Yesterday pretty much nailed it: John McCain and Lindsey Graham issued a joint statement way back on August 7 that said, “The President needs to devise a comprehensive strategy to degrade ISIS.” And then Obama went on vacation and played golf. Lots and lots of golf, prompting the liberal editorialist Maureen Dowd to point out on August 23:
FORE! Score? And seven trillion rounds ago, our forecaddies brought forth on this continent a new playground, conceived by Robert Trent Jones, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal when it comes to spending as much time on the links as possible — even when it seems totally inappropriate, like moments after making a solemn statement condemning the grisly murder of a 40-year-old American journalist beheaded by ISIL.
I mean, Obama literally left to play golf NINE MINUTES after delivering his “statement of resolve” following Foley’s beheading.
Wednesday, John McCain says what is by now beyond painfully obvious yet again:
Asked if he would want Obama to seek congressional authorization for airstrikes against ISIS in Syria, McCain said the president still hadn’t developed a strategy.
“Under the War Powers Act he can bomb and then come to Congress after 30 days,” McCain said. “But what he really needs to do is come to Congress with a strategy, with policies that implement this strategy. Does anyone on earth know what the president’s strategy is?”
Well, DOES anyone on earth know what the president’s strategy is? When the Turd-in-Chief finally comes back from vacation even HE says, “Hell no!” He pointed out yesterday, “Hey, I’m the fool president and even I don’t have a damn clue what the president’s strategy is.” That’s basically what Obama said:
“I don’t want to put the cart before the horse. We don’t have a strategy yet.”
At least the fool didn’t say, “I don’t want to put the cart before the clubs.” As in GOLF clubs.
Now, he could have gone on to say, “But don’t worry. I will be going straight to the Situation Room and will not be coming out until America has an effective strategy to deal with the terrorist army that I foolishly and stupidly called “JayVee” just a few months ago.” But then he’d have to say, “PSYCH! I’m only kidding. I’m not going to the Situation Room. I’m going to another damn FUNDRAISER! I don’t give a damn about the American people. They’re less than cockroaches to me.”
Mind you, it’s not like this terrorist army that Obama only recently was mocking as “JayVee” has been building and growing for the last four years. Except oh, wait, it HAS been.
Obama having no strategy is a national disgrace that will cause serious damage to America. There IS no enemy who presents a greater threat to the security of the United States than our Fool-in-Chief. It is FAR easier to destroy a nation from within than it is from without; as Obama is proving every day.
Amazingly, Obama the coward is trying to blame both the media and the Pentagon for his being a fool without a damn plan. It’s not the Pentagon that doesn’t have a damn plan; it’s the failed fool who is supposed to be the damn commander-in-chief. The Pentagon has ALL SORTS of plans that are just waiting for a president to ask for them. That’s all some top brass DO is formulate plans for every possible scenario. The only possible crisis disaster that the Pentagon doesn’t have a plan for is what happens if a moronic thug assumes the office of the presidency of the United States. At the same time, Obama is trying to blame the media for the stupidity of his words, as if it’s the media’s fault that they are quoting exactly what he said exactly as he said it, as if Obama views himself a hand-puppet and is accusing some reporter of forcing his lips to mouth “I don’t have a plan” as he impersonated Obama’s voice just off the platform.
That sort of moral cowardice is the hallmark of his entire presidency as he first demonized and blamed Bush for his first failed term as president and then began to blame the House of Representatives for his second failed term as president. Every president since George WASHINGTON had a predecessor and even WASHINGTON had politicians from the other party in Congress. Obama is the first true coward who believes that a single opponent with any power is a threat to his status as a fascist dictating tyrant. And that’s why this malevolent narcissist is so paranoid about Republicans.
And of course what’s Hillary Clinton saying about Obama’s not having any plan? She’s repeating her Benghazi line saying, “What DIFFERENCE does it make?” She said in testimony about that utter and disgraceful fiasco, “With all due respect, the fact is, we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or because of guys out for a walk one night who decide to kill some Americans, what difference at this point does it make?” And she couldn’t even provide the correct motive – a TERRORIST ATTACK – as one of her possible scenario options to consider.
We had THREE WEEKS WARNING of that attack which resulted in the murder of the first United States Ambassador since the failed Carter years in the 1970s. But what difference does it make, indeed.
There’s a crystal-clear pattern of Democrat behavior: an inability to see or face danger which results in our being viciously caught unprepared. It’s been the case since World War I, frankly. World War II, happened again. Korea, happened again. Vietnam, happened again.
Mind you, it’s not just Hillary Clinton. Her replacement as Secretary of State has also twisted reality into a pretzel to suit the Obama talking points spin. A year ago they refused to arm the rebellion in Syria when the experts (and the Republicans) were urging them to, citing their fear that the weapons would fall into the hands of the more radical elements. Until it suited their talking point to claim the EXACT OPPOSITE and argue that in fact the rebel opposition was actually somehow growing more moderate as a result of Obama’s dithering and refusing to lift a damn finger to help them. And the facts that documented the opposite just be damned.
Now, I would submit to you that the forces of ISIS/ISIL that pretty much OWN everything that Syrian dictator Assad doesn’t rather proves the fact that John Kerry and the damn Obama regime couldn’t have been more freaking wrong. With the result that Obama literally cemented both ISIL AND Assad to permanent power in the region.
Meanwhile, Fort Hood murderer Nidal Hasan wrote a letter asking to join ISIS/ISIL and become a “citizen” of the terrorist state. But keep in mind according to Barack Obama, Nidal Hasan is NOT a terrorist. He’s only guilty of “work-place violence.” And the fact that he screamed Allah Akbar while he was murdering American servicemen after passing out business cards that announced him as a “soldier of Allah” meant NOTHING to Democrats. Not ONE DAMN THING. So let’s bury our heads in the sand and not call reality what it is and hope it goes away. That’s the security platform of the Democrat Party.
Democrats are pathologically weak on national security. And they have been ever since they hounded Lyndon Baines Johnson – who of course is to blame for the Vietnam War if ANYONE is – back in 1968 when they showed that the heart of the modern Democrat Party is VIOLENT FASCISM at the 1968 riot otherwise known as the Democrat National Convention.
There’s a reason for that. And that reason is that the Democrat Party is completely wedded to secular humanism, and therefore to atheism, to postmodernism and to existentialism. They don’t believe in Truth as an objective category, and therefore they do not believe in any ultimate line between good and evil. It’s all infinite shades of gray to them. At least unless they’re talking about homosexuality and abortion – in which they take a firm stand landing on the completely opposite side from God and His Word.
And that moral idiocy makes Democrats moral cowards.
Consider a few FACTS as I demonstrate this point and drive it home:
- Since 2010 there has been a 58% increase in the number of terror groups.
- The number of jihadist terrorists have DOUBLED.
- Al Qaeda is larger, stronger and controls more territory than at any time in history.
- “The Islamic State, which emerged from the Syrian civil war, has conquered a swath of Iraq and Syria and governs the region under an extreme form of Islamic law.” Thursday [August 28], Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called its threat “beyond anything we’ve seen.”
- Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel stated that ISIS “is more of a threat than al Qaeda was before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.”
- ISIS – now the Islamic State – is in “a league well beyond anything al-Qaeda ever was or can now hope to be,” according to John McLaughlin, former deputy CIA director
- McLaughlin also argues that the ISIS “rivalry with al-Qaeda makes a strike at the U.S. homeland more likely, because “success would contrast sharply with al-Qaeda’s inability to pull off another major attack here after 9/11.”
- The worldview of ISIS/ISIL is “apocalyptic. … This is not a group that can stop. It has to stay on the offensive,” states Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs Gen. Martin Dempsey
- British Prime Minister David Cameron states that “What we’re facing in Iraq now, with ISIL, is a greater and deeper threat to our security than we have known before.”
On many levels these ISIL terrorists are worse than the Nazis EVER were and a far greater threat to the world than the Nazis ever were.
Who let this happen??? If you say “Bush” you are both stupid and depraved. By the end of 2007, al Qaeda in Iraq was routed. In fact, al Qaeda had not only been defeated, but humiliated. Obama kept claiming that al Qaeda was on the run while in reality he was allowing them to rebuild. But al Qaeda truly WAS on the run when Bush left office – having been routed and humiliated in Iraq – and ISIS basically didn’t even exist yet.
It is simply a documented FACT that Barack Obama cut and ran from Iraq AFTER the United States under George W. Bush had secured victory in the form of a safe and stable Iraq that Obama and Biden BOASTED about.
It is a documented FACT that back in early 2009 we have Obama ON THE RECORD overruling his generals and his experts and deciding that he would completely abandon Iraq. That is simply a FACT and anybody who tries to whine about Obama desperately trying to obtain a suitable status of forces agreement is a LYING FOOL. In the same manner, we have Obama ON THE FACTUAL HISTORICAL RECORD OVERRULING HIS ENTIRE NATIONAL SECURITY TEAM AND DECIDING IN HIS OWN INCOMPETENT STUPIDITY NOT TO ARM THE PRO-DEMOCRACY REBELS IN SYRIA WHEN THEY HAD A REAL CHANCE TO ATTAIN VICTORY.
There is simply no question that Obama gave his fiasco of a “red line” warning and then did NOTHING. Except allow Putin and Russia to step in and ensure the continued rule of Syrian dictator Assad who suddenly became instrumental because of his part in cooperating to destroy the WMD (much of which almost certainly came to Syria via IRAQ, fwiw). And allow ISIS to spread like the cancer it is, first exploiting Obama’s weakness in failing to attack in Syria and then in Obama’s weakness in completely pulling out and abandoning Iraq.
If you ask any liberal, “Which wins wars, materiel or will?” That Democrat will say “Materiel, of course” They view war as pushing a button and defeating an enemy. But to any graduate of West Point or Annapolis, that answer is WRONG. It is WILL that defeats opponents and wins wars. And under Obama we don’t have any will to fight. Polls show that the American people don’t want to fight because their president has taught them his moral foolishness and cowardice. A people need to be led; Obama has led them to the pen where they can be slaughtered like the sheep they have become.
And now we have not a terrorist group but a terrorist ARMY that is even WORSE than al Qaeda with a stranglehold over a 36,000 mile CALIPHATE that Osama bin Laden DREAMED of to show for it. Obama’s own experts are pointing out the FACT that they are more dangerous than al Qaeda EVER was. And it was Obama who allowed this terrorist army to metastasize. They called themselves “ISIS” which meant Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. But since Obama literally GAVE them Iraq and Syria, they are now calling themselves simply “IS” for “Islamic State.” Because the more you give these monsters, the more they become hungry to TAKE. You cannot negotiate with them. You cannot appease them. You can only either defeat them or bow down before them. That is your stark, black-and-white choice.
Back in 2005, US intelligence captured a letter from the top al Qaeda leadership that put the aims of al Qaeda into four stages: 1) Drive America out of Iraq; 2) create a caliphate; 3) use that as a base to attack the United States and other countries; 4) attack Israel. They didn’t drive us out of Iraq; Obama drove us out of Iraq when we had already secured victory. And we have since watched them systematically succeed in their plan beyond all of the worst possible scenarios. They’re coming right back at us and we’re now far too weary, weak and divided to fight them.
Liberals don’t believe in “black-and-white.” Their world consists of infinite shades of gray. There are no transcendent absolutes; there is no objective right or objective wrong. Morality is relative, constantly changing and evolving according to Obama’s whim rather than according to God’s timeless Word.
There is no question that Obama and Democrats allowed this. The only question is WHY did they allow it. And here’s the answer:
Jonah Goldberg reminded us of the attacks that came from the left when George W. Bush had the narrow-mindedness to refer to terrorists as “evildoers.” Goldberg pointed out the left’s objection to the word “evil” because to them:
it was, variously, simplistic, Manichean, imperialistic, cartoonish, etc.
