(UPDATE) Lindsay Graham stumps the “brave” Eric Holder

Eric Holder gave his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday.

Basically, Holder AND Obama have given one reason for trying KSM and others in New York Federal Court as “we can’t cower to the terrorists.”     But Lindsay Graham (R – South Carolina) was having none of it.  Like RINO Graham or hate him…he completed OWNED Eric Holder in this exchange.

Reaction from others —

Moe Lane at RedState.com:

Not filmed was the bit in the end where Holder was on the floor, looking for his teeth. You do not walk into a situation like that without an elementary knowledge of the relevant historical record. You do not come completely unprepared for a obviously-telegraphed question like “So. What are you going to do with a captured bin Laden?” And you do not assume that Senators like being given the mushroom treatment. Because if you do any of that, you can be assured that some Senator, somewhere, will take the opportunity to introduce you to pain.

From Allahpundit at HotAir.com:

…..here’s how “carefully” Holder consulted the law before pulling the trigger on KSM. Not only does Graham have to tell him that there’s no precedent for trying battlefield detainees in civilian court, but Holder’s emphasis on how we don’t need a confession to convict Bin Laden completely misses the larger point Graham’s trying to make. The real worry in a district-court trial isn’t what’ll happen to archterrorists like Osama or KSM, whose perpetual detention is assured; the worry is that those trials will establish precedents that’ll be exploited by lesser jihadis at their own trials later on. KSM won’t be released because the political consequences to the administration are too dire, but what about some other terrorist who’s less well known to the public and whose guilt, while certain to the CIA, is less provable under normal evidentiary rules? A confession in a case like that might be critical — but what if he wasn’t Mirandized before he confessed? What then? That’s Graham’s point, and Holder seems to want nothing to do with it…..

……The decision on what “due process” is due, in other words, is based not on the nature of the underlying act — war perpetrated by a foreign enemy — but on the outcome The One wants to achieve, with Holder actually going so far today as to say, I kid you not, “Failure is not an option.” Isn’t failure always an option in a true due-process regime?

And then the ever-profound, “Leaky” Leahy had this to say when speaking to C-SPAN yesterday.  (Did anyone hear him in the testimony yesterday?  He sounded almost drugged with his slow speech…I think he’s been sittin’ in that Senate chair WAY TOO long.):

“The red herring that my friend [Sen.] Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) was covering is not realistic,” Leahy said during an appearance on “Washington Journal” on C-SPAN.

 ”For one thing, capturing Osama bin Laden — we’ve had enough on him, we don’t need to interrogate him,” Leahy added.

Leahy….I’d say it’s time for you to go…what a ridiculous statement.

UPDATE:  More thoughts from Ace of Spades blog:

Here’s the crap Holder is trying to sell that Graham won’t let him get away with…Holder says, ‘we don’t need to question bin Laden because we have so much evidence already so we won’t question him for a statement, therefor Miranda doesn’t apply’.

Graham nails him with the fact Miranda isn’t just about ‘the right to remain silent’. It’s also about an affirmative right to an attorney.

The fight is about when does a “military capture” become a “civilian arrest” and when and how do all the rights that come with a civilian arrest and trial attach. Right now there are no answers because as Graham points out, the Obama administration is making it up as they go.

Guess who is going to get involved in that question at some point. The courts. Given the arc of cases since 9/11 is anyone 100% sure (hell, 50% sure) that a court won’t throw out a conviction or even a bar a trial on any number of 6th Amendment grounds?

Holder is left babbling like a fool about these basic questions.

Why the Left fears Sarah (and who can possibly relate to her?)

I just read an article at American Thinker about why the Left fears Sarah Palin…..and they do.

Sarah Palin has been persecuted by the Obama-loving media, the so-called print media, and left-wing attack groups since her arrival on the national stage last year.

From American Thinker, excerpts (my emphasis):

Have you ever seen so much hatred for, and vitriolic criticism of, someone who had only a brief stint on the national political stage? More than a year after the presidential election in which Sarah Palin, as the GOP nominee for Vice-President, campaigned for about three months, she is still being pilloried by the left-wing loons as though she had been elected and were actively engaged in dismantling the liberal establishment. Not a day goes by in which we don’t hear or read vicious attacks on a woman who represents the wholesome conservative values of Middle America — values that have been insidiously and incrementally eroded during the last few decades.

….What this country needs is a strong conservative leader with the courage of her convictions. Sensing those qualities in Sarah Palin, the liberal left is becoming frantic because they can’t seem to halt her popularity. The reason they’re panicking is because they’re afraid of her connection with regular folks who work for a living, pay their taxes, attend a religious worship service regularly, and believe that our country has lost the moral fiber that once united us.

……I could illustrate hundreds of other examples of rampant corruption by people in elective office. Pointing to government decay is the job of the free press. But are they hounding any of the power-hungry scoundrels that masquerade as symbols of decency and honor? No, they’re engaged in a continuous merciless attack on a woman who has led the way in the fight against the very corruption being overlooked by those who have become blinded by ideology.

Sarah Palin is a threat because she symbolizes decency in a country taken hostage by moral degenerates. If she isn’t stopped, this country might end up reclaiming some of the values that made us the envy of the world.

This is exactly what is happening in the attempts to bring Sarah Palin down.  

Frankly, I really don’t know if she could win the Presidency or if that is her desire.  What I do know is that her brand of conservatism and love of America is a threat to those who view America as evil and who apologize for America.  And I believe that she has a perspective unlike just about anyone else on the national stage right now. 

Sarah Palin embodies the experiences of a wide cross-section of Americans.  She is the exact opposite in her beliefs and experiences than what the liberals and media elites believe is “correct” in a popular politician.    She is pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-American, pro-Capitalist, pro-free market, pro-family, pro-national security, pro-Constitution, and a devout, unapologetic Christian.    And did I say she is wildly popular?  Her book*, Going Rogue, was an unprecedented best seller before it hit the shelves this week. 

Thus, you see the Left’s urgency in attempting to bring Sarah Palin down politically and personally.

My own personal opinion on her popularity and also the source of the vitriol from the Left is that Sarah Palin can relate to different aspects of many American lives…and vice versa. 

This is in stark contrast to many of the “professional politicians” leading our country who have attended elite schools, have made leaching from the government their life’s career, and are smothered in the snobbery of thinking they know better than everyday Americans.

Sarah Palin hits a chord with many different groups and types of Americans, thus the huge interest in her.  Many politicians and those in the public eye can voice opinions on issues such as conservation, outdoor sports, hunting, guns, abortion, motherhood, war, babies, special needs children, and more.  But few of those politicians and figures have ever truly experienced or embodied the actual values they espouse in those areas.  Or, at least, many don’t have the list of experiences in those areas that Sarah Palin possesses. 

What experiences and with whom does she seem to so naturally connect?

Average ordinary Americans - Sarah Palin wasn’t born with a silver spoon, she attended a “regular” college in Idaho, she married her high school sweetheart.  She wears a $35 wedding band. She eloped with Todd at the age of 23.  She grew up in the same manner as the vast majority of Americans  in a middle-income household with two parents who love her and taught her many of life’s lessons.  She didn’t attend Harvard or Yale, she didn’t need “affirmative action” to take the place of real credentials, and she didn’t set out to be a career politician.  She’s not a lawyer and she doesn’t have labor unions in her back pocket (or the other way around.)

Hunters, Outdoorsmen (and women), and True Conservationists -   Sarah Palin learned to hunt and respect the land she lived upon from a young age.  Where she was raised in the state of Alaska, many people engage in hunting and live with a respect for the balance between wildlife, land, resources, and human needs.   Like many older and rural Americans, Sarah Palin understood and has lived this balance long before the “green religion” was thrust upon us.  She is the complete opposite of the fat, meat-eating, jet-flying, carbon generating, false “green” prophet, hypocritical Al Gore. 

Gun Owners - Palin is an advocate of gun ownership.  She believes in, defends and exerts her Second Amendment rights.  She actually owns firearms…and she knows how to use them!  (Wonder how many of the anti-gun lobbyists and politicians have actually owned a gun, much less shot one?)

Mothers – Sarah Palin is the mother of five children.   Mothers, stay-at-home mothers, mothers of special-needs children, single mothers….all have a role model in Sarah Palin.  Mothers who’ve sent their sons off to war have a role model in Sarah Palin.   Mothers with teenage daughters can relate to Sarah Palin (especially those with daughters who have found themselves as unwed mothers at an early age).    Mothers relate to other mothers…especially those who have: remained married to the father (Todd), taken the responsibility for raising their own children, made parental mistakes, forgiven their children’s mistakes, and faced the ups and downs of parenthood with grace.  She has a happy, traditional family.  Unbeknownst to many liberals, that still resonates in America.

Men – Let’s face it.  Even aside from Palin’s experience, knowledge and “essence of ordinary” — she’s is considered hot!  (Of course, unfortunately, that can also work against her professionally)

Women – Educated and career-oriented women have a role model in Sarah Palin.   Young women can see the potential in themselves by studying the life and career of Sarah Palin.   Older women can respect the traditional life and values of Sarah Palin.   Self-made women can relate to and admire Sarah Palin since she went from  housewife to holding local office, to mayor, to governor to VP  of the USA candidate.  Doesn’t get much more “self-made” than that.

Pro-lifers – Sarah Palin, while faced with an unexpected pregnancy AND impending birth of a Down Syndrome baby, chose to keep the life that God created.  It probably wasn’t much of a “choice” since she believes all life is sacred, but it resonates BIG with those in America who also believe all life is sacred.    Sarah Palin also encouraged and supported her own unwed, teenage daughter to keep her child when she discovered the teenage pregnancy.

Parents of Special Needs children – Sarah and Todd Palin are the poster parents for embracing the love and special place that these children bring to a family.  These children are not mistakes and parents of these children know it experience God’s little blessing everyday.  These children bring many lessons, much love, patience, and enjoyment to the families for which they belong.   Parents of special needs children have a connection and bond that other parents do not.  And Sarah Palin has stated that one of her passions is elevating the understanding of and the place for these children in our world.

Americans with loved-ones in the military and fighting in the War on Terror – Sarah’s own son just returned earlier this year from a one-year tour in Iraq.  Sarah Palin proudly displays a blue star mother flag and lapel pin.  Patriotic, proud Americans with loved ones in the military know that Sarah Palin understands their plight like only those who’ve sent loved ones to the War Zone can.  Not only that, Sarah Palin is unabashed in your support and love for those who have chosen to serve our country….and it is sincere. 

The list is long and the areas I’ve mentioned are life areas and not particularly political or policy areas in and of themselves.  If you include Sarah Palin’s policy and professional experience you would have to list among those curious and intrigued by her as those involved in energy, security, local governing, state governing, and other business arenas.

All I can say is God Bless Sarah Palin and I hope she succeeds in promoting her Reaganesque conservatism to the masses …..in whatever form that may take.

(*I am awaiting the arrival of her book, Going  Rogue,  that I pre-ordered weeks ago on Amazon–can’t wait to read it.)

(UPDATED) Obama pre-judges outcome of KSM trial in New York; Holder displays major chutzpah in his testimony today

Obama was asked today about the fact that most Americans believe Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should not be tried in federal court, but in a military tribunal (which has historical and legal precedents).

During a round of network television interviews conducted during Obama’s visit to China, the president was asked about those who find it offensive that Mohammed will receive all the rights normally accorded to U.S. citizens when they are charged with a crime.

“I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” Obama told NBC’s Chuck Todd.

He’s right about that, but as a Constitutional lawyer, Obama should know better than to pre-judge the outcome because of tainting the government’s case.

From Sweetness and Light blog, the point is made that the government’s case could be tainted already with such a judgement from President Obama, even though he tried to “walk it back”.

Given that Mr. Obama is a lawyer, and that he taught law, and that he claims to be a Constitutional scholar – for him to make such statements seems like he is intentionally trying to wreck the government’s case even before it begins.

Sure, Mr. Obama made a show of walking back his first remark. But any competent lawyer would argue that the damage has already been done.

Just imagine the uproar if a Republican had said anything like this about someone on trial.

Wait a minute. We don’t have to imagine.

Back in 1970 then President Nixon said a very similar thing about another mass murderer, Charles Manson. And he also issued a hasty “clarification.” But that still didn’t prevent the possibility of a mistrial.

Not only that, but Holder and Obama supposedly want everyone in the world  to see the “fairness” in the US legal system.  (Never mind that military trials are legal and used around the world)  But both of them are touting the inevitable outcome before the trial begins.  Not only that but they insinuate that if these terrorists are found “not guilty”, Holder will still detain them.  What message does that send to the rest of the world? 

Here’s Obama’s “walk back” on his prediction of guilt for KSM:

When Todd asked Obama if he was interfering in the trial process by declaring that Mohammed will be executed, Obama, a former constitutional law professor, insisted that he wasn’t trying to dictate the result.

“What I said was, people will not be offended if that’s the outcome. I’m not pre-judging, I’m not going to be in that courtroom, that’s the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury,” Obama said. “What I’m absolutely clear about is that I have complete confidence in the American people and our legal traditions and the prosecutors, the tough prosecutors from New York who specialize in terrorism.”

If you read nothing else today, read Andy McCarthy’s piece which tears apart many of the presumptions, assumptions, and words from Eric Holder today on this decision.

A sampling –  in bold are Holder’s words/assumptions:

3.  We can protect classified material because of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA).  It is not just classified information that is helpful to terrorist organizations. The list of people who might be identified as unindicted coconspirators that I had to turn over in 1995 was not classified, but it told al-Qaeda who was on the government’s investigative radar screen. Moreover, CIPA does not shield all classified information from the terrorists — just the classified information the judge decides is neither discoverable under the rules nor relevant to the trial. If it is discoverable and/or relevant, the defense gets it. And in civilian court, the terrorists can demand to represent themselves (as I explained in this column), so the government can’t shield the classified information from them as it can in the military system (where it can require them to have military lawyers with security clearances in order to get access to the discovery).

……  Classified information procedures in the Military Commissions Act, which would apply at military commissions, are “based on” the CIPA that applies in civilian trials.  They may be “based on” the CIPA rules, but they are not the same as the CIPA rules. The MCA provisions (Sec. 949(j)(c)) expressly provide for (1) deletions of classified material from discovery documents made available to the accused; (2) the withholding of methods and sources of intelligence collection from the accused; and (3) the deletion of classified information from exculpatory evidence. It is true that, whether you’re in civilian or military court, the executive branch gets the opportunity to propose a substitution (e.g., an unclassified summary of the information) rather than surrender the classified information. But in civilian court under CIPA, the presumption is that if classified information is relevant under the rules of evidence, the accused gets access to it. In military court under the MCA, the presumption is that classified information gets withheld, especially if it involves methods and sources of intelligence.

…For eight years justice has been delayed — no longer, “It is past time to finally act.” Holder, of course, does not mention the role of his firm and others in delaying and derailing the military commissions during their representation of America’s enemies. 

McCarthy had another column yesterday that addressed Holder’s hypocrisy and blatant “blame Bush” method of operation (my emphasis):

The principal reason there were so few military trials is the tireless campaign conducted by leftist lawyers to derail military tribunals by challenging them in the courts. Many of those lawyers are now working for the Obama Justice Department. That includes Holder, whose firm, Covington & Burling, volunteered its services to at least 18 of America’s enemies in lawsuits they brought against the American people. (During 2007 alone, Covington contributed more than 3,000 hours of free, top-flight legal assistance to our enemy detainees.)

By the way, Rush made  a good point today that perhaps Holder should have recused himself from this decision on KSM entirely because Holder and his firm VOLUNTEERED their legal services to 18 of America’s enemies….good point. 

More from McCarthy (my emphasis):

Almost from the moment President Bush authorized military commissions in 2001, this legion of litigators flooded the courts with habeas corpus petitions, contending that military detention and trials violated the Constitution, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions.

In 2004, the al-Qaeda bar induced the Supreme Court, in Rasul v. Bush, to grant enemies a statutory habeas corpus right to challenge their military detention in civilian court. Congress tried to stop them by amending the habeas statute to divest the lower federal courts of jurisdiction in these lawsuits, but the al-Qaeda bar later persuaded the liberal bloc on the Court to ignore that amendment.

One side note:  Holder said today in his testimony that military justice was valid and that is why he is using it for other terrorists held (namely those who bombed the USS Cole).  So, why the change of heart?  Holder and his minions were pleading that military detention and trials were  a violation of the Constitution when Bush was in office, but now they are valid? 

Sounds a bit like the KSM trial is highly political and ideological which leads to a rather likely conclusion that KSM is being tried in New York in federal court  as pseudo-trial against the Bush administration and waterboarding.

More from McCarthy (my emphasis):

It is mind-boggling that the delay in completing commission trials would be derided by Eric Holder, a lawyer whose firm is among those responsible for the litigation-driven delay that became a lawfare triumph for al-Qaeda. Holder and his comrades did everything they could do to undermine the commission system, both in legal motions and in public appearances accusing the Bush administration of torture, war crimes, and disregard for the legal rights of terrorists.

 And exactly when would Holder have had Khalid Sheikh Mohammed be tried? We did not gain custody of him until his capture by the Pakstanis in 2003. After that, years were taken to break him in our attempt to extract the full breadth of his knowledge of al-Qaeda’s players and plans, and to exploit that intelligence to save lives. KSM was submitted to a military commission in 2006 — shortly after Holder’s colleagues in the al-Qaeda bar got the commission system invalidated in Hamdan.

UPDATE (11/18/09):  Holder did state today that he will find ways to continue detaining KSM and the other terrorists if they are found not guilty in the NY Federal Court circus trial.   So much for showing the world how fair we are, huh?  From Sister Toldjah:

“Under the regime we are contemplating … the ability to detain under laws of war, we would retain that ability,” Mr. Holder added, meaning anyone freed by the courts could simply be returned as an enemy combatant to indefinite military detention.

Krauthammer on Obama: “The narcissism of the man is rather unbounded.”

Today on Bret Baier’s Fox All-Star Panel, Charles Krauthammer didn’t mince words when explaining the egotistical and narcissistic view of himself that Obama possesses when he claims to be  ”America’s First Pacific President”.

While in Asia, first Obama trashes George W. Bush and America overseas.  Later, Obama claims that he is the “First Pacific President“.    In a sickening display of disrespecting his predecessor while overseas, Obama then moves into his Messiah mode and says:

“There must be no doubt,” he said. “As America’s first Pacific president, I promise you that this Pacific nation will strengthen and sustain our leadership in this vitally important part of the world.”

After all, you know that American history and Presidential greatness didn’t begin until Obama took office in January, 2009.

On the panel (video below), Krauthammer gives many examples including John F. Kennedy and George H.W. Bush’s service in WWII…both of who ended up, literally, in the Pacific Ocean while fighting the War.

After that Krauthammer lays it on…..

“These people actually spent time in the deep Pacific, but in Obama’s mind it doesn’t anyway match the experience of the baby Jesus….excuse me….baby Obama growing up on some Pacific island.

The narcissism of the man is rather unbounded.”

Don’t hold back now Krauthammer!

After Nina Easton basically agrees and brings up other “Pacific” President examples….Krauthammer, correctly and sarcastically says:

“But, you see, everything in Obama’s life makes him world historical.”

Here’s the video.  It is worth watching the entire clip, but at 1:25 Krauthammer references Kennedy and Bush and at 1:45 he begins his “Baby Jesus/Obama” reference.

I could think of a lot more firsts that are much more appropriate. 

 Obama could be America’s:

• First Auto Company-Owning President
• First Bank-Owning President
• First Death Panel President
• First “Jobs Created or Saved” President
• First Community Organizer President
• First Man-Child President
• First Anti-American President
• First Chicago Thug President
• First 90-degree Bow Wow President
• First Marxist President
• First Military-Loathing President

First Pacific President?  Not so much.

O-bow-ma screwed up the bow: Even when trying to “put the US in its place” in his eyes, he screws up

As I alluded to in an earlier post, I believe that Obama’s subservient bow to the Emperor of Japan was an attempt to bring America down a notch or two (where it should be in Obama’s mind).  

Also, Obama, in his skewed anti-American mindset, was likely attempting to assure the Japanese Emperor that Obama is a “different” President that didn’t agree with the A-bombs being dropped on Japan.    That’s how I see it.

Those on the left have seen Obama’s bow as making amends for the “tortuous” and “alienating” policies of Bush…and showing respect and humility…you know, not being the cowboy….the “anti-Bush”.

But it seems the message Obama actually left with the Japanese was one of disrespect and a view of Obama as weak….and the message from the Japanese Emperor back to Obama was no bow…which likely is should be seen as an insult.

From Thomas Lifson at American Thinker:

Bad enough that Obama bowed down to another head of state yesterday. Even worse, he did not bother to learn how one bows in Japan, and just winged it.

….The one thing that virtually everyone who teaches bowing etiquette stresses is under no circumstance try to combine a bow with a handshake.

The Emperor appears to smile, which is something polite Japanese are taught to do when embarrassed.  Unlike just about everyone who comes into the Emperor’s presence, Obama obviously received no instruction on Imperial etiquette.

……Anyone with about two days’ familiarity with Japan knows about bowing. The average person in Japan bows dozens of times a day. You see it everywhere.

 

Another fundamental precept of the ordinary bow: it must be reciprocated. To do otherwise is a grave insult. Yet, we see in this short video clip that the Emperor did not even nod his head. To be honest, I am not sure the Emperor is ever supposed to bow back to anyone. He is, after all, according to Shinto, a god.

Watch it:

Apparently, Jake Tapper’s sources claim Nixon did bow to Hirohito back in 1971.  But he wasn’t actually bowing, only bending at a slight angle, without touching…basically without international incidence. 

Obama made America and himself look weak according to sources of Jake Tapper at ABC:

“The bow as he performed did not just display weakness in Red State terms, but evoked weakness in Japanese terms….The last thing the Japanese want or need is a weak looking American president and, again, in all ways, he unintentionally played that part.

(h/t:  HotAir.com)

 

Obama’s mix of ego, ignorance, and anti-Americanism sure is making the world a better place, huh?

 

(UPDATED)Bow to a world leader? Sure, says Obama.

Obama is at it again, bowing to another world leader.  Not too many months ago, Obama was bowing to the Saudi King. 

This time he is bowing to Emperor Akihito in Japan.  This is a full deep bow….not the traditional head nod/hand shake gesture.

Of course, Obama sympathizers will see nothing wrong with a US President bowing to the Emperor…..tradition and US Presidential protocol really don’t matter to those who blindly follow Obama.  

Since it is common to bow in Japan under certain circumstance, Obama-ites will say it is courtesy to bow in Japan, even if you are the leader of the most powerful nation on earth.

So lets take a look at how other world leaders have greeted the same Emperor.

View this visual  to view the other heads of state/representatives NOT bowing to a Japanese Emperor….so that pretty much throws out the possibility that just because bowing is common in Japan that heads of State should engage in it.

Why, even Miss Manners gets it (H/T: WND).  She says: 

“One does not bow or curtsy to a foreign monarch because the gesture symbolizes recognition of her power over her subjects.”

And Obama not only deep-bowed once to the Emperor, but bowed his head at least six times to both the Emperor and his wife.  It almost appeared as if Obama had a nervous tic and the Emperor’s wife had an expression of “WTH? Watch the Video (H/T: Gateway Pundit)

As was similarly asked when Obama bowed to the Saudi King, “If Obama bowed out of respect and not deference then why wasn’t the bow reciprocated by the Emperor?”

Great question. 

The problem here is that we have a President who can’t seem to place his hand over his heart during the American National Anthem, nor can Obama, as Commander-In-Chief, muster the will to salute or place his hand over his heart while recognizing our Veterans at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier…..but in the name of courtesy and respect, he bows in deference to another head of state (now two heads of state)?

Obama is not a fan of the very country he has taken an oath to serve and protect. 

You have to realize the mindset of Barack Obama to understand why he places himself in deference to some of the world leaders such as the Japanese Emperor and the Saudi King…..

Obama could not even bring himself to defend the actions of the United States in dropping the A-Bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.  View the video here, but here is a summary of his exchange with a reporter in Japan:

JAPANESE REPORTER: What is your understanding of the historical meaning of the A-bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?  Do you think it was the right decision?

Obama took a deep breath, paused . . . and punted.

PBO gave a halting response that utterly failed to answer the question.  The closest he came was to observe that Japan “has a unique perspective on the issue of nuclear weapons as a consequence of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I’m sure it helps to motivate the Prime Minister’s deep interest in this issue.”

The reporter tried again: “do you believe the US dropping of nuclear weapons on –”

Obama cut him off, choosing to answer an unrelated question on the situation in North Korea.

Obama believes the United States is a heinous country. Obama does not stand for the traditions and values of our country.  And he is doing his best to apologize and tear his own country apart at its core so that he can remake it in his skewed Marxist image.

Would a President who loves this country, its capitalist markets, its freedom and its military…. 

• refuse to where a flag lapel pin in the name of patriotism?
• dither for months on whether to follow the requests of his hand-picked Generals on the ground in Afghanistan?
• take over banks and car companies at lightning speed?
• attempt to take over 1/6 of the economy and control the health and well-being of every living citizen?
• call his own citizens “teabaggers” and have his administration outline pro-life, anti-tax, anti-stimulus, pro-capitalist protesters  as “extremists” and potential domestic terrorists?
• make judgments about the actions of a Cambridge cop who arrested one of Obama’s friend without knowing the facts, but refuse to call a Muslim Major who murders 13 of our finest military citizens a terrorist even though the evidence is clear?
• refuse to show respect at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier or during the National Anthem, but bow to two World Leaders out of “respect”?

The list for Obama goes on and on…..his actions speak louder and clearer everyday. 

And while I believe he is grossly inexperienced to be the President of the United States, I don’t believe that is the reason for all of his poor decisions, words, and gestures…..I believe those come from Obama’s clear disgust for the country he leads. 

He is attempting to “put America in its place.” And if bowing to Kings and Emperors makes America move down a notch or two in world stature, then Obama is all over it.

It is digusting and disheartening to know we have a President who does not have our best interest at heart, nor does he “respect” his own country or its citizens.

But as James Lewis at The American Thinker wrote yesterday, there is hope…..real hope…not ”Obama-type hope” (my emphasis):

The Audacity of Obama is a front, and it’s starting to crumble. America’s endurance is in our people, the tens of millions who remember our history — not the phony history that the vulgar Marxists are now peddling all over the schools. The conservative media are beginning to seize the national narrative again. All we need to do is to tell the truth over and over, every single chance we get.

Our great American Oak Tree will outlive the grasshoppers of the hour, may they never chirp so loud.  Obama is like his styrofoam Greek columns. He’s all show, all hungry ego, all chirping grasshopper, all Styrofoam.

America is a lot tougher and a lot more enduring than the radicals who now prance around Washington, DC.

Amen….

UPDATE 11/15/09:  From Sister Toldjah, the point is made that it is NOT customary in any sense for a President to bow to heads of state.  From the 1994 NYT, which also points out that when Clinton was accused of something similar, even the Clinton Administration knew enough was wrong with the idea of bowing that they protested the “unthinkable” accusation vehemently:

But the “thou need not bow” commandment from the State Department’s protocol office maintained a constancy of more than 200 years. (Clinton) Administration officials scurried to insist that the eager-to-please President had not really done the unthinkable.

Also, a great point from Sister Toldjah to the libs who think a bow is A-OK and that Americans who understand it is “unthinkable” are wrong to protest:

If you’re ok with American Presidents bowing like he has to other heads of state, then perhaps you were disappointed with the outcome of the Revolutionary War, too.

And, from Michelle Malkin who refers to the President as President “O-bow-ma” :

“The Left complained that George W. Bush was too much of a cowboy on the global stage.

It’s better than having a waterboy….”

LOL – that is exactly right!

Salute? Did someone say salute?

Can our President be more clueless, indifferent, improper or just plain loathing of our military and traditions?  (I’ll let you decide which one!?!?!)

Did he salute and do it quickly so no one could see?  Or did he just not think about it?  Or perhaps, it is beneath him to do so? 

In any case, he looks like a buffoon.

President not saluting at Tomb of the Unknown Soldier Veteran's Day 2009

(H/T:  Lucianne.com via Gateway Pundit)

Thank You Veterans

Thank you to all of our Veterans!

Because of you, we have remained free and others are free around the world.

We owe a debt to you that can never be repaid.

Thank you …thank you…thank you!

A poem I found today…..

Two Simple Words

Have you thanked a soldier lately
For everything they’ve done?
For all their work and sacrifice;
For battles lost or won?
Have you ever passed a moment in quiet solitude?
Thinking of a way to show support and gratitude?
What about two simple words?

Thank You

Remember those that came before us,
and those that stand with us today,
And to those whose time is not yet here,
I have two words to say -

Thank You

You have the Heart to stand and fight.
The Soul to stand for what is right.
You stand for Freedom, day and night.
For all this and more -

Thank You

Two simple words you may not hear enough
When the good is hard to see, or the battle is getting rough.
Although your heart may break, yet and still you remain tough.
For all that and more -

Thank You

And though I might not know your name,
We’re Red, White and Blue… family the same.
You serve our country willingly, protect freedom without fail.
Compared your brave actions, these words may seem a little pale.
But still… for everything you are, and everything you do
I’d like to say two simple words -

Thank You

We need more Tom Coburn’s in Congress

I read today the New York Times article on Tom Coburn, Senator from Oklahoma.   I expected the article to be a perfect slam against a man who holds his views tightly and is not afraid to buck the overreaches in the halls of Congress.

But, I was pleasantly surprised.  While I’m sure the NYT’s references to Coburn’s down-to-earth view and his pride in being called “Dr. NO” are designed to make him look argumentative and out of the mainstream, those are two of the qualities that I admire and believe we need more of in the Congress!

