Syria

The Red Ranger: So we have a country that has used chemical weapons on its citizens and the world fails to take quick and decisive action.  I would have thought that a Nobel peace prize winner like Obama would have been able to quickly pull together a bilateral coalition to extract some payback on Assad.  I guess that he does not really have the confidence of the world leaders like everyone thought he would get when he was elected.

In fact, Obama seems to be totally fumbling US foreign relations.  Other than getting Bin Laden which if you believe some accounts Obama wasn’t too interested in following what has he done.  Our relations with Russia are probably at their lowest level since the pre-Reagan years, the Benghazi attackers have gotten away unscathed and even Britian, our former strongest ally, will not fall in line with us.  Let’s not forget his support of the Muslim Brotherhood in the coup that ousted Mubarak in Egypt.  How many Christians have the Brotherhood murdered or how many churches have they destroyed since their ouster in Egypt.

Looking back the awarding of the Nobel peace prize to Obama when they did makes the committee look pretty foolish.  The award shouldn’t have been given based upon hope but on actual results.

 

Nattering Naybob: First, am I to believe that you are still adhering to that Sean Hannity nonsense that Obama “didn’t really want to get Osama bin Laden”? You’re joking, right? From Day 1 in office, Obama informed his National Security team that catching bin Laden would be a priority. Unlike George W. Bush, who replied in a press conference on Marsh 13th, 2012, LESS THAN ONE YEAR AFTER THE 9/11 ATTACKS, and I quote: “I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority”.

Every President has foreign policy mis-fires, it’s part of the cost of doing business. Stop reading columns by John Bolton.

The Red Ranger: I did not mean to imply that Obama did not want to get Bin Laden, I was just referencing the fact that there were reports that he wasn’t too interested in watching the actually taking down of Bin Laden.

I would classify a mis-fire as something that happens on a rare occasion.  It seems like other than Bin Laden all of Obama’s foreign policy moves have been mis-fires.

Nattering Naybob: Oh. You are only saying that there are “rumors” (source: unknown) that he did not want to actually watch the video of bin Laden being taken down. Frankly, I don’ think it’s important whether he did or not. All I know is that he was there, watching intently. Or, you may have been seeing those internet reports from the usual Right-Wing nuts, that claim Obama’s image was somehow CGI’d or Photoshopped into the official photographs of the “war room” during the raid.

I find it truly, profoundly, pathetic that so many people waste so much time trying to discredit or criticize every single aspect of this President’s life. Over two years after we successfully captured and killed the perpetrator of the worst carnage ever inflicted on this country’s soil from outside forces, Republicans are still scraping, scratching, clawing, biting, and in some cases, chewing, to find any possible way to criticize Obama’s role in it. Sad.

And still, The Red Ranger always wonders: “What is happening to our country?”

The Red Ranger: Did you find it as profoundly, pathetic that so many people wasted time trying to discredit or criticize every single aspect of Bush’s life?  Or were you just part of the mindless Democratic horde partaking in this sport?

Nattering Naybob: No, I was not, if you want to know the truth. I thought George W. Bush  was an incompetent Chief Executive who listened too much to people who were giving him terrible advice (read: Dick Cheney). However I actually gave him credit for the way he handled the aftermath of 9/11. His “bullhorn moment” at the top of the debris pile at Ground Zero was a stroke of leadership genius, and one of the iconic moments in the history of the American Presidency. I thought he was unfairly criticized for continuing to listen for a few minutes to the reading of the students whose class he was visiting, before he started to take direct action on the news given to him on that morning.

I think Bush did a good job in imploring the nation to not take individual vengeance for 9/11 on Muslims in their neighborhood, or who they came across during their day. I think it was disgusting that someone threw shoes at him during a press conference in Iraq late in his Presidency because I think that could conceivably have been deemed an assassination attempt, and it was horrible that anyone would laugh at that and praise the show-thrower.

Bush was and is a devoted and faithful husband, father, and son, and I think his wife was an excellent and dignified First Lady. I think that any suggestion that he would have taken part in a “plot” to help facilitate 9/11 is outrageous and utterly contemptible because for all his management deficiencies, I think he is at heart a patriot and loves his country.

These are all positive comments that Republicans and the Right-Wing lunatic fringe, would never in a million years consider bestowing on Obama.

“The Thrilla in Wasilla”: Cheney vs. Palin

Nattering Naybob: What do you think of the tiff between Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin? In case you missed it, Red Ranger  (I know you spend most of your free time in a monogrammed silk bathrobe and matching ascot, reading the stock ticker), Dick Cheney was interviewed the other day and he stated quite unequivocally that he thought John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008, was a “mistake”. Cheney then agreed with the interviewer’s suggestion that Palin was “not ready” for the role. Choosing whose side I am on in this face-off reminds me of when I used to watch “Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein” on Channel 11 on Sunday mornings, 11:30 thru 1:00 (with a little luck, there could be a Yankee doubleheader on immediately afterwards… this in the day that MLB actually scheduled single-admission doubleheaders). Anyway, I always thought to myself, who should I root for near the end of the movie, when there was basically an intra-monster battle among the Wolfman, Frankenstein, and Dracula, when they pushed the gurney back and forth that had the strapped-down Costello? I never could decide, but it was a fun intellectual exercise.

My choice between Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin, however, while featuring one less monster, is almost as difficult. But after serious soul-searching, I am coming down, with nose firmly pinched shut, on the side of Dick Cheney. My reasoning is simple. Cheney, for all his latter-day evils, has at least had a productive, fairly distinguished career (prior to his shape-shifting into a reincarnation of Mr. Potter from “It’s a Wonderful Life”), highlighted chiefly by his tenure as Chief of Staff to President Ford, and then most notably, Secretary of Defense during the First Gulf War… the war against Saddam Hussein that was actually warranted (I am not including his 8 years as Vice-President as among his “distinguishments”, because I am trying to make believe it never happened). Sarah Palin, on the other hand, could not even hack fulfilling a complete term as Governor. I could go on about her numerous other shortcomings, but there will be many, many other Second Grade Minds posts down the road to fill this important need. Thoughts on the Cheney-Palin conflict, Red Ranger?

The Red Ranger: Your and the Left’s pre-occupation with Sarah Palin is mind-boggling. She currently does not hold an elected position nor is she running for one, but she is constantly brought up in discussions by the Left. She must really strike fear into them; how else can you possibly explain this fixation with her?

I do not know that calling it a “mistake” is the right term. It was more of a calculated risk taken by McCain. He needed to do something to energize the Republican party since the Dems were all awestruck by the “Messiah”, while McCain himself was not the most exciting campaigner. Palin did what was expected of her by bringing some life and excitement back into the Republican campaign.

However, what McCain and his team underestimated (and how they did so is baffling) was the degree to which the MSM would go to portray Palin as a bumbling, backwoods bumpkin who knew nothing other than how to catch salmon. If they would have brought this same vigor into vetting Obama we probably wouldn’t be stuck in this death spiral we are in now.

I do not know how you can say she couldn’t hack a full term as Governor. She left the job out of respect for the people of Alaska realizing that being governor and running for Vice-President were mutually exclusive. Continuing to draw the Governor’s salary from the taxpayers of Alaska was not fair. Palin realized this and did the honorable thing. Unlike Obama, who basically abandoned his job as senator to become a full-time campaigner, all the time showing no remorse about drawing a salary from the US taxpayer. I know that you will bring up that McCain did the same thing but at least he started campaigning later than Obama and served in the Congress much longer than Obama.

Was Obama ready to be President? If you think yes, based upon what criteria, being able to read a TelePrompter?

Nattering Naybob: Ah, Red Ranger. To quote the title of one of my earlier SGM topics, “Where do I begin”?

First, Palin did not resign while she was running for Vice-President. She resigned well after the 2008 Election. She claimed she could no longer withstand the scrutiny that came with being Governor of Alaska, the least populous state in the Union. Whereas just a few months earlier she had been campaigning for a position that was, to use a cliché’ “one heartbeat away” from being leader of the Free World, and the total isolation and anonymity that comes with it.

Second, stop blaming the “Lame-Stream Media” (one of Palin’s many Tiger Beat-level verbal stylings) for her utter lack of knowledge and intellectual curiosity. Your implying that Sarah Palin was intellectually equipped to actually be President of the United States, demonstrates once again that Modern Republicans place blind, partisan ideology above all else. I wish I had a dollar for all the Republican voters I saw interviewed during the 2008 campaign, who said “Oh, I want Sarah Palin to be President one day, because she’s just like I am!” Really?! Ignorant, uninformed voters supporting an ignorant, uninformed candidate for the second-highest office in the land. Perfect symmetry.