“Perhaps without even realizing it,” Peter Roff, then with UPI, wrote in October 2001, “the president is using language that recalls a simpler time when good and evil seemed more easy to identify — a time when issues, television programs and movies were more black and white, not colored by subtle hues of meaning.”
A few years later, as the memory of 9/11 faded and the animosity toward Bush grew, the criticism became more biting. But the substance was basically the same. Sophisticated people don’t talk about “evil,” save perhaps when it comes to America’s legacy of racism, homophobia, capitalistic greed and the other usual targets of American self-loathing.
For most of the Obama years, talk of evil was largely banished from mainstream discourse. An attitude of “goodbye to all that” prevailed, as the war on terror was rhetorically and legally disassembled and the spare parts put toward building a law-enforcement operation. War was euphemized into “overseas contingency operations” and “kinetic military action.” There was still bloodshed, but the language was often bloodless. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a protege of al-Qaida guru Anwar al-Awlaki, shouted “Allahu Akbar!” as he killed his colleagues at Fort Hood. The military called the incident “workplace violence.”
But sanitizing the language only works so long as people aren’t paying too much attention. That’s why the Islamic State is so inconvenient to those who hate the word “evil.” Last week, after the group released a video showing American journalist James Foley getting his head cut off, the administration’s rhetoric changed dramatically. The president called the Islamic State a “cancer” that had to be eradicated. Secretary of State John Kerry referred to it as the “face of . . . evil.”
Although most people across the ideological spectrum see no problem with calling Islamic State evil, the change in rhetoric elicited a predictable knee-jerk response. Political scientist Michael Boyle hears an “eerie echo” of Bush’s “evildoers” talk. “Indeed,” he wrote in The New York Times, “condemning the black-clad, masked militants as purely ‘evil’ is seductive, for it conveys a moral clarity and separates ourselves and our tactics from the enemy and theirs.”
James Dawes, the director of the Program in Human Rights and Humanitarianism at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn., agreed in a piece for CNN.com. Using the word “evil,” he wrote, “stops us from thinking.”
But as Goldberg points out, it’s not the people who use the term “evil” who “stop thinking”; it’s the idiots who refuse to think in the category that clearly reflects basic human reality.
The Bible nails these people. They are “always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.” And “professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”
When James Dawes says that “using the term evil stops us from thinking,” he’s not referring to himself or to his leftist ideology. Of course not. He’s referring to narrow-minded conservatives who think in ancient and therefore non-progressive and therefore obsolete terms of right and wrong. He’s referring to those who in their narrow-mindedness refuse to understand morality as “colored by subtle hues of meaning” the way he does, the way Peter Roff does, the way Michael Boyle does, the way Barack Obama does.
Understand that Obama’s political rhetoric may have changed but he is still a doctrinaire liberal who continues to think like the doctrinaire liberal he is.
Obama referred to ISIS after the choreographed video of James Foley’s public beheading as a “cancer.” But it’s just words. If Obama truly realized the Islamic State terrorist army was a “cancer” he would order all of our resources to cut that cancer out and remove it no matter how painful that “surgery” would be. But General Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said with crystal clarity that the only way to defeat ISIS is to take them out in Syria:
WASHINGTON — The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria cannot be defeated unless the United States or its partners take on the Sunni militants in Syria, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Thursday.
“This is an organization that has an apocalyptic end-of-days strategic vision that will eventually have to be defeated,” said the chairman, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, in his most expansive public remarks on the crisis since American airstrikes began in Iraq. “Can they be defeated without addressing that part of the organization that resides in Syria? The answer is no.”
Obama’s meaningless response to ISIS in Syria makes it clear: Obama will NOT defeat ISIS. At best, he will play patty cake with “cancer.” Thank God Obama will eventually go, but when he [finally!!!] does, the “cancer” of ISIS will remain. Due to the pathological weakness and cowardice of Obama.
ISIS/ISIL has been growing and building for all the years that Obama has been our failed president. While Obama was mocking them as “JayVee” they were building up with experienced terrorist personnel, seizing territory, seizing BILLIONS of dollars, seizing a vast arsenal of military equipment such that they literally have the power of a true state, and absorbing whole networks to keep becoming more and more and more effective. While Obama did NOTHING.
Now, understand why I call Obama a “coward” for not taking on a fight that his previous weakness and cowardice caused. Obama doesn’t give a DAMN if our soldiers die; he’s out golfing. What makes Obama afraid and a COWARD is that if he tries to stand up and do the right thing, his own leftist base will viciously turn on him. Because liberals are evil and cowardly and everything that is truly contemptible. Obama isn’t man enough to deal with his own base; THAT’S what makes him a “coward.” And a coward he is.
This is a story of of Overseas Contingency Operations, Man-Caused Disasters and how the pathological weakness and moral cowardice of Barack Obama and the Democrat Party has inspired ad emboldened our worst enemies.
One of the things I vividly recall after the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was his statement – after being waterboarded and broken – that he believed that the United States response after the 9/11 attack was so massive and so lethal and so devastating that he doubted that al Qaeda would ever dare to attack the United States again.
The terrorist mastermind was waterboarded until he was “vomiting and screaming.” He was waterboarded and he was interrogated until he was broken.
Now, we were told by a dishonest media that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was “waterboarded 183 times.” Which is bullcrap. He was waterboarded FIVE TIMES, which consisted in 183 pourings of water.
Another lie of the dishonest leftist media is that Mohammed was interrogated during his waterboarding and we could somehow not trust anything he said because people will say anything you want them to say when they are being tortured. Again, bullcrap. For one thing, waterboarding consisted in only one aspect of his interrogation. He wasn’t interrogated AT ALL while he was being waterboarded; the entire process was intended to acheive one thing and one thing only: to alter the terrorist’s perception and to force them to understand their new reality, that the United States of America owned them and would stop at nothing to defeat them and to crush their ideology. Waterboarding was only one PART of that process that Obama has ENDED.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was wrong, of course, in his assessment that terrorists would never dare to attack the United States again due to the astonishing massiveness of the American response. He was wrong because his waterboarding colored his thinking such that he failed to remember how pathologically weak the Democrat Party truly is and how inspired and emboldened the pathological weakness of the Democrat Party makes our enemies. All it took was for one Democrat regime to get elected to re-embolden the stunned and dismayed terrorists.
It was via waterboarding and that breaking process that KSM and the other two terrorists who were WATERBOARDED gave up two key facts that ultimately led to the killing of Osama bin Laden: the name of Osama bin Laden’s courier – Maulawi Abd al-Khaliq – and the city in Pakistan -Abbottabad – where bin Laden was hiding. Those two crucial pieces of information ultimately enabled American intelligence to track Osama bin Laden to the very house he was living in in that large city.
Barack Obama was able to boast that he got bin Laden. But he only got him because of the very thing he demonized and criminalized.
America will NEVER break another terrorist until every Democrat has been hunted down with dogs and burned alive. Because the platform of the Democrat Party is treasonous self-loathing and the refusal to stand up to our enemies and punch them in the mouth before you blow their smirking heads right off their shoulders.
Obama has GUTTED our intelligence capability and he was already at work doing so back in 2009.
Right now we’re seeing the fruits of Obama’s pathological weakness. For example, when you see the images of beheaded journalist James Foley and the other captured Americans in orange jumpsuits -
Both prisoners in the video are wearing orange shirts and pants, similar to orange jumpsuits worn by detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. A similar outfit, believed to be a jihadist symbol of the prison, was worn by Nicholas Berg, an American businessman kidnapped in Iraq in 2004 whose execution by an Islamic State precursor organization was recorded on video and posted online.
- realize that Barack Obama is very obviously far too much of a damn coward to put terrorists in orange jumpsuits (which scream GITMO), but our terrorist enemies have no such fear of putting Americans in them.
In the same manner, consider how liberals came completely unglued over “the scandal” of Abu Ghraib and terrorists being “abused” and “humiliated.” And of course it was all Bush’s fault. But of course the even worse scandals that happened under Obama WEREN’T his fault. But forget about the leftist abject hypocrisy and simply contrast our Abu Ghraib with how the same people who were such “victims” act when THEY get power: they strip them to their underwear, march them humiliated into the desert and mass-execute them. The Islamic jihadist terrorists view us as weak because we don’t have the stomach to impose our power the way THEY clearly have. And liberals are literally morally incapable of saying which is worse – Abu Ghraib where nobody died or ISIS where they slaughter their prisoners like sheep – because their hatred of Bush is only surpassed by their hatred of Truth and Objective, Transcendent Morality.
We’ve got a very firm and clear pattern established: Republicans fight evil and liberals surrender to it.
You look at the disastrous cuts of the 1970s under Carter. You look at the disastrous cuts under Clinton in the 1990s. You look at the disastrous gutting of the military under Obama now. And you realize that Democrats are pathologically stupid people because they are pathological moral idiots who cannot understand the nature of the world because at their core they do not believe in good or evil due to their abandonment of God.
We had the weak disgrace Jimmy Carter. And then we had Ronald Reagan who had to pick up the pieces of Carter’s disgraceful weakening of America.
Then we had George H.W. Bush’s “This will not stand” contrasted with the Bill Clinton subsequent legacy of disgraceful policy toward terrorism. Bill Clinton’s legacy was to leave America both weak militarily and blind due to his crippling of our intelligence capabilities. As I’ve documented more than once:
Why did we get attacked on 9/11? :
“Our boys no longer viewed America as a superpower. So, when they left Afghanistan, they went to Somalia and prepared themselves carefully for a long war. They had thought that the Americans were like the Russians, so they trained and prepared. They were stunned when they discovered how low was the morale of the American soldier. America had entered with 30,000 soldiers in addition to thousands of soldiers from different countries in the world. … As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press…” — Osama bin Laden
Our military was weak as a result of Clinton’s cuts. How about our intelligence that is tasked with seeing an attack coming??? :
Author James Risen won the Pulitzer Prize on Tuesday for his much ballyhooed New York Times report last December that revealed President Bush’s previously secret terrorist surveillance program – a revelation he uncovered while researching his book “State of War.”
In the same book, however, Risen makes an equally explosive claim about President Clinton’s relationship with the CIA – which his editors at the Times have so far declined to cover.
Upon taking power in 1993, Risen reports, the Clinton administration “began slashing the intelligence budget in search of a peace dividend, and Bill Clinton showed almost no interest in intelligence matters.”
The agency cutbacks combined with presidential disinterest took their toll almost immediately.
“Over a three-or-four-year period in the early-to-mid 1990s,” reports Risen, “virtually an entire generation of CIA officers – the people who had won the Cold War – quit or retired. One CIA veteran compared the agency to an airline that had lost all of is senior pilots . . . “
After Clinton CIA Director John Deutch cashiered several senior officers over a scandal in Guatamala, the situation got even worse.
“Morale [at the CIA] plunged to new lows, and the agency became paralyzed by an aversion to high-risk espionage operations for fear they would lead to political flaps. Less willing to take big risks, the CIA was less able to recruit spies in dangerous places such as Iraq.”
The 9/11 attack was the result of the joke that the military had become as a result of a Bill Clinton who gutted the military budget. Bush I took Reagan’s mantle and won the Cold War and defeated the Soviet-armed Iraqi regime; Bill Clinton tore that great, powerful military apart. And we paid dearly for it. And every single penny that Clinton saved by dismantling our military and our intelligence Bush had to pay a thousandfold.
As Bill Clinton turned over the presidency to George Bush, he turned over a nation that had already been infected with the 9/11 attack. Every single 9/11 attacker was ALREADY IN AMERICA while Bill Clinton was president. They already had most of their training. They already had their funding.
And now we’ve got George W. Bush contrasted with Barack Obama. Carter tore the military down. Reagan built it back up and won the Cold War that had begun under the presidency of Harry Truman in the aftermath of World War II. Bush II continued the military build-up to confront the new threats that were arising in the Middle East; Clinton said a strong military was obsolete and tore it down again. Bush II built the military up because Clinton had failed America and ignored the warnings of the cancer of terrorism. And now Obama has gutted it again. Our military is a shambles under Obama. Three calendar years ago I was pointing out how evil was spreading like cancer in the Middle East under Obama. That is simply a fact and has BEEN a fact that our enemies have noted just as they have taken Obama’s measure and noted his personal weakness. And if you want to tell me that Obama’s putrid weakness has worked better for us that Bush’s policy of FIGHTING OUR ENEMIES, please don’t write to me, because weaklings and cowards make me sick and I’m sick of being sickened by people like you.
Bill Clinton said the right things when it was politically expedient for him to do so and then denied the very things he said when it was politically expedient for him to do so. He stood for nothing. And it was just hollow words, much like when Obama calls ISIS/ISIL a “cancer” and then refuses to stop its spread and kill it.
A liberal writer writing for the liberal Daily Beast and quoted by a different liberal publication framed the rise of al Qaeda from the dust of death it had been in thus:
The regeneration of al Qaeda in Iraq and its expansion into Syria is a warning to American decision makers. Few al Qaeda franchises or associated movements have ever been permanently destroyed. They can be disrupted and dismantled and yet fully regenerate once the pressure subsides. [Daily Beast]
Let me simply ask you: who kept the pressure on and who took the pressure OFF? It was OBAMA who took the pressure off these terrorists and allowed them to rebuild. Who on the other hand has been screaming to keep the pressure ON and been repeatedly demonized for doing so? The Republicans who have the courage to face reality while the Democrats are COWARDS to their cores.
Which is why Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, “both close allies and military partners, acted without informing Washington, leaving the Obama administration on the sidelines.” As they New York Times put it in describing how these two nations took matters into their own hands (because Obama was cowering in a corner when he wasn’t strutting around on a golf green) and bombed ISIS in Syria. We are now completely irrelevant, even to our closest ALLIES in the region. We spent the last century building our power and our alliances so that we could shape events. And one weak, cowardly petty tyrant has squandered all of our influence and prestige and ability to project power away from us.
There is something chilling about the execution by beheading of James Foley that you need to understand:
A video posted on YouTube, later removed, purported to show the execution of James Foley after he recited a statement in which he called the U.S. government “my real killers.”
Foley gave them what they wanted. He said everything they wanted him to say, did everything they wanted him to do. And then they slaughtered him anyway.
You can’t appease these people. You can’t compromise with them. You can’t negotiate with them. You can’t “seek to understand them.” Tolerance is a form of suicide.
The Democrat Party has not understood that since 1968.
You either fight and defeat jihadist terrorism or you knuckle under and surrender to it. And history has now proven again and again that Democrats will surrender to terrorism every chance they get. Because they are moral idiots who are incapable of truly believing in good and evil and therefore have an innate tendency to seek to compromise with evil and negotiate with it and ultimately to surrender to it.
There is a simple formula of wisdom or common sense: when it comes to a strong military and reliable intelligence, would you rather have when you may not need – as conservatives have been arguing we should have since we were caught completely flat-footed and weak when we were attacked to start World War II – or would you rather desperately need when you do not have as Democrats desire? That formula has led to disaster over and over again. And it has led to disaster now. Conservatives want a greater projection of strength to DETER aggression; Democrats want more welfare, more dependency, fewer people with jobs, a weaker America, an America that will bare its throat to the scimitar.
There are TWO forms of evil that are both working in concert to destroy America today: one is the evil of ISIS terrorists and the other is the evil of the Democrat Party that has enabled them to so gain the upper hand and which continues to be the only barrier to America having the resolve to fight them and destroy them. And interestingly both forms of evil are mutually parasitic upon the other: the terrorists cannot win without the Democrat’s movement of cowardly appeasement and surrender; and the modern Democrats need to have Republicans take a strong stand against evil so they can backstab and undermine and demagogue and demonize and fearmonger that strong resolve as they whine, “They’re going to drag you into another war if you vote for them!”
Your vote in November, in 2016 and beyond will be a historic affirmation of whether you have courage or whether you are a true coward.