Culture: Color Me Racist

Color Me Racist Nancy Morgan RightBias.com September 17, 2009

---

Its now official. I'm a racist. No less than a former president of the United States has declared that if I oppose the takeover of 17% of our economy under the guise of health care reform, I hate black people.

According to President Carter, U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson's objection to a 'misstatement' in President Obama's speech to Congress last week was an act "based on racism" and rooted in fears of a black president. And a Rasmussen survey shows that fully 12% of Americans agree with him.

The old media has chimed in, with the left's favorite columnist, Maureen Dowd, going a step further. Rep. Joe Wilson said, "You lie' to Obama. But Maureen Dowd heard, "You lie, boy." Boy being one of the many politically incorrect words the left has decided is an indicator of racism. Point made. Case closed.

Another columnist, E. Danielle Egan, has joined the growing chorus. In the Philadelphia Enquirer, Egan blithely dismissed the app. 2 million protestors who turned out last weekend to protest Obama's policies, writing them off as illegitimate. "So I have decided it's time that what I've been watching be called what I believe it is: racism." She continues, "The level of rage being expressed is different and out of sync with what we know from the past." I guess she was visiting Atlantis during the Bush years, or something.

And just in case anyone has missed the point, ABC has devoted a full story to the racist motives of the Obama protestors.

So there. The media and political elite have spoken. Any opposition to Obama means the protestor is a bad person. A person unable to see beyond the color of his skin. A racist. (Isn't that called profiling?)

Conveniently for these elites, they have also decided that responding to ignorant racists is quite beneath them. Being a racist is bad, therefore there is absolutely no need to respond to the underlying complaint. Whew.

This is the ultimate free pass. It almost makes me wish I had been born black. Then I could make any claims I want, without any facts to back them up, and still maintain the moral high ground. I could blame every bad decision I ever made on racism and, best of all, put my opponents in the impossible situation of trying to prove a negative.

I would gain membership in the ever growing class of 'victims', which automatically grants me immunity from the normal rules of civilized behavior.

The fact that Joe Wilson was quite correct in branding Obama a liar is not the point. By diverting the issue to racial animus, Obama's 'misstatement' is conveniently overlooked. This is called a win-win situation.

Wilson's audacity in branding Obama a liar has caused a national firestorm. The left is in high dudgeon, quickly spinning the truth of Wilson's (admittedly disrespectful) assertion into a condemnation of his integrity, topping it off with the unprecedented act of issuing a formal rebuke from the House. Bad boy! (Can I say that?)

Not mentioned in this national brou haha is Sen Reid's Dec 15, 2004 statement, where he called called President Bush a liar. "President Bush is a liar. He betrayed Nevada and he betrayed the country."

I guess its OK to call white guys liars. Even when they can't come up with any specific lie. Its just something everyone knows. Bush lied. Strangely enough, I've never been taken up on my challenge to pay $100.00 to anyone who can cite a specific lie that Bush told. I digress.

Also not included in the conversation the left is successfully controlling, is President Obama's statement last week branding Kanye West a jackass. But, hey, West is black...this is starting to get confusing.

I'm in awe of the left. Though they have admitted not knowing the details of the 1,000 plus pages of the Obama health care 'reform', they have managed to divine what is in my heart. And the hearts of millions of others. And it's called racism.

Despite having elected a black president, the left would have us believe that the millions of whites who voted for Obama still hate black people. They would have us believe that, even though we can't see it, racism is still a dominant force in America. Its just evolved into the silent 'institutional' kind of racism that no one can quantify. But it's still there. I guess we just have to take their word for it. If we dare question their premise, we're racists. Game, set and match.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina

New Jimmy Carter Game: JimmyLand

Jimmyland Board Game: Appease Terrorists and Dictators


Click on image to enlarge.

NOW the whole family can "Be Like Jimmy" and appease terrorists at home with Jimmyland!

Hours of enjoyment - even the kids can join in - as you collect payments from Middle Eastern patrons and gladhand autocrats in Jimmyland!

Hours of fun - and no sharp edges or intellects to deal with - as you join Jimmy on his continuing Quest for a Legacy in Jimmyland!

A KG3 progressive game product from the People's Cube.*

* - Jimmyland may not be for those who remember 1977-1980.

Want more subversively progressive humor? Try these past KG3 faves: * Obamahitler * The Protest Bra: 100% Clear! * Green Nazi Magazine: Earth Day Issue AND, by Red Square: * "The People's Cube: Guaranteed Results * Obama's Flip-Flopping Caused by Evil Twin

From the KG3 at the People's Cube:
"Who or what are The KG3? And why? Some say they are an ad hoc group of cagey party misfits "putting the toil in toilet humor." Others suspect this troika was selected for its commitment to outstanding production. Do not be ridiculous. But perhaps the masses have the right to know why The KG3s efforts merit a separate category when they are not even children of elite Party members? Perhaps it is not wise to ask too many questions."


by Irony Curtain of the KG3
Source: Jimmyland Board Game: Appease Terrorists and Dictators

Obama Hoping Voters Don't Remember Previous CHANGE

"The more things change, the more they stay the same."
--author unknown

For the past 32 years, the election cycle has revolved in a most familiar way.

Every sixteen years, the Democrat candidate for president has been a relatively-unknown who campaigned as an agent of "CHANGE!"

"One reason why this constant mantra of “CHANGE! HOPE!” is so irritating is that they’ve been peddling this snake oil for decades."
--Charles Johnson, Little Green Footballs



Thirty-two years ago, it resulted in a squeaker of an election that wasn't decided until the next day. Jimmy Carter became just the second Democrat since 1944 to convince a majority of voters that the country needed "CHANGE!" Carter received 50.1% of the popular vote.

He was the last Democrat who's managed that trick.

Carter's term was disastrous and, after four years, the U.S. had had enough of his "CHANGE!"

Many Americans saw Carter as an inept leader who had failed to solve the worsening economic problems at home, and had made the US look weak abroad. The election was held on November 4, 1980. Ronald Reagan with running mate George Bush beat Carter by almost ten percentage points in the popular vote. Republicans also gained control of the Senate for the first time in twenty-five years on Reagan's coattails. The electoral college vote was a landslide, with 489 votes (representing 44 states) for Reagan and 49 votes for Carter (representing 6 states and the District of Columbia).

Sixteen years after Carter, Bill Clinton--another relatively-unknown Democrat--convinced 43% of American voters that the country needed a "CHANGE!"



In 1996, Clinton almost got a majority of the vote: 49.4% voted for him. Both times, Clinton won a comfortable margin in the Electoral College.

Clinton's "CHANGE!" included failed attempts to nationalize health care and forcing the military to change its policy on homosexuals, as well as an endless parade of scandals.

In the 2000 election, Clinton's vice-president Al Gore lost the election (he received 48.38% of the popular vote, though), even though the US economy--always an important issue--was strong.

Sixteen years after 1992, Barack Obama--once again another relatively-unknown Democrat--is campaigning on "CHANGE!"

Every sixteen years, another group of Americans--who are unfamiliar with Carter or Clinton and the results of their "CHANGE!"--enter the voting booths. It is this group of historically-ignorant voters that Democrats rely on to win national elections. 2008 is no different.

Carter and the "misery index" are unknown to these voters. That's the combination of the unemployment rate plus the rate of inflation. It reached 21.98% in June 1980, Carter's last year.

Currently, it is 8.94%.

"Monica Lewinsky", "Hillary's health care task force", "Buddhist temple fund raisers", "the selling of sensitive technology to China" and "the selling of the Lincoln Bedroom" are just names and phrases to those who were too young to recall the Clinton years. The consequences of Clinton's selling of US military technology to China are still being felt.

Newly declassified documents show that President Bill Clinton personally approved the transfer to China of advanced space technology that can be used for nuclear combat.

