by Eric DonderoOne of the Nation's leading Liberal spokespersons Peter Beinart is admitting this morning in the Washington Post, that the Surge has worked, and that the War in Iraq is a success. Amazingly, he even gives great credit to Republican President George W. Bush, and uses the term "courageous" to describe his support for the Surge. Beinart is a regular on Cable News like Fox and CNN.
From the Washington Post, "Admit it, The Surge Worked":
It's no longer a close call: President Bush was right about the surge. According to Michael O'Hanlon and Jason Campbell of the Brookings Institution, the number of Iraqi war dead was 500 in November of 2008, compared with 3,475 in November of 2006. That same month, 69 Americans died in Iraq; in November 2008, 12 did.This stands as a nice across the aisle parting gift to the President, 4 days from the end of his term. It shows, that at times, even highly partisan Liberals can be fair-minded and honest.Violence in Anbar province is down more than 90 percent over the past two years, the New York Times reports. Returning to Iraq after long absences, respected journalists Anthony Shadid and Dexter Filkins say they barely recognize the place.
That still doesn't justify the Bush administration's initial decision to go to war... But if Iraq overall represents a massive stain on Bush's record, his decision to increase America's troop presence in late 2006 now looks like his finest hour. Given the mood in Washington and the country as a whole, it would have been far easier to do the opposite. Politically, Bush took the path of most resistance. He endured an avalanche of scorn, and now he has been vindicated. He was not only right; he was courageous.
The same cannot be said unfortunately, for some within the Libertarian movement. To this day, the Libertarian Left has been completely silent on the success of the Surge. Not a single Leftist Libertarian has given any credit to Bush for the ultimate success of the War. A look at the usual suspects shows all without exception, completey silent in regards to Iraq War success.
Some leaders on the Libertarian Left with tight lips over Victory:
Justin Raimondo & Eric Garris of AntiWar.com
Paleos - Lew Rockwell, Anthony Gregory, Alan Turin & Walter Bloc
Steven Greenhut of the Orange County Register
Beltway Libertarians - Doug Bandow & Dave Boaz of Cato
Editorial Board at Reason - Matt Welch, Dave Weigel, et.al.
Ron Paul and Ron Paul supporters
Libertarian Party Anarchist/AntiWar faction - Gene Berkman, Steve Newton, Mary Ruwart, Tom Knapp, Trent Hill, George Phillies, Todd Andrew Barnette, et.al.
Each of these individuals and organizations are highly respected leaders of the left wing of the overall libertarian movement. For years they have brutalized Bush and Republicans over the Iraq War. They have taken vitriolic jabs at anyone, even among libertarians, who supported the War. Now that the Mission in Iraq has been Accomplished, not a single one of them, has come out and admitted that perhaps they were wrong You know it's pretty bad when Liberals prove to be even more honest than some Libertarians.
Note - In 2004, I founded and co-chaired Libertarians for Bush.
LINKS
This editorial has been featured on Yahoo News - Politics Page - Blogs.
64 comments:
Eric,
I don't think it is a matter of admitting the surge worked or not.
It's a matter of, at what cost?
Hell Mussolini got the trains to run on time. All he had to do is post a soldier at every train station and if the train pulled in late, the conductor was summarily shot.
Mussolini got the trains to run on time. But at what cost?
Alas, I should add you to the list of Surge Worked deniars.
Really Tom, that was a very pisspoor attempt at deflection. Surely, you can do better than that.
At what cost?
4,000 American lives. That's less than perished in a single hour on the Normandy Beaches or in 15 minutes at Iwo Jima. That's 1/100th of those who died in the Civil War.
Have we become that much of a pussy Nation that we can't even tolerate 4,000 War dead to rid the World of the most evil murderous Thug Dictator in modern times? (Unless you count Castro or Chavez).
And as a Veteran I will tell you Lundy, that THERE IS NO GREATER HONOR FOR A VOLUNTEER IN THE UNITED STATES MILITARY TO GIVE ONE'S LIFE FOR LIBERTY AND PROTECTION OF THE HOMELAND.
A concept that non-servers find hard to comprehend.
You've proven again, what you've said many times. This is not a blog for pointy headed intellectuals, or just plain intellectuals, for that matter.
A major point you seam to be missing…
In this country, the military is controlled by civilian politicians. If anyone disagrees with the civilian politicians, this somehow translates into not supporting the troops. This is just not true.
They are, after all, the same scumbag politicians that are taking this great country down the road of ruin.
99% of the problems in this country can be laid at the feet of politicians.
99% of politicians are low life scum bags whores.
When these same low life scum bag whores wrap themselves in the flag doesn’t change anything.
Politicians are politicians and 99% of them are low life scumbags whores.
And you've proved PRECISELY what I've been screaming at the top of my lungs for 25+ years in this libertarian movement of our: POINTY HEADED INTELLECTUALS ARE DESTROYING LIBERTARIANISM!!!
Lundy, we need Meat and Potatos libertarians, blue collar guys, Joe the Plumbers, Tito the Builders, Libertarians who love their country, have pride in the Military, and aren't afraid to wear that on their sleeves.
You side with the pointy-headed Geeks. Thus, I