Editorial, Washington Times.com

 

It was the sniper shot heard round the world. One moment, a young woman is standing on the sidewalk, watching the Iranian people stand up to the state. A second later, she crumbles to the sidewalk, blood pumping uselessly out of the gunshot wound in her chest. A faceless police sniper has killed Neda Agha Soltan, but also made her immortal. Her murder was videotaped and sent worldwide. Her death is now the defining image of the 2009 Iranian revolution.

 

For 30 years the world has tolerated this cruel and calculating regime, as it took hostages, paid terrorists and built bombs meant for allied troops in Iraq. Now the people of Iran are pleading their case before the world. While events are still unfolding, some lessons can be drawn regardless of how the revolution ends. Read article.

Martin Kramer, Sandbox.Blog-City.com

 

There is nothing at all surprising about Barack Obama's reluctance to embrace the surge for freedom in Iran. As I've shown, he received his primer on the Middle East from Rashid Khalidi, who facilitated Obama's formation as a Palestine-centric Third Worldist. In this view of things, only the situation of the Palestinians deserves to be described as "intolerable" —the word Obama used in Cairo—and action is promised only to them.

 

Iranians are defrauded and assaulted by the bizarre dictatorship of the "Supreme Leader" and his Basiji minions? America, Obama says, is "watching." Why? Obama's master plan for the Middle East is supposed to commence with his entry to Jerusalem as the messiah of peace, godfather of the Palestinian state. Everything is supposed to follow from that.

 

Well, the Middle East doesn't revolve around the Palestinians, and young Iranians don't intend to wait for Mahmoud Abbas (emir of Ramallah, where there is a "good reality") to get off his derrière before demanding their freedom. Iranians rightly think they're no less worthy of the world's sympathy than the Palestinians. (One of the chants of Iran's protesters: Mardom chera neshastin, Iran shode Felestin! "People, why are you sitting down? Iran has become Palestine!") Events in Iran have left Obama's simplistic mental map of the Middle East, first learned from a few Palestinian activists and an old Hyde Park rabbi, in shreds. Read article.

 

Michael Evans, YidWithLid.com

 

Two years ago there was an interesting analyisis in the JPost which said in part:

 

Carter viewed Khomeini as more of a religious holy man in a grassroots revolution than a founding father of modern terrorism. Carter's ambassador to the UN, Andrew Young, said "Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint." Carter's Iranian ambassador, William Sullivan, said, "Khomeini is a Gandhi-like figure." Carter adviser James Bill proclaimed in a Newsweek interview on February 12, 1979 that Khomeini was not a mad mujahid, but a man of "impeccable integrity and honesty."

 

The Shah, on the other hand had the Peanut President down pat.He told his personal confidant, "Who knows what sort of calamity he [Carter] may unleash on the world?"

 

It was Carter's Kumaya-pacifism that got him into trouble:

 

Carter never got it that Khomeini, a cleric exiled to Najaf in Iraq from 1965-1978, was preparing Iran for revolution. Proclaiming "the West killed God and wants us to bury him," Khomeini's weapon of choice was not the sword but the media. Using tape cassettes smuggled by Iranian pilgrims returning from the holy city of Najaf, he fueled disdain for what he called gharbzadegi ("the plague of Western culture").

 

Carter pressured the Shah to make what he termed human rights concessions by releasing political prisoners and relaxing press censorship. Khomeini could never have succeeded without Carter. The Islamic Revolution would have been stillborn. Gen. Robert Huyser, Carter's military liaison to Iran, once told me in tears: "The president could have publicly condemned Khomeini and even kidnapped him and then bartered for an exchange with the [American Embassy] hostages, but the president was indignant. 'One cannot do that to a holy man,' he said." Read article.

 

Tom Gross, NRO.com

 

President Bush said liberating Iraq would have a regional domino effect and give people a taste for freedom and democracy. Is this what we’re seeing now in Iran?

 

As Bush said, liberty isn’t American, or British, or French. It is human. No, the morality police in Iran are not just “part of Iranian culture” as some critics of Bush have claimed. Nor are public hangings. Nor are arbitrary detentions of doctors, or Holocaust denial conferences.

 

Peace comes through the spread of liberalism and democracy. Whatever the “foreign policy realists” or “regime apologists” might claim, there is little doubt in my view that should Iran become a free nation the world will be a safer place for all, not just a better place for Iranians.

 

I have posted some videos of the Iranian uprising on my website and I would strongly urge you to watch them.

 

They show the reality of Iran’s dictatorship, a reality that many international TV networks are refusing to show. Some of these videos are disturbing but I feel they need to be watched to understand the true nature of Iran’s regime and why it should never be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Read article.

 

Alan Aronoff, American Thinker.com

 

Barack Obama signed the Stimulus bill on Feb. 18, 2009 amid much fanfare. Proponents of the bill stated that it would save or create 3.5 million jobs. Now, four months have passed since the passage of the stimulus package, its time to take a first look at the stimulus. 

 

By the president's own words, the stimulus should improve employment in America and make us more prosperous. Prosperity can be measured as growth in GDP, growth in asset values such as real estate and stocks, and growth in personal income. 

 

"I have every confidence that if we are willing to continue doing the critical work that must be done - by each of us, by all of us - then we will leave this struggling economy behind us, and come out on the other side, more prosperous as a people,"    - Barack Obama

 

The Stimulus spending allocated for 2009 is $140B. Of that amount, $40B has been spent, which is in keeping if the spending is linear over the course of the fiscal year. 

 

Obama's claim that the Stimulus created or saved 150,000 jobs is not only immeasurable but also not believable in the context of the current economic downturn. Jobs growth is a lagging economic indicator and does not improve until recovery is well under way. The government is hiring to fill jobs created by the Stimulus, and many of these jobs carry the title ‘czar'. This Administration has more czars than the Romanov family. The Stimulus is temporary, so the jobs created today in the government may not remain. Read article.

 

David Limbaugh.com

 

American freedom lovers studying the reign of Obama have been in a constant state of anxiety over the administration's assault on capitalism and America's very solvency, its thuggish political style, its PR war against America's history, its radical social policies and its Carteresque foreign policy. But for the first time, there are signs that America is starting to wake up.

 

The latest daily Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll has Obama slipping into negative net approval territory, with more Americans strongly disapproving of his performance (34 percent) than strongly approving (33 percent). Just 54 percent of voters say they at least somewhat approve. Even the Gallup Poll reports a decline in his approval rating to a new low, albeit still at 58 percent. The decline results from a drop in support among independents, as well as Republicans -- but not Democrats.

 

Can you imagine what these numbers would be if the mainstream media weren't invested in Obama's success or, better yet, if moderate Democrats weren't still blinded by their lingering excitement over regaining the presidency and their vulnerability to Obama's cultish aura? Read article.

 

Peter Wehner, Commentary Magazine.com

 

I recently devoted a piece to trying to decode President Obama. In reading more of his comments, I’ve noticed a tendency that now almost qualifies as a reflex: the more strongly the president denies something — and especially, the more he mocks his critics and feigns amusement at what they say — the greater the odds are that he will do what he denies.

 

In an interview yesterday, the president said, “I think the irony … is that I actually would like to see a relatively light touch when it comes to the government.”

 

Of course; examples of his “light touch” abound during the first five months of his presidency.

 

During his press conference discussing his first 100 days in office, Obama said, “And that’s why I’m always amused when I hear these, you know, criticisms of, ‘Oh, you know, Obama wants to grow government.’ No. I would love a nice, lean portfolio to deal with, but that’s not the hand that’s been dealt us.”

 

Why would anyone think Obama wants to “grow government”? Isn’t it clear by now he wants to limit it? (!!) Read article.

 

Rabbi Shmuel M. Butman, Israel-Commentary.org

 

During Israel’s 61 years, the U.S. has undeniably been its best friend. President Truman first recognized Israel’s independence, prompting many other lands to follow. Far more than any other land, the U.S. has generously supported Israel with economic and defense aid, political support and genuine friendship in the face of its frequent international isolation. The U.S. has acted as a protective big brother to Israel, for which the Jewish state should forever be grateful.

 

Moreover, Israel has responded in kind. Even without any formal alliance, Israel has acted as a loyal ally to the U.S. It has shared valuable intelligence of all kinds, reports on its tests of American weapons in real world conditions of actual warfare, given preference to American products, and given in to U.S. requests and demands.

 

However, gratitude does not mean totally submerging its independence. After 61 years, Israel has matured and is no longer America’s kid brother. In the face of its considerable isolation, Israel still values America’s political support in the world arena. However, the U.S. must accept that what its newest generation of leaders may see American interests do not necessarily coincide with those of Israel.

 

Right now, the American president believes he can achieve a rapprochement with the Muslim world by bullying Israel into acting against its own interests. Read article.

 

Anthony G. Martin, Examiner.com

 

*Several citizens have filed criminal complaints calling for the impeachment of Barack Obama based upon these and other issues. One of those issues is the illegal use of the military in Alabama to police the streets of a small town that had been hit with a crime wave.

 

Canada Free Press published an interview with one man who filed a criminal complaint against Obama based upon the illegal use of the military, his missing birth certificate, and his treasonous acts regarding America's enemies.   Here is the reporter's introduction to the interview:

 

In light of the now almost daily bombardment of the US Constitution by the sitting US Commander in Chief, the question ‘is our Constitution still the law of the land?’ is increasingly being asked by We-the-People. The problem of Barack Hussein Obama seeming not to be a natural-born citizen is still an extremely salient issue—an issue that has led Obama to hire a team of lawyers to keep all information on his actual country of birth and all of his college records hidden. The latest estimate on the fees charged to do so is over $1Million. 

 

This, coupled with Obama’s continued and strong apparent push to completely bankrupt the USA and turn it into his own personal totalitarian utopia has led to unprecedented actions by some US citizens.

 

Recently, retired Navy Commander Walter Francis Fitzpatrick III filed a criminal complaint of Treason against Barack Hussein Obama. This has prompted other individuals around the country to do the same. As our Republic now stands on the brink of complete collapse, I thought an interview of Commander Fitzpatrick was in order. 

 

And here is an excerpt of this explosive interview: CLICK HERE to read the full report.

 

John Kass, Chicago Tribune.com

 

Do the the fawning media think Obama learned his politics in Narnia?

 

Just two weeks ago, inspector general Gerald Walpin, who watches over volunteer community programs, was fired. He investigated Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, an Obama pal and former NBA star. Walpin alleged Johnson misused $850,000 in federal youth grants.

 

The use of political muscle may be prohibited in the mythic transcendental fairyland where much of the Obama spin originates, sprouting green and lush, like the never-ending fields of primo Hopium.

 

But our president is from Chicago. Obama's Media Merlin David Axelrod and chief of staff Rahm Emanuel come right from Chicago Democratic machine boss Mayor Richard Daley. They don't believe in fairies. Read article.

 

Michael Barone, Townhall.com

 

We pundits like to analyze our presidents and so, as Barack Obama deals with difficult problems ranging from health care legislation to upheaval in Iran, let me offer my Three Rules of Obama.

 

First, Obama likes to execute long-range strategies but suffers from cognitive dissonance when new facts render them inappropriate. His 2008 campaign was a largely flawless execution of a smart strategy, but he was flummoxed momentarily when the Russians invaded Georgia and when John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. On domestic policy, he has been executing his long-range strategy of vastly expanding government, but may be encountering problems as voters show unease at huge increases in spending.

 

His long-range strategy of propitiating America's enemies has been undercut by North Korea's missile launches and demonstrations in Iran against the mullah regime's apparent election fraud. His assumption that friendly words could melt the hearts of Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have been refuted by events. He limits himself to expressing "deep concern" about the election in the almost surely vain hope of persuading the mullahs to abandon their drive for nuclear weapons, while he misses his chance to encourage the one result -- regime change -- that could protect us and our allies from Iranian attack. Read article.

 

By LTC Carolyn Abell, U. S. Army, Retired

 

I hope that by the time this gets to press, our President has found the courage and moral imperative to condemn the oppressive shariah law-inspired Khamenei - Ahmadinejad dictatorship in Iran, but I’m not betting on it. Ever since the obviously “fixed” results from last week’s presidential election declared Ahmadinejad the winner, Iranian students and other Iranian citizens longing for change have been demonstrating their dissatisfaction with the status quo in that country. Thus far Obama’s statements concerning that situation have been pitifully lame, in true keeping with his philosophy of appeasement.

 

This is something he can’t blame on his predecessor, like he has everything else that has gone wrong. It all began on his watch, and with his abysmal lack of knowledge and experience in dealing with such a situation, his first reaction is to ignore it and hope it goes away.

 

After all, Obama was really counting on his charismatic personality to win over the jihadists bent on our destruction. If he managed to hypnotize over half of the U. S. voters into believing he was a messianic savior, why couldn’t he similarly charm the rest of the world with his vague rhetorical jargon? Since he is so fond of Islamic world leaders (kissing up to the king of Saudi Arabia, for example), maybe he thought he could convince them he was the long-awaited 12th Imam. All indications are that he has the hubris to believe it. His refusal to call them “terrorists” is so naïve as to be laughable. Iran has been funding and equipping terrorist groups all over the world for years. Ahmadinejad is very open about his intentions to annihilate Israel and the United States, and is rapidly building up the nuclear capability to carry out that threat. As the prophet Jeremiah phrased it, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?” You can cozy up to a leopard and call it “kitty, kitty” if you want to, but it’s still going to attack you at the first opportunity.

 

His refusal to call them “terrorists” is so naïve as to be laughable. Iran has been funding and equipping terrorist groups all over the world for years. Ahmadinejad is very open about his intentions to annihilate Israel and the United States, and is rapidly building up the nuclear capability to carry out that threat. As the prophet Jeremiah phrased it, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?” You can cozy up to a leopard and call it “kitty, kitty” if you want to, but it’s still going to attack you at the first opportunity. Read article.

 

Print This E-mail This

Share It: