Additional Pages

Friday, September 21, 2012

Obama Chose His Side

I guess it depends on which religion is being denigrated. There is no religion which has endured more denigration than Christianity, or more support than Islam from the Obama Administration. In an effort to ease the hurt feelings of Muslims over the anti-Islam video, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pointed out clearly that they were not associated with the video, but supported freedom of religion.

At this story from Al Jazeera, the supposed defenders of freedom make these remarks in an ad running on Pakistani television.

From Barack Obama: "Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others."

And, from Hillary Clinton:  "Let me state very clearly, the United States has absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its contents. America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation."

Missing from the remarks is the absolute defense of freedom of speech, of the necessity of the United States to support the freedom of expression no matter what the subject matter.

This is an attempt by leaders of the United States of America to distance themselves from the violence of Islamic hate-mobs. They do nothing to support the equally important freedom of speech, of every one's right to express themselves freely and to support the view that violence is not the answer to disagreements about religion or any other subject.

These statements would have been much better served by assuaging the hurt feelings of the Catholics and other religious organizations forced to pay for abortions and contraceptive methods under Obamacare, but those words were never used in connection with that issue. It came with mealy-mouthed options to "deal with it."

They didn't the tell the Pakistanis to "deal with it," that there were ways to overlook the impact of the video, to put their emotions aside and recognize every one's right to say, write and produce a representation of their beliefs.

The actions of the President and the Secretary of State reinforce the conclusion that violence is the only answer to the many abuses of this Administration, that without it, there is no respect for any one's rights or beliefs. What other conclusion can one make?

These remarks show the very heart of this Administration. They display the hostility toward Christianity and the sympathy for the Islamic cause. I'm not sure how one who is a Christian can justify a vote for Barack Obama. I don't know how, having revealed his sympathy and support for Islam, a homosexual might vote for Barack Obama, unless it is with a blindfold and ear plugs. It has been proven time and time again that Islamic nations oppress and murder homosexuals, often subjecting them to mutilation and torture. I don't know how women, knowing the support Barack Obama has shown for Islam, a religion that denigrates women, that murders them for infidelity, that murders them for the clothes they wear and the things they say can support Barack Obama.

How is that possible? What sort of delusional mind-frame allows such duplicity?

The President of the United States and the Secretary of State are supposed to represent the interests of the United States, to stand up for its values, to support the views of its people. This shameful pandering to a violent religion over the freedom of speech of one of it's citizens is shameful. They have done nothing less than step in front of the mob and direct its actions against anyone who might oppose the violent suppression of free speech. They have done nothing but put themselves on the side of the Islamic hate-mobs against the very principles of American society.


  1. The enemy of the Femocrat enemy is their friend. Until they aren't. The main enemy of the Femocrats is the original closer one but that one is almost beaten.

    1. The leftists think Muslims are their useful idiots, Muslims regard leftists the same way. Once power is achieved useful idiots are murdered or enslaved, it's not gonna be pretty.

  2. Obama already stated, "I will stand with the Muslims should political winds shift in an ugly direction."
    Hillary is an anti-Semite and a a supporter of Islam as well. Her "companion"/assistant Huma Abedin reaffirms her support for Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood.

    The Left wants to make America a socialist country. Obama goes a step further, wanting to destroy America first, and then re-make it in his own image, which is both Marxist and anti-colonial (2016: Obama's America).

    Since America was founded upon Judeo-Christian values, with a Constitution and a form of government designed to function with a moral. righteous, and Judeo-Christian citizenry, the shortest route to destroying such a country is through the support of its deadliest enemy: Islam and the muslim scum who live by its tenets.

    Make no mistake - even though there were many aspects of the Crusades that were due to a desire for wealth and plunder, for power and control, the primary basis of the Crusades was the realization that Islam and Christianity (and its parent, Judaism) could not co-exist. Islam by definition (it means "Submission", _not_ "Peace") excludes all other religions, cultures, and governments.

    I don't know where the battle at the Gates of Vienna will be re-fought in this day and age, but it will be fought. And we need to remove this cancerous growth called Barack Hussein Obama from the body politic before it kills us. If not at the polls, then when?

  3. 2 usurpers, 2 dichotomies, 2 acts of out right treason. It is nothing less than 2 acts of giving aid and comfort to foreign enemies by 2 domestic enemies, 2 traitors who took 2 oaths between them to defend and protect the US Constitution and the People of the United States of America from All enemies, foreign and domestic.

  4. No surprise to any of us, I am sure.

  5. "What sort of delusional mind-frame allows such duplicity?"

    They can't, obviously.
    You're giving those cretins more credit than they deserve.
    It ain't about keeping Obama in, it's about keeping Romney out.
    Notice the last couple decades worth of national elections, it's always about the lesser of 2 (perceived) evils.

    Round and round it goes and the spiral tightens with each revolution on the downward helix to hell.

    1. Let me get this right Obama not Romney right? No hes a Leftist socialist Communist,with a cabinet full of radical hippies, who still think they are at wood stock who still dont have a clue. I understand the two have questionable history, but who supports the destruction of the Constution, destroying our military standards for gay rights so they can destoy an instatution that held a standard that molded our young men to be leaders and defenders of our nation, sending Chaptians to prisson for not marring Gays. Claiming full credit for bagging Osama Binladin, instead of giving credit to Seals who did the Job after all. Also supporting the UN to control our sovern rights. Passing eductive orders that are not constutional sound. Support rights of those groups that are out to destroy the Jewish Nation. Remember that the nation that prays and support Isreal, will be in favor with this Nations Creator and protector our of Nation. Will we support a presedent who is socialist, who does not have respect for this countrys Constution and does not obay his oath to protect and defend the constaution but is out to destroy it? If we as a nation have Obama for another four years , we better exept the fact america is lost and it will get what it asked for in voting in Obama back in office.

  6. "...the conclusion that violence is the only answer to the many abuses of this Administration, that without it, there is no respect for any one's rights or beliefs. What other conclusion can one make?"
    I believe this rhetorical question can be asked in the context of almost every aspect of our current form of governance. You've no doubt heard the saying "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner."
    At what point does the sheep get to initiate...?

    Dan Knowles


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.