“A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money”. (G. Gordon Liddy)
In the Wall Street Journal on August 1, 2011, Fouad Ajami published a devastating analysis of Obama’s foreign policy under the title,” Barack Obama the Pessimist; His lack of faith in American exceptionalism has dashed any hope of a ‘transformational’ presidency”. He focused on Obama’s reflexive radical Leftist ideology that posits phantom American colonialism and neo-colonialism as the original sins for which we must atone.
“In one of the illuminating, unscripted moments of the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama said — much to the dismay of his core constituency — that unpopular wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; he could forgive the conviction that the country was ready for an economic and political overhaul. He gave it a mighty try. But the transformational dream was not to be. The country had limits. Mr. Obama couldn’t convince enough Americans that the twin pillars of his political program — redistribution at home, retrenchment abroad – are worthy of this country’s ambitions and vocation.”
By the Reagan standard, Mr. Obama had been a singular failure. The crippling truth of his presidency is the pessimism he displayed and the low expectations he had for America. He had not come forth to awaken the country to its stirring first principles, but to manage its decline at home and abroad. Rather odd, given his inspiring biography for one who provides no inspiration with a personal story of “The Audacity of Hope” yielding a leader who deep down believes that America’s best days “are behind it”.
‘In his encounters with the foreign world, Mr. Obama gave voice to a steady and unsettling expression of penance. We had made our own poor bed in distant lands, Mr. Obama believed. We had been aggressive and imperial in the wars we waged, and in our steady insistence that our way held out the promise for other nations.
In that narrative of American guilt, the Islamic world was of central importance. It was in that vast, tormented world that Mr. Obama sought to make his mark. It was there he believed we had been particularly egregious.”
Fast forward to Mach 20, 2013, we find Amotz Asa-El’s “Welcome, Mr. President” in reference to Obama’s 2nd visit to Israel, four years have elapsed from the 1st. He initiates his Op-Ed by remarking that much has happened in the interim., “—–and the Cairo where you delivered your much-heralded speech has since become part of a broad, intra-Arab war zone that renders your rhetoric then tragically aloof.”
Facing a large audience of selected Arabs, he referenced Israel including “—a humanitarian crisis in Gaza though there wasn’t any, and you cried out that ‘it is time for these settlements to stop”, a sentiment that Israelis like Asa-El shares, but by no means sees as a cause of Western-Muslim discord.
With Mubarak jailed, Gaddafi slain, the former leaders of Tunisia and Yemen exiled, and Assad dismembering Syria, Obama’s analysis begs revision. Islamism’s electoral victories disproved his insistence that Middle Eastern extremism is the lot of “a small but potent minority.” In fact, in that part of the world to which he refers, fanaticism is the majority’s will.
Tom Friedman had stated that “the most destabilizing conflict “was the Shiite-Sunni war. While this too is debatable, the diagnosis rightly dismisses previous mantras that the Mideast is unstable because of the Arab-Israel conflict. Asa-El expressed the hope that Obama’s visit would convince him of this.
“The hundred self-immolated Arabs who set the Arab word ablaze did not care about Israel. They wanted jobs and dignity, and were demanding them from not from Israel nor from yesteryear’s foreign rulers, but from their own elites, who squandered Arab petrodollars on arms and overseas investments while cultivating ignorance and war.”
As Obama agreed, the subject conflict was “used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems.” But the Arab world did not hear, because all they heard was his attack on Israel. Speaking of the speech Obama was about to deliver in Israel, Asa-El felt it would not amount to much. “It would, therefore, be more useful for you to use this visit to learn rather than to preach.
Probe two things while here. The 1st is the depth of Israelis disillusionment. You would do well to hear the Middle Israelis who backed all of Israel’s peace gambles, only to ultimately emerge wounded, bitter,, and humbled; people like Arab Affairs expert Ehud Yaari; jurist Amnon Rubinstein; Israel’s leading political scientist Shlomo Avineri; and the country’s most influential journalist Nahum Barnea.
There is no need in telling us how gruesome wars are. We, unlike most of our critics, have actually been to war. We lost relatives, classmates neighbors and colleagues on battlefields from Egypt to Lebanon. This is Israel — admonishing us now about the merits of land-for-peace and the drawbacks of settlements will only lead you to that part of our physique that Moses described as ‘stiff-necked’.
The Jews had lied to themselves for ages that their sorry lot was God’s will. The Palestinians are lying to themselves that their sorry lot is Israel’s will. Peace will become discussable when Israel’s neighbors realize that Palestinian displacement was not ‘brought by Israel’s founding’ as you suggested in Cairo, but by reckless leaders who rejected UN’s two-state vision and waged war on embryonic Israel; peace will sprout after Arab leaders garner the courage to admit that Jews national and cultural roots lie in the land of their forbearers; and peace will flourish when Arab leaders tell their citizens its time they learned self-help from the Jews.”
With the advent of President Joe Biden, we have an individual, who early on prior to the 2020 Democrat Convention almost gave up on gaining the Democrat choice of becoming the party’s candidate to becoming a dictator President. What Bret Stephens once referred to “Obama’s Curious Rage” [Wall Street Journal of Sep.1, 2014] hardly compares to the hatred of Biden for Trump. Any valid document bearing Trump’s name is destroyed without any serious consideration. In fairness, hatred has become the religion of the present-day Democrat Party.
