The thin skinned Candidate Obama…er, I mean President Obama…is back.
As if he ever left:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcNflFiTiXs[/youtube]
And the sniveling didn’t end there for our “leader”
Drudge also notes the difference between his refusal to meet with the Republicans to his acceptance of this:
This is what leadership looks like in the Obama age I suppose. He is like a little kid who sulks and gives people the silent treatment if not given his way.
This Presidency is the epitome of how NOT to lead a nation.
The Brotherhood is the world’s most important Islamist organization. It is openly, unabashedly committed to the destruction of the United States and the West. In typical Obama fashion, this disastrous decision to engage America’s avowed enemies has been couched as the mere continuation of prior policy: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is reported to have confirmed that the U.S. would “resume” contacts which had “occurred in recent years.” But make no mistake about it, this is a new policy.
The contacts that have occurred in recent years have been outside of U.S. policy — at the urging of leftists in the State Department, the intelligence community, the commentariat, and, in particular, the Obama White House. They have long campaigned for a policy of “engagement” with the Muslim Brotherhood (including Hamas, the terrorist organization that is the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch). They’ve needed to do this campaigning because it was American policy not to deal with the Brotherhood — dealing with the Brothers empowers them, bolstering their status as leaders of mainstream Islam and legitimizing their agenda, which calls for Islamicizing societies, ultimately establishing a global caliphate, destroying Israel, and incrementally expanding sharia throughout the West.
…Only a few months before Clapper’s testimony, the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, Muhammad Badi, called for “jihad and sacrifice” in confronting the United States and Israel. He proclaimed that America is “experiencing the beginning of its end and is heading toward its demise.” The enthusiastic endorsement of violence, particularly against Israel, would be surprising only to those who drink the Obama Kool-Aid that claims the Brotherhood has renounced violence.
As I have repeatedly pointed out — and as Barry Rubin argues in this excellent analysis of the new Obama policy — the Brotherhood has always favored violence where it would advance the Islamist cause; it tactically renounced violence against the Egyptian regime because it would have prompted ruinous retaliation from Mubarak and because the Brotherhood was making progress through the political process and influence over Egyptian institutions.
Quite apart from its long history of violence, the Brotherhood has long endorsed terrorism (which it calls “resistance”) against Israel and against Western forces operating in Islamic countries.
Halperin said it best….this man is a dick.
See author page
The article says:
“The contacts that have occurred in recent years have been outside of U.S. policy — at the urging of leftists in the State Department, the intelligence community, the commentariat, and, in particular, the Obama White House. ”
What I am not understanding is if the lefty’s/progressives want to ’embrace’ the muslim brotherhood, don’t they realize this is like trying to embrace a grizzly bear, boa constrictor or rattle snake (take your pick)… do they really believe they will become ” immune to the hatred” and possible death by the hands of these terrorist groups by virtue of attempting to ‘befriend’ or try to ‘understand’ them or their hatred? What purpose does this serve?
Since the MB makes no bones or excuses for their wanting the destruction of the West/America …Why would the left/WH (be so naive /stupid/ ignorant/ arrogant) as to put themselves, their families/friends and the rest of America at such risk???
There is going to come a day when we are going to stand up and say Screw Political Correctness … and start calling things as we see them… People are just going to have to grow a few more layers of skin… because things are just becoming more wrong on many levels in this country and people need to be made aware of it… even if it “hurts their feelings” …. get over it!
Oh wow, that was TOO funny that a talking head on MSLSD said Obama was “being kind of a dick.”
Does this mean that the end times are upon us when Obama’s favorite “news” outlet is turning on him?
Has anyone kept track where Obama is during the five or so times a day Muslims are supposed to pray?
Here we go again–Islam-o-fascism. The Muslim Brotherhood is a broad political party whose extreme conservative wing would be similar to Fundamentalist Christians in this country–with their desires to have government act in continuity with their religious principles. Anybody who blindly accepts the rhetoric to the contrary, needs to do some serious research. By research I mean searching out information on both sides of the issue–instead of being influenced by only those positions with which they agree.
