Chinese hackers caused two power blackouts in the United States in the last half decade, according to the cover story in tomorrow’s National Journal. American intelligence sources confirm that the People’s Liberation Army was responsible for intrusions in 2003 that likely caused North America’s largest blackout, which affected three states, parts of Canada, and 50 million people. More than a hundred generating stations were shut down. To this day the Chinese activity that precipitated the cascading failure is not fully understood.
Then, this February, three million customers were hit by a blackout that appears to have been inadvertently caused by the People’s Liberation Army as it mapped the network of Florida Power & Light. “I suspect, as the system went down, the PLA hacker said something like, ‘Oops, my bad,’ in Chinese,” said an unnamed information-security expert quoted in the story.
As they say, the Chinese are at war with us every day over the phone lines. Washington is squeamish about publicly naming China as the source of hostile attacks, so we almost never push back.
Whatever happened to the don’t-tread-on-me spirit in this country? We ignored al Qaeda’s attacks until September 11. Now we’re adopting the same passive approach to Chinese assaults on our critical infrastructure. Last August, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, while in Beijing, publicly told off Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao about Chinese hacking. Why can’t Robert Gates muster the courage to say anything in front of the microphones when he travels to the Chinese capital? Beijing has rewarded our secretary of defense for his discretion by hacking into the computer network serving his office last June.
We need a better China policy. So here’s a proposal. The next time the Chinese cause a blackout in this country, let’s take down all their grids. The communists in Beijing will be angry, but I suspect they’ll get the message.
” But then I read the transcript. Brace yourself – what follows is a series of statements that range from naively optimistic to disturbingly misinformed:”
Look,Obama is a open minded type of guy,who loves to hear many points of view on many issues. Let him know that you’re an exceedingly bright pundit from Commentary,let him know that he is naive and misinformed. That will bother him;he hates misinformation. I’m sure he will spend some time with you,and be very appreciative of your efforts to educate him. Thank you,Eric
Perfect example of why you are out of power and broadly viewed as simpletons and failures. Obama nailed this interview and showed the power of humility in furthering America’s foreign policy goals. I know you aren’t capable of comprehending. But the American people do, as do the people of the world. And we will happily move forward without you.
I predict Obama will be disappointed.
Foreign Policy disagrees.
“It’s impossible to exaggerate the symbolic importance of Barack Obama choosing an Arabic satellite television station for his first formal interview as President — and of taking that opportunity to talk frankly about a new relationship with the Muslim world based on mutual respect and emphasizing listening rather than dictating. His interview promises a genuinely fresh start in the way the United States interacts with the Arab world and a new dedication to public diplomacy.”
http://lynch.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/27/obama_on_al_arabiya
What worked with American voters does not, and will not work with” people who acted in ways that’s not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region:… their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past – none of these things have been helpful,”
Perhaps if he called back George Mitchell and sent George Clooney.
Obama and Mitchell are delusional if they think Isarel wants peace.
Andrew Sullivan also disagrees.
It popped up on television last night and I had two reactions. The first was a sense of met expectation. Part of the rationale for Obama’s presidency from a foreign policy perspective was always his unique capacity to rebrand America in the eyes of the Muslim world. Since even the hardest core neocons agree that wooing the Muslim center is critical to winning the long war against Jihadism, Obama’s outreach is unremarkable and should be utterly uncontroversial. Bush tried for a while to do the same. But Karen Hughes is not exactly Barack Obama. And the simple gesture of choosing an Arab media outlet for his first televised interview as president is extremely powerful. It has the elegance of a minimalist move with maximalist aims. It is about the same thing as inviting Rick Warren or supping with George Will: it’s about R-E-S-P-E-C-T.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/01/the-al-arabiya.html
This is directed at commentor 2 (Dave).
Dave, here’s the trouble with President Obama’s approach. The Iranian leadership and the Syrrian leadershipis that they are tyrranical dictatorships. Have you read any history? In any case, these leaderships are quite brutal. Photo ops, treaties, and hand shakes with these sorts would send most people needing a week long shower to fel clean. With that said, any interaction with these folks at all, only serves to prop them up…to legitimize their oppression of their peoples. Are you following me? Good. Confrontation may not be the wisest approach. I agree with that. However, extending the hand of friendship is like shaking hands Charles Manson. This should be avoided!!!
On a different track. The GOP owns the Iraq relationship while the Dems will own the Iran/Syrian relationship. Currently Iraq has elections this Saturday. Iran will probably have their typical political oppression on that same day. In 20 years, will see which country is a better friend, supports basic human rights, has a better functioning more educated society, and is better integrated into the world-body politic as a functioning respected nation.
Is there any doubt how this will turn out?
“The Iranian leadership and the Syrrian leadershipis that they are tyrranical dictatorships.”
so are saudi arabia and egypt and china for that matter and BUsh had them in the rose garden and even arrested the tai chi lady who shouted stuff at hu jintao
#9,”Is there any doubt how this will turn out?”
Yes, there’s a lot of doubt. In a few years,Iran and Iraq may be best buddies. Just as likely as your Mary Poppins view.
Jimmy Carter v. 2.0. We know how this ends.
by the way, didn’t the last President, and also the President before him, kick off their ME efforts by sending that Big Man of Diplomacy, George Mitchell, over for a little face time with the dictators? And will someone please refresh my recollection with a quick tour of Mitchell’s various diplomatic successes?
What exactly happened 20 or 30 years ago that marked a change in US policy toward the Middle East? Was it switching from Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy to Ronald Reagan’s? Was it switching to a more pro-Israel stance? Was it being less even-handed in our treatment of the region? I don’t get it.
Right now, it’s clear that Obama’s entire foreign policy vocabulary is comprised of the dregs of the “non-aligned world,” peace movements of the 80s and 90s, Carterism and community organizing writ large. So far, he is incapable of thinking outside of that very small box. His (and, more importantly, our) only hope is that he is capable of learning, and quickly, from experience. He is very prickly, narcissistic and arrogant, so it may be that a couple of rebuffs and double-crosses from those he is currently “respecting” will change his attitude dramatically. It’s a way to keep hope alive, anyway.
I can almost hear Obama singing Kumbaya in the background.
He did an interview on an Arab TV station – that’s nice
He wants to help the impoverished Muslims in the Arab states that are more committed to terrorism and racist ideology than trying to improve the fabric of life of their own citizens – well that’s nice too.
Reality will be a cold glass of water on this version of Kumbaya.
I see our enemies in retreat as we speak.
We shall see if he lives up to his promise of keeping Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
We shall see if he lives up to his promise to focus on Afghanistan – “the true battleground” against Al Queda – and more importantly – if and when he backs out when the going gets tough.
We shall see how much political capital he will spend on the Israeli- Palestinian peace process
We shall see how well his version of Kumbaya works against people, terrorists and rogue states that only seek our defeat.
Dave wrote:
“Obama nailed this interview and showed the power of humility in furthering America’s foreign policy goals.”
No, Obama showed his arrogance, his ignorance, and his naivete. Do you really think radical Islam will be satisfied if we’re just nicer to them? Chamberlain thought that Hitler would be satisfied if we just gave him the Sudetenland.
Do a little Googling and see the pictures and articles of recent Muslim riots in Europe. No, you’re not going to see these things in the American mainstream media because they’re protecting Obama by hiding the truth from us.
David wrote:
“What exactly happened 20 or 30 years ago that marked a change in US policy toward the Middle East? Was it switching from Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy to Ronald Reagan’s?”
You are correct when you wrote that you don’t get it. The Iranians took 450 hostages in the American embassy while Carter was president, so you can’t blame it on Reagan.
Bill Clinton had at least two offers from Somalia to extradite Osama bin Laden to the US, but he refused. All Clinton did was launch a couple of cruise missiles at camels when radical Islam attacked us.
Would you blame the change in Germany during the 1930s on US policy? I certainly hope not. Neither should you blame the rise of radical Islam on US policy. They want to kill you and they don’t give a rat’s rump even if you are a nice little liberal who wants Hopey-Changy and Kumbayah. It’s not about us — it’s about them.
AA wrote:
“it’s about R-E-S-P-E-C-T.”
Respect? Like when he met with Republicans about their concerns over expensive government giveaways and simply told them “I won?”
Or when he told congress that people need to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with him? The liberal definition of bipartisanship is conservatives caving in to every liberal demand.
How about when he promised strict rules on hiring lobbyists then said he wanted to make an exception to the rules the very next day?
How about hiring a tax cheat to run the treasury?
Obama doesn’t respect you or anybody else. Someday you’ll find out.
Lester wrote:
“so are saudi arabia and egypt and china for that matter and BUsh had them in the rose garden…”
Wait, you liberals and the media (but I repeat myself) have been saying that Bush never bothered to negotiate. Now you describe Bush as a negotiator. You can’t have it both ways — one or the other is a lie.
Bush did not arrest the Tai Chi lady. She was taken away from the scene by Secret Service and released because she was causing a disturbance. I respect the lady for saying what she said. However, you can bet your liberal behind that, if a conservative caused a ruckus at an Obama press conference, they would be arrested, and rightly so.
Jay from Texas wrote:
“We shall see if he lives up to his promise to focus on Afghanistan – “the true battleground” against Al Queda – and more importantly – if and when he backs out when the going gets tough.”
I agree with your sentiments exactly. I’m assuming you know (the naive and uninformed liberals here don’t) that the true battleground is wherever the terrorists are. Battling terrorists in Iraq was a brilliant strategical move — all one has to do is look at a map and see how many terrorist states surround Iraq and see how easy it was for them to go to Iraq. Once the terrorists got to Iraq, it was a turkey shoot. Now we have to move on to the isolated areas of Afghanistan and Waziristan to root out the remainders.
This is not a War on Terror (that’s like saying we’re in a war against guns) and is certainly not a war limited to Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other country. It’s a war against radical Islam and we need to fight them wherever they are.
