Bloodthirsty Liberal

Some call it terrorism, but that is so darn harsh

Investigators probing the derailment of an express train in Russia have found “elements of an explosive device” at the site and believe an act of terror caused the deadly incident.

The derailment killed at least 26 people and injured about 100, but there was no immediate word on who or what group might have been behind the action.

“One can say with certainty that that was indeed an act of terror,” Vladimir Markin, spokesman for the investigative committee of the Russian prosecutor’s office, told CNN.

He would not elaborate on exactly what kind of “elements of an explosive device” the investigators discovered earlier, but said the crater found beneath the railroad bed was “1.5 meter by 1 meter in size.”

He said investigators are “studying the site of the accident, questioning the witnesses and conducting all kinds of forensic and technical examinations.”

Maybe it was self-defense?

- Aggie

American gay people who are disappointed that President Obama has words, just words, on their behalf can take solace that words, just words, are all his administration has for gays around the world:

Russia’s leading gay activist said yesterday that he was disappointed that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met with an outspoken foe of gay rights during her two-day visit and did not decry homophobia.

Clinton attended a statue unveiling of Walt Whitman at Moscow State University with Mayor Yuri Luzhkov. Luzhkov has blocked all attempts to hold gay pride marches in Moscow, once saying they “can be described in no other way than as satanic.’’

Clinton did not mention of the issue during the ceremony. Some biographers have described Whitman as homosexual and US gay activists have claimed him as a symbol of their movement.

…

Gay activist Nikolai Alexeyev said yesterday that he was disappointed Clinton did not discuss discrimination against gays.

“Russia is supposed to be a democracy and she said nothing,’’ he said.

Alexeyev had called on Clinton to denounce what he called entrenched and degrading homophobic attitudes in Russia.

I’m sure she’ll get right on that.

America is supposed to be a democracy, too, Nikolai, and how’s that working out for us?

Another in a series of check-ups on the status of Smart Power (ower-ower-ower), the amazing ability to turn foe into friend, enemy into amigo, by saying pretty please and thanks ever so much.

It may be true that you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar—but you can catch most of all with s**t:

Russia pushed back Tuesday at U.S. efforts to threaten tough new sanctions if Iran fails to prove its nuclear program is peaceful, a setback to the Obama administration’s desire to present a united front with Moscow.

After meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Moscow believed that such threats would not persuade Iran to comply and that negotiations should continue to be pursued.

“At the current stage, all forces should be thrown at supporting the negotiating process,” he told reporters at a joint news conference with Clinton. “Threats, sanctions and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are convinced, would be counterproductive.”

Clinton, on her first visit to Moscow as secretary of state, had been looking to gauge Russia’s willingness to join the United States in applying additional pressure on Iran to come clean about its nuclear intentions.

Back in the day, we killed commies on sight. Now we just give looks that could kill.

Hardly the same thing.

So not only has Iran spat at Obama’s extended hand of friendship—and in the face of the international community—but Russia won’t even offer us their handkerchief to wipe away the spittle.

This is how Secretary Clinton defined Smart Power in her confirmation hearings (and we won’t let her forget it):

We must use what has been called “smart power”: the full range of tools at our disposal — diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural — picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation.

With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy. This is not a radical idea. The ancient Roman poet Terence, who was born a slave and rose to become one of the great voices of his time, declared that “in every endeavor, the seemly course for wise men is to try persuasion first.” The same truth binds wise women as well.

Oh, please. Yes, you are very wise Madame Secretary, very wise indeed.

But a wise guy (in the organized crime sense of the word) would recognize that the tool called for in this instance is a tire iron or a crow bar. The feather duster you brought isn’t up to the job.

We’ve been hard on the UK (well, Aggie has), and with good reason.

However.

For he himself has said it,
And it’s greatly to his credit,
That he is an Englishman!

Barack Obama: President Pantywaist

Barack Obama’s chances of re-election in three and a half years’ time may be evaporating at unprecedented speed, but his presidential ambitions could still be realised in another direction. He would be a shoo-in to win the next Russian presidential election, so high is his popularity now running in the land of the bear and the knout. Obama has done more to restore Russia’s hegemonial potential in Eastern and Central Europe than even Vladimir Putin.

…

If the word is out that America is in retreat, it will soon find it has no friends. The satellites will pragmatically accept their restored subordination, without openly acknowledging it, and co-operate with their dangerous neighbour, ushering in a new generation of Finlandisation.

…

Barack Obama is selling out America and, by extension, the entire West. This is a catastrophe for America and the wider world.

Just when the world needs America to push back the advance of evil from Islamic fundamentalists, to stand up to the tinpot tyrants and duplicitous dictators that proliferate like mushrooms after a spring rain, to lead honestly and rationally on any number of transnational issues, President Pantywaist has opted to neuter himself (easy)—and us (out of my cold dead hand).

And speaking of eunuchs, where has Mr. Too-Busy-To-Bother-About-ACORN been spending his precious time?

U.S. President Barack Obama listens to the Libyan representative deliver his remarks in the United Nations Security Council, Thursday, Sept. 24, 2009.

He sits down with mass murderers.

I prefer those who stand opposed.

A syllogisms is (and I quote): “an instance of a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn (whether validly or not) from two given or assumed propositions (premises), each of which shares a term with the conclusion, and shares a common or middle term not present in the conclusion”.

You know, like: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (Or, as Woody Allen concluded: All men are Socrates.)

That lesson concluded, maybe someone out there can explain this bit of illogic to me.

The UN’s mangy, toothless, rabid little Shih Tzu of a nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, has rolled over and played dead to Iran’s pit bull:

Experts at the IAEA are in agreement that Teheran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report seen by The Associated Press on Thursday.

The document drafted by senior officials at the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency is the clearest indication yet that the agency’s leaders share Washington’s views on Iran’s weapon-making capabilities. It appears to be the so-called “secret annex” on Teheran’s nuclear program that Washington says is being withheld by the IAEA’s chief.

According to the document, the Islamic republic has “sufficient information” to build a bomb. Iran is likely to “overcome problems” on developing a delivery system, according to the report.

If that be the case, can somebody tell me how this makes any sense?

As I said during the campaign, President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat. And that’s why I’m committed to deploying strong missile defense systems which are adaptable to the threats of the 21st century.

The best way to responsibly advance our security and the security of our allies is to deploy a missile defense system that best responds to the threats that we face and that utilizes technology that is both proven and cost-effective.

Excuse me?

Our president is buying our national security at Cosco? Where do they keep the Cruise missiles, next to the paper towels in case of a leak?

I’m okay with the switch if it’s a better idea.

But I listened to Col. Jack Jacobs on a local radio show, and he said “You lie!”, or words to that effect.

Jacobs’ point was that the easiest way to take out a missile is is to bomb it before it is fired. Second easiest is to shoot it down shortly after it’s been fired. It gets progressively more difficult as the missile nears its target.

And the president is telling us that the switch from long range missiles to short range missiles is an improvement?

You’ll pardon me, I’m pray, if I believe the medal of honor winner over the community organizer.

Russia is tickled pink (get it?), but our European allies take a dimmer view:

“This is not good news for the Czech state, for Czech freedom and independence,” said Mirek Topolanek, the former Czech Prime Minister. “It puts us in a position where we are not firmly anchored in terms of partnership, security and alliance, and that’s a certain threat.”

…

“The decision announced today by the Administration is dangerous and short-sighted,” the No 2 Republican in the Senate, Jon Kyl, said in a statement.

Mr Kyl said that the shift would leave the United States “vulnerable to the growing Iranian long-range missile threat” and would send a chilling message to former Soviet satellites who had braved Moscow’s anger to support the system.

“This will be a bitter disappointment, indeed, even a warning to the people of Eastern Europe,” said Mr Kyl, who pointed out that both Poland and the Czech Republic had sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. “Today the Administration has turned its back on these allies.”

Senator John McCain, Mr Obama’s defeated Republican White House rival in 2008, said he was “disappointed” with the decision and warned it could undermine US standing in Eastern Europe amid worries there of a resurgent Russia.

“Given the serious and growing threats posed by Iran’s missile and nuclear programmes, now is the time when we should look to strengthen our defences, and those of our allies,” he said in a statement.

“Missile defence in Europe has been a key component of this approach. I believe the decision to abandon it unilaterally is seriously misguided.

But the real beneficiary is Iran, which couldn’t be happier if the 12th Imam returned to earth—and brought KFC and Dos Equis with him:

Iran security forces clashed with supporters of opposition leader Mirhossein Mousavi and arrested at least 10 of them during annual anti-Israel rallies in central Tehran on Friday, a witness said.

“Security forces just arrested over 10 people,” the witness said. “They are pushing protesters and beating them.”

…

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a speech at Tehran University, hinting once again that the Holocaust never took place.

According to him, “If the Holocaust was planned by the West, why won’t you allow any research on the Holocaust? The Holocaust has turned into a black box and they won’t let anyone open it and examine it… If this is such an important event, why won’t you let us reveal the reality to the entire world?”

Ahmadinejad reiterated his past “proposal”, to have the Jews immigrate to other country. “Why don’t they immigrate to Canada or the United States? They can go live in other countries. The Palestinian people don’t have to pay for your crime. What is the Palestinians’ sin? [Don’t get me started.

“The Zionists are the greatest criminals in history. Resisting the Zionists is a national duty and a religious commandment and a human duty. The Zionist regime is a tree with rotten roots,” Ahmadinejad said.

He added, “It’s clear that this fake regime was established for colonialist goals, and there is no logic behind its establishment.” The crowd responded by chanting, “Death to Israel.”

President Obama is not the political reincarnation of Jimmy Carter (not just); he is the physical reincarnation of Neville Chamberlain. And we know how that turned out.

[T]he settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you. We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement, as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.”

…

My good friends, this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. And now I recommend you to go home and sleep quietly in your beds.”

With this bastard in charge, I just wonder how many of us will wake up in the morning.

I’ve heard references to this disgraceful, treasonous affair in Ted Kennedy’s senatorial past, but it’s time to air it completely.

We used to shoot people for such offenses in the past, but it’s understandable why many might not have wanted to pull the trigger in this case.

The issue is a remarkable 1983 KGB document on Kennedy, which I published in my 2006 book, The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism (HarperCollins). The document is a May 14, 1983 memo from KGB head Victor Chebrikov to his boss, the odious Soviet General Secretary Yuri Andropov, designated with the highest classification. It concerns a confidential offer to the Soviet leadership by Senator Kennedy. The target: President Ronald Reagan.

…

According to the memo, Senator Kennedy was “very troubled” by U.S.-Soviet relations, which Kennedy attributed not to the murderous tyrant running the USSR but to President Reagan. The problem was Reagan’s “belligerence.”

This was allegedly made worse by Reagan’s stubbornness. “According to Kennedy,” reported Chebrikov, “the current threat is due to the President’s refusal to engage any modification to his politics.” That refusal, said the memo, was exacerbated by Reagan’s political success, which made the president surer of his course, and more obstinate — and, worst of all, re-electable.

On that, the fourth and fifth paragraphs of Chebrikov’s memo got to the thrust of Kennedy’s offer: The senator was apparently clinging to hope that President Reagan’s 1984 reelection bid could be thwarted. Of course, this seemed unlikely, given Reagan’s undeniable popularity. So, where was the president vulnerable?

Alas, Kennedy had an answer, and suggestion, for his Soviet friends: In Chebrikov’s words, “The only real threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations. These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Therein, Chebrikov got to the heart of the U.S. senator’s offer to the USSR’s general secretary: “Kennedy believes that, given the state of current affairs, and in the interest of peace, it would be prudent and timely to undertake the following steps to counter the militaristic politics of Reagan.”

Let us give the late Senator the benefit of the doubt (which the record does not seem to support) and allow that he offered to betray the elected President of the United States to a foreign power not merely for electoral benefit (for Walter-[bleeping]-Mondale, as it turned out), but for some deeply held personal motivation.

I know, I know. But that’s just the kind of guy I am.

But trust me, sincerity does him no favors. I’m not sure when he first joined the Senate Armed Services Committee, but someone who served in the Senate as long as he did (in an era of Soviet expansionism), whose own brother stared down the same Soviet monsters over missiles in Cuba and who sought to counter their moves in Southeast Asia—I think it’s fair to say that Ted Kennedy knew full well with whom he was double-dealing.

Orrin Hatch loved him, thousands of constituents had him to thank for favors and personal notes of kindness.

But to the extent this story is true, he has forfeited any gratitude he may be owed from the nation. Burial in Arlington seems obscene in this context.

As Henry Louis Gates might say, “This is what happens to a black man in Russia.”

Nearly 60% of black and African people living in Russia’s capital Moscow have been physically assaulted in racially motivated attacks, says a new study.

Africans working or studying in the city live in constant fear of attack, according to the report by the Moscow Protestant Chaplaincy.

A quarter of 200 people surveyed said they had been assaulted more than once.

Some 80% had been verbally abused.

But the number of assaults was down from the MPC’s last survey in 2002.

The report’s clear conclusion was that Africans living in Russia exist in a state of virtual siege….

But it’s getting better! At this rate, they’ll be welcome at borscht counters everywhere in about 2057.

Excuse my language, but what else can one say to this?

Authorities in China have highlighted inadequate knowledge of contraception and poor sex education as major factors in the high number of abortions there.

There are 13 million abortions each year, compared to 20 million births, according to newly published research.

Researchers believe the real figure could be even higher because there are many abortions at unregistered clinics.

…

Although the number is high, China’s abortion rate of 24 per 1,000 woman of childbearing age, as the rate is usually calculated, is far from the top of the international list.

According to UN figures, Russia is highest with more than 50. The US has 15 and Spain just under 12.

China began restricting the number of children each couple can have in 1978. Officials say this has prevented 400 million extra births.

The article says that in some years Russia has more abortions than live births.

Holy [bleep]!

I’m sure Mark Steyn must have mentioned this before, but I’m stunned. It’s like something out of a bad Hollywood movie, filmed monochromatically, with dreary overcast skies and the threat of rain.

Sometimes, I feel like all America has to do to win its wars of attrition against communism and radical Islam is just tread water and wait for the nasty bits to get flushed away. Joe Biden was right about Russia; he was just an idiot to say it.

We told you he was a dolt. Not exactly a news flash, I suppose, but when Biden’s remarks about the Russian nation he had just visited were published, we knew he had put his foot in his mouth… again:

Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, yesterday sought to head off a spat with Russia after it was angered by comments by Joe Biden, US vice president.

The Kremlin had demanded clarification of remarks in which Mr Biden suggested Russia would be forced to improve relations with the US because its economy was “withering”.

Barack Obama’s administration has made improved relations with Russia a centrepiece of its foreign policy. But in an interview with the Wall Street Journal Mr Biden, who has a reputation for frank speaking, suggested that Russian agreement to strategic arms cuts was dictated by a weakening economy.

“We view Russia as a great power,” Mrs Clinton told NBC’s Meet the Press on being asked about the vice-president’s remarks. “Now every country faces challenges . . . The Russians know we have continuing questions about some of their policies and they have continuing questions about some of ours.”

…

Moscow had said that Mr Biden’s “perplexing” comments raised questions about who was in charge of US foreign policy just weeks after a showpiece summit between Mr Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, Russian president.

“The question is: who is shaping the US foreign policy, the president or the respectable members of his team?” said Sergei Prikhodko, the Kremlin’s chief foreign policy adviser, who added that this month’s summit in Moscow had created a “good atmosphere”.

“If some members of Obama’s team and government do not like this atmosphere, why don’t they say so? If they disagree with the course of their president, we just need to know this.”

How many more? How many more gaffes, misstatements, hyperbole, and revelations of unacknowledged truths before this guy is reassigned to dog catcher?

I repeat myself, but if the best way to judge a presidential candidate is by his selection of a running mate, Barack Obama would still be a first-term hack senator making shady deals with Rod Blagojevich. That’s commensurate with his skills and experience.

PS: If Vice President looks like a dolt trying to defend the stimulus, he is hardly the one to blame. It’s probably punishment for all his past goofs. Stick him out there—nobody messes with, or listens to, or believes in, Joe.

What a coincidence! Today’s Wall Street Journal has an excellent op-ed by none other than Liz Cheney

She’s a mother of five, conservative, well-educated, had a high level job in the State Department under Bush, has a sister who is in a committed lesbian relationship (the couple has a young child)… what’s not to like? They will tear into her, I’m sure, but it won’t be nearly as easy as it was with Sarah Palin. They will be going after the gay rights crowd and Liz Cheney speaks the same language as any eastern liberal. She doesn’t drop the “g” in words ending in “ing” for example. Therefore, eastern liberal snobs will thinks she’s intelligent.

She rips our idiot President to shreds:

Obama Rewrites the Cold War
The President has a duty to stand up to the lies of our enemies.

By LIZ CHENEY

There are two different versions of the story of the end of the Cold War: the Russian version, and the truth. President Barack Obama endorsed the Russian version in Moscow last week.

Speaking to a group of students, our president explained it this way: “The American and Soviet armies were still massed in Europe, trained and ready to fight. The ideological trenches of the last century were roughly in place. Competition in everything from astrophysics to athletics was treated as a zero-sum game. If one person won, then the other person had to lose. And then within a few short years, the world as it was ceased to be. Make no mistake: This change did not come from any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be peaceful.”

The truth, of course, is that the Soviets ran a brutal, authoritarian regime. The KGB killed their opponents or dragged them off to the Gulag. There was no free press, no freedom of speech, no freedom of worship, no freedom of any kind. The basis of the Cold War was not “competition in astrophysics and athletics.” It was a global battle between tyranny and freedom. The Soviet “sphere of influence” was delineated by walls and barbed wire and tanks and secret police to prevent people from escaping. America was an unmatched force for good in the world during the Cold War. The Soviets were not. The Cold War ended not because the Soviets decided it should but because they were no match for the forces of freedom and the commitment of free nations to defend liberty and defeat Communism.

It is irresponsible for an American president to go to Moscow and tell a room full of young Russians less than the truth about how the Cold War ended. One wonders whether this was just an attempt to push “reset” — or maybe to curry favor. Perhaps, most concerning of all, Mr. Obama believes what he said.

Mr. Obama’s method for pushing reset around the world is becoming clearer with each foreign trip. He proclaims moral equivalence between the U.S. and our adversaries, he readily accepts a false historical narrative, and he refuses to stand up against anti-American lies.

The approach was evident in his speech in Moscow and in his speech in Cairo last month. In Cairo, he asserted there was some sort of equivalence between American support for the 1953 coup in Iran and the evil that the Iranian mullahs have done in the world since 1979. On an earlier trip to Mexico City, the president listened to an extended anti-American screed by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and then let the lies stand by responding only with, “I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for the things that occurred when I was 3 months old.”

Asked at a NATO meeting in France in April whether he believed in American exceptionalism, the president said, “I believe in American Exceptionalism just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” In other words, not so much.

The Obama administration does seem to believe in another kind of exceptionalism — Obama exceptionalism. “We have the best brand on Earth: the Obama brand,” one Obama handler has said. What they don’t seem to realize is that once you’re president, your brand is America, and the American people expect you to defend us against lies, not embrace or ignore them. We also expect you to know your history.

Mr. Obama has become fond of saying, as he did in Russia again last week, that American nuclear disarmament will encourage the North Koreans and the Iranians to give up their nuclear ambitions. Does he really believe that the North Koreans and the Iranians are simply waiting for America to cut funds for missile defense and reduce our strategic nuclear stockpile before they halt their weapons programs?

The White House ought to take a lesson from President Harry Truman. In April, 1950, Truman signed National Security Council report 68 (NSC-68). One of the foundational documents of America’s Cold War strategy, NSC-68 explains the danger of disarming America in the hope of appeasing our enemies. “No people in history,” it reads, “have preserved their freedom who thought that by not being strong enough to protect themselves they might prove inoffensive to their enemies.”

Perhaps Mr. Obama thinks he is making America inoffensive to our enemies. In reality, he is emboldening them and weakening us. America can be disarmed literally — by cutting our weapons systems and our defensive capabilities — as Mr. Obama has agreed to do. We can also be disarmed morally by a president who spreads false narratives about our history or who accepts, even if by his silence, our enemies’ lies about us.

Ms. Cheney served as deputy assistant secretary of state and principal deputy assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs from 2002-2004 and 2005-2006.

I printed it all so that you could get a feel for the quality of her mind and of her politics. I certainly hope that she becomes politically active.

Run, Liz, run!

- Aggie