Paling Around with Presidents Dictators



Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (R) gives U.S. President Barack Obama a copy of “Las Venas Abiertas de America Latina” by author Eduardo Galeano during a meeting at the Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain, Trinidad April 18, 2009.
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

A kinder, gentler PotUS:

Defending his brand of world politics, President Barack Obama said Sunday that he “strengthens our hand” by reaching out to enemies of the United States and making sure that the nation is a leader, not a lecturer, of democracy.

Obama’s foreign doctrine emerged across his four-day trip to Latin America, his first extended venture to a region of the world where resentment of U.S. power still lingers. He got a smile, handshakes and even a gift from incendiary leftist leader Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and embraced overtures of new relations from isolated Cuban President Raul Castro.

“The whole notion was that if we showed courtesy or opened up dialogue with governments that had previously been hostile to us, that that somehow would be a sign of weakness,” Obama said, recalling his race for the White House and challenging his critics today.

“The American people didn’t buy it,” Obama said. “And there’s a good reason the American people didn’t buy it _ because it doesn’t make sense.”

Of course Chavez and Castro would embrace Obama… why shouldn’t they be happy about this? It’s in their best interest. But are we gaining anything back in return? Is this “Obama doctrine” really a strength or a show of weakness?

Newt Gingrich on Sunday:

“This does look a lot like Jimmy Carter. Carter tried weakness and the world got tougher and tougher because the predators, the aggressors, the anti-Americans, the dictators, when they sense weakness, they all start pushing ahead.”

Maybe he’d care to extend that “reaching out/turning enemies into friends” policy to non-states as well, and not just lefty dictators- er, I mean presidents (no I don’t)?


Al Qaeda’s second-in-command told Muslims not to be fooled by U.S. President Barack Obama’s policies which, he said on an Islamist website on Monday, are no different to those of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

“America came to us with a new face, with which it is trying to fool us. He is calling for change, but (he aims) to change us so that we abandon our religion and rights,” Ayman al-Zawahri said in an audio recording on the website.

Zawahri said Obama’s election was an acknowledgement that Bush’s policy had failed.

“Obama did not change the image of America among Muslims…America is still killing Muslims,” said the Egyptian militant leader.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It’s a sign of stupidy and delusion. In other words, being a member of the left.

I may have the verbal equivalent for the optical illusion, that when some people look at it, they see a candle stick and other people see two people about to kiss.

muslim: any last words to the video before I cut off your head?
american-leftist: I apologize for my country; for our arrogance and our policies.
muslim: uhhhhh.. ummm ok.

“All we are saying is give peace a chance”, LOL

This interloping, charlatan, anti American thug which inhabits 1600 Pennsylvania Ave is repugnant and vile beyond belief.

He makes McGovern and Carter seem like hawks!!!!

Oh geez- I’ve seen this movie before, only the lead was an idiot from Georgia. Have no desire to watch the remake, even if the lead is an idiot from Chicago.

Newt’s argument doesn’t make a lot of sense – when he was asked what Obama should have done instead (yelled at him? punched him? stared him down?) Newt’s response was “well of course he had to shake hands, but he shouldn’t have smiled”. To me it looks silly that pundits are now defining how jovial our president should look when he’s meeting with foreign leaders. Of all people, I really like what Grover Norquist had to say:

Britain “recognizes” any old tyrant that runs the government ruling a nation. The United States has selectively chosen to refuse to recognize certain governments–the Soviet Union until FDR, Communist China until Jimmy Carter–and/or refused to send an ambassador. As a moral gesture this has been a bit hollow. Big mass murderers get recognition–and handshakes: USSR, China. Tiny murderers get virtuously and bravely shunned: Cuba.

He goes on to propose that the US simply recognize any country that is in power and have talks with them frequently enough that they are not seen as something special: a despot won’t feel especially recognized, nor will they expect something out of the deal; and we won’t have to isolate ourselves from half of the world.

In any case, I think this will do more PR harm to Chavez than to Obama – his anti-American criticisms will now seem hollow considering how friendly he was in person, and the US won’t appear as a great a Satan to the Venezuelan people. I don’t see how we lose here?


Professor Eidelberg attempts to re-educate Americans to bring us up to speed in understanding what our Founding Fathers knew, and what they made the foundation of our great land, and what the Left seeks to undo, with Obama’s wholehearted commitment.

If we don’t know our roots, we are without a compass, and at the mercy of the parasites within and without.

If Castro and Chavez were right wing dictators Obama wouldn’t go within a mile of them—it having nothing to do with them being dictators—its their political idealogies. Obama, Castro, Chavez and Rev. Wright are all cut from the same cloth.

“…all cut from THE SAME CLOTH“.


And, as to the “Obama doctrine;” it’s a kind of idolatry where, in the “hope” of improving the welfare of the world the best of the world commits unilateral suicidal self-sacrifice to appease the world’s sub-human beasts in order to assuage one’s fear of them. But that will only leave the evil ones still here, and more influential and powerful than before, while the real “hope” of the world will have been lost. What a boneheaded bargain, that! …kind of says a lot about the intelligence and priorities of the Obama voter.

Plain and simple: Low rent.

There’s an ugly truth to absorb here. Venezula is a US trading partner for their oil. And unless the O admin is willing to replace our dependence upon Chavez with use of our oil, shale and natural gas fields, we’ll continue to be a trading partner.

I don’t like that we have to deal with Chavez at all. But I can understand meeting someone who contributes to the US energy lifeblood…. like them or not.

I’m going to have to put this one in the ugly-but-necessary column. Otherwise it’s rather disingenuous to complain about shaking hands wtih a US trading partner… scummy as they are.

All that said, it’s embarrassing to have a POTUS run around the world groveling and apologizing for our nation. And there in lies the “weak” view… not the handshake, the apologies.

Good thing that he’s an elected official, and not king. I daresay the US will survive, and recouperate from the Obama reign. We lived thru Carter… we’ll live thru the O. Just alot of teeth grinding inbetween.

At this point I’m concerned about how many of us will live thru the obama mistake.

Nice projection there fit.
I am not scared. I do believe that we will be hit again thanks to obama
hurting national security and prostrating himself before our enemies.

My mother passed away 2 years ago at age 90 and if she were alive she would be in tears daily over this very stupid man who is president and how he embraces the enemies of the USA. In my heart I am glad she is not witnesing how Obama is destroying us from within.


“There’s an ugly truth to absorb here. Venezula is a US trading partner for their oil. And unless the O admin is willing to replace our dependence upon Chavez with use of our oil, shale and natural gas fields, we’ll continue to be a trading partner.

I don’t like that we have to deal with Chavez at all. But I can understand meeting someone who contributes to the US energy lifeblood…. like them or not.

I’m going to have to put this one in the ugly-but-necessary column. Otherwise it’s rather disingenuous to complain about shaking hands wtih a US trading partner… scummy as they are.”

I think we found something we agree on, although you put it better than I could have. I think Obama is attempting to strengthen our relations with the rest of the world, although we may not agree with all of his methods in doing so, I do believe he does have our best interest in mind overall.

@Fit fit:


“Liberals see their faith [interresting term for an irreligious fundamentalist belief system] as something that fills them up and, without it, they conjure up metaphors of emptiness, depletion and scarcity,” McAdams said. “While conservatives worry about societal collapse, liberals worry about a world without deep feelings and intense experiences.”

In other words, Liberals fear the dark fantasies from the innermost recesses of their minds, and are more concerned by visceral sensations than with reality, while Conservatives are concerned that the world function optimally, with the most people achieving the most good. That is a VERY telling (and powerful) indictment of Liberalism!

Did you actually read that before you posted it? …or are you coming to see the error of your previously errant ways?


My Dad passed away 6 years ago, but if he were alive today, what they are doing to his country would have killed him.


That’s an interesting, if twisted, interpretation.

My problem with the article is that only studied those with religious/ spiritual inclinations, which, while may go hand in hand with ones political views, is a separate matter and does not reflect everyone on either side.

If I was a democractic/reform dissident in Iran or Venezuela, I would be disheartened right now. Seeing the US President shaking hands (and accepting the book) with Chavez would be a slap in the face. Chavez has taken the country into mob rule, prosecuted the press and nationalized businesses (aka: steal private property).

In Iran, the US President can only say “I’m deeply disappointed” when one of his own citiznes is given a bum trial. If he can’t help one his own citizens what chance has he of helping them?


Actually, from everything I’ve read about “Liberals” (Leftists) vs Conservatives, that study is “spot on” as far as the responses of the two groups, irrespective of whether they are religious or not.

It’s because “Liberalism” (Leftism) is largely a mental disorder, or at least rooted in one, as DrSanity explains…

Really, religion isn’t the root of Leftist or Conservative mental processes, their brains just function differently, and in the extremes the Left is, in general, much more dangerous, because they are far less rational and hence more likely to make decisions based on whims or gut feelings. True, even while rationality can’t gurantee success, it can drastically improve the odds, not to mention informing one how to properly hedge one’s bets, which is especially important when the stakes are high, like with millions of lives on the line.


Thanks for the chuckle!


Your welcome.

Go ahead and enjoy the race while it’s still exciting, and your horse hasn’t shown itself to be the nag that experienced breeders already know he is. But when you find out that your loss vastly exceeds your gain, and the joke really was on you all along, I doubt you’ll be laughing very much at all. Of course, if you’re addicted to gambling your life away on loosers like O’Bumpkin, like an uncle of mine was on the horses, you won’t learn. And that’s another sure way to spot it as a mental illness, repeating the same mistake over and over, ever expecting a better result THIS time.


And yet some put their bets on Seabiscut. whom experienced breeders paid no mind to at first.

The experts put their money on poor Barbaro.

Perhaps another definition of insanity is believing that even informed opinions are unequivocal facts, thusly branding anyone who disagrees as mentally flawed. Not the track I want to run on, personally.

Blinders are for horses. People should see everything around them.


Ahhh, the “wisdom” of a confirmed gambler. I never said the experts were always right, just that they improved the odds, which is only on average. Just because the experts don’t get it right one time, the average Joe thinks his gut feeling is just as good as their expertise, and that keeps him coming back for more excitement, and hope, and the change in his fortune when, on average, he loses.

Yeah, sure, Obama’s never done anything, except let the district he represented in Illinois go to hell,…
…but why should that prejudice me against him? After all, maybe he’s really got what it takes, THIS time!

AND THEIR OFF…. coming into the first turn, …what’s this?! …O’Blivious has stopped to sniff a patch of dandelions by the fence, …and the crowd is going wild . . .

…is it possible they think he could still yet win, …or maybe they don’t really care, because it’s not really whether you win or lose, but how excited you get during the race?

And, yes, you’re right, “Blinders are for horses. People should see everything around them.” But, again, it’s not what you see, it’s how you respond to it. There’s a great line in a goofy but entertaining movie my kids watched years ago. In the move “Thumb Wars”…
…the protagonist thumb (Luke Skywalker equivalent) says as he’s approaching the target that he’ll use his feelings, and the Obie Wan equivalent says, “Use the control panel, that’s what it’s there for.”

Sure, sometimes you still miss, but you are less likely too, and success is more often assured, if you think with your head instead of your Kishkahs.


Actually, I don’t gamble money at all. Never even bought a lottery ticket. If I did gamble, based on informed expertise, and the odds, I would’ve bet on the Yankees this past week (I mean the Indians?! Come on!)……

Since the “experts” don’t always get it right, as you freely admit, are you willing to concede you may be wrong yourself?

Btw, I love the Thumb Wars flick! Although nothing beats The Court Jester with Danny Kaye!

And while I agree with your point about using your head, there is something to be said about using your gut when dealing with people, too. There have been many instances when my first impression of someone was less than favorable, but my intellect told me to ignore my feelings, and nearly every single time I got burned. Perhaps I can break it down to tangible things like eye contact or a handshake, but most often it’s just a feeling. And it surprises me when I find my initial gut feeling was something I should have gone with. I’ve since learned that intuition has as much value as intellect.


It isn’t a matter of always being right or wrong. I’ve been saying that the whole time, so nothing will change by “admitting” that, though it would create the illusion that you have persuaded me to do so, even though that’s not the case.

One mustn’t gamble unless one has no other option, and even then only do it after careful thought. With the unbelievable lack of scrutiny Obama received (compared with the MSM’s obsession to destroy Palin), there is no way you can argue any serious thought was put into his qualifications at all.

Anyway, I think I’ve exhausted the gambling analogy, so I’ll quit while I’m ahead.

Oh, I almost forgot. Yes, intuition is a good tool, and when in certain circumstances it is almost always right, you need to go with it. But when it is wrong, you need to do the opposite. Now, whenever I’ve voted for a Democrat, for example, my intuition told me not to, and guess what, it was almost always right.


Have you a link to the Danny Kaye movie? He’s one of the oldies but goodies. I wouldn’t mind watching that when I have the time.



I couldn’t find the entire movie online, but the dvd is easy to find. I went through two VHS copies, and now my dvd is well worn!

Here’s what is probably the most famous scene, about 10 minutes…


This was sent to me by a friend. I know you will be interested.
Marion A. Valentine, Oath Keeper

This following poem is to ALL Patriots who have stood and those that continue to STAND.
Deepest Thanks to all of you! What you do does count. There is a Right and Wrong. You have decided to “turn” and do what is RIGHT!

Patriots’ Turn

Out of a murky past the Usurper rose.
Unconstitutional Laws he would impose.
With minions and media they would devise.
The plot of continual spreading of lies.
And, with Congress they would meet.
Also, those upon the Senate seat.
Concocting a plan of Our Country’s fall.
It would require them to “sell out” ALL!
The Judges Courts they allow to Fail.
Wrecking the balance of our Justice Scale.
Just, for only, the Bankers Greed.
They push through Bills they do not read.
Believing they have sealed our Fate.
By telling us that it’s to Late.
But, wait! What is that thunderous sound?
So very loud, it shakes the ground.
Could it be millions upon millions of Patriots’ feet?
That is marching, ever marching to Liberty’s drumbeat.
Now, the good men will no longer ignore.
The oath of allegiance that they did swore.
Our Constitution is the key to restore.
To the erosion of Freedom WE say. “No more!”

Kim American



This is the best I could do.

I don’t know if they will play the whole thing, or just part, but if it is just part, it’s a long part so far.


@Marion Valentine:

Pretty good. Accurate, too.

Like I (and others) have said, the next four years are going to be pure-comedy-gold!

The shit writes itself…

Comedy Gold? I am pretty sure that if Obie gets his way, he will royally screw things up. Just like friction between a foot and some carpet, all that has been done lately is the extreme polarization of our country. The more friction, the more polarization happens until finally it is all harnessed into a huge discharge.

With all the forces at work, I really don’t see anything good coming out of this scenario. The MSM and pop culture are putting all of their ‘progressive’ eggs into this basket. We all know that socialism is only a couple votes away, but yet I see very few real points of debatable contact between each party.

For example, the left wants to not only keep abortion legal, but also the ability to keep a young girl from telling her parents (she can travel state lines if necessary). A baby can be delivered and then slaughtered on the table without any repercussions. If my wife is pregnant with our next child, and someone murders the both of them, democrats are telling me that it will only be a single murder conviction. Funny how a woman can get pregnant, make a CHOICE last minute that her child is a stumbling block and get it killed, while I have no choice in the matter to convict that person of double murder. Pro-choice isn’t about choice at all and neither are most of the rest of the leftest laws.

A tangent, but nonetheless… The left keeps screaming at us, ‘aren’t you happy with the stimulus package?! You will get more money back from the government!’.. why is the least efficient american entity taking my money, spending it, and wanting me to say ‘thank you oh great government’? And then the left feels like that is an opportunity to rub it in my face? It encourages the poor and lazy; entitling them to a sense of power and ownership over things they never earned. How convenient. I own my own companies, worked hard, and sacrificed everything to get there. They didn’t sacrifice shit and I am supposed to pay their mortgage?

Ok, a little overboard and really just a rant at nobody….

by the way thebronze.. i am not aiming anything at you. I get what you are saying.

O’Dumbo knows how to make friends. Leave a trail of green (Billions of taxpayer dollars) behind everywhere he goes and they’ll follow him anywhere, until the green ends then they’ll cut his throat. It’s no longer a problem to find a comedy on TV, just surf the news channels and you’ll find some clown making excuses for the ringleader of the circus.

#15 We may agree that the hype of the handshake is overblown considering our trading status. But I’m afraid we’ll have to disagree that Obama has the US interests at heart.

Obama has successfully convinced me that his interests lie solely with elevating his own status in the world’s eyes. He’s an opportunist who attempts to be bolstered internationally by diminishing the US. Never have I see such a vain and arrogant politician, fooled into believing he is capable of doing more than taking the trash out to the streetside curb.

And while I’m on the subject of arrogance, you… Fit… are demonstrating such if you mistaken my unmitigated anger with what this fool of a POTUS is doing to this country as fear.


You give O’Blunder way too much credit. I doubt he would last a week as a janitor.

…and the part about unmitigated anger, as well!

I think the photos of Obama meeting with Chavez are blown out of proportion. There are plenty of other legitimate reasons to dislike Obama but I’ve never been an “I gotcha ” kind of person when it comes to sound bites or photos taken out of context.

I hated it when the left used to take every misspoken word or photo op of Bush and blow it out of proportion so as to make him look bad…… I’m not overly concerned about photos. It’s what was said in those meetings that matters to me.

Besides it not like past presidents haven’t done this before!



Interesting how those who’ve earned the right to rant at being taken advantage of when they do, feel bad about it, yet those whove done nothing have no shame and even invent phony claims to justify their lust for the property of others. And yet, that’s probably one of the reasons you’ve succeeded, and they have not – except with the help of the crooks who want to divide in order to conquer by, among other evils, stealing from their foes to reward their vote-slaves.


It didn’t post my link.

Public Domain: President Nixon Meets Chairman Mao, 1972 (NARA)


To Wordsmith:

Oh please don’t think my comment was directed at you. I was speaking in generalities about how conservatives think Obama meeting Chavez is such a bad thing. I’ve seen other photos posted on other conservative websites that make it seem like Obama and Chavez are best friends. That’s what I meant by the “gotcha” moments.

I also understand why you posted it.



There’s an ugly truth to absorb here. Venezula is a US trading partner for their oil. And unless the O admin is willing to replace our dependence upon Chavez with use of our oil, shale and natural gas fields, we’ll continue to be a trading partner.

I don’t like that we have to deal with Chavez at all. But I can understand meeting someone who contributes to the US energy lifeblood…. like them or not.

I’m going to have to put this one in the ugly-but-necessary column. Otherwise it’s rather disingenuous to complain about shaking hands wtih a US trading partner… scummy as they are.

All that said, it’s embarrassing to have a POTUS run around the world groveling and apologizing for our nation. And there in lies the “weak” view… not the handshake, the apologies.

Good thing that he’s an elected official, and not king. I daresay the US will survive, and recouperate from the Obama reign. We lived thru Carter… we’ll live thru the O. Just alot of teeth grinding inbetween.

I don’t have much with which to argue. Well stated.

What I don’t like is the talk about Obama being “anti-American” and/or “weak” with regard to criticism and apologies. It’s crystal clear to absolutely everyone in the world that he’s not criticizing America — he’s criticizing George W. Bush. This is congruent with the way the leaders of the world want to view things: it’s not that the USA is a bad country; it’s rather that the USA happened to (unwisely, in their view) elect a bad leader, who behaved in a very arrogant and self-serving manner.

Now, I understand entirely that Mata and virtually everyone else on this blog would categorically reject that characterization, but the point is that this is precisely the way that virtually the whole world sees things. It’s not an illusion that George W Bush’s international approval ratings were on the order of 10%. Obama wants to repair that; so he’s basically throwing President Bush under the bus, as opposed to remaining mute on Bush’s policies or defending Bush’s policies. You can call it scapegoating, but I think that most objective analysts would conclude that Obama’s actions have been constructive to the future international interests of the USA.

There’s a lot of sentiment here that Obama’s actions (e.g. “bowing” to the Saudi king, shaking the hand of Chavez) constitute “weakness,” and that somehow it is to the advantage of the USA to always appear to be “tough.” Recall, however, that Theodore Roosevelt’s advice was to “speak softly, but carry a big stick.” The world is very familiar with the size of the “stick” carried by the President of the USA. With this in mind, a little bit of soft speech goes a long way in international diplomacy.

Just as in the case of the economic situation, none of this is theoretical. We’ll all get to see how it plays out, over time.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach


A semi-rhetorical question.

What would ZERO-Blanko do if he were in a situation where the needs of the country were clearly at odds with his narcissistic fantasies of what they should be?

A semi-rhetorical answer.

If he is unable to distinquish between the needs of his ego and the needs of the country, then his love is of himself and not the country.

So far he’s not shown me he’s capable of separating the two, and all indications are that when push comes to shove, his ego will always take precidence over America.


obama wants the world to see him as a great leader,every country that he has entered as president of the united states see him as an idiot,he wants to rule the world,show me just one leader of any country around the world that is willing to hand over their country to obama,chevez was all smiles as he shook hands with obama then wiped his hands off on his pants leg to erase obama touch,iran says obama is worse than president bush,because he hold out a hand that wants to destroy iran,every thing obama say he is going to do ,he does the opposite,he is dangerious to our country and to the world.he is an insult to our country,he is an insult to our laws and more inportant to our constitution,he took an oath to protect and defend this country from all enemies foreign and domestic, that oath to him is just mere words,words he can walk away from and feel nothing,he is the terror that we need to fear,he and his administration is hell bent on destroying our country,he wants to make every one that disagrees with him as an enemies of the country,if you believe in our constitution,our laws,if you believe in no obortion,if you have put on our uniform to protect our country here and around the world then your the enemies,if you speak out,you will be watched like a criminal,instead of a hero. WE ALL NEED TO PRAY TO GOD TO DELIVER US FROM THIS EVIL,PRAY,PRAY FOR OUR COUNTRY,PRAY FOR OUR PEOPLE,PRAY FOR THE WORLD.


I just watched that segment. Very entertaining. But it’s also illuminating.

The reason I found the comment I referred to in Thumb Wars to be so hilarious is that it’s a bit of solid wisdom which was totally unexpected – a dose of solid reality protruding suddenly into the fantasy. Delicious! On the other hand, Danny Kaye is funny because he’s a clown, a very talented clown, but a clown none the less.

The reason I used that piece was because it got my point across. While I appreciate your sharing something you enjoy with me, and which I also enjoy, there was no point to it other than the shared visceral pleasure, no intellectual contribution to what we were discussing.

So, I feel I should thank you for giving such an excellent illustration of the differences I was trying to highlight.


Larry W: What I don’t like is the talk about Obama being “anti-American” and/or “weak” with regard to criticism and apologies. It’s crystal clear to absolutely everyone in the world that he’s not criticizing America — he’s criticizing George W. Bush.

I know that’s why you’d like to believe, Larry. However it’s simply not true. Let’s look, for example, at his al Arabiya interview fresh out of the Oval Office box.

A “ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect”. Tell me exactly where George W. Bush, or any predecessor has not “respected” the Muslim world?

In fact, the Assyrian International News Agency ran Mona Charen’s op-ed about Obama’s persistent references to this supposed “non-respect”.

One of President Obama’s first official acts was to grant an interview to Al Arabiya, the Arabic-language television network that broadcasts worldwide. This signified, aides explained, the new page that Obama meant to turn in relations with the Arab and Muslim worlds. Just as he did last week in Europe, Obama began the conversation by criticizing America. Asked about relations between Israel and the Palestinians and the appointment of George Mitchell as special envoy, President Obama said, “What I told [Mitchell] is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating — in the past on some of these issues — and we don’t always know all the factors that are involved. So let’s listen.” Throughout the rest of the interview, Obama returned again and again to the word “respect,” stressing that his administration — unlike previous American administrations — would base relations with the Muslim world on “mutual respect.”


Lest this slander pass into conventional wisdom, it must be protested. George W. Bush was never disrespectful to the Muslim world. He was extraordinarily careful to telegraph his respect for the Muslim faith — some thought to a fault. (“Why is it,” asked one wag, “that the only people who say Islam is a religion of peace are Christians?”) Bush made the Feast of Eid, which marks the end of Ramadan, an annual White House celebration with prominent Muslim guests. He arguably saved more Muslim lives through the African AIDS initiative than any other world leader could claim. Mrs. Bush made improving the lives of women and girls in Afghanistan her special project. In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, when this was not an obvious move, President Bush visited the Islamic Center in Washington, D.C. to telegraph to the nation that anger toward American Muslims would be a misplaced response to the atrocity.

The caricature of Bush as a heedless militarist and xenophobe — which no one is doing more to promote than the current president — is a libel.

As Charles Krauthammer pointed out in WaPo:

Every new president flatters himself that he, kinder and gentler, is beginning the world anew. Yet, when Barack Obama in his inaugural address reached out to Muslims with “to the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect,” his formulation was needlessly defensive and apologetic.

Is it “new” to acknowledge Muslim interests and show respect to the Muslim world? Obama doesn’t just think so, he said so again to millions in his al-Arabiya interview, insisting on the need to “restore” the “same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

Astonishing. In these most recent 20 years —- the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world —- America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them. It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved —- and resulted in —- the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq.

The only way Obama can pass off creating a “new mutual respect” is by dissing and nullifying the past respect from prior administrations. I agree with both Charen and Krauthammer… it is both “libelous” and “off the mark”.

Then we come to Europe… where he claimed America is dismissive and arrogant.

Addressing a crowd of some 2,000 mainly students from France and Germany, Mr Obama said: “In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world.

“Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

Perhaps Obama should explain what “leading role” Europe played in the recent past that we are supposed to appreciate? They have been a follower, not leader, since WWII… and at that, it only came by pulling teeth at the UNSC or NATO.

He then follows with chiding Europe for it’s anti-Americanism. Yet he justified that disdain by pointing out first that America had been “arrogant and dismissive”. In short, he provided them with an excuse for their anti-Americanism.

Nile Gardiner, Director of the Thatcher Center for Freedom, called this an insult not only to President Bush (whom Obama did not even have the balls to call out by name, blaming the nation instead), but also to the sundry troops that have laid down their lives to liberate Iraqis, allowing them to have the freely elected government they have today.

I would also like to add that Obama’s comments not only reflect badly on Bush, our troops and the nation, but equally on all coalition nations who also participated in Iraq… including but not limited to the UK and Australia, and the 30+ other nations who contributed service personnel and aid.

I would guess this “crystal clear to absolutely everyone in the world” perception you have is purely a pipedream on your part. And in fact, many believe Obama looks like a whiny child complaining to mommy that it’s all his siblings fault, and as an embarrassment to Americans, servicemen and women, and Iraq coalition nations.

What is, or should be, “crystal clear to absolutely everyone in the world” (and if it isn’t yet, it soon will be) is that Obama is really an even bigger idiot (and far more dangerous) than we on the Right have been warning that he is.

[in his] “address to thousands of cheering French and German youth in the Rhenus Sports Arena in Strasbourg. Mr. Obama said, ‘In America, there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.’

Uh, Mr. Obama…what European leadership are you speaking to exactly?”

And there are others I’ve never seen before raising their voices to protest his abhorrent behavior…

“This loathsome creature goes abroad and shames all of us. …….. We as Americans have sacrificed our blood sweat tears and money for the rest of world, and we have pulled Europe’s chestnuts out of the fire in two major wars, including the re-building of our enemies when WWII ended. Then there was NATO and the Berlin airlift, not to mention the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, thanks to President Reagan. There is nothing for which America should apologize, ever, except for electing a Marxist idiot like Obama…”

His presidency is an enormous embarrassment to sane people everywhere.

hell the book aint even a hard copy it looks like a paperback?

What a bunch of well fill in the blank.