In order to comprehend the depth of this uncommon hatred, a study of: “The Disease of the Mind, Sickness of the Soul” by Donny Fuchs, could be helpful. He is of the opinion that liberalism in the current usage of the terms is an ideology of pseudo-moralism, where principles are twisted and altered on a whim, to satisfy the latest version of political correctness and societal perception. Liberalism reflects a detachment from the most basic components of human morality.
The innocent are guilty. Predators become victims. Society eats itself. How else to explain the support many American liberals still have for “Planned Parenthood,” even in the wake of numerous videos documenting monstrous actions? The modern-day liberal worships at the altar of women’s rights, and no horror on earth, documented or otherwise, will get in the way of his progressive thinking.
Liberal hypocrisy: This generally applies to all tenets of contemporary liberal values. Liberals profess to oppose violence, yet they consistently tolerate, perpetuate, and appease the worst perpetrators of violence in society. Liberals support policies, which harm the innocent in order to fuel a self-righteous need to understand the “humanity” of predatory humans.
The fully formed innocent in the womb is robbed of life, yet serial rapists and murderers deserve rehabilitation. Animal rights before people. “Gay rights,” except when Muslims hurl homosexuals from buildings. Same with female genital mutilations, beatings, and honor killings; favorite pastimes of Muslims worldwide. Outrage is always selective.
Liberals oppose racism unless it is perpetrated against whites, Jews, and those who don’t fall under the multicultural umbrella. The black equivalent of the KKK is acceptable and indeed reasonable for too many liberals. Black supremacy, Latino Power, all of them noble for the contemporary liberal. Multiculturalism is for cannibals and headhunters. In truth, black lives do not matter to most liberals. If they did, they would place the microscope on black society as a whole. The perception that they do is far more important to them.
A liberal never learns. Look at Europe. Blown up today by jihadists, yet they continue to appease the hordes of Islam the very next day. Obama and other world despots are importing murderers into their own countries, despite the evidence and the carnage before their eyes. Even the documented acts of Islamic savages sawing heads off and crucifying thousands fail to impress the liberal. “A minority,” they declare. “Our eyes and ears are deceiving us. Islam is peaceful.”
Can there be a more degrading, pandering, gesture towards a nation of Jew-haters, who align with our murderous enemies time and time again? Let all of Eurabia burn. Let them enjoy the benefits of Islamic savagery. Would any French citizen ever contemplate the notion of changing their profile pic to represent Israel’s flag?
I consider liberalism to be a mental disorder and a spiritual pathology. Naturally, the Jewish version is always worse, since the Jew brings his unrelenting passion, talents, and energy to the table, and he retains a stiff neck for eternity. And he begs a Jew-hating world to love him.
Dr. Kenneth Levin, the famed psychiatrist and historian, has penned, “A Jewish Plague”. He commences the essay with the words, “Individuals betray their own nations and communities for well-known reasons — material gain, ideology, retaliation for perceived grievances, and blackmail. But betrayal takes on special dimensions for those groups subject to chronic assault by the surrounding world.”
From Bernie Sanders’ embrace of Marxism and many other Jews in the current American government, we find a betrayal of Jewish norms. Embracing the enemies’ traditions is hardly a desired Jewish tradition, nor is hatred. The US Democrat Party, unlike the Party of Harry Truman, has become a home for Jews, such as those of J Street, who accept at face value the indictments of their accusers in the hope of thereby escaping their predicament. Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff, Richard Blumenthal, Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein come to mind. Voting records serve as confirmation.
The riot which occurred on January 6, 2021, was a manifestation of the prior six-month period. Examination of available internet videos clearly demonstrates this. Why then are Democrat leaders, who were empowered to put a stop to the killing, wounding and property destruction not indicted? Instead, they blamed Trump who as President did not have the legal authority entrusted to the respective Democrat mayors and state governors. How ironic that the same individuals who advocated defunding the police during the summer were desperate for police protection on January 6. Nor did they knowledge how many police officers were killed.
“Democrats were for riots before they were against them” by Daniel Greenfield, published by the Jewish Press of NY on January 8, 2021, provides a far more expansive coverage on the respective rioting. A few extractions from this excellent paper.
“Violent protests, including those targeting public officials and legislative bodies, had been championed and normalized by Democrats and their media over the last four years. That included the harassment of officials, property destruction, and assaulting law enforcement.
A bail fund backed by Senator Kamala Harris and Biden campaign staffers focused on helping the rioters and looters get out of prison. Along with any other criminals along for the ride. Now, as the Democrats expect to take power, they suddenly decided that rioting is bad.
The Democrats and media had cheered Black Lives Matter violent protests. They had colluded in previous invasions of Congress and the harassment of elected officials. But now they wanted a violent riot they could condemn. And such a riot would helpfully put to bed any further questions about a rigged election.
Much as in Charlottesville, marginal figures who were hostile to President Trump, to Republicans, and to conservatives, had taken center stage at the behest of the media. The purpose of the entire circus was to provide a propaganda opportunity for the Left.
Why is broken glass on Capitol Hill so much more precious than the broken glass that ended the dreams of store owners in Kenosha? Where was all the outrage, the tears wept for our country when Black Lives Matter thugs were prying open shops around the country, looting them, and assaulting their owners on a scale so vast it racked up $2 billion in damages?”
Comparing January 6 to 9/11 is ludicrous. During the latter, there was no engagement in the blame game, despite the loss of over 3,000 lives at the hands of Islamic terrorists.