Tag: Barack Obama
Obama Does the Impossible: Makes European Men Seem Manly
Barack Obama is married to Michelle.
Nicolas Sarkozy is married to Carla Bruni.
Who’s the manlier man? ~ RichInOC (Free Republic)
It’s been a rough couple of weeks for Barack Obama. Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Pantywaist’s settlement freeze proposal. Bibi told Bam Bam that his government was not amenable to putting limitations on building Jewish settlements in the capital of Israel. Obama responded by offering to immediately freeze all US settlements in Washington, DC as a goodwill gesture toward Hamas.
Still stinging from Netanyahu’s rebuff, Obama made the harebrained decision to challenge Dick Cheney to a debate on, of all things, foreign policy. Someone on Team O was astute enough to realize that TOTUS would not be well served by being the second act to Cheney, whose speech at AEI had been planned for weeks. Instead, the chaos president scrambled to seize some time immediately preceding the former Vice President’s speech. In an excruciatingly transparent attempt to run out the clock, Obama began late and dragged his speech out for approximately sixteen hours.
Had no one on the O Team reviewed the Cheney/Edwards match up before the 2004 election in which the picayune Edwards was lambasted effortlessly by Mr. Cheney? Cheney always makes pummeling liberals look easy.
Obama, petulant at being challenged, took twenty eight shots at the former administration and blathered about some middle way in dealing with terrorists. Compromise and middle ground are efficacious strategies at PTA meetings; less so with rogue dictators plotting to wipe us off the map.
Wimpy liberals are violently opposed to the use of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques unless practiced on members of the Bush administration. The thought of putting a caterpillar in a cell with a barbarian who would gladly saw our heads off shocks the liberal conscience. The left deems water boarding to be a vile form of torture, despite the fact that millions of us water board ourselves every morning with a Neti pot and some SinuCleanse®.
Now that his first official Disgrace to America tour is over, confidence in our Commander in Chief is waning across the pond. When the Europeans start calling you “President Pantywaist”, don’t expect to be taken too seriously by merciless crazy men with nukes.
Benjamin Netanyahu was once a captain in an elite IDF commando force. Community organizer Bambi failed to get asbestos removed from all of the units in the government subsidized housing project, Altgeld Gardens.
Despite the contemporary allure of androgyny, (how else can we explain Johnny Depp), Americans still like Real Men. In fact, the more Dick Cheney talks, the better we like him.
We cheered for Captain “Sulley” Sullenberger who saved the lives of passengers and crew by landing a disabled jet on the Hudson River. We couldn’t get enough of the humble and courageous Captain Richard Phillips who was held hostage by Somali thugs while the Wuss in Chief wobbled.
All sane Americans were proud when our magnificent Navy SEALS finally were unleashed to do what they do as only they can.
Ann Coulter unravels it: liberals have canonized single moms, disregarding how badly their kids keep turning out. Sit com fathers have become dispensable buffoons. One sperm donor per child is becoming chronic.
Unintentionally proving Ann’s point, I Village offers up some advice for single moms raising boys. Presumably, it was not meant to be satire when Andrea Engber assured single mothers that their boys can grow up to be emotionally healthy men, citing a few examples, including: Tom Cruise and Bill Clinton! Engber goes on to offer more sapient advice: “Be a little creative in helping your child learn guy stuff. For instance, many single mothers report concern over their son’s using the potty while sitting, or playing with their makeup.”
It is irrefutable that single moms have the manifest advantage when it comes to teaching their sons how to apply guy liner correctly. How many Oprahfied little boys will grow up to join the military? We’ve got a future national security crisis.
The unavoidable by-product of the Cheney/Obama joust was the demonstration of dissimilarity between a Real Man and the Metro Sexual in Chief. In his characteristic low key style, Cheney recited weighty fact after weighty fact. Obama groused about how burdensome it is to be Obama always having to battle imaginary enemies. The president’s ineptitude and narcissism were on exhibit.
It’s not unusual for boys raised by single moms to become narcissists (see Clinton, William J). The metro sexual male is defined by narcissistic traits, most notably, an over concern for his appearance that we don’t see in Real Men. Sure, they will dress up when the occasion demands, but not without some obligatory grumbling. Liberals didn’t learn from Clinton’s wussified approach to Islamic terrorism that putting a narcissistic pantywaist in the White House doesn’t make terrorists love us after all. Clinton sat on his hands while terrorists attacked us repeatedly:
Mogadishu, the USS Cole bombing, the attacks on our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, please forgive me if I overlooked any others. There was his indefensible refusal to capture bin Laden when the terror leader was offered up to him. Clinton hobbled our military when there were clear opportunities to take the savage barbarian out before 9/11.Real Man, John Bolton, started shouting from the rooftops about a week before Memorial Day that the North Koreans were about to run a nuclear trial.
As Bolton had presaged, the North Koreans celebrated our Memorial Day by detonating a large nuclear bomb. As expected, Obama responded swiftly with a stern warning to Pyongyang that further Nagasaki- caliber bomb explosions could result in a tersely worded letter from the UN.
The North Koreans have been launching missiles approximately every five minutes ever since. Our president put North Korea on notice by speaking briefly at Arlington on Memorial Day and then summoning the intestinal fortitude to hit the links for the rest of the day.
Obama has eschewed building up US missile defense preferring instead to pursue a senseless disarmament program that would debilitate the United States in the hope that beneficent tyrants like Li’l Kim and Ahmedinejad will be so bedazzled by our good will that they’ll abandon their nefarious machinations.
Sensing that perhaps our current Commander in Chief is somewhat lacking in mettle, part time Columbia professor and rabid Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad dispatched six warships to international waters, including the Gulf of Aden, to celebrate Iran’s successful test firing of a new ballistic missile.
Deploying his weapon of choice, the politics of distraction, the president responded to nuclear threats from maniacal dictators by rolling out his newest fountainhead of commotion: his execrable appointee for the US Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, who is precisely the kind of whacky activist judge that weak willed liberals and terrorists can applaud.
Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
It is hard to believe but Obama may be worse than Jimmy Carter. Obama is an ideologue and much more dangerous than Carter. Carter was just totally incompetent.
During the U.S. Presidential primaries last year, I had expressed my misgivings that Barack Obama might turn out to be another Jimmy Carter, whose confused thinking and soft image paved the way for the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.
The subsequent Iranian defiance of the U.S. and Carter’s inability to deal effectively with the crisis in which Iranian students raided the U.S. Embassy in Teheran and held a number of U.S. diplomats hostage led to disillusionment with him in sections of the U.S. and to his failure to get re-elected in 1980. The strong line taken by him against the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet troops towards the end of 1979 did not help him in wiping out the image of a soft and confused president.
The defiant action of North Korea in testing a long-range missile with military applications last month, and its latest act of defiance in reportedly carrying out an underground nuclear test on May 25, can be attributed–at least partly, if not fully–to its conviction that it will have nothing to fear from the Obama administration for its acts of defiance. It is true that even when George Bush was the president, North Korea had carried out its first underground nuclear test in October 2006. The supposedly strong policy of the Bush administration did not deter it from carrying out its first test.
After Obama assumed office in January, whatever hesitation that existed in North Korea’s policy-making circles regarding the likely response of U.S. administration has disappeared, and its leadership now feels it can defy the U.S. and the international community with impunity.
A series of actions taken by the Obama administration have created an impression in Iran, the “Af-Pak” region, China and North Korea that Obama does not have the political will to retaliate decisively to acts that are detrimental to U.S. interests, and to international peace and security.
Among such actions, one could cite: the soft policy toward Iran: the reluctance to articulate strongly U.S. determination to support the security interests of Israel; the ambivalent attitude toward Pakistan despite its continued support to anti-India terrorist groups and its ineffective action against the sanctuaries of Al-Qaida and the Taliban in Pakistani territory; its silence on the question of the violation of the human rights of the Burmese people and the continued illegal detention of Aung San Suu Kyi by the military regime in Myanmar; and its silence on the Tibetan issue.
Its over-keenness to court Beijing’s support in dealing with the economic crisis, and its anxiety to ensure the continued flow of Chinese money into U.S. Treasury bonds, have also added to the soft image of the U.S.
President Obama cannot blame the problem-states of the world–Iran, Pakistan, Myanmar and North Korea–if they have come to the conclusion that they can take liberties with the present administration in Washington without having to fear any adverse consequences. North Korea’s defiance is only the beginning. One has every reason to apprehend that Iran might be the next to follow.
Israel and India have been the most affected by the perceived soft policies of the Obama administration. Israel is legitimately concerned over the likely impact of this soft policy on the behavior of Iran. South Korea and Japan, which would have been concerned over the implications of the soft policy of the Obama administration, had no national option because they lack independent means of acting against North Korea.
Israel will not stand and watch helplessly if it concludes that Iran might follow the example of North Korea. Israel will not hesitate to act unilaterally against Iran if it apprehends that it is on the verge of acquiring a military nuclear capability. It will prefer to act with the understanding of the U.S., but if there is no change in the soft policy of the Obama administration, it will not hesitate to act even without prior consultation with the U.S.
India, too, has been noting with concern the total confusion, which seems to prevail in the corridors of the Obama administration over its Af-Pak policy. Some of the recent comments of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about alleged past incoherence in U.S. policy toward Pakistan–and about the part-responsibility of the U.S. for the state of affairs in the Af-Pak region–have given comfort to the military-intelligence establishment and the political leaders in Pakistan.
Obama’s new over-generosity to the Pakistani armed forces and his reluctance to hold them accountable for their sins of commission and omission in the war against terrorism have convinced the Pakistani leaders that they have no adverse consequences to fear from the Obama administration. India would be the first to feel the adverse consequences of this newly found confidence in Islamabad vis-a-vis its relations with the U.S.
Jimmy Carter took a little over three years to create the image of the U.S. as a confused and soft power. Obama is bidding fair to create that image even in his first year in office. The North Korean defiance is the first result of this perceived soft image. There will be more surprises for the U.S. and the international community to follow if Obama and his aides do not embark on corrective actions before it is too late.
Load More