Educating the ignorant Kumbaya candidate
My syndicated column today looks at Barack Obama’s dopey, dangerous views on ending jihad with “understanding.” He shouldn’t be protesting cartoons. He is a walking, talking cartoon.
***
Diplomas won’t make jihadis go away, Barack
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008
In all the brouhaha over the New Yorker’s satirical cover cartoon of Barack and Michelle Obama, a truly “tasteless and offensive” passage in the magazine’s feature article got lost. The magazine piece quotes Obama’s recommendations for how to stop jihad in a local Chicago newspaper op-ed he had published eight days after the September 11 terrorist attacks. It’s a self-parody of blind, deaf, and dumb Kumbaya liberalism:
“We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.”
Is this man for real? Osama bin Laden’s murderous legions are plenty able to “imagine” the “suffering of others.” Go watch an al Qaeda beheading snuff video. Just Google it or surf YouTube. Imagining the suffering of infidels is covered amply in Basic Jihadi Training 101.
You’ll note, too, that Obama’s fresh instinct in the week after the 9/11 attack was to diagnose it as a “tragedy” stemming from lack of “empathy” and “understanding”–instead of yet another deliberate, carefully planned evil act of the long-waged Islamic war on the West that it was.
As for Obama’s continued delusion about the “climate of poverty and ignorance” that supposedly breeds Muslim terrorists, can American politicians ever rid themselves of this unreality-based trope? This belief is part and parcel of the same idiocy that lead the State Department to embrace “spa days” for Muslims to “build bridges” with the Arab world and President Bush to open up our aviation schools to more Saudi students to “improve understanding.” John McCain also alluded to education-as-cure for Islamic terrorism at the L.A. World Affairs Council in March, when he declared that “In this struggle, scholarships will be far more important than smart bombs.” Just what we need: more student visas for the jihadi-infested nation that sent us the bulk of the 9/11 hijackers.
Author and National Review Online blogger Mark Steyn’s sharp rejoinder to McCain then applies to Obama now: “There’s plenty of evidence out there that the most extreme ‘extremists’ are those who’ve been most exposed to the west - and western education: from Osama bin Laden (summer school at Oxford, punting on the Thames) and Mohammed Atta (Hamburg University urban planning student) to the London School of Economics graduate responsible for the beheading of Daniel Pearl. The idea that handing out college scholarships to young Saudi males and getting them hooked on Starbucks and car-chase movies will make this stuff go away is ridiculous - and unworthy of a serious presidential candidate.”
Ayman al-Zawahiri didn’t need more education or wealth to steer him away from Islamic imperialism and working toward a worldwide caliphate. He has a medical degree. So does former Hamas biggie Abdel Rantissi. Seven upper-middle-class jihadi doctors were implicated in the 2007 London/Glasgow bombings. Suspected al Qaeda scientist Affia Siddiqui, still wanted by the FBI for questioning, is a Pakistani who studied microbiology at MIT and did graduate work in neurology at Brandeis.
And as I’ve reported before and must reiterate again for the hard of hearing in Washington, lowering academic standards at American colleges helped al Qaeda mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed further the jihadi cause. In the early 1980s, he enrolled at tiny Chowan College in Murfreesburo, N.C., which had dropped its English requirements to attract–ahem–wealthy Middle Easterners. At Chowan, Mohammed bonded with other Arab Muslim foreign students known as “The Mullahs” for their religious zeal. Mohammed then transferred to North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, where he earned his degree in mechanical engineering along with 30 other Muslims. Mohammed applied his Western learning to oversee the 1993 World Trade Center bombing plot (six Americans dead), the U.S.S. Cole attack (17 American soldiers dead), and the September 11 attacks (3,000 dead). He has also been linked to the 1998 African-embassy bombings (212 dead, including 12 Americans), the plot to kill the pope, the murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl, and the Bali nightclub bomb blast that killed nearly 200 tourists, including two more Americans.
Perhaps bleeding-heart Obama thinks a master’s degree in social work would have convinced poverty-stricken, helpless, ignorant, despairing Mohammed to change his mind?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- JABbering Stooge :: Shorter Michelle Malkin: :: July :: 2008
- Ask Obama: Does Evil Exist? | Conservative247
- An Excerpt From 9/19/01 - Page 4 - NY Sports Day Forums
- BigMouthFrog
- No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Morning Scramble - 7/16/2008
- Obama Consistantly Weak On Terrorism « Nice Deb
- Educating the ignorant Kumbaya candidate « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Drama Queen’s Obama And News Reporters Need To Get Real, It Is Satire! : BigMouthFrog
- Steynian 200 « Free Mark Steyn!
- Snark of the Day: Michelle Malkin | BitsBlog
- Obama; Does He Have a Clue About the Middle East? « Riggword Weblog
- Educating the ignorant Kumbaya candidate « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Michelle Malkin » Meanwhile, back on the War on Terror…
When Obambi promotes the false notion that “poverty breeds terrorism” and other myths, once most wonder if he is just ignorant and relies on his misguided “gut feelings,” or if he’s intentionally lying. We simply can’t have a President this clueless or this dishonest.
New Yorker Cover Insults Muslims !!!
It is the latter. He is intentionally lying in his move to the “center.” His entire background and beliefs before this election were that America and Israel are evil, imperialistic, racist, and Islamophobic.
Like Puhiawa states, “He sees himself as the man that will transform America away from ‘Western’ ideas and civilization.”
Obama’s mother hated America; most of his relatives are Muslim. Everybody knows that you get your values from your parents. They are the single biggest influence on your political views. He married the Marxist Michelle Obama and chose to attend an American-bashing, Marxist church for 20 years.
He sounds as bad as the average imam when he claims that the New York cover “insults Muslims.” He is trying to whip up anti-American fervor around the world.
God help our country if Obama is elected.
(oh, and englishqueen, I can’t vote. I’m British)
I do not support Obama because I am a born-again Christian, and my views of God and what He says in scripture directly affect my politics. So I’m conservative because I am a Christian.
Sadly, 45% of likely voters agree with Obama - or are incapable of understanding his views.
How about Jay Leno’s Jaywalking?
I don’t know how old you are, but in 1980 I voted in my first presidential electtion and I was proud to cast it for Mr. Reagan. After Jimmy the Disaster there was no question. If John McCain would stick with Reagan’s principles he would be a shoo-in. Even Reagan’s logical and sane opponents respect him because he stuck to his principles. If you go to RealClearPolitics and look at the electorial map of the past Presidential elections you can see the political shift.
The liberals/progressives/communists (or whatever they are calling themselves) have pretty much taken control the the coastal states, New England and the Rust Belt states. Now that they have destroyed their own localities they are moving from the blue to the red. How many Californians have moved to Nevada, Arizona, Utah, and Colorado and still vote the same way. New Yorkers and Massachusettes voters have moved to NH, VT, CT, ME, NJ, NC, VA, SC, and FL.
Interestingly, if you look at the crime statistics from the liberal utopias compared to the so called “conservative gulags” the utopias have much higher crime rates per capita.
These blue staters forget with civil rights come civil responsibilities. Our country was founded on a set of morals and principles that required the citizens to adopt them. Unfortuantely an increasing larger segment of our population want to rid themselves of the responsibilities. While diversity in some things are good, diversity in our moral codes and principles is breeding most of the dissention we see today. Hence the motto “E Pluribus Unum”.
Barack just needs to bring all of the terrorists to America and get them on welfare and get them a V.I.P. mortgage and then he can educate them in the college of their choice just like all the other illegals. What a dumba**! The only way to get rid of them is to kill them before they kill all of us.
Oh, Michelle, are you making mischief again? Oh, those left-wing nutjobs (especially in education) as well as those in the different Dem victim communities (blacks, Latinos, and muslims) will cry racism! They will say, “how dare you! We’re a “multicultural” society that accepts everyone. So if appeasing a few Muslim wackjobs will get us to that goal sooner, so what?”
You hit nail on head, Michelle. I have seen how education can lift some people out of poverty and into self-reliance (like my mother) and give them an understanding of how great this country is or remain pitifully ignorant and self-centered (my younger sister). Education can, indeed, cut both ways. Education can broaden your horizons or narrow them.
I am a bit puzzled by the whole Obummer and McCain fluffy sentiment that education will make Muslims/Arabs/Palestinians/Jihadis less angry at the “big bad West.” How will encouraging the education of terrorists and those who support them enhance our understanding of them? How will education make them more compliant to the West?
If Obummers (and McCain’s) attitude toward terrorism is just give the terrorists freebies like education to make them “like” us, they’re really missing the big picture. I find it astounding that if we show just a little more “empathy,” give the poor, misguided darlings hugs and kisses they’ll suddenly hate us less. How this is possible, what with a culture that tolerates the lack of education for Middle Eastern women, lack of rights for women (forcing them to marry, no say over their lives, etc.), along with the lack of tolerance for other religions, is beyond me.
And Obummer wonders why he has people questioning his patriotism and his religion when he says tripe like this. McCain should know better, but beginners like Obummer make McCain look smart (if that is possible right now) by comparison.
BTW, check your history. At the end of the Civil War their were 3775 free blacks that owned 12,407 slaves. One of the first plantations on the James River in VA was owned by Blacks. The first court case involving an indentured servant who was black and thought his servitude was over and his ower challanged it and the servant remained a slve. The owner who won was black.
Will all the decendents of the black slave owners be made to pay reparations or will they receive them?
Slavery was not a racial issue, it was politcal and economical issue at the time it was legal in the US. It became a moral issue to end it. The reparations and white guilt crowds have made it a racial issue. Jim Crow was a racial issue that should have never been implemented, but while history made be rewritten it cannot be changed.
Obama is wealthy, well-educated, empowered, and hopeful, yet he’s deluded about how the world works, what moves people, and which policies will make our country strong. He’s a perfect counter-example to his own thesis of what causes wrong thinking. So what’s his excuse.
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Ron Paul, when it comes to Iraq, radical Islam, foreign policy in general, these people are cut from the same cloth.
Now I can use the word of the day in a sentence.
Chimerical
Senator Obama’s pursuits are chimerical.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates warned yesterday against the risk of a “creeping militarization” of U.S. foreign policy, saying the State Department should lead U.S. engagement with other countries, with the military playing a supporting role.
“We cannot kill or capture our way to victory” in the long-term campaign against terrorism, Gates said, arguing that military action should be subordinate to political and economic efforts to undermine extremism.
If 9/11 didn’t arouse his inner warrior…If he was “feeling sorry” for those who slaughtered 3000 of our innocent citizens, eight days afterward, then you have to wonder, what he’d do in another attack.
He’s an open invitation to our enemies, who would know, full well, there’d be no retribution.
Gladys,
I’m 33, and pretty much have always voted Republican. Sometimes people aren’t as stupid as they seem (even if Obummer doesn’t know this). One of the reasons I don’t like Obummer is I can smell a phoney a mile away. I grew up in a liberal college town full of liberal, educated weenies stuck on their own self-importance. My parents and I have known a number of lib professors who sound just like Obummer. Naive, deluded loons stuck in their own educated echo chamber (you’ve probably seen a few of those on this blog) but have no experience of the real world.
The thing that McCain is not doing near enough of is involving 20 and 30 somethings in the conversation. While they’re not considered a reliable voter block (my age group tends to make excuses to bypass voting like it’s not as exciting as happy hour), addressing things like healthcare, jobs, the economy, and approaching each issue in a sane, honest, realistic manner is a start.
Unfortunately, when you’ve got Obummer and the Dems (sounds like a bad band name if you ask me) offering freebies like free education, universal healthcare, etc- things that this Republic was not founded to either support or create, reality always gets lost. Some people in my generation will know Obummer right away to be the phony creep he is. Others, who’ve grown up without proper guidance, who’ve been coddled their entire lives, will take Obummer’s message as a sign that their time is now and it’s time to suck up as many Big Nanny Welfare State freebies as possible. No truth, no consequences.
If McCain doesn’t paint the picture of where the country will go domestically if Obummer is in charge (as another poster did the other day), show the consequences of where Socialist Democracies end up (such as Europe) then he will be perceived as old and not willing to fight for this presidency.
Liberals always laugh off the suggestion that we’re a Democrat Socialist state but it’s where they’ve been taking the country since the end of WWII. When baby boomers decided to accept social security and medicare/medicaid, that was just the beginning of the end. Big welfare states such as Spain, France, Britain, even Canada are in big trouble. Britain’s univeral healthcare program is insolvent.
Another thing McCain needs to hammer is that these freebies aren’t free. If he talks to those of us in their 20’s and 30’s as responsible taxpayers in our own right whose taxes will be raised for all of Obummer’s Socialist largesse, it will make the situation a very stark reality for many of us who cannot afford that. Yes, there are many 20 and 30 somethings who are naive and think the US owes them something. That is the attitude that Obummer is courting.
As you said, Gladys, the internet is McCain’s best bet. Many 20 and 30 somethings are politically cynical and many more either hate their country (like my sister who wants to move to Canada- I’m not kidding), or want to refashion it into some great Socialist paradise where everybody is equal…. unfortunately that didn’t work for the Soviet Union and looked where they ended up?
Good one W.C.C.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates warned yesterday against the risk of a “creeping militarization” of U.S. foreign policy, saying the State Department should lead U.S. engagement with other countries, with the military playing a supporting role.
“We cannot kill or capture our way to victory” in the long-term campaign against terrorism, Gates said, arguing that military action should be subordinate to political and economic efforts to undermine extremism.
Well, Lollington, I guess Gates is just a dirty traitor who is undermining our President in a time of war and should be taken out back and summarily shot.
Only stupid people and tyrants want socialism. Sound redundant?
Oh, I dunno, Bobby - I’d say it’s worked pretty well for the last 232 years. I’m not quite ready to switch to “kill ‘em with kindness” just yet, thank you.
rambler said (#119):
Americans by a huge majority want Social Security, environmental regulations, progressive income tax, public schools, taxpayer funded government projects, etc. Are these socialistic? If so, does that make the vast majority of Americans stupid? If so, do you feel comfortable insulting the vast majority of your countrymen? Is it possible to love America while thinking most Americans are stupid?
Yes, I love America and I think you are a retard. Does that count?
Sure lgm, but they’re run like dog sh*t by moron liberal a$$h*les like yourself.
Lollington/Chaps:
My question to you both is: what happens when economic and political efforts fail by our State Department. What’s the next step?
You speak highly of a state department more adept at kissing our enemies’ cheeks rather than actually getting them to reveal all their cards on the table. A twist of irony on both your parts.
Where are your statistics to prove this? Americans don’t want government wasting money on social programs that don’t work, supporting people who won’t (not can’t) take care of themselves, and other government schemes that the governmant takes away dollars and returns cents.
Our government’s purpose was very carefully laid out in the Constitution. “PROVIDE for the common defense and PROMOTE the general welfare” not the other way around. There is no verse, phrase, or clause that says the government is to support people. Government is to provide the needs and services that the indivdual citizen cannot supply their self. Some examples are roads, means of exchange (currency), judical system, and law enforcement.
Please move to China, Cuba or some other socialist state if you want “free” health care and foodstamps.
The 2 most prevalent elements on the planet - hydrogen and stupidity. Social security was designed as a supplemental retirement plan. I don’t plan on it being there for me at all.
Documentation, please.
Social Security was doomed to failure, right from the beginning.
It’s nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme, based on picking the pockets of our children.
If a politician were to try to push a plan like this today, he’d get laughed right off the podium.
There you go again lgm pulling non-factual ramblings out of your ass. You do it so much it must be sore.
Every time you come on here you are proven wrong. As long as people are made aware of the strings attached to these handouts, they usually vote the right way.
See when Ronnie talked about government waste people listened. But since most of our politicians lack core values, almost no one speaks the truth.
What was that line from American President the movie? It so fits today.
They don’t have a choice! Obama is the only one doing the talking! People want leadership, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they’ll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They’re so thirsty for it they’ll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there’s no water, they’ll drink the sand.
That is not what either Obama or Gates was saying. I don’t suppose you took the time to read the sentence that originally preceded MM’s Obama quote (she certainly didn’t feel the need to cite it):
A little less kumbaya, isn’t it?
And how is what was quoted and/or what you assume lol and/or I take from it a “twist of irony”?
Michelle, thanks for this one. I had not seen this post 9/11 pscho-babble from this numb nuts.
Now he is an expert at terrorists lack of empathy. Unbelievable.
PC is Thought Control
LEE
If Gates believes what he said, he’s a squish and ought to be removed.
Countries don’t defeat alien, hostile and murderous ideologies aimed at destroying them by “em>per se not reachable by reason.
If they seek to kill or terrorize us the only rational decision is to kill and capture those we can, and break the will and war-making capabilities of the rest.
chapoutier said:
So Obama’s for profiling? There’s one thing we have in commen.
Mathman:
Government goodies come with strings. Those strings are increased taxes for all of us. It’s not working well in much of Europe. The only great thing about the EU (and there’s not much) is that if you live in a high tax country like Denmark (which is almost 50% for those who earn $70k or more), you can move to establish yourself in a better tax state. Ironically, well-educated Danes seem to favor Britain because their taxes aren’t so punitive.
Please provide the proof that Americans “actually” want more Social Security (a now defunct social program), public education (a mismanged, incompently run cesspool of liberal ideology), a progressive income tax (that redistributes the earninges of the successful to the deadbeats and layabouts- this is a core argument of many socialist programs in Europe which are routinely gamed by grifters), and government-funded programs (oh, that must mean free college education and socialized healthcare that will increase my taxes and take more money out of my family’s budget).
As to your assertion that Americans “desire” public education, how do you explain homeschooling? Why do many parents want vouchers where their children have the opportunity to either attend charter or private schools? The government’s Tricare system is so wonderful that it’s incompetent, hard to find doctors who will see to your needs, and hard to fill a prescription when a given clinic has it on a waiting list. Yeah, that’s my definition of success for a socialized healthcare system.
Please, don’t bother playing the guilt card with us. It won’t work. To answer your questions:
1. Yes, wanting somthing for nothing and expecting that it will cost nothing and that there are no strings attached is, indeed, stupid.
2. Unless you have some evidence of this vast majority of Americans you cite, then, no, I’m not at all uncomfortable calling Americans on their perfidy and their shallowness.
3. Well, this is the same educated soul who thinks you can love America and hate her military. I love the way America used to be, when everybody was self-reliant, took care of themselves and only relied on America for their protection. Socialism isn’t protection it’s tyrany. Stupid Americans like yourself are why America is rotting from within. When Americans accept the easy solution instead of accepting the difficult truth is when America has lost that unique quality that made her so great in the first place.
How does any of this redirection even relate to, uh, Obummer’s permissive attitude toward terrorists? Oh, that’s right it doesn’t.
For a person who is educated, you certainly don’t pay attention to the topic at hand do you?
My post got sent w/o my doing. I meant to say:
If Gates believes what he said, he’s a squish and ought to be removed.
Countries don’t defeat alien, hostile and murderous ideologies aimed at destroying them by “talking to them” Such fanatics are per se not reachable by reason.
If they seek to kill or terrorize us the only rational decision is to kill and capture those we can, and break the will and war-making capabilities of the rest.
alaskangrizzly said (#122):
Yes, in grades K through 3.
Goldwater Knight said (#123):
And you say liberal sites are full of profanity and hatred.
JT said (#129):
Maybe, but he didn’t touch Social Security. There must be a reason. He didn’t stop building roads.
Ronnie didn’t touch SS because the elderly, a huge group of voters who actually will vote, said no messing with SS until after we’re gone! My mother had no problem with any grandkids in the country paying for her SS because she felt she deserved it. The gov told her so!
lgm
Maybe you should do a recount, this time go outside your tiny circle and count all americans.
What I say is out of fustration over your stupidity. Name one New Deal program that’s rocking America right now.
Why, yes, yes it does! If YOUR Democrat majority wants more, more, more, and want the ones who have run SSI into the ground, created environmental regulations based on the hypothetical not on science, taxed prosperous citizens as reward for their risk and hard work, dumbed-down our public schools even after throwing money at it for decades, and built government projects which prove profitable only to the “friends” of said politicians, then they ARE stupid, and regardless of what you want to call it, they don’t care, as long as they “get their fair share.” That fair share, by the way, will never be satisfied.
Alexander Tyler, History Professor, said in 1787, this (emphasis, mine):
This is what you are shooting for, right? There is no compassion in this.
And, exactly how much do you read every single thing that Obummer says? Do you read between the lines (or lies) or do you actually just believe he magically came up with his own thoughts?
So I guess you missed all of Obummer’s promises of leaving Iraq in 16 month, right? How is that a security assurance? Doesn’t smack of listening to the Joint Chiefs of Staff or studying the facts on the ground, does it?
Or I guess you missed the part where Obummer suggests that the US should just invade Pakistan to get OBL, too, right? He was against the Iraq War but he’s for invading an ally? That’s certainly a twist of irony in this guy’s foreign policy playbook.
BTW, did Obummer miss the creation of Homeland Security, the intelligence reorganization, or that the US is doing the best it can to step up security at our airports? However, because Obummer says it, then that must mean nothing’s going right.
Again, what the heck does this have to to with pacifyng terrorists? Obummer (like McCain) is pointing to education as a way of understanding a way of life ingrained for centuries. If that’s the kind of approach you think we need to defeat terrorism then all the of amount changes we’ve made to our security won’t matter.
It’s amazing how much you’ll stand up for this guy. Obummer is a political opportunist who coopts others’ messages and makes them his own.
Another stupid Obama quote:
Which nation is he running for president in?
No. But its clear that you are willing to be spoon-fed anything MM puts up. Didn’t that “We must also, however,…” that led the quote make you even a little curious about what the also and however was? Or are you just intellectually lazy?
No reasonable reading of his proposals to unilaterally go into Pakistan to capture or kill Al-Queda on actionable intelligence can possibly be spun as “invading Pakistan.” In fact I believe we have already done that a few times under GWB.
Duh. Did you happen to miss WHEN he wrote that? 8 days after 9/11?
He is not talking about pacifying terrorists. He is talking about addressing conditions that breeds the development of terrorists. Didn’t your momma ever tell you an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?
Translation - Take, by force, “capital” from the wealthy, and give it to the very poor, which will enable them to also become wealthy.
I don’t recall any time in history when giving a windfall of capital to the poor has resulted in the poor themselves becoming wealthy. Even state lottery winners, although presented with vast amounts of capital, seem to loose it, and return to their levels of prior comfort (with few exceptions, I believe.)
This just so much socialistic garbage…in socialist societies, only those already wealthy, and in the political arena, remain so. The rest suffer.
OH NO! It now looks like Bush is also now a traitorous appeaser!
Right_On:
Care to explain how they stay wealthy if all their wealth is taken?
You might want to tell Denmark, or any of the other socialist Scandinavian countries who consistently rate as the “happiest” on Earth that they are actually suffering. I don’t think they got the memo.
Chap said:
Barack Obama, a leading Democrat candidate in the US presidential race, provoked anger yesterday by threatening to send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists — even without permission from that country’s Government.
Standing in front of a Stars and Stripes flag, Mr Obama said: “There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again . . . If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
He’s not going to “invade” per se but is more than willing to do a Pancho Villa. This seems a bit cavalier considering ‘rouge’ elements of the Pakistani military may have access to nukes.
If you call a society that is all into themselves and values more about their porn, free medical coverage and education while paying 80% in taxes to cover it, having no means of self-defense in their homes, and are under the thumb of big government for their every whim, and having less freedoms than we do by a long shot “happy” then I will take moderately happy and closer to totally free any day of the week. They can keep their socialism and I will laugh when their own hate crimes/PC/thought crimes legislation comes back to bite them in the arse as it is in the rest of Europe as the new “immigrants” out breed them and use their own policies against them to institute their own new policies and establish power. Only this time I hope America stays home and lets them stew in the mess they have created rather than coming in to save them again.
Since November 2001, the Danish Prime Minister has been Anders Fjogh Rasmussen from the Venstre party, a center-right liberal party.
So, Goldwater…
What would you have our President do if we knew where OBL was and Musharraf dragged his feet? Capitulate and let that little dictator determine our military objectives?
And again, didn’t GWB do this exact same thing already? Launch missile strikes into Pakistan onto Al-Quaeda positions? I swear I recall that happening shortly after Obama made that statement.
And that is fine and not unreasonable. But emjem said they were “suffering” and I think that for the most part they would beg to differ.
According to World Bank, Denmark has the most flexible labor market in Europe. It easy to hire, fire, and find a job…and also one of the least regulated product markets.
Wow just reading this makes me happy.
1. Do you think you will ever claim this country as your’s as well?
2. If liberals are much like you and are the majority - then the answer would be - YES!
3. I seem to recall on another thread you said there is no such country as “America, it is North America.” So, anything you have to say about America and Americans is rendered moot.
Now go learn to spell twenty-three - IDIOT.
GWB kept silent about it to save face. Obama’s saber rattling is a bit sophomoric. Just my 2 cents.
It’s clear you’ve missed all the times I’ve disagreed with our hostess on McCain. So your “spoon-fed” reproach is a bit lazy on your part. I’m not very curious about Obummer. I’m interested in electing a leader, not a social worker or our “first, bestest black president” evah! Yay! /giggle giggle simper (I added that in just for you, Chaps, since you lost any appearance of indepenent thought when you went overboard for Obummer).
If you think I’m intellectually lazy, perhaps you need to reassess all the borrowed slogans, speeches, and ideas Obummer has used throughout his campaign? If I’m intellectually lazy, then what does that make you? Open minded?
You wanna bet? Hate to break up your hate fest for Pres. Bush, but I guess violating another Middle Eastern country’s territorial soverignty is legal under Obummer while under Pres. Bush it wasn’t. Care to share the difference? Oh, that’s right it’s because Mr. HopenGlo has got that ole D next to his name so who cares?
Uh, Duhhh… did you miss all the flipflops he’s done on this issue? I think it quite interesting that’s he’s pretty much blamed this country in later interviews for the attack.
Ohhhh, does that mean he’ll send a bunch of social workers and Peace Corps volunteers over to the Middle East to hold their hands, give ‘em a hug, and pat their hands and say, “there, there, I’ll wear your burqa if you wish it.”
Since you really don’t know my mother, please don’t include her in your personal simper fest for Obummer. My mother, a daughter of an alcoholic, never blamed the alcohol for alcoholism. She blamed the weak-mindedness behind it. But then again, she’s been a teetotaller all her life and firmly believes if you don’t overindulge in alcohol, you won’t be an alcoholic.
I will agree that terrorism is a disease that can be cured by a big ole smart bomb being dropped on a terrorist camp, though. Then again, your whole allusion was a straw man argument. We’re not facing a outbreak of cholera, we’re facing a pack of animals who live in ignorance (and not all of them are ill-educated dopes), and want to kill us. Or are you just thick to this reality?
Sittin’ down for a chat won’t make much of a difference. So, yes, Pres. Bush is appeasing the Iranians here as well. Then again, he’s gotten the Obummer seal of approval so now it makes it all better, right?
The same guy who backed off most of his more conservative ideas once in office? The same guy who declared “the death of liberalism” in 2005? (fyi, talking about old definition liberalism, not the modern US definition).
Regardless of who the PM is, I would challenge you or anyone else here to call Denmark something other than a socialist society, at least according to this board’s general standards.
Actually, I never said any such thing. For someone who’s just accused me of being intellectually lazy, yet is all out for Obummer (that means he’s open-minded), it would seem you can’t read, or lack reading comprehension skills.
Why is it that Denmark is hurting for workers? If Danes are so happy, then why aren’t more Europeans flocking to their Socialist paradise? Why are so many European countries (such as Italy) importing labor from South America and Eastern Europe?
Back to Denmark- why are highly skilled, white collar workers leaving Denmark for other European countries? Some of these folks have been interviewed and feel like they have a better standard of living in a place like Britain, which has a lower tax rate.
I think the people who are truly “suffering” (the first time I’ve used the word on this topic), are the productive citizens who have to pay for this Socialist paradise. If, indeed, they were so happy about giving half of their paycheck away, then why have they been interviewed as saying differently? Why are they leaving Denmark? Why is Denmark hurting for labor right now?
Please enlighten us all, Chaps, since you appear to be the expert on all things socialism.
So is he going to ban the koran throughout the world?
First, as I recall, he made that statement with respect to a direct question in a debate. So I don’t know if you could call it sabre rattling. And you still didn’t answer this question:
Well, since your options for leader are either Obama or McCain, your lack of curiosity about him does make you intellectually lazy, yes.
I hope that was cathartic for you. Seems like you’ve been wanting to get that off your chest for some time.
Strawman and a stupid one at that. Seems as though many on the right are forced to rely on these stupid distortions and outright lies rather than engaging the actual substance.
What allusion and what strawman? I don’t think you know what either of those words mean.
I will let slide that you are now just trying to shift focus on the fact that you are a careless reader and just address what you said. Please show me where he has “blamed America” or “flip flopped” on:
1. steping up security at our airports.
2. reexamining the effectiveness of our intelligence networks.
3. identifying the perpetrators of these heinous acts and dismantling their organizations of destruction.
And remember, the perpetrators of 9/11 were and are in Afghanistan/Pakistan, which military action Obama has always supported.
You are right. it was right_on I was quoting. My apologies.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen
…His government has introduced tough restrictions on immigration and frozen the tax rates at the existing levels before he took office…
Rasmussen is in favour of deregulation, privatization, and limiting the size of government. His government has also enacted tough measures designed to limit the number of immigrants coming to Denmark, specifically as asylumseekers or through arranged marriages.
As Prime Minister, Rasmussen strongly supported the 2003 Iraq War.
This guy sounds like a Democrat from 45 years ago.
I would, considering the Pakastani’s were pissed about it.
I hardly think that’s the case. There’s no need to capitulate to Mushy, in fact you need him to keep their military stable; he’s in Bush’s back pocket. Probably why the Dems attempted to bring
‘democracy’ there with Bhuddo.
Reading the entire sentence might be helpful.
As a true believer in socialism, as I assume from your comments, you should know that ONLY those in the ruling class (party faithful) retain their wealth, or are allowed to increase it. The proletariat is NEVER allow to climb that ladder, and are relegated to accept whatever crumbs the “elite” class deigns to give them.
And Denmark? That’s the best you can offer? I guess you haven’t cared to believe or understand what has been taking place lately, in this, your model of socialism.
So, it begs a question…given your choice, would you, personally, care to live in America, where you can choose to work hard and reap it’s benefits, or would you choose to live in Denmark, that progressive society, where their socialists ideals, since 1990, has seen their country overrun by Islamists, living off of their generous social programs, and whom now want to take over the government, and install Sharia law? Living free, in the socialist utopia, ahhh, that’s the life, except you have to watch what you say, or risk offending Omar.
By the way, do you think the Chapoutier’s in France made their mark in the wine industry, by depending on a socialist mentality? Just curious…and your ancestors came here why?
right_on
Not to quibble, but if you meant that those stay wealthy under socialism must be 1) wealthy to begin with AND in the political arena, the comma in your sentence was misused. But whatever.
The bigger point is that what my or anyone else’s choice with respect to living in a more or less socialist society is irrelevant. You said that those that live in socialist countries suffer. I do not think the data with respect to our Scandinavian friends, which are some of the most socialist countries in Europe, but which also register some of the highest standards of living and happiness in the world, bear that conclusion out.
And FWIW, I have no relation to the winemaking Chapoutiers. I just have always used it as a handle online for a variety of purposes going back to law school based on my affinity for their product.
Goldwater,
But now you are changing the premise of the question Obama was asked. It was specifically IF Pakistan would not take action (or presumably give the go-ahead for the US to) what would you do?
BTW, anyone noticed why hasn’t Michelle Malkin posted anything with respect to the stunning reversal of Bush administration’s stand on Iran today?
I don’t see the connection between Denmark’s happiness rating and socialism.
France is socialist too and rated the most unhappy people on the planet.
However, just from perusing Denmark’s economic paradigm and political climate I’d say it’s mostly conservative leaning lately.
Or not. Economists believe the welfare state in Denmark is unsustainable (probably the reason for their immigration freeze), divorce rates are high, crime is high, those with college degrees are low.
Looks like Denmark is a socialist system caving in on itself where conservatives are creeping in.
Nor do I, necessarily. I think it is just as wrong to say that people necessarily “suffer” under socialism, which was my entire point.
I’d send the Rangers in regardless of what Mushy says. In fact, he wouldn’t even know we were there.
So say it….come on….you can do it…. on this ONE teensy tiny issue, you agree with Obama.
Sorry, Chap. I thought your whole point was that people thrive and proper under socialism. Do I understand correctly that you are taking exception with my blanket statement, that people under socialist governance suffer? I do understand that many countries have “social” programs, but it is my opinion that those programs are there to appease, and keep the population under control, and to also maintain the heirarchy’s positions of power.
I can’t think of any country in the history of man that has prospered under a socialist ideology. By country, I mean the entire population, not just the few who provide for the masses.
I think that if it (socialism) was such a great system, the United States would not be THE world superpower. No?
Can you please name the capitalist country wherein the entire population has prospered?
Can you name a socialist country wherein the entire population has prospered?
There are no absolutes, but there are systems that are better for the people in general. If capitalism, is so bad, why do most modern-leaning countries at least try to have some of it’s functions worked into their own systems of government. China for example. Communist socialism was failing them, and look where they have gotten economically in the last 20 years. They are still an oppressive regime without the freedoms we enjoy, but the people are better off than under the pure C/S system, yet they are still clamoring for a system more like the US’s.
I wouldn’t want to live under any other system that ours, as flawed as it may seem, would you?
Right on…
You are the one that keeps moving the goal post.
First it is that people “suffer” under socialism.
Then it is people don’t “prosper” under socialism. And by people you mean the “entire population”.
And then you move on to “well…I guess there is NO system where everyone prospers, but the US is still the best.”
Its very hard to argue against you when you can’t even decide on what argument you want to make.
I thought you were an attorney? The argument is the same. I haven’t changed anything. A socialist system encompasses an entire population, as does capitalism, right? Is it not appropriate to include the “entire population” in a discussion of systems of governance?
Do people prosper under socialist rule? Some do, but in my experience, it seems it is the elitists in charge that flourish, not the general population (the proletariat.)
In capitalist systems, most people prosper, athough I conceded that there are those who don’t. Those types people wouldn’t prosper in any system, because they will always be willing to let someone else provide for them.
I was trying to avoid absolutes when I offered that “there is no system where everyone prospers,” adding my conclusion that the US is still the best place for that opportunity. Do you follow me?
You either neglected, or didn’t want to answer my earlier question about where you would prefer to live. Will you not give me an answer? It’s a simple question. What would be your choice…the USA, or Denmark?
lgm, and the vast majority of people he is quoting in his post got their education at the public schools, where the emphasis is in creative learning, rather than math and science.
Unfortunately, nobody taught them how to trade their creative talents for milk and bread.
Their only hope, now, is the Government. What they can not earn in a free market, they want handed to them.
Right_on…
First, you have changed your argument.
Second, this:
What do you have to back that up other than your own feeeelings? Because if you look at standard of living comparisons of countries, yet again, many scnadanavian countires (and Canada too) come out on top and ahead of the US. One example here.
I didn’t answer it because it is irrelevant your assertion (or assertions) about socialist countries.
What is the United States?
Alex, I’ll take Incredibly Easy Questions for $200.
Hippie,
If you think the entire population of the US has ever been prosperous, then I want some of whatever you are smoking.
And I am not even talking about what I am sure your next argument would be, something about how we can’t count welfare people or those that are just too damn lazy to work. OK, take them out of the picture and there is still a poor working class that will never be considered “prosperous.” Not destitute, maybe and certainly not as bad as the most poor in other countries, but hardly “prosperous.”
Chaps, while making blind assumptions, blithefully said the following:
I’ve actually taken a look at all his great “plans” for the US (on his website) and they do not align with my politics. This also goes for McCain. However, McCain has stated some plans that align with my Conservative viewpoints. What exactly does Obummer say that would align with my Conservative beliefs?
For a politician who says he’s something different, Obummer is certainly playing the same political games. Political expedience has become his best friend. Political and personal associates can be thrown under the bus. I’m not saying that he’s any different than McCain, but my curiousity diminishes with each pandering, political flip flop Obummer makes. Is that change we can believe in? Or more of the same?
For a man who thinks nothing of pandering to every different identity group (Latinos, blacks, women), he decided it wasn’t necessary to participate in a townhall meeting at a military base where McCain has agreed to participate and take questions from the thousands of military members (and their families) who will be there. Obummer said he couldn’t come because of a “scheduling conflict,” even though the organizers offered him alternative dates. No, I get bored with politicians who aren’t interested in taking the questions of all groups of people, only those socially aligned to them. I get bored with politicians who won’t answer difficult questions, only the easy questions that they want to answer.
Chaps, I don’t think you know what the meaning of the phrase “intelectually lazy” is but I’m sure your face could be stamped right next to the phrase.
Condescending statements like this are why I neither trust your viewpoint nor respect your “open-mindedness.” Also, I used this example to demonstrate that your “preventative cure argument” will not solve the root problems of terrorism. Terrorist/Islamic fundamementalism isn’t caused by poverty, it seeks to restructure the economic, social, and political structure of the Middle East. It seeks to limit freedoms. When you limit people’s economic prosperity (as did the Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalists), poverty occurs.
This is the problem with you, Chaps. You think that a big PR offensive will win the hearts and minds of the Middle East. If we just send our Peace Corps over to the Middle East, that will result in more Democracy, less terrorism. The only problem with this is that, until very recently, in Al-Anbar Province in Iraq, the people didn’t stand up to the terrorists. The terrorists “terrified” the people into submission. It took major support on the part of the US military, gaining the locals’ trust, to encourage groups like the Sons of Iraq to fight back. It took constantly routing out terrorists in that province to convince the people to trust us and defend it themselves.
Do you know what either word mean? Aren’t you beneath such dictionary enforcement tactics? I thought your argument was working perfectly, Chaps. Why bring the petty “word usage” defense?
Since allusion means representation or reference, I simply used this as a connection to your whole “prevention as cure” argument. Then I used the whole straw man argument (an argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted) to point out that your whole “prevention as cure” or “social work is best” fit this premise.
However, it now occurs to me, where is your proof that applying “prevention as cure” works? Please point this out to this blog audience. I’m sure Michelle herself would be curious. Oh, and don’t redirect and use other geographical or historical examples- let’s keep to the Middle East. We wouldn’t want to confuse you with LGM, okay?
Oh, Chaps, must I repeat myself? I guess I must. Let’s point out the obvious:
1. The quote Mrs. Malkin used to demonstrate the whole “social work/empathy for terrorists” as preventative cure against terrorism. Oh, that’s right, Obummer was misquoted, that seems to be happening to him a lot in both the Washington Post and The New Yorker, doesn’t it?
2. Obummer has flip flopped on the Iraq War. Let’s see, it’s a bit confusing to illustrate since he’s woven an entire maze (of his own doing) but I’ll try. He supported an immediate drawdown, withdrawal, redeployment for his liberal crowd, then he said he would consult the Joint Chiefs of Staff and then “may” have to change his mind, then Moveon got mad at him and so he had to go running back from the center to the left (perhaps he’s center-left or left-center?) to satisfy his left-wing handlers and donors to keep that money rolling in.
3. His end the war now rhetoric has been completely removed from his website. Why is that?
4. For someone supposedly interested in tearing down the terrorist apparatus, is it helpful to attack Pakistan, an ally? Now do we want Pakistan’s cooperation (that’s why liberals push diplomacy at all costs, right?), or their enmity?
If that is the case, great. But don’t blame me for thinking you hadn’t when you say things like this:
You have every right to believe that. I would never presume to change anyone’s mind here about Obama or his qualifications. I just don’t like it when they are, in my opinion, distorted or lied about.
No. Obviously nothing is nearly as simplistic as that. And I certainly do not know where you get or why you keep clinging to this “send in the peace corp” idea, but I never said anything about it and neither has Obama as far as I know. But if you think that social and economic conditions in Middle East countries does not contribute to terrorism (or lack thereof), you are incredibly wrong.
And military might will always be important. Everyone agrees it was right to go into Afghanistan.
I do know what they mean. Strawman is where you take an opponent’s argument and represent/and or distort it in a way that makes it absurd and easily refutable. Kind of like this:
I am still trying to figure out what argument of yours I apparently distorted to the point of absurd. The argument one is making oneself, by definition, can’t be a strawman. You may disagree with it and/or think its stupid and wrong, but that does not make it a “strawman.”
Logic lesson over.
Did you read his quote? Does he talk about empathizing with the terrorists or the terrorists’ lack of empathy for their victims and the root causes of this lack of empathy? Let me help you out:
You can disagree with what he feels are the roots and/or the approach he would take to address them, but at least get his argument correct. And don’t say that he wants to go give warm fuzzies to existing terrorists; that is a blatant distortion.
And you still haven’t shown me where he flip flopped on 1,2 or 3. Obama’s position is that the war in Iraq really had nothing to do with 9/11. Feel free to disagree with that position. And feel free to think he has shifted his thinking on the war in Iraq. But accepting his initial premise, it doesn’t show a change in position with respect to 3.
Well, “prevention as cure” is not exactly what I said and is on its face contradictory, but I get what you are saying. And it is a fair point. Pretty much untested, at least in the context of the middle east. But use of appropriate military force and attempting to address the root causes of terrorism are not mutually exclusive.
I know that many of you here think that the terrorism is rooted more in the religion rather than socioeconomic conditions, and if that is your opinion then it is understandable that you would think any attempt to address terrorism by addressing socioeconomic conditions is a waste of time. Fine. Not going to try to convince otherwise, but again, lets at least argue from the standpoint of accurate representations of the arguments.
Again, this is a blatant lie about his position. Did he advcate 1) attacking Palistan or 2) to go after terrorists located in Pakistan on actionable intelligence if Pakistani government refused to act?
I’ll help you out with this one too. It was the latter, something, btw that the Bush administration has done already.
Did Bush therefore attack Pakistan as well?
Help!! How can I extract a portion of a previous post to respond to?
Copy appropriate section.
Press “quote” button. You will see blockquote
Paste section.
Make sure your cursor is at the end of the selection and hit quote again. You will see /blockquote. You can then continue with your post.
Use preview to make sure it looks okay.
Chaps:
You seem to either be deliberately obtuse or misunderstand. I said I wasn’t very curious about Obummer because a) I’m not interested in electing the “first” black president b)I’m tired of political games and for someone who says he’s not playing them just gets old c) I want a leader not a messiah.
For you to deliberately “distort” my opinions like you seem to be suggesting that I’m doing the same to Obummer is disengenuous. When anybody criticizes Obummer or throws hi