It didn’t take long for President Barack Hussein Obama’s aggression inviting weakness messages to bear fruit.
Iran’s Jew genocide-seeking MembersOnlyJacket-ijad “reaches out” to our America-Criticizer-in-Chief (A-CINK), but I can’t tell if A-CINK will interpret this as an open hand or a clenched fist:
“Those who say they want to make change, this is the change they should make: they should apologize to the Iranian nation and try to make up for their dark background and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation,” [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad (pictured) said.
Not hard to tell for whom Iran’s Commander-in-Chief speaks, is it? Unlike yesterday’s olive branch from our A-CINK, President Obama:
“What I told him [Middle East envoy George Mitchell] is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating,” Obama told the interviewer.
The first Iranian fruits from our President’s increased diplomatic emphasis break from the Bush Administration comes on the heels of earlier moves last week announcing the closing of Gitmo withing 12 months and that capture terrorists will have not one hair on their heads bothered before their “OJ trials.” The target audiences of these moves and messages have been Obama’s left-wing base and liberal media around the world in an effort to make people like us more. But the message sent to our enemies, and especially the world’s number one sponsor of terror for four decades, is one of weakness or, as Osama bin Laden concluded before 911, that the U.S. as a “weak horse” and a “paper tiger.”
More of Iran’s demands:
“When they say policy would change, it means they would end America’s military presence around the world,” he said, referring to U.S. troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the world.
The Iranian president listed a range of “crimes” such as trying to block what Tehran says is a peaceful nuclear power generation program, hindering Iran’s development since the 1979 revolution and other actions by several administrations for more than 60 years.
End America’s military presence around the world? The last time our world military presence was reduced, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran twice and conquered Kuwait as our country suffered multiple attacks from al Qaeda and Iranian-backed terrorists throughout the 1990s culminating with those on September 11, 2001.
Since that date, during the era of America’s clenched Bush fist, we have suffered ZERO attacks.
Still want to loved by Al-Arabiya and the BBC, Obama?
___________________________________________________________________________________
Originally published by Mike DeVine, Legal Editor for The Minority Report
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Examiner.com and Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
January 28th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Mike, the President of Iran is not the commander and chief of the Iranian military, fyi.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Scary.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Sorry to see this site being pitched, more and more, to the slobbering moron level.
This stuff is just so mindless and wrong, to boot.
“The last time our world military presence was reduced, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran twice and conquered Kuwait ”
Oh really – was that the Reagan reduction in our military, or the Bush 41 reduction?
“Since that date, during the era of America’s clenched Bush fist, we have suffered ZERO attacks.”
Tell that to the nearly 5000 families who lost loved ones, or the tens of thousands injured. They have been attacking us on a daily basis – just not here at home. They attack us where we are most vulnerable.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
#1 – Shhh, that makes it less scary.
–
“Gitmo withing 12 months and that caprured terrorists will have not one hair on their heads bothered before their “OJ trials.” ”
Do you honestly have any reason to believe that or do you just enjoy regurgitating partisan rhetoric heard elsewhere?
January 28th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
You’re blaming Obama for the rhetoric of Iran’s psychotic little dictator!?!?
I’m sorry, I always try to be critical without calling names, but you’re just relentlessly worthless enough to exhaust my self-restraint.
Devine, you’re a mean-spirited, sub-par, STUPID little nutjob. You pass off National Enquirer-level partisan swill in every goddam post you put up, and then have the gall to accuse any of the conservatives here that have enough IQ points to be put off by your idiocy of being liberals.
A-CINK? Go to hell, you fucking mindless freak.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Win M., you may not like this post, but you’re the one that got personal. Cool off, and remember, it’s just the internet.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Yeah Win M. I can’t say I like GameCock, but took things way too far. This isn’t DailyKos.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
sigh… another “Gamecock” post
January 28th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
More to the substance of the post, it seems like GC wants failure for Obama. The President is adopting a new posture for our foreign relations, which many of us (meaning Americans…maybe not as many on this site) think is good strategy. Disagree if you like, but you can’t blame Ahmadinejad’s same-old, tired rhetoric on Obama just because he’s in the Oval Office right now. It’s nothing new.
To suggest that the two are correlated (“first fruits”) THIS EARLY is projecting failure.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Good point, MellowFellow. I was sick of this failure crap ever since I saw Republicans do it vs. Clinton, then Democrats vs. Bush… It gets so old.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
Yawn.
What no mention that you use to be a Democrat Mike?
There is a reason your posts continually have the least amount of discussion.
Sorry, keep trying you might write something worthwhile eventually.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Can we slow down the Gamecock posts? I’ve started to just skip them due to their hyper-partisan shrieking, but there’s so many that its becoming easier to just skip the race website altogether….
January 28th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
These Gamecock posts really don’t do this great site any credit.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
I don’t want failure for America mellow fellow.
January 28th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
There’s such a thing as overkill, and you’re rapidly approaching it/already there. Relentless attacks on Pres Obama will either sink him or isolate him from criticism. He’s got enough political skills that it’s going to do the latter. Let’s fine tune the criticism to increase the impact. Not every potential flaw needs to be attacked like it means the end of the world.
January 28th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Doug wrote a great piece on Obama’s interview. Check it out above this one on the front page.
January 28th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
I am sick about hearing of the danger of Iran. They pose no threat. All Iran does is talk and flap its mouth. They have no nuclear weapons at all. They are years away from that. They can’t do anything to anyone.
Israel has the fourth largest army in the world and nukes. Israel and the U.S. can destroy Iran any day they want.
Pakistan and the collapse of Mexico are the biggest threats to the United States.
January 28th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
From the day Obama took office, he has been sending the wrong message to the world. The photo released, showing Obama breaking Bush’s Oval Office dress code and conducting official business in informal shirt sleeves and casual attire is a metaphor for the message of appeasement, informality, and recklessness this administration sends daily. Obama is fulfilling campaign promises and harnessing foreign policy for domestic political campaign-like rhetoric instead of developing policy through consulting all of the informed men around him from the joint chief of staff, to the commanders on the ground in Iraq.
January 28th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
I would like to suggest that JA Pruce also be given front page status; along with Gamecock, that would be a dream come true. Please consider it.
January 28th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Party pooper.
January 28th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I’ve got one word for the liberals on here. NAIVE!!! Unbelievable how you trust the terrorist thug nations….and unbelievable how some of you seem to thing that Iraq was better off before we came. That’s simply beyond belief that any grown up would think that.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
21 – Illguy
First off, I hope you realize that after the last 8 years, no Republican gets to call anyone else “naive” – not for a long long time.
Secondly – what is this “trust the..thug nations” thing? Who said anything about trusting anyone? Where did this charge come from – did you just dredge it up from the handy wingnut toolchest of handy insults?
Finally, no one said that Iraq was better off under Saddam. Its just that no one, or very few people, believe that it was worth well over 4000 American lives, tens of thousands of often-grievous injuries, and a trillion dollars – to replace a murderous secular dictator with a crew of sketchy Iran-loving incompetents.
I doubt that even you would have bought this war if it had been sold as such beforehand.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
“All Iran does is talk and flap its mouth.”
and fund terrorists, and try to develop nuclear weapons, and encourage attacks on Israel…
You get my point.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
I’ve got one word for the liberals on here. NAIVE!!!
NAIVE is believing that anyone who doesn’t swallow Gamecock’s thoughtless rant is a liberal.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Accurately quoting a democrat is considered slander.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
I believe that Iran is one of the gravest threats our nation has ever faced.
January 28th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
“NAIVE is believing that anyone who doesn’t swallow Gamecock’s thoughtless rant is a liberal.” No, not everybody to the Left of Gamecock is a flaming Liberal, but than again?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Gamecock, this post was really, really, really embarrassing.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
#28 We disagree, really, really, really, really.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Alex Knepper is normally way too liberal for me, but I agree with him totally on this post.