that the reason that he is so popular among democrats even after the last six months, is that what he is is what the majority of the Democrat party has become.

Chuck:

Because he may be facing such protests on the streets of America come the 2010 election

Actually the thought occurs to me that given his reaction to Iran, and the number of enemies in this country he’s made over that sorry response he’s just about assured himself mobs of angry protesters com 2010, and 2012.

Therefore, I give it a high probability that they will make every effort to ’steal’ the election.

It’s interesting that you should mention that. I was just now working on a piece with regards to ACORN. The implication there should be rather obvious.

Just got back from a weekend camping trip without media. The underlying point of my last comment is articulated more clearly by Victor Davis Hanson in the second of his reasons why Obama hasn’t spoken out for the dissidents in Iran.

I’m sorry if this sounds patently racist but I sincerely believe that there are a set of clearly identifiable prejudices held in common by African Americans of every economic and social stratum. Moreover that these prejudices are shame-based and rooted mainly in ignorance–often willful–of true history.

The belief that Europeans are more broadly and more cruelly racists than Orientals is merely one of these. The related absurdity that black people flourished under Islam is another.

For Barack Obama, as for many other African Americans, there is not much daylight between Christianity and Islam. No more than there is between the Reverend Wright and the Reverend Farrakhan.

Obama’s fresh new approach toward Islam requires a large show of respect for Islamic tradition. The mullahs and the ayatollahs in their turbans and flowing robes represent that tradition. The dissidents do not. They’re just pro Western same old, same old. Insufficiently ethnic and funky.

In his heart of hearts, Obama favors the authoritarian and traditional Muslim clerics. And for the shallowest of reasons.

This is a great deal of back and forth for two people basically in agreement.

Obama is a third world leader. He is guided by popular political fashion and that fashion is leftist. He is a shallow internationalist who doesn’t appreciate what makes the nation he presides over special. Worst of all he imagines himself morally and intellectually superior to the citizens he serves.

Obama spiritually vapid and far too sophisticated to be religious himself he is deeply reverent of Islam. So much cooler and funkier a faith than Christianity. So ethnic and indigenous. So angry and in-your-face. Great costumes, too. Aleikem Salaaam, brutha.

Obama doesn’t speak out for freedom or democracy because he has no reverence for freedom or democracy. Otherwise, he wouldn’t grovel before the Saudi king or call the decrepit religious dictator holding the Iranian people hostage Iran’s “Supreme Leader.”

Our president belongs to the Democratic Party but he is not generically a democrat. He is a constitutional lawyer but has no appreciation of the brilliance and towering moral spirit of the Founding Fathers. In his guts, Obama is rooting for the ayatollahs.

….strongly in support of the protesters.

Why?

Because he may be facing such protests on the streets of America come the 2010 election.

Think about it…..

….why have the Democrats been so strong on electronic voting machines?

In my personal opinion, it’s because you can fake a ballot on those. Whereas a paper ballot turned in by a person properly identified as being eligible to vote is much more difficult to fake.

The Democrats and Obama cannot afford to lose the 2010 election of Congress. And in light of all the damage Obama has done to the country in just the first six months of his ‘administration’….and the likelihood that the damage will be even worse by the next election….Congress will most likely change hands from Democrats to conservatives. Republican or not makes no difference to me.

Therefore, I give it a high probability that they will make every effort to ’steal’ the election. Just like the mullahs have done in Iran in order to maintain THEIR control of the country. In which case, we’ll see such civil disorders taking place in Tehran on the streets of America.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Be Prepared -- motto of the Boy Scouts of America]

You’re the one who doesn’t ‘get it’.
Here’s a concept you won’t be able to get your mind around;

The Revolution currently happening in Iran wouldn’t be possible but for George W Bush going into Iraq.

It was that act of ousting Saddam, which started this desire for democracy on the part of the people in the middle east, in Iraq certainly… but now Iran, as well. Do not make the mistake of thinking the two situations so isolated from each other. Being neighboring countries with less than well-protected borders, news of what’s changed for the better in Iraq has doubtless started filtering across the border, person to person.

Consider the changing and rather ironic dynamics here.

For all the animosity built up on the Iran- Iraq war and before, the degree of social isolation in Iraq because of Saddam, was actually a boon… a protectant against the influence of the rest of the world, from the point of view of the Iranian regime. Similarly, Afghanistan, run as it was by the thugs, also provided Iran with Isolation they couldn’t have purchased with any price of arms or money.

That’s important for this reason: Have you ever seen a dictatorship where isolation from free people wasn’t part of the mixture that made it possible? That isolation is increasingly disappearing.

I’ve suggested in the past that this was part of the reason for going into Iraq in the first place; to start that ball rolling. The momentum of history has changed as a result of that act of Bush in Iraq. It has spread to Iran, now, and best the Iranian regime can hope for is to delay it for a while, regardless of how this situation works out in the shorter term. The genie is out of the bottle, now.

Word about what is possible under a greater degree of individual freedom is hardly information that will be passed between the Iran Iraq and Afghanistan that existed as little as a decade ago. It can now, though, and we see the result. Islamic Extremeism is no longer flousihing, there.

Pakistan, now finds itself in a fight for it’s life with the extremists, but it does seem one they’ll win. Syria, is now isolated from other extremist states,Hamas driven by Syria and ruling Lebenon until recently through Hamas has been removed form power in Lebenon and so Syria will be increasingly unable to aid the cause of the extremists in any significant way. Eventually the pressure there will build to the point where it has in Iran, and freedom will take root there, as well. You think this a failure? I don’t.

Meanwhile, Obama won’t speak up, even denying moral support to the freedom seekers in Iran.

I’d call THAT a failed presidency, but then again, that’s me And about 70% of the rest of the country too. If you don’t understand any of that, may I suggest you address your questions to WSB’s morning man?

David Levavi:

Again, no argument. I think, though, you misread MY intent. Notice that in both the case of JFK and the case of Reagan, we didn’t go to war. Indeed, other than speaking out, not much else was required in those cases; speaking up for liberty was enough. Speaking the truth is enough. Moral support if you will.

Obama can’t bring himself to do that even in the defesnse of liberty. Understand, I’m not holding JFK up as an icon by any means, though I’m sure some of my readers, here will… Martin for example leaps to mind. But that I hold him as low as I do, furthers, not lessens my point… even he knew what was what, enough to speak the truth. Obama doesn’t.

America doesn’t want the failed policies and idealogies of conervatives. Period.

Why can’t you get it?

We have no argument re intention. Unfortunately, good intentions are nothing without execution. Kennedy’s behavior was mercurial, possibly the effect of all the speed he was doing.

The Invasion of the Bay of Pigs and the aftermath of the Trujillo assassination were black comedies. Tragic farces produced by an inexperienced president trying to prove himself and lacking the necessary resolve. Kennedy was plenty pugnacious but when the chips were down, he just didn’t have the cojones.

Kennedy, like Obama had loyal supporters from his old hood. Hard-nosed, limp-dicked and impeccably preppy anti-communist ideologues and policy wonks determined not to be humiliated by Krushy and the Commies.

Supporting Kennedy’s tough-talking, pipe smoking cronies, were that elite cabal who journalists style Wise Men. The eunuchs of Foggy Bottom who the Founding Fathers would have tarred and feathered and run across the Canadian border on a rail.

At one point during the instability following Trujillo’s assassination, gunbout diplomacy was decided on and a considerable fleet assembled, including helicopter and winged aircraft carriers and troop carriers full of marines

The State Department insisted that the ships steam no closer than 100 miles from the Dominican shore. The admiral protested that a fleet that couldn’t be seen was hardly intimidating to those on shore. So after some back and forth, State relented and allowed the fleet to stand only 50 miles offshore.

Circumstances in the Island of Hispaniola proceeded of their own momentum and this farce ended with waves of American fighters screaming over Dominican rooftops.

Were the Dominicans properly intimidated? No such thing. Dominicans like their long time leader Rafael Trujillo love America. Sweet, innocent folk, they stood out in the open and waived delightedly at the American jets treating them to the air show, shouting, “Viva la Imperialistas.”

Funny stuff except that Trujillo was butchered as were, in their turn his six assassins. And all because Kennedy and company along with the eunuchs at State were panicked by the success of Castro.

25. Sebastian Shaw:

Lincoln was assassinated, too. That is not why he is an icon.