David Horowitz was one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s and later became a conservative activist. He writes: The nation building effort in Iraq led to a squandering of American resources and a weakening of American power. Putting a man who is hostile to American power in the White House is not the least aspect of this American decline. Because of these nation-building delusions we are still mired in Afghanistan — now the longest war in American history. And now we have been plunged into the Middle Eastern maelstrom with no clear agenda or objective.
The Obama Administration, in my view, is the most dangerous administration in American history, and conservatives need to be very clear about the limits and objectives of American power so that they can
lead the battle to restore our government to health. To accomplish this, neo-conservatives need to admit they were wrong, and return to the drawing board. They should give up the “neo” and become conservatives again.
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/03/23/why-i-am-not-a-neo-conservative/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_campaign=a731957f04-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK Daily Mail reports: Deep divisions between allied forces currently bombing Libya worsened today as the German military announced it was pulling forces out of NATO over continued disagreement on who will lead the campaign.
A German military spokesman said it was recalling two frigates and AWACS surveillance plane crews from the Mediterranean, after fears they would be drawn into the conflict if NATO takes over control from the U.S.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Powerline Blog opines: Of course, President Obama isn't around to answer those questions [about Libya]; he is in South America.
Politico asks, "Did Obama Lose Congress on Libya?" National security adviser Tom Donilon stood in for Obama and tried to explain the administration's failure to involve Congress. Here is part of what he had to say:
First of all, consultation with Congress is important, as I said. Secondly, the administration welcomes the support of Congress in whatever form that they want to express that support.
So Obama has gone from 1) the President has no authority to undertake military action in these circumstances without prior Congressional approval, to 2) the President--as long as it is Obama--"welcomes the support of Congress in whatever form they want to express that support," after the fact. The arrogant presumption of the Obama administration never ceases to amaze.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/03/028660.php
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Thinker opines: It should be obvious that Obama and the left wing of the Democratic Party are not struggling to defend the middle class. Most of the time they are struggling to disenfranchise it by ignoring the basic rights of human liberty and of property that are guaranteed under our Constitution.
The 18% real rate of unemployment during Obama's first two years in office has not done much for the middle class. At the same time, there has been an enormous transfer of wealth from the middle class to the underclass. ObamaCare, financial services reform, mortgage reform, education reform, tax reform: in all of these areas, the administration's efforts have been to create and expand services for the poor at the expense of the middle class. http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/obamas_war_on_the_middle_class.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Huffington Post writes: Faced with a Congress hostile to even slight restrictions of Second Amendment rights, the Obama administration is exploring potential changes to gun laws that can be secured strictly through executive action, administration officials say.
As for other possible actions that can be taken without Congress, Mayors Against Illegal Guns has compiled a
wish list of sorts, suggesting that the national background-check system enforce the requirement that all federal agencies report individuals forbidden under federal law from purchasing guns; that the White House restructure regulations requiring that the FBI destroy firearm-purchase records after 90 days; that the FBI, DOJ and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives be more aggressive in pursuing federal prosecutions against those individuals who illegally attempted to buy firearms; and that the latter agency ramp up undercover investigations of sales at gun shows.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/obama-gun-laws-congress_n_836138.html------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Politico reports: "Barack Obama has now fired more cruise missiles than all other Nobel Peace prize winners combined.”
Exactly who said that first is unclear, but at some point over the weekend, the line began circulating around Twitter.
Since President Obama announced Friday that he had ordered an attack on Muammar Qadhafi’s forces in Libya, he has attracted plenty of new critics, including
lawmakers in his party. Now, some foreign leaders are asking that the Nobel Committee take back the peace prize it awarded Obama in 2009.
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the vice chairman of the Russian legislature’s lower house,
released a statement on Monday titled “Deny Obama the Nobel Prize!” In the letter, Zhirinovsky argues that Obama was given the Nobel for his “contribution to the struggle for nonproliferation of nuclear weapons in the world.”
“This is another flagrant intervention in the internal affairs of an independent state,” the Russian leader wrote.
Bolivian President
Evo Morales has also called for Obama’s honor to be taken back, telling reporters: “How is it possible to give the Nobel Peace Prize to someone who has launched an invasion, a bombing? It's a violation, an assault, an aggression.”
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0311/throw_it_back_ca3f5568-3b71-494e-bc37-b198cfd1a2b4.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot Air opines: When the Abu Ghraib scandal broke in 2003, the mainstream media and liberal blogosphere couldn’t find enough column inches to express adequately their shock and revulsion. The New York Times alone published 56 stories on the hideous revelation of —inexcusable acts that the Times placed squarely at the feet of then-president George W. Bush.
What a difference a president makes. Until you flash forward to today’s bombshell, dropped by the British newspaper The Guardian, noting that members of a self-styled U.S. Army “kill team” posed for photos not with tortured prisoners but with corpses. Of civilians. Whom they had killed. Investigators at Der Spiegel unearthed approximately 4,000 photos and videos taken by the soldiers. The accompanying article in the magazine provides shocking details about the depraved, sadistic behavior of the men.
A spokesman for the military is quoted as having apologized for the images, which in his words depict “actions repugnant to the U.S. as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States.” So far, the White House has released no statement regarding the images or accounts. Neither, surprisingly, has the
New York Times.
[Perhaps Obama is learning that even a President cannot stop war-ravaged or evil people, even those in our military, from bringing dishonor on our country. The difference here is the reaction of the media.] http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/03/21/breaking-obamas-abu-ghraib-the-stuff-hits-the-fan/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the shocking revelation by a brave Glenn Beck, Business Insider reports on the video of a speech by Lerner to a Pace University Forum. A former official of one of the country's most-powerful unions, SEIU, has a secret plan to "destabilize" the country.
[How can it be described as secret when he was on tape giving the speech to a university forum?]
The plan is designed to destroy JP Morgan, nuke the stock market, and weaken Wall Street's grip on power, thus creating the conditions necessary for a redistribution of wealth and a change in government.
Lerner said that unions and community organizations are, for all intents and purposes, dead. The only way to achieve their goals, therefore--the redistribution of wealth and the return of "$17 trillion" stolen from the middle class by Wall Street--is to "destabilize the country."
Lerner's plan is to organize a mass, coordinated "strike" on mortgage, student loan, and local government debt payments--thus bringing the banks to the edge of insolvency and forcing them to renegotiate the terms of the loans. This destabilization and turmoil, Lerner hopes, will also crash the stock market, isolating the banking class and allowing for a transfer of power.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts
That Obama guy IS THE WORST AND MOST DANGEROUS PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY! Agree with what Horowitz has observed...no doubt about it, the man is so arrogant, careless, clueless it is disgusting to witness! Surely hope & pray the folks who elected him are seeing him for what he is!!
ReplyDeleteObama Loses Nobel Peace Prize!!!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWmVKnYFodg