Dennis Prager, Townhall.com

 

This week, President Barack Obama is scheduled to give a major address in Cairo to the Muslim world. He is likely to reiterate what he has stated previously to Muslim audiences, that America has no battle with Islam, deeply respects Islam and the Muslim world, and apologizes for any anti-Muslim sentiment that any Americans may express.

 

Here is what an honest address would sound like:

 

"Thank you for the honor of addressing the Egyptian people and the wider Muslim world.

 

"I am here primarily to dispel some of the erroneous beliefs many Muslims have about America and to thereby reassure you that America has no desire to be at war with the Muslim world.

 

"To my great disappointment, many Muslims have come to believe that my country has declared war on Muslims and Islam.

 

"Because of this widespread belief, I said in an interview with al-Arabiya a few months ago, that we need to restore “the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

 

"Lets’ look a little deeper at that relationship. For the truth is, as noted by the Pulitzer-Prize winning columnist for the American newspaper the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer, in the last 20-30 years America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for Muslims. Read article.

 

Robert Spencer, American Thinker.com

 

As Barack Obama prepares to give his long-anticipated major address to the Islamic world from Cairo, as a public service I here offer the speech he should give:

 

Dear friends,

 

I have said that in this speech I would offer my personal commitment to engagement with the Islamic world, based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. Establishing peace between the forces of the global jihad and America and her ally Israel is something that I would very much love to do. The first thing I must acknowledge, however, is that much as I would love to see this peace dawning over the world, it is not within my power to achieve this.

 

That may surprise many of you. You have grown accustomed to thinking that the tensions between Muslims and the United States - tensions that boiled over on September 11, 2001 and on the occasions of many other acts of jihad terrorism as well - are entirely the fault of the United States. Americans have been told that we are hated because of our support for Israel, and because of our attempts to bring freedom and stability to the overwhelmingly Muslim people of Iraq and Afghanistan. We are hated because we have spent American treasure to try to secure a better life for Muslims the world over, spending billions of dollars in aid for Egypt, Pakistan, and other Muslim countries.

 

We have showered billions on Pakistan to enable the Pakistani government to fight the Islamic jihadists, only to see a great deal of that money being funneled to those same jihadists, who are now stronger than ever.

 

We have tried to establish democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan, only to see non-Muslim minorities treated worse than ever, such that they have been streaming out of Iraq in unprecedented numbers, while the few that remain in Afghanistan are subject to increasingly violent persecution. Read article.

 

Gerald Warner, Telegraph.co.uk

 

Kim Jong-il, the charismatic and popular (if you are a Pyongyang resident and covet a life expectancy of more than 24 hours) Dear Leader of North Korea, is on his sixth or seventh missile this week. See the pretty vapour trails streak across Asian skies, in an impressive firework display to celebrate the arrival of President Pantywaist in the Oval Office.

 

School's out! Suddenly it is playtime for all the naughtier elements in the more "reclusive" parts of the world who enjoy kicking Uncle Sam's butt but didn't much relish tangling with Dick Cheney and (what was that other guy's name?). This time Comrade Kim is really throwing his toys out of the playpen. He has even unilaterally revoked the 1953 armistice between the Korean War belligerents, which means, in case anybody is interested, that North and South Korea are once more at war.

 

So, what is the response of the Messiah in the Oval Office? Really severe rhetoric, is the answer. The soundbite manufacturers have been burning the midnight oil and the auto-cue is going into meltdown. So is the confidence of Asian leaders. The word is out: the most powerful nation on earth has got itself a pussycat for a president. Read article.

Chuck Fetter, Chronwatch-America.com

 

Let’s imagine that the American electorate had a totally unfamiliar person running for President of the United States and, oddly, that whenever he appeared in public he always carried a small box under his arm. Being innately skeptical of the unknown, reasonable Americans asked the obvious question: What is in that box?

 

The candidate’s stock answer was always that the box contained a fruitcake, given to him by his loving grandmother. But those skeptical-but-reasonable Americans couldn’t help wondering it that the innocent-sounding fruitcake was not, in fact, a stealth explosive device--considering September 11 and all that!

 

The candidate obdurately refused to lift the lid of the box, going so far as trying to silence the skeptics by placing a photo of a fruitcake on the Internet, along with a picture of himself, his swear-on-a-holy-Bible grandmother, and the fruitcake itself. What's more, he paid a boatload of attorneys hundreds of thousand dollars--actually more than a million--to fight the efforts of skeptics to reveal the contents of the box.

 

The media--whose job it is to vet candidates by researching their backgrounds--argued that the box contained what the candidate said it did, i.e., a fruitcake.

 

Bleeding-heart liberals, whose DNA guilt for the slavery that their ancestors were culpable for, said that, of course, the box contained a fruitcake. Then again, they agreed that whatever the box contained, it didn’t matter. Expiating their guilt by kissing the candidate’s feet which trumped even a cursory examination of the box’s contents. To them, a Black presidential candidate was sufficient to abandon any semblance of objective journalism. Read article.

 

Sher Zieve, Canada Free Press.com

 

Despite his feigned protestations to the contrary, since his usurping of the US presidency Supreme Leader Barack Hussein Obama (AKA “Barry” who said he does not want to run a car company) now owns General Motors and will soon own Chrysler. Although his mainstream media continues to say that “taxpayers own the companies,” we do not. Obama and his friends do. We will NEVER see any viable return on investment for this Obama folly-for-us-and-money-in-his-and-his-buddies’-pockets for him. He has now--almost single-handedly--destroyed the US auto industry. 

 

Obama must be very proud. His dictatorial power (now almost absolute) is growing exponentially and he is getting virtually everything he wants. No elected officials--from either side of the aisle--are attempting to stop him. Obama, also, now appears to be unequivocally running the US Department of Justice.

 

The DOJ dropped a voter-intimidation lawsuit against the New Black Panthers, even though (see below video) they were clearly threatening all those who entered the shown polling place. Thus far, no reason has been given for this action by any member of the US Department of Justice. The only reason that currently has any viability is that Obama ordered them to do so. Bear in mind, the New Black Panthers supported Obama for POTUS. Are we on our way to becoming South Africa--or worse? Read article.

Col.Bob Pappas, USMC, Ret., Gulf1.com

 

For years, even decades U.S. Administrations have made the mistake of believing that Communist China would act as a restraining force on North Korea. I have always been of the opinion that the latter is both puppet and attack dog for Communist China and by extension the former U.S.S.R. If one has made even the least study of Chinese history, one understands that its perception of itself is as the “Center of the World,” and for good reason. Whereas Nixon “opened” relations with China as a vital component of the solution to the Vietnam “quagmire” from the U.S. perspective, the Chinese did so to gain access to the enormous wealth and potential of trading with the U.S.

 

Has anyone but me been paying attention to the economic inroads and attendant influence and control that the communists have made over U.S. policies and economics? Why else would Bush, Obama, Clinton and Pelosi grovel to them and choose to ignore their human rights abuses that until their election, they maligned? To his eternal damnation Bill Clinton saved the Communist Chinese decades of research and development and enormous expense by giving them access to both U.S. missile and nuclear technology that when combined with the enormous wealth they gained by production of low cost goods for U.S. consumers, catapulted them into the ICBM and space age, in less than a decade.

 

Where Bush likely had honorable intentions of “engagement,” Obama and his socialist lemmings are inherently cohorts of communist China and North Korea, so don’t expect this Administration to take any action against North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons or ICBM technology; and, Obama may well abandon South Korea in the Orient just as he is abandoning Israel in the Middle East. Read article.

 

Kit Lange, AlanPetersRoundup.blogspot.com

 

Barack Obama was handed the White House on a silver platter by a fawning media, a bevy of foreign donors (who, to this day and in violation of U.S. election laws, remain nameless and unaccounted for), and a populace who voted based on color instead of right and wrong--even in the face of the most damning evidence against a Presidential candidate in many years, perhaps ever.

 

It is said that the people receive the government they deserve. Sadly, I fear that's correct. We have become complacent, unwilling to see the writing on the wall, content to frolic in the warm water without bothering to notice that it's been getting hotter by the minute.

 

We are two seconds from a rolling boil--and perhaps it is already too late.

 

So, liberals, enjoy your victory. Jump around. Have a party, file for your free grants. Scream "Gimme my handout!" and make fun of those of us who fought to make sure your "messiah" didn't get access to the most powerful position in the world.

 

Just remember when it all comes crashing down:

 

You own the White House, the Congress, and soon the Supreme Court.

 

You have no one to blame but yourselves for the mess you just created.

 

As for me, I'm buying my handguns this week so I have an answer for those who will come and try to take them. Read article.

Fred Barnes, Weekly Standard.com

 

Let's stipulate that President Obama is a wonderful speaker, vigorous in promoting his policies and even eloquent at times. But there's a problem: He's not persuasive. Obama is effective at marketing himself. His 64 percent job approval (Gallup poll) is a reflection of this. But in building public support for his policies, Obama has been largely unsuccessful.

 

You'd never guess this from the laudatory press coverage of Obama. With every major speech or press conference, the media and a sizable chunk of the political community--including many Republicans--assume Obama has carried the day. Actually, he rarely has.

 

The most striking example is Obama's strenuous defense of his decision to close Guantánamo pris-on by next January 22 and to bar "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding in questioning captured terrorists. He gave a highly publicized address on this policy last month. After the speech, support for closing Guantánamo fell.

 

And this occurred despite Obama's supposedly powerful argument that Guantánamo has "set back the moral authority that is America's strongest currency in the world," become "a symbol that helped al Qaeda recruit terrorists," and "weakened American national security." As usual, the media praised the speech.

 

The president's remarks were followed (same day, different location) by a speech by former Vice President Dick Cheney in which he criticized the president on Guantánamo and interrogation tactics. "Clearly the president is a more popular figure," says pollster Scott Rasmussen. "The numbers still shifted a little away from Obama." Read article.

 

Rich Lowry, NRO.com

 

The interlocking directorate is anathema to trustbusters and corporate watchdogs. It occurs when a board member or top executive of one company sits on the board of another company, accumulating undue power over a given industry. When it reduces competition, the arrangement is forbidden by the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.

 

If Henry De Lamar Clayton, the Alabama congressman who introduced the aforementioned act, were still with us, he’d presumably be shocked at the creation of the most far-reaching interlocking directorate in U.S. history. Obama Inc. has effectively won a seat on the board of companies at the heart of the nation’s industrial production and its financial system. The robber barons of old would marvel at the tentacles of influence of Barack Obama, a CEO whose power would overawe J. P. Morgan (the famous industrialist, not the bailed-out bank).

 

In difficult negotiations with business, Obama has the advantage of sitting at both sides of the table. This makes the art of the deal considerably simpler than when Donald Trump wrote about it years ago. Consider the matter of CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy), the mileage standards that have been resisted by automakers for decades in a multifaceted regulatory and legal battle featuring enviros, the state of California, and industrial-state lawmakers. The other day, Obama snipped the Gordian knot in an offhand swipe with his fingernail clippers. Read article.

 

Burt Prelutsky, Townhall.com

 

Those on the Left who have trashed George W. Bush for this entire decade claim they weren’t being rude or unpatriotic, but were simply talking truth to power. That has a nice ring to it, so I think I’ll give it a shot.

 

Today, I’ll talk truth to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, potential justice of the Supreme Court Sonia Sotomayor, Pope Benedict XVI and President Barack Obama. That’s a more powerful lineup than the 1927 New York Yankees, if I do say so myself.

 

I have almost begun to feel sorry for Nancy Pelosi. After all, when you get past the facelifts and the Botox injections, the designer suits and the large private jet, you have an aging grandmother who, in a perfect world, would be home playing with the grandkids and letting the wrinkles show. Instead, she’s constantly on TV, telling lies and looking like a small animal staring at oncoming headlights. Read article.

 

Barry Rubin, Gloria-Center.org

 

If President Barack Obama actually succeeds in making himself more popular among Arabs and Muslims, what material advantage would it give the United States?

 

 The answer shouldn't be taken for granted. Consider the following points:

 

 --All of these regimes are dictatorships and so popular opinion is of very limited importance.

 

 --Publics are very hostile to America and the West and will not be easily moved by the charm of an American president unless he does things far beyond any possible policy he might follow. Bashing Israel won't transform this opinion.

 

 --The impressions of U.S. policies and leaders among these groups are mediated by state-controlled media which are hostile for reasons of national or regime interests, and intellectual elites which tend to be carriers of either Arab nationalism or Islamism, world views that have a systematic antagonism to the United States.

 

 --Islamists and radicals such as Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and the Muslim Brotherhoods view America in all its varieties and guises as an enemy. No matter what Obama says or does they will deem it a trick.

 

 Unless, of course, he gives them concessions in which case they will take them, see him as weak, and give nothing back. That isn't popularity; that's contempt. Read article.

 

Ralph Peters, NY Post.com

 

In the old days at Officer Candidate School, the "tac officers," snapping and snarling, would circle a hapless would-be lieutenant:

 

"You're lost, Candidate."

 

"You're confused.

 

"What are you going to do now?"

 

"Make a decision! Make a decision!"

 

That cherished image of the bewildered victim of calculated harassment fits President Obama perfectly, when it comes to the shambles he's made of foreign policy in record time.

 

Around the globe, our enemies -- immediate and potential -- are testing Obama to see how far they can go. Thus far, he hasn't set a limit anywhere. Not a single dictator or terrorist leader got a single time-out.

 

Last week, North Korea nuke-mooned him, then spit missiles in multiple directions. Our president admonished Pyongyang. Words solve everything in Obama-World.

 

The Master of the Teleprompter didn't seem to grasp the basics: Like spoiled brats, the North Koreans were demanding attention (and got it); Pyongyang never honors agreements; and, above all, this isn't our problem to solve -- it's China's. We just need to worry about nuke exports and keep our Navy gainfully employed. Read article.

 

Mark Hemingway, NRO.com

 

On Tuesday, May 26, Senate majority leader Harry Reid threw one heck of a book party. His memoir, The Good Fight: Hard Lessons from Searchlight to Washington, just came out in paperback, and to celebrate the occasion the Nevada senator held a fundraiser at Caesar’s Palace. The event, billed under the same title as the book, featured Vegas headliner Bette Midler, as well as Sheryl Crow. But the star of course was Barack Obama, who spent the evening praising Harry Reid and working on his stage banter — “Hello, Las Vegas,” “Give it up for our outstanding performers,” etc. The cost of admission? A mere $2,400 toward Reid’s reelection — the maximum allowable campaign donation.

 

Most authors would kill to promote their work with these kinds of resources. But having recently read The Good Fight, it seems doubtful to me that even a star-studded party (literally singing the book’s praises) and an endorsement by the leader of the free world can sell this turkey. And given how unintentionally unflattering the book is to its author, Reid would probably be better off keeping the book’s existence quiet.

 

And it’s been kept pretty quiet so far. Released a year ago, the book got one glowing review: from his hometown paper. Every other major media outlet has been standoffish. Take this blurb from the Washington Post, proudly emblazoned on the back of the paperback edition: “Recounts fights with everyone from classmates to the man who would eventually become his father-in-law, preparing him for a senatorial life of battling the Bush White House and Republican filibusters.” Beware the value-neutral blurb: In fact, the Post never reviewed the book — the quote comes from a gossip column published a month before the book’s release. One of the most powerful men in Washington published a book, and the entire journalistic establishment’s reaction seems to have been, “If you can’t say something nice . . . ” Read article.

 

Ace of Spades.mu.nu

 

Voters are extraordinarily sensitive to hikes in gas prices. Ask George Bush.

 

Add in the coming general inflation, rising interest rates, etc., and Obama's determination to raise taxes still further and his true-believer zealotry in refusing to expand conventional (i.e., "real") energy production, and you can see the thunderheads sweeping towards the White House.

 

Crude oil rose, capping its biggest monthly gain in a decade, as the dollar weakened against the euro, bolstering the appeal of commodities.

Oil climbed above $66 a barrel to a six-month high as the dollar declined beyond $1.41 against the euro for the first time this year, making raw materials such as oil and gold an attractive alternative investment. Prices also gained as U.S., and Asian indicators pointed to a global economic recovery.

 

“The devaluation of the dollar is leading to the revaluation of energy and commodities in general,” said John Kilduff, senior vice president of energy at MF Global in New York. “This is a monetary-based rally. The market is focused on the future and ignoring the fundamentals of the present day crude-oil supply and demand picture.”

 

Prognostication: Depending on when the bad economic news hits, Obama's approval ratings will drop precipitously, beginning in six months to a year. He'll drop from his ~55% rating to ~40% in just a couple of months. Read article.

Print This E-mail This

Share It: