“And does it matter if Obama throws some leaves on a tomb?”
This quote was from from the execrable David Corn writing for the Nation magazine on the occasion of Obama avoiding Arlington National cemetery in VA back in 2010 for his ill fated appearance at the Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Illinois. At the time Obama said that decision was at the behest of presidential daughter Sasha who wanted to vacation in Chicago.
The recent controversy about Barack Obama desiring that Israel return to a recognition of the pre-1967 borders caused me to realize why it is so vital to ensure that a nation properly recognize and commemorate its fallen heroes. Israel has enjoyed a far greater sense of security after it obtained the disputed regions that it acquired by force of arms during the 1967 war. These regions have enabled Israel to maintain much more defensible borders than the ones it had before that war. So it is safe to say that Israel is vastly more secure today because it prevailed in a defensive war through force of arms wielded by its soldiers and citizen soldiers.
There is NO nation state whose borders have not been created, altered, or obliterated by force of arms. This universal truth is so self-evident that I find it laughable as how often it is ignored in the various arguments over the state of Israel’s right to exist within defensible borders.
Nowhere is that axiom truer than in the case of the United States. Its wars have defined its borders and it continues to exist by means of its self evident willingness to employ force of arms to maintain its borders. If you think that is a good thing that the United States exists, you must also admit that it exists because there is an Armed Forces willing to fight and die to preserve those borders for this nation.
The people who wield the force of arms that ultimately define and maintain all nationstates are the personnel of its armed forces. When a nation contracts with its citizens to enter its armed forces and calls upon them to sacrifice their very lives to the proposition of engaging its enemies in combat in pursuit of national objectives, I think that at a minimum those people should have an expectation that the nation would honor such sacrifice by means of regularly scheduled commemorative ceremonies such as Memorial Day. This is particularly poignant as you ponder the fact that the Armed Forces of the US have liberated more people from or secured them from the clutches of tyranny than any military in the history of mankind.
Implicit in that contract is that the leader and commander in chief of the armed forces of the nation orchestrate and lead in those ceremonies that are designed to honor and exalt all those who have died in the service of the Armed Forces of our nation. I believe that there is no nobler or critical service than honorable service in the Armed Forces of our nation, because such service enables the survival and existence of our nation and many of our allies. This reality will not continue without that service being continually reproduced. Disrespect and denial of this self evident truth will only serve to minimize the likelihood that that service will continue to be refreshed.
All this brings us back to the case of the 44th president of the United States. The16th President of the United States said it best when he dedicated Arlington National Cemetery: The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.
But no matter what our poor power may be add or detract may be, we must always strive to express our gratitude for our honored dead’s heroic sacrifice. When the President of the United States doesn’t even show up in a ceremony designed to honor those dead, that too is a profound statement. It is the statement of a man who appears to hold other priorities in higher regard.
Last year, Obama’s speech at Abraham Lincoln national Cemetery in Elllwood Illinois was short-circuited by heavy rainfall and a lightning storm.
I think the veterans in heaven got together and said “not today moron, we’re not in the mood.”
He claimed that electing him would lower the sea levels. You would have thought that he would be able to make the rain stop.
The president travels to tornado-wrecked Joplin, Mo., on Sunday. The president will visit with survivors and family members of the worst tornado in decades, a monster storm that tore through Joplin a week leaving more than 130 dead and hundreds more injured. About 100 others are unaccounted for, and the damage is massive.
The good people of Joplin Missouri are hurting, the damage is massive and they need help. But Obama has been in Europe all last week botching toasts to the Queen of England. I would think that Missouri could do without Obama’s August presence for just one more day while he devoted all of Memorial Day to the war dead of this nation.
I hope that you will understand my ambiguity in so far as this situation is concerned. I am extremely queasy at the idea of the person Barack Obama, whom I believe is a Marxist usurping demagogue prevailing over ceremonies designed to honor those who are amongst the noblest of our citizens. On the other hand I’m offended that the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the United States does not set aside a day to honor them in ceremony. Reluctantly I am forced to concede that the man who claims to be president of the United States should have set aside a ceremony at Arlington Virginia.
Perhaps our president is not a patriot, as Herman Cain asserted recently. What evidence is there in support of that proposition?
Cain is a reasonable man, and made a reasonable assertion based on the available evidence.
Rush Limbaugh didn’t intend to do so, but that same day, he essentially recited a nearly comprehensive list of the ways Barack Obama has not acted as a patriot during his two-plus years in office:
So where are we? Bottom line: Obama chose Palestinians over Israelis. Obama is essentially demanding that Israel commit suicide. Netanyahu says I’m not gonna commit suicide. People say Netanyahu was rude when he refuses to commit suicide. Obama chose Palestinians over Israelis. He did it after learning that Hamas became a part of the Palestinian ruling class, the terrorist group.
Obama chose the Muslim Brotherhood over freedom when he invited them to his Cairo speech and when he endorsed the misnamed Arab Spring without reservations or conditions. We know now what’s happening in Egypt.
