Insecure Obama, Insecure World

The United States has had good presidents and bad, but it has never had a leader who came to a debate on national security with so much insecurity. It was a small petty man who sat on the other side of the screen, alternately smirking and scowling, grinding his teeth and launching attack after attack instead of finally taking the opportunity to set the record straight with the American people.

Barack Obama came to the debate with a roster of prepared speeches, few of them about foreign affairs and most of them about the economy. Even while his Secretary of Defense has given an unprecedented order to top military officials to stonewall the congressional investigation into Benghazigate, even as it has become known that his administration watched four Americans be murdered in real time and did not lift a finger to save their lives, talking points prepared by highly paid speechwriters fell out of his mouth assuring the American people that everything was going well. There was nothing wrong except for a few non-optimal bumps in the road made up of dead Americans.

Anyone listening to Obama would have to conclude, like Voltaire’s Pangloss, that we truly live in the best of all possible worlds. During the Bush administration, liberal pols like Obama liked to claim that they were part of the reality-based community. But as Calvin of “Calvin and Hobbes” said, “I’m not in denial. I’m just very selective about the reality I accept.” Obama would appear to have joined Calvin’s selective reality community.

Instead of discussing foreign affairs and national security, the Contender-in-Chief did his best to divert the debate with a talking point that he called “Nation Building at Home.” “Nation Building” is usually a term reserved for the reconstruction of backward or broken nations. That Obama insisted on applying it to the United States was telling, but even more telling was that his big idea for the debate was not only a distraction but a call to repeat the same disastrous stimulus and shovel-ready project boondoggles that had dug the country 16 trillion dollars into debt.

Obama’s idea of a foreign policy agenda is to borrow trillions of dollars from China to invest in green energy and teachers unions while calling it nation building. Left unasked was the question of what nation would we be building—America or China?

In a truly bizarre moment, he insisted that the Navy no longer needed battleships because they had become as outdated as horses. The aircraft carrier and the submarine, according to Obama, had made the Navy destroyer as outdated as the bayonet and the warhorse.

While many Navy veterans might have punched a wall after listening to that idiocy, they can count themselves fortunate that Obama is in charge of America in 2012 and not in 1942 during the Battle of Midway. But no doubt Obama has a plan for lifting an Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and continuing his program of countering China in the Pacific at the same time… without relying on anything but aircraft carriers and submarines.

And what of the 20,000 Marines that Obama is firing after promising to keep faith with our troops? Perhaps they too are only horses and bayonets to be replaced by more advanced technology, like killer robots.

Obama claimed to have cut unemployment for veterans even while he plans to fire 50,000 soldiers, 10,000 airmen and 20,000 Marines. And then cut their Tricare health care benefits so that those men and women, who bore the brunt of Obama’s bungled Afghanistan surge, laying down 1,500 lives and 15,000 wounded, will now have to pay more for their health care while waiting on the unemployment line.

As he does in every speech and at every campaign event, Obama patted himself on the back for ending the Iraq War on Bush’s timetable, without conceding that it was Bush’s timetable, while accusing Romney of wanting to keep troops in Iraq. In reality, Obama’s own Vice President and Secretary of Defense had tried to negotiate an agreement to keep troops in Iraq. Obama lied about it then and has continued the proud tradition of lying about it now.

Once again Obama repeated his claim that the move to Afghanistan was an attempt to refocus the fight against Al Qaeda. But Al Qaeda continues to carry out far more terrorist attacks in Iraq, than in Afghanistan.

This week Al Qaeda bombmakers in Iraq supplied the explosives for a plot that would have killed thousands in neighboring Jordan, targeting shopping malls and the US embassy, demonstrating that Al Qaeda in Iraq remains a far more dangerous and destabilizing presence than in Afghanistan.

Obama showed his cluelessness again by boasting of having wrecked Iran’s economy while assuring the audience that this would make the Islamic Republic give up its nuclear program. North Korea’s economy is even more wrecked than Iran and its nuclear program remains on track. Given a choice between guns and butter, fanatical dictatorships will choose guns. Or as Nazi leader Hermann Goring said, “Guns will make us powerful; butter will only make us fat.”

“One thing Americans should be proud of,” Obama said, chin held high, “when Tunisians began to protest, this nation, I, stood on the side of the protesters.” And as a result of Obama’s stand, Tunisia, a formerly free nation has been taken over by genocidal Islamists, Sufis are being persecuted, tourists assaulted and rape victims put on trial. Perhaps that is something that Obama could be proud of, but few Americans would be.

