obama fall

Who would have thought that a sane person could see this image and have to think about the answer to that question?


Olimometer 2.52

It’s money and I’m scrambling to finish things before leaving tonight DC and the Exempt America from Obamacare Rally

While I didn’t manage 10% of last Sunday we did manage 10% of the weekly paycheck goal.

Only $273 and 14 more $20 tip jar hitters are needed to fill this weeks paycheck. It would be nice to leave for DC with a full check already in hand.

If you would care to help in that quest please hit DaTipJar below.

and if you’re going to be in DC Tuesday look me up.


Still looking to crowdsource my radio advertising. If you want more info click this link and make up to to $400 for yourself.

Was it just 33 years ago that we saw things like this

Syrian government supporters smashed windows at the U.S. Embassy in Damascus on Monday, raised a Syrian flag and scrawled graffiti calling the American ambassador a “dog” in anger over the envoy’s visit last week to an opposition stronghold, witnesses said.

At HotAir Ed Morrissey who also remembers the late 70’s opines:

Obama had better act quickly to make clear to Assad that this kind of attack won’t be tolerated. The last thing Obama needs now is yet another parallel to the Carter administration in a sacking of a Middle East embassy by “students.” Unfortunately, the White House appears somewhat distracted by yet another effort to push the nominally-US-aligned Saleh out of power

I haven’t done the Carter/Arthur watch lately but I just want to remind you of something I wrote the day Obama was inaugurated:

Lets hope that Obama’s decision to walk is just symbolic and not an actual reflection on the Carter vs Arthur watch.

Seriously considering the crowd and the mood it makes sense but please please PLEASE I hope its not another Jimmy Carter! Unless of course it is followed by another Ronald Reagan, preferably from Alaska.

We’ve reached a point where the Jimmy Carter vs Chester Arthur question is no longer in doubt, the only question left is will the public give us a Reagan in 2012 or a Ford.

Way to go Mr. President not only are you fumbling the ball but you actually have managed to make Mubarek a “hero” for staying.

Nothing raises the profile of an Arab leader more than poking an US president in the eye.

Of course James Clapper actually saying that the Muslim Brotherhood is “largely secular” was nonsense too but at least that was simple stupidity in testimony, saying stuff like the publicly just makes us look like dopes.

Now if the administration’s goal was to make sure Mubarek stays without making it known that it was the goal then it was brilliant but my God it’s the late 70’s all over again. It’s also interesting to note that if you check out Memeorandum not a single headline hits the White House for making dopes of themselves, but its moves like this that validate Trumps statements on the administration.

We haven’t had the Arthur Carter Watch for quite a while but this is the ultimate Arthur Carter Moment.

You might recall Jimmy Carter and the transformation of Iran from a stable US ally to an Islamic state that has been the source trouble worldwide for decades.

Now in Egypt we have lets face it a Dictator albeit a friendly one to the US, that has repressed free speech to a degree, and played both ends against the middle.

If there was ever a test of this president, if he is going to be Jimmy Carter or Chester Arthur it is now.

If the Islamic Brotherhood ends up taking over it would be the final irony of Barack Obama the replacement of an American Ally with an Islamic state. It would be the ultimate Jimmy Carter moment. Some in government are already worrying along these lines.

Pam Geller notices one other oddity:

Interesting, too, how everyone, even Obama, is talking about Egypt’s uprising. And yet Iran experienced an even greater people’s movement and Ahmadinejad and the mullahs crushed it with a violence incomprensible to the West. And yet nobody was talking about it. Nobody. There are tens of thousands in the street of Egypt, there were millions in the streets of Iran and they were raped, tortured, publicly hanged, slaughtered because they marched for freedom.

Obama pretended it wasn’t happening. Media too.

Well after all Iran is on the other side and a revolt there affirms what GWB said for years. A revolt in Egypt doesn’t so a revolt is a good thing to the left. And by an odd coincidence there are now protests in Jordan too. What do these two countries have in common? Peace with Israel.

If you see protesters in the US supporting change in Egypt, change in Jordan, but no word about Lebanon where Iran and Hezbollah are calling the shot that will tell you everything about what is going on, it’s also noteworthy to note this via the Lonely Conservative:

Iranian leaders and their state-run media love instability in the Middle East as long as it’s not happening in Iran. They’re gleeful over the unrest in Egypt, according to CNS News.

The Tehran Times, Iran Daily and Resalat newspapers were among those that led their Thursday editions with the Egypt story, using headlines like “Spirit of Tunisia comes to Egypt,” “Egyptians demand end to Mubarak rule” and “Intensification of public protests against Mubarak regime.”

The Tehran Times describes itself as the mouthpiece of the Islamic revolution, Iran Daily is affiliated with the official state IRNA news agency, and Resalat is a conservative daily supportive of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

If Iran is backing revolution in Egypt that adds up to big trouble for the rest of us.

Of course the ideal is a democratic Egypt that is allied to the US and friendly to Israel. The odds of that are slim to impossible.

The disaster result is an Islamic state, run by the Muslim Brotherhood and ready to go to war with Israel. That is disaster and will mean more trouble than anyone can imagine.

Looking at the reaction of the protesters and their reactions, it appears that the military is a more respected than the police. Mubarek is in his 80’s he doesn’t have much more time in charge anyway, and yet you also don’t want to see a repressive government that abuses the Egyptian people. Threading the needle is to give a government that represent Egyptians without an unfriendly power.

For an experienced and strong leader with a discreet diplomatic corps and wise advisers it would be a tough spot requiring a delicate touch.

Unfortunately we have the Obama administration. I don’t envy them this problem. I would suggest a public statement opposing violence and the aspirations of the Egyptian people while privately doing working a deal to:

  1. Keep Iran and China out
  2. Keep Islamists down and out.
  3. Guarantee basic rights for Egyptians
  4. Maintain Peace with Israel
  5. Protect open access to the Suez canal

Remember its not the name of the guy or guys in charge that matters in Egypt, it’s the goals.

If there was ever a time for this president to be Arthur instead of Carter this is it. I wish the administration luck, they’ll need it.


Update:  Stacy makes his case for targeted batons, I’m not buying that but I do buy the update:

A former adviser to the Obama administration argues that the Muslim Brotherhood “should not be seen as inevitably our enemy” — which is what you’d expect an Obama adviser to say, I suppose — but Thomas Joscelyn isn’t buying it:

Hosni Mubarak’s regime is no friend of freedom, even though it is certainly an ally against al Qaeda.
In all likelihood, an Egypt dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood (if that is how the turmoil plays out) would be neither.

I saw the clip today on Morning Joe where Chris Matthews declares that Palin will win the nomination in 2012 if she runs, Newsbusters was surprised:

An unexpected prediction, and an even more surprising admission from Chris Matthews this morning . . .

Appearing on Morning Joe, the Hardball host predicted that Sarah Palin would seek the Republican presidential nomination, and painted a path to victory for her. In a moment of candor, Matthews admitted that “the media will try to destroy her, of course.”

Matthews made his comments in the course of a pre-taped Mojo Midterm Exam segment that aired on today’s Morning Joe.

Newsbusters is shocked SHOCKED that Matthews would say what he says. They should not be. If they paid attention to what followed they would understand.

Barnicle maintained that if Palin is the nominee that Obama wins re-election automatically. Matthews believes this too.

Matthews is a hyperpatrisian but he is no fool. He knows what both 2010 & 2012 have in store for Democrats in general and this administration in particular. He wants Palin running not because he thinks she can win, but because he thinks she can not.

Newsbusters is reading Matthews wrong but Matthews is reading Palin wrong and Joe Scarborough God bless him hits the nail on the head. When Scarborough points out that Matthews claims concerning Palin’s ignorance are the same thing that was said about Reagan, Matthews declares Reagan well read and substantive.

Unfortunately for Chris like myself Joe read Tip O’Neill’s Autobiography and reminded Chris what his old boss said about Reagan. It was the liberal line for decades until he died. I remember the arguments, I believed them at the time, the difference was when the facts didn’t support those beliefs I changed my opinion, they haven’t.