Obama chose lawlessness and open borders over protecting innocent citizens when he sued Arizona and stood with Felipe Calderone and the DemocRATS in Congress in criticizing the sovereign state of AZ as it sought to protect itself from that which the federal government is obligated to do and has failed to do so.
Obama chose voter intimidation over civil rights when he chose not to prosecute the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia.
Obama chose the public sector over the private sector with his stimulus slush fund.
Obama chose fascism over the private sector when he took over two US car companies.
Obama chose a path to socialized medicine over free market solutions to health care when he signed Obamacare into law.
Obama chose real cowboyism over Congress when fighting a war on Khadafy and Libya, ignoring the War Powers Act by saying, well, we are just involved in a kinetic military action..
Obama chose czars over cabinet members.
He chose class warfare over prosperity when he demagogued taxing the rich over cutting out-of-control spending.
He chose politics over solutions when he failed to produce a budget or demand one from Congress.
He chose to ignore a court ruling that his Gulf moratorium on oil drilling is unconstitutional particularly in light of four dollars gallon gasoline.
Let’s now run through exactly why Herman Cain’s claim is on such solid ground.
When you catch someone lying for the first time, the proper evaluation of the situation is to say, “That person is lying.” You do not say, “That person is a liar.” You would be wrong to do so, as that person has from all appearances engaged in atypical behavior.
However, if the person repeatedly lies, is repeatedly advised that they are lying, and doesn’t change their behavior, you ultimately and reluctantly have to conclude that the person doesn’t merely lie a lot. You’re forced to conclude that the person actually is a liar. The person, as a liar, is the sum of his or her choices to serially lie. Why that person is a liar is irrelevant to accurately identifying them as one.
Similarly, when you catch someone stealing for the first time, the proper evaluation of the situation is to say, “That person has just stolen something.” You do not say, “That person is a thief.” You would again be wrong to say so.
However, if the person is repeatedly caught stealing, you ultimately and reluctantly have to conclude that the person doesn’t merely steal a lot. You must instead conclude that the person is a thief — the sum of his or her choices to steal. As with identifying liars, determining why a person is a thief is not important.
Finally, when you see a president take an action that is clearly against the best interests of his country and its people for the first time, the proper response is to say, “He is not acting patriotically.” You do not say, “He is not a patriot.” You would be wrong make that assertion, as he is from all appearances engaging in atypical behavior.
But Rush recited eleven instances in just the past two years and four months (the first one is conceivably subject to some debate, but the other ten really aren’t) where Barack Obama has acted against the best interests of his country, the best interests of its people, and/or its founding principles (which in essence comprise what the Founders saw as the country’s best interests). What’s more, Rush didn’t even get to the Obama administration’s clear determination — by their actions, not their words — to increase this country’s dependence on foreign energy, or its EPA-driven economic war on the state of Texas.
What do you say about a person who repeatedly commits acts that are against the best interests of his country and its people, is repeatedly told that he is doing so (e.g., in the November 2009 and November 2010 elections, as scores of those who largely agree with his actions were cast aside in favor of those who do not), and doesn’t change his behavior? A reasonable person can conclude that the person involved doesn’t merely commit a lot of unpatriotic acts. A reasonable person can conclude that the person is not a patriot. As with lying and stealing, determining why that person is not a patriot (e.g., antagonism, profound ignorance, being controlled by other forces, etc.) doesn’t matter.
As Rush said, Barack Obama is the sum of his choices, and there have been enough of them for reasonable people to arrive at the belief that Barack Obama is not a patriot.
Therefore, Herman Cain, when asked whether the president is a patriot, acted as a reasonable person when he said, “No.”
Where’s the comparable mountain (or even molehill) of evidence which would demonstrate that Herman Cain is even remotely wrong, and that the sum of President Barack Obama’s actions would instead demonstrate that he is a patriot?
“(a man who is working to do what he sees as right for his country)” is NOT the definition of a patriot. It is self-referential and says nothing more than “when a person wants America to be whatever he wants it to be.” Under this definition, an American-born muslim terrorist would qualify as a patriot because he “is working to do what he sees as right for his country” — making it muslim.
It is this kind of definition which makes it possible for democrats to claim they are patriots. When a democrat says “Are you questioning my patriotism?” the answer should be “Absolutely” and then illustrate it by pointing out that a patriot is one who “is working to return or reshape their country so it is in line with the original intent of the founders of that country.” If they are not fighting for the original, but are “working to do what he sees as right for his country” in his own eyes, he is not a patriot. This is a change of definitions as extreme as two men being called “married” and nobody calls them on it.
President Obama on Sunday will speak at a memorial service for the more than 130 people who were killed last weekend when a tornado ripped through Joplin, Mo.
Just don’t let him sign any guest books that might cause him to mistake the year like when he signed 2008 for the queen’s guest book.
- He may think he’s inspecting the destruction from the Great Mississipi and Missouri Rivers Folood of 1993.
In conclusion, barrack Hussein Obama, AKA Harrison J Bounel, Um Umm Ummm !!!!!