Damned Dirty Ape

Update: Something from the Wolffe book we can all agree on – Barack Obama’s assessment of Michelle Obama and Michelle Obama’s assessment of Barack Obama:

For all the smiling photos of Barack and Michelle Obama, the couple went through a tough time in their marriage in earlier years, according to a new book. [snip]

“There was little conversation and even less romance,” Wolffe writes. “She was angry at his selfishness and careerism; he thought she was cold and ungrateful.”

Also, check out the comments HERE and HERE for more on the Wolff book.

——————————————————————————————————————

We’ll get into the Middle East mess, Israel, Obama and Muslims, all those touchy topics starting tomorrow, but we cannot allow the latest Richard Wolffe book attacking Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton to go by unremarked by us. We also cannot allow Arriana Huffington to go by undiscussed.

Since 2007 we have been working on a post regarding Arriana Huffington. It was never the right time to publish the article because there was always some new Barack Obama outrage to discuss. But the time to discuss Arriana Huffington and what we call Huff n’ Puff, her self-promotion website, has arrived.

There have been many reasons to discuss Arriana Huffington. We once referred to her as the missing Gabor sister and had this to say about her:

Enter the least talented of the Gabor sisters, Arriana Huffington: “Hillary Clinton’s problem with the blogosphere is that she has been so calculating that you can smell it. Every thought has been processed through multiple channels in her and her consultants’ brains. It’s so fabricated.” Arriana Huffington criticizing anyone for anything is funny in and of itself. But Arriana calling anyone “calculating” or “fabricated” is actually self-evaluation.

Republican Ed Rollins (campaign manager for Arriana’s husband at the time, Michael Huffington, in his 1994 campaign for Senate from California) called Arriana “a domineering Greek Rasputin” who was “the most ruthless, unscrupulous, and ambitious person I’d met in thirty years in national politics.” Of course this was when Arriana was right hand to Republican Newt Gingrich. At some later date we will detail Arriana’s membership in that weird religious cult, her “marriage” to her husband whom she effectively forced to spend millions in his Senate campaign so that Arriana could be a Senator’s “wife” in D.C., and her ceaseless attacks on the Clintons when they were in the White House. Nothing changes with Arriana except her political bed partners.

The New Republic has a review of Arriana Huffington’s latest waste called The Puffington Host. In the review, we get a review as well of the former Arianna Strassinopoulos, now Huffington. Don’t expect blue PINO Big Blogs to discuss this review of Huffington because the alliance with the vile Arriana shows how degenerate and low the Democratic left has fallen.

The New Republic takes us back to 1978 and Arriana unwittingly denouncing people exactly like her:

“For the first time in history,” Stassinopoulos portentously began, “an opinion on everything has become an indispensible accessory of modern living, and everybody goes about in the cast off clothing of the latest media gurus.” After approvingly quoting Kierkegaard, she continued:

The world is reduced into flat, surveyable, two-dimensional world events; and we can all enjoy the illusion that we know exactly what has happened in the last twenty-four hours and what precisely to think about what has happened. Except that the meaning and significance that even the most averse to thought among us need, remain lost. The news and opinions, the perishable, ephemeral and valueless facts with which alone we are bombarded is as much of a substitute for the truths we long for, as a telephone number is for its subscriber. So it is not so much that we know more and more about less and less, but that we know more and more about the less and less important; and the more the precision of our knowledge increases, the more trivial the questions we seek to answer.

Arianna Stassinopoulos is now Arianna Huffington, and she is best known as the proprietor of The Huffington Post, and as a personification of the hyperactive up-to-the-nanosecond news-and-opinion universe of the web. Her fame now approaches her immodest ambitions. And more than Huffington’s name has changed since she wrote those early premonitory words. She is now a steely–“bleeding heart” somehow does not fit–liberal, rather than a politically incorrect conservative. She has been, as Americans like to say, on a journey. Her historical timing has always been exquisite. If she is herself some sort of institution, she is an exceedingly adaptable one.”

The political bed hopping of Arriana is traced:

In the early 1970s, she made herself a star by rubbing outrageously against the liberal grain. A well-turned-out young woman in articulate recoil from feminism, a woman disputing the reigning ideologies and dogmas of her day–or at least the reigning ideologies and dogmas of college and university students–was ideally suited for the role of right-wing contrarian. But that may have been the last time she moved against the wind. Now “progressivism” reigns supreme in cyberspace and in the Beltway, and noisily progressive she is. No courageous heterodoxy this time around. Now she is a “player.” A look at Huffington’s career reveals someone uncannily–no, cannily–adept at recognizing and navigating the social and political currents, a zeitgeist artist, even though she has written nothing that requires her to be taken seriously as a thinker.

Huffington’s “work” is described as “not intellectually consistent. Her “limp” spirituality “never moves beyond fatuities and banalities”. With the internet Arriana has “thrown in her lot with precisely the sort of shallow discourse that she once railed against.”

On feminism, now PINO-beloved Arriana wrote a book to condemn feminists:

In retort, Stassinopoulos’s The Female Woman called the women’s movement “repulsive,” and went on to claim that “it is not a movement calling for equal opportunities, equal pay, equal status for woman’s role in life, in fact as well as in law; instead it attacks the very nature of woman, and in the guise of liberation, seeks to enslave her.” Stassinopoulos espoused women’s “emancipation” because it would allow women to play distinctly female roles, as opposed to women’s liberation, which demanded “identical patterns of behavior.”

The Female Woman is a strange and unappetizing book. Stassinopoulos launches a confused attack on Mill, and writes that feminists and Nazis are ideologically simpatico because both groups wish to abolish the family (a bizarre claim for many reasons), and permits herself even a few homophobic digressions. Of lesbians, she writes that “their inner confusion is often expressed in arrogance, a conspicuous exhibitionism, in an attempt to compensate for the femininity they have denied and the masculinity they have failed to attain.” This passage is probably the book’s best example of Stassinopoulos’s hypocrisy in condemning the women’s movement for limiting women’s roles: she, too, had a rather circumscribed idea of what constitutes femininity. Other passages appear designed simply to infuriate, in the manner of a certain sort of attention-grabbing British journalism: “Women’s Lib claims that the achievement of total liberation would transform the lives of all women for the better, the truth is that it would transform only the lives of women with strong lesbian tendencies.”

Little wonder then that Arriana, who married a barely closeted homosexual man in order to advance herself, would attack women like Hillary as calculating and waged a war against Sarah Palin. Arriana has a lot of problems.

In 1986, she married the wealthy up-and-coming Republican politician Michael Huffington, who was elected to the House of Representatives from California in 1992 and then defeated in a Senate run two years later. Huffington’s notable effort in this period was a spiritual guide called The Fourth Instinct: The Call of the Soul. [snip]

This book, like so many of her books, is, well, dumb. [snip]

Huffington began writing a right-wing syndicated column. She fervently supported the Contract with America and the rise of Newt Gingrich, while at the same time preaching compassion for the poor. She became a figure in mid-’90s Washington, using her new megaphone, and her dining table, to speak out more loudly on the same issues that had occupied her for years. Reading Huffington’s columns from this period is disagreeable, because her mixture of spiritualism, libertarianism, New Right dogmatism, and concern for the downtrodden does not amount to anything coherent. In 1995, she wrote a piece for The Weekly Standard declaring that Gingrich should challenge Bill Clinton for the presidency because the Speaker was the only national figure who truly cared about poverty and inner-city turmoil. “Precisely because Gingrich is right about the moral crisis the country is facing–millions of lives and entire communities destroyed by drugs, alcohol, gangs, and violence–there is a moral imperative for him to fill the leadership vacuum and address the growing devastation.” Another column made the claim that the White House feared Gingrich because he could “paint vivid pictures both of the crisis and of what life will look like after the revolution,” while other Republicans could not.

This Gingrich lover, this creature of low intellect, this bamboozler deluxe is now the PINO Goddess. This confused Clinton hater is what drives Big Media narratives for the Dimocratic Left.

As the right’s revolution began to cool, Huffington’s revolutionary fervor started to wane, too. The Huffingtons divorced in 1997, and the following year Michael Huffington announced that he was bisexual. In 1998, Huffington published a book called Greetings from the Lincoln Bedroom, a lame anti-Clinton satire–Huffington is painfully unfunny–that nicely coincided with a general disgust with Washington. [snip]

And so she made herself over as an enemy of power, a tribune of the people, an A-list populist.

Her criticism of the Clinton years evolved from concerns about the president’s personal failings to a critique of his policies from the left. And she continued to demonstrate a rare gift for articulating the prevailing mood without ever saying anything especially probing or memorable. [snip]

That same year Huffington ran as a populist in a gubernatorial recall election in California, and succeeded only in seeming ridiculous. The election was ultimately won by a celebrity much more famous than she was.

Fanatic and fool, Arriana is the PINO Goddess and they will not discuss her hate for the Clintons from the left, or her hate of the Clintons from the right. It’s Clinton hate. But PINOs love Clinton hate – even when it comes from a Gingrich lover. Instead of questioning the newly minted “progressive” PINOs embraced Arriana even though it made no sense to do so:

There was something almost comical about the insistence of this sudden liberal that she be regarded as some kind of leader of American liberalism–that her latest incarnation be treated as her whole story.

* * * * *

Richard Wolffe has a book out which distributes the Obama view of the world. We’ll cover the book in greater detail in coming days/weeks. In the Wolffe book Obama states that “We had to figure out how to deal with a former president who was just lying, engaging in bald-faced lies.”

Obama attacking anyone for engaging in “bald-faced lies” is like Arriana Huffington attacking anyone for being “calculating”.

Want an example of a topical Obama “bald-faced lie”? How about Obama saying he did not bow to the Saudi King?



Obama insists he did not bow. Anyone believe that bald-faced lie?


The Corrupt Bow To The Corrupt

Bill Clinton himself refuted the Obama charge of racism which the “bald-faced” Obama charge refers to in the most recent Sunday New York Times. We wrote about the Obama bald-faced race-baiting lies repeatedly as have well-respected Democratic historians.

We will discuss the Wolffe book in more detail as necessary, but we noticed a section which has been ignored by just about every commentor thus far. Here is Obama’s view of a meeting with Hillary Clinton:

He was traveling to Des Moines for yet another debate and was getting ready to board his plane at the same time as Clinton was boarding hers, at Reagan National Airport. Clinton asked to talk to Obama and she apologized to him for comments by her New Hampshire co-chairman. Billy Shaheen had suggested that Republicans would exploit Obama’s self-confessed drug use if he won the nomination. Such comments had no place in her campaign, Clinton assured Obama, and Shaheen would resign. But Obama was not satisfied: he felt it was part of a pattern, which included an email forwarded by a Clinton volunteer in Iowa, suggesting that he was Muslim. Clinton grew agitated, waving her arms and poking her finger at him, as she hurled his own negativity back at him. Wasn’t he the one who just called her disingenuous for saying she couldn’t release her own White House papers? Wasn’t it his donor, David Geffen, who accused her and her husband of lying with ease? Instead of responding with anger, Obama tried to chill his rival, placing a hand on her arm. Clinton recoiled from the gesture, which seemed either patronizing or restraining, or both. Obama boarded his plane with a new sense of wonder. “I never saw that look of concern in her eyes before,” he told his senior aides. “I think we can we can win this one.”

That is Wolffe regurgitating Barack Obama’s view of himself as calm and logically while hysterical woman Hillary went nuts and out of control.

But to us the paragraph shows Hillary’s decency to an indecent Obama. Obama who had circulated anonymous memoranda attacking Bill Clinton in ugly ways and done nothing to shut down an ugly video equating Hillary with Big Brother in 2007 engaged in Dirty Mud Politics (our article from June 2007 HERE) and pretending to be a victim.

To us, Obama grabbing at Hillary wasn’t trying to “chill” her. Obama was trying to intimidate her. The look of “concern” in Hillary’s eyes was realization that Obama was a thug trying to mug her.



“Take your stinking paws off me you damned dirty ape” is the attitude Hillary had towards (yup, he’s white so keep your “racist!” charges to yourself Hopium eaters) Rick Lazio and Lazio merely approached her on a (Tim Russert moderated debate) stage, not grabbed at her at an airport hangar.


Jut Jaw

Arriana and Wolffe will spin for Obama. Wolffe will peddle Obama’s bald-faced lies. But Obama knew what he was doing when he grabbed at Hillary. Decent men know not to grab people.

Thugs grab.

Share

85 thoughts on “Damned Dirty Ape

  1. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23252.html

    At a book party at Washington’s Café Atlantico Monday night, there were quail eggs and caviar but no Newsweek editors, who declined to speak on-the-record about Wolffe or his book.

    Some of his former colleagues grumble privately that the magazine gained little of news value from Wolffe’s access to Obama and his inner circle, and suggest he lost detachment as he became more enraptured by a politician with whom he shares personal and ideological sympathies.

    Some Republicans say the same thing publicly.

    “Richard Wolffe was doing PR for Barack Obama throughout the campaign,” said Michael Goldfarb, a former aide to John McCain and a writer for the conservative Weekly Standard. “At least now, with the new book and the new job, he’s dropped even the pretense of being a journalist.”

  2. Admin,

    They keep coming out of the woodwork with their overblown egos and narrowminded brains. Your article says it all!

  3. Israel’s fear justified
    Iran leader looms as a modern Hitler

    By Marvin Hier
    OpEd
    Monday, June 1, 2009

    President Barack Obama travels to Cairo this week to deliver an important speech in an effort to seize the opportunity and inject momentum into the stalled Middle East peace process. Just as important as the speech is its symbolism, a new American peace initiative delivered by a U.S. president from an Arab capital and unveiled first not to America’s strategic partner, Israel, but to the Muslim world.

    On the very next day, the president seeks to engage and reassure the Jewish community by visiting the Buchenwald Concentration Camp that his great uncle helped liberate. By making this visit, and bringing back tragic memories, the president is signaling Israel’s supporters that he understands their fears and concerns.

    The president is surely aware that for Jews those memories are at the very heart of the current impasse in the Middle East. How can they not be when the chief funder of terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah is Iran – the same country that just successfully tested a new missile with a range of 1,200 miles that can reach Europe; a country whose president denies the Holocaust and calls for the eradication of Israel.

    However, to really understand the existential threat that Iran poses to Israel, the president and fellow world leaders gathering in France on Saturday to commemorate the 65th anniversary of D-Day might recall a similar fear that gripped Winston Churchill in the days prior to Operation Overlord.

    On May 18, 1944, he wrote to his chief of staff: “I do not myself believe the Germans will use poison gas on the beaches . . . the reason is that we could retaliate ten fold [with poison gas] . . . however, the temptation to use it on the beaches might be strong enough to override prudence – it’s worth considering whether a warning should not be uttered by me and the president [Franklin Roosevelt] that if any form of gas or toxic substance is used upon us or any of our allies, we shall immediately use the full power of our forces to drench German cities and towns.”

    Tragically, no such warning was ever issued on behalf of Europe’s Jews. Hitler was never told that if he continued to use Zyklon-B gas in the concentration camps, the allies would retaliate by gassing his SS divisions and installations all over Europe. The U.S. State Department confirmed Hitler’s extermination program as early as November 1942. Yet the allies warned against the use of poison gas against their own soldiers while never extending that warning to include the Jews who were gassed in the crematoria. Indeed, even after the successful landings at Normandy, those gassings continued.

    That is what troubles Israelis and their friends – not that the world doesn’t care, but that it won’t act in time. There is little doubt on whose side the Western allies would come down if Iran ever attacked Israel. But by that time, it could again be too late to save the Jews.
    Israelis cannot afford to take that chance. Almost 6 million Jews live in Israel today. What took Hitler five years to destroy could take just a few hours to accomplish should Iran acquire nuclear weapons. Israelis don’t want to bet their children’s future on potluck or the inability of an Iranian nuclear warhead to penetrate Israeli defenses. That is really the main message that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu brought with him to Washington. What he really was saying was that while the World War II allies liberated the concentration camps, by the time they arrived Hitler had already accomplished his task. Israel has no intention of allowing Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinijad to have history repeat itself.

    news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1176009

  4. More from the politico story:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23252.html

    “Obama has inspired a collective fawning” in the media, columnist Robert J. Samuelson recently wrote. At the recent White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, Obama joked, “Most of you covered me; all of you voted for me.”

    “Renegade” is billed on its cover as “based on exclusive interviews with Barack Obama.” The footnotes detail 21 such interviews. They were so exclusive, as it happens, that key elements of them apparently did not appear contemporaneously in Newsweek, which was footing the bill as Wolffe flew around the country with Obama for two years. Nor did they appear in the magazine’s own post-election volume.

    [snip]

    All of that will be good for sales — for the book, but not for Newsweek, which Federal Election Commission records show reimbursed the Obama campaign nearly $170,000 for the cost of flying Wolffe around the country in the candidate’s bubble.

    “We should have had most of what’s in the book,” said one Newsweek staffer, who complained that the magazine had gotten little in exchanged for the softened reporting that often comes with access.

    [snip]

    He painted the Obamas largely as they have portrayed themselves: reluctant, modest warriors who would have preferred to run a cool, intellectual campaign but were dragged into the mud by the Clintons.

    [snip]

    Wolffe writes that he identified with Obama because of his own mixed background – his parents hail from different parts of the Jewish diaspora – and his love of basketball. His book is deeply sympathetic to Obama and his viewpoint, and broadly – though not uniformly –accepts the campaign’s view of itself.

    [snip]

    On the public stage, Wolffe is best known for his appearances on MSNBC. During the campaign, he would often play the chortling Ed McMahon role to Keith Olbermann, as the host lacerated McCain.

  5. Slay the Denial Dragon

    Jun. 3, 2009
    Abraham Cooper and Harold Brackman ,

    On the eve of his historic speech at Cairo University, we wonder whether President Barack Obama will use this unique venue to provide a reality check for his hosts and through them the larger Arab and Muslim worlds about accepting and respecting Jewish history and aspirations.

    Case in point is Cairo¹s Al Ahram, Egypt¹s most prestigious daily and the semi-official voice of the regime: it seems to have already inoculated the Egyptian public from any temptation of taking to heart a possible plea from the US president for better relations with Jerusalem. Al Ahram has given its editorial page to Cairo University political professor Hassan Nafaa, whose rambling diatribe informs Egyptian readers that they need not bother their heads about recognizing Jewish history or Israeli rights because “Iraqi researcher Fadel Al-Rabiei, who studies pre-Islamic Arab history … believes that the Jerusalem of lore was not even in Palestine, but in Yemen, and argues that Mount Zion was in Negran in Yemen.”

    Unfortunately, denial from Solomon¹s Temple to the murder of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust ­ is the operative word for much of the mainstream Muslim world, a fact that has supercharged enemies of peace like Iran’s emboldened fanatic president Ahmadinejad.

    THE DEMONIZATION of Israeli leaders seems to be catchy, with some respected American pundits, including Fareed Zakaria and Roger Cohen, wondering aloud if Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu ­beneath his bon vivant secular veneer ­ could be a closet religious fanatic who believes that Iran is the reincarnation of Amalek, the biblical enemy who became short-hand for every tyrant who has threatened the Jewish people ­and who, according to the Torah, must be annihilated.

    Bibi as an avenging Moses – incredible on its face – makes sense only if you looking to excuse Ahmadinejad for threatening to “wipe Israel from the map.” The Iranian president quite openly believes in an imminent apocalypse, to be ushered in by the mysterious Thirteenth Imam. Netanyahu loses sleep not because he wants to incinerate millions of innocent Iranians but because of the all-too-real-threats from the Teheran regime, armed with nuclear-tipped ambitions committed to finishing Hitler’s work.

    To his credit, in advance of his Mideast trip Obama told PA President Mahmoud Abbas “that it was very important to continue to make progress in reducing the incitement and anti-Israel sentiments that are sometimes expressed in schools and mosques and in the public square, because all those things are impediments to peace.” Kudos to the president for even bringing up this issue, which the world’s media generally ignore. There is no reported or discernible evidence in either Gaza’s “Hamastan” or Abbas’ West Bank of “progress” in reducing anti-Israel and anti-Jewish “incitement,” which remains rampant and officially promoted in Palestinian mosques, madrassas, and media. Abbas’ response: nada. He completely stonewalled on the issue.

    REAL PEACE has to be made not only from the top down but from the bottom up. This is why Palestinian politicians since 1993, when Arafat first promised to recognize Israel’s “right to exist,” have put themselves in a box by
    demagogically inflaming their own people. It’s not merely extremist preachers on Palestinian television describing Jews as “apes and pigs” destined for destruction. It’s Palestinian politicians, who describe Jerusalem as the Holy City of Islam and perhaps Christianity, but never Judaism.

    If President Obama wants to become an historic Mideast peacemaker, he’s going to have to slay the dragon of a deeply embedded mythology. The beast he must confront resides not in the head of Israel’s democratic majority or its prime minister but in the minds and hearts of too many Arabs and Muslims who believe outlandish, anti-Semitic as well as anti-Israel fantasies. The
    podium at Cairo University offers President Obama an unprecedented historic opportunity to confront this dragon in its lair. Let’s hope he will seize it.

    jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244034987845&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

  6. “reluctant, modest warriors who would have preferred to run a cool, intellectual campaign but were dragged into the mud by the Clintons.”

    ——————————

    Excuse the language, but all I can think of at the moment is that bambi and his thugs are a bunch of bastards!!!

    And Wolffe is a disgrace to the Jewish race!

  7. June 03, 2009
    Categories: Healthcare

    A year later, Hillary wins

    A year ago today, the final set of primaries made official the foregone conclusion that Barack Obama had won the primary, and Hillary Clinton lost it.

    There’s far too much going on today to dwell on an anniversary, but it does seem worth noting one particular piece of news in its light: On the central health care policy debate of the Democratic Primary — which was, to be fair, conducted within a fairly narrow frame — Obama appears to have conceded today to a Senate plan likely to more closely resemble Clinton’s.

    In a dense, careful letter to Ted Kennedy and Max Baucus, Obama offered his principles for a health care plan and conceded on a central point: He is now open to an individual mandate, which he campaigned against, and which is now being talked about by Senators of both parties with the buzzword “shared responsibility.”

    Obama still backs a “hardship waiver” for people unable to afford the mandate — which is consistent with the core of his objection to the mandate. But what he cast as a principled difference of approach — was the problem merely that people couldn’t afford insurance? or something more? — seems to have been conceded.

    Here’s the relevant paragraph:

    I understand the Committees are moving towards a principle of shared responsibility — making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage, and asking that employers share in the cost. I share the goal of ending lapses and gaps in coverage that make us less healthy and drive up everyone’s costs, and I am open to your ideas on shared responsibility. But I believe if we are going to make people responsible for owning health insurance, we must make health care affordable. If we do end up with a system where people are responsible for their own insurance, we need to provide a hardship waiver to exempt Americans who cannot afford it. In addition, while I believe that employers have a responsibility to support health insurance for their employees, small businesses face a number of special challenges in affording health benefits and should be exempted.

    politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/A_year_later_Hillary_wins.html

  8. June 03, 2009

    Categories: Sunday Shows

    Hillary heads to “This Week”; first Sunday show in a year

    George Stephanopoulos nabs Hillary Clinton this week for her first Sunday show interview since losing the Democratic primary one year ago.

    Stephanopolous, on his blog, writes: “Six months into her job, Secretary Clinton has traveled to 18 countries and territories. On her plate — some of the most pressing issues facing the Obama administration: U.S. relations with Israel, Iran, China, Cuba, and North Korea’s latest nuclear positioning, to name a few.”

    politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0609/Hillary_heads_to_This_Week_first_Sunday_show_in_a_year.html

  9. REAL PEACE has to be made not only from the top down but from the bottom up. This is why Palestinian politicians since 1993, when Arafat first promised to recognize Israel’s “right to exist,” have put themselves in a box by
    demagogically inflaming their own people.
    *********
    That is exactly right. In every Islamic country in the region ~80% of the population say that there can’t be a solution as long as Israel is a Jewish state. Even if they wanted to, no mid-east govt could agree to the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, and survive. Sadat was probably the only politician in the region who negotiated in good faith and he ended up in a box.

  10. the colusion between O and Wollfe…and O and NBC the past two nights is nauseating…the man thinks everything is one big joke but don’t worry he will still find time to be the first man in history to save the world and the first man to do everything first…and no cost is too much…he wants what he wants when he wants it…reality be damned…

    Samuelson just touched the tip of the iceberg…our country has been taken over by hero worship…everything has to go back to O…like one big endless commerical day in and day out glorfiying O…it does not end…there is no perspective…we are becoming the mirror of some third world country where the ‘leader’ is ever present…and the government is everything…and the government runs all the shows…this is really getting out of hand…there are zero checks and balances and no media to insist on accountability and worse no opposition at all…this is not good…

    and as ADMIN says the left is useless…sure, Ted Ralls spit out the koolaid and once in a while Greenwald and Hedges will see the light but basically the majority of them are useless…in fact, the left is dangerous…if you do not see things their way, the left is out to destroy and demonize…there are no ‘two sides’ or co-existence, it is complete tunnel vision and their way or no way…

    something has to give…our country cannot go on like this…

  11. To us, Obama grabbing at Hillary wasn’t trying to “chill” her. Obama was trying to intimidate her. The look of “concern” in Hillary’s eyes was realization that Obama was a thug trying to mug her.
    ************************************

    Yes, yes, yes…

  12. msunderestimated.com/2009/06/03/barack-gets-rebuffed-on-saudi-welcome-line-video/

    you have to see this!

  13. Hillary was most likely trying to restrain herself from slapping the living daylights out of him.
    Hillary is anything but submissive she knew this con artists game from the day one.
    Arianna Huffington has always been insanely jealous of Hillary Clinton because she never became a senators wife and her charade of a marriage failed.

  14. Admin:. You are truly brilliant and I cannot thank you enough. During the primaries I didn’t spend much time here. I knew you were a dedicated Hillster and I knew there were dragons that needed to be slayed so I fought but now I choose my battles and this place is where I come to recharge so thank you for that. You are amazing and fabulous.

    I despise the Poopster and your scored a knock out. You need to add the magic share buttons. Please?

  15. “There was little conversation and even less romance,” Wolffe writes. “She was angry at his selfishness and careerism; he thought she was cold and ungrateful.”
    ———————————–
    Thank you for those bird droppings Wolff–you maggot. It makes them seem so, so, so . . . real . . . a better word would be psychotic. Let me see if I can put the marriage between those two lovebirds to lyrics.

    A FINE ROMANCE (MODIFIED)

    (BAMBI)–
    A fine romance with no kisses
    A fine romance, SCOOP JAW, this is
    We should be like a couple of SPOILED tomatoes
    But you’re as cold as yesterday’s mashed potateoes (BARF)

    (SCOOPJAW)–
    A fine romance, YOU ASSHOLE BAMBI
    I’ll take romance, you take TELE
    You’re colder than the seals in the Arctic Ocean
    At least they flap their fins to express emotion

    (DUET)
    THIS AINT a fine romance
    BUT WE GOTTA PRETEND ITS CAMELOT
    (Larry Sinclair–meet me in the gazebo at 10 pm).

  16. Wbboei, Billy Holiday’s (our favorite) version of A Fine Romance. [thanks for reminding us of this song and for the B.O. lyrics]

  17. Here is why ACORN is a problem:

    “Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street.” —-Joseph Goebbels

  18. Thanks Admin. Billie Holiday was a great one alright. To me she always seemed more like a Jazz Age singer in the Era of Swing. I rather suspect that was part of her appeal.

    I have been thinking about designing a new award which begins where the Proxmire Golden Fleece award left off. It should be given out once every four years to the politican or spouse who puts on a vulgar display of lavish ostentatious spending while the country is in the grip of an economic crisis the likes of which we have not seen since the Great Depression. Call it the Marie Antoniette award and give it to the First Lady of Hate as a token of our eternal admiration for the way she punishes the taxpayers pocket.

  19. Obama in Egypt is saying he has ordered the closing of Guantanamo. Egyptians will no doubt wonder when the doors of Guantanamo will actually close. Americans will fairly ponder the same question.

  20. The Turkish government, which restricts scarves on women, is sure to be angry with this paragraph of the Obama speech:

    Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

  21. Obama preaches women’s rights – in other countries:

    In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

  22. Surprise, Obama is spending more money:

    On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

  23. Admin,

    Kudos to you for reporting on huffpoo. i can’t bear to read, see or listen to her so I had to skip most of your thread. 👿

    Listening top the news this morning, as is my custom, I was sickened by the fauning even at FOX over Bo’s Muslim outreach.
    I will NEVER embrace any idealogy that consigns women to property status.
    WTF is wrong with the women in this country? WTF should WE placate Muslims? Their extremist elements, which are NOT universally condemned by Muslim countries, murdered 3000 of our citizens. How can the country be so IGNORANT as to forget 911 ever happened? I am concerned and worried about how quickly the muslim mantra is overtaking the country, from BO’s LIES that Muslims are a large part of the population – NOT – to Jarett’s comments today echoing her boss’s stance. She spoke about how important it is for the US to reach out to the 8 million muslims here. I have a sense of something terrible about to happen.
    I read on another blog that the FBI has been ordered NOT to investigate the Arkansas muslim murderer’s ties to terrorists.