The article makes much of Coburn’s efforts to stop wasteful spending even when he swims upstream against a majority in his own party.  But I believe that both sides of the aisle have become enthralled with their own power and have forgotten their role in Congress which leads to massive spending, elitism, and losing touch with those who put them there.

Not so with Coburn….a practicing family practice physician and Southern Baptist deacon.   I mean who better to speak up about the healthcare monstrosity that the Democrats are trying to foist upon this country than a practicing physician who hasn’t made Washington his only career?

Coburn is certainly not perfect, but the article clearly points out some of the better traits of a man who we could use about 99 more times over in the Senate and 435 times over in House.

Humility and Character:

Senator Tom Coburn’s office is the rare Capitol Hill work space without a “me wall” — the display of photographs of a lawmaker standing beside presidents, foreign leaders and other dignitaries, all illustrating How Big a Deal he is.  

Instead, hanging above Mr. Coburn’s desk is a large framed print of the word “no.” It was a tribute from a liberal voter in New York thanking Mr. Coburn, a conservative Republican from Oklahoma, for his efforts at thwarting expensive legislation.

Defining Principles:

Known as Dr. No, Mr. Coburn, a family practice physician, views legislative battle less in terms of Republicans versus Democrats than as a matter of yes versus no. He sees himself as a one-man treatment center helping Congress beat its bipartisan addiction to misguided spending.

“I’ve always considered myself an opposition within the opposition,” said Mr. Coburn, whose willingness to block, delay or neuter bills through an array of procedural measures has made him an effective nuisance during his five years in the Senate.

Experience that provides insight into the issues:

Known as Dr. No, Mr. Coburn, a family practice physician……..“My mission is to frame this health care debate in terms of the fiscal ruin of this country,” said the 61-year-old Mr. Coburn, who recently railed on the Senate floor that the federal debt was “waterboarding” his five grandchildren. “I have instructed my staff to clear my schedule for every minute that bill is on the floor.”

Down to earth…knows (and remembers) how the other half lives:

After inflicting migraines in Washington, Mr. Coburn goes home on weekends to Muskogee, where he treats patients on Mondays. He says he does his best thinking aboard his John Deere mower, which can run 20 miles an hour and slash through pretty much anything on his seven-acre meadow. Mr. Coburn dons earplugs, stares straight ahead and cuts a determined swath, just as he does in the Senate.

…………..Mr. Coburn spends as little time as possible in Washington, a place he seems to genuinely dislike. An ordained Southern Baptist deacon, he attends church every Sunday back in Muskogee and teaches a Bible study class. He tries to stop armadillos from tearing up his lawn. He pulls fat water moccasins from his pool.

“I kill them,” he said with relish, “by slicing their heads off with the sharp edge of a shovel.”

I like that last line…seems like a great analogy to what he does in the Senate….killing the poisonous “creatures” (legislation).

I like his allegiance to his beliefs but also his discernment in what is most important at any given time:

Mr. Coburn was elected to the Senate with a reputation for outspoken social conservatism. He had denounced the “homosexual agenda” and said he favored the death penalty “for abortionists and other people who take life.”

These issues remain deeply meaningful to him personally, but “none of these things are important right now,” he said, compared with the “fiscal ruin” he sees the country facing.

“If you look historically, every great republic has died over fiscal issues,” he said. “That is the biggest moral issue of our time.”

And he is a good example of a man who “marches to his own drummer”….and remember, those who are effective, are not always liked and shouldn’t care if they are or not…if they stand on principle…

The first thing you can say about Tom Coburn is that he marches to his own drummer,” said Dick Armey, a Republican who was majority leader in the House when Mr. Coburn served there in the 1990s.

…….His at-times hyperbolic rhetoric, fervent social conservatism and seeming indifference to whether or not people like him have made him something of a lightning rod. “If we wiped out the entire Congress and sent common people who have no political experience, we would get far better results than we have today,” he said in a remark typical of how he views the institution.

I agree with his last statement….of course, Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and other elitists look down upon the “common people”…….. so let’s do our best to replace theses elitist, power-hungry excuses-for-leaders  in 2010 (and 2012), OK?

Obama is an arrogant, un-Presidential so and so….

Does Obama’s arrogance and condescension know no bounds?

He says: “Republicans….they just do as their told”

It is like experiencing fingernails on a chalkboard to watch, but just experience ”un-presidentialness” (is that a word?) of your President!

(H/T: Ace of Spades)