Al Qaeda Hits Baghdad —- Obama Hits the Beach

20080813-222218-pic-219988107_s640x448“This was the moment,” Barack Obama had told the cheering audience in St. Paul, Minnesota. “When we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war.”

St. Paul has an Ocean Street. It has an Ocean Spa and Salon. It even has an Oceanaire Seafood Room. It does not however have an ocean. But with ObamaCare an unpopular subsidized failure, the few new jobs around being confined to a local McDonald’s and Al Qaeda taking over Iraq; Obama has nothing left to do but to go back to his old promise of defeating the rise of the ocean.

With Al Qaeda pressing in on Baghdad, Obama ruled out air strikes. He did however order the Department of Defense to assign a senior official to the vital task of fighting mislabeled seafood. While the Iraqi government was begging for air support, Obama instead issued an order in the name of the authority vested in him “by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America” to “ensure that seafood sold in the United States is legally and sustainably caught.”

The United States Constitution does not have much to say about sustainable seafood. The Founders liked their flounder and they disliked kings and emperors telling them where to fish.

King George III responded to Patrick Henry’s cry of “Give me liberty or give me death” with the Fisheries Bill which banned the fishermen of New England from the North Atlantic. A letter sent to a sea captain denounced it as, “A Bill so replete with inhumanity and cruelty… an everlasting stain on the annals of our pious Sovereign.”

But not even King George III would have contemplated creating a “national monument” consisting of 782,000 square miles of water. And despite being a monarch, he did not unilaterally issue a ban, rather parliament did. Even during the American Revolution, King George III was a more lawful and democratic monarch than Obama’s unilateral reign of royal executive orders.

Three percent of American tuna from the western and central Pacific comes from the waters of the latest national monument to Obama’s ideology. That means rising tuna prices which will hit working Americans, who already have trouble affording basic staples, even harder in the wallet.

The average price of albacore in 2008 was $1.14 per pound. In 2011 it hit $1.94 per pound. It was amazing how much of a difference three years had made. And not just in the price of tuna.

In 2008, Al Qaeda in Iraq was on the run and its leaders were being killed off one by one. Now that same organization is besieging Baghdad under a terrorist leader released by Barack Obama.

Obama has declared war on fishermen in the Pacific Ocean, but the Constitution, which Obama had been ignoring as thoroughly as Al Qaeda in Iraq, mentions providing for the “common defense.” And it isn’t talking about sending out the troops to save the tuna from the fishermen.

While ISIS Jihadists were tweeting photos of severed Iraqi heads, John Kerry was tweeting photos of himself with Leonardo DiCaprio. It was hard to decide which was more gruesome, the corpses or the sight of the country’s top diplomat fawning over an environmentalist movie star while the greatest terrorist crisis of his administration was reaching a critical point.

As the Iraqi government begged for air strikes against Al Qaeda, Kerry instead held a Twitter chat to discuss the real national security threat.

Rising oceans.

Water level rise had begun slowing anyway, for reasons having nothing to do with Obama. That may have been why Obama refused to acknowledge it.

Secretary of State John Kerry convened #OceanChat on Twitter to take questions about the great wavy threat of tidal terrorism. Most of the questions however came from people wondering why he was talking about the ocean and Leonardo DiCaprio instead of Al Qaeda.

“How is it you have time to chat with Iraq in flames?” one user asked him. “What happens to our ocean is int’l security issue,” Kerry replied.

Forget the terrorists and let’s fight the flounder.

“Any awareness of climate change in Iraq-Iran?” PBS’ Bill Nye asked him. “There is awareness in the Middle East – a number of countries engaged in transition,” Kerry replied.

The Middle East is certainly in transition, but not to Global Warming awareness. Al Qaeda is building its own state, but it doesn’t have a policy on Global Warming. It does however have one on murdering Americans.

The rising oceans have yet to swallow St. Paul, Minnesota, but they have swallowed the Obama agenda. Obama has given up on doing the little things, like jobs, health care and defeating Al Qaeda, three things he was taking credit for just last month, and has refocused on the truly grandiose, controlling the oceans.

King Xerses, known to most Americans as the bejeweled self-proclaimed deity of the movie 300, ordered the whipping of the sea when it wouldn’t obey him. But Obama wants to whip the ocean. Mere mortals like Bush might fight Al Qaeda. Obama wants to take on an enemy that can be trusted not to fight back because it doesn’t even know that he’s there.

Battles are quantifiable things that have undeniable outcomes. You can instruct your press corps to claim victory when you are actually running away, as every ruler exercising unlimited power has, and as Obama did in Iraq and Afghanistan, but when the enemy takes the territory that you claimed was safe, it becomes harder for your media minions to claim that you actually won.

Unlike Al Qaeda, oceans don’t throw victory parades. They rise and fall as part of a rhythm that predates the kingdoms of man. They will persist in their rhythms uncaring and unheeding of the bureaucrats and regulators, the peddlers of Green Luddite science, the celebrities and politicians who claim to control their waters.

The ocean does all this without press releases. The Pacific will never mock Michelle Obama on Twitter the way that ISIS has and the Great Southern Ocean will never tweet photos of drowned Global Warming researchers who went to their deaths in its icy depths certain that the ice had melted. The mockery of the great deep is a more subtle and more enduring thing.

That is why it is politically safer to hit the beach than Al Qaeda. It’s easier to grandstand on saving the world from an imaginary catastrophe (at the bargain price of a few mere trillion) than to deal with a real threat.

After failing at jobs and health care, and abandoning the world to tyrants and terrorists, Obama has hitched up his pants to take on the ocean. And if the ocean doesn’t do what he tells it to, he can always send out the EPA’s crack SWAT team to have it whipped.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • 11bravo

    I wonder if Barack will commit suicide after he leaves office. How Jimmy Carter has been able to bare his burden of national failure, is beyond me.
    Maybe Obama will do what the WWII vets did when they came back home – drink!!

    • naguakkina

      of course it should be make money online

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Kudos for your creative method of getting an ad in here. Flagged …

    • WhiteHunter

      Not likely. That would be the honorable thing to do, and he’s not an honorable man.

    • nomoretraitors

      Maobama is not at all bothered by failure. He is devoid of conscience, morals or humanity

      • Christopher Riddle

        The thing is, he HASn’T FAILED!!!He is accomplishing what he set out to do!!!”Fundamentally Transform This Country”!!!!!!!!!!!

  • jeepwonder

    Valerie Jarrett has him on a short leash when it involves Iran.

    • Pete

      I wonder why the disreputable Baruch Obama administration even considered working with Iran.

      “Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Condemns U.S. Involvement In Iraq”

      • jeepwonder

        They know they won’t take us down overnight.
        The islamists didn’t take down the Byzantine Empire over night.

        Each step Obama takes gives them more leverage and us less.
        It’s a struggle that will go on for a while.

  • truebearing

    Obama could be insane, but he is so consistently insane that you have to look at the pattern of consequences from the things he’s done to see if there is coherence. The one thing that is true about his decisions, whether it is releasing a malignant Al Qaeda terrorist, five Taliban leaders, or banning fishing, is that it invariably hurts this country in demonstrable and serious ways. There is a method to his madness and the intent appears to be to continue destroying the fabric of America on a daily basis.

    Perhaps Obama’s most effective weapon against his scandals is to create yet another scandal. The lag time in investigations, combined with the scandal fatigue in this country, is making it impossible to pin something on him that will stick. His polls should be in the minus numbers considering the number and kinds of scandals his presidency has produced, but they are still over 40%. If the media would report on this renegade president as the enemy to America that he clearly is, the scandal-a-day strategy would no longer work in his favor, but they are still trying to protect him, so it continues to achieve Obama’s desired result.

    For those who would argue that these scandals and insane decisions will hurt the Democrats in the upcoming election, I would point out that Obama already ignores Congress and can do so with impunity because Holder is part of this coup. Control of both branches of Congress is good, but ultimately, it may only be good enough to create a constitutional crisis that Obama may actually want. A constitutional crisis is not a good thing for America, after all, so forcing one would be consistent with his pattern of being destructive to America.

    • MrUniteUs1

      You just don’t like him because he’s taller.

      • reader
        • ObamaYoMoma

          If ever he runs for political office again, that would make a great campaign video for the opposition. It’s sort of like the one of Dukakis riding on the tank.

      • Webb

        Nawwww, we don’t like him cuz he black, and keepin de white man down.

      • Webb

        Do your corporate paymasters know you’re back to trolling the day away again? They can’t afford to pay you for that.

      • J.B.

        So how high can you stack $h–?

      • truebearing

        That was really witty.

      • Pete

        Tall isn’t everything. Proportion or build matter more.

        Just ask a tall skinny guy. it can be tough in highschool.

        Good thing Obmam was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and his richy rich family sent him to the most exclusive private school in Hawaii.

        • Americana

          Pres. Obama had a silver spoon in his mouth? You don’t really know that much about academic salaries.

          • Pete

            “You don’t really know that much about academic salaries.”

            Yes, I do.

            Regardless of how much they pay the teachers at a private school, they charge the parents/guardians of the prospective quite a bit.

            If it were cheap to go to a private school more people would be doing it.

            I grew up middle class and what Obama experience was definitely higher class (economically).

            Interesting that you reply to my post when my post was a reply to another. It is also interesting that my post was not about policy and yet you flew to Obama’s defense.

          • Americana

            I don’t care for invented facts. It was your post that made the silver spoon remark. Since that is what I’m objecting to, you post is what’s going to elicit a response from me.

          • Pete

            Punahou School (President Obama’s Alma Mater)

            “The school has long educated the elite of Oahu … ”

            Tuition > $ 18 LARGE


            I wonder if they gave financial aid back in the time of Obama at Punahou? Probably is a more recent invention.

            Silver Spoon

            “The English language expression silver spoon is synonymous with wealth, especially inherited wealth; someone born into a wealthy family is said to have “been born with a silver spoon in his mouth”. As an adjective, “silver-spoon” describes someone who has a prosperous background or is of a well-to-do family environment, ”


          • truebearing

            No one cares what you care for, so deal with it.

            “Invented facts?” Obama went to expensive, exclusive schools his whole life, and never spent his own hard earned money (mainly because the lazy SOB never had a job or earned any money). He ended up in two Ivy League schools that are quite expensive. Funny that you don’t define that as being born with a silver spoon.

            You can add to that the social silver spoon of affirmative action, where poor performance is protected by racism.

    • Kerri Feldman

      Very well written truebearing.

      • truebearing

        Thank you. Isn’t it a shame we have to speculate on the mental wellness of our president, or on just how evil he is?

        • Americana

          Yes, it is a shame that people speculate on whether their President is mentally ill when they know nothing about the subject and they simply extrapolate and conflate all prior history instead of investigating the reality behind the legislation or the policy move.

          • truebearing

            It’s a shame when trolls try to sound erudite but always end up sounding like snotty little girls.

            If he can’t blame his policies on mental illness he has to admit he is evil.

            As a citizen, I can speculate on the mental health of anyone I want, especially the president. He was elected to serve the people of this country and he’s doing a horrendous job. As a citizen and voter, I have a responsibility to speculate on the mental stability and moral character of all elected officials. Voicing an opinion is the right of every American, guaranteed by the 1st amendment. If you don’t like free speech, move back to Britain and submit to the Muslims.

            You seem to still get quite touchy when mental illness is brought up. Gee, I wonder why…

      • BS77

        Didn’t King Xerxes order his soldiers to lash the waves of the sea to stop the incoming tide? An exercise in futility.

        • Adolphus

          It wasn’t Xerxes who did that in real life, if I remember correctly. I believe Caligula, the Roman emperor, did something like that, as well as making his favorite racing horse a senator and having sex with all three of his older sisters and probably his mother Agrippinilla.

    • Americana

      I shouldn’t have to ask you, but just who do you think recommended these fishery protection steps to Pres. Obama? They didn’t come from Leonardo di Caprio much as you’d like to be able to claim that. Those fishing quota recommendations came from the scientists of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization NOAA which has a fisheries division that is in charge of evaluating and advising on oceanic resource use. Fishery quotas are not something that U.S. officials can flounder on when there are countries like China and other Far East countries pillaging the seas in defiance of fishing zones and fines and quotas. If you think Daniel has a right to complain about tuna prices right now, imagine what will happen if those less tuna species stocks begin to dwindle under fishing pressure from China? As for the increase in size of the Marine Preserve, that is another aspect of fisheries management that is necessary considering the pressure the Pacific nations are putting on Pacific fish stocks.

      • truebearing

        I don’t recall Obama saying anything about China. Did you hear him say this was to protect the US fisheries from China? I would like to know because that would be a first –Obama protecting the US, fo once.

        Excuse me if I don’t put much stock in NOAA. It is run by whacked out environmentalists who peddle global warming and other fairy tales.

        Why don’t you address the bigger issue i commented on, which is Obama’s destructive pattern in his policies. Maybe you would like to list his top five policies that have benefitted the US. That ought to be fun.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          Who knows? Perhaps he’s closing off the fisheries to US fishermen to open them to the Chinese.

          • truebearing

            That would be my first guess, given his past performance.

            I defer to the instincts of the Comanche, who have well honed instincts for detecting deception. There is no iron in his words. (I love the exchange between Josie Wales and Chief Ten Bears in “The Outlaw Josie Wales “). “Iron in your words” is among the most powerful metaphors I have heard for truth.

          • macktoid

            “I reckon’ so”! (spit)

          • BagLady

            Now why would he do that?

            Excuse me if I don’t put much stock in NOAA. It is run by whacked out environmentalists who peddle global warming and other fairy tales.

            So what you’re arguing is that there is no problem with depleting fish ‘stocks’ (as though they are some man made fabrication). What the hell difference does it make who is divesting the oceans of their all important creatures? The fact is, that is what is happening.

            What is your argument? Grab it all whilst the going is good, else the Chinese will? It all ends up on your dining table regardless the flag flying on the trawler’s bows.

          • BagLady

            He’s from the banking fraternity. He doesn’t care whose flag flies from the trawler, and neither should you. It’s meaningless. They are owned by offshore companies that exist only in cyberspace. Their shareholders/owners can be American, Chinese or Brazilian. Makes no difference. It’s the small entrepreneur who will suffer, as usual.

        • Americana

          Why should Pres. Obamaa have to say anything about protecting those fisheries from Pacific nations when that’s CLEARLY the intent? Do I actually have to go dig up information for you two on the issues in the Pacific fishery? (Off to do that…)

          You consider Pres. Obama’s policies destructive and, frequently, as in this instance, you know nothing about the topic. The protection of those fisheries is an extremely valuable policy undertaking for the U.S. As you and Daniel would know if you followed the fisheries information disseminated on the NOAA site as well as some of the studies through the Scripps Institute of Oceanography. No one would avoid the hard science about other issues on the NOAA site simply because they’re upset over the organization’s stance on global climate change. Just don’t look at the global climate change information and read the other stuff.

          • truebearing

            Yes, you actually have to dig up the information.

            I know nothing about Obama’s destructive policies? How about we start with his violation of the rights of secured bond holders when he gave Chrysler to the Italians and a large portion of GM to the leftist union that had destroyed it? I think the record will show it is you who know nothing.

            Americana, I may have been too harsh with you. You seem like a nice person. The problem is that your beliefs don’t match with what has actually transpired. You need to look a little deeper.

          • Americana

            Which American investors were willing to buy Chrysler? I don’t recall an American consortium of buyers hence it ended up in other hands. What was the alternative to the Italians? The union may have “destroyed it” because of continuing unrealistic wage and benefit pressures but I also recall that Chryster was willing to hire Lee Iaccocca at the highest wage/benefit package for an American CEO during their first crisis. Many car companies around the entire world were in crisis and not all of them imploded because of their unions, or, rather, they didn’t implode solely because of their unions but because their pricing structure viz their competition made them a less economical buy. This Chrysler sale was another instance where there was new and uncomfortable and unfamiliar ground being broken for large companies that face bankruptcy. Perhaps we’ve learned something from this about protecting investors.

            This sale was not all the fault of the government and, certainly, if Americans have concerns about how events like the Chrysler bankruptcy are handled, they should make suggestions about novel ways of handling the situations. There were many different professions involved in crafting the Chrysler decision, the President was only the final hurdle. Do the Scandinavians feel this same way about losing their national car brands? Did the government betray their national carmakers? I’ll read whatever compelling evidence you link to that the President did the wrong thing.

          • truebearing

            Obama didn’t give investors a chance to buy Chrysler, and no investor in their right mind would invest in a company where the secured bondholders were being ripped off, illegally, by a president bent on making the unions “stakeholders.” As with the bailouts, and everything else Obama has done to damage this country, he insisted that everything was a life and death crisis, then rushed his agenda through. How can you even begin to suggest there was an atmosphere conducive to investors after that?

            We have a method for dealing with businesses, big and small, that get into financial trouble. It is called bankruptcy. That is what GM and Chrysler should have been forced into. A bankruptcy judge would have made GM and Chrysler renegotiate all contracts with the unions to cut operating costs, and that is exactly why Obama jumped in and illegally took control of both companies. He was protecting his leftist alliance with the unions and paying them back for their support. It was illegal, unethical, and the beginning of his lawless regime.

            Lee Iaccocca delivered Chrysler from collapse. He made them viable once again, anf Chrysler paid its loan back. If they paid him a lot to deliver them from collapse, so what? He did the job well. He earned the money, which is something Obama will never be able to say.

            We aren’t talking about car companies around the world, we’re talking about a lawless president who illegally used American companies as if they were his own assets, to be divied up among his corrupt supporters, the very people who put the American auto industry into the uncompetetive and unsustainable shape that it was in.

            You clearly still don’t understand the situation, or are purposely being obtuse. We don’t need new laws and regulations to protect investors. We have them and they are perfectly fine protections, but they don’t work when the President of the United States decides to employ fascist tactics to payoff his allies. Yes, by definition, what Obama did was Fascism and illegal. He does not follow our laws and that is the problem I was getting at, that you have blithely ignored.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            The is addressed to both you and Americana, a person that I have come to like, in spite of ideological differences.

            Americana is a person who, in my estimation, is simply too nice to be capable of dealing with the likes of Obama & Company, et al. He looks for reasons to trust them, and digs deep to find information that will support his side of any issue. I believe that he deeply and fundamentally wants to trust Obama.

            My opinion is that protecting the administration with “facts and figures” … produced by the administration … is like admiring Al Capone because of his charitable works. Al Capone is still Al Capone, no matter what he does.

            Between the two of you, however, I believe that a powerful combination of realism and research could be created, that could cut through the sh*t and arrive at reasoned conclusions.

            Why don’t I include myself in this arrangement? I hate to wish away my life, but I long for the day when I go out and get drunk, when the nightmare of Obama is finally over.

          • Americana

            Wolf, that is what our country requires right now — the ability to arrive at the best solutions despite daunting challenges and despite partisanship. I don’t believe I’m “too nice” to handle the political aims of the Obama administration. As far as I’m concerned, as American citizens, we’ve always had this uneasy relationship between the private sector and the government but, in the past, we’ve had far more room to maneuver because the country was so vast and the resources so rich. We also came on the world stage at a point when American industrial might elevated us to a superior international status that took on all comers.

            That preeminence is something we now have to continuously fight for and it’s threatened by various factors from trade agreements like the Trans Pacific Partnership to the possibility the U.S. won’t retain the status of the world’s reserve currency. I don’t necessarily trust the government to always do the right thing, administration by administration, but I also believe there are so many that must participate in decisionmaking that there are protections built into the functions of government that supersede each administration. That may be the only difference underlying my partisanship — that I look to the larger scope of the decisions presented by each administration. We do have to look far beyond our partisan divide especially w/China and India coming on like gangbusters.

            (I’ll now join Wolf in hoisting a couple of bottles of stout…)

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I can agree with you on most of what you said, although it’s too early to hoist the stout.

            I’ve had disagreements with all administrations, over various aspects of their governance, and I’ve agreed with them, when they were right (even Carter, over the Camp David accords). For the most part, the Democrat administrations were simply slightly farther to the Left than the GOP administrations I supported.

            The change came in 1972, although it was not immediate. The nomination of George McGovern I considered a threat to the entire nation. This is when the Democrat Party changed, and it hasn’t reverted to the old norm. An Obama was simply the logical outcome of the decisions made at the 1972 Democrat Convention.

            Prior to that, I could have lived, with a feeling of security, under any DEM president. Johnson gave me pause with the “Great Society”, the consequences of which we still live with, today. I would have groused for few days, had Hubert Humphrey won in 1968, but I still would have believed that he was a good man who wanted what was best for the nation.

            Obama is something of a “deal-breaker”, with me. I look at his policies, and his lackluster performance in office, and the state of the world, and I fear for the future, especially with regards to my children and grandchildren.

            This is the fundamental difference between us. I see no good in Barack Hussein Obama. Instead, I perceive him as the tool of the enemy, who has finally gained the collective dreams of their lifetimes.

          • Americana

            Hmmm, I guess I see the last 40 years as rising from different causes. I also don’t give Pres. Obama a pass on certain policies though we’ll have to argue those individually over time. As far as our country’s development and present state, to me, it’s a cumulative effect of our long term status viz the world — from accepting the role of being the world’s policeman to our industrialization being overtaken by that of other countries. We didn’t need to remain in Europe for nearly as long as we did and, even if we did, we should have charged those European countries for the privilege of having U.S. forces there. I likely don’t see the precise same kind of threat in Pres. Obama that you do, but I believe any threat posed by a President, ANY President, can be OPPOSED by a BETTER CONCEPT being presented by opposition parties.

            Just one such idea I have is that any research undertaken by the U.S. Armed Forces medical divisions that arrives at usable, profitable techniques or vaccines could be used as a financial underpinning to any national health care program we’ve got, from Medicare to Medicaid to Obamacare. If U.S. Army doctors discover something that has applicability in the private sector, I would license it under similar conditions to private research and the money would go into a health care investment fund for the U.S.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Interesting comments …

            As long as the Soviet Union existed, American troops had to remain in Europe, because the will for large armed forces, and the money for them, did not exist in that continent, after the Second World War.

            After the fall of the USSR, we were needed to literally keep the peace. Europe’s history is not a peaceful one, and the pullout of American forces would be a temptation to one or more countries to build up their military forces, be seen as a threat by other countries, who then build up their forces, until there is a trigger.

            Don’t believe that? I have a large number of family members who live in Magdeburg, Germany. Whenever I see them, there’s always a little grousing about traditionally “German” territories belonging to Poland, the Low Countries, and France … even Russia. Do we really need that, in the 21st Century?

            Concerning the president, if his policies represent a threat to the nation, and Congress opposes those policies, what is to happen if the president simply ignores the opinion of Congress? One could say, “Impeach him.” But that assumes that there is some sort of unanimity among the members of Congress. Without that, the President is basically a semi-dictator, ruling by executive fiat.

            I like your medical research idea.

            If I were to characterize you in a political sense, would I be too far off if I said you were a “left-leaning libertarian”?

          • Pete

            “I also don’t give Pres. Obama a pass on certain policies though we’ll have to argue those individually over time.”

            would not hurt to rattle off 3 to 7 off the top of your head

            Sound more like I’ll criticize you now and the other side later.

            sorry, seen that move already.

          • Americana

            I will criticize as the topics come up either in the news or as policy moves. What does it matter if I criticize one side now and the other side later? The fact is, I’m pretty much of an equal opportunity criticism disher.

          • Pete

            ” I’m pretty much of an equal opportunity criticism disher.”

            Funny that is not what I see nor what most posters here see.

            Basically, you pivot from one topic to the next without resolving anything like your heart throb.


          • Americana

            You post on multiple topics and I rarely get the sense that you “resolve anything” (what is that supposed to mean anyway?). You asked me to list topics on which I disagree w/the POTUS. I should do that because why? So you can then tell me I pivot from one subject to the next? You mind your own posting history and either respond to my posts as you read them or not. But don’t dare identify me of something of which all of you are just as guilty. Oh, I need to take up the whole smarts video thing, huh? Sure, will do.

          • Pete

            I’ll dare all day.

          • Pete

            ” the ability to arrive at the best solutions despite daunting challenges and despite partisanship”

            That sounds like a 3rd way speech to disarm conservatives and keep on the same old leftists policies.

          • Webb

            Anyone taken in by Troll Commiecana is getting old and soft in the head.

          • Americana

            Oh, what a sorry azz webb we weave…

          • truebearing

            You and some idiot friends making a hammock?

          • truebearing

            Read the whole thread. Don’t worry about me getting “taken in” by Americana. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

          • BagLady

            “.. he gave Chrysler to the Italians…”


            We are living in parallel worlds. Them and us. They have no borders, no taxes, no restrictions on movement of capital. There is no ‘country’.

          • Pete

            It follows a pattern.

            First President Bubba Clinton ropes of a source of low sulfur coal in the South west. All the while there was Indonesian and Chinese cash going into his campaign coffers.

            Now this.

        • Americana

          William Ruckelshaus, a co-chair of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, who served as the Environmental Protection Agency administrator under Presidents Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan, said the new flurry of activity on maritime issues could represent an important shift.

          “These kinds of issues only get elevated if the president puts it high on his priority list,” he said.

          Older pieces:

          • truebearing

            Republican presidents have appointed Supreme Court justices who turned to the Left. What does that prove? That Republicans sometimes lose their minds or get senile?

            NOAA is a politically corrupted joke. Even the patent office has been corrupted by Obama’s polical evil. They’re trying to deny patent protection to the Washinton Redskins on purely political grounds. Fascism, yet again.

          • Americana

            What a weird remark. Having a Supreme Court Justice decide he sees the value of a more or less conservative approach on the bench is different than facts turning to the left. It’s not that facts turn to the left or the right, they’re either RIGHT or WRONG.

          • truebearing

            You are dense. The point was that appointed people don’t necessarily end up ideologically compatible with the appointee. What you call facts are frequently less scientific than political. Global Warming is exhibit A in leftist agenda driven “science.” The only placed Slobal Warming science has settled is in the bottom of the scientific outhouse.

          • Americana

            You’re calling me dense after not even investigating why Pres. Obama would sign such an executive order instead of immediately leaping on the fact he used that power he’s given? You’re calling me dense after denying the crash of both American fisheries?

          • truebearing

            Read these and weep.




      • Webb

        Nice mess of pabble. Print. Wipe.

        • Americana

          Oh, gotta love it! You even dismiss the fact that an appointee of two Republican Presidents agrees w/Pres. Obama on this protection of the Pacific Ocean fisheries. How is it even possible you missed this sentence? Wilful blindness? Took your glasses off too soon before you could read anything that actually recommended this step be taken to protect the Pacfic Ocean fisheries? >>> “William Ruckelshaus, a co-chair of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, who served as the Environmental Protection Agency administrator under Presidents Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan…”

          You’re actually claiming you don’t believe that quote is real? Do a search on it. As for your commentary on the PO fisheries issue, it’s neither knowledgeable nor substantive. That’s a choice we all make, to sit in the cheap seats and jeer, but someone who merely opts for pointing the finger and screaming, “Commie” has about ZIPPO in the way of credibility w/me.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Are the scientists at NOAA … or any scientists, for that matter … free of any pressure from government to arrive at pre-ordained conclusions?

        • Americana

          Considering these “preordained conclusions” by the NOAA marine scientists have been coming down the pike for a long, long time, I’d say the conclusions they’ve reached are fairly accurate. Fishing totals have been going down since forever in the Pacific. Several of the top food fishes are dropping rapidly in total catch. That doesn’t happen unless the particular species is: 1) becoming hard to find in its traditional known fishing grounds; 2) is down to its last and more remote populations that weren’t in the fishing rotation previously; 3) the species isn’t rebounding in population to restock its traditional habitat. But try to ignore it and the Pacific fisheries will end up in the same state as the Atlantic fisheries w/collapsed stocks. Don’t forget, I’m originally from a small lobstering village in Massachusetts, Scituate. It used to have a fairly sizable fishing fleet. No longer.

          Same thing for Gloucester, MA. Huge fishing fleet that’s been substantially reduced over the last decade. WHY Because there are fewer fish to catch.

          The fishermen are quite clear about they want. They want an interim measure passed that allows them to fish enough cod to survive the year. Just one more year, they say, and the cycle of the sea will bring the cod back.

          They don’t believe the science, and they certainly don’t believe there are no cod.

          And if they can’t fish, they want relief.

          “Washington rushes in to help our farmers. Washington needs to rush in to help our fisherman,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren cried to cheers from the crowd.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I said “pre-ordained conclusions”. That was central to my comment.

            Science is not pure. Science is driven the need for money. If you are a scientist, and you wish to do research, you need grant money. You will get your money if … and only if … you are “orthodox”. Unorthodoxy is the surest way to have a wilderness experience.

            Government scientific agencies … like NOAA (in the age of AGCC, perhaps especially NOAA) … are driven by the ideology of the powers-that-be. Although it’s an extreme example, if those powers (primarily elected government leaders) believed that the world was flat, the government agencies would strive to prove it. That’s how they get funded.

          • Americana

            Only some scientists are funded by grant money. Most oceanographers that are affiliated w/one of the world’s major oceanographic institutes don’t shill for cash. The scientists attached to NOAA aren’t dependent on grant money. They also aren’t ideologically driven because otherwise they’d be PIVOTING from one ideological basis to the next as administrations changed. You’ll note that the oceanographers haven’t changed their opinions on the fisheries issues since the Bush administration. Those fisheries are in trouble for various reasons and those reasons have to be understood and then actions be recommended and actions then taken for the fisheries to recover.

            We’ve already had many instances where overfishing has been seen to be deleterious to the long term productivity of certain fisheries. The collapse of the California sardine fishery in the 40s and 50s took until very recently to recover to the point (over 50 years) where Californians have seen sardine runs in the Pacific that were like the anchovy runs of yesteryear.


          • Wolfthatknowsall

            So, Obama is justified in closing down incredibly massive areas of ocean to US fishermen … which will have absolutely no effect on foreign fishermen.

            Why don’t government agencies “pivot” from one administration to another? Have you ever seen how hard it is to fire a federal employee?

            Like I said, science is not pure …

          • Americana

            Foreign fishermen would also be technically banned from that Marine Monument preserve as well since they are now under the expanded rights of American territorial waters. Since the U.S. Navy is now shifting to a larger presence in the Pacific Ocean, there’s also a chance that more of these foreign vessels will be caught if they risk fishing illegally within the reserve. You’re right though that we’ll need to find better ways to police these waters since they’re so far out in the Pacific. I’m hoping that a suggested satellite surveillance system will yield better targeting of vessels committing fishing infractions.

          • truebearing

            Thank goodness I have the sense to stop at “see more” whenever you comment.




      • Pete

        Fisheries do not matter without a Coast Guard to back it up. Isn’t that the complaint of the Somalis and the West African nations?

        How many Coast Guard cutter, drone, planes or whatever do we have there monitoring activity?

        If a Chinese ship does violate it, Obama will go to the UN or the WTO and several years later they might do something.

        Key word is MIGHT.

    • cathnealon

      As a resident of the 7th district that just unseated Cantor, I can tell you the consensus of those who have lived here a long time is that this was a very bad year to oust the RINO. The Left has been out in full force here for four years–Moveon has been flooding 7th districters with emails since 2012(unlike the IRS i have saved them)–they engineered the primary results–and people like Levin, Coulter and Ingraham played right into their hands–those 3 should have come out of their own fancy neighborhoods and vetted the situation here a little more. Now we will pay the price while they don’t even live here.

      The upcoming elections will not do one thing! Ever since Van Jones said “I study the Tea parties” back in 2011 the 24/7 Marxists have been mixing and matching issues with TP folks, at least here–getting them to meet ‘on common ground.” Got news for TP there is no common ground with people who want to destroy you.

      Sorry to disagree with the author but “after failing at jobs and healthcare” should be changed to “after succeeding at jobs and healthcare.”

    • Steve

      Now Obama is insane? You righties are absolutely hysterical with your racist hatred of this man.

      • truebearing

        So now calling a part black, part white man insane is racism? Is it racism against the black part or the white part? Please include your brilliant reasoning with your answer.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          He hates the first half-white POTUS for his whiteness.

          Of course, if Dr. Ben Carson was elected POTUS, he would hate him for being “white” in spirit, i.e., having succeeded in the white man’s world. I think that the accepted scientific terminology would be “Uncle Tom”.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Uptown Steve is back, with his racist trolling.

  • Johnny Palestine

    The Jewish side of my extended family still believes that Das Obmama ( I am not sure of his gender ) has done so much for people, especially women and the economy. My non Jewish part of my extended family believes that he is the devil and so are the names we hear: Rice, Kerry, Pelosi, etc..

    I agree with the non Jewish part. Fortunately Jews are a small minority in the Western world so the damage they can do via politics is limited. But the Latinos ( me!), the Black people and the women all seem to love the Democrats for all the good they have tried to do.

    I believe that perhaps Susan B. Anthony was not correct and that only those who have a house, a car and have or had children, should be allowed to vote. I am not ashamed to say this.

    In pockets of the West, the economies are strong because we all stupidly think that the currencies have value. When the west is in pieces, an extension of Detroit, what will we tell our children?

    • liz

      The Founder’s restricted voting to those who owned property. Back then that meant that at least most of them would have a decent education.
      Sadly today a decently educated citizen is hard to find.
      The majority range between ignorant and brainwashed.

      • Johnny Palestine

        Having children and a home means that one has made an emotional investment in the country where one lives.

        Having done so, this means that one believes in the future of the country. This MUST be a requisite to vote; for the left or right.

        Left wing ?&%$/ Thom Hartman has 4 kids. But among this profile conservatism is very popular compared to the communist/progressive/left/ gauchiste/socialist/ etc..

        • J.B.

          Emotional investment in the country a person lives in? Tell that to the tens of millions of Spanish speakers waving Mexican flags.

    • MrUniteUs1

      Something to tell your children.
      Read this book about the incredible role Detroit played during WWII.
      Without Detroit’s manufacturing capabilities we would have lost the war.

      • truebearing

        And the leftist unions destroyed it, so what is your point?

      • Webb

        De black man he save Merica, but he still keepin de white man down!

      • J.B.

        Detroit was a different color back then.

  • naguakkina

    are they naturally enjoying make money online

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Flagged, off-topic …

  • Lanna

    That’s our boy….Disengaged for America, but pro-active for the Middle East in allowing the real change of big proportions!

    • Johnny Palestine

      This beach boy looks like he wants something in his mouth. This is the President of the USA?????

      • nomoretraitors

        Wouldn’t it be great if the ocean were to rise up and sweep him away?

    • nomoretraitors

      He is not disengaged. He is actively engaged in his purpose — the destruction of this “mean” country

  • Johnny Walker

    Al Queda are butchers BUT they provide opposition to Iranian theocracy. I say keep them healthy and well stocked with arms AND contained in Iraq/Syria with the understanding that they fight Iran as well. Hopefully they will kill each other just a little bit faster

    • MrUniteUs1

      I say let them fight it out or work it out. No Americans killed in Iraq since our troops left. Let’s keep it that way.

      • nomoretraitors

        The problem is if Al Qaeda takes over Iraq we will eventually have Americans killed in America

        • Charles Martel

          Then retailiate so harshly that attacking us again will be so unthinkable that their own people will rise up and kill them. Offer to destroy Mecca.

        • MrUniteUs1

          I say just the opposite the more time they spend trying to take over and hold ground in Iraq. The less time they’ll spend thinking about us. Beside they never needed to take over a country to launch terrorist attacks before. I got a feeling that those that welcomed Al Qaeda will soon unwelcome them and ISIL

          • Daniel Greenfield

            If Al Qaeda gets its hands on heavy firepower and controls millions of people, it will be in the position to do a whole lot more damage

          • MrUniteUs1

            Hasn’t happened yet. Al Qaeda got ran out of Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and most of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
            Some Sunnis are already complaining about Al Qaeda and ISIL in Iraq.

          • truebearing

            Your theories are …interesting. Unfortunately for you, they are wrong.

          • Drakken

            The next time you have a thought? Just let it go.

      • Webb

        I say zippity do-dah, zippity day! My oh my . . .

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Giving weapons to a terrorist group at war with the US is not a good idea

    • carlos

      Al Qaeda, already reported to be instituting SHARIA LAW in the areas they have conquered……..

  • DennisMets

    The United States is so much better off if Obannana stays out on the golf course, this is sorta how the military puts non productive people to work, put them in a non critical area so they can not screw things up

    • liz

      Yeah, too bad he can carry his pen and his phone with him out on the golf course.

  • MrUniteUs1

    Off topic. What should happen to this man?
    An 89-year-old Philadelphia man has been ordered held without bail after his arrest on charges of aiding and abetting the deaths of 216,000 Jewish men, women, and children during his time as a guard at the notorious Nazi death camp Auschwitz

  • Cappy1437

    Thank you Daniel Greenfield. Excellent article.

  • ffighter13

    With all the weapons being procured for the middle east I am reminded of roosevelts “Lend Lease progrom”.I get a kick out of Mr. Greenfields sword like pen, he does cut through the bs.

  • nomoretraitors

    An utter and complete disgrace to the office

  • Softly Bob

    If the Ba’athist sodomite is so interested in the Ocean he should do the decent thing and drown himself in it.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    The problem Xerxes had with whipping the ocean was that he ticked off Poseidon, and lost his little war against the Greeks. Let’s hope that Obama has the same problem. His war, after all, is against the American people …

    • Johnny Palestine

      I wish I posted that entry. I must study about Xerxes and Poseidon

    • Texas Patriot

      I don’t see it that way, Wolfie. Perhaps it’s more like Leonidas at the battle of Themopylae. With Xerxes attacking with his 10,000 Persian mercenaries, did Leonidas dance and strut and beat his chest? No, he did not. He stood silently with his battle phalanx of 300 Spartans, waiting for Xerxes to make a stupid move and be forced to expend his precious resources and men, thereby costing him valuable time depriving him of the essential element of surprise. There are times when it takes more courage to stand strong and wait for the most opportune moment of attack, and perhaps this is one of those times.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Actually, all I was doing was playing around with the fact that Obama’s sending 300 men to Iraq. If it wasn’t so sad, I would have thought it funny …

        Concerning Leonidas and the Spartans, the Persians were poorly-trained, lightly-armored (or not at all), and the most “multicultural” army of his time.

        The Spartans were heavily armored … and the movie The 300 notwithstanding … wore breastplates, helmets, and greaves of bronze, and carried a bronze shield. Also, they were a unicultural force, sharing common values. Packed into the tight space of Themopylae, they were a force difficult to penetrate, and most of the Persians had weapons that couldn’t go through bronze.

        The most heavily-armored of all the Persian forces were the so-called Immortals. They wore light leather armor, with small rectangular plates of metal … very thin … sewn into the leather. Spartan armor, weapons, and tactics were more than a match for them. Too bad there weren’t 30,000 of them, rather than 300.

        • Texas Patriot

          WTKA: Also, they were a unicultural force, sharing common values.

          I couldn’t agree with you more about the necessity of a unified America to defend against the increasingly unified elements of global Islamic jihad. Check out this ISIS recruiting video. Very slick stuff.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            This is one of the most powerful videos I’ve ever seen about them. It shows their power … and I suspect it is growing … and their unity. To be put at the “mercy” of men like this would end only one way.

            They must be defeated, but we are divided along ideological lines, and our cause is championed by weak and ineffectual leaders. We are hamstrung by our blind acceptance of international norms of behavior. We must realize that unity, and strength of purpose, are the ONLY things which will put an end to Islam (or, at least, cause is to morph into a religion, rather than a vehicle to conquest).

            We’ve also got to get over our fear of using all the weapons at our disposal.

          • Texas Patriot


          • Americana

            I’ll have to ask you for clarification on what you mean by “using all the weapons at our disposal.”

          • Drakken

            Anything that breaks things and kills a lot of haji’s.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Preferably, conventional weapons. But nothing should be taken off the table …

          • Americana

            You realize that if we resort to nuclear weapons, it opens up that sphere of warfare on the battlefield?

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I merely stated that nothing should be off the table. Nukes are the world’s ultimate terror weapon, and the Muslim world should be properly terrorized by our possession of these weapons.

            Battlefield nuclear warfare has already been opened, at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For our nuclear deterrence to be credible, the rest of the world must know that we are willing to go “there”, again, if we must.

          • Americana

            Wolf, once the United States Armed Forces use tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield (or otherwise against larger civilian targets), we will have FOREVER opened the world’s battlefields to nuclear weapons by any and all combatants. If you want to subject American soldiers to these nuclear weapons fine, but I think it would be a mistake. There’s a reason nuclear weapons have been delegated to being defensive weapons of last resort as opposed to offensive weapons of first resort.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Uncertainty is the greatest weapon that any nation possesses against its enemies. If a nation takes the use of its most powerful weapons off the table, that act makes the enemy more certain that their actors will not suffer the ultimate consequences for their actions.

            In essence, you free the enemy to be more aggressive and brutal.

            Once again, and in other words, the nuclear genie is out of the bottle, for better or for worse. This is why states like Iran want them, and must not be allowed to gain them.

            Taking weapons off the table is the same as rules of engagement that force our troops in Afghanistan to go on patrol without a round chambered in their weapons. It’s stupid …

          • Drakken

            Your hero Obummer is doing his very best to make sure Iran gets them, when dealing with MAD, it works with civilized or semi-civilized nations, when dealing with uncivilized nations, it’s a pipe dream.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            My hero, Obummer? Was this commented directed to me, by mistake?

          • Webb

            Troll, you can take that to mean WHOOF! — Problem solved!

          • truebearing

            “using” means employingor put into service. “all” means everything. I’m guessing you know what “weapons” means. “Our disposal” is a phrase that indicates possession.

  • Clare Spark

    POTUS probably a Red Green, and the Greens are a big constituency in the West, seeking to reconcile science and religion. See”Darwin and the climate change debate: The Greens have it.”

  • Capt Bob

    When the bad guys In Iraq Start shooting at the 300 Military men that Obama is sending to Iraq we are going to have to come up with a new name for combat because Obama said they would not be involved in combat.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Video collateral damage, no doubt.

      It worked in Benghazi

      • zoomie

        No one seems to have pointed out that it is over 400 statute driving miles from Baghdad to the Persian Gulf. It is over 300 straight line flying nautical miles. There won’t be any helicoptors to evacuate the embassy to an aircraft carrier offshore. This will likely become exceedingly ugly.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          If there are no serious plans for a complete evacuation if enough of the Iraqi military collapses so that all that’s left are Shiite and Sunni militias, then this will become really bad.

          • Drakken

            It already is bad, chaos, panic, incompetence, stupidity, wishful thinking and downright cowardice rule the day here. So many chiefs and not enough Indians to get through to these bureaucrats that the situation deteriorates by the day, and the window of getting out of dodge is closing.

          • truebearing

            The SOB in the Whitehouse doesn’t care. He’s hoping Iran will do something.

            How many are there left to evacuate at the airport? Can you get out if the SHTF?

          • Drakken

            It is a bloody mess to say the least, there are a lot more folks than they ever planned to evacuate. Your have Westerners from every European country here that are engineers, cooks, bakers and candle stick makers and there is a complete breakdown of communications of who, what ,where and when. So we tell them make your way to the airport when our convoys leave, for hey are not getting guidance from their Govts. So how best to describe it? FUBAR and yes our folks have plan B ready to go.

          • truebearing

            Good luck. We’ll all be pulling for you.

  • Enlighted to Left Wing Speak

    Bill Nye the Science Guy works for PBS now? Bet Sheldon’s tuned in every night!

  • Charles Martel

    I don’t like Obama. As a matter of fact, I think he has intentionally damaged America. But i agree with his decision to stay out of Iraq. I supported the war effort in Iraq, and thought we would find weapons. I also thought Sadam should be taken out. I spent time in the desert in the first gulf war, and had an intense hatred of Sadam. But i have grown. I realize he was not be big threat. He was a harsh cruel dictator which is what the the Middle East needs with the exception of Israel in order to maintain control.

    As for fighting terriorism, you are using PC speak. Terriorism is not an enemy it is a method. Name the enemy, destroy them, and we owe no one a rebuilt country.

    If the people in Iraq become a threat to the US, aniliate them and move on.

    • zoomie

      more and more people are getting the logic correctly, like you

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Which part of “Al Qaeda” is vague?

      • Johnny Palestine

        Das Obmama is the new megaversion of ” The Music Man” with Robert Preston as gresy as the ”Flim Flam Man” with George C Scott.

        What an American talent Robert Preston was. Robert Preston is a singer melange of Obama and Reverend Wright plus a suspicion of George Bush senior selling himself on the Larry King show in 1988:

    • lostlegends

      Well put! Thank you.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Terror would have been a method, if it was any political or religious group other than Islam. But terror is the preferred method of Islam. The War on Terror, perhaps, should be renamed the War on Islam, because that’s what it is. The Koran and the Hadith both encourage the “believer” to engage in terror.

      This is not PC speak. It is the reality of the situation, since Mohammed first opened his mouth …

  • trickyblain

    Vastly reduced fish stocks is an “imaginary catastrophe”? Taking measures (that the both environmental groups AND fishing industry fully support) to conserve natural resources means that this is the only thing Obama has been thinking about this week?

    • J.B.

      The only “fishing industries” that support Obama’s anti-American proposals are foreign ones, because they will catch every fish Obama pretends to preserve – not that fishing stocks are endangered in any way.

  • Andy_Lewis

    Pssttt…he’s celebrating.

  • Kerri Feldman

    OMG Impeach him already.

  • POA

    Whatever hurts the whites/christians is what is done. Think about that…..

  • Webb

    Your question, you answer it.

  • USARetired

    Obozo would make excellent Shark Bait, if the Sharks wouldn’t spit him out as ‘unacceptable’!

    • Webb

      Notice who isn’t with him — she’d kill all the fish.

  • Anamah

    And why in the world nobody is able to save America (*) from his extremist attacks.
    It seems she is in her last moments…bleeding hard under current malignancy and stupidity of Democrats and their Republicans establishment accomplices.

    (*) In the facts, not in words.

  • Texas Patriot

    Perhaps this was the moment when Barack Obama finally has had to wake up and become an All-American War President. After the events of the last two weeks, and the considered opinion of the best military experts in the world is that very little, if anything, can be done to stop the disintegration of Iraq, perhaps going for a walk on the beach on a Friday afternoon is the very best thing he could have done. Be not afraid my fellow Americans and my fellow lovers of truth and freedom, whomever and wherever you may be. There will be plenty of opportunities for the American Eagle to attack the random snake.

    • Drakken

      Yes and if we really wish hard enough, those rainbows and unicorns will magically appear.

      • Texas Patriot


  • popseal

    This feckless Dilettante-in-Chief reminds me of the funny turtle picture where he’s on top of a fence post wondering how he got there. Only with the president, the world is fast becoming a much more dangerous place as a consequence of stupid and naïve voters who were either trying to prove they weren’t racists or voted in the hope of getting free stuff from a long leg Mack Daddy.

  • joshuasweet

    obviously not one of the new exclusion zones for a vacation or was it?
    And here we go again helping the Muslim Brotherhood advance their agenda yet again now with Iran to put down Syria and Iraq.

  • Ellman48

    The comparison between Xerxes and Obama is telling. Xerxes thought his status as a god allowed him to control the seas. Obama thinks that being a ruler over a vast government and its resources and power can do the same. In his mind those who govern sit on Mount Olympus and can control nature and people.

    Xerxes met his Waterloo when the Greeks would not submit to his tyranny. The same will happen to Obama once Americans rise up to refuse his totalitarian presumptions. Someone should pose the following question in a poll: ‘Is Obama America’s friend or foe?’ The results would be very interesting indeed!

    • cabensg

      Obama doesn’t think he can control the ocean but he does know he can control the people who fish in it just like he uses mandates to control every other part of American life. I’m not saying he doesn’t have delusions of grandeur but that doesn’t mean we should think he isn’t practical in all his actions of tyranny.

  • Douglas J. Bender

    Can someone with skill please photoshop a picture of a heavily-armed military guard unit (I don’t know if a “SWAT” team is technically “military” rather than “police force”) aiming their weapons at the ocean waves on a beach? (Oh, and with Obama in the background, directing the troops with a golf-club.)

  • BagLady

    King George III responded to Patrick Henry’s cry of “Give me liberty or
    give me death” with the Fisheries Bill which banned the fishermen of New
    England from the North Atlantic. A letter sent to a sea captain
    denounced it as, “A Bill so replete with inhumanity and cruelty… an
    everlasting stain on the annals of our pious Sovereign.”

    Whilst not wishing to fan the flames of hatred, this does rather put me in mind of the limits placed on Gazan fishermen and their 3 mile fishing limit.

    There is much fishiness going on in Iraq.

    How did a marauding bunch of murderous kids manage to sweep down through Iraq, taking town after town and defeating the huge Iraqi army in a matter of weeks when the mighty forces of NATO, who’d spent 15 years in battle and garnered nothing but hatred, failed totally.

    There is only one explanation for Obama holidaying while the Middle East burns and that’s complicity.

    • T100C1970

      The Iraqi Military has always been a paper tiger. The US forces completely decimated the Iraqi Military Army in a matter of a few weeks under both Bush 41 and 43.

      It was the “marauding bunch of murderous kids” that neither Bush nor Obama could entirely suppress.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The UK fishing ban didn’t have anything to do with weapons smuggling.

      The Iraqi officers appear to have left prematurely, some perhaps because they were in league with the Baathists, but it’s possible that this collapse was really a joint effort by Iran, Al Qaeda and the Kurds to trash a united Iraq for good.

      There is evidence that Maliki and the Kurds both had a role in the engineered collapse.

  • Aajaxx

    Wow, this author is triumphantly ignorant of the state of the oceans and the fishing industry. Typical GOP wacko.

    • Webb

      I vote for you to go over and tell those Chinese how it’s going to be when Bathhouse Barry pulls out his pen–.

    • Gislef

      Judging from the lack of information you provided, apparently so are you.

    • CapitalistPig

      Perhaps you could enlighten us & by extension, Mr Greenfield, on the errors or fallacies you feel he’s presenting.
      I find his columns to be thorough, well researched, factual & free of extraneous emotion—in short, he’s the “anti-liberal” in style & substance.
      He often weighs in with his readers on this site so don’t be surprised if you get a response directly from DG. In any event, how about helping the rest of us or perhaps, maybe you’re the one who has been misinformed? FPM isn’t like most left wing sites like the HuffinGlue Post. Responses from the left are actually posted & remain on the site.

  • Tanker74

    It’s going to take Iraq’s GLBLTQ community asking for help to generate any action from Barack Hussein Obama.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Obama can’t fight terrorism, but maybe he can beat the ocean.

    The so-called War on Terror hasn’t turned out too well so far has it? Let’s see so far we have had the two greatest strategic blunders ever in American history in Iraq and Afghanistan, where we were trying to not only democratize the Islamic totalitarian world, which is utterly impossible, by the way, but also to lift up Muslims (who are also our eternal mortal enemies), do nation-building, and prevent radical Islam from hijacking moderate Islam, except there is no radical Islam or moderate Islam, since there is only mainstream orthodox Islam. Besides wasting trillions of dollars, all we got to show for it is thousands of dead and maimed American soldiers now being abused by our federal government run and managed VA system. Not exactly a bright spot in American history.

    Not to mention that Muslims aren’t terrorists. They are jihadists instead, as all mainstream orthodox Muslims in the world are jihadists in one form or another. So they couldn’t even get the name of the stupid war right.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    While ISIS Jihadists were tweeting photos of severed Iraqi heads, John Kerry was tweeting photos of himself with Leonardo DiCaprio.

    That’s the deal, clueless squeamish Americans see photos of severed heads and automatically think, “oh how extreme.” However, the truth is Muslims have been barbarically lopping off the heads of infidels since the seventh century. Hence, while it may seem extreme to civilized and polite society, for Islamic society, on the other hand, it is par for the course. In Islamic society severed heads are the rule rather than the exception. There is nothing extreme or unusual about it.

  • Dean Jackson

    The Daily Mail article reports the UN Secretary General’s imbecilic rationale for no air strikes (in fact, the Secretary General is reading from a script), “Speaking at the Asia Society on Syria he said that military strikes might have little lasting effect or even be counter productive if there is no movement towards inclusive government in Iraq. Calling sectarian warfare a disaster for all, he added: The Sunni extremists are trying to show that the governments in Baghdad, Iran and the United States are working together to support atrocities against Sunni communities. ‘This would help them mobilise support from the Sunni majority that does not share the extremist’ agenda. It is essential that the government of Iraq and its supporters do everything possible to avoid falling into this trap.'” —

    Firstly, the UN Secretary General is regurgitating the same ludicrous talking points as the Communist-co-opted talking heads in the United States…

    Secondly, the Sunni religious “extremists” were created by the United States (as tasked by the USSR/China Axis & Allies) and trained in Turkey by United States military personnel…

    “The source said that after training in Turkey, thousands of ISIS fighters went to Iraq by way of Syria to join the effort to establish an Islamic caliphate subject to strict Islamic law, or Shariah.” —

    Thirdly, the Sunni extremists are supposedly religious “fundamentalists”, meaning, if ISIS were a real home-grown organization, ISIS could care less how the secular Shia government in Baghdad behaves towards Sunnis. And fourthly, the government in Baghdad does what the United States government tells it to do (after the United States is told what to do by the USSR/China Axis), hence why there is persecution not only against Shia but Christians too.

    This is the same chaos-game the West has been tasked to perform throughout the world by the USSR/China Axis, the purpose of which is to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where Western nations are seen causing chaos; and (2) and weaken the United States Armed Forces via involvement in never-ending wars.

    The end result of this long-range Communist strategy is to isolate the United States…

    Take a look at what the Russian government ordered the Russian Ministry of Defense to keep on the masthead of its official newspaper…see if you notice something odd…

    “Krasnaya Zvezda” is Russian for “Red Star”, the official newspaper of Soviet and later Russian Ministry of Defense. The paper’s official designation is, “Central Organ of the Russian Ministry of Defense.” Note the four Soviet emblems next to the still existing Soviet era caption titled “Red Star”(!), one of the Soviet emblems including the image of Lenin, the man who removed the independent Russian nation from the map, supplanting it within the new nation called the USSR, a murderous one-party government that spread violence throughout the world in order to “liberate” the world, and bring into existence a one-world Soviet dictatorship! If the “collapse” of the USSR was real, then the “Red Star” caption, four Soviet emblems and Lenin’s image could not form the masthead of the Russian Ministry of Defense’s newspaper, due to their association with the Soviet Union and its ideals of world revolution. Imagine the official paper of the German Ministry of Defense is named “Das Third Reich”, where next to the caption are four Nazi emblems, one of the emblems sporting a profile of Adolph Hitler’s head!

    Then for Russian Naval vessels, take a look at the following photo from 2013, and note what’s still appended to the bows (enlarge picture)…

    See the Soviet era Red Star still attached to the port bow, near the anchor!

    Those pictures were taken in 2009, 2004 and 2013, respectively, not before the “collapse” of the USSR. As you can see, the distinct Soviet era nationality emblem of the Communist Party…the distinct-designed Red Star… is still present. That political symbol of the Soviet government would have been immediately removed in early 1992 if the “collapse” of the USSR were genuine. As the legal emblem of the USSR and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the distinctive Red Star nationality emblem can only be present if Communists are still in power in Russia and the other 14 republics that made up the USSR.

    Now, the distinct Soviet roundel (a roundel is the nationality emblem on military aircraft that identifies the nation the aircraft belongs to) is a five-pointed Red Star with a white border area and an outer thin red line, as the link immediately below shows…

    Now, take a look at the Soviet nationality roundel on a Russian military aircraft in 2009:—Air/Sukhoi-Su-25SM/1606418/L/

    Take a look at what’s still on Aeroflot aircraft…

    Note the Communist emblem of the hammer & sickle stenciled on the Aeroflot aircraft’s fuselage! Imagine the Swastika still on Lufthansa commercial aircraft!

    The Soviet Air Force Base outside the town of Engels (Saratov Oblast District, Russia) named Engels Air Force Base (the only Soviet Air Force Base named in honor of Engels; none were named after Marx nor Lenin), is STILL called Engels Air Force Base, and the adjacent town is still called Engels. Both town and air base were named after Marx’s colleague Friedrich Engels…

    Engels Air Force Base:

    Also, notice the modified Soviet Red Star roundel, created in 2010, 19-years after the collapse of the USSR (people were talking about the inexplicable continued use of the Soviet roundel, so instead of creating a new roundel for the new Russian nation, which was supposed to have occurred in 1992, the Duma instead merely modified the Soviet roundel!). Here’s the Soviet roundel, for comparison…

    The only difference between the two roundels is the addition of the narrow blue trim bordering the red star. Imagine today’s German Luftwaffe using a modified Nazi Swastika on its aircraft! Even so, the unmodified Soviet era roundel remains in-place on most military aircraft, meaning Russians, who were 94% non-Communist Party members in late 1991, have fond memories of being persecuted under the nationality that that roundel represents! Imagine if Germany had been 94% ethnic Jewish during World War II, and after the Allies’ occupation the Jewish German population used the Swastika roundel for the new Luftwaffe!

    Engels city:,_Saratov_Oblast

    In fact, Engels city still has Lenin Square…

    …and Saratov city (right across the Volga River from Engels city) still has its massive statue of Lenin…

    In fact, approximate 97% of Lenin’s statues that stood in Russia before the fake collapse of the USSR are to this day still standing (that 97% statistic constitutes thousands of statues)….

    The only statues taken down were in those locations where foreign tourists would travel the most, and those statues were lovingly disassembled and placed in museums or parks, waiting there for their planned resurrections–after the defeat of the West…

    The fraudulent “collapse” of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Moscow & Allies, which explains why verification of the “collapse” was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    Notice that not one political party in the West demanded verification of the collapse of the USSR, and the media failed to alert your attention to this fact, including the “alternative” media. When determining whether the “former” USSR is complying with arms control treaties, what does the United States do to confirm compliance? Right, the United States sends into the “former” USSR investigative teams to VERIFY compliance, yet when it’s the fate of the West that’s at stake should the collapse of the USSR be a ruse, what does the United States do to confirm the collapse? Nothing!

    It gets worse–the West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members; and (2) arrested and detained the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior control the populations of the larger cities during the period of “Perestroika” (1986-1991)!

    There was no verification, de-Communization and de-mobilization.

    Now read these two revealing quotes from Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and former Soviet minister of foreign affairs Eduard Shevardnadze, and what they have in mind for Europe in the near future:

    “Editor’s Note: The phrases ‘From the Atlantic to the Urals’, ‘From the Atlantic to Vladivostok’ and ‘From Vancouver to Vladivostok’ are interchangeable in the strategists’ lexicon. In the course of his Nobel Peace Prize Lecture, delivered in Oslo in June 1992, Gorbachev said: ‘Our [sic] vision of the European space from the Atlantic to the Urals is not that of a closed system. Since it includes the Soviet Union [sic], which reaches to the shores of the Pacific, it goes beyond nominal geographical boundaries’. Note that Gorbachev, who had been out of office for six months, referred to the Soviet Union, not Russia. In an interview on Moscow Television on 19 November 1991, Eduard Shevardnadze continued speaking as though he was still Soviet Foreign Minister: ‘I think that the idea of a Common European Home, the building of a united Europe, and I would like to underline today, of great Europe, the building of Great Europe, great, united Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, from the Atlantic to Vladivostok, including all our territory, most probably a European-Asian space, this project is inevitable. I am sure that we will come to building a united military space as well. To say more precisely: we will build a united Europe, whose security will be based on the principles of collective security. Precisely, collective security’. These statements by key implementers of the strategy reflect the central strategic objective of asserting ‘irreversible’ Russian/Soviet hegemony over Eurasia, thus establishing the primary geographical component of the intended World Government.” — ‘The Perestroika Deception’, by KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn.

    and here’s more on the upcoming “Atlantic to Vladivostok” union…

    When the new “Atlantic to Vladivostok” union materializes, Communist strategists will have achieved two goals, (1) the further isolation of the United States in the world; and (2) the disbanding of NATO.

    While we don’t know when exactly the Democratic Party was co-opted by Marxists, thanks to the peculiar historical nature surrounding the founding of the Republican Party, we do know when exactly the party of Lincoln was co-opted…

    Marxists/Socialists who after the failed 1848 revolution in Germany came to the United States. Upon arrival to the United States they infiltrated the embryonic Republican Party, many forming voluntary Germanic Union Armies and becoming General Officers themselves within the Union Army, such as…

    (1) Brigadier General Joseph WEYDEMEYER of the Union Army was a close friend of Karl MARX and Fredrick Engels in the London Communist League (Assistant Secretary of War Charles A. DANA —close friend of Marx, published with Joseph Weydemyer a number of Communist Journals and, also “The Communist Manifesto,” commissioned by Karl Marx. As a member of the Communist/Socialist Fourier Society in America, Dana was well acquainted with Marx and Marx’s colleague in Communism, Fredrick Engels. Dana, also, was a friend of all Marxists in the Republican Party, offering assistance to them almost upon their arrival on the American continent.);

    (2) Brigadier General Louis BLENKER, Union Army—radical socialist/Communist from Germany—was remarkably successful in encouraging German immigrants to join the Union Army and the Republican Party;

    (3) Major General August WILLICH—often called “The Reddest of the Red ‘48ers” was a member of the London Communist League with Karl MARX and Fredrick ENGLES. Before seeking refuge in the U.S. Willich was a personal acquaintance of Karl MARX;

    (4) Major Robert ROSA, of the Union Army, was a proud member of the New York Communist Club;

    (5) Brigadier General Carl SCHURZ –as a young socialist, was noted for helping Gottfried Kinkel of Bonn escape from Spandau while imprisoned there for his socialist activities in the ’48 Revolts. Schurz came to America in 1848. He was a forty-eighter who became very active in the development of the Republican Party and in politics. He was given a high position by Lincoln in the Union Army;

    (6) Brigadier General Alexander Von Schimmelfenning, like most of the other MARXISTS /Socialist/Communists who came to the U.S. after their failed uprising in 1848;

    (7) Major General Franz SIEGEL, thought to be one of Lincoln’s most controversial and the poorest of his generals;

    (8) Commander Friedrich Karl Franz HECKER, (exact military title not known) known as “Red” and “Flagrant Friedrich.” Educated in Germany, received his doctor of law degree in Munich. He was expelled from Prussia. Arriving in the U.S., he took part in the creation of the Republican Party, encouraged the proliferation of German newspapers carrying the Socialist propaganda, aided in the election of Lincoln, and propagandized heavily among German immigrants for volunteers for the Union Army. He was named Commander of a regiment he raised of Germans;

    (9) General John C. FREMONT was noted for his close association with all of the socialist/communists whom Lincoln placed in positions of command in his army. Fremont was the first Republican candidate for president. He was considered to be the “darling” of the most radical socialists. His chief of staff, early in the war, was Hungarian socialist revolutionary;

    (10) Brevet Major General Frederick Charles SALOMON, one of a group of four radical socialist brothers, with highly similar names– three of whom were in the group of Socialist 1848ers. Frederick began his career in the Union Army as a Captain in MO, wound up as a Colonel in the Ninth Wisconsin Volunteer Regiment, then a brigadier general and a brevet major general;

    11. Brevetted Brigadier General Charles E. Salomon, also started his American military career with a bunch of MO volunteers. Born in Prussia, he, also, was one of the radical socialists arriving in the U.S. after the 1848 Socialist uprising failure and was a brother to Frederick Charles;

    12. Governor Edward Salomon, a third Salomon brother, also born in Prussia, did not do military service, but ran for political office in Wisconsin, was elected lieutenant governor, becoming Governor of Wisconsin when the elected Governor “drowned”; and

    13. Colonel Fritz ANNEKE/ANNECKE was a Forty-eighter, with a strong leftward tilt. He was a Communist League member and a Baden Revolt veteran…the list goes on…

    The failed 1848 revolutions thought Marxists a powerful lesson, that lesson being they couldn’t win overtly, so they adopted the tactic of infiltration of the West’s political parties.

    By the way, did you notice who Lincoln’s last Assistant Secretary of War was? Marx’s confident here in the United States–Charles Dana, who when a newspaper editor earlier in his professional life published all of Marx’s writings for his newspaper the New York Daily Tribune. He also published the first American printing of Marx’s ‘Communist Manifesto’…

    Now you know how Bolshevik Russia survived in 1917; how the West “lost” China to the Communists in 1949; why the Eisenhower administration turned a deaf ear to the anti-Communist Hungarian uprising in 1956; why the Eisenhower administration in 1959 was indifferent to the Castro brothers’ Communist fidelity, actually used the CIA to overthrow the Batista government; why the Nixon administration abandoned Taiwan for Communist China, and signed treaties/provided economic aid to the USSR; why the Nixon administration refused to tell the American People that over 50% of North Vietnamese NVA regiments were actually Chinese People’s Liberation Army soldiers (attired in NVA uniforms), thereby (1) ensuring the Vietnam War would be lost; (2) destroying the prominence of the United States abroad and at home; and (3) securing Communist victories in Southeast Asia. Working in the background within the political parties of the United States and Great Britain were Marxist agents doing their best to (1) ensure the survival of Communist nations when they popped up; and (2) sabotage any policies that would bring down a Communist nation.

  • YouHateMe

    In the words of a famous cartoon character: Weeeee’re dooooomed!

  • BagLady

    I am all for preserving the rhythm of life both above and below the waterline. However, I can’t find any info on the new regulations he plans to put in place, what they will entail, nor what it will cost the average small fisherman. As 15% of the worlds protein is provided by wild fish, it’s vital we control it from overfishing.

    It would seem there are already laws in place at a local level and surely these can deal with the problem. They could be tightened where necessary.

    At the same time, after 20 years of fighting agri-business over the addition of iffy ‘natruceuticals’, the minions at the USDA have swung regulations in favour of the $30 billion organic industry (including cheap Chinese imports) at the expense of ‘small’ farmers whilst selling out the consumer.

    Strangely, and coincidentally, across the pond, the British Government has also sold out’ the public, by taking the opposite position but arriving at the very same conclusion.

    There was an hue and cry following last year’s horsemeat scandal and many promises were made by Cameron.

    Whereas Obama reckons he can control fraudulent fishing, the Coalition argue that they cannot feasibly trace the origin of meat that finds its way to supermarket shelves, in one form or another (yuk) and nothing more can be done.

    In both cases our shareholders are on a win-win roller coaster whilst (happily) destroying the middle class capitalist.

  • Immigrant_from_Socialism7



  • Debbie G

    Obama: Married to a fish wife and likes to tell fish stories.

  • truebearing…

    Any more questions? Go read Greenfield’s piece on how Obama’s latest scheme will hurt our navy’s ability to protect the nation from China.

    • BagLady

      There’s that quiet addendum he adds, however.

      Without going back to his speech (on my failing system) I recall him saying that it all hinged on international co-operation.

      Some hope of that. The fish is dead in the water and you are angling for political advantage rather than the very real danger that over-fishing poses to the food chain.

      I have stood many a time on the docks as the fishing boats come in. Most have no fish, but with their oversized nets, they trawl the seabed for whatever is left. I see not a single fish, just the detritus that piles up and stinks out the wharf. It all goes off to make fish sauce, leaving no nourishment for the fish.

      I see to that skin cancer is now becoming a real issue in the fishy world. Fuk-u-shima?

    • BagLady

      America has no business in the South China Sea.

      China has been quietly going about its business, winning friends and influencing people around the world while America has been busy taking aggression to another level.

      Whilst the US spends $30bn killing Afghanis, China spends $30bn on infrastructure in Beijing. While America spends $30bn killing Iraqis, China spends $30billion on Shanghai.

      You can’t have it both ways.