    Oh, and BTW, the jihadists just beheaded another British citizen.
    The Saudi Family, as Wbboei posted on the previous thread, has executed dozens of women.

  24. I just heard a large chunk of the speech on the radio and it was typical Obama (if we just work to understand each other our conflicts will cease). I agree with admin–it was a broad speech about Islam and perceptions.

    Some things that caught my ear: It’s now apparently OK to talk about Obama’s connections to the Muslim faith and his middle name, he intends to pursue his “new beginning” approach with Iran without preconditions, evidently Iran can have nuclear power and we shouldn’t worry about it, no country, including ours, should be saying anything who can or cannot have nuclear weapons.

    He says we are in a “new age” and that any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. Evidently, in Obama’s world no country can act in a leadership role for others.

    Also there was this:

    “I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations – including my own – this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities – those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.”

    Is he saying that any objections to his policies and decisions is simply because we are fearful of his “modern” approach to the world? I for one am not afraid of change or modernization at all. I am simply fearful of the direction he is steering it.

    Anyway, that’s my 2 second take on what I heard this am–more later…

  25. My take on the subtext of BO’s remarks;
    (paraphrasing – of course)
    yeah, 911 was a terrible thing but Americans need to get over it.

    I DESPISE him.

  26. americangal,

    The extremists LOVE the idea of a ‘new beginning’, one in which the US is defeated.

    I don’t want or need any ‘new beginning,’ nor does the country. His friggin arrogance, his presumptuousness is chilling.

    And the emphasis now on his muslim roots is nauseating. As Wbboei siad in the previous thread, it’s a boiling-the-frog approach to during the country.

    The hypocrisy is truly unreal. i wonder how McCain feels these days about his command NOT to say BO’s middle name during the campaign?

  27. How different are some of the things said in this speech compared to past presidents? I am sure that both George Bush and Bill Clinton called for a great tolerance and understanding of views in the middle east and between America and Muslims.

    Except for the Obama specific portions, hasn’t some of what he said today been given in speeches before? The spin seems to be that this is a new approach by our country and that there has been nothing but negativity before. It may be a new approach in political governing but I doubt that calling for peace and understanding only arrived on the scene with Obama.

  28. “The extremists LOVE the idea of a ‘new beginning’, one in which the US is defeated. ”

    Good point basil9 and I agree with you..

  29. americangal,

    One of his remarks went something like this: “911 caused great trauma in the US and (my paraphrasing) might have contributed to an over-reaction.”

    BTW – Am i imagining things or is that HRC in a yellow pantsuit and head covering trailing well behind BO and the Egyptian prez(?) and his wife? If so, I am gonna puke. The symbolic submissiveness is just too much for me to handle.

    BTW – Having lived in one of the most densely-Muslim populated areas in the US, I saw up close how the men regard non-burkha covered women. I also have known many muslim women, some of who ‘converted’ and took to wearing the burkha and their groveling submissiveness was just plain sad.

  30. The NYC Post gets it.

    Obama really buttered them up in Cairo.

    He thanked them for everything from algebra to the pen, though he curiously failed to mention that they often throw people in prison for using it.

    He even went so far as to tell the audience that he considers “it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

  31. In the meantime, Iran’s khomeni says this:

    “The nations in the region hate the United States from the bottom of their hearts because they have seen violence, military intervention and discrimination,” Khamenei said at the mausoleum of Khomeini.

    “The new US government seeks to transform this image. I say firmly, that this will not be achieved by talking, speech and slogans.

    “They have done things that have deeply hurt the nations in the region… action is needed and one can not remove this deep hatred by words, speeches and slogans.”

  32. I am surprised that Hillary is with him on his trip to Cairo. Wonder why he thinks he needs her on that trip since he is “all that”. We all know he desperately needs her.
    No doubt Axelrod uses her for PR and legitimacy of this insane administration.
    Apparently Greta will interview Hillary tonight about the mideast visit.

  33. What I get from this speech is that he just gave Israel the finger. He announced we are going to allow Iran to have the ability to make a nuclear weapon. He does this by allowing them to have nuclear power. We know that the nuclear industry loves Obama, now we know why!

  34. SET YOUR VCRs, or TIVO, OR WHATEVER YOU KIDS ARE USING TODAY…

    politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0609/Hillary_heads_to_This_Week_first_Sunday_show_in_a_year.html

    Hillary heads to “This Week”; first Sunday show in a year
    ========================================

    George Stephanopoulos nabs Hillary Clinton this week for her first Sunday show interview since losing the Democratic primary one year ago.

    Stephanopolous, on his blog, writes: “Six months into her job, Secretary Clinton has traveled to 18 countries and territories. On her plate — some of the most pressing issues facing the Obama administration: U.S. relations with Israel, Iran, China, Cuba, and North Korea’s latest nuclear positioning, to name a few.”

    &&&&&&&
    also, at the bottom of the link, are comments, many favorable to Hillary.

  35. I am surprised that Hillary is with him on his trip to Cairo. Wonder why he thinks he needs her on that trip since he is “all that”. We all know he desperately needs her.
    No doubt Axelrod uses her for PR and legitimacy of this insane administration.
    Apparently Greta will interview Hillary tonight about the mideast visit.
    ——————————————-
    Confloyd: trust me. Wild horses could not keep her away from the Middle East at this point. Mr. Obama is about to assume personal responsibility for ending a complex conflict which is centuries old.

    I have it on good authority that when all else fails he will try to Saudi variant of “why can’t we all just get along so the King can exploit his subjects and keep his solid gold crapper?”

    That will be the cue wolffish big media to say: isnt he swell, isnt he grand, there has never been such a leader as him throughout all history, rather than the truth which is the emperor has no clothes.

  36. What I get from this speech is that he just gave Israel the finger. He announced we are going to allow Iran to have the ability to make a nuclear weapon. He does this by allowing them to have nuclear power. We know that the nuclear industry loves Obama, now we know why!
    ———————————————————-
    Confloyd: you are correct. He is giving up a strategic advantage held by the United States, Israel, Britain and other interests. But think of how this benefits GE and Immelt. Why should the Russian companies get all the gravy here building these reactors. I am quite sure that is one of the angles here. And he will have all the benign excuses in the world–like clean energy, what better way to monitor, etc.

  37. In the meantime, Iran’s khomeni says this:

    “The nations in the region hate the United States from the bottom of their hearts because they have seen violence, military intervention and discrimination,” Khamenei said at the mausoleum of Khomeini.

    “The new US government seeks to transform this image. I say firmly, that this will not be achieved by talking, speech and slogans.

    “They have done things that have deeply hurt the nations in the region… action is needed and one can not remove this deep hatred by words, speeches and slogans.”
    ——————————-
    How about money? Because that is the only thing left that Bambi has left to offer. And not just any old money. Our money. Which he sees as his private piggy bank. If it were just $40,000 nights on the town in Manhatten it would be one thing. It is far far far more than that.

  38. I am not expert, but anyone who knows anything about the Middle East knows that their deepest fear is not the United States per se, but it represents namely modernization, westernization and the corresponding loss of their identity and their values. It is a manifestation of the apprehension that idigenous populations throughout the world feel in the face of economic globalization. And it threatens the domain of the ayatollas, taliban and others. What Bambi is essentially offering them is more of the hair of the dog that bit them. He is promising to restore the flower of high muslim civilization which existed between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance but it is akin to the Great Society Program gone global, with the same inevitable result–trillions of dollars later. And the King keeps his kingdom and the gold crapper–which is the real end game here. If it were otherwise, the King would be spreading his vast wealth to his subjects.

  39. House Republicans offer $23B list of spending cuts

    google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jH_qOu2WXdjfeYUYs4ObnnAvdhagD98JOVB00

  40. Thanks, Admin for the rundown on his speech. I want to write a post on his speech (for NQ) but I am sick to my stomach about what he is doing. Instead of taking the religious element completely out of terrorism he is reinforcing the notion that there is a Muslim and non-Muslim world and they are at odds with each other (just as the terrorists want it). All this grovelling to the silent bystanders and their oppressive and devious regimes in the “Muslim World” makes me sick. So he thinks he will change the hearts and minds of these people on the street who languish in poverty while turning a blind eye to their oppressive govts looting them everyday? I am so angry right now.. not the least of which is the thought to countries like India which has significant mixed population that carry on their world affairs respectably well in the midst of having nuke neighbors who carry on their shenanigans with the assistance from the US with impunity. He comes across as a clueless one trick donkey. I have never felt this angry before.

  41. BORN IN THE USA?
    ‘Transparent’ White House blacklists ‘birthers’
    Obama eligibility topic missing from plans for next phase of dialogue

    (very long article)

    wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100035

  42. Four views of Obama’s Mideast speech
    Reuters

    THE U.S. VIEW

    “Americans have seen these types of threats before. I don’t think it’s surprising that al-Qaeda would want to shift attention away from the President’s historic efforts, and continued efforts to reach out and have an open dialogue with the Muslim world.”

    — Robert Gibbs, pictured, White House spokesman

    “There’s been a breach, an undeniable breach between America and the Islamic world, and that breach has been years in the making and it’s not going to be reversed with one speech or perhaps in one administration.”

    — David Axelrod, Obama advisor

    THE JEWISH VIEW

    “The American president has the right to try to reconcile with the Muslim world and compete with al-Qaeda or Iran for its heart. We have to make sure that this will not harm our common interests.”

    — Israeli Transport Minister Yisrael Katz, a close ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

    “Obama plans to teach Netanyahu, pictured, about tough love.”

    –The Haaretz newspaper

    “Obama wants to make Israel his whipping boy.”

    — Gemma Blech of the radical Women in Green movement protesting outside the U. S. consulate in Jerusalem

    THE TERRORISTS’ VIEW

    “Let the American people be ready to reap what the White House leaders have sown. Obama and his administration have sown new seeds to increase hatred and revenge on America.”

    — Osama bin Laden, pictured, message broadcast on Al-Jazeera television yesterday

    “His [Obama’s] bloody messages were received and are still being received by Muslims, and they will not be concealed by public relations campaigns or by farcical visits or elegant words. As for his choice of Turkey and Egypt to be the places from which to address the Muslim world as he claims, well, this choice holds another indication that simply says that the kind of Muslims the Crusader Americans would be pleased with are those who abandon Islam and embrace secularism, those who acknowledge Israel, conclude security agreements with it, and take part in its military drills.”

    — Ayman Zawahiri, al-Qaeda No. 2 in a video on Tuesday

    THE MUSLIM VIEW

    “Don’t be biased towards Israel, don’t interfere in countries’ internal affairs and don’t give lessons in democracy.”

    — An editorial in Egypt’s state-owned Rose El-Youssef newspaper giving advice to Mr. Obama

    “There’s nothing more absurd than putting more pressure on the Arab-Muslim world.”

    — Ossama Saraya, chief editor of Egypt’s state-owned Al-Ahram newspaper

    “What’s he going to do for us? Lower the price of bread? If he does, then he’s welcome here.”

    — Cairo cafe worker Ahmed Abdel Salam, 38

    nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1662057

  43. I do not like the idea that it is Stepanaopolis. I view him as an enemy. He is too embedded in the Obama administration to be an honest journalist. He is one of the four who meet with the administration every morning and help them manage the propaganda which keeps the public in the dark. Also, he betrayed the Clintons in that book. This is not the kind of thing the Administration could dictate so she must have her reasons for talking to him, or at an earlier phase Mitchell. One thing about George–he is not as “Wolffish” as Bitchell.

  44. Israel praises Obama, says its security paramount

    Thu Jun 4, 2009 9:55am EDT

    JERUSALEM, June 4 (Reuters) – The Israeli government responded to U.S. President Barack Obama’s speech to Muslims on Thursday by saying it shared his hopes for Middle East peace but Israel’s security interests remained paramount.

    “We share President Obama’s hope that the American effort heralds the opening of a new era that will bring an end to the conflict and to general Arab recognition of Israel as the nation of the Jewish people that lives in security and peace in the Middle East,” an official statement said. “Israel is committed to peace and will do all it can to expand the circle of peace while considering its national interests, first and foremost being security,” it said after Obama’s address in Cairo.

    The statement made no mention of Jewish settlements, which Obama said should not be expanded, nor Palestinian statehood.

    At odds with Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that construction would continue in existing settlements in the West Bank and he has not publicly endorsed a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Netanyahu, who heads a right-leaning government, has said Israel’s security considerations were key in the pursuit of peace with the Palestinians and that any entity they established must be demilitarised and have limited powers of sovereignty.

    reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSL41035801

  45. Thanks, Admin for the rundown on his speech. I want to write a post on his speech (for NQ) but I am sick to my stomach about what he is doing. Instead of taking the religious element completely out of terrorism he is reinforcing the notion that there is a Muslim and non-Muslim world and they are at odds with each other (just as the terrorists want it). All this grovelling to the silent bystanders and their oppressive and devious regimes in the “Muslim World” makes me sick. So he thinks he will change the hearts and minds of these people on the street who languish in poverty while turning a blind eye to their oppressive govts looting them everyday? I am so angry right now.. not the least of which is the thought to countries like India which has significant mixed population that carry on their world affairs respectably well in the midst of having nuke neighbors who carry on their shenanigans with the assistance from the US with impunity. He comes across as a clueless one trick donkey. I have never felt this angry before
    ————————————————-
    Excellent insight. He is all about preserving social advantage. By casting the problem as he did, he avoids the pivotal issue which is the lack of responsibility of the ruling interests in the arab states to their own people which is the root cause of terrorism. He shifts it to the broader issue, which is thing that limosene liberals in this country do to preserve their social advantage–blather on about racism. It is a diversionary tactic, which protects the elitists and exascerbates the real problem.

  46. I wonder if the Wolffe book will come up in the discussion with Stepanaopolis.
    —————
    It will unless it has been censored by prior agreement. If it does not come up then you will know that George is a controlled animal.

  47. Israel will walk the dog on this one. Security interests are paramont. It is a hall of mirrors. No leader can survive by alienating his constituency. The consensus has already formed within the region. These comments are more for the benefit of European and American interests. The beauty of this position is no one can tell Israel how much security is enough security. Only they can decide that question. And that is the control point to all this fanfare and nonsense.

  48. I swear, it must be a conspiracy. Yesterday afternoon, on NPR news, was a story that a judge ruled that lemon law lawsuits against GM and Chrysler were to be dismissed as a result of their bankruptcy filings. And protestors were howling.

    Yet I can’t seem to find any articles on it, on “All Things Considered”, NYT, AP, Google, jeez!!!

  49. Jan–on the four views, the one I find least credible is the one expressed by the Administration. Much of it has to do with the sources–Axelrod and Gibbs who are known to be pathological liars. But on another level, it shows you how far our country has moved away from reality. Our stategy should be about forcing the Arab regimes to stop exploiting their people, share their wealth, and act like statesmen as opposed to pigs.

  50. wbboei Says:

    June 4th, 2009 at 11:46 am

    —————————–

    As par for the course, I am in total agreement with you!

  51. I swear, it must be a conspiracy. Yesterday afternoon, on NPR news, was a story that a judge ruled that lemon law lawsuits against GM and Chrysler were to be dismissed as a result of their bankruptcy filings. And protestors were howling.
    ——————————
    If it is true, then it is probably the result of the priorities established under bankruptcy law. It does not bode well for the marketabilty of their products or those of GM (government motors) in the United States. And, in some ways, it paves the way for the exit stategy I speculated on yesterday which I believe is part of the globalist plan.

  52. wbboei Says:
    June 4th, 2009 at 4:07 am

    Here is why ACORN is a problem:

    “Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street.” —-Joseph Goebbels

    ===================

    Wow. That is a new idea to me. What did Alinksy say abut Gobbels?

  53. 1. ADMINISTRATION: “There’s been a breach, an undeniable breach between America and the Islamic world”. WRONG DIAGONOSIS. SELF SERVING CRAP. CAMPAIGN POLITICS UBER ALLES.

    2. ISRAEL: “The American president has the right to try to reconcile with the Muslim world and compete with al-Qaeda or Iran for its heart. We have to make sure that this will not harm our common interests.” CORRECT AND ARTFULLY SAID. BAMBI IS AN OUTSIDER. AL QUAEDA AND IRAN ARE LOCAL. WHO DO YOU SUPPOSE WILL HAVE MORE INFLUENCE. ISRAEL WILL MAKE SURE THAT BAMBIS FOLLY DOES NOT HARM OUR COMMON INTERESTS. YOU AINT THROWING ME INTO THE BRAMBLE BUSH FOR THE SAKE OF A HEADLINE.

    3. TERRORIST: His [Obama’s] bloody messages were received and are still being received by Muslims, and they will not be concealed by public relations campaigns or by farcical visits or elegant words. ON THIS POINT HE SPEAKS THE TRUTH.

    4. MUSLIM:“Don’t be biased towards Israel, don’t interfere in countries’ internal affairs and don’t give lessons in democracy.” LESSON 1: MATURE ADULTS DO NOT LIKE BEING LECTURED TO BY CHARLATANS. LESSON 2: WE WANT TO WESTERNIZATION. LESSON 3. WE DO NOT WANT TO GIVE POWER TO OUR PEOPLE.

  54. correction: we DO NOT want westernization. We will decide for ourselves what we will do and when we will do it. We do not need Bambi to tell us what to do.

  55. Wow. That is a new idea to me. What did Alinksy say abut Gobbels?
    —————————————–
    I suspect he would have been reluctant to acknowlege their intellectual and tactical kinship and lineage.

  56. Backlash from China as Clinton calls for Tiananmen ‘healing’US secretary of state calls on regime to name protesters killed in 1989, release those still held and foster democracy…

    China has accused the US of “crudely meddling” in its affairs after Hillary Clinton urged Beijing to account for those killed in a crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square 20 years ago.

    The US secretary of state last night also called on China to release those still imprisoned in connection with the protests, stop harassing those who took part and begin a dialogue with victims’ families. She urged the regime to “examine openly the darker events of its past and provide a public accounting of those killed, detained or missing, both to learn and to heal”.

    “China can honour the memory of that day by moving to give the rule of law, protection of internationally recognised human rights and democratic development the same priority as it has given to economic reform,” she said.

    A China foreign ministry spokesman, Qin Gang, said at a press conference: “The statement from the United States ignores the facts and makes groundless accusations against the Chinese government. “We express our strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition. We urge the United States to forsake its prejudices, correct its erroneous ways and avoid obstructing and damaging China-US relations.”

    The Communist party describes the events of 4 June 1989 as “a counter-revolutionary riot” and has never released the names of those who died. Qin refused to answer questions about the death toll at the news conference.

    Independent estimates suggest hundreds died as troops forced their way through the city to clear the square of demonstrators. Some arguing the deaths ran into thousands.

    Uniformed and plainclothes police thronged Tiananmen Square today and foreign journalists were barred from entry. Online services and foreign media have been heavily censored.

    The Chinese Human Rights Defenders network said it had documented 65 cases of people harassed by officials to stop them organising or taking part in activities commemorating the anniversary. In several cases, police and other officials told relatives that detainees would be released after 4 or 5 June.

    Many are human rights campaigners and participants in the 1989 protests. Some were reportedly being held in their homes under guard, while others have been forced to take “tourist trips” with police. Under such “soft detention” they may be allowed to leave their homes, but are closely followed and monitored by police or asked to travel in police vehicles, and often barred from meeting other activists.

    guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/04/tiananmen-clinton-china-meddling-1989

  57. Occupied mayorships upset over Hillary snub

    By Elias Hazou

    THE MAYOR of the occupied town of Famagusta wants the government to protest to Washington because US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “refused” to see the mayors of occupied townships when the opportunity arose recently.

    According to Alexis Galanos, a delegation of PSEKA had arranged a meeting with Clinton and they had asked that the meeting include mayors of occupied municipalities.

    However it seems the Secretary of State resorted to a bit of diplomatic legerdemain. According to Galanos, prior to her meeting with PSEKA, Clinton had set the condition that she would see only American citizens—effectively disqualifying the Greek Cypriot mayors who were keen for some face-time with the top US diplomat.

    Galanos speculated this was part of US protocol of “keeping equal distances”: had Clinton agreed to meet with the Greek Cypriot mayors, this might have upset the Turkish Cypriots. But Galanos was none too impressed, calling the treatment of the mayors “unacceptable.” He said the snub was a sign the Obama administration was not as “involved with refugee issues as much as we’d like.

    “It is the first time this has happened…and we express our bitterness,” the Famagusta mayor told newsmen. “We believe our Foreign Ministry should issue a demarche to Washington,” he added.

    On a smaller scale, the mayors’ grievance echoed the fuss made by certain quarters last month after Clinton had agreed on a one-on-one with Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat.

    Galanos praised the Greek Cypriot community in the United States for its solid work in promoting the Cyprus issue, but bemoaned the lack of coordination between expat organizations and the government.

    PSEKA, also known as The International Coordinating Committee “Justice for Cyprus,” was founded in 1975 by the late President of Cyprus, Archbishop Makarios. The organization, with headquarters in Nicosia, Cyprus, has chapters all over the world. Its North American headquarters are located in New York City

    cyprus-mail.com/news/main.php?id=46037&cat_id=1

  58. OBAMA FACTOIDS ON STEROIDS

    blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/06/03/barack_hussein_obama_us_one_of_the_largest_muslim_countries_in_the_world

    Barack Hussein Obama: US “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world”
    ======================================================

    Posted By: Toby Harnden at Jun 3, 2009 at 04:14:00 [General]

    It is important to note that “if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world”.

    So says President Barack Obama. Or I should say: Barack Hussein Obama.

    That’s right: Barack Hussein Obama. Say it proud. Say it out loud. The middle moniker that dared not speak its name during the election campaign is now front and centre of the US president’s attempt to woo the Muslim world, the theme of his visits to Riyadh on Wednesday and Cairo on Thursday.

    Petrified of the potential political fallout of being branded a Muslim, Candidate Obama – a practicing Christian – never used the name “Hussein” and its use was frowned upon as a forbidden code for the nutty accusation that he was some kind of Islamic Manchurian candidate.

    No more. To say Barack Hussein Obama – BHO for short – now appears to be the height of political correctness.

    As I argue in this analysis for the Telegraph dead tree edition, Obama is seeking to return to a Middle East policy based on realism – buttressed by the bona fides of his own multi-cultural (including Muslim) background.

    In Strasbourg two months ago, the president tried out his full name. Days later in Ankara, he was introduced to the Turkish parliament by his full name.

    As ABC’s Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller astutely outline here, the Obama administration is embracing the new president’s inner Muslim, as it were. Deputy national security adviser stated that Obama had “experienced Islam on three continents…growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father — obviously Muslim Americans [are] a key part of Illinois and Chicago”.

    So that’s once, twice, three times a Muslim?

    Just in case the Arab world hasn’t yet got this message of inbuilt tolerance, Mr Obama himself has gone a step further. In an interview with France’s Canal Plus released on Tuesday evening, he suggested that the United States might be a Muslim country.

    Obama said he wanted to “create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what’s happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians”.

    So far, so blah – President George W. Bush often expressed much the same sentiments.

    But then, as is his habit , Obama turned the concept around. “Now, the flip side is I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam.

    “And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there’s got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples.”

    Obama said in Turkey that Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation”. John McCain was criticised in 2007 for saying the US was “a Christian nation”, later amending this to “a Judeo-Christian valued nation”.

    Of course, the concept of separation of church and state, which derived from the First Amendment to the Constitution, means that the US is not officially a Christian nation or a nation of any other particular religion. Which means, I suppose, that the US is as much a Muslim nation as a Christian one.

    It’s a bold – some might say audacious – turnaround by the president.

    It’s also a classically Obamaesque move.

    During the 2008 campaign, he skillfully made himself, through his life story, the personification of change.

    Now, implicitly contrasting himself with the born-again, evangelical Bush who pursued a post-9/11 “crusade” against terrorism, Obama is presenting himself to the Islamic world as the personification of a new, tolerant – and, yes, partly Muslim – America.

    UPDATE: The excellent Don Surber crunches the numbers and points out that Obama’s claim is highly dubious. According to Surber, the US has an estimated three to eight million Muslims, less than one per cent of the world’s total and less than at least 23 other countries.

    The average claim for the US Muslim population is about six million. The precise figure is difficult to get because it’s not included in US census data and many put the figure at much, much less.

    But even if we assume there are six million Muslims in the US, that makes it only the 34th biggest Muslim country in the world – behind Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria, China, Ethiopia, Algeria, Morocco, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Tanzania, Syria, Malaysia, Niger, Senegal, Ghana, Tunisia, Somalia, Guinea, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Burkina Faso and Tajikistan.

    UPDATE 2: Debbie Schlussel cites a reputable survey by Pew that puts the number of Muslims in the US at 1.8 million. This would make it the 48th biggest Muslim country, after the above list plus France, Libya, Jordan, Israel, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritania, Germany, Kuwait, Oman, Eritrea, Lebanon and Serbia and Montenegro – and just above Britain, which would be the 50th.

  59. very interesting interview/debate on GM. Kinda long, so I didn’t put it up here, but is really in depth.

    democracynow.org/2009/6/2/ralph_nader_and_labor_professor_harley

    Guests:

    Harley Shaiken, professor at UC Berkeley who specializes in labor and the global economy. His latest article is in the current issue of Dissent Magazine, called “Motown Blues: What Next for Detroit?”

    Ralph Nader, longtime consumer advocate and former presidential candidate. His first book, Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile, published in 1965, took on General Motors and its Chevrolet Corvair model.

  60. Backlash from China as Clinton calls for Tiananmen ‘healing’US secretary of state calls on regime to name protesters killed in 1989, release those still held and foster democracy…

    China has accused the US of “crudely meddling” in its affairs after Hillary Clinton urged Beijing to account for those killed in a crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square 20 years ago.
    ————————————————–
    What if anything does the timing of Hillarys statement tell us about the success or lack thereof of Geithners trip? As you may recall, she was unwilling to call them on this before Geithner made the trip. In fact, she said other issues, i.e. global economic collapse, climate change were front burner, corrupt jouranalists like little Matt Lee made a big thing of it, and amnesty groups split a gusset. Well, now that she has done it, in what I consider a diplomatic way–asking them to do it themselves, and it has drawn the reaction most of us knew it would, I just wonder if the globalist Geithners trip was not as encouraging as his masters had hoped it would be. To be fair, issues like moving away from the dollar, investing less heavily in t bills etc do resonate. But again, the Bambi cure will be worse than the disease.

  61. I think we do respect their clothing customs in this country. Our clothing customs are not respected at all in theirs. When they start letting Western women wear western clothes in their country, we will totally accept their clothing customs, except where security is an issue.

    How can the American people keep accepting and praising his constant put down of Americans.

  62. Seems like our politics has morphed from problemsolving to symbolism. And it is becoming true on all levels.

  63. Obama speech pushed hard by White House

    Posted by lvecsey June 04, 2009 12:20PM

    The White House conducted a full court press today getting the word out about President Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo which addressed the relationship of Muslim communities around the world. We even got an email from David Axelrod, special advisor to Obama. The former campaign manager wrote:

    “As a Senior Advisor to the President, I’m here in Cairo, Egypt where I watched President Obama deliver an unprecedented speech calling for a new beginning for the United States and Muslim communities around the world,” Axelrod said.

    “We all know that there has been tension between the United States and some Muslim communities. But, as the President said this morning, if all sides face the sources of tension squarely and focus on mutual interests, we can find a new way forward,” he said.

    “The President outlined some big goals for this new beginning in his speech — including disrupting, dismantling, and defeating violent extremism. It was a historic speech, and since many Americans were asleep at the time it was given we wanted to make sure you had a chance to see it: ”

    blog.pennlive.com/politics/2009/06/obama_speech_pushed_hard_by_wh.html

    —————————-

    Hogwash!

  64. I wrote a post on NQ after his Turkey speech. He is playing a dangerous game here by redefining the problem (and creating new problems for America) to suit his selfish needs, to suit the only solution they know — inventing a problem to suit the solution they have on hand which is HIS and his cronies’ welfare. Self-serving to boot and why is everybody here giving away their prestige and dignity following this fool?
    ———–
    wbboei Says:
    June 4th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

    1. ADMINISTRATION: “There’s been a breach, an undeniable breach between America and the Islamic world”. WRONG DIAGONOSIS. SELF SERVING CRAP. CAMPAIGN POLITICS UBER ALLES.

  65. This was excellent. I read the ‘Puffington” piece on a link on RCP the other day and thought ‘Finally, someone has the balls to call this former rightie/Clinton hater out”. It has not, however, been well circulated among the blogs/political websites because-well, we already know. Wolfee is a despicable creature who appears about every other night on Olberman since the primaries. I may be wring, but I believe he was given access throughout the campaign by the Obama team and traveled with them. He never , much like Twitty, even attempted to hide his bias for BO and this book is the culmination of the pro-Obama /anti-Clinton forces. It pains me to see this, which will be just one of many books further demonizing the Clintons and aiding and abetting in the Messiah like rrise of Obama. I don’t see an end any time soon and we are in for a very long period of transformation of the basic mores and values that have made our country so great. We are no longer the nation to lead, but one who will literally bend over to any thug, dictator, Muslim?Arab fanatics to be seen as a “fair and balanced” player in a world of very dangerous people.
    I prefer not to revisit

  66. Muslims see shift in Obama speech, no breakthrough

    By MARJORIE OLSTER and BRIAN MURPHY – 29 minutes ago

    CAIRO (AP) — Muslim shopkeepers, students and even radical groups such as Hamas praised President Barack Obama’s address Thursday as a positive shift in U.S. attitude and tone. But Arabs and Muslims of all political stripes said they want him to turn his words into action- particularly in standing up to Israel.

    Obama impressed Muslims with his humility and respect and they were thrilled by his citing of Quranic verses. Aiming to repair ties with the Muslim world that had been strained under his predecessor George W. Bush, he opened with the traditional greeting in Arabic “Assalamu Aleikum,” which drew applause from his audience at Cairo University.

    His address from Cairo touched on many themes Muslims wanted to hear in the highly anticipated speech broadcast live across much of the Middle East and elsewhere in the Muslim world. He insisted Palestinians must have a state and said continued Israeli settlement in the West Bank is not legitimate. He assured them the U.S. would pull all it troops out of Iraq by 2012 and promised no permanent U.S. presence in Afghanistan. But at the top of his priorities, he put the battle against violent extremism. And he was faulted for not apologizing for U.S. wars in Muslim countries.

    Fawzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza, said there was change in tone. But he complained that Obama did not specifically note the suffering in Gaza following the three-week Israeli incursion earlier this year that killed more than 1,000 Palestinians.
    “There is a change between the language of President Obama and previous speeches made by George Bush,” he said. “So all we can say is that there is a difference in the statements, and the statements of today did not include a mechanism that can translate his wishes and views into actions,” said Barhoum, whose group the U.S. considers a terrorist organization.

    A joint statement by eight Syrian-based radical Palestinian factions, including Hamas, was harsher in its assessment. “Obama’s speech is an attempt to mislead people and create more illusions to improve America’s aggressive image in the Arab and Islamic world,” it said.

    Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, a moderate who rivals Hamas for leadership of the Palestinians, welcomed Obama’s words. “The part of Obama’s speech regarding the Palestinian issue is an important step under new beginnings,” his spokesman Nabil Abu Rdeneh said. “It shows there is a new and different American policy toward the Palestinian issue.”

    Before the speech, many Muslims said one of the things they wanted to hear most from Obama was respect for Islam. And many said he delivered that in his speech.
    “It was very good of him to address Muslims by quoting from holy Quran, something I did not expect in his speech,” said Osama Ahmed Sameh, a 45-year-old Iraqi government employee at the Ministry of Higher Education.

    In Egypt, Shahinda al-Bahgouri, a 20-year-old student at Cairo University where Obama spoke, was also impressed. “All we want as Muslims is for there to be a partnership,” she said. “And he was seriously humble. humility is important for us.”

    Arab satellite stations Al-Arabiya and Al-Jazeera, as well as Egyptian TV broadcast the speech live, with a voice-over Arabic translation.

    In Lebanon, Hezbollah leaders said they didn’t see the speech and could not comment. But the militant group’s TV station Al-Manar broadcast it live, with an Arabic voice-over translation. Syrian state TV did not air the speech but the mobile text messaging service of the official Syrian news agency SANA sent four urgent headlines on it as Obama spoke.

    In Israel, the speech was broadcast live on all TV and radio stations. TV stations ran subtitles or provided Hebrew voiceovers, while radio stations provided simultaneous translations.

    Afghanistan’s state television broadcast the speech live, but without translation so few could understand it.

    Iranian television did not air Obama and there were no reports on it. But Iranian radio reported that Obama gave a speech in Egypt — in a single sentence report without giving details. Most Iranians who own satellite dishes could not watch it as their reception was jammed. In Iran, Mohammad Ali Abtahi, a cleric who was vice president under reformist President Mohammad Khatami, called the speech “compensation to hostile environment which was created during President Bush.” “This can be an initial step for removing misconceptions between world of Islam and the West,” he said.

    Political commentator Ali Reza Khamesian said Obama’s acknowledgment of Iran’s right to produce nuclear energy for peaceful purposes was “a step forward for better ties with the United States.”

    Before the speech, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said any statements by Obama were just “words, speech and slogan” without specific measures by Washington, such as lifting sanctions on Iran.

    The speech contained a mixed message for Israel. Obama strongly endorsed the U.S. alliance with the Jewish state but harshly criticized its West Bank settlement policy.

    The director of Israel’s government press office, Danny Seaman, called Obama’s speech “not bad.” “All in all, his attitude is one we certainly share as a democratic country. The state of Israel isn’t against reconciliation … We think we should be more cautious and it should be done in such a way that the extremists shouldn’t take control,” he said.

    Baghdad resident Mithwan Hussein called Obama “brave.” “I think it’s a good start and we hope he will open a new chapter with Islamic world and Arab Nation in particular,” he said.

    But not everyone was impressed.

    Wahyudin, the 57-year-old director of a hard-line Islamic boarding school in Jakarta, Indonesia, said “I don’t trust him.” He spoke as he watched the speech on television.
    “He’s just trying to apologize to Muslims because of what America — or really Bush — has done in the past,” said Wahyudin, who goes by one name. “He’s promising to be different. But that’s all it is, a promise. We want action. We want to see an end to all intervention in Muslim countries. That’s what we’re fighting for.”

    In Pakistan, where the U.S. believes many top al-Qaida leaders including Osama bin Laden may be hiding, citizens were generally skeptical that American deeds would match Obama’s soaring words. “Whatever wounds America has inflicted on the world, they are very deep and they cannot be erased away by only one speech,” political analyst Siraj Wahab told Aaj TV. “Overall the speech was positive, but let’s see whether it was merely good words or could we ever see these words be practiced.”

    Zahid Husain Gardezi, a 50-year-old landowner in the Pakistani city of Multan, seemed pleased at the gesture. “It is the first time I have ever heard such affectionate words from an American for Muslims,” he said. “Apparently we can expect America to try to befriend the Muslim world in deeds as well. But let’s see how long it will take to see this on the ground.”

    google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i9Fn1iXzTXuYdO20X-RHRhhcPMUwD98JVAG81

  67. A change in tone? Of course. A change in tone. A change in action? How? What? When? About all he has done is create expectations. And when the parties are as far apart as they are, is there in fact a middle ground? On paper perhaps. But only on paper. It gets down to what is in the hearts and minds of the people. And it gets down to the de facto leaders in these communities. And the pervasiveness of religion and religious absolutes, and shariah law and the structure of society and the fear of modernization, and the history of western exploitation and this strange young man who never goes anywhere without a teleprompter (his wife has the AMEX card, so Karl Mauldon does not need to worry.)

  68. Re how many Americans are Muslims and how many are Buddhists, I wonder if they are counting ethnic Buddhists vs ethnic Muslims or if their Buddhists include ethnic WASPS who read Kornbluth and go to workshops at Esalen.

    Still there are lots of people here from Vietnam, China, Japan … likely Buddhists in all senses.

  69. confloyd…

    JanH Says:

    June 4th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
    Pictures of Hillary and Obama in Egypt…

    worldbulletin.net/news_detail.php?id=42836

  70. huffingtonpost.com/peter-daou/let-women-wear-the-hijab_b_211226.html

    Let Women Wear the Hijab: The Emptiness of Obama’s Cairo Speech
    ================================================

    Peter Daou
    Posted: June 4, 2009 07:41 AM

    I know many will gush over President Obama’s Cairo speech and I’m likely swimming against the tide of the media and my fellow Democrats and progressives. But reading the transcript, I was struck by two things:

    1. Aside from a few platitudes, it is disappointingly weak on human rights and specifically women’s rights.

    2. It betrays a naiveté, perhaps feigned, about how the Arab world works.

    I sometimes preface my posts by explaining that my Mideast perspective is that of an American-Lebanese-Christian-Jew who grew up in Muslim West Beirut at the height (or should I say depth) of the Lebanese civil war. The tumultuous and bloody intersection of religions and geopolitical interests is painfully real to me.

    Yes, Obama is targeting the Arab ‘street’ and global public opinion – but to the corrupt regimes that dominate that region of the world, his oration means virtually nothing. Repression and suppression will go on uninterrupted. And to those whose abiding hatred of Israel (and thus America) is absolute, Obama’s words will be seen as empty and hypocritical.

    Egyptian blogger Hossam el-Hamalawy explains:

    ### start quote ###
    Right before he took off from DC, on what the media has been depicting as some “odyssey,” to address the Muslim World from Cairo, President Obama had described the 81-year-old Egyptian President Mubarak as a “force for stability.” This week Cairo and its twin city Giza have been a showcase of what this “stability” cost.

    The capital is under occupation. Security troops are deployed in the main public squares and metro stations. Citizens were detained en masse and shops were told to close down in Bein el-Sarayat area, neighboring Cairo University, where Obama will be speaking. In Al-Azhar University, the co-host of the “historical speech,” State Security police raided and detained at least 200 foreign students, held them without charges in unknown locations.
    ### end quote ###

    Is there an overarching purpose to Obama’s speech? Is it to repair our image after eight years of a radical rightwing administration? Of course. But if the goal is to repair our image, then how about shunning the barbaric concept of indefinite detention? How about heeding the increasingly distressed calls of those who view the new administration’s actions in the realm of civil liberties as a dangerous, disturbing, and precedent-setting affirmation of Bush’s worst excesses?

    &&&
    Glenn Greenwald writes:

    ### start quote ###
    The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman — called The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009 — that literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any “photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States.”

    What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people? Read the language of the bill; it doesn’t even hide the fact that its only objective is to empower the President to conceal evidence of war crimes.

    That this exact scenario is now happening in the U.S. is all the more remarkable given that the President who is demanding these new suppression powers is the same one who repeatedly vowed “to make his administration the most open and transparent in history.” After noting the tentative steps Obama has taken to increase transparency, the generally pro-Obama Washington Post Editorial Page today observed: “what makes the administration’s support for the photographic records act so regrettable” is that “Mr. Obama runs the risk of taking two steps back in his quest for more open government.”

    What makes all of this even worse is that it is part of a broader trend whereby the Government simply retroactively changes the law whenever it decides it does not want to abide by it.
    ### end quote ###

    Glenn has been documenting – and railing against – dozens of similar instances. I echoed his concerns in a recent post:

    ### start quote ###
    “Setting aside all the campaign slogans about hope and change, what Obama really signifies is a razor sharp break from Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Rice, Rumsfeld, Addington, Libby, Bybee et al. After eight years of damage to the fabric of our Constitution and our nation, the entire point of a new face, a smart, youthful, inspiring Democratic president is to completely and totally reject the Bush years, to reject the lawless behavior, the Orwellian rationales, the blatant disregard of the Constitution. Neglecting to do so, and leaving any doubt about where Democrats stand on these issues, is profoundly detrimental to the country.”
    ### end quote ###

    Take the issue of women’s rights, addressed in Obama’s Cairo speech with the most tepid language:

    ### start quote ###
    “The U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.”

    “I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.”

    “Now let me be clear: issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.”

    “Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.”
    ### end quote ###

    Is that a joke?

    With women being stoned, raped, abused, battered, mutilated, and slaughtered on a daily basis across the globe, violence that is so often perpetrated in the name of religion, the most our president can speak about is protecting their right to wear the hijab? I would have been much more heartened if the preponderance of the speech had been about how in the 21st century, we CANNOT tolerate the pervasive abuse of our mothers and sisters and daughters.

    I return to the example of Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow:

    ### start quote ###
    13-year old Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was stoned to death in Somalia by insurgents because she was raped. Reports indicate that was raped by three men while traveling by foot to visit her grandmother in conflict capital, Mogadishu. When she went to the authorities to report the crime, they accused her of adultery and sentenced her to death. Aisha was forced into a hole in a stadium of 1,000 onlookers as 50 men buried her up to the neck and cast stones at her until she died. When some of the people at the stadium tried to save her, militia opened fire on the crowd, killing a boy who was a bystander.

    A witness who spoke to the BBC’s Today programme said she had been crying and had to be forced into a hole before the stoning, reported to have taken place in a football stadium. … She said: ‘I’m not going, I’m not going. Don’t kill me, don’t kill me.’ “A few minutes later more than 50 men tried to stone her.” The witness said people crowding round to see the execution said it was “awful”.
    ### end quote ###

    Enough with the perpetual campaign. True justice, true peace, these are earned through courageous decisions and bold actions. Real truth to power.

    If we are to fix America’s image in the world and if we are to heal the planet’s myriad ills, it will not be done through contrite kumbaya speeches about how we are all one world and how we should all coexist peacefully, no matter whether the remarks are delivered in Cleveland or Cairo. It will be done by leading through example, by righting the many wrongs here at home, by seeking justice and fairness for all, by doing what is right, not saying what sounds pleasing to the media elite and the pliable punditocracy.

  71. tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090603/ap_on_hi_te/us_warrantless_wiretapping

    Federal judge tosses warrantless wiretap cases
    ==================================

    By PAUL ELIAS, Associated Press Writer – Wed Jun 3, 2009 7:59PM EDT

    Recent Tech News StoriesFather’s Day tools, gadgets are good for yardwork and o …
    Dallas Morning News Thursday 04th June, 09:25:09 AM

    Fresno Co. warned of ID theft gadgets
    The Fresno Bee Wednesday 03rd June, 12:04:38 PM

    Book it: Last day for the Police, Fire and Security Exp …
    The Palm Beach Post Thursday 04th June, 05:50:59 AM

    ADVERTISEMENT

    Recent Articles About Technology
    Common GPS could help better track airline flights (AP)
    Review: Dazzling Palm software beats the iPhone (AP)
    Intel to buy software maker Wind River for $884M (AP)
    Activision sues to stop Jack Black game (AP)
    Federal judge tosses warrantless wiretap cases (AP)
    Microsoft, Sony take aim at Nintendo Wii at E3 (AP)
    White House Web push for Obama speech (AFP)
    Sony keeps PS3 price cut deliberation close to vest (Reuters)
    DAVE Wireless signs roaming deal with T-Mobile USA (Reuters)
    Lawsuit filed over Sonny & Cher payments (AP)
    E3: What’s Wrong with Microsoft’s Xbox 360 Motion-Control Approach? (PC World)
    Apple releases AirPort Utility 5.4.2 update (Macworld.com)
    Russia launches antitrust probe of Microsoft (Reuters)
    JavaFX set for phones, smartbooks, TVs (InfoWorld)
    Fed Up With Twitter Spam? It’s Going to Get Worse (PC World)
    Acer Will Use Moblin Linux Across Its Products (PC World)
    SAN FRANCISCO – A federal judge on Wednesday tossed out more than three dozen lawsuits filed against the nation’s telecommunications companies for allegedly taking part in the government’s e-mail and telephone eavesdropping program that was done without court approval.

    In addition, he ordered officials in Maine, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont and Missouri to halt their investigations of the telecommunication companies for their alleged participation in the once-secret surveillance programs.

    U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker also deferred a decision on whether to sanction the government for refusing to turn over a top secret document in one of the few wiretapping cases still pending.

    The judge’s dismissals of most of the lawsuits were widely expected after Congress in July agreed on new surveillance rules that included protection from legal liability for telecommunications companies that allegedly helped the U.S. spy on Americans without warrants.

    Walker upheld the constitutionality of the new surveillance rules in a written ruling Wednesday. Lawyers representing the telecom customers said they would appeal the judge’s ruling.

    The judge said congressional actions didn’t prohibit telephone and e-mail customers who believe they were targets of warrantless wiretaps from suing federal government officials, whom he called “the primary actors in the alleged wiretapping activities.”

    He noted that several lawsuits that directly accuse the government, rather than the companies, of wrongdoing are still pending.

    Also Wednesday, Walker deferred a decision on how to deal with the government’s continued refusal to turn over an apparent log of telephone calls that the U.S.-based arm of an Islamic charity says shows it was the subject of warrantless wiretaps.

    The Obama administration insists in court filings that release of the document will create “intolerable risks” to national security, the same stance taken by the Bush administration.
    [SNIP]

  72. It harkens back to a rather volatile discussion I had with some friends recently. Why is obama even considering “breaking bread” with countries who treat women so hideously and whose human rights records are so repellent?

    Furthermore, why is he doing it at the expense of the Israelis?

  73. politico.com/news/stories/0609/23328.html

    Gay groups grow impatient with Obama
    ============================

    By BEN SMITH & JONATHAN MARTIN

    President Barack Obama’s promises of change are falling short for one core Democratic constituency: gays and lesbians, whose leaders say Obama’s administration isn’t keeping up with the times.

    Gay rights campaigners, most of them Democrats who supported Obama in November, have begun to voice their public frustration with Obama’s inaction, small jokes at their community’s expense and deafening silence on what they see as the signal civil rights issue of this era.

    His most important campaign promises repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the military ban on openly gay and lesbian service-members have not been fulfilled.

    And the news, which emerged quietly earlier this year, that he’d supported same-sex marriage back in 1996, then changed his mind, especially rankles. As mainstream Democratic politicians such as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) move to support same-sex marriage, gay rights advocates say that the barrier-breaking president looks increasingly odd for opposing what they see as full equality.

    “Obama is out of step with his party, which is overwhelmingly in favor of marriage at this stage,” said David Mixner, a veteran gay rights activist who is among the organizers of a march on Washington for same-sex marriage scheduled for this fall. “He’s out of step with the next generation.”

    Gay rights issues have been moving at breakneck speed, none faster than same-sex marriage. Most public opinion polls now show more than 40 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, seen as a fringe issue just a few years earlier. Already, five New England states and Iowa have same-sex marriage laws on the books.

    “Politicians are finding out that their voters are moving faster than they anticipated,” said Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who called Obama’s place behind that curve “surprising, because he is the next-generational candidate.”

    She noted that Obama could be concerned about alienating older voters in the Midwest who would be turned off if he came out in support of same-sex marriage.

    The White House has been reluctant to spend its political capital pushing Obama’s highest-profile pro-gay positions believing, White House allies say, that it could detract from priorities like health care. And it may be even less likely to do next year, with midterms approaching.

    [snip…lots more if you want]

  74. Is it just me? Or does this “Cairo Speech” seem like another huge waste of time?

    Another “speech”.
    Another chance for obama to hog the spotlight, saying nothing but platitudes.

    Another in a series of faux apologies. Obama: “I’m sorry the US has been such a terrible world citizen for two centuries. I apologize. Now, as for doing anything specific, I’m at a loss.”

    Another media analysis frenzy: “Was it good?” “Did Muslims buy into it?” “What’s this mean?” Oh, STFU already.

    Meanwhile, Rome (the US, its economy, jobs, foreclosures, health care) burn while Nero visits Cairo. Obama is not leading Congress, he’s not crafting legistlation, he only knows campaign mode. At some point, people will realize that the emperor does no work.

  75. Admin: in any negotiation, you have to be very careful to lay down markers so they other side knows what is negotiable, and what is not. If you fail to do so, worse if you give them encouragement to believe anything is negotiable and that you are flexible on your principles, you give them every incentive in the world to test you. That is precisely what Mr. Obama has done in this we are the problem not you speech to the Muslims. He has caused them to blame America first, for their current plight. That is a powerful idea that will resonate throughout their world, and give credence to the sales pitch of terrorist.

    Hillary did it the right way. She was clear and unambigious about what the destruction of Israel would mean to Iran. That is how you deter such acts. To be ambiguous on the point, for fear of displeasing the Arab despots he appears to represent invites others to test him. He is a fool times ten.

  76. That photo of Obama looking down his nose at Clinton – where and when is it from? It’s a stunning image.

Comments are closed.