Yes – The middle east has been SO PEACEFUL in the eight years that the Neo-CONs controlled the White House – and the six year previous to that that Republicans chaired all our military and intelligence committees – they’ve done SO WELL in the region, that we should all plotz as we await their next words of wisdom…
Sorry guys – you had your chance and you blew it – Bush left office with two wars in the middle east, Pakistan on the verge of collapse, Iran on the rise and Israel battling Hamas in gaza…
IOW – YOU GUYS DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT…
Obama couldn’t do worse under any conditions…
“Is there any doubt how this will turn out?”
No doubt – Iraq will support the Iranian regime and will nevr support Israel in the region…
“Respect? Like when he met with Republicans about their concerns over expensive government giveaways and simply told them “I won?””
He DID win – and Republicans are gonna have to chew on that – I sure don’t recall Bush worrying about Democratic support – Mister Bring it On…Respect means listneing to the minority party – it doesn’t mean implementing their terrible policies – the ones that got us into this mess…
“Or when he told congress that people need to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with him? The liberal definition of bipartisanship is conservatives caving in to every liberal demand.”
That’s not what he said – but even so, Rush speaks for the right wing – 20 million listeners a day according to the big, fat reprobate junkie. I seem to recall during the Republican run for president, that the medai was a whipping boy for the right – McCain attacked the NY times by name. Rush wishes failure on Obama and Obama responded… Chew on THAT loser…
“How about when he promised strict rules on hiring lobbyists then said he wanted to make an exception to the rules the very next day?”
Def Sec Gates PERSONALLY requested the waiver on Bill Lynn – i can just hear the Neo-COn War Mongers (like you) responding if Obama had said no to gates…
“How about hiring a tax cheat to run the treasury?”
Confirmed by the US Senate – they could’ve denied….Since when do Republicans give a hoot about Taxes?
“Obama doesn’t respect you or anybody else. Someday you’ll find out.”
Why should Obama respect the right wing? No one else does… Most of America thinks you suck…
Obama is just one of millions….
“You are correct when you wrote that you don’t get it. The Iranians took 450 hostages in the American embassy while Carter was president, so you can’t blame it on Reagan.”
Blame reagan? For what – rewardng iran with the sale of sophisticated TOW Missles? For priming al qaeda (9then known as the Afghani Resistence) – with dollars and weapons to fight the Soviets. for supplying Iraq with weapons technology in their war with iran? If one were to connect the dots, one might call Reagan the father of modern Jihad. As I always said – Republicans own 9/11…
“Bill Clinton had at least two offers from Somalia to extradite Osama bin Laden to the US, but he refused. All Clinton did was launch a couple of cruise missiles at camels when radical Islam attacked us…”
The lie that won’t die! Sudan offered to send bin laden to Saudi Arabi – they rejected the offer. And let’s face it, all Bush got us was a lot of Dead Americans, a huge pile of dead soldiers – and bin Laden laughing at America. Radical Islam is centered in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – and WHOM did Bush make close allies – Saudi Arabi and Pakistan…
One of Obama’s multi-million strong army of trolls, marching in lockstep. (Did that count as feeding?)
WarPublican wrote:
=========
“Sorry guys – you had your chance and you blew it – Bush left office with two wars in the middle east, Pakistan on the verge of collapse, Iran on the rise and Israel battling Hamas in gaza…
IOW – YOU GUYS DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT…”
=========
So you blame Middle East violence in the Clinton administration on the Republicans who controlled congress for 6 years? So would it be fair to say that you blame the Middle East violence of the last 4 years on the congressional Democrats under Pelosi and Reid.
No, I didn’t think you would.
Were Iran and Pakistan problems long before you even heard of Bush? Yes, they were. I take it that you weren’t around, don’t remember, or so uninformed that you don’t know what things were like during the Carter years, when Democrats controlled everything.
For your information, the war in Iraq has been over for a good year now. It’s just that the libs and the press don’t want Bush getting the credit for winning when they predicted failure. I fully expect that, sometime this spring, Obama will declare victory in Iraq and his mind-numbed robots will believe that he ended the war.
And you say that we conservatives don’t know what we’re talking about?
“So you blame Middle East violence in the Clinton administration on the Republicans who controlled congress for 6 years? So would it be fair to say that you blame the Middle East violence of the last 4 years on the congressional Democrats under Pelosi and Reid.”
I never blamed anything on republicans – I just SCOFF at people like YOU who claim to KNOW what’s best for the ME – when bozos like Reagan and Bush I sold weapons to Iran, sold weapons to iraq, gave arms and training to al qaeda (against the soviets) – invaded Iraq as a response to 9/11, have presided over the WORSE attacks on our nation since 9/11 (both the congress and the White House), have presided over horrific attacks on our close allies in the days AFTER 9/11, have presided over the slaughter of 4000 plus American troops so Iraq could wave the purple thumb of love at Iran, have presided over an economic meltdown and bin laden is still free to boot – so why – WHY – would ANYONE listen to you?
Give me ONE reason.