Third, is the Modern Republicans’ inexplicable obsession with TelePrompters. Every President since Lyndon Johnson has used a TelePrompter, but, of course, only Barack Obama is criticized for it. Why? Again, to borrow a rhetorical question you posed about Louis Farrakhan in an earlier blog, “is it because he’s black?” What difference does it make whether Obama reads his remarks from a sheaf of papers, from a TelePrompter, or off his own hand, as Dame Palin did a few years ago at some bogus Right-Wing confab. Or do you really believe that a President, or Presidential candidate, should be expected to deliver speeches (typically a half-hour or more in length) extemporaneously?

Just admit it. The Red Ranger has been check-mated by Cheney’s (correct) assertion that Palin’s Vice-Presidential candidacy, was a “mistake”. I suggest you cut your losses and move on to your next topic, perhaps an analysis that wistfully bemoans the fact that America never got a chance to see the real Herman Cain.

The Red Ranger: First, my apologies for the erroneous time line on Palin’s exit from being governor of Alaska (like your crack research team, mine had the day off). Prior to being chosen as McCain’s running mate her approval ratings as governor in Alaska ranged anywhere from a low of 80% to a high of 93%, and this was when all the people in Alaska had to judge her on was her performance. As a point of reference, her predecessor had an approval rating of 19%. However, once the MSM began their vicious assaults on her, her approval ratings declined up until the point that she resigned when she realized that the attacks would never stop and that the course of least damage to her state would be to resign. Funny thing is that her approvals ratings (despite the constant attacks by the MSM) were still better than Obama’s even though he has the MSM fawning all over him and never presenting him in a negative image to the public. Just imagine where Obama would be if he faced the same level of scrutiny that Palin faced. Palin faced this scrutiny while doing an outstanding job according to her constituents. Obama is facing no scrutiny while doing a poor job.

I will stop blaming the Lame-Stream Media when you stop believing them when they say how brilliant Obama is just because he went to an Ivy league school. One of my favorite YouTube videos is of Elizabeth Hasselbeck schooling Joy Behar. Behar makes a statement that Obama is very intelligent because he went to an Ivy league school and Hasselbeck shoots back, “Then Bush must be very intelligent also”. Behar was speechless. It was great to see another dumb liberal put in their place. At least Bush released his college records, I believe. Here is the link to the video just in case you would like to view it yourself and witness one of your ilk being thoroughly embarrassed.

I am assuming that you are joking when you talk about Republicans placing blind, partisan ideology above all else. That is the very definition of the Democratic party. Ignorant, uninformed voters supporting an ignorant, uninformed candidate for the highest office in the land is what got Obama elected. How else do you explain 99% of a race voting for a candidate? If 99% of white women voted for McCain because Palin was a woman like them imagine the uproar that would have created. My guess is that if you matched up SAT scores with voting districts you would find that the voting districts with the higher SAT scores tended toward voting Republican. Granted, high school seniors do not make up a large percentage of the voting population but their scores would represent the relative intelligence of their district as a whole.

I have no problem with him reading off a TelePrompter since as you note making a 30 minute speech without it is difficult. However, what is interesting is that whatever he doesn’t have the TelePrompter guiding him he always seems to go off message and make a gaffe which displays his true intentions.

I wish I had a dollar for all the Obama supporters I saw interviewed who had no idea what his policies were or when given a policy that was actually McCain’s pledged their whole-hearted support for it.

Ready for your typical weak rebuttal.

Nattering Naybob: When exactly does Obama “make gaffes”, either while reading off a TelePrompter or making spontaneous remarks? Any supporter of Mitt Romney should not be accusing President Obama of making gaffes. And the reason that most African-American voters chose Obama, and almost half of Caucasian voters also chose Obama, was Obama’s message of hope appealed more (and still does) to a wider swath of Americans, regardless of ethnicity, than the narrow, fear-mongering, John Birch-tinged message presented by Modern Republicans, who are well-known for their general disdain for minorities, and people they consider beneath the arc of the Bell Curve. Let’s see… what else. Do you really find that a lot of people proclaim their support of President Obama, based on his attendance at an Ivy League school? I rarely hear that. Where do you hear it? Oh yes, Fox News. I forgot.

I still think you would have been better off taking my earlier advice and bowing out of this posting, gracefully. You need to recall your research team back from their vacation at the Cape, and quickly.