sitting on the edge of the sandbox, biting my tongue

January 17, 2017

Who Will Obama Pardon?

Filed under: politics — Tags: , — edge of the sandbox @ 2:02 pm

UPDATE: This was first published two years ago, I think.  I decided to reread it in the light of Chelsea Manning’s sentence commutation. Next thing I know, the post is b ing updated and on the top of my blog. Oops.

Ukraine: bzzzz. I know.

A few days ago — and I’m always playing catch up with the news — the word on the street was that Bowe Berghdahl will be charged with desertion.  My first thought was “Well, if he’s convicted, Obama will pardon him.”

My second thought was “Who else is he going to pardon?”  Cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal seems like a good candidate because a) he’d been a far left cause celebre long enough and b) Obamster has an issue with police officers.

Who else? Another cop killer Leonard Peltier, maybe?  I’m sure there is plenty of lower profile “kids” who ended up in prison for shooting police officers and/or FBI agents.  And how about releasing everybody on death row?  O is transformative, after all, thus he needs to outdue Clinton who commuted sentences of FALN terrorirsts.

And how about Jahar Tsarnaev?  At the time of bombing he was just a babe, you know.  Umm… maybe not.  Tsarnaevs were basically white.

Advertisements

August 31, 2013

Focus

Filed under: politics — Tags: , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 10:38 pm

What’s the most important issue facing the country today?  If you listen to pundits on the right, it’s Syria.  And yeah, there is much to relish in Obamster’s foreign non-policy bloopers.  Personally, I like Sarah Palin’s take on the situation: Let Allah sort it out.  But, lets face it, since our President declared that some sort of red line was crossed, it would be nice to deliver the consequences, belatedly, and even if he, our President, went back on his “red line” line and threw the ball into Congress’s court.  (Since when does he defer to the legislative body?)

While I enjoy ridiculing of O’s foreign non-policy as much as any other blogger, I don’t think there is much at stake in this conflict.  American boots are unlikely to touch the Syrian ground, and while we are going to waste considerable treasure firing missiles in the desert, I can live with that.  Sure, it feels good to expose the failures of our first post-American President to the middle-of- the- road voter… but wait, what if this middle of the road is about to shift to the left, significantly?

Ladies and gentlemen, listen to Mickey Kaus:

But I’ve always wondered: How were they actually going to pass an amnesty bill in the GOP House without anyone noticing?  Even if the MSM cooperates by playing down the issue? The debt ceiling/Obamacare fight isn’t enough to distract the base forever.  We’re no longer shocked by the NSA and IRS tax exemption stories, everyone’s picked their side–another scandal isn’t going to do the job. You’d almost need a war or something. And that’s not about to happen.

I’m just a little blogger who typically writes about off-beat topics and leaves the big issues to big guys who cover them better than me. And yet, I am amazed by the lack of focus on the current version Amnesty this summer, even when it’s proponents sound confident.  Did we concede?

May 21, 2011

So Much to Learn, so Little Time (Only a Year and a Half)…

Filed under: Israel, politics — Tags: , , — edge of the sandbox @ 5:27 am

I would hate to be Barack Obama too.  Thrusted at the peak of his ignorance to the position of enormous power, he thought he was going to part the oceans, but now he’s being lectured by some man from a tiny country in the middle of nowhere.

Yeah, I would hate to be Barack Obama too.  I certainly resent being governed by him, in part because his feeble and inconsistent foreign “policy” brought shame on our great country, and will sure to cost us human life and treasure.  Oh, and given how Nethanyahu ushered in very successful free market reforms in Israel during his first stint as a Prime Minister in the 1990s, perhaps he can do us all a favor and explain our President a few things about domestic policy as well.

UPDATE: Uppity Canadians.  (Via an Ace comment.)  Maybe Obama should go to Canada and give a speech.  That will change everything.

May 20, 2011

It’s Jewish American Heritage Month, and I’m Offended!

Not that American Jews need a heritage month.  Every day is a Jewish American heritage day, because not a day goes by without hearing about our achievements in science, literature, arts, economics — what have you.  But since that’s the language our President understands, I’m going to declare myself offended.  Why did he have to pick the month of May to announce his plan to divide our Jewish capital, Jerusalem?

Oh, and did you know that East Jerusalem Arabs prefer Israel to a Palestinian state.  As they say, LOL!  In any event, there was always a large Jewish community in East Jerusalem — until Jordan occupied it and forcibly expelled all Jews in 1948.  So yeah, lets now call it “Arab East Jerusalem”.

And while our dear President wants Arab “right of return” to be a part of the final settlement — a major diversion from classic American policy — what about the Jewish refugees?  If “Arab Spring” is worth anything at all, why not ask the presumably newly free Arab countries to compensate Jews they were so happy to kick out  a half a century or so ago?  In fact, why not make compensation for Jews kicked out of East Jerusalem a part of bilateral negotiation?

Obama’s on thin ice with Jewish voters.  I’m sure he’s still going to get the majority, but not 78% majority, and many will sit out the election.  He can count on fewer donations, too.  He’s scheduled to deliver speech to AIPAC on Sunday, apparently.  They should boo him.

Oh, and Assad heard Obama’s call of liberalization, and fired on protesters.  Killed 9.

…Actually, I’m not offended.  I’m absolutely outraged and scared.

UPDATE: Damage control already.

April 8, 2011

With Enemies Like These, who Needs Friends?

Filed under: politics — Tags: , , — edge of the sandbox @ 5:13 am

Qaddafi endorsed Obama:

For whatever reason, Muammar Qaddafi has decided, in a letter to President Obama, to just ask if America and NATO would maybe stop bombing Libya, please? Though Qaddafi obviously doesn’t approve of the military campaign against him, he still has plenty of nice things to say to Obama, including:

Despite all this you will always remain our son whatever happened. We still pray that you continue to be president of the U.S.A. We Endeavor and hope that you will gain victory in the new election campaigne [sic].

Obama’s first big endorsement! Anyway, back to the core of the message, “Stop bombing us”:

Bearing in mind that you are the president of the strongest power in the world nowadays, and since Nato is waging an unjust war against a small people of a developing country. This country had already been subjected to embargo and sanctions, furthermore it also suffered a direct military armed aggression during Reagan’s time. This country is Libya.

The best part is that clarifying last sentence. Just in case. This is too important to risk any misunderstandings. Of course it wasn’t important enough to spell Obama’s name even remotely accurately:

Our dear son, Excellency, Baraka Hussein Abu oumama, your intervention is the name of the U.S.A. is a must, so that Nato would withdraw finally from the Libyan affair.

Proper spelling is like proper grammar: neo-colonialist.  Authenticity beats spelling.  If Qaddafi believes Obama is a Kenyan Muslim, then why not a Kenyan Muslim name?

Since kinetic military action can last well beyond 2012, a new President might feel obliged to finish up Scarecrow’s mess.  Although this Commander in Chief just may end up sending ground troops to Libya, I’m not sure how it’s supposed to happen when he threatens to defund the military.  I guess it’s one of those instances where he can’t make up his mind.  Given that we are at war with him, I can think of a few sane reasons why Qadaffi prefers a weak POTUS.

March 27, 2011

Good News for Obama?

Filed under: politics — Tags: , , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 4:31 am

Per latest Reuters poll 60% of Americans support Operation Let’s Pound Libya a Little.  Not bad, considering that the pundits are not impressed.  But that’s not where the good news lies.

Apparently a whopping 17% of American adults see Obama as a strong military leader.  I’m trying to imagine who this 17% are and whatever gave them that idea.  Perhaps they are very young and don’t understand what constitutes leadership.  Maybe some of them are followers of Luis Farrakhan who can’t believe that Obama got the temerity to go against Qaddafi.  But Farrakhan can’t possibly have that many followers.

Further good news:

Of those polled, 48 percent described Obama’s leadership as commander in chief as “cautious and consultative,” 36 percent as “indecisive and dithering” […].

“The data suggest he is perceived to be more consultative in his approach, which may distinguish him in the minds of the American public from his predecessor, George W. Bush, who was not perceived to be,” said Ipsos Public Affairs Director Julia Clark, adding that the responses broke along political lines.

So nearly half of Americans thinks that some sort of caution and deliberation was behind the “kinetic strike” business.  Do we have any evidence of any kind of deliberation on the part of the President?  As Pundit and Pundette note, Scarecrow is winging it (h/t Political Junkie Mom).  He articulated no goal, no plan of action, and is avoiding addressing the nation and the Congress to see how things will shake up.  In the meantime White House can’t figure out how to transition responsibilities to NATO.

Obama’s very own special multilateralism person Samantha Power wearing a negligee.

I find Caroline Glick’s take instructive.  First, there is Obama’s outlook:

The first side in the debate is the anti-imperialist camp, represented by President Barack Obama himself. Since taking office, Obama has made clear that he views the US as an imperialist power on the world stage. As a result, the overarching goal of Obama’s foreign policy has been to end US global hegemony.

Obama looks to the UN as a vehicle for tethering the US superpower. He views US allies in the Middle East and around the world with suspicion because he feels that as US allies, they are complicit with US imperialism.

Of course, the anti-imperialist ideology is mighty convenient when you have no interest in foreign policy to begin with.  If the United States is not a force of good in the international stage, then better stay out of the world affairs.  Better imagine that foreign countries, all of them, are good, and a few bows to foreign monarchs will solve all the problems.  No need to learn about history, politics or national character.  Not that they teach any of that in universities these days.  While shunning away from international affairs, our President busies himself campaigning and nationalizing this or that industry.

Obama subcontracted his foreign “policy” to Hillary, “the opportunist,” who:

[…] supports whoever they believe is going to make them most popular with the media and Europe. In the case of Libya, the opportunist interests dictated military intervention against Gaddafi. Europe opposes Gaddafi because the French and the British bet early on that his opponents were winning. France recognized the opposition as the legitimate government two weeks ago.

Once Gaddafi’s counteroffensive began, France and Britain realized they would be harmed politically and economically if Gaddafi maintained power so they began calling for military strikes to overthrow him.

Far from “cautious and consultative,” Obama is wish-washy and weak.  Republicans have their work cut out for them explaining this all to American people, 64% of whom don’t find the current President indecisive and dithering.  One hopes that the registered voters are a little better informed than the general population.

Obama and Qaddafi in the happier days.

For the record, I’m for replacing the old drag queen with a French or an American puppet, but that’s not what appears to be going on.

December 22, 2010

Paper Scarecrow

Filed under: politics — Tags: , , — edge of the sandbox @ 8:48 pm

In honor of Senate’s ratification of Obama’s nuclear treaty with Russia, it’s time to recall a lovely conversation I had with my daughter, then three.

Me: What animal are you?

Her: I’m a froggy!

Me: What animal is your brother?

Her: Oh, he’s a kitty!

Me: What animal is daddy?

Her: He’s a kitty too.

Me: What animal is mommy?

Her: Mommy is a scarecrow.

Hmmm… is it because I told her not to band on the window with her magic wand? Does she even know what a scarecrow is?

Me: What animal is the President?

Her: The President?  He’s… he’s… paper scarecrow!

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: