The Iranian "whatever they call their electoral commission" has declared that Mahmoud won and it's time to move on!
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Just in case you didn't know: Mahmoud won!
The Iranian "whatever they call their electoral commission" has declared that Mahmoud won and it's time to move on!
The Iranian "whatever they call their electoral commission" has declared that Mahmoud won and it's time to move on!
Now for the fun part: Will Pres BO recognize Mahmoud or will he declare that he is illegitimate? Will he crack again?
BRET STEPHENS has a good post entitled Obama's Obsolete Iran Policy:
"What they need is Mr. Obama's spine.
If that means "democracy promotion" and tough talk about "regime change," well, it wouldn't be the first time this president has made his predecessor's policy his own."
We need another BO reversal. We need for BO to adopt Bush's commitment to regime change.
Why regime change? Because it's the best solution for everyone, and specially the women of Iran forced to live under 12th century rule?
P.S. Speaking of Iranian women, I can't wait to see The Stoning of Soraya:
Once again, we see Pres BO lining up with our enemies rather than our allies.
In Honduras, a Chavez-like president attempted to change the constitution and extend his rule.
Chavez did it in Venezuela. Why not Zelaya in Honduras?
"There was a coup all right, but it wasn't committed by the U.S. or the Honduran court.
It was committed by Zelaya himself.
He brazenly defied the law, and Hondurans overwhelmingly supported his removal (a pro-Zelaya rally Monday drew a mere 200 acolytes)."
Chavez has threatened to invade Honduras and restore Zelaya.
Of course, Chavez doesn't have the military resources to send a naval force across the Caribbean Sea and into The Gulf of Mexico.
However, he can destabilize Honduras, a small Central American nation.
Wonder what Pres Calderon of Mexico and Pres Uribe of Colombia think about Pres BO lining up with the region's # 1 thug?
Mexico and Colombia were recent targets of Chavez' meddling! Again, wonder what they think of "hope and change" down in Mexico City and Bogota these days?
As the world turns, BO seems awfully comfortable promoting a pro-Chavez agenda in Central America.
Wouldn't we better off if Pres BO and the US were promoting a "rule of law" agenda?
P.S. We agree with Ed's post:
"It’s difficult to make sense out of the foreign policy coming out of the White House under Barack Obama.
On the one hand, Obama insisted that he could not interfere with the internal politics of the “sovereign government of Iran,” refusing for days to even condemn Iran for its flagrantly violent repression of dissent.
When Honduras’ military staged a coup, though, Obama apparently had no such reticence in involving the US on behalf of deposed President Manuel Zelaya — a close ally of Hugo Chavez..."
It's a sad day when Pres BO is lining up with Chavez and Castro.
Has Pres BO read the Honduras constitution?
So let's hope that someone at The White House reads Honduras Defends Its Democracy by Mary A. O'Grady:
"Hugo Chávez's coalition-building efforts suffered a setback yesterday when the Honduran military sent its president packing for abusing the nation's constitution."
No Chavez in Honduras.
This is not your old fashioned military coup. Instead, this is actually a nation defending the "rule and law".
Why do you think that Chavez, Castro & Ortega are rooting for former Pres Zelaya?
Let's hope that Pres BO catches up with reality down in Honduras.
P.S. We also recommend Honduras defends its democracy by Fausta, a lady who knows her stuff:
"Zelaya couldn’t get the ballots printed in Honduras since the referendum had been pronounced illegal by the country’s Supreme Court AND the electoral board.
Therefore, the government couldn’t print them. No private printer was willing to break the law, either.
So Zelaya had the ballots printed in Venezuela and flown in."
So who is supporting Zelaya?
Raul Castro, Hugo Chavez and that fellow named BO!
Sen McCain got this one right in: 'Unions are running a lot of this administration'
"McCain referenced the auto bailouts as well as President Obama's push for a healthcare reform package that includes a public (or "government-run") option for consumers as examples of union influence on the administration.
Unions have worked to organize support for the healthcare reform bill, and have also pushed for the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), a labor reform bill which the administration has said it supports.
McCain, who faced off against Obama in the 2008 presidential election, accused his onetime electoral nemesis of conducting "far-left" policies in a "a right-of-center nation."
We can add "protectionism" to Sen McCain's comments.
Pres BO is pursuing a union agenda! The country needs a "jobs" agenda!
Monday, June 29, 2009
OK. He is dead.
OK. He is really dead.
Do we have to watch this story 24/7!
As we wrote before, Jackson was a freak, a creep and a very bad role model.
Let him rest in peace and let's get back to the real stuff in the world:
Again, let MJ rest in peace and let's move on to stuff that really matters!
Should we expect Pres BO to do more than just talk about the situation in Iran?
Yes we can.
Did you know that Iran imports most of its gasoline?
"Despite having the world’s second largest reserves of oil, Iran must import 40% of its gasoline because of a lack of refining capacity.
Most of its refined gasoline comes from the Jamnagar Refinery, operated and owned by Reliance Industries, an Indian company.
And guess who has guaranteed a $500 million loan to expand this refinery?
The American taxpayer, through the Export-Import Bank provided the loan guarantees as part of a $900 million package to Reliance."
Let's support the Sherman-Kirk Amendment in Congress.
This is an amendment that cuts off Export-Import bank financing for any firm that exports gasoline to Iran.
It sounds good to me!
It will have a devastating impact on the rulers' ability to stay in power.
Yes, I understand that it will hurt people. However, it will destabilize the economy even more and push the regime over the cliff.
Former Spanish PM JOSé MARIA AZNAR has a good column about Iran:
"Watching videos of innocent Iranians being brutalized, it's hard to defend silence." (JMA)
No silence in this blog!
Sunday, June 28, 2009
In 1981, Poland erupted and Pres Reagan responded:
"All the information that we have confirms that the imposition of martial law in Poland has led to the arrest and confinement, in prisons and detention camps, of thousands of Polish trade union leaders and intellectuals.
Factories are being seized by security forces and workers beaten.
These acts make plain there’s been a sharp reversal of the movement toward a freer society that has been underway in Poland for the past year and a half.
Coercion and violation of human rights on a massive scale have taken the place of negotiation and compromise.
All of this is in gross violation of the Helsinki Pact, to which Poland is a signatory.
It would be naive to think this could happen without the full knowledge and the support of the Soviet Union.
We’re not naive.
We view the current situation in Poland in the gravest of terms, particularly the increasing use of force against an unarmed population and violations of the basic civil rights of the Polish people.
Violence invites violence and threatens to plunge Poland into chaos.
We call upon all free people to join in urging the Government of Poland to reestablish conditions that will make constructive negotiations and compromise possible."(HotAir)
Don't make excuses for Pres BO's timid and late response.
We need a president who will stand for freedom and stand with people crushed by security forces.
We agree with the WSJ: Reagan's Polish lesson for Obama and the American left
It's time to put negotiations or "BO's Iranian talk" show on hold.
It's more important to stand with the people than their corrupt leaders!
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Wonder what North Korea thinks of this: US will not use force to inspect NKorean ship!
We went to the UN....got a very tough resolution.....but we can't inspect a ship.
Wonder who is laughing tonight?
I like what Ed-M wrote about this:
"Instead of Obama looking tough, Kim has shown the world that he can bully the US into retreat at any time.
He exposed Obama as a paper tiger."
Pres Bush was right about North Korea.
I like what Ashok Malik wrote about this: Bush was right after all
8 years of Bush.....no missiles
5 months of BO: lots of missiles and more coming!
Not at all.
The North Koreans don't fear BO!
"Hope and change" continues its reversals.
Wonder what the "yes we can" screamers would have said about any of this during the campaign?
We read this today from Andrew Malcolm's: Obama prepares to hold Gitmo guys indefinitely, just as Bush did
We are happy that "hope and change" has come to its senses.
Let Mr. Malcolm explain it further:
"According to the Post report, the 44th president is now starting to think that closure of the internationally-reviled Guantanamo Bay detention facility, which Obama announced with so much fanfare on his first day in office last winter, may be impossible to actually accomplish before the one-year deadline he set for himself before actually planning where else to put these prisoners.
In other words, fanfare aside, status quo ante.
Democrat or Republican, same deal.
Ex-Vice President Dick Cheney will be so pleased that the Obama-Biden folks finally accepted his advice to protect national security.
Another sign, finally, of real change after eight long years of the very same thing."
Again, we are happy that Pres BO is putting national security ahead of keeping silly campaign promises to "yes we can" screamers.
My question is this: Who is going to apologize to Pres Bush and VP Cheney?
Who is going to apologize after spending two years claiming that the Bush-Cheney administration was breaking the law?
P.S. We refer you once again to The adolescent angst of Barack Obama By Michael Barone! It's amazing how different the world looks when you are actually responsible for our national security!
Friday, June 26, 2009
Here we go again.
Gov Sanford was one of the promising stars in the party.
As we posted before, our comeback will be fueled by governors, such as Romney, Huckabee, Palin and our own Perry of Texas.
Republicans are "a state driven" party. Our future presidents are usually successful governors, such as Reagan and GW Bush.
I like our current roster of governors! (Again, keep an eye on Rick Perry of Texas. He is slowly but surely turning into "the anti-federal government candidate" of 2012)
Gov Sanford was one of those guys on the roster. He was a good governor and represented the "growth" part of the country, i.e. the Republican South!
So it was very sad to see Sanford go down the drain!
Over the next few days, we will hear the left wingers say that Republicans are hypocrites and so on.
Are we hypocritical because we preach morality, family values and respect for the unborn?
Not at all.
Do some of our guys make mistakes and destroy themselves, as well as their families?
Gov Sanford needs to resign and concentrate on putting his marriage back together. Let's remember that there are four boys in this equation!
Beyond that, Gov Sanford needs to come clean about any use of public funds to support his relationship with the Argentine lady.
We always forgive people who make mistakes.
We are not so kind to to politicians who misuse public funds, betray the public trust and engage in very irrational behavior!
P.S. The media should not publish Gov Sanford's private e-mails! It does not add to the story and embarasses his wife even more! Also, I understand that he was using a private e-mail address and not his official one.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
We know now that Pres BO wrote a letter to the Iranian leaders prior to the election.
What was that all about?
We don't know for sure.
However, it appears that Pres BO was setting up a meeting with the Iranian leadership.
How is that going to play with the people in the streets?
Incredibly, Pres BO has now aligned the US government with the corrupt regime running Iran.
Bill Katz has a post about it:
"You'd think the president of the United States could have at least waited until after the "election," so he'd know who he was dealing with. And you'll notice that the Supreme Leader hasn't even responded yet, even though the letter was sent weeks ago." (THE OBAMA IRAN LETTER)
We also hear this: Ahmadinejad Tells Obama Not to Interfere in Iran, Seeks Public Apology
What's one more apology from Pres BO?
P.S. More brutal news from Iran: Witnesses Report Clashes Around Iran's Parliament!
Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and professor and director of the Touro College Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust in New York.
Today, she posted A Weak American President:
"President Obama has staked his reputation on being a human rights guru to people around the world.
But his remarks at Tuesday's news conference and behavior since taking office have instead exposed a different persona--that of human rights charlatan."
She is right.
We have a great opportunity for regime change in Iran. We have a chance to be with those who want change in Iran.
Where are we?
Pres BO is still interested in talking to the thugs killing innocent people.
The world is watching Iran. The bad buys are indeed watching Pres BO!
P.S. We understand that it was a very bad day in Iran: Witnesses: Protesters, riot police clash in streets around parliament...
Deborah Weiss is an attorney and regular contributor to FrontpageMag.com.
Today, she posted a wonderful article about the courageous ladies of Iran: Why Iran's Women Are Rioting!
She recommends a new movie:
"Nothing better illustrates the awful injustices Iranian women face than a soon-to-be released film, The Stoning of Soraya M.
The film tells the grisly true story of an innocent woman who was stoned to death in Iran on charges of adultery."
Let's stand with the people of Iran, and specially the ladies yearning for change! By the way, Ed has a preview of the movie: Opening night get-together for The Stoning of Soraya M!
Michael Barone is one of the nation's best political analysts.
Today, he posted The adolescent angst of Barack Obama.
This is one my favorite paragraphs:
"Back in July 2007, Obama said that he would meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and other tyrants without preconditions.
Grown-up squares like George W. Bush wouldn’t talk to these guys, so as the avatar of the generation of hope and change, Obama would.
Obama figured he was cool enough to get the mullahs to agree to renounce nuclear weapons and all that hate stuff."
Here is my second favorite paragraph:
"As parents know, it takes time for an adolescent to grow up."
Yes, it does!
Read it because it is great!
P.S. On a similar topic, Reality Bites — Doesn’t It, Mr. President? By Jennifer Rubin is worth checking out:
"Reality is catching up to the president. He has lived in a world of media adulation and campaign spin ever since he announced his run for the White House.
He has not had to face hard decisions and, instead, had the luxury of dismissing them as “false choices.”
But now, both on foreign and domestic policy, the real world has intruded and it is not at all clear how — or if — the president will respond."
I really like this:
"In short, it wasn’t all Bush’s fault.
Many of Bush’s anti-terrorism decisions and national security architecture have proven to be entirely reasonable and politically popular to boot.
He actually had the North Koreans and Iranians pegged pretty well (although he arguably hadn’t dealt effectively with either’s nuclear ambitions before he left office).
By contrast, the rainbow and ice cream vision of the world which entails sitting down with mullahs and North Korean crackpot dictators is quite unreasonable and entirely ill-suited to the world in which the president finds himself."
Hope and change is running out of gas and in need of a tune up less than six months into a presidency!
Back during the campaign, I mentioned that a young "yes we can" screamer was convinced that BO's personality would change the world.
I have not seen him recently. It'd be interesting to get an update following the brutal crackdown in Iran.
Pres BO committed himself to a different foreign policy. Unfortunately, nobody asked him to explain it, i.e. no one in the media challenged him.
Today, Pres BO is dealing with the harsh reality that Iran is a terrorist state that kills its people.
"Before June 12, Obama's eagerness to negotiate with Ahmadinejad -- ridiculed by his conservative critics -- was hailed by the establishment and the left as proof of his high-minded faith in diplomacy, a healthy antidote to George W. Bush's allegedly close-minded approach.
But now, if the clerical junta prevails, anyone who shakes hands with Ahmadinejad will have a hard time washing the blood off his own hands."
Does anyone at this White House understand the backlash if he now meets with Iranian leaders?
It's time for BO to make some "in flight corrections".
It's time for the naive candidate to come to grip to some reality.
There won't be a face to face meeting with Iran's leaders.
BO isn't going to get a chance to change the world with his personality.
P.S. Dick Morris has a note about Pres BO's foreign policy:
"In the meantime, Obama's pathetic performance vis-a-vis Iran and North Korea cannot but send a message to all of America's enemies that the president of the United States does not believe in using power.
That he is a wimp and they can get away with whatever they want. A dangerous reputation, indeed."
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
We really love Thomas Jefferson in this blog.
Thomas Jefferson was 32 years old when he wrote The Declaration of Independence in 1776.
Jefferson went on to be our 3rd president.
Jefferson coincidentally died on July 4, 1826, or the 50th anniversary of the document that made him famous. (John Adams, the other big player in the signing of the declaration died on that day too!
We remember Jefferson for composing the most important words in US history:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"
What side do you think that Thomas Jefferson would take in Iran?
A corrupt repressive regime?
Or people demanding their freedom?
Pres BO got a question at today's press conference.
It was a simple question: Are we still inviting Iranian diplomats to our July 4th party?
"State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said on Monday that Iranian diplomats are still welcome to attend Fourth of July parties at U.S. embassies around the world:
"There's no thought to rescinding the invitations to Iranian diplomats," Kelly said.
"We have made a strategic decision to engage on a number of fronts with Iran.
And -- and we tried many years of isolation, and we're pursuing a different path now.""
So the Iranians are coming!
Has anybody in this White House thought about the potential PR blunder of this invitation?
It was a stupid idea before the Iranian election.
It is a dumber idea now!
We get the impression that Iran's demonstrations have spoiled Pres BO's obsession with "talking" to the country's leadership.
Now we read this: U.S. Contacted Iran Supreme Leader Before Election!
According to media reports, Pres BO sent a message calling for better US-Iran relations.
Again, doesn't the Obama White House understand the PR blunder of sitting down with people who have brutally cracked down on their population.
I agree with Mark Davis: Why Iranian protests paralyze Obama!
Mark is right. The demonstrators spoiled BO's chance to "charm" Iran into cancelling their nuclear program.
Patrick has been writing extensively on Mexico's domestic situation.
His latest posts were: Mexico’s Midterm Elections, Abstention and Party Picks and 'Cartels': A Counterproductive Mexican Drug War Misnomer.
Click here for the show or go to the radio box on the left column.
Adryana Boyne and I had a discussion about Iran and other issues!
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Check out Sen McCain's statement about the demonstrations and Neda's murder.
Sen McCain has been upfront on Iran, as he was last summer when the Russians moved into Georgia.
Today, I am very proud that I voted for McCain. Again, we are not talking about "choosing sides". We are simply talking about standing up for some basic values, such as not getting killed for expression your opinion.
My guess is that a lot of Iranians are very happy with McCain, too!
P.S. By the way, are we still inviting Iranian officials to join us on July 4th?
Is that a joke?
How in the world can Pres BO do that?
Shouldn't he cancel the invitation?
How can you share Thomas Jefferson's words with a bunch of thugs who kill people?
It's a beautiful sight. Thank you ladies of Iran! We love your courage!
We see women marching for freedom. We see young women standing up for their dignity. I heard that the men are crashing security forces and the ladies are blogging to the world!
Where is Pres BO? He is still concerned about "meddling" in Iran!
"The regime may succeed.
Violence usually succeeds, at least in the short term, in intimidating people.
In the long term, however, the links, structures, organizations and groups set up by Iranian women, not to mention the photographs of the past week, will continue to gnaw away at the Iranian regime's legitimacy -- and we should take note."
We are witnessing a little history in Iran.
Where is Pres BO?
He is concerned that the women of Iran, as well as their male colleagues, have killed his upcoming talks with thugs and killers.
Talk to the mullahs?
Support the Iranians and all of those young women who want to break away from 12th century rule!
Last, but not least, the Iranian thugs are always going to blame the US anyway.
The White House should read: Iranian leaders will always believe Anglo-Saxons are plotting against them By Christopher Hitchens!
Is Press BO naive? Does he think that the demonstrations will stop if the mullahs accuse the US of intervention?
Where did BO come to believe such nonsense anyway?
He learned it from Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright, the two most important influences in his life!
It was so easy for Pres BO and the Dems to blast Pres Bush and the Republicans about health care.
It was so easy to talk about health care in the abstract. (Yes we can!)
It's a lot more complicated to get something done, specially with Dems freaking out at adding US$ 1 trillion! As we posted, the Dems are starting to worry about carrying BO's deficits and unemployment in 2010!
Today, we saw this story from Bloomberg:
" President Barack Obama may not have enough votes in the U.S. Senate to pass his effort to overhaul the nation’s health-care system, California Democrat Dianne Feinstein said.
“I don’t know that he has the votes right now,” Feinstein said today on CNN’s “State of the Union” program.
“I think there’s a lot of concern in the Democratic caucus.”
Controlling costs of the new system is a “difficult subject.” Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana said on the same program that the overhaul should be done slowly, and not this year, to ensure it doesn’t “threaten the basic structure of the economy.”"
Out of control costs? Where I did hear that before?
It gets better.
James Pethokoukis tears up "BO-Care" in Why Obamacare may be flatlining:
"And then last week, the Congressional Budget Office, the respected arbiter of what new government programs might cost, calculated that the Senate Finance Committee’s health reform bill would cost more than $1.6 trillion over 10 years.
That was determined to be a political no-go by Senate Democrats– a smart conclusion given the recent polling — and the committee moved on to a still evolving plan B."
This is 1993 all over again. All we need is for the Cowboys to win the Super Bowl and the Blue Jays win The World Series!
Back in '93, another Dem president with a Dem majority decided to push health care reform.
The public read the bill.
They put substance over style.
In the end, the voters did not want Euro-type taxes in exchange for a public health care program.
By the way, what happened to the new Dem president and his big majority in 1993?
The Republicans took over the House and Senate.
What happened to Pres Clinton? He said that "the era of big government was over" in first State of the Union after losing Congress!
We agree that something must be done. What should we do?
First, let's check out some facts before making wholesale changes.
We remind you that the public is divided on the government to take over health care: 41% Favor Public Sector Health Care Option, 41% Disagree!
George Will blasts BO-Care and its assumptions:
"Almost 39 percent of the uninsured are in five states -- Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, all of which are entry points for immigrants.
About 21 percent -- 9.7 million -- of the uninsured are not citizens.
Up to 14 million are eligible for existing government programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, veterans' benefits, etc. -- but have not enrolled.
And 9.1 million have household incomes of at least $75,000 and could purchase insurance.
Those last two cohorts are more than half of the 45.7 million.
Insuring the perhaps 20 million persons who are protractedly uninsured because they cannot afford insurance is conceptually simple:
Give them money -- (refundable) tax credits or debit cards (which have replaced food stamps) loaded with a particular value.
This would produce people who are more empowered than dependent.
Unfortunately, advocates of a government option consider that a defect. Which is why the simple idea of the dependency agenda cuts like a razor through the complexities of this debate."
Larry Elder goes after the myth of 45 million uninsured people:
"Nearly half of the 45 million fall in the category of my 26-year-old nephew.
He smokes cigarettes, dates, eats out, goes to movies and, like all young people, lives through his cell phone.
With a slight change in priorities, he could afford health insurance, the cost of which at his age and health starts at about $100 a month.
Take a look at a Reason Foundation video (http://reason.tv/video/show/560.html) of interviews with a bunch of non-health-insured 20-somethings."
We do not have a health care crisis.
We have a health care problem that could be addressed with minor reforms and the promotion of personal responsibility, i.e. buy your own policy!
What kind of reforms?
How about tort reform, a major part of health care costs.
What should we do about people who lose their employer based insurance or hit some hard times?
Give these people an insurance card and cover them.
As soon as they find a job, let them pay for their own private sector insurance.
We should move away from the employer based program and encourage people to buy their own plans.
Why? Because individual health insurance policies won't be impacted if you lose or change your job.
Yes, the system needs a few reforms.
Is BO-Care the answer? No. The answer is for every family to prioritize their budget and get an insurance policy!
How many unsustainable entitlements can we afford? We have Social Security and Medicare about to go broke! Where are we going to find trillions of dollars to pay for a fantasy called universal health care?
Let me keep my private health insurance! Let's encourage others to be responsible and buy their own private policies! Again, we should encourage personal responsibility rather than dependency on Democrats!
This is from Contentions:
George Will on This Week on the president’s obsession with Fox News:
“Well, it’s the discordant note in an otherwise harmonious chorus, I suppose that’s why.
But three great love affairs in world history are Abelard and Heloise, Romeo and Juliet, and the American media and this president at the moment.
But this doesn’t matter over time. Reality will impinge.
If his programs work, he’s fine.
If it doesn’t work, all the adulation of journalists in the world won’t help.”
We can always count on George Will for a good explanation!
Iran is the latest chapter in Pres BO's massive introduction to the real world.
What happens to presidents?
Events don't go as planned.
In the real world, "stuff happens".
And lots of stuff is happening to BO:
During the campaign, candidate BO, and the band of enthusiastic "yes we can" screamers committed to change the world, projected a post-Bush world.
Here was the plan:
We will talk. We will sit down and listen to our enemies' grievances. We will let BO's personality turn the world around.
Last, but not least, we won't have Bush & Cheney around to blow up things anymore.
Strike one: They foolishly tried to close GITMO.
Strike two: Iran turned brutal on its own people.
Strike three: North Korea got crazy with missiles.
All of sudden talking to Iran is out of the question. In fact, Pres BO's anticipated "face to face" encounter with Iran is highly unlikely.
Pres BO won't get to do an "Oprah" and sit down with our enemies on live world TV.
You can throw that ticket away. And don't expect a rain check either!
Reality 1, "yes we can screamers" 0!
P.S. Let's hope that they discuss today's WSJ editorial at The White House morning meeting. It is very instructive:
"President Obama took office loudly promising to be the anti-George W. Bush of foreign policy, vowing to "extend a hand" to adversaries "willing to unclench" their fists.
What he has received instead is an education in the reality of global rogues, and how he responds has become a major test of his Presidency." (Obama and the Rogues: North Korea and Iran intrude on his diplomatic hopes)
LISTEN TO OUR RECENT SHOWS
Check Out Politics Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Silvio Canto Jr on BlogTalkRadio