Here Joe was able to see what Chris Matthews had wrong. Matthews and Barnicle are assuming that the nation won’t accept a Sarah Palin, they assume she is some kind of dunce that people will see right through. However what people see right through are the media types who think this.

2010 may be 2004 redux but 2012 has the potential to be 1980 all over again. A Carter like president facing crises that he can’t cope with, a republican field with one or more established faces (Romney, Huck) and an outsider, a former governor who is considered by the intelligentsia just a lightweight celeb. The left was delighted when Reagan was the front runner, convinced that he couldn’t win, remember how that turned out?

Will the left learn from history? I see no reason why they would start doing so now.

Update: Captain Ed’s take, he notices something too.

Notice that no one objects to this characterization of the media on this panel of, er, media personalities. No one questions whether that is actually the media’s job, to intentionally try to destroy political candidates. It’s all just a given. Palin runs, media will attempt to destroy her — and it serves as an implicit admission that the media did exactly that in 2008.

Solid point.

One of the mistakes of the Obama administration was the “I’m in charge” mode on this, taking ownership on the BP stuff early. Now he owns a mess.

Matthews just compared it to the Iranian Hostage Crisis in terms of political cost. That is exactly right and depending on the long term effects of this spill (BP will eventually get it fixed maybe even this week.) it will bleed him the same way the Iranian Hostage Crisis did.

The ultimate Arthur vs Carter experience!

Well after hitting the president for his decision on Missiles for a good chunk of the day comes a big win for the country

Law enforcement officials in New York have questioned at least 12 men about their connections to Zazi, who arrived in New York after a 1,777 mile drive from Denver. His trip to New York triggered a series of raids by heavily armed police and federal agents.

Authorities told ABCNews.com that Zazi’s computer contained bomb-making directions and an explosives recipe that would have produced homemade bombs of the same size and type used in the terror attacks on the London subways in July 2005.

Not only has he been caught but he might be of use in the War on Terror:

The Afghan national at the center of a reputed Al Qaeda terror cell probe was trying to cut a deal Friday after two days of FBI grilling, sources told the Daily News

Now one could say that this investigation has been going on since last year, but President Obama is the man in charge and whatever he might be doing it certainly was right.

I will be opposing the president on a lot of his domestic agenda but as long as he guys continue successfully defending the nation his presidency will be an overall success. You don’t have to be friends to celebrate.

Carter 15/ Arthur 10

After a pretty good week the president is off the wagon:

The Obama administration will scrap the controversial missile defense shield program in Eastern Europe, a senior administration official confirmed to CNN Thursday.

I’d keep an eye on Sarah Palin’s facebook page, this one is a fat pitch over the plate.

Lets cut to the Chase, Gates blather not withstanding the reason why the shipboard option is bad is because it is not actually in the country being protected so they have absolutely no control over their own defense or the decision to actually defend themselves.

This kind of stuff is sure going to provide an incentive for countries to be allied with us isn’t it?

That’s as Carter as you can get:

Carter 15 Arthur 9

This is a full You Fool moment:

Exit question: Is this the price from Russia keeping nukes out of Chavez’s hands and is this administration stupid enough to believe him? Can they learn from President Bush’s mistake concerning Vlad?

Update: Nothing on facebook yet but Conservatives for Palin has an awesome title post:

America’s New Foreign Policy – Speak Softly And Carry A Big “Kick Me” Sign……

Pretty good.

Update 2:
Hotair comments

Since I brought it up lets update the Arthur/Carter watch.

In terms of the country his actions on Iran, Chavez, North Korea and Honduras are all worth Carter points, that gives him 14.

His actions this week on Afghanistan, Cuba , the Somalia Strike and the Patriot Act are definitely Arthur moments. That brings his Arthur total to 9.

So the score is 14-9 Carter but do you notice a trend? All the Carter points are from inactive wars and diplomacy, while almost all the Arthur points involve actual fighting.

Could this be Obama crazy as a fox? Or is it a question of him willing to indulge his leftist allies as long as he doesn’t get blamed for military defeat? It might even be both at the same time.

When I saw Barak Obama he he reminded me of Jimmy Carter the first week the blog was open I quoted myself concerning what I thought:

You sometimes get a rookie pitcher with a winning season but usually not. I’m hoping for Chester Arthur but I’m expecting Jimmy Carter.

so much I started the Arthur/Carter Watch to see if he would be Jimmy Carter or Chester Arthur (Arthur was a Machine Pol who became president when Garfield was shot but governed like Prince Hal, turning away from his old self)

Now Carter has joined the Maureen Dowd Chorus saying to oppose Obama is to be Racist:

I think Mickey Kaus is dead on concerning this:

A good example of how, if the MSM wants to tilt against the Republicans, it’s often too wedded to its own conventions–e.g., the desire to ‘make news’ with an ex-Pres.–to be effective. … No sophisticated campaign propagandist would say, “OK, let’s throw Jimmy Carter at them. They’ll be reeling!

I’m starting to think comparing Obama to Carter is too much of an insult to Obama.

Jimmy Carter is our worst ex-president ever with only John Tyler competing and he only competes because he sided with the Confederacy so he would be an actual traitor, but Carter maintains his lead. Jay Nordlinger said it best years ago:

The ex-president is known as Joe Human Rights, but he’s mighty selective about whose human rights to champion. If you live in Marcos’s Philippines, Pinochet’s Chile, or apartheid South Africa, he’s liable to care about you. If you live in Communist China, Communist Cuba, Communist Ethiopia, Communist Nicaragua, Communist North Korea, Communist . . .: screw you.

Read the whole thing.

One of my favorite lines in The Screwtape letters is letter 13 and it concerns reality:

The characteristic of Pains and Pleasures is that they are unmistakably real, and therefore, as far as they go, give the man who feels them a touchstone of reality. Thus if you had been trying to damn your man by the Romantic method—by making him a kind of Childe Harold or Werther submerged in self-pity for imaginary distresses—you would try to protect him at all costs from any real pain; because, of course, five minutes’ genuine toothache would reveal the romantic sorrows for the nonsense they were

When president Bush referred to Iran as part of an Axis of Evil he was widely derided one of the calmer statements was from the BBC:

Dissenters from Washington’s “axis of evil” say that the concept can only radicalise Tehran further, make the work of Iranian moderates and reformists far harder and in the long run destabilize the region.

as for Iranian Nukes

Less easy to establish is Washington’s assertion that Iran is attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, that might threaten the US and its allies.

Ah those carefree days of 2002; but we can see as recently as February of this year see a US “realist’s” rose colored view of Iran:

Despite growing concern about the regime’s suspected nuclear weapons program, Iran’s assistance in the war on terrorism, and the gradual evolution of liberal thought there puts it in a different category from Iraq or North Korea, Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage said in an interview. “The axis of evil was a valid comment, [but] I would note there’s one dramatic difference between Iran and the other two axes of evil, and that would be its democracy. [And] you approach a democracy differently,” Armitage said.

Well Mr. Armatage here is your “democracy” burning in the streets. Lets check with Chris Hitchens first on the nukes:

Mention of the Lebanese elections impels me to pass on what I saw with my own eyes at a recent Hezbollah rally in south Beirut, Lebanon. In a large hall that featured the official attendance of a delegation from the Iranian Embassy, the most luridly displayed poster of the pro-Iranian party was a nuclear mushroom cloud! Underneath this telling symbol was a caption warning the “Zionists” of what lay in store. We sometimes forget that Iran still officially denies any intention of acquiring nuclear weapons. Yet Ahmadinejad recently hailed an Iranian missile launch as a counterpart to Iran’s success with nuclear centrifuges, and Hezbollah has certainly been allowed to form the idea that the Iranian reactors may have nonpeaceful applications. This means, among other things, that the vicious manipulation by which the mullahs control Iran can no longer be considered as their “internal affair.” Fascism at home sooner or later means fascism abroad. Face it now or fight it later. Meanwhile, give it its right name.

and then on Iranian “elections”

There is a theoretical reason why the events of the last month in Iran (I am sorry, but I resolutely decline to refer to them as elections) were a crudely stage-managed insult to those who took part in them and those who observed them. And then there is a practical reason. The theoretical reason, though less immediately dramatic and exciting, is the much more interesting and important one.

Iran and its citizens are considered by the Shiite theocracy to be the private property of the anointed mullahs. This totalitarian idea was originally based on a piece of religious quackery promulgated by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and known as velayat-e faqui. Under the terms of this edict—which originally placed the clerics in charge of the lives and property of orphans, the indigent, and the insane—the entire population is now declared to be a childlike ward of the black-robed state. Thus any voting exercise is, by definition, over before it has begun, because the all-powerful Islamic Guardian Council determines well in advance who may or may not “run.” Any newspaper referring to the subsequent proceedings as an election, sometimes complete with rallies, polls, counts, and all the rest of it is the cause of helpless laughter among the ayatollahs. (“They fell for it? But it’s too easy!”) Shame on all those media outlets that have been complicit in this dirty lie all last week. And shame also on our pathetic secretary of state, who said that she hoped that “the genuine will and desire” of the people of Iran would be reflected in the outcome. Surely she knows that any such contingency was deliberately forestalled to begin with.

Michael Rubin agrees:

I had the pleasure of visiting the Islamic Republic twice as a student, and it was absolutely fantastic. But the Iranians I would meet on the street had no say in their governance, any more than the ordinary Afghans I met in Kabul and Qandahar in March 2000 had any influence over the Taliban. This is where Fareed Zakaria is so ridiculous when he writes about Iran. In countries like Iran, it’s the guys with the guns that matter in policy. The ordinary citizens are the victims.

We see that the Iranian “Democracy” is trying to control communication, again the BBC:

It is important that what is happening in Iran is reported to the world, but it is even more vital that citizens in Iran know what is happening. That is the role of the recently-launched BBC Persian TV which is fulfilling a crucial role in being a free and impartial source of information for many Iranians.

Any attempt to block this channel is wrong and against international treaties on satellite communication. Whoever is attempting the blocking should stop it now.

And social networks,

‘The blocking of access to foreign news media has been stepped up, according to Reporters Without Borders. ‘The Internet is now very slow, like the mobile phone network. YouTube and Facebook are hard to access and pro-reform sites… are completely inaccessible.'”

And reporters are targets:

A British reporter in Tehran tells FOX News that regime thugs are beating reporters on the streets of Tehran. The regime wants reporters out of the country. Iranian thugs are keeping reporters hiding in their hotels:

Israel thinks it knows why:

Without support from the United States and other Western countries, Iranian opposition groups will likely stop demonstrations against the Iranian regime and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s declared victory in Friday’s presidential elections, senior Israeli defense officials said Sunday.

Why all of this? The Gloria center has a thought:

I certainly expected Ahmadinjad to win but figured the regime would play out the game. He’d either genuinely gain victory in the second round or they’d change just enough votes to ensure his victory. What no one expected is that the regime would tear up the whole process like this. Their brazen way of doing so–if you don’t like it you can go to hell, we’re going to do whatever we want, and we don’t care what anyone thinks–signals to me that this ruling group is even more risk-taking and irresponsible than it previously appeared.

This is the key point: the problem with Iran’s regime isn’t just that it is a dictatorship, it’s that it is such an extremist, aggressive dictatorship.

The only logical explanation for why the regime did this is that Ahmadinejad’s opponents got so many votes that it frightened the regime. It also shows that the regime is wedded to Ahmadinejad and his approach.

Amir Taheri thinks so:

Many in Tehran, including leading clerics, see the exercise as a putsch by the military-security organs that back Mr. Ahmadinejad. Several events make these allegations appear credible. The state-owned Fars News Agency declared Mr. Ahmadinejad to have won with a two-thirds majority even before the first official results had been tabulated by the Interior Ministry. Mr. Ahmadinejad’s main rival, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, retaliated by declaring himself the winner. That triggered a number of street demonstrations, followed with statements by prominent political and religious figures endorsing Mr. Mousavi’s claim.

Then something unprecedented happened. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last word on all issues of national life, published a long statement hailing Mr. Ahmadinejad’s “historic victory” as “a great celebration.” This was the first time since 1989, when he became supreme leader, that Mr. Khamenei commented on the results of a presidential election without waiting for the publication of official results. Some analysts in Tehran tell me that the military-security elite, now controlling the machinery of the Iranian state, persuaded Mr. Khamenei to make the unprecedented move.

And events in Iran seem to support that to wit:

Ahmadinejad decides it’s prudent not to leave the country on a scheduled trip to Russia. “Plainclothes militia” authorized to use live ammunition. EU officials express “serious concern.”

And this:

Grand Ayatollah Sanei in Iran has declared Ahmadinejad’s presidency illegitimate and cooperating with his government against Islam. There are strong rumors that his house and office are surrounded by the police and his website is filtered. He had previously issued a fatwa, against rigging of the elections in any form or shape, calling it a mortal sin.

And this too:

Via Raymond Jahan on Twitter (h/t Allahpundit), tens of thousands of anti-A-jad protesters have taken to the streets in Iran (click here for full-size).

And reactions like this:

Best-case scenario is that they “merely” beat him into unconsciousness. Rather than give you just the video of the beating, though, I’m embedding a kaleidoscope of 14 clips put together by Breitbart.com to show you how widespread and violent the protests already are. If you can’t spare a few minutes to watch them all, at least watch the first three plus the seventh, where you’ll find the Basij — essentially Iran’s answer to the Nazi SA — riding by on motorcycles with batons and taking swings at anyone wearing green to indicate support for Mousavi.

And more video and photos here.

As you might have guessed the best coverage is from Michael Totten, but that’s not a surprise. He talks about the moment that the regime most fears:

We don’t know whether the policeman and the man on the edge of the crowd already realize what has happened. The man has stopped being afraid – and this is precisely the beginning of the revolution. Here it starts. Until now, whenever these two men approached each other, a third figure instantly intervened between them. That third figure was fear. Fear was the policeman’s ally and the man in the crowd’s foe. Fear interposed its rules and decided everything.

Now the two men find themselves alone, facing each other, and fear has disappeared into thin air. Until now their relationship was charged with emotion, a mixture of aggression, scorn, rage, terror. But now that fear has retreated, this perverse, hateful union has suddenly broken up; something has been extinguished. The two men have now grown mutually indifferent, useless to each other; they can now go their own ways.

Accordingly, the policeman turns around and begins to walk heavily back toward his post, while the man on the edge of the crowd stands there looking at his vanishing enemy.

Zaneirani agrees:

Today it is even more evident that something really really funny is going on. Rafsanjani’s house is apparently surrounded by security forces. Let’s face it Rafsanjani has the most to lose here. His and his sons head is on the line. If there is any chance that this trend is going to be reversed, Rafsanjani will be the key player. Today is the day that the Islamic Republic officially transformed from a theocracy supported by Pasdaran to a Junta supported by a handful of clerics.

Dan Riehl reminds us of history:

I’m not prepared to say this is it for the regime. It depends on what cards they are willing to play. This could end with successful counter-revolution, or mass slaughter. And if Carter hadn’t been the weak, misguided President he was, it wouldn’t have been necessary. This is also the regime Obama couldn’t wait to say he would talk to despite election irregularities. Insurrection Day 2 and Carter 2, as well.

Good point what is the administration doing here? Lets see:

Hillary Clinton expresses the wait-and-see approach of the Obama Administration:

“We, like the rest of the world, are waiting and watching to see what the Iranian people decide,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said during a visit to Niagara Falls, Ontario, on Saturday. “We obviously hope the outcome reflects the genuine will and desire of the Iranian people.”

In one sense, this unsatisfactory response is entirely consistent with the nuanced approach that President Obama laid out in his Cairo speech.

Seem familar?

It reminds me of of George H. W. Bush’s reaction to the events preceding the fall of the Berlin Wall. The best word to describe both administrations is flatfooted. I guess this is the way that all “pragmatists” react when their neat, little assumptions about the world order run into reality. An ideologue might actually have a position on a revolution against thuggish tyrants.

Well it would seem a Carter vote in the Arthur Carter watch but not so fast, we all know who is really to blame don’t we? Yes you got it. It’s all Bush. Ahmadinejad is Bush! Really! After all Laura Secor says so in a story called Meet Iran’s George W. Bush.:

This ought to be a no-brainer: Ahmadinejad has made a mess of the economy, clamped down on political dissent and social freedoms, militarized the state, and earned the enmity of much of the world

This is a fair description of how the left views the ex-president. But there is some confusion maybe he is Rove or Palin:

Ahmadinejad’s bag of tricks is eerily like that of Karl Rove – the constant use of fear, the exploitation of religion, the demonization of liberals, the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin

This confuses some:

What’s going on here? Does the American Left – after eight years of whining about make-believe tyranny – not know how to react to actual tyranny when it sees it in action?

Angers others:

Really, Sully? I mean, really? WTF goes through someone’s mind when they dream up an idiotic comparison between (a) Karl Rove, a Republican political strategist, and (b) Mahmoud Ahmadinejed, a Jew-hating genocidal maniac?

You might as well compare Rove to Charles Manson or Pol Pot. Please note that Sullivan’s comparison involves no hypotheticals. It does not appear to be any sort of parodic humor, except unintentionally. He evidently means to suggest in all seriousness that Ahmadinejad and Rove are similar in some meaningful way.

Whatever you think of Karl Rove — and I am certainly not his biggest fan — there is something absurdly puerile in the suggestion that his political strategies involve “the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin” (???).

But for all the rhetoric where does this leave us? Bill Jacobson thinks its all bad news:

A classic no win situation. If there were fraud, then the Iranian people unwillingly will be subjected to the consequences of pursuing Ahmadinejad’s policies. If there were no fraud, then the result is the same. In either case, it is no win for the prospect of a peaceful resolution of the Iranian nuclear weapons program, unless the West, Israel and the U.S. capitulate.

Max Boot channels Eric Idle seeing the bright side:

Even the Obama administration will be hard put to enter into serious negotiations with Ahmadinejad, especially when his scant credibility has been undermined by these utterly fraudulent elections and the resulting street protests.

That doesn’t mean that Obama won’t try–but he will have a lot less patience with Ahmadinejad than he would have had with Mousavi. And that in turn means there is a greater probability that eventually Obama may do something serious to stop the Iranian nuclear program–whether by embargoing Iranian refined-petroleum imports or by tacitly giving the go-ahead to Israel to attack its nuclear installations.

So in an odd sort of way a win for Ahmadinejad is also a win for those of us who are seriously alarmed about Iranian capabilities and intentions. With crazy Mahmoud in office–and his patron, Ayatollah Khameini, looming in the background–it will be harder for Iranian apologists to deny the reality of this terrorist regime.

Allahpundit says the something has to happen:

Now comes the moment of truth: Does he really believe that? Does he honestly believe, after years of stonewalling, with the country maybe a year away from being able to build a bomb, that they’re going to throw in the towel now? If not, then walk away. There’s no downside and potentially a tremendous upside if the regime falls or a grateful Mousavi ends up being installed as president. And needless to say, from a moral standpoint, he’d be on the side of the angels.

Back to the Gloria Center:

Is a regime that just committed itself irrevocably to the most extreme faction, most radical ideology, and most repressive control over the country going to compromise with the West on nuclear weapons or anything else?

I think Karl puts it best when he calls it the reality bomb:

Obama’s immediate problem is that the naked power grab ongoing in Iran has exposed to even the casual observer that “the Iran we have” is the Iran we have always had. Obama’s larger problem is that still seems to hold the notion that he can “deal” with Iran in the sense of “engagement,” even after the reality bomb has detonated.

That takes us back to the start of the post. What Iran is, what the Mullahs are and what Ahmadinejad is and their collective goals have always been what they are. No amount of posturing, clever words, talking heads or wishful thinking changes this.

A supporter of Iran’s hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad holds up a poster bearing a picture of Jerusalem’s holy Dome of the Rock mosque with the slogan “Our war will culminate with the takeover of Palestine”, during a massive rally to celebrate his victory in the presidential elections in Tehran’s Valiasr square on June 14. (AFP/Olivier Laban-Mattei)

With the riots and the repression on screen it breaks down the atoms of the fake picture some drew for their political gain or personal comfort. Who knew Russel T. Davies could be so prophetic:

In a classic TV show it is easy to spot the bad guy. Hopefully this reality bomb allows us to see what is there. People may want to deny or disguise the face, but this election and the reaction detonates the reality bomb and shows us what’s behind the mask. We see the face of actual evil and protesters fighting it. Not feel good protests against phony tyranny but the real thing with their own lives on the line.

Now it right in front of us. The bottom line is what are we as a nation going to do about it?

Update: Rush has a montage of people comparing this to Florida and a “stolen” election I see what they mean other than the people shot and slashed in the streets this is just the kind of thing you would expect from the old Bush administration. Will the reality bomb be strong enough to affect the MSM or Obama?

You know I seem to be noticing something. I could be totally wrong about this and I would like any of my readers on the right and left to tell me why I’m wrong or right on this but I seem to noticing a pattern on the president at least in foreign affairs.

In terms of Rhetoric and visuals he is Carter all the way, from Europe, to Ortega, to Chavez, to Iran, to Cuba his words drive any Bush supporter in general and person on the right in particular up the wall.

In action however the substance doesn’t seem to have followed the talk. He talks a tough game about Gitmo, but its still open and will take a ton of time to close, he talks about Afghanistan and disengaging then increases troops, he releases the memos then the info about the success about protecting LA comes out, he smiles and takes cudos from Chavez but acts with Uribe. He waffles on rendition and prosecutions.

Now on the domestic front it’s a different story but that the subject of this post. Dissenting Justice has been noticing stuff like this for a while and to his credit Sock Puppet extraordinaire Glenn Greenwald has been consistent in his beliefs.

Could the general strategy be to appease the far left with rhetoric but actually decide to do what is needed to keep us safe? His Clinton Era guys are more than savvy enough to play this game. The president has correctly figured out that short of picking Sarah Palin to replace Joe Biden the mainstream media will defend him come what may.

If that’s the case I’m all for it and the reason be damned. After all Johnson’s civil rights pushes in 58 and 64 were more about him than civil rights but who cares? I don’t care if he did it due to a bribe, the result was important.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If this president successfully protects us from attack and doesn’t neutralize our military I will deem it a success.

We are only three months in and things can turn on a dime but this is what I’m seeing. What do you think? Am I missing something?

Every time I think the Arthur/Carter Watch isn’t worth having something comes to throw me a curve.

A whole lot of people look at the president and see Jimmy Carter. Looking at his Latin America trip you just want to give him 10 Carter points and be done with it. Combining that with the release of the so called “torture” memos you would think there would be no contest.

But then he turns around and not only decides not to make any legal moves against the people who were protecting us. (To the outrage of the left) but he decides to give the cold shoulder to the Durbin II “racism” conference. And don’t think that Obama not going didn’t give cover for Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, and even New Zealand to give it a miss.

Ironically his massaging of the egos of Morons like Castro and Chavez actually adds to the street cred to say this thing is wrong. Granted I think president Bush would have avoided this travasty without having to play other games but that’s not the point. It’s a solid action and he deserves credit for it.

So once again we have an Arthur /Carter Wash. I wonder if we will see a pattern of rethoric to satisfy the left while doing actions that cover himself and his administration in case of trouble.

Maybe it should be the Arthur/Carter/LBJ watch? After all the saying went Lyndon goes the way the wind blows.

Well the score remains Carter 10 Arthur 5. However I don’t know what to actually think anymore.

It’s not possible to have a proper Arthur Carter watch when you can actually watch the president be Carter in this pirate episode.

I woke up on the couch (fell asleep during the ten commandments) and actually saw someone saying we can’t stop this until we address root causes. I had to shut the TV off.

UPDATE: That’s more like it!

As you might have noted above I didn’t give the president any Carter points so there are none to remove. Kudos to the USS Bainbridge and it’s crew, they are worthy of their ships namesake who was once imprisoned by pirates himself after being captured.

In fairness if the president was given blame for the dithering then he also gains credit for the successful operation.

Update 2 Apparently the credit goes to the captain who again got overboard and this time the navy didn’t wait and took out the pirates. So it looks like the Captain Phillips acted while Obama dithered, he is still C in C so he still gets credit for the Navy’s successful finishing off of the pirates.

Update 3: 3:24 p.m. Unbelievable MSNBC is complaining that now the pirates will become more violent. They are bringing up Black Hawk Down, does anyone remember that casualty wise we killed and wounded the enemy more than 15 to 1. The anchor woman calls it great news but the reporter on the phone is all doom and gloom, what if we hurt people they will get angry. My God where do they find these idiots!

Update 4 Jim Miklaszewski of NBC news describes the captain as jumping off the boat to “save his own skin” and says it with in my opinion a derogatory tone (this is a bad thing?). I guess my eyes weren’t deceiving me before, the Captain Phillips being a class act gives all the credit to the USN. I’ll stick with it to see if the tone changes.

Update 5: Apparently the navy attached a towline to keep the lifeboat from drifting to the shore. His repeat of the story doesn’t mention the captain jumping in the water this time, as this is all early all reporting should be considered as preliminary. No nasty tone the 2nd time the story is told.

Update 6: Talk left regrets that loss of life was necessary. Jeralyn’s commentators however are sad for the death of the pirates a great example:

An Example had to be made, or so they say, the glee I’m hearing at the news of the retribution is most unsavory.

I’m not gonna judge until I’ve lived in Somalia, watching all that money float past day after day after day.

Apparently the pirates are the victims.

Update 7: 3:55 p.m. MSNBC claims that president Obama gave the order for force to be used. It’s unclear if she means using the navy, allowing the use of the towline or the actual shooting of the pirates.

Update 8 4:03 p.m. MSNBC continues the anchor suggests the navy shot the pirates as a last resort. TalkLeft will be pleased. Don Surber is pleased too, but due to the combination of a free captain and dead pirates. They are again saying the president approved a rescue attempt, I’m wondering if they gave the approval if an opening to save him come up to jump at it. That would make a lot of sense. Tigerhawk and instapundit are happy too. 4:07 pm. The Anchor just described the pirate in custody as being “taken hostage”!

Update 8: At the press conference NPR’s reporter seems to be trying to find out why we thought the captain was in danger, what was different today from yesterday, after all yesterday he was only being held by armed pirates for ransom. That apparently according to NPR doesn’t constitute having your life in danger.

Update 9: Jim Miklaszewski asks my question concerning standing orders they confirm that it was a general ok to go after things rather than a step by step approval however that was ONLY if he was in imminent danger, good move by the president on that. He is asking pretty good questions taking advantage of the spare press available since most are likely enjoying their Easter Holiday. He presses on the imminent danger business, if I am hearing things right the Captain of the Bainbridge got to decide the definition of imminent danger.

Update 10: NPR confirms that the shots that killed the pirate came directly from the Bainbridge, but can’t confirm if the Captain jumped into the water or just distanced himself enough from the pirates to allow the sharpshooters to finish them off. The shot was apparently made from about 25-30 meters a pretty close shot for snipers in my opinion.

Update 11: Updated the title, NPR is now trying to get the difference between negotiating with pirates and negotiating with terrorists. The captain was tied up inside the lifeboat that suggests that he didn’t jump overboard but that isn’t confirmed yet.

Update 12: RedState says that the president was saved by the Captain’s plunge (assuming it took place). If not then I presume he would have in their mind been saved by the Captain of the Bainbridge, I still maintain that he deserves credit for giving them the green light to act.

Looks like the president decided he wanted to score some serious points:

White House aides told Jewish leaders on a conference call today that the United States will boycott the United Nations’ World Conference on Racism over hostility to Israel in draft documents prepared for the April conference.

The aides, including an adviser to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, Jennifer Simon, and longtime Obama advisor Samantha Power, said the administration will not participate in further negotiations on the current text or participate in a conference based on the text, sources on the call said.

Hotair is impressed:

Well, well, well. I’m not sure whether I’m more surprised to see Obama change his mind or Samantha Power take the side of Israel. Okay, I know I’m more surprised about Power going quietly from Durban II.

Yourish had this to say:

Well, there goes my subject for next week’s SNN. Now I need to find a new one.

Hey I guess Martin Perez a bone sometime.

I can’t help but think of Ken Burns telling us that Nathan Bedford Forest quit the KKK when it became too violent even for him in the last episode of the Civil War Series. I guess the conference is too anti-semitic even for the Obama administration.

We’ll be generous, we will not only give him an Arthur point but we will remove this Carter point for not objecting to a draft as well!

Carter 10 Arthur 5

Now lets see if he acts on the Zombie Unemployment issue!

UPDATE: Accidentally put this under the Amazon reviews catagory instead of Arthur/carter

…for the Obama administration to get this low:

The Obama team was not only silent on the new “Israel is racist” language, it also said nothing when faced with Holocaust denial. Negotiators from the European Union suggested on Wednesday a new provision to “condemn without reservation any denial of the Holocaust and urges all states to reject denial of the Holocaust as an historical event, either in full, or in part, or any activities to this end.” Iran–whose president is a Holocaust-denier–immediately objected and insisted that the proposal be “bracketed” or put in dispute. The move blocked the adoption of the proposal and ensured another battle over the reality of the Holocaust in April–at these supposedly “anti-racism” meetings. After Iran objected, the chair looked around the room, expecting a response. He said: “Is there any delegation wishing to comment on this new proposal by the European Union? It doesn’t seem the case. We move on.” U.S. delegates said nothing, even after the prompt.

The official US delegation of the Obama administration was not willing to officially object to Holocaust being in dispute. Can’t make Iran angry.

Since the Obama administration is not a Pseudo Bishop without actual standing in the Catholic Church I suspect the media will not jump on this at all, but the Arthur Carter Watch does:

Carter 11 Arthur 4

Via Glenn

Andy McCarthy asks the question What good is it to validate Gitmo and defend renditions if Obama is going to release the terrorists anyway?:

We are going to need a Friday night news-watch on this administration.

According to the New York Times, the British government has announced that it has struck an agreement with the Obama administration to release the terrorist Binyam Mohammed.

The article gives the details and closes thusly:

A couple of Fridays ago, the Obama administration promised families of the 9/11 and Cole bombing victims that justice against terrorists would be swift and sure. Well, this certainly is swift, isn’t it?

Hey that point lasted almost 5 hours: Carter 10 Arthur 4

It seems all over the world the US is in retreat. It looks like Obama is making it up as he goes along.

I’m really thinking that Mrs. Clinton is going to just wait and let this build on the assumption that it won’t be blamed on her since it is Obama’s policy and she is totally divorced from the “stimulus” plan.

I haven’t seen an Arthur side in a while, should we keep it up?

It is getting abundantly clear that this watch might be a waste of time thanks to stories like this:

American officials have privately backed Pakistan’s “Sharia law for peace” deal with Taliban militants in the Swat Valley despite publicly criticising it as a “negative development”.

The deal, under which Sharia law will be introduced in the Malakhand and Kohistan districts of Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province if Taliban militants end their armed campaign in the Swat Valley, has been met with alarm by Nato chiefs and British and American officials.

Nato fears the deal would create a new “safe haven” for extremists, said a spokesman on Tuesday night, while a statement from Britain’s High Commission in Islamabad said: “Previous peace deals have not provided a comprehensive and long-term solution to Swat’s problems. We need to be confident that they will end violence, not create space for further violence.”

Sharia law, well THAT will de-radicalize Islamists.

Carter 9 Arthur 3

No particular action for the Arthur vs carter watch at the moment but at Big Hollywood there is an excellent article on the subject comparing the decisions the president will need to make with that of Marshall Will Kane in High Noon:

It’s 11:57 in Hadleyville. The movie is “High Noon.” Marshall Will Kane (Gary Cooper) seals an envelope containing his last will and testament. He writes, “To be opened in the event of my death,” on its front panel. A train carrying a freed murderer, Frank Miller, who wants to gun Kane down will arrive in just three minutes. Marshall Kane has been abandoned by everyone. All that he believed is tarnished. He stands alone without a badge, with only his conscience. His new bride, the church, the state, old friends and allies have all turned their backs…

…Winter, 2009, Washington, D.C. It is 11:57 once again. Our new President, Barack Obama, must now choose how he will lead us in our continued response to the menace of Islamic terror. Will he appease the pacifists who believe the road to peace is paved with inane bumper stickers, humane treatment of savage killers, and good intentions? Will we capitulate to a world view which celebrates terrorist regimes while demanding that our true democratic allies in the war on terror, who have defended themselves, be tried for war crimes? Or, will he lead us to choose darkness and evil? Will he allow his new attorney general, Eric Holder, a man who orchestrated the release of convicted Puerto Rican terrorists, to prosecute the very people who have risked their lives to successfully protect us these last eight years? Or will President Obama lead us to stand tall and fight, choose light and life?

Economy or no this will be the question of this presidency that I care about. To get an idea of the tension the scene below from the movie says it all.

Do you remember during the election Gov Palin talked about Obama worrying about Mirandaing terrorists left called us a bunch of alarmists?

Wellllll lookie here:

But in a potential problem, Pentagon officials note that most of the evidence against Jawad comes from his own admissions. And neither he nor any other detainee at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was ever told about their rights against self-incrimination under U.S. law.

The Miranda warning, a fixture of American jurisprudence and staple of television cop shows, may also be one of a series of constructional hurdles standing between Obama’s order to close the island prison and court trials on the mainland.

The weekly standard opines:

if the Los Angeles Times is to be believed, his administration is considering doing just that. The obvious consequence of such a decision: terrorists would now have the right to remain silent.

And Jo’s Cafe brings up a great point:

You have the right to remain silent. Okay that’s obvious duh! But then jump down to Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? Now law enforcement officers first have to determine what language the terrorist speaks. Arabic? Pharisee? You get the point. So before an officer can even mirandise a suspect, they have to figure out what language they speak.

Then they have to find a translator in that language.

But do they really understand their rights? Language translation can be suspect and can the officer understand if the rights are even being translated with the proper meaning of the warning?

Land minds everywhere.

Our guys are just going to end up shooting these people in the field instead. So much for information. This is madness. I predict that this is going to destroy Army recruitment over the next couple of years.

National Review nails it:

Some of our enemies can be convicted in federal court. Most of them can’t—at least not until after they’ve carried out the kind of attacks that it is the aim of this war to prevent. We can have the war, in all its imperfections, or we can have those attacks. We can take four months to study it, but there is no avoiding that choice.

If this stuff keeps up we won’t need to have an Arthur Carter watch the hoping for Arthur is going to be done.

Carter 8 Arthur 3

UPDATE: AllahPundit was on this yesterday.

The stimulus bill has created a giant sucking sound keeping other news to the background but lets take a quick look:

President Obama appears on an Arab network full of Mea Culpa for the US. Iran demands apologies and continues to build the bomb with a worldwide reach.

Russia flexes its muscle and suddenly Kyrgyzstan carries Russia’s water giving us notice to scoot. Russia finances the closing and then “consents” to help us.

Pakastan releases Kahn from house arrest no word from the white house.

New North Korean missile tests. IMAO has the Obama plan.

India; which was one of the real triumphs of Bush era diplomacy is cooling. Cooperation becomes warning after warning.

And hey lets drop charges against the Cole bomber.

When you look like the weak horse, people try to ride you. Carter 7 Arthur 3

Update: and yes I know IMAO is a joke site.

Update 2: The Anchoress said something similar last night. That’s my kinda company.

Victor David Hansen nails it with a column today President Hamlet:

Sometime around mid-2007, during its coverage of the Democratic primary, it ceased to be investigatory and chose to become an adulatory megaphone. A news story on the front pages of the New York Times or Washington Post, or a piece aired on NPR, or a feature in Time or Newsweek, is simply a disguised op-ed on yet another underappreciated moral or intellectual gift of Barack Obama. He has transcended the traditional doctrinaire support for liberal governance and become a sort of talisman that offers exemption to our elite from all sorts of guilt and anguish in matters ranging from race at home to multicultural sensitivity abroad.

The whole article is something Hanson bottom lines the choice for the president:

In the next year Obama can continue to run against George Bush and whine about the “mess” that “they” left him as he tries to turn the U.S. economy and government into copies of those in Spain and Greece. He can print money and label as “stimulus” a pork plan that is designed to empower Democratic constituencies at the price of leaving generations to come with decades of debt. He can use his formidable powers of rhetoric to talk of ethical progress while he allows Clintonian ethical regress. He can hope-and-change the world—and learn to his dismay that its thugs take such magnanimity for weakness to be ridiculed and indecision to be exploited. And he can end up a mediocre president who counts on historians to whitewash his presidency just as the media once ensured it.

Or President Obama can decline to be worshiped and instead stop the monstrous borrowing, unsustainable debt, and endless expansion of an increasingly incompetent government. And as solace, he can remember that his idol, Lincoln, was as hated by his contemporaries as he was worshiped by posterity—and that the latter is often predicated on the former.

The either or is the meat of the Carter/Arthur watch but I’m reminded of the Book I Claudius . Claudius goes on the how Caligula could have been Caligula the good , or Caligula the wise, but concludes of course if he was that type of person he wouldn’t have survived to rule. Same thing.

Update: Exhibit B at newsbusters and Michael Bates Blog.

I have maintained in the past that although you have to do what you have to do in the war on terror it is important to question what is being done to keep yourself honest.

I have questioned the left’s insistence that Gitmo has needed to be closed and the left has misrepresented the place over and over.

I also maintain Waterboarding is not torture, but I can see why some have said so.

The use of prisons in other western countries is a little more iffy since we may not have control but the various western countries have rules to keep things in check.

Now of all the tactics used Rendition is the most iffy, its the one that leaves me the most queasy. Of the left’s arguments this one was the best of the batch. And Obama has decided to keep it and expand it:

Barack Obama exploited that outrage when he promised Hope and ChangeTM, and the Left squealed with joy over the Brave New Obama World in national security. Now they’ll have to squeal again as Obama has had a sudden revelation as President that renditions are more necessary than ever, if the CIA can’t hold these subjects at Gitmo or its own secret sites:

Moe Lane called out leftist bloggers on this but the most amazing thing is reported at Dissenting justice where he calls out Human Rights Watch:

Now that the L.A. Times reports that rendition will continue during the Obama administration, Human Rights Watch has apparently altered its position. According to Tom Malinowski, the organization’s “Washington advocacy director,” the risk of torture and other abuses does not mandate the prophylactic cessation of rendition. Instead (quoting the L.A. Times)

I haven’t seen such a double standard by a “human rights group” since…well every time any of em deal with Israel.

I give full marks to that blog on the left for doing so and being honest enough to be outraged. I actually liked the outrage on the left over Gitmo because although false it produced an irrational fear of the place to the newly captured that might have gotten them talking but now the choices have been reduced to bad ones.

Don’t you wonder what Obama saw in the briefings that changed his mind on this? I’ll give the last word to the Captain:

Frankly, I think the US does a better job of treating its detainees than anywhere a rendition program would deliver them, but without a Gitmo or CIA holding site, that’s the only way to ensure that we can get any intelligence that will protect the US. I’m not surprised that Obama has reached the same conclusion, now that he has the responsibility to keep the nation secure from foreign attack. It’s amazing how clarifying that responsibility can be, and Obama at least must have a little more comprehension of what Bush went through the last seven years.


Update: Whoa! My first Instalance and I didn’t even notice it. Hi. Take a look around, particularly if you are looking for remote tech support. or if you are a Fan of Morning Joe which I tend to liveblog a bit. See the shock of Iranian rejection and learn the ways of the internet scam. I write a bit about Religion, Israel, my current job search and a tad bit of baseball.

Oh and if you are a Doctor Who fan make sure you check out this blog. It isn’t mine but its awesome.

Update 2: Missed the link to Captain Ed at hotair, thanks to commenter Paul for catching it.

Update 3: I guess he gets an Arthur vote for this. Running total Jimmy Carter 6 Chester Arthur 3. An explanation of the Arthur Carter watch here.

Update 4: A disagreement in comments continues here.

Barak Obama yesterday in his interview:

he hoped for a restoration of “the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

Us Muslim relations 30 years ago:


News from Iran today:

Iran will have enough enriched uranium to make a single nuclear weapon later this year, the prestigious International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) predicts…

Yup looks like Obama will get his wish. BIG Jimmy Carter vote for this one Carter 6 Arthur 2

The truce still holds, the rockets still haven’t fired but some things are unfortunately returning to normal:

Hundreds of Palestinians are starting to repair tunnels in Gaza that are used for smuggling in goods from Egypt.

Israel, which ended its 22-day offensive last Sunday, has warned of renewed military strikes on the strip if the tunnels are reopened.

If Hamas rearms and rockets return then so will the war.

It hit me that I didn’t specify how we got to the current 5-2 count with Carter in the lead.

The president got one vote for Arthur with the predator strike in Pakistan.

He got three additional Carter votes for the following:

The Jimmy carter walk. (I know it’s cheap but all I could see was Carter when he did it)

The unwillingness of his own press people to confirm the strike above

The call for Israel to open up the Gaza checkpoints

No points yet for the Mitchell appointment but that’s close.

Apparently the Anchoress has come to the same conclusion about Obama and Carter as I. However she doesn’t have the hope of a turn toward Chester Arthur that I do.

Then again the Obama’s gitmo moves are a Carter vote so she might have a point.

I guess we will see.

My current count is Carter 5 Arthur 2

Update: Welcome Anchoress readers, take a peek around. You might find the essays on belief of interest or a little debate on the subject. I’d also appreciate any new perspectives on Anna Maria College after my son’s visit. And if you are looking for remote PC support I do that too.

Lets hope that Obama’s decision to walk is just symbolic and not an actual reflection on the Carter vs Arthur watch.

Seriously considering the crowd and the mood it makes sense but please please PLEASE I hope its not another Jimmy Carter! Unless of course it is followed by another Ronald Reagan, preferably from Alaska.

UPDATE: Going back in the car.

Well despite firing an aide over Hamas contacts during the campaign it looks like the president elect will be talking to Hamas, according to the Guardian:

The incoming Obama administration is prepared to abandon George Bush’s ­doctrine of isolating Hamas by establishing a channel to the Islamist organisation, sources close to the transition team say.

The move to open contacts with Hamas, which could be initiated through the US intelligence services, would represent a definitive break with the Bush ­presidency’s ostracising of the group. The state department has designated Hamas a terrorist organisation, and in 2006 ­Congress passed a law banning US financial aid to the group

Well that’s one vote for Carter, but wait a moment…That’s not what Fox says:

“The President-elect has repeatedly stated that he believes that Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to Israel’s destruction, and that we should not deal with them until they recognize Israel, renounce violence, and abide by past agreements,” transition spokeswoman Brooke Anderson said in a written statement.

Well in that case that one vote for Arthur instead but wait…The Age says they are, a vote for Carter.

But the Austin News says they will not, a vote for Arthur.

But the Jerusalem Post says they will, a vote for Carter.

But then it says he won’t a vote for Arthur…

But CBS says he will.

Well Newspost says maybe, lets stick with that for now. No votes awarded

I should point out that articles dated today have reported on both sides ARRUGH.

Via Israellycool this Arab written article is rather amazing:

With Israel entering its fourth week of an incursion into the same Gaza Strip it voluntarily evacuated a few months ago, a sense of reality among Arabs is spreading through commentary by Arab pundits, letters to the editor, and political talk shows on Arabic-language TV networks. The new views are stunning both in their maturity and in their realism. The best way I can think of to convey them is in the form of a letter to the Palestinian Arabs from their Arab friends:

Dear Palestinian Arab brethren:

The war with Israel is over.

You have lost. Surrender and negotiate to secure a future for your children.

The next phrase sounds just like Sherman:

…you and your leaders have wasted three generations trying to fight for Palestine, but the truth is the Palestine you could have had in 1948 is much bigger than the one you could have had in 1967, which in turn is much bigger than what you may have to settle for now or in another 10 years. Struggle means less land and more misery and utter loneliness.

At the moment, brothers, you would be lucky to secure a semblance of a state in that Gaza Strip into which you have all crowded, and a small part of the West Bank of the Jordan. It isn’t going to get better.

Here is Sherman in Jan 1964

Three years ago by a little reflection and patience they could have had a hundred years of peace and prosperity, but they preferred war; very well. Last year they could have saved their slaves, but now it is too late.

All the powers of earth cannot restore to them their slaves, any more than their dead grandfathers. Next year their lands will be taken, for in war we can take them, and rightfully, too, and in another year they may beg in vain for their lives. A people who will persevere in war beyond a certain limit ought to know the consequences.

I attribute Arab movement in this direction to three things: The War in Iraq, The Gaza withdrawal, and Iran’s move for the bomb. It remains to be seen if Israel can win the propaganda war. If it can the whole dynamic of the area can change.

We can be sure that unless totally destroyed Hamas will hold out till at least the 20th to see if there is any change with the new president. It will be interesting. Arthur or Carter. Believe it or not I’m betting Arthur.

In this post I made a rather provocative assertion when explaining why 65,000 civilian deaths dead in the fight against the Tamil-Tigers provoked no protest on the left as opposed to Israel and Gaza:

How could this be? Simple answer. If you can’t blame Jews or Americans, then its not evil or important. Why? Because their final goal is dead Jews. Period.

In is column today, Jay Nordlinger may have a better explanation:

During the Cold War, we used to speak of anti-anti-Communists. These were people (on the left) who were not exactly pro-Communist. But they so hated the anti-Communists, they were . . . well, anti-anti-Communists — the best, the fairest name for them.

Today, there are anti-anti-Islamofascists. They are not on the Islamofascist side in the War on Terror. But they hate those who are fighting, or attempting to fight, the Islamofascists more than they could ever hate the Islamofascists. They are anti-anti-Islamofascists.

The similarities between yesterday’s anti-anti-Communists and today’s anti-anti-Islamofascists would make a very good essay — perhaps by David Pryce-Jones or Norman Podhoretz. Of course, many of today’s anti-anti-Islamofascists were yesterday’s anti-anti-Communists — I mean, the same people, in the flesh.

And it’s all embodied in a publication such as The New York Review of Books.

That is a much more charitable explanation, I’ll have to think on it.

He also touches on another quote I made during the first week of this blog.

You can take this to the bank: Any successful attack on American soil during an Obama administration is going to be wholly owned by not only that administration but the Democratic party.

Here is Nordlinger:

A wise Republican head said to me the other day, “I actually think Obama is going to have a hard time of it.” Here was his reasoning: “Two things Bush has done right are Iraq (after the surge) and preventing a second attack. Those are big achievements to live up to — especially if you don’t believe there is any connection between the president’s means and these ends.

This goes to the heart of the Arthur vs Carter question. Anyway its another reason why Nordlinger should be regular reading for you.

As for yesterday’s anti-anti Communists as today’s anti-anti-Islamofascists; I guess they are fooled twice. Shame on them.

Well all kind of round ups are taking place over the hits of Gaza this week and there are quite a few surprises. Lets start a Powerline Blog.

In Calling Hamas pt 2 they look at the tactic of hiding being civilians:

The video vividly illustrates how Hamas uses civilians as shields against a humane enemy, making the avoidance of civilian casualties virtually impossible. Hamas’ conduct is illegal and evil. Under the circumstances, the Bush administration’s instruction to Israel to avoid civilian casualties at best represents a kind of confusion regarding the challenges Israel faces on each of its borders. The challenges are akin to those the United States faces in its own engagements in the region, so it is hard to believe that the problem is one of intellectual clarity rather than political cowardice.

They also touch upon coverage and attempts to scrub things in Hamas’ favor. Referencing the blogs Mere Rhetoric and I*Consult. Note also this post at I*consult concerning the Washington Post ended up pulling some “fake” photography.

Powerline further notes that the Arab governments are not following as blindly in these two posts.

Our next stop is Hotair where the Captain notes a change in the air:

The Sunni Arab nations see less of a threat from Israel than from Iran, the Persian Shi’ite nation bent on establishing regional hegemony. Hamas gets its funding and direction from Tehran, in part through its Syrian ally. Egypt has no desire to see Iran establish a satellite nation on its border and on the Mediterranean, and the Saudis won’t much care for it either. Hamas’ war gave the Sunni moderates an opportunity to isolate their leadership among Arab nations, enough of an opportunity to do it publicly.

Personally I think this is part of the success of the Iraq war, they know which horse is strong and they know who the #1 killer of Muslims is, and it isn’t the US or Israel. Iran is giving them an excuse and they are going to take it.

Gateway pundit notes the reactions of CAIR and Hamas and sees that they are the same. Funny I don’t recall CAIR condemning the rocket attacks on Israel.

He notes that Egypt is not towing the line and has video:

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit harshly censured Hamas today (27 Dec), placing responsibility for the current situation on Hamas. At a noon press conference broadcast on Egyptian television, he said that Egypt had repeatedly cautioned against continuing the situation and that whoever did not listen (Hamas) should assume responsibility and not blame others.

Michelle notes Israellycool’s liveblogging but you already knew about that didn’t you.

Meryl Yourish notes that the causalities seem to be the right ones.

The bad news is that Ismail Haniyeh is still alive. The good news is that it seems the casualty rate was about 94% terrorists.

She also names names:

Three senior terrorists bought the farm today. Unfortunately, we don’t know of any more. But still, the loss of two hundred Hamas terrorists is a good thing.

The 230 Palestinians killed in the Israeli air raid on Gaza Saturday included three senior officers: Tawfik Jabber, the commander of Hamas’ police force in Gaza; his adjutant, Ismail al-Ja’abri, commander of the defense and security directorate; and Abu-Ahmad Ashur, Hamas’ Gaza central district governor.

And targets:

IAF jets struck tunnels connecting the Palestinian and Egyptian sides of Rafah, a Gaza Strip border town which has become a main entry point into Gaza of weapons, dynamite and other smuggled military equipment and consumer goods.

And Snark. Oh bother, just keep going to her blog and keep scrolling.

Kos decries progressive response:

I remain confounded by the American progressive movement’s widespread refusal to stand behind the Palestinian people as they are subjected to an endless barrage of colonialist, racist aggression.

While Little Green Footballs, celebrates progressives inner Chester Arthur.

I, on the other hand, see it as a rare sign of wisdom. Not all “progressives” are as gullible and blind as “Daisy Cutter,” apparently.

CNN reports the president elect has been briefed bye Sec Rice but Obama is saying nothing. This looks like a vote for Chester Arthur to me.

Jules Crittenden also sees the hand of Bush in the Hamas’ lack of support in the Arab world and notes that the Washington Post doesn’t:

The Post must have missed the part about Bush and the unprecedented gathering of Arab states with Israel and other world powers, united in their revulsion of Hamas.

National Review has some debate; Cliff May on getting what you pay for:

Instead of proving to the world that they are capable of building a free and democratic state, the Palestinians voted in the militant Islamist group Hamas which – with support from Tehran — quickly turned Gaza into a terrorist enclave.

Hamas then took over full control of Gaza in a bloody operation against the Palestinian Authority and its supporters.

In June of 2006, Hamas “commandos” invaded Israel and kidnapped an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit. The “international community” has been virtually silent about Shalit who — unlike the detainees at Guantamo – has never had access to the Red Cross much less to an attorney.

The real question now is will Israel do to Hamas what it failed to do to Hezbollah: demonstrate clearly that terrorism is a dead end – figuratively and literally — for those who employ it, sponsor it and support it?

Andy McCarthy dissents from the dead end theory:

For myself, I don’t think terrorism is a dead-end: It’s been a very successful strategy for Hezbollah and Hamas: the more atrocities they commit, the more the Europeans and factions of our State Department and our intelligence community want to negotiate with them — just as they want to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood, which ostensibly has given up terrorism but in actuality continues to preach it.

As for demonstrating that it is a dead-end, I suppose that depends on whom the demonstration is intended for. Hamas, for example, exists to be a terrorist organization. They are incorrigible, and there has already been enough demonstration for them that their methods work.

The question is whether the Palestinian people are educable. Which brings me back to the first point: the Palestinians voted to put in power — i.e., vest with the power of a quasi-sovereign government — a terrorist organization which thinks legitimate governing consists of bringing about the annihilation of its sovereign neighbor and, meantime, targeting the said neighbor’s civilian population with bombing attacks. When you do that, you make yourself a target.

As I recall in 1861 the southern states voted for secession and got what they voted for too. Lucky for Gaza Sherman isn’t in Israel.

Time will tell how this will all come out. Was Hamas testing Israel with the attacks this week? Did Iran want to see what would happen before their proxies hit from the north?

My take on it. This is a strategic move by Iran and a smart one. I personally think this is Iran’s war by proxy. Their best next move is an attack by Hezbollah as soon as possible. This would serve two purposes. It will divide the Israeli response and if it suckers Israel into Lebanon it could not only bog them down but might change the direction of the propaganda war.

Unfortunately no matter what happens even a total Israeli victory the winner here is Iran. As long as the world is talking about Gaza and rocket attacks and responses they are not touching the ongoing building of Nukes by Iran. I think this is all a sucker punch to keep the heat elsewhere. If Israel is hitting Gaza and or Lebanon they are not hitting Iranian nuke sites. They are buying time with Arab rather than Persian lives.

I could be wrong but we will see.

There has been a lot written on this subject of the scandal in Chicago and what the president elect may or may not know:

Kate Granju says Axelrod or Obama is lying.

Gateway Pundit goes to town on Obama , Blagojevich, Emanuel and Jessie Jackson Jr. I think he is enjoying himself too much.

Drudge is , well Drudge above the fold and red.

HotAir has much on the hot air coming out, but also gives credit where credit is due.

The Corner is on it just keep scrolling and Byron York is as always just the facts. (Is there a better straight reporter in the media? I think not.)

Michelle Malkin devotes her column to the Democrat culture of corruption and doesn’t leave out Mrs. Patty Blagojevich from her mind.

Meet Patty Blagojevich, hardball political thug

Lady Macbeth anyone?

Newsbusters notes double standards (of course) but gives Morning Joe props:

Here’s the deal. If Karl Rove had said George Bush has never talked to ‘x’ then — or George Bush talked to ‘x’ and denies it, people would be screaming and yelling from the top of this building and other every media building in the nation. It’s the same thing with Rahm Emanuel, chief of staff, saying Barack Obama ran Rod Blagojevich’s campaign along with him in 2002. Then come back and deny it.

I saw Morning Joe today. This morning Mika Brzezinski cited the Iraq war when trying to deny that President Bush would be treated by the media differently than the president elect. Lucky for me I wasn’t drinking when she said it.

Joe also gave kudos to Jake Tapper at ABC’s Political punch blog for playing it straight. He’s right.

Protein Wisdom makes fun of this Slate headline and rightly so.

All I have to say is that Illini are pretty damn ‘incurious,’ considering “that Blagojevich is the fifth Illinois governor to be charged with criminal conduct over the last 50 years.”

He must be right since Chicago Boyz doesn’t say much on it. He just thinks it happened sooner than he thought.

I think most people familiar with Illinois politics expected that eventually some kind of Chicago landmine was going to go off under President-elect Barack Obama – it’s just that few people expected it might happen before the 20th of January.

And Glenn stresses Roger Kimball take on what the primary media message is.


For me my first thoughts of course turn to the Arthur vs Carter watch. Well Arthur was a member of a machine so some would say the news today might be a vote for Arthur but once in Washington Arthur turned away from corruption, some might say that is also a vote for Arthur, but we don’t know how it will turn out and remember Arthur is the POSITIVE vote in this watch, so for now I’ll withhold the vote.

As for my take on this scandal its the same as the election. This is Chicago what do you expect? As for the president elect? The American people as always got the candidate we deserved.

After holding a McCain Palin sign on election day for 7 hours when the election was done I had this to say about the president elect.

You sometimes get a rookie pitcher with a winning season but usually not. I’m hoping for Chester Arthur but I’m expecting Jimmy Carter.

Well the staff picked so far seem to address my main concern which was not losing the war. It is very premature to say since the president elect is still the president elect for the next 49 days so we will have to see what they actually do when they are in there.

Well one vote for Chester so far

Running count Chester 1 Jimmy 0