“In Egypt, we stood on the side of democracy,” Obama continued, and that is true. The outcome of that stand on the side of democracy has been another genocidal Islamist takeover, an attack on the US Embassy in Cairo, the end of the Camp David Accords, the ethnic cleansing of Egyptian Christians and an Islamist president from a movement inspired by Nazi Germany chanting amen to a call to kill the Jews.

“The Libyans stand with us,” Obama assured Americans. And there can be no clearer sign of that than the refusal of the Libyan government to allow the US to fly armed drones or even properly investigate the attack. Obama mentioned the populist mob that attacked the Islamist militias in Benghazi. What he left out is that the mob only acted because the Libyan government insisted on shielding and protecting the militias.

From Iraq to Libya, from Afghanistan to Egypt, and back home where the nation building program never stops and the beneficiaries are his own bundlers and donors, Obama could not point to a single success. Even in Obama’s state of selective reality, there was nothing there. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are all violently unstable danger zones and will remain so for the foreseeable future. And the homefront is divided between those who are looking for work, those who have given up looking for work and those who expect to have to begin looking for work at any time.

As the evening wore on, Obama talked, he jabbed, he pointed, sneered and recited prepared speeches. What the world saw and what we saw was an insecure man once again trading the security of his country for another few minutes in the spotlight.

When he began the Libyan War, Obama stuck it out in Rio. When the Benghazi consulate was attacked, he chose Vegas over national security. Now given one last chance to tell the American people the truth, he took yet another vacation in the state of his own insecurity, over doing what is best for this country.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Fanlad

    Well said, this is why the undecided voter when he or she steps into the voting booth will not be able to, with good conscience, cast the vote for Obama/Biden. Romney/Ryan with the good conscience of the American voter, becomes our next President and Vice President. However, the big question becomes, is the American voter awake or aware of what you state and we know? Has the false narrative been maintained by this administration and the main stream news media. The Truth will allow Romney/Ryan to be elected.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Has the false narrative been maintained by this administration and the main stream news media."

      It doesn't crumble all at once in the eyes of most. It's more like opacity becoming transparent or fabric losing threads to reveal what's underneath. It's a process, and let's hope it happens in sufficient numbers and time to get rid of this loser-of-losers phony leader.

  • jacob


    • mlcblog

      Hear hear!!

  • pennylane

    With a murder rate tenfold that of civilised nations, the biggest security risk for the US population is walking the streets of their nation. The US would do well to civilise themselves before trying to civilise others.

    • tagalog

      Got any suggestions as to civilising (sic) the U.S. population? Where ya from? Britain? Canada? Australia? New Zealand? India?

    • guest

      It would help if other nation's corrupt leaders did not send their criminals into our open society to feed off our unique civil rights like parasites.

    • George_Babbitt

      The highest murder rate over the last 100 years in the U.S. was experienced in the 1950's,followed by the 1980's, according to FBI records, thank you very much.

    • Kufar Dawg

      Why don't you try telling that statistic to:

      i. the Coptic Christians of Egypt?
      ii. Nigerian Christians living in Nigeria?
      iii. Syrian Christians?
      iv. Iraqi Christians?

  • Spinoneone

    Excellent post! You should try to place it as an op-ed in every newspaper in Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and New Hampshire.

  • WildJew

    I was not able to listen to the entire debate. The Hill reports: ‎"Romney praised Obama for joining an international coalition that routed Moammar Gadhafi last year…."

    Why would Romney praise Obama for helping the jihadists (al-Qaeda of North Africa and other killers) in Libya? Didn't John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio do enough damage to our cause?

    Daniel Pipes (NRO) wrote: "When asked about Egypt, Romney digressed and moved to discussing the U.S. economy. When asked about American’s role in the world, he touted the achievements of fourth-graders in Massachusetts during his governorship. Perhaps his recurring emphasis on the economy will win over the elusive undecideds, but it left this viewer frustrated.

    "The Libya topic was Romney’s great surprise and his missed opportunity. Asked a softball question about the mistakes made in the aftermath of the attack on Benghazi on September 11, he talked about better education, gender equality and other worthy humanitarian goals — but ignored the opportunity to establish that the Obama administration is not only inept but engaged in fabrications about the events. Most agonizingly, Romney congratulated Obama for taking out Osama bin Laden without noting that this accomplishment did limited good, for al-Qaeda still had the ability to attack and kill Americans in Benghazi…."

    This, in large measure, is the reason I voted for Gingrich in our primary. Gingrich would have fought Obama. He would not let Obama get away with these terrible lies. I am guessing after trouncing Obama in the first debate, Romney feels he can surge to victory. Maybe. Still it is disappointing when he does not expose Obama's lies.

    • mlcblog


      Still I'll take a God-believing (God as we individually understand it) business and family man over what we have now. I believe Romney to be a constructive force as opposed to the destruction we have been watching.

  • marios

    Yes, I was for Gingrich as well but… On the ballot will be Obama and Romney. Incomparably Romney is much, much better President. Obama is disaster but Romney will fix our economy and I hope foreign policy idiocy. Obama's ideology is socialism which is failed everywhere and that kind of regime is benefited only those who is in Power. Socialism is dictatorship. Romney is Capitalist and believe in American values. He survived Salt Lake Olympic, he fixed MA being governor, he survived many companies working in Bain Co, etc. If we want to survive we need Romney. And.. he is decent Man, not those non-stop layer. When I watch debate yesterday I feel that Obama was alien and talked about some unknown for us country. All what he said should be percept as opposite: when he said it is white we should understand that it is black in reality. We should bring at least 10 people to vote for Romney on Nov.6. The article is brilliant.

  • Schlomotion

    I gathered from last night's debate that Romney has the same foreign policy ideas as Obama and is having a hard time making them look more severe or different. Obama is content to lie and say that the US and Israel are getting along famously. Frankly, I think that is all that Israel deserves from the US right now, and it is shameful that so much time of the debate was spent on appeasing Israel. Obama blasted Romney pretty well when he called him out for going to Israel solely to beg for bribes. If Romney is elected then the foreign policy advisor will be that neocon loser Dov Zakhiem, and we will have more looting of the Pentagon. That would be bad for American interests. If Obama is elected it will be more of the same. We have a really lousy choice this year.

    • tagalog

      Obama was telling a half-truth when he remarked that Romney's foreign policy was Obama's policy, only "louder." The difference is that Romney intends to do foreign policy from a position of strength (both diplomatic and military), while Obama seems to think that if we just abase ourselves enough to the thugs of the world, they'll be nice to us. Obama carries a daffodil while Romney wishes to carry a big stick. That's the difference.

    • Advocatus

      Right on cue, Schlo materializes from the nether regions of imbecility to mouth off about them evil Joos as usual. So what's new?

      You've already recycled your opinion about Jews and Israel hundreds of times on this site. Why keep repeating it with the zeal of a constipated evangelist?

      Surely, there must be a cure for your monomania, no? You could start by finding a hobby.

    • Omar

      There is no appeasement of Israel. Where did you get that ridiculous idea? If anything, there is an appeasement of Iran. The Israelis are getting worried about that appeasement, which could lead to a dangerous and catastrophic war (which could end up leaving many people dead as well as the destruction of Israel). Get your facts straight.

      • Schlomotion

        Wrong again. Four minutes of last night's Presidential debate spent in West Palm Beach discussing how best to appease Israel as a litmus test for getting the Presidential vote. What an obscenity!

        • Omar

          How am I wrong? I'm telling you the truth about Israel, Iran and appeasement.There is no appeasement of Israel, bu there is appeasement of the Islamist theocracy in Iran. That's the reality.

          • Kufar Dawg

            For Schlo, the mere suggestion that Israel has a right to exist is an act of appeasement.

        • Drakken

          Israel is a western ally you effing moron, the muslims aren't. Your utter stupidity still amazes me.

        • Touchstone

          What's happening here is that whenever you hear a politician express solidarity with Israel, you reflexively mistake that solidarity for appeasement. This reflex of yours is the result of an irrational prejudice. You simply can't process a pro-Israel statement any other way. It MUST be a sign of corruption. It can NEVER be genuine.

          Reflexes aren't mediated by thoughts. They're instantaneous reactions. Your comments on Israel often seem like the product of thoughtless reflex action. A conditioned reflex, to be more precise. You've conditioned yourself to react this way. It's not respectable, but it's certainly predictable.

          In the post that started this thread, you amplified the importance of Israel in the debate. Was nothing else discussed? Did any other topics come up? You apparently didn't notice that the majority of the debate concerned other issues.

          A conditioned reflex. A monomaniacal obsession. One day you were stopped at a checkpoint, and a hatred was born.

          • Schlomotion

            No. That is a common move on your part, to try to broaden what I said. It's not "whenever." It's at certain egregious times like when the Presidential debate is held in a hotbed of Zionist corruption like Boca Raton, and each candidate bends over backwards to slurp the foreign nationalist popsicle as a prerequisite to getting votes. If they had gone to Miami and promised a cornucopia to Cuban gusanos, I would have said the same thing. If they went to Southern California and pandered to illegal aliens, I would have said the same thing. Our leaders should not have to stroke the IRA, the Zetas, MS-13, Likud, Accion Cubana, Keystone, or any other backstabbing enclave as a litmus test to being democratically elected in the United States.

          • Touchstone

            So it's Boca Raton that bugs you? You've got to be kidding me!