The documents show that in 1996 Clinton approved the export of radiation hardened chip sets to China. The specialized chips are necessary for fighting a nuclear war.

Two years ago, Democrats took over Congress by campaigning--again--on "CHANGE!"



What have been the results of Nancy's Pelosi's "CHANGE!"?

We'll let the reader come to his own conclusion.

The Obama campaign is wise to target these (mostly) young voters, who don't remember those previous promises "CHANGE!" from a relatively-unknown Democrat presidential candidate. If Obama is to be president, he absolutely needs these votes. If John McCain is to win, he needs some of these votes, as well as those of Independents.

It promises to be another close election.

"The more things change, the more they stay the same."

To paraphrase another famous quote by philosopher George Santayana which carries much the same message:

"Those who cannot remember "CHANGE!" are condemned to repeat it."

To paraphrase

by Mondoreb
Source:
* 1980 election in the United States
* Clinton Gave China Chips for Nuclear War
* Jimmy Carter 1976 Election Ad: Change!

Jimmy Carter's Magical Misery Tour: Gaza, the EU and the USA

Beep! Beep! Come on, Jimmy! Time to go!

Jimmy Carter continues his brave but losing battle against diarrhea of the mouth.

Carter, ex-president, continued his nearly 3-decades-long "Crusade to Be Relevant" by calling for the European Union to break with the U.S. over Jimmy's Kids, the Palestinians.

Britain and other European governments should break from the US over the international embargo on Gaza, former US president Jimmy Carter told the Guardian yesterday. Carter, visiting the Welsh border town of Hay for the Guardian literary festival, described the EU's position on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute as "supine" and its failure to criticise the Israeli blockade of Gaza as "embarrassing".

Referring to the possibility of Europe breaking with the US in an interview with the Guardian, he said: "Why not? They're not our vassals. They occupy an equal position with the US."

Carter is no more relevant today than 30 years ago. To recount the blunderful Carter years would keep one busy for months--even if Jimmy suddenly went deaf, dumb and blind.

So, we turned to one of the best.

Click on image to enlarge (from Political Party Poop)

“When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.”
--Jimmy Carter, Glorious Ex-president

To which Snoop--of Political Party Poop--replied, "Jimmy Carter Yup, that’s what he said. The dictator “speaks for all the people.”

By now, Jimmy Carter knows that the only time he garners any press coverage is when he's either bashing the U.S., shilling for his paid clients, the Palestinians, or making some outrageously-dumbass statement.

By his above statements, he's gone 3-for-3.

Demonstrating an effectiveness never demonstrated in that four-year cycle of despair, gloom and slapstick known as the "Carter Years."

by Mondoreb

Sourceimages:
* Carter urges 'supine' Europe to break with US over Gaza blockade
* Stupid x-presidents
* Retarded x-presidents...
DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page

Jimmy Carter: Seven Carter Pictures You're Not Likely to See Anywhere Else

Okay, so a couple might be photoshops.

You didn't have them, did you?

by RidesAPaleHorse
images: RAPH


DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page

Jimmy Carter

Jimmy Carter's presidency was many things to many people.

To Democrats, he was a winner. Out of the White House for eight years, the Democrats took advantage of the anti-Washington mood stirred up by Watergate and nominated the obscure Georgia governor.

He squeaked out a win over Gerald Ford, winning 23 states.

Election day was November 2, and it took most of that night and the following morning to determine the winner. Carter defeated Ford by two percentage points in the popular vote. The electoral vote was the closest since 1916; Carter took 23 states with 297 electoral votes, while Ford won 27 states and 240 electoral votes (one elector from Washington state, pledged to Ford, voted for Reagan). Carter's victory came primarily from his near-sweep of the South (he lost only Virginia), and his close victories in large Northern states such as New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Ford did well in the West, carrying every state except Hawaii.

Jimmy Carter campaigned in 1976 as a "Washington Outsider", someone different from the Washington power brokers. He also was not shy about broadcasting that he was a "born again Christian".

Close observers would notice the beginning of the Mainstream Media's disdain for Christianity during the Carter campaign and ensuing presidency.



Jimmy Carter has become the quintessential simple-minded, John Lennon Democrat: all he is saying is "give peace a chance". Carter has never let love of his country stand in the way of an almost desperate avoidance of the tag of "worst U.S. president. Whether it's his country, his countrymen or his country's interests, Carter is ready to throw any and all of them under his merry prankster peace parade.

Except Carter's never brought peace--with the lone exception of the bringing together of Begin and Sadat in a marriage of reality and convenience at Camp David.

Jimmy is remembered by many for the string of American sell-outs and giveaways he was responsible for during his term. Others remember the 21% interest and raging inflation rising so fast that soup cans sometimes had 5 different price stickers on them, the prices went up so fast.

During Carter's term, the "Misery Index" became well-known: that's the percentage of inflation plus the unemployment rate. When Carter left office in 1980, the Misery Index was at an all-time high of 21.98%.

When people grumbled about the Misery Index, Carter told them that the American people suffered from "malaise". This is a "sense of depression or discomfort". It wasn't long before a lot of people attributed their "malaise" or depression to Jimmy.



Jimmy coulda been a contender. Carter's first inclination in any test of wills is to grin and holler "Uncle!". The Iran Hostage Crisis was no different, just the most famous example of Carter's diplomacy at it's finest.




No hot spot in the world is immune to the "Jimmy Carter Touch".

No interest is so vital to the U.S. that it can't be high-jacked by Down-home Jimmy.

No enemy of America is off-limits to the Peanut Prostitute and his "paid by the Saudis" checkbook approach to solving the world's problems--if the problems of the world or the United States were defined as "whatever is in the interests of the people paying Jimmy's bills".

Foreign policy during the Jimmy Carter years usually consisted of three reliable Carter methods for dealing with International problems. If the first two didn't work--which happened the majority of the time during Jimmy's forgettable one term--then the former Georgia governor could always be counted on to turn to the one thing he knew would break any impasse.



This Carter "world withdrawal" strategy is the one gift he left the Democrat Party. It may very well be the legacy he has struggled so mightily to bequeath to history.

Carter was swamped in the 1980 election. He had a record to run on and Americans voters judged Carter with their votes.

By any measure, the election was a crushing rebuke of Carter and his policies.

The election was held on November 4, 1980. Ronald Reagan with running mate George Bush beat Carter by almost ten percentage points in the popular vote. Republicans also gained control of the Senate for the first time in twenty-five years on Reagan's coattails. The electoral college vote was a landslide, with 489 votes (representing 44 states) for Reagan and 49 votes for Carter (representing 6 states and the District of Columbia).

Carter has spent the 28 years since his electoral rejection by the American people in a variety of ways. Writing books, building houses, refereeing elections and trying to craft a legacy other than the one he left with the end of his presidency.

He has insisted on butting into American foreign policy, whether he was invited or not. Mostly he has a string of photo credits with various dictators to show for his trouble.

As well as a failed agreement with North Korea's dictator Kim, over nuclear materials and production.



His books mostly reflect Carter's viewpoint, as told by the largest benefactors of his Carter Center: mostly Sunni Arabs from the Middle East.

Jimmy Carter has taken a decided anti-Israel tone since the Carter Center funding as relied heavily on Middle Eastern sources.



His pronouncement of President George W. Bush as "the worst president" was amusing. Some thought that Jimmy was the victim of his wishful thinking's growing steroid habit.



Jimmy's anti-Israel stance increased this past week with his meeting with terrorist group, Hamas.

But regardless of his many fruitless efforts, Jimmy Carter is likely to be remembered in only one way.



At least by the people who had to live through the four long years of the Carter presidency.

by Mondoreb
images:
* Cox and Forkum
* Worth 1000
* Mrs. Satan
* UofTexas
* Time
* matthewwyglesia
* Angry Conservative
* flapsblog
* flickr
Sources:
* United States Presidential Election 1976
* United States Presidential Election 1980


DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page

Jimmy Carter and Hamas: "Final Peace Agreement"

Iran Hostage Crisis, Tehran, 1977

Ex-President Jimmy Carter organized a Tea Time with Terrorists when he met with Hamas officials last Tuesday at a reception in Ramallah. Carter also announced his intentions to meet with exiled Hamas political chief, Khaled Mashaal, in Damascus, Syria, on Friday. Carter met with Hamas at the West Bank, part of a series of planned meet-ups between the ex-president and Hamas officials in what he describes as discussions towards a "final peace agreement".

We decided to put together a short list of Carter's accomplishments as President: signing away the Panama Canal, signing a treaty with Soviet Russia shortly before they invaded Afghanistan, and the colossal inept bumbling of the Iran Hostage Crisis.

Ex- President Jimmy Carter lays a wreath at the tomb of Yasser Arafat, April 15, 2008

Carter defended meeting with the terrorist group Hamas, stating that their involvement was necessary for a "final peace agreement":

"Since Syria and Hamas will have to be involved in the final peace agreement, they ought to be involved in the discussions leading up to... peace."

Carter also met with Nasser al-Shaer, a senior Hamas official at a reception, organized by the Carter 's office in Ramallah. According to USA Today, al-Shaer was greeted by Carter with a hug and kisses.

He gave me a hug. We hugged each other, and it was a warm reception," Shaer told the Associated Press. "Carter asked what he can do to achieve peace between the Palestinians and Israel ... and I told him the possibility for peace is high."

While Carter is meeting up with Hamas we thought it might be fun to take a little trip down memory lane in regards to Jimmy Carter's presidency to gain a clearer perspective on Carter's proclivity for "peace" at all costs.

We begin with September, 1977, with Carter signing away the Panama Canal.

More Jimmy Carter: Tea Time with Terrorists at DBKP.com

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page

Jimmy Carter Needs Help with Hamas

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."
--Hamas charter

Jimmy summons his mental energy

Former president and current professional terrorist apologist, Jimmy Carter, once again demonstrates he needs to get on the phone to Vanna White and buy a clue.

Carter's answer to protests that he's meeting with militants from the terrorist group, Hamas, was positively beauty pageant-esque: "I'm quite at ease". Carter went on to say that Hamas was "essential" to any future peace with Israel.

Of course, Jimmy knows that the stated goal of Hamas is to destroy Israel. What kind of essential peace will Jimmy be able to achieve with a group whose charter states:

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

Carter, like a bad yeast infection, just won't go away. He spoke on ABC's This Week also said he would oppose a U.S. Olympic boycott and hopes all countries will join in the Beijing games--presumably after holding hands, singing songs and exchanging wet kisses.



Also at DBKP.com: "Carter, Hamas: Jimmy Needs to Make the Call".

At least Carter has some experience with Olympic boycotts. The U.S. boycott of the Olympics in 1980 was the only time Carter showed any spine. Like most of his other forays into the international arena, it was ineffective and only hurt U.S. athletes.

Several State Department officials, including the secretary, Condoleezza Rice, criticized Carter's plans to talk in Syria this week with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in the first public contact in two years between a prominent American figure and the group. Carter said he had not heard the objections directly, although a State Department spokesman said earlier that a senior official from the department had called the former president.

"President Carter is a private citizen. We respect his views," Stephen Hadley, President Bush's national security adviser, said Sunday on ABC.

Want to play "Pretend Middle East Peace"?
Jimmy does too! Buy the home edition!

Jimmy Carter had his chance at playing "International Politics Mystery Date". It came back during 1977-81. The USA's flirtation with the peanut-farmer-turned-Georgia governor resembled a bad one night stand: both suffered regrets and tried forgetting about the whole thing--and neither party respected the other in the morning.

If Jimmy Carter were not so smugly self-assured, he might listen to just one piece of advice before he leaves for his pow wow with Hamas.

It's not to late.

Jimmy, pick up the phone and make that call to Vanna.

by Mondoreb
story idea: RidesAPaleHorse
image: salon
Sources:
* Jimmy Carter Defends Meeting with Hamas
* Carter, Hamas: Jimmy Needs to Make the Call


DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page

Jimmy Carter: Meet The Condi Rice Extreme Workout

pictured at left: Carter Secretary of State, Cy Vance

My secretary of state can beat up your foreign minister or Do Republican women read fitness magazines?

The news that Jimmy "I'll Submit" Carter has scheduled a sit-down with Hamas (Carter to Meet Hamas Leader: Jazeera) reminds one of the whole difference in tone between the Carter years and the Bush years.

"Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter plans to meet Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in Syria next week, despite U.S. efforts to isolate the Islamist Palestinian group, Al Jazeera television said. Carter served one term between 1977 and 1981."

There were many reasons Carter was an unlamented one-termer, but one stands out: his thankfully now-forgotten foreign policy, led by Secretary of State Cyrus Vance. Carter and Company claimed it was a "human rights-oriented agenda".

The rest of the world quickly translated that to mean something completely different, although there is some argument over whether it was "putz" or "pussy".

Now, we always had a soft spot for native West Virginian Cyrus Vance, but whether it was working out on America's enemies or just working out, he was no Condi Rice.

Darren Garnick, of the Boston Herald (and his own Darren Garnick's Media Lab blog) takes it from here:

By now, surely you’ve heard that Condi Rice starts her “No Excuses” workout routine at 4:30 a.m. in the State Department gym. For a deep analysis on how this affects you, check out my Boston Herald column, “My secretary of state can beat up your foreign minister.”.

As Darren put it:

Condi’s hours on the treadmill watching SportsCenter have produced enviable results. She’s much buffer than her pudgy predecessor, Colin Powell. And Clinton’s people? Please. Madeleine Albright and Warren Christopher always looked like they were picked last in sixth-grade gym class.

But just how tough is Rice?

But as menacing as Secretary Rice looks on the bench press, she’s unlikely to ever intimidate Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Remember when he posed shirtless last summer during a Siberian fishing trip? Let’s just say he’s Ivan Drago, the steroids-loving blond boxer in “Rocky IV.” Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama should rethink those comparisons they’ve been making to Rocky Balboa [trailer]. Based on his pin-up, it looks like Putin could pummel a Democratic tag team and McCain in the ring.

Maybe Rice would be the underdog in a Putin-Rice cage match, but the smart money would have been on Condi in a Boris Yeltsin-Rice 10K run--especially if she could've negotiated a few toasts for the pre-race ceremonies.

But Darren noticed something about how Rice's workouts were covered.

Read the rest of Condi Rice-Cyrus Vance Foreign Policy Cage Match at DBKP.com.


by Mondoreb
Sources:
* Condi Rice-Cyrus Vance Foreign Policy Cage Match
* un
* My secretary of state can beat your foreign minister
* Do Republican women read fitness magazines?


DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page

Barack Obama: CHANGE U.S. Defense Back to Clinton and Carter Days

"This video -- presumably made for a very, very, very liberal audience -- is evidence that Barack Obama is ill-prepared, at best, to serve as America's Commander-in-Chief."

--Doug Ross

Obama's "change" sounds like the "same old, same old" from Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

Doug Ross has performed a much-needed public service.

Must watch video: Barack Obama Promises to Disarm America



Doug posted the above video and information on what "hope" looks like--through the eyes of Democrat presidential candidate, Barack Obama.

The above video and Doug's list of how Obama has voted in his short time in the Senate on important issues is must-read for anyone thinking that they might vote for the junior senator from Illinois.

