The Thin Skinned, The Water's Edge Hypocrisy, and the Pale Democratic Horse
Posted by Eric at 10:59 PMSome seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.
--President George W. Bush, May 15, 2008
On the Knesset floor in recognition of Israel's 60 birthday
The tradition has always been that when a U.S. president is overseas, partisan politics stops at the water’s edge. President Bush has now taken that principle and turned it on its head.
--Representative Rahm Emanuel (D-IL),
Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus
Democrats are livid over a perceived jab at the presumptive democratic presidential nominee. Senator Obama, perhaps thinking the world revolves around him, has taken umbrage at the President's remarks yesterday in Israel. Who was Bush speaking to? Israelis. In what context was he speaking? In one that they understand all too well: Appeasement kills innocent civilians. President Bush made no mention of Obama by name or by innuendo. He spoke "Truth to Power" in affirmation of a principle the Israeli people know intimately and all too well. But the world revolves around Barack Obama, so he takes umbrage. He takes it, and steals a meaning into the President's statement of the obvious that simply wasn't there.
How can I know this? The same way Obama and Democrats can say Bush directly attacked Obama. I read Obama's mind, much like Obama read Bush's mind. That cute picture Dan has of McCain with a "Carnac turban"? How quaint. Now let's give it to Barack, for the hat certainly fits.
Let's look at the worst President in modern history, Jimmy Carter. Here's a man who repeatedly thumbs his nose at this administration and attempts to negotiate with terrorists. Could it be that this is to whom Bush referred? Absolutely not! Everyone knows it was Barack that Bush attacked.
As for this Water's Edge nonsense, Carter himself has violated this unwritten rule, castigating Bush while on foreign soil. William Jefferson Clinton also trashed the President while on foreign soil. Democrats of some or no report have routinely violated this unwritten yet inviolable rule. But Media calls it fair criticism of an unpopular president. But unpopular to whom? The Left, Media, Democrats and Progressives. Because media says it's so does that make it so? Not hardly.
What it all boils down to is this. Barack is thin skinned and cannot, for all his Don Knotts blustering to the contrary, take the heat. He's immature as a politician and yes, quite naive. And yet he has the uncanny ability to read minds. Dan is even having Obamasms over at Payne[fully] Hollow. Everyone on the Left is absolutely orgasmic over Barack Hussein Obama.
The Left doesn't care that he has the most Liberal voting record in Congress. They don't care that he supports Partial Birth Abortion. They don't care that he doesn't even have compassion for the survivors of abortion... "Kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out" Semper Fi, Barack! Stand tall and proud for those wondrous and holy Christian principles of yours. America doesn't even care that your ex-pastor is a racist! They don't care that you intend to gut the military, and make nice with terrorists.
I can't wrap my mind around the Democratic party. They are not the least bit democratic, as evidenced by their nomination process. They're racist through and through as evidenced by their history of suppressing, and being an affliction upon, Black America. They cannot tell the truth about anything. Not about the Housing crunch, the price of oil, the global warming hoax, about what Bush actually said on the Knesset floor. They hold the Right to standards they themselves disdain. They embody the worst of human nature.
There's not an honest intellectual bone in a one of them.
Democrats do not support Life. They support Death. They do not support the Troops. They support the means and methods of the acquisition and retention of political power. Dr. Evil's every one. Except perhaps Lieberman. They vote down a bill to allow drilling for American oil, while insisting we beg terrorists to pump more. They seek to plunge America in a Marxist nightmare..... I heard the question asked: When everyone in America is receiving taxpayer funded benefits of one kind or another, who will be working to pay for those benefits? Good grief! Taxing the citizenry into ignominy so you can give them a handout!?
Obama wants to negotiate with terrorists, but is outraged that his opponents would use it against him. Obama wants to gut the military, but insists he loves America, Freedom, Mom and Apple Pie. He won't wear a flag pin, but he loves America. He won't place his hand over his heart for the National Anthem, but he loves America. He is a hypocrite and a liar.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
America is outraged at what Bush had to say in Israel yesterday? Uh uh... MEDIA was outraged and they chose to use the occasion to whip up the ignorant villagers into yet another pitch fork frenzy against Bush and Republicans.
You can't make me believe that a born again child of God, with the Spirit of God residing in him, would support Roe v Wade, Partial Birth Abortion, and vote against the Born-alive Infants Protection Act. I am personally outraged that the man calls himself a Christian.
Obama should be unelectable in November, but thanks to Democrats own hypocritical election tampering McCain is the man he'll be running against. Will the world explode in a fiery furnace of death and mayhem should he win? That could happen any time.... China, Burma (Myanmar), Indonesia, Thailand, New Orleans.
The Democratic party is the apotheosis of pale, though their horse is no horse at all. They are cankers on America's dwindling freedoms, and they haven't an honest argument between them. A diseased philosophy cannot bear any fruit fit to eat, but that's the banquet they promise us. Such philosophy is good only for spreading its own infection. And I think American's have had about enough of that. Or have they? I reckon it depends on who you ask.
Better that one philosophy should die than that an entire nation perish.
22 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
And I am personally outraged that you would presume to call some hundreds of thousands of your brothers and sisters in Christ, "NOT Christian" based on a political issue that is not covered in the Bible.
When God dies, I'll let you know so you can step into those shoes and start making that call. In the meantime, let's leave these matters to God and God's grace, brother.
And many of us on the so-called Left (we who favor personal responsibility, small gov't, responsible defense, fiscal responsibility, you know, the "liberals") are excited about Obama because he seems to us to be the closest thing to an honest, reasonable presidential candidate that we've had in a longtime.
One whose policies don't offend our Christian sensibilities (if you're talking about the Religious Left), nor our Pro-American, pro-World, pro-Earth sensibilities.
You are free to disagree.
And there is a difference between being thin-skinned and letting the other candidate and/or the current failure of a president to set the tone or agenda. That would just be stupid campaigning. "Oh, okay, spread lies about me and/or my friends and I'll just sit here and be quiet so you can see how thick-skinned I am..."
Shall McCain adopt that approach, too?
Do you honestly think that they weren't directed towards the Dems in general and Obama, specifically? Don't you think that's a bit naive?
Are you serious!? "Thou Shalt Not Kill"
"Do you honestly think that they weren't directed towards the Dems in general and Obama, specifically?"
Someone get this man a turban and an envelope! Who was he speaking to? Jews. In what context? Their history as a nation of people, their history as a Nation, and what appeasement with Hitler bought them personally. Is Obama Hitler reincarnated? No. Ergo, Obama is a thin-skinned crybaby. I know it must be hard to accept this, but Bush was celebrating Israel's 60th anniversary, NOT campaigning for McCain. The world does not revolve around Barack H. Obama.
You're free to believe he was, but you do not know that he was. But even if he was directing it at Obama, when Media and Liberal politicians cease to go beyond Water's Edge to criticize and lambaste George Bush, then you can complain without sounding like crybabies. Besides which, Bush was right: negotiating with terrorists offers nothing but "false comfort [and] appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." And if Obama doesn't like that rhetoric perhaps he should stop talking about "negotiating with terrorists." Perhaps he should throw his buddy Jimmy under the bus as well.
My outrage isn't personal. It's wide and broad and directed at any damn fool who presumes to speak for God, presumes to know who's "in" and who's "out" with God, presumes to have THE answers, and pretends to give a rat's about this country, when he only gives a rat's about his own warped vision of what he thinks this country once was, and what he wastefully wishes it might be. There's more than one of ya out there, brother, so it's not personal -- but may I personally thank God there's not as many like you as you wish there were.
And as to whom he was referring: I don't care. Another tempest. Obama was smart to take umbrage, for political reasons -- it draws attenton, again, to the fact that the president doesn't know peas from appeasement, or a dipstick from diplomacy. As head of his party, I like to see such reminders. As if anyone could ever doubt or forget it.
Oh, "water's edge" - total, total myth. Just one of many in American history. Like American exceptionalism, manifest destiny, and that there was anything Christian, besides the rhetoric, surrounding the founding of this country.
Though Dan presumes much, it's pretty clear to me that Barry's notion of Christianity leaves much to be desired. I know that he and ER leave the definition wide open to allow for absolutely anything, especially if it fits their vision, but it's clear through God's Word in the Bible that it's a bit more narrow of a definition into which Barry has a hard time squeezing himself.
Check out the third paragraph of Dan's first response, "And many of us on the so-called Left...etc" which shows a complete lack of understanding of all on the list in the parenthesis, as well as who those in his camp believe to be an honest and reasonable candidate. It would be laughable if not so sad and dangerous to our culture.
Now Barry's free to criticize anyone or anything he wants. Frankly, he should be outraged to be exposed by his association with those of whom Bush spoke, since he does indeed match the stupidity of the appeaser. Certainly if Bush's remarks didn't hit the mark which also resides within Barry, or rather, if that mark didn't exist within him, Barry would not have been outraged, only concerned about what Bush meant. I have no doubt that if Bush had wanted to verbally smack Barry, he would have been afraid to be far more direct.
I know you have problems with those who presume to speak for God. Those damned priests and preachers gotta lotta nerve. Would I be out of line to say, "God says, 'Do not steal and do not lie'"? Of course we can speak for God on all those many points that are so clearly presented to us in Scripture. If we couldn't, the whole notion of Christianity would have dies out centuries ago.
As to whether or not Christianity played a part in our founding, it's simply naive or dishonest to suggest such a thing. It very much did so, even if not exclusively. With the level of Biblical training so high at the time, how could it not have? Plus, these days, there are plenty of books available that describe just how much it did play a part.
I agree, cracked me up, too. A good joke is a good joke... And Eric's good at it when he's not in derangement mode.
NBC (John Yang): Speaking on background, a senior administration official says the president's language to anyone -- the official specifically mentioned Obama and former President Jimmy Carter's suggestion that the U.S. talk to Hamas -- who has suggested engaging with rogue states or terrorist groups without first getting some leverage.
CNN (Ed Henry): While the words Barack Obama were never used White House aides privately admit the President referring not just to Barack Obama but other Democrats like Jimmy Carter, for example, who has recently suggested himself has sat down with Hamas leaders and has suggested that the U.S. government to should sit down with Hamas. So, the inference is clear. Although the President didn't name names, administration officials are privately acknowledging this was a shot at Barack Obama and other Democrats.
Whadda ya know, Bush was referring to Obama and Carter. Nice to have that little mystery solved.
Next question. Should presidential politics stop at the water's edge? When international trips were weeks and only for long-term political maneuvering, it was important that foreign diplomats and officials didn't contradict or commit the nation while abroad. Today it's only a quaint custom whose time has passed.
Third and final point. Pres. Bush is completely loony to think that discussion and negotiation is the same as appeasement. Whether negotiation with rogue regimes and terrorists can produce results is a question worthy of debate. Whether diplomatic contact with bad actors lends those parties legitimacy is an interesting topic for debate. If conservatives can only express their point as, "It's like giving in to Hitler." Then they are in bad shape.
It is time for serious people with intelligence and ability to discuss serious problems. Those who do not meet those qualifications, should politely step aside.
What is patriotism? Is simple, surface gestures? A lapel pin? A car sticker? A hand on the heart?
I know for a fact EL that almost no one wears a flag pin every day. I also know that almost no one pledges the flag every morning.
Patriotism is love of country. It's that simple. I love the United States of America. I love our energy and vibrancy. I love our diversity. I love the rural towns and I love the large metropolises. I love our ingenuity that creates fashion and media and technology. I even love the wonderful tension we have between our schools of political thought. Yet we have problems too. Our country doesn't care for all its citizens. People through no fault of their own face hardships, that we could alleviate. There are poor and uneducated. We have little compassion in other places around the globe, less fortunate than ourselves. Because I see flaws in our nation does not make me unpatriotic, and it does not negate my love of this country.
I don't know whether Barack Obama feels exactly like I do. I think he does. I think John McCain does too. I can't imagine anyone who would want to run for president and not love this country and its potential.
The only person I know who has never praised this country is in fact you, EL. Your hatred of our citizenry. Your intolerance with our culture. Your loathing of our political system. These traits to me signal a deep lack of patriotism in you. I don't know your inner heart, I can only read your words. Perhaps you should look into moving to another country that shares your isolationistic, theocratic views.
As I review your media quotes, I have to say that it looks as though the media people drew the conclusion that Obama was the prime target. Seems reasonable to conclude that he could certainly be the impetus for the statements by Bush, but I think that, even from the quotes you've presented, that he was indeed referring to all who feel like Obama, rather than to him specifically. To put it another way, Obama is the one now talking about talking, and Carter has been doing it, so they both can definitely have inspired the Bush statements without actually being the "target" as it were, of the statements. Plainly, Bush speaks of "all" who suggest talking to the despots in question.
Personally, I would be happier to know that Bush DID target Obama specifically, since the buffoon is running for the highest office and thus will endanger us with his goofy ideas about trying to convince the insane to stop trying to kill us. In this sense, the analogy of Hitler is exactly appropriate and not a sign of desperation or anything like that. In other words, Obama will meet with the same results by doing the same thing Chamberlain did.
"I rever the flag. I revere America."
He had the time and the ability to say, "I love the flag", and I love America", but he chose instead to use a word that means simply respect. It is possible to respect something or someone without loving them. I respect Dan when he isn't being stupid. But Dan, like an entire nation full of lemming mentality Liberals, has become stupid in his blind support for Obama and his peculiar brand of Liberalism.
I believe Obama meant exactly what he said. He doesn't love America. His own wife said she isn't proud of America.
Why do the Liberals love this fool? If elected, he could lead his country to the virtual brink of destruction. Just as Neville Chamberlain did.
Little history lesson and some perspective:
Israel, prior to 1948, had not been an autonomous nation in some 2,500 years, which makes Israel the singularly most unique-- and miraculous --nation upon the face of the earth. For 2,500 years her enemies have sought her destruction; to steal from her, destroy her cities, kill her sons, rape her daughters, crush her utterly that the word "Jew" might cease to have meaning.
Let's forget the spiritual implications in this, for now, and stick to the political. IN AD 70 Israel was scattered to the four corners of the world. Everywhere they have lived, kings, rulers, governments have sought her destruction; to steal from her, destroy her communities, kill her sons, rape her daughters, crush her utterly that the word "Jew" might cease to have meaning. She has been chased out of every nation until the 1500's. Yet she survived. She kept her faith. She kept her laws. And she kept hope; the kind of hope Barack Obama can only dream about.
But then along comes a man named Hitler who, through sheer hatred, murders 6 million jews; roughly two thirds of the world's population of Jews. The horror of Hitlers atrocities against the Jews caused the world to do a double-take. And in "a single day," according to prophesy, Israel became a nation once more.
But in less than three hours she was beset by 7 Arab armies. Forty thousand Jews sharing ten-thousand guns. Their Air Force consisted of only two piper-model prop planes. And yet they defeated all comers. THAT was a bona fide miracle.
Today, celebrating her 60th anniversary, an American president stands in agreement with the Jewish nation. He reminds them, "Never again!" He pledges his and his nation's support "You are not just seven million, you are three-hundred and seven million. America supports you."
There can be no appeasement of, or talk of peace with, Israel's enemies until they demonstrably cease their desire for, and actively work toward, her destruction; to steal from her, destroy her cities, kill her sons, rape her daughters, drive her into the sea, crush her utterly that the word "Jew" might cease to have meaning.
That men like Carter, Obama, and others-- even within the Jewish leadership --would seek to talk with Her enemies when they have made no demonstrable effort to turn away from their rhetoric or provocations, clearly shows that they have forgotten the lessons of Neville Chamberlain, and the cruel price Hitler inflicted upon the Jew as a result.
Bush did not "lose" anything by telling the Knesset and the Jewish people that the American people-- enough of them anyway --remember the lesson of Neville Chamberlain.
That Obama and many many Dems and Libs voiced outrage over such a universal statement of truth... rather than offer their own hearty "hear! Hear!!!"'s, says a lot about the thin-skinned: They HAVEN'T learned the lesson of Neville Chamberlain.
That she did not exist as a nation for 25 centuries, kept the same faith, language, and national identity throughout, only to return to the land promised unconditionally by God to be theirs in perpetuity... Well, that is a miracle.
Throughout their entire history, the forces of Evil have sought to destroy the Jew; the intent being, seemingly, to make God's word out to be a lie. If Satan can kill all the Jews, God can't keep his promise. And if God can't keep his promise, Satan CAN set his throne wherever he wants it [Isaiah 14:12-14], he might even avert the doom God and his own sin has placed upon him. If he destroys the Jew, he destroys all nations, because all nations are said to be blessed through the seed of Abraham, and if the seed of Abraham be utterly destroyed Satan wins. But he didn't win, Jesus died upon the cross fulfilling the eternal council of God.* [See Below]
Like the bargain between God and Satan over the life of Job [Job 2:3-6] (I hesitate to call and recognize it as a bargain, because all God did was give "measured" permission for Job's testing)...
Satan: "Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face."
The LORD: "Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life."
...Satan, however much he tries, he cannot utterly destroy the Jew. He doesn't have permission. The LORD will not give it, the LORD will not allow it. But that hasn't stopped Satan from harassing Israel throughout the centuries.
Then a curious thing happened. God, seemingly, said, "Enough." And per His divine word made promise, and according to Ezekiel 34:11-16 God drew His people to the land He promised them, and prepared a table for them in the presence of their enemies [Psalm 23]. He has drawn them out of the 4 corners of the world back to the land of promise, as Ezekiel 37:1-14 describes; a nation once more, in unbelief, restored to the fat of the land, still waiting for the day they will all come to faith. Just as they were made a nation in one day, so too will Israel come to God, as a nation, in a single day [Zechariah 12:8-10, Zechariah 14:2-12]... in a single moment [Matthew 24:29-31]
As an aside, though still in the ballpark, God has promised to fight for His people [Isaiah 31:4, and many other verses besides]. He's made promises of protection [Deuteronomy 28:7]. In light of Deuteronomy 28:6 I find it curious that within 3 hours of declaring independence seven armies attacked Israel with ONE goal in mind, yet all were miraculously defeated and sent packing in SEVEN directions, to the nations from which they came... Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, Libya...
Very interesting. All praise and glory to God.
[...]
I could have just said "Obama needs a history lesson," but who would have accepted that without the pudding? How many of you will accept it WITH the pudding? But then it's easier to cling to outrage rather than admit to truth.
-------
* The Eternal Council of God...
The Son: 'I'll go to earth, live a sinless life, and die upon the cross for the sins of the elect if you will raise me from the dead.'
The Father: 'Son, if you go to earth, live a sinless life, and die upon the cross for the sins of the elect, I'll raise you from the dead.'
Here's a broader image from S. Duytsch...
"It is then in the suffering of Christ on the cross that the apostle [Paul, writing in Galatians] desires to glory. And, no wonder, for when he thinks about Golgotha and there beholds the cross of Christ, then all things, as ground for boasting, flee away and the cross alone fills his heart and mouth with praises. There with an enlightened mind’s eye he sees on the one hand God’s spotless holiness, His unimpeachable justice, His eternal truth and on the other hand God’s infinite love, His free grace and His boundless mercy complementing each other. O, what a glorious sight to behold, more beautiful than ever Adam saw in his state of rectitude. There he sees that great mystery which the angels desire to look into, how God can and wills to be the God of a lost, poor, wretched and hell worthy sinner. There he sees with wonderment the fulfilling of the eternal council of God that was foretold by all the prophets that Christ should suffer; that Jesus of Nazareth should die on the cross. There he sees the fleeing away of all the shadows of the Old Testament worship and promises in the light of the Sun of Righteousness Jesus Christ Who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God. There he sees with glorious adoration the complete satisfaction of the divine justice, reconciliation for sin brought about, an eternal righteousness brought forth, the sin of the world carried away in one day, the serpent’s head crushed, death swallowed up in victory and the bringing forth of life and immortality for God’s people."
Pure self-righteous indignation. Ignorants and Hypocrites all.
Insert: "not as many who think like you ..."
Sorry, dude. I do try to jump ugly on ideas, not on peeps, and I fail a lot.
It looks like Obama is going to spend the next 5 months trying to take back stuff he said in the last two years. Sound familiar, at least now we already have a term for it: flip-flopper.
Oh but let’s remember anytime opponents bring up contradictions in Obama’s statements they are to be dismissed as “distractions”, because the great O is above criticism. (I bet you Dan and ER just crossed themselves)
They were directed that way...and towards France and other capitulators.
Accurately, too.
The reverend loves those two words, don't he?
It amazes me he doesn't see the "bile and vitriol" that permeates his every comment.
But then...he has a different opinion of himself than I have of him.