            60 million people watched the debate on TV. The candidates were speaking to millions upon millions of voters out there, not just the few hundred people sitting in the audience!

            Do you honestly think the candidates cared more about pandering to a few locals — who were instructed not to boo or applaud, I might add — than persuading tens of millions of people at home to vote for them? Are you out of your mind?

            The candidates haven't spent fortunes of time, effort and money to change their message for one single night to make it suit one single group of spectators in one single town. They would have said what they said had the debate been conducted anywhere else, for the simple and supremely obvious reason that it's the multitudes of voters at home who really matter to them.

            The debate location is incidental, but in your unhinged mind it's of all-consuming importance. Good grief.

          • Schlomotion

            Yes. After the Bernie Madoff scandal and after investing in businesses recommended highly by Bill Zanker of The Learning Annex that turned out to be nothing but boiler room operations and tax havens funneling money to IAI and Yeshiva University, I am bugged by Boca Raton. That Mitt Romney went there to promise half of his own buttocks to Israel and defamed 47% of Americans as lazy tax evaders is another reason to be bugged by the place. That when you type in "Boca Raton" and "fraud" you get "Bernie Madoff," "Mitchell Jay Stein" as well as "mail, stock, mortgage, wire, securities, insurance" you can easily see that it's a Jewish and Italian community noted for an amazing smorgasbord of nearly every type of long distance fraud you can imagine. Sure I am bugged that the Presidential debate was held there and they kissed Israel's butt for four minutes of an hour long debate.

            Basically, "settlement" means two things there. It's what real estate magnates build in Sderot and what fraudsters do as a result of class action lawsuits.

            Boca Raton is the home of Joseph Merlino, mobster.
            Boca Raton is the home of Alvin Malnik, mobster.
            Boca Raton is the home of Frank Rosenthal, mobster.
            Boca Raton is the home of Lewis Kasman, mobster.
            Boca Raton was the home of Gus Boulis, mobster.
            Boca Raton is the location of properties owned by Daniel Leo, mobster.

            That's all easy public information just drawn from Boca Raton newspapers. That the Presidential debate was held there smacks of the highest corruption. It's literally a slime pit of corruption.

          • Touchstone

            I suggest you make a list of all the residents of Boca Raton that AREN'T mobsters.

            Then compare it to your list of Boca Raton residents that ARE mobsters.

            Then see which list is longer.

            Much, much longer.

            Then you'll understand why I said you're unhinged, a verdict by which I stand more strongly now than before.

            Seriously, you've got problems, and they don't concern Boca Raton, home to a great many perfectly nice people, like all those non-mobster Jewish grandparents in condos. (It's also home to the Cartoon Museum, a cool place not known for its slime and corruption.)

            "That the Presidential debate was held there smacks of the highest corruption."

            No, but your comment smacks of paranoid conspiracy theorizing, given that you never accused the other debate locations of being hives of scum and villainy as well, to quote an old Jedi master.

          • Schlomotion

            Thank you. Thank you for refuting Daniel Greenfield's scurrilous attack on Detroit.

          • Touchstone

            What you've just declared is surrender. You didn't change the subject and win a point against Greenfield; in your typically circuitous way, you admitted how wrong you are and how right I am. If you think my last post successfully refutes Greenfield, that means you also think my last post successfully refutes your own baloney about Boca Raton. That's what you're saying.

            So the question now becomes: will you admit it openly? Will you concede the point in a straightforward way, or will you employ yet another kind of weasel tactic and scurry away? Are you a man or a frightened rodent?

            Has this humiliating defeat taught you anything about how paranoid and irrational your thoughts are? Will you now seek a doctor's care, or will you continue to post unmedicated?

          • Schlomotion

            You can be right if you want to. I don't want to hog it. Nobody wants to be friends with somebody who is right all the time. Touchstone, you are right. I am saying that as fun as it would be to say that Boca Raton is the "mouth of the rat" and nothing but rats dwell there, the simple fact is that there are bocas all over the Florida coast, and the boca de ratones simply means that there were a lot of boat-scraping rocks in that particular inlet. Rhetoric takes a backseat to facts. Also, the Cartoon Museum is a wonderful point of interest.

            You mistake why I am talking to you. I don't need to win. Ha. My sons race up the stairs to see who gets to the door first, which one will win. But they are brothers, and Dad holds the keys. If no one bothers the neighbors, everyone wins. Of course there are wonderful grandmothers and grandfathers in Boca Raton, and, one hopes, good people outweigh bad people in not only number but in deed.

            Will I admit that sometimes I lie on here? Yes. Sometimes I lie on here. It is a lie every time we write something and we know it is not the whole truth, that the truth is much more complicated, but we are merely abbreviating. Yes indeed. I was disingenuous about Boca Raton, using facts and tying them into exaggerations, matching what I read here at Frontpage. This is a crooked game, and I play it crookedly to achieve straightness across many levels. We should all get along with one another. Those who do not are evil.

            Am I humiliated? No. How can you humiliate someone with a Tantric mindset? Do people who plant or harvest gardens reel in horror each time their hands touch dirt? Reading many of these articles and responding to them is like touching dirt and turning over bugs and worms in search of one small potato of truth. Seldom. Seldom is there one. Even in Greenfield there is the small hope of a wild strawberry amidst all the dung, but you presume if you think I search for it out of a hungry desire to hoard and own, to win. I am always winning. I made coffee today. I won. I built a bicycle today. I won. I listened to Zeev Tene today. He won. I kept people safe today. What a win. In this discussion, things were said. Before that, things were not said. Victory.

            In the name of Lance Smart I declare… Serenders.

          • Touchstone

            Oh please. I'm not insisting I'm "right all the time", and I didn't realize all your provocations amounted to an exercise in friend-making. I'm just pressuring you to see and admit the error of your ways. You're unfailingly paranoid, so it's only logical you'd go wrong so often. This is just one instance. It's much less meaningful for me to confront the fact of not being omniscient than it is for you to admit your reasoning is deeply flawed. You're the one on a self-righteous crusade, not me. It follows that you're the one who should open his eyes as to how lacking in righteousness your attacks really are. (After depositing thousands of slanders and provocations here, how can you even begin to lecture anyone on how to make friends?!)

            It's easier to expand the context to a point of absurdity than it is to face down your own baloney. You do that by broadening the definition of "winning". This exchange was about winning or losing a specific point and the implications of that, not whether you "win" in other areas of your life. Apples and oranges.

            "This is a crooked game, and I play it crookedly to achieve straightness across many levels.

            You're always compelled to append a noble-sounding objective to what generally seem like gratuitous, spiteful attacks on your usual targets. It's easy enough to CLAIM you're trying to achieve "straightness", but I'm not so sure you're any different than the millions of other angry people out there who express their impotent rage online, venting and ranting with no higher purpose than to provoke their enemies and spread hatred and blame.

            I think you're much less compelled to achieve "straightness" or any other virtuous goal than you are to keep CLAIMING you're motivated by lofty aims. If you truly had high-minded goals, your tone would reflect that, and you'd probably spend a lot less energy on snide, defamatory remarks and much more on productive endeavors.

          • Schlomotion

            I agree. There is not one analysis there that I disagree with. All of the statements that you think are leveling statements, I agree with. Yes, my reasoning is deeply flawed. Wouldn't it be nice if reasoning were as unflawed as philosophers make it seem, from Cynics to Logical Positivists? But no. Everyone's reasoning is deeply flawed. Mine. Yours. Wiesel's. Unflawed reasoning is the stage makeup of celebrity performance ontologizing. Clear thinking is synthetic, truncated. The truncation is a lie. The possibility of pure analysis is a falsehood. You and I could have a double blind analysis of the facts, but we would have to put our own eyes out, pretend these facts are not punch cards riding on the backs of melting Ganeshes. Why do I argue these points. Because I am a Goy. I am a Jew. I am a Palestinian. An atheist. A believer.

            You had better believe I am unfailingly paranoid. If paranoia failed, then what a calamity would that hail? Reliable paranoia, one part of us feels it, the next part of us suppresses it. Analyzes it. It would be also as much a handicap to be failingly suppressive, failingly analytical, failingly critical as to be failingly paranoid. To fail is nothing. To get up repeatedly is the strength.

            I doubt my Zionism less than you. Even though it is a lie, I doubt it less than you, because your Zionism is a lie too. I doubt also my anti-Zionism. And this week, look at Gilad Atzmon in disagreement with Mondoweiss, throwing the word Anti-Zionist Zionist around. It's as meta-mathematical as music is. It is as amusing as a Shakespearean ending. There is no truth in any of it, or in Frontpage's rejection of Atzmon, or Mike Rivero's embrace of Atzmon and not Max Blumenthal, or Horowitz's embrace of Dershowitz, but not Beinart. I see through this whizzing cloud of befuddlement, the confusion of the angry Frontpage commentators, as to why I embrace people I disagree with or, chiasmically, why I disagree with people I embrace. It is a question for Athanasius Kircher.

          • Omar

            Schlomotion, you are so wrong. first of all, quit calling Cuban Americans "gusanos" (meaning worms). That is really racist. The Castro regime and its supporters are the real gusanos. Cuban Americans simply want to see Cuba become free and democratic (Cuba currently has the only dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere). Second, there is no Zionist "corruption" in this country. There is Islamist corruption, which is the Muslim Brotherhood's attempt to transform America into an Islamist country. You should also talk about the political corruption of left-wing groups in Puerto Rico. Those left-wing groups and radical unions are trying to destabilize the democratically-elected, pro-statehood New Progressive Party (NPP) government of Governor Luis Fortuno. The opposition, pro-territorial (Commonwealth) Popular Democratic Party (PDP) and the far-left secessionist Puerto Rico Independence Party (PIP) are in an alliance in trying to destroy conservatism and democracy in the U.S. territory. The PDP and the PIP are encouraging some student groups at the University of Puerto Rico (UPR) to riot and destroy property. The PDP has tried to rig past plebiscites on Puerto Rico's political status, while the PIP is openly funded and supported by the Castro regime in Cuba, the Chavez autocracy in Venezuela and their far-left political allies in the Hemisphere. It is important for conservatives in the U.S. mainland to support the NPP and statehood for Puerto Rico, as well as defend the island and its democracy from dangerous foreign influences (primarily from Cuba and Venezuela). I don't recall hearing about Israel openly trying to fund foreign opposition groups at all, yet you blame Israel for almost everything and never blame despotic regimes like the Castro regime and the Chavez autocracy in Venezuela. You have a huge double standard, Flipside.

          • Schlomotion

            Just because those other sources of corruption exist does not mean, as you say "there is no Zionist 'corruption' in this country, only the other kinds."

            "I don't recall hearing about Israel openly trying to fund foreign opposition groups at all"

            Of course they do. They run Mujahadin-e Khalq. They also facilitated the secession of South Sudan.

          • Omar

            Even if Israel supported South Sudan's independence, it was a good thing they did so. The Southern Sudanese were being oppressed by the racist, sexist, Islamist regime (which behaves worse than South Africa's former apartheid regime) in North Sudan. Remember Darfur? Also, the Islamist regime in North Sudan has funded and supported Islamist groups and other groups which refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist. Why don't you criticize Sudan for its horrible human rights network? Why don't you criticize Communist Cuba for being the only dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere? Bottom line: Israel supports democracy, freedom and peace, while its leftist and Islamist adversaries support totalitarianism and oppression.

          • Schlomotion

            See? Your claim was false.

          • Omar

            How is my claim false? I said "even". That doesn't mean that it is true. Still, South Sudan's independence was a good thing.

          • Schlomotion

            We'll see if it is. I hope it is. Salva Kiir Mayardit seems like an interesting guy. Hopefully Israel won't throw him under the bus.

          • Roger

            Schlo, you just cease to amaze me.

            Well, you can't actually cease to amaze me when you never amazed me.

            But you do continue to not amaze me.

    • Mo Schlotion

      Why didn't you run for President?

    • Ghostwriter

      Schlomotion,at least Israelis aren't screaming for American deaths like the Palestinians do every single day. Why don't you join the real world instead living in your creepy fantasy world?

      • mr. polly

        Palestinians will be calling for American deaths as long as America supports the Zionist crime gang.

        • Omar

          mr. polly, you are so ignorant. First of all, the so-called "Palestinians" are not an ethnicity. They are an invented people (Newt Gingrich is right). Palestine is a geographical region, not an ethnicity. Anyone who lives in the former Palestine Mandate (Israel, Gaza, the West Bank and Jordan) is a Palestinian, regardless of characteristics. The Israelis and Jordanians are Palestinians. Palestine is not even an Arabic name. Palestine is a Latin name meaning Philistines, who were Greek sailors who had red hair (the Philistines were not Arabs). The Romans conquered the Holy Land region (where Jews have lived continuously for over 3000 years) in 66 AD/CE, (almost 600 years before Islam was established and the Arabs started moving into the area) and renamed the area "Palestine". Second, what "Zionist crime gang"? Arabs living in Israel have more rights and liberties as Israeli citizens than people living in other countries in the Middle East. For over 60 years, Israel has had to defend itself from attacks by enemies who want to destroy the Jewish state. Israel had to build a fence (which was build in order to keep terrorists out, not civilians) in order to stop the terrorist attacks against the Jewish state. Hamas refuses to make peace with Israel (Hamas even refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist) mr. polly, what you really want is a world where women are treated like chattel, where homosexuals are lynched from cranes for being homosexuals, and where Jews and people of other beliefs and faiths (as well as non-religious people) are not allowed in. Also, quit blaming the United States for everything. The United States has stood for democracy and freedom for a long time. Why don't you blame Russia and China for supporting the Assad family dictatorship in Syria? Why don't you blame Russia and China (along with Iran) for openly funding and supporting Hamas, Hezbollah, the Islamist regime in Sudan or other Islamist organizations and countries in the Middle East. Yet, you don't hear Israelis, Syrian dissidents nor Southern Sudanese people scream "Death to Russia!" or "Death to China"! because the free world's(America, Britain and their allies) allies (Israel, South Sudan, and to a lesser extent, the Syrian dissidents) are much more civilized than the free world's enemies. Quit supporting leftist/Islamist propaganda.

      • Schlomotion

        Just because they do it at a Hasbara dinner party instead of in the street doesn't mean they don't do it.

        • Omar

          Schlomotion, when was the last time an Israeli screamed for the death of another people? When was the last time Israelis marched in the streets, screaming "Death to Iran!", "Death to Russia!" and "Death to China!"? Israelis have never done any of the above because they want peace with their neighbors and with the world. Israel has tried to make peace with its neighbors for a long time, yet its Islamist adversaries keep calling for the destruction of the Jewish state. Bottom line, Israel wants peace, democracy and freedom, while its Islamist enemies want totalitarianism and oppression. That's the reality. Stop supporting leftist/Islamist propaganda.

          • Schlomotion

            "Marching in the streets" is just a flourish. It adds festivity. Israelis don't march while they do it. They make funny cartoon drawings instead.

          • Roger

            Better than when they strap on suicide bombs or pack the car full of explosives like the muslim militants do.

          • Omar

            Flipside, what does this have to do with drawings? I'm simply pointing out the difference between Israel and its adversaries.

    • Pontotoc Bill

      Typical of SchloMo, Blame the Jews for everything.

  • Stanley Scott
  • Asher

    I have been saying, "So what are families supposed to live on broken promises, and empty rhetoric. Gov. Romney was right on so many issues, especially the debt, spending, national security, and creating jobs. The consdescening, arrogant remarks came from the President saying, " We have ships that planes can land on, (aircraft carriers), and ships that go under the water, (submarines) as if Romney didn't know this, and we do still use bayonettes. Romney is a balanced, even tempered, capable man, and he shows us this in all the debates. We need a President who isn't ready to attack those who disagree with him at the drop of a hat. Both Donald Trump and Romney realize the unfair trade that is going on with China…they own our debt, and they will also dictate to us as the UN is trying to do. Osama bin Laden said in December 2001, "If their economy is destroyed, they will be busy with their own affairs rather than enslaving the weak peoples. It is very important to concentrate on hitting the US economy through all means possible, and thats whats happening.

    • tagalog

      When Obama said that about bayonets, I had the thought that we probably have more bayonets issued to our military personnel today than we did in World War II.

  • mlcblog

    I still love skipping over Schlmo's blurbs as well as the replies to same.

    Mr. Greenfield, This article is excellent. Thank you.

    • WilliamJamesWard


      • mlcblog

        Great minds think alike.

  • Valo84

    Great article, Mr. Greenfield! Would that the average voter understood what you put forth.

    Just one thing.. "Benghazigate"… (I know you didn't coin the phrase yourself, but still,) I understand that ____-Gate is a common use for scandals, especially cover-ups.

    IMHO, this term only serves to trivialize the matter. No one died when the Watergate Hotel was broken into, and as far as I know, Nixon didn't kill anyone either…

  • pierce

    He, Obama, eats with that mouth. It is not garbage that come out, it is pure unadulterated s–t. And the worst part is, his followers go out in droves to listen to the crap. They must be part of the millions of unemployed, and have nothing better to do with their time, lord knows don't go out and look for a job when the COMMANDER IN CHIEF will give you food stamps. And the throngs cheer him.

  • Pepper

    On the discussion of the number of ships required by the Navy. One can only conclude that this commander in chief doesn't have a clue. Carriers are highly vulnerable and have to be protected. I wonder if he ever heard of Battle groups. The number of oceans being patrolled, the size of the carrier battle group, the rotation of ships and maintenance in port of ships are factors determining the size of the Navy. Additionally the availability of critical personnel can determine some ship's ability to deploy. To make this complex issue a political sound bite defies basic intelligence. For me this is an issue that should concern the citizens of this country.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Carriers are highly vulnerable and have to be protected. I wonder if he ever heard of Battle groups."

      Battle groups went out with bayonets. We have ships that go under water now, what do we need those other thingies for?

      "For me this is an issue that should concern the citizens of this country."

      I think many of us have gotten used to being scared by his mouth and actions. All we can do now is vote.

  • BLJ

    Obama is a joke. I would love to knock that smirk off his face. He is and always will be a little sissy. The MSM has tried to create the myth that he is an athlete. Please. I can't wait till he crawls back under a rock on Jan 21, 2013.

  • trickyblain

    'In a truly bizarre moment, he insisted that the Navy no longer needed battleships because they had become as outdated as horses."

    Considering the last battleships were decommission in the early 1990s, it's not really bizarre at all.

    • Kufar Dawg

      I have to agree on this one. There are no commissioned battleships left in the USN now. I believe the last time a battleship fired any ordnance in action was in Libya, when Clinton had a battleship fire some cruise missiles.

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Insecure Obama? Insecure America, how could anyone have a secure feeling knowing that
    the President of the United States is a bald faced liar. To add to this disgrace his entire
    Cabinet is made up of bald faced liars. Hillary liar Clinton and Joe liar Biden et. al.,
    sat idly by as Benghazi unfolded and death took Americans. Lie, cheat and steal, yes
    the crew of professional criminals running the government do it well but their greatest
    scam is in posturing but posturing does not deliver when more than deception is needed
    because it is no substitute for determined, capable, resolute action. Obama and Co. should
    resign. It will be a great mistake to let this betrayal go unpunished, a President Romney
    cabinet must take on this abysmal situation and give satisfaction first to the families of the
    dead and then to America, Justice must be served. without Justice and Truth insecurity
    becomes institutionalized abuse…………………………William

    • mlcblog

      Bingo! is too weak a comment for your stirring analysis.

  • Horace

    Violently agressively naieve democrats are pouring out of their deflating houses and rushing down to early voting to save Obama's jihad against the USA. Get at least one other anti Obama voter down to registration and early voting if possible and fight/vote back Save your future. Prolific Dan knocks another one out of the park. Write letters to the editor of your local newspaper, comment on your local tv and radio webpages. Get busy. Fire Obama.

  • Kufar Dawg

    Another great article by Mr. Greenfield. Hopefully a positive comment will make it past the censors.

  • Barb3000

    I know one thing I would hate to be in the shoes of anyone that has to deal with the huge mess that the Middle East is in. I think that Romney will pick the best people possible for the job. From the hate filled murderous expression on Obama's face during the debate if he could have got away with it he would have attacked Romney right there. He looked like someone deranged with hatred. This is a face that none of us have ever seen before but I will bet the people that was picked to manage some of the agencies that later quit have seen it especially if they brought a report to him that he didn't like.

  • Jidun

    Oblama is so dumb, he thinks that there is no terrorism anymore, because Osama bin Laden is dead. And the Fort Hood attack CAN'T be terrorism, because it wasn't ordered by Bin Laden. And now that Bin Laden is dead, there is no more terrorism in the world. Oh! The Benghazi attack wasn't terrorism. It was a spontaneous attack by locals over a Youtube video. Right! The biggest terrorist in the world is still at large, and he currently resides in the White House.

    • mlcblog

      He may still think that if he just goes and talks to them that he can convince them to be nice. Still a little deluded pot-brained hippy. ??? or methinks there is something more sinister as above in William James Ward's comments.

  • Sunbeam

    It would be dangerous for Obama to be voted for another term. I do think by then the national security of the United States would be threaten, not by arms or by nuke, but by the very existing society that calls and advocates its primary agenda. This itself in the note spells danger. It is time to cast rightly this time, someone who is trustworthy and think of the Americans' welfare top priority while at the same time being prudent of its foreign policy. America cannot continue to aid the foreign Muslim rebels in their fight against their government, not since what happened after the Arab Spring. It didn't got them better, instead it produced adverse effects to the former governance. This leaves us the doubt for a democratic type of rule which we zealously promote. America should learn from this bitter lesson and not to repeat this error again, failing which America will have to suffer the consequences of being used of by these very enemies themselves. We need to be very prudent in carrying out our foreign policy. Sympathetic doesn't seem to be the right discourse, while prudent is. .

  • Western Spirit

    In WW2 battleships shot into the water to provide walls of water for Kamikazi's to run into rather than allow them to fly into our ships.

    They are invaluable in protecting carriers. Obama is as bright as a sponge.

    • Randall Hayden

      See my comment about battleships.

  • Randall Hayden

    Yep, Barry's response to Romey's statement about maintaining a strong Navy, above 300 ships was sure disconnected, attempting to ridicule, divert & insult. BO's response actually gave 2 examples for MR's point subs & carriers are very important. MR wasn't even talking about technology, it's a given that US equipment is advanced.

    BTW, the last US battleship was decommissioned 12+ years ago. Barry's mention of battleship was about the game,not their use, but certainly not applicable to Navy superiority. It's even point in favor of MR's point, in that the game starts off with 5 ships each.