Highlights from the video ...I will cut investments in unproven [sic] missile defense systems... ...I will not weaponize space... ...I will slow development of Future Combat Systems... ...and I will institute a "Defense Priorities Board" to [prevent] unnecessary spending... ...I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons... ...and to seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons... ...I will seek a global ban on the development of fissile material... ...and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert... ...and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals... Barack Obama's plans for America in a dangerous world.

Should Obama make it to the White house, it would seem that after his above "changes", America's best defense would consist of: hope.

Hope that Iran doesn't nuke us.

Or Russia.

Barack Obama is for "change". But his rhetoric sounds like the same old Democrat line whenever it comes to defending American interests.

After Jimmy Carter, the American military had to re-tool. After Bill Clinton's "peace dividend", the same was true.

When you take military and defense options away from yourself, you leave little room to maneuver in an emergency.

Neither president had much of a will for a strong defense.

Carter's response to the invasion of Afghanistan was to boycott the Olympics. His military response to the Iranian hostage crisis was--do you really have the time?

Clinton's response was always to bomb and fire rockets--sometimes at empty buildings.

Re-watch the video and read the Doug Ross story.

And think about Obama's "change" in America's national defense.

Does the U.S. military have time in this dangerous world to recover from an Obama presidency?

by Mondoreb
image: michael ramirez at ibd
Source:
* Must watch video: Barack Obama Promises to Disarm America



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

U.S. Foreign Policy in Good Hands

[graphic:RidesAPaleHorse]

For those of you reading about U.S. Foreign Policy and wondering "What the @$#*&!"? RAPH offers a reassuring view at the inner workings of America's approach to the thorny Israeli-Palestinian problems.

And now, a collective sigh of relief is heard.




Back to Front Page.

Terrorists to Giuliani: "You Don't Deserve to Live"Jimmy Carter Mum

[above: Jimmy Carter's Spokesrabbit, Harvey. photo: LBG]
by Little Baby Ginn

Terrorists threaten presidential candidate, cite Rudy's war stance, Arafat treatment

Where Is Jimmy Carter’s Outrage?
Too Busy attacking VP Cheney?
When It's More Than Just A War Of Words

Apparently Republican presidential candidate, Rudy Giuliani, has touched a few nerves in the terrorist community. A well-known terrorist organization spokesman, Ramadan Adassi, chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades:

WND Exclusive ELECTION 2008
"If I had the occasion to meet him (Giuliani), I would hurt him.”
Abu Hamed, chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the northern West Bank:
"[Giuliani] can hate Arafat and the Palestinians, but he knows that nobody is hated in the world more than his leadership, his party, his president, and his Zionist friends. All the polls in the world prove that this [conservative] wing of America and the Zionists are considered to be the most dangerous for the security of the world."

Pre-9/11, Osama in 1996, Bin Laden issued a fatwa or declaration of war against the United States. No one knew it would eventually mean the death of over 3000 of our citizens. Couldn't the same now be said about the safety of Rudy Giuliani?

Palestine is and has always been Jimmy Carter’s favorite Habitat For Inhumanity. The man was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for in the words of the Nobel Peace Prize Awards Committee , “untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."

A large of part of this Peace Prize was for Carter’s long time work in finding a “solution” to the Middle East “crisis.” Of course this Middle East crisis has been ongoing for literally decades and has afforded many Presidents, diplomats, bureaucrats and their ilk the chance to sort it out. Numerous visits to Camp David, photo op’s at the White House all in the quest to bring “peace” to the Middle East. No one has been milking the Middle East Peace Crisis a la Palestine longer than Ex-President Jimmy Carter.

When will people realize that Carter is/has been championing a long line of dedicated and outspoken terrorists--whose main occupation is brute force and terror, not democracy. Where is Jimmy Carter’s outrage over Abu Hamed, Chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade’s statement that he would “hurt [Giuliani]”? Or that

"[Giuliani] can hate Arafat and the Palestinians, but he knows that nobody is hated in the world more than his leadership, his party, his president, and his Zionist friends. All the polls in the world prove that this [conservative] wing of America and the Zionists are considered to be the most dangerous for the security of the world."

When you adopt a long line of dysfunctional and thug children as Jimmy Carter has done all these years. With Arafat and his ilk one needs to take a closer look at terrorist enabler Carter: his “children” are not going to change. Their modus operandi works well for them. They have a United States ex-president as their spokesperson-foster father and a blank check from the citizen taxpayers of America.

When will Jimmy Carter denounce these types of statements and the terrorists who make them? Especially when made against someone like Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani stood up to the world’s most beloved thug and terrorist Arafat back in mid-90s.

Multiple leaders of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades had harsh words for Giuliani, who in 1995 famously booted Arafat from an invitation-only concert at New York's Lincoln Center celebrating the 50th anniversary of the United Nations.

Arafat attempted to crash the event, and when Giuliani saw the PLO leader and his entourage making their way to a private box seat near the stage, the mayor immediately ordered Arafat off the premises, calling him a murderer and a terrorist.

So apparently, Rudy's not going to be getting many Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade votes in any of the Republican primaries real soon. Of course, he would be in real trouble if they showed up at any debates: they would be the clear favorite in any Rudy-AA Martyrs Brigade showdown hosted by Chris Matthews. But the key fact to remember is: his life has been threatened by terrorists.

Again, where is Jimmy Carter’s outrage?

Carter: Bush Tortured PrisonersCNN: Carter Tortured Listeners

"Jimmy Carter's grasp of U.S. foreign policy, 1976-2007: a topographical representation"

By Mondoreb

Question: What do you do if you're a failed ex-president with time on your hands?
Answer: You get interviewed by CNN's Wolf Blitzer and remind people why even Democrats are embarrassed when your presidency is mentioned.

From CNN:
The United States tortures prisoners in violation of international law, former President Carter said Wednesday.

"I don't think it. I know it," Carter told CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

Of course, Jimmy also knew that he was attacked by a killer rabbit during his sad little time in office. The rabbit, like Carter's grasp of past US foreign policy and his understanding of the role an ex-president has to play in the present, is the product of a over-wrought mind.

Dhimmy showed the same understanding of key issues and their solutions on CNN that he demonstrated when Iran stormed the US Embassy and held 52 Americans hostage for over a year. The hostages were blindfolded, threatened and paraded in front of TV cameras regularly for the remainder of Carter's term. The 39th President promptly responded with his "Rose Garden strategy". He vowed not to leave the White House until the hostages were returned. Besides driving his wife Rosalynn nuts, it accomplished nothing, except ensuring the Americans remained hostages until Ronald Reagan was elected.
Carter continued to show off his keen intellect for Blitzer.

[photo:Ask.com]"Our country for the first time in my life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights," Carter said. "We've said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."

Carter's logic that the prisoners are covered under the Geneva Convention is something only a DailyKOSSACK would subscribe to. His definition of torture was based on a NY Times article which described alleged "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures". The NY Times article left "being lectured by Jimmy Carter" off the list.

Responding to the newspaper report Friday, Bush defended the techniques used, saying, "This government does not torture people."

Asked about Bush's comments, Carter said, "That's not an accurate statement if you use the international norms of torture as has always been honored -- certainly in the last 60 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was promulgated.

Carter also recently disagreed with, then attacked Vice-president Cheney's position on Iran, so he did what any good Democrat in a debate does: he called him names, a "chickenhawk" to be more exact. Carter calls the administration liars, attacks US foreign policy and slanders Israel at every opportunity. The technical term for this is "the Huffington Post trifecta". It's perfect for scoring points at the Berkeley Far-Left Luncheonette and Latte, but doesn't hold up to much more serious scrutiny.

Jimmy Carter's 50.1% of the vote makes him the only Democrat presidential candidate to win over 50% of the popular vote in the last 42 years. Every time he opens his mouth in public, he convinces more people that perhaps it should be another 42.
VOTE FOR IT! on FP
Back to Front Page