“For your information, the war in Iraq has been over for a good year now. It’s just that the libs and the press don’t want Bush getting the credit for winning when they predicted failure. ”
Here you go again. you SAY the war is over. Who did we defeat? Bin laden? Saddam Hussien? Al Qaeda? Is the Islamic terrorist threat lessened? We won NOTHING in iraq – nothing. Bush had to SNEAK into the country like a thief – only to be insulted and embarrassed by a shoe thrower who’s now a NATIONAL HERO! Sure, the iraqis have freedom of speech – and what do those speeches say?
DOWN WITH AMERICA.
DOWN WITH ISRAEL!
What a victory!
why should anyone listen to you?
WarPublican wrote:
=========
“Why should Obama respect the right wing? No one else does… Most of America thinks you suck…”
=========
But one of your buddies just wrote that Obama respected us. You need to get your stories straight.
=========
The lie that won’t die! Sudan offered to send bin laden to Saudi Arabi – they rejected the offer.
=========
LOL! How about reading what the CIA agent in charge of operations from Washington had to write on the subject: http://www.wanttoknow.info/041205latimes
And here’s another one from the person who arranged one of the opportunities to extradite bin Laden to the United States: http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
You can even hear Bill Clinton talking about refusing to extradite bin Laden on tape: http://archive.newsmax.com/audio/BILLVH.mp3
What documents you think that Sandy Berger was stuffing in his pants? We’ll never know, because some were irretrievably destroyed. Why do think the Democrats worked hard to prevent this information from reaching the 9/11 hearings.
Sorry, you’ve proved that you really don’t have a clue about what you’re talking about and you show no signs of wanting to be educated. But don’t worry, Obama likes clueless people.
WarPublican wrote:
=========
And let’s face it, all Bush got us was a lot of Dead Americans, a huge pile of dead soldiers – and bin Laden laughing at America. Radical Islam is centered in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – and WHOM did Bush make close allies – Saudi Arabi and Pakistan…
=========
Iraq is a free country with — even you admit this — free speech. Yes, free speech allows morons like the shoe-thrower to throw hissy fits just like it permits morons in the United States to lie like rugs about Bush, the war, and who was behind the economic meltdown.
Unfourtunately, Obama and the Democrats are trying to reinstitute some form of the Fairness Doctrine to eliminate free speech here. You libs have said that “dissent is the highest form of patriotism” for the past 8 years. Now your leaders are trying to eliminate dissent — just as we freedom-loving conservatives predicted.
There are a lot of dead terrorists because Bush and the military made a great strategic decision. Millions have their freedom in Iraq. Millions more won their freedom from communism because of Ronald Reagan. Osama is sick, hiding in a cave, and couldn’t mastermind a picnic these days. We have not had any attacks on the United States since 9/11.
You’re welcome.
“But don’t worry, Obama likes clueless people.”
So does the GOP. Clueless people = GOP Base Voters.
Don’t believe me? Go try to have an intelligent conversation about economics, foreign policy or even arts & literature with the GOP rank and file “joe six-pack” voters. Needless to say – you won’t be impressed with their simple responses about not gonna lose their guns and the anti-christ. You can point fingers and try to ridicule the opposition as being naive and out of touch. Fair to say – perhaps. But face it, there is a lot of dumb to go around with the US electorate – and the “dumb” is just as plentiful on the GOP side as that of the Dems.
WarPublican wrote:
========
Rush wishes failure on Obama and Obama responded… Chew on THAT loser…
========
I hope that Obama fails, too. I hope that he fails to stifle free speech. I hope that he fails to implement socialized medicine (you’ve obviously never encountered the health care systems in Europe and Canada), I hope that he fails to give money to the incredibly corrupt ACORN, I hope that he fails in his blame-America policies that will open us up to attack, and I hope the stimulus bill fails because Obama is repeating the mistakes of Hoover and Roosevelt.
Obama picked the wrong man to respond to when he blamed problems on Rush. There are 48% of Americans who are not going to let our freedom be taken away so easily.
=========
Confirmed by the US Senate – they could’ve denied….Since when do Republicans give a hoot about Taxes?
=========
Unfortunately, the Senate is controlled by Democrats.
It’s Republicans who want to lower taxes. From Kennedy to Bush, lowering taxes has always stimulated the economy. Obama does not want to stimulate the economy, or he would do the same. Obama wants control over the economy to create a majority of Americans who believe that their only hope for abundance is to rely on government handouts.
Spartakist Revolt wrote:
========
Don’t believe me? Go try to have an intelligent conversation about economics, foreign policy or even arts & literature with the GOP rank and file “joe six-pack” voters. Needless to say – you won’t be impressed with their simple responses about not gonna lose their guns and the anti-christ.
========
I agree with you that there are a lot of dumb Americans on both sides of the aisle. However, they are right about things that you don’t give them credit for. The Second Amendment is very simple and doesn’t require a nuanced answer. Wanting lower taxes so that we can spend our own money the way we want to isn’t rocket surgery either.
Compare and contrast with tolerant left, who are making plans as we write to ban dissenting speech, who don’t know and don’t care when life begins, and who blame everything from World War I to Katrina on Chimpy McHitlerburton.
I’ll take the ignorant right over the ignorant left any day.
The leftists who post on this site give sufficient evidence of the low level of intelligence of the members of their cult.
adam wrote:
===========
The leftists who post on this site give sufficient evidence of the low level of intelligence of the members of their cult.
===========
Maybe not so much a lack of intelligence as a lack of sound reasoning, judgment, and basic knowledge of the facts. That and a sheeplike mentality. Oh, and a vicious hatred.
Roosevelt and LBJ used handouts to gain votes for the Democratic Party. Obama is doing exactly the same thing.
Obama’s first week has been an unmitigated disaster. A few more months of this and maybe people will have their eyes opened up enough so that he can be prevented from doing so much damage.
Maybe you’re right–the fact that these Leftist trolls feel a need to maintain their campaign of hate (or maybe that should be HATE!!!) on sites like this even after the inauguration is a sign of uncertainty. They don’t feel they can afford to give an inch or relax for a second. I hope they’re right.
@ #33 –
Wow! Michael what up!?
I’ve cut & pasted some of your tirade for further review -
“I agree with you that there are a lot of dumb Americans on both sides of the aisle. However, they are right about things that you don’t give them credit for. The Second Amendment is very simple and doesn’t require a nuanced answer. Wanting lower taxes so that we can spend our own money the way we want to isn’t rocket surgery either.
Compare and contrast with tolerant left, who are making plans as we write to ban dissenting speech, who don’t know and don’t care when life begins, and who blame everything from World War I to Katrina on Chimpy McHitlerburton.”
1) I support the second amendment. On this issue you and I most likely have perfectly aligned thoughts. No argument from me on that. My point was the idocy of the electorate in terms of this single issue and the value that is placed on it. These people that I insulted couldn’t even articulate their position on this amendment. But, I suspect you already realize their limitations.
2) Going further… Regarding taxes… well I have to say that I do agree that paying taxes is patriotic. See, I want for my community and my nation to succeed. Success (education, miliary, infrastructure, etc…) costs money. I truly resent people that are always attempting to use the tax issue as a moral argument. It’s selfish. I work every day, and do a good job at what I do. For me, paying taxes is part of life – and I don’t have a problem with it since I think that we’ve got a pretty good deal here in the USA with all that our tax dollars have accomplished for the benefit of this republic. In this case, you and I will not meet eye to eye.
3) …who don’t know and don’t care when life begins… Now this is the phrase that completely sums up your political ideology. Cool, I respect your position on abortion. I feel the same way in many aspects. But in the case of rape or incest, I think that a woman should have the right to terminate without questions or governmental prohibitions.
4) more on your final paragraph on the “tolerant left” and “Chimpy McHitlerburton” – well, I don’t know WTF that means. Seriously, what are you saying here?
5) “I’ll take the ignorant right over the ignorant left any day”… Hmmm…. I’m equally frightened by both groups of these ignorant plebes.
The only success Bushs bully-in-the-schoolyard approach brought was increasing the number of terrorist recruits. Time for a new tactic. I commend the president in his efforts.
Bush’s approach (when he stuck to it) was a stand up to the bully in the schoolyard one. The bullies and those who would submit to keep the peace (i.e., “world opinion”) are now very happy that the new schoolmaster believes the bullies have just been misunderstood.
President Obama should be shown the Muslims sawing off Daniel Bergs head for being exactly what the people that elected him are, infidels. How soon we forget.
Dave and Lester, how do you feel about Obama’s plans to send more troops to Afghanistan?
Obama tells us that “ordinary people … are suffering from poverty.” Indeed, that’s true in many parts of the world, not only among Arabs or Muslims. But it would be false to ascribe Islamic terrorism to poverty as a cause. I hope that Obama knows that Muhammud Atta was the son of a physician, Bin Laden son of a multi-billionaire, etc. Now, if The One is truly interested in helping the POOR in Muslim-ruled lands, then why doesn’t he call on the friends of jimma carter, Bill Clinton, and the Bushes [I & II]? They all have good, sincere friends in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi and so on. These friends are reputed to be superrich, even by American standards. Why can’t The One humbly request that they provide for their poorer brethren out of their own pockets, rather than dishonorably allow the Americans to pick up the tab??
What would be dangerous would be if Obama would try to promote a narrative that the Arabs are somehow impoverished because of Israel and that the Hamas struggle is a matter of economic have nots [Gaza Arabs] versus those undeserving haves, the Jews, now known as Israelis. Actually, Condoleezza Rice was already promoting that narrative more than a year ago, before Annapolis. Of course, it’s a lie. There are both rich and poor Arabs. And poverty in Syria is more caused by Obama’s hoped for partners in dialogue [Assad et Cie] than by anything that Israel does. Many Lebanese complain that the Assads have been milking their country. But Obama has already forgotten that Assad murdered Hariri and dozens of other Lebanese since Hariri’s murder. Now, Hariri was very rich. Does that justify his murder by Assad? Is Syrian control over Lebanon justified by the Lebanese being more prosperous? Shall we see Assad as a have-not fighting for the poor by having Hariri murdered?
Or shall we see Assad et Cie as a cause for poverty in Syria??
I think Eric Trager may be too mild with a president who knowingly falsifies reality and creates or promotes false narratives in order to confuse the public, and perhaps for the purpose of undermining Israel too. Will the Teheran Duce invite Mr Obama for tea in Firdawsi’s Rose Garden?
Seriously man…. there were people on the McCain side who didn’t want to vote for Obama because they thought he was “muslim”, “arab”, and by extension terrorist. Now, of course thats a fringe, and of course it has nothing to do with you. Obama is at least trying to be civil and to be nice.
You’re analysis is pretty stupid i have to day
Spartakist Revolt,
I apologize that I went a little bit over the top with you. I tossed your comment in with comments of, shall we say — lesser quality — and I should not have done that.
1. I’m glad that we agree on the Second Amendment. I was a liberal during my 20s and the right to bear arms was my last step in my movement toward conservatism.
2. I agree with you that we should pay a certain amount of taxes. But I would also argue that the government should not spend our money foolishly. Both Democrats and Republicans have eaned my ire on this one. We should not be paying people not to grow wheat. Bill Clinton was literally forced to sign welfare reform and, lo and behold, people who formerly would not work found jobs. I’ve seen how bureaucracies waste money. The private sector is simply more efficient than the public sector. We need to spend less and we need to pay less taxes.
3. You wrote: “But in the case of rape or incest, I think that a woman should have the right to terminate without questions or governmental prohibitions.” I would be happy to see an abortion bill that eliminates abortions except in the case of rape or incest. I have to write quickly now, but if you Google you will find that the Guttmacher institute — the research arm of Planned Parenthood — says that only about 3% of abortions are due to rape or incest. A law like that would eliminate some 97% of abortions. Check out my blog and read some recent posts on the racism and eugenics behind the abortion movement. Blacks make up about 13% of the population but account for 36% of abortions. I’m a big human-rights advocate, which I think is perfectly in line with conservatism.
4. You haven’t heard of Chimpy McHitlerburton or any of the other various versions of the names that Bush is called? Just Google on “Chimpy” and you’ll see what I mean.
5. I’ll still take the ignorant right over the ignorant left. I want to kick them sometimes — I value education and don’t tolerate ignorance very well — but I’ll take anyone who comes down on the right side of the issues even if they took a strange path to get there. Not only that, but there is a huge swell of anti-semitism on the left. Google around about the recent riots in London, Paris, Sweden, and Denmark. It’s right out of the 1930s. Don’t expect to read about it the American mainstream media though.
It’s good to see an intelligent post from the other side of the political aisle. Take care.
Best regards
Elliott:
======
What would be dangerous would be if Obama would try to promote a narrative that the Arabs are somehow impoverished because of Israel and that the Hamas struggle is a matter of economic have nots [Gaza Arabs] versus those undeserving haves, the Jews, now known as Israelis.
======
Come now. Those are the official talking points and you will be silenced if you disagree.
As I wrote to Spartakist Revolt while ago, anti-Semitism is worse now than at any other time since the 1930s. Again, it’s coming from the left (remember, Hitler was a socialist) and it’s very scary.
When the inane and asinine Commentary magazine is finally proven wrong on this, just like on just about everything else, can we all look forward to it closing up shop for good already!
elliot- I am totally opposed to any and all involvement in afghanistan, but I don’t see obama pulling out of there any time soon. at least those troops wil have the benefit of having a plurality of americans behind what they are doing.
I would point out that max boot and others on this side think afghanistna isn’t worth it and have said so here. so we agree on one foreign policy issue after all
“Lester wrote:
“so are saudi arabia and egypt and china for that matter and BUsh had them in the rose garden…”
Wait, you liberals and the media (but I repeat myself) have been saying that Bush never bothered to negotiate. Now you describe Bush as a negotiator. You can’t have it both ways — one or the other is a lie.
Bush did not arrest the Tai Chi lady. She was taken away from the scene by Secret Service and released because she was causing a disturbance. I respect the lady for saying what she said. However, you can bet your liberal behind that, if a conservative caused a ruckus at an Obama press conference, they would be arrested, and rightly so
”
all I was doing was pointing out that not meeting with dictators isn’t a big thing if you meet and are allied with other ones.
china is a client state, iran is not. therfore china is on the road to democracy and iran is evil. meanwhile, students protest in iran and get made fun of on ahmednejads blog. in China? far worse if we heard about it at all
@ #45 Michael M. -
“anti-Semitism is worse now than at any other time since the 1930s. Again, it’s coming from the left (remember, Hitler was a socialist) and it’s very scary.”
Michael, I just want to make a comment on this very important point. In this case (and hopefully all cases) I’ll analyze this from a non-ideolgical viewpoint for the benefit of historical accuracy.
Let me begin by saying that I have seen no evidence of “anti-semitism” in years. I certainly never see it in my personal or professional life, and I’m not seeing it in Europe – other than some goofy nazi revival movement in Germany that is just as fringe element as this movement is in the USA. I’ll go so far as to say that I’m concerned, but not too concerned. The Europeans have come a long way – just like we Americans have. There will never be another holocaust by Americans or Europeans simply because there are too many (like myself) that would actively fight such a horrific revival of evil. The Europeans may protest for peace, but this should not be construed as classical anti-semitism. They don’t hate jews, and they don’t mean Israel any harm. We can agree to disagree but I’m just calling it like I see it.
Back to the important point though. Yes – Adolph Hitler’s NSDAP was definitely a left-wing movement at its inception, but left-wing in terms of the German society in the 1920s. The right-wing (remember – German society) were the military, the various monarchy houses of elites formed from the aggregate of territories that were brought under the rule of house of Hohenzollern during Kaiser Wilhelm I and Otto Von Bismark, and of course the business and industrial elite and other wealthy citizens. As Hitler had to consolidate his base in the early 1930s, he had to make dramatic movements to the “right” to appease the powerful political classes and to continue the delicate dance around the military establishment led by Paul Von Hindenberg and avoid confrontation. Solution: As I said, the NSDAP movement transformed from a revolutionary movement to a “respectable” party within German politics. One of these moves was what we know as “the night of the long knives”. I forget so much, but I believe that around 900 or so SA Brownshirt leaders were assassinated during this event. This greatly appealed to the German military since the SA (led by Rohm) was the primary threat to the Werhmacht’s continued existence. And so the process continued with the elites and the politically powerful classes. The NSDAP continued to move “right”and consequently transformed itself from the National Socialist German Worker’s Party to a movement that barely resembled what it was at its inception (or what it was meant to be – i.e. GERMAN SOCIALISM for Germans).
Anyway, I could continue – but you can just read a book or watch a good History Channel documentary to get the rest. My point with all of this is that it’s historically innaccurate to lable the jew hating anti-semitic NAZI party of 1933 – 1945 as a left-wing movement. It wasn’t. Therefore, I find the fear that you have of revived leftist anti-semitism to be unrealistic and illogical. And of course, I say this with respect with no intention of offending. Take care.
Dear moonbats,
you all approve of Obama’s obsequious attempt at diplomacy and consider it a smashing success–despite the fact that it has not accomplished anything other than the usual acclaim from his worshipers in the west. You fervently believe his “dialogue” with “the muslim world” will help make the world a better place.
As usual, time will prove you wrong. Obama’s miserable performance on Al Aribiyah will not abate muslim savagery one jot, nor will it do anything to improve conditions in America–far from it. The only “international experience” his cabinet appointees have in that region is that of abject failure.
Praising the Anointed One for an imagined accomplishment is premature, but that never stops you fanatics from doing so. Don’t you ever get tired of being wrong? The sooner rational Americans get tired of the mistake they put in office, the better.
RCARDED wrote:
“#9,’Is there any doubt how this will turn out?’
Yes, there’s a lot of doubt. In a few years,Iran and Iraq may be best buddies. Just as likely as your Mary Poppins view.”
So Persians and Arabs will eschew their 1400 year history of mutual animosity because Obama performed an interview on Al Arabiyah? Iran and Saudi Arabia will stop vying for control of the region and the world’s muslim population?
Talk about a Mary Poppins view.
MoveOn.org Review,
“Yes – The middle east has been SO PEACEFUL in the eight years that the Neo-CONs controlled the White House – and the six year previous to that that Republicans chaired all our military and intelligence committees – they’ve done SO WELL in the region, that we should all plotz as we await their next words of wisdom…”
Yes, the Near East and Middle East have been SO PEACEFUL since the inception of islam 1400 years ago. It’s clearly a neocon plot, masterminded by that well known Jew, President Bush. That Haliburton time machine he had sure came in handy.
The Democrat strategy of treating terrorism as a law enforcement matter–a strategy they still espouse–was astoundingly successful in the past. After murdering Americans for 30 years, jihadis successfully perpetrated the 911 atrocity. The Bush Doctrine on the other hand, was a failure because it kept America safe, killed hundreds of thousands of terrorists, liberalized Afghanistan and Iraq, and prevented murderers from thumbing their noses at America from their safe havens in the Near and Middle East.
“Sorry guys – you had your chance and you blew it – Bush left office with two wars in the middle east, Pakistan on the verge of collapse, Iran on the rise and Israel battling Hamas in gaza…”
Your attempt at misdirection doesn’t obscure the fact that Obama’s feckless performance on Al Arabiyah has accomplished absolutely nothing of benefit to America or the world. In fact, he has made conditions worse with his contemptible and ignorant attempt to appease an implacable foe at his own country’s expense.
Please list the two countries you think America is at war with, and how you think Bush is responsible for Pakistan’s imminent (and imaginary) collapse, Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and the savagery of Hamas.
Tell us again how Republicans/neocons/dem Joos are responsible for the backward state of the Near and Middle East, and why Afghanistan and Iraq are worse off as representative Republics that no longer rape, torture and murder their citizens willy-nilly. Tell us why the negotiation tactics that Obama and the Dhimmiecrats are pursuing will miraculously work this time, after a 30 year track record of unmitigated failure.
Like all Obamatons, your smug pretension to superiority is misplaced.
Spartakist is Revolting,
the Republican base is not comprised of “Joe Six-packs,” and “Joe Six-pack” is not the benighted dolt you caricature him as. Your entire anecdotal description is a fantasy.
Your ridiculous claim that anti-Semitism is not on the rise is a despicable lie that has been disproved countless times, and so not worth addressing in depth. This very website has documented that rise with great accuracy. Only muslims surpass Europeans in the scope of their anti-Semitism. Your claim that you “haven’t seen” the vile anti-Semitism practiced in Europe and the left-wing movement in America is ignorant at best, disingenuous almost certainly, and a bald-faced lie at the worst. You can deny that the increased antipathy in the world for Israel constitutes anti-Semitism, and pretend that you haven’t noticed the sharp increase in calumny, rioting and assaults against Jews, but that only makes you a liar or a deluded fool.
Your claim that Hitler and his NAZI party were not socialists but right-wingers is likewise despicable, and even more asinine. There was not a single plank of the NAZI party that deviated from socialist doctrine–from state control of private enterprise, to the redistribution of wealth and commodities.
Your claim that the German military was right-wing is absurd, and cannot be supported by fact.
Your claim that anti-Semitism is not a staple of left-wing ideology is as dishonest as the rest of your contemptible claims. Marx and Engels were the fathers of leftism/socialism/communism and they were rabidly anti-Semitic. That is an indisputable fact born out by their own writing. It is the ideological and political left in America which screech the loudest about the supposed evils of AIPAC, dual loyalties, phony human rights violations and war crimes committed by Israel against “Palestinians” and terrorists, etc.
There’s a common thread to your “non ideological” falsification of historical facts: Dishonest denial. You don’t want to admit that leftist ideology has always proven a destructive and murderous failure when instituted, and you use the politically correct doublethink you learned in school to blame its failures on those you deem to be “right-wing.” Your distortions are so crude, dogmatic and vacuous that you could very well be an employee of our failed educational system.
This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 1/28/2009, at The Unreligious Right
Lester wrote:
I would point out that max boot and others on this side think afghanistna isn’t worth it and have said so here.
==========
The question is not whether Afghanistan is worth it, but whether our lives are worth it.
@ Ziggy Zoggy -
Dude, you’ve gone deep down the rabbit hole with your vile hatred and rediculous rantings. You’ve said nothing – litterally nothing – of any value or substance with your pathetic writings above. You even put the most absurd contentionistas to shame with your bizzar view of history. Within the confines of your dysfunctional mind, you’ve created a world in which “leftist anti-semitism” is an equal threat as that of global jihadism. There is no leftist anti-semitic agenda. It just does not exist. You’ve created this myth in your mind to justify all of the other ills in society as you connect your dots. My assessment of the rise of the NSDAP and the moves to the “right” (remember – right in terms of German society) is correct and can be verified by all credible academic historians the world over. I’ve got your simple minded ass trumped on this one you ignorant moron. You on the other hand, are in the world of bizzaro-conspiracy. Seriously man, I didn’t even want to respond to you since I would never carry a conversation with such a frightening lunatic in person. You need psychological help. I’m not saying that to be insulting, but then again I really don’t care. You’re a very sick man. I typically encounter your kind at gun & knife shows – generally ranting about conspiracies and peddling militia phamphlets. I rarely say this about anyone, but I sincerely hope that your remaining time in this world is short. You bring nothing to the table to benefit humanity. Go rest in your eternal misery and hell.
This interview was ridiculous. I’ve never seen such a pathetic display of waffling from any American ambassador, much less the President.
Obama can’t be everyone’s friend, and neither can America.
Oh and Sparta… try listening in on a prayer coming from your friendly neighborhood Mosque – it’ll likely contain the words: “Allah”, “infidel”, and “kill all Jews”.
Disregarding any other points debated between you and Ziggy, you need to pull your head out of the sand on this: the jihad hates Jews.
Spartakist is Revolting,
weak ad hominem insults and juvenile pettifoggery are no substitute for reasoned debate. The stock leftism uber alles narratives you’ve picked up from your favorite moonbat websites and failed education haven’t prepared you for a real debate. Empty claims with no facts to bolster them cant prepare you to counter an honest to God disagreement. When somebody like me refutes your nonsense you’re incapable of formulating a rebuttal, so you resort straightaway to sophomoric name calling–and you cant even do that effectively.
You ignored every point I made except one, and the closest you came to addressing that one was to simply disagree with it. You didn’t offer a shred of evidence to support your position. I cant say I’m surprised. If “all credible academic historians the world over” believe the NAZI party was a right-wing party, you should have no problem listing a few of them. However, something tells me we have different standards for what we consider credible. You’re obviously still a snot-nosed kid, so I don’t expect anything more out of you than the semi-literate rants and simple minded insults you’ve offered so far.
Now that you’re finished with your temper tantrum, you should change your undies, wipe the spittle from your chin and adjust the controls on your tinfoil hat. I think its baking your brain like a bag of popcorn.