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
Sounds like someone needs to start taking their own advice.
1/8th of the mandatory zagat (money from every Muslim) must go to fight jihad in the war Allah has called against all the rest of the world, until Islam is over everyone.
The other 7/8ths goes to Mosques, various religious leaders, religious schools and other seemingly secular needs.
It is to garner more of that 7/8ths of this honeypot that almost every terrorist (jihad) group also forms a non-fighting wing.
Thus Fatah is made up for non-fighting, but they have a military wing called the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade.
If you read about the HolyLand Foundation case where CAIR was an unindicted co-conspirator, you see that this was the issue.
All zagat is fungible when given.
So CAIR’s money to a ”peaceful brother” of a terror organization equaled giving money to the terror organization as well.
Of course, recently, Obama let CAIR off.
@Liberal1 (objectivity): #4
Since I am not a church goer I agree with almost everything you say about religion. The Constitution says that the government can’t establish a religion. To me that means that it can’t sanction ANY religion either. Right now, the Christian religion is the dominant religion of the USA and the members want the USA to go by their rules. Using the Christian logic of dominance, this means that if Muslim or any other religion should become the dominant religion in the USA, the the Federal government has to go along with their rules.
Since marriage isn’t mentioned in the Constitution, this means there are no Federal laws regulating it except those written later. When I lived in Massachusetts there was a question about gay marriage. Some said the state constitution allowed it because marriage wasn’t mentioned in it. Anything that isn’t declared illegal is legal.
I personally would like to see all tax exempt status eliminated for ALL religions. Some are created just to make money or other reasons, not to spread The Word. The good religions would survive. The ones who can’t get enough money to keep going will fail. There should at least be requirements that the religions that teach any kind of hatred against others should not qualify.
I will throw out one more of my beliefs for free. For those who say being gay is a choice, you have to admit that being straight is also a choice. It can’t be one way for one type of life style and a different way for another life style. Either you CHOOSE to be gay or straight, or you are naturally gay or straight. There is nothing in the Constitution about being gay, so there is no law against it except in religions. I do believe the Joint-Chiefs-of-Staff should decide about military service for gays.
in THE TIMES INDIA, I READ JUST A FEW MINUTE AGO, HILLARY SAYING:
US WILL RESUME CONTACT WITH EGYPT MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD ,
SHE ADDED: THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S DECISION
AS A CONTINUATION OF AN EARLYER POLICY,
it reflex a shift that US official nowwill be able to deal directly
with the BROTHERHOOD, who are not member of PARLEMENT,
I wonder what it mean on the last line,
are the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION NOT ABLE TO DEAL WITH AMERICANS
who are not member of PARLEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? !!!!!
@Liberal1 (objectivity): You incorrectly stated:
Really?
So Fundamentalist Christians in America are willing to die for their religious beliefs?
Really?
PLEASE show the proof of that. Cite a source, provide a link.
Because THIS is what the MB is:
So go ahead liberal1 (absolutely no objectivity), please, PLEASE provide proof that American Fundamentalist Christians are planning the overthrow of the rest of the world, that they prefer to die for God because that is “their way.”
*taps foot impatiently*
@anticsrocks:
It’s quite telling that libtard #2 RARELY posts more than once on a thread. It only proves that even he/she knows how wrong it is in addition to being unable to coherently defend it’s views.
I recall the one time it tried to debate. Gen. Custer himself commented that even he didn’t get his butt kicked as badly.
@Hard Right: You said:
LOL, reminds me of the time that GaffaUK tried to defend his statement that the world would be better off if there had never been religion…
@anticsrocks:
Now that must have been a hoot. I call him Gaffe UK for reasons such as that.
I would say Liberal #2’s goal is to irritate and aggravate. Quite sad that it has such hate towards us. Then again attacking us allows it to avoid taking a hard look inward.
@Hard Right: True about liberal2. And yeah, Gaffer tried, but I pinned him to the wall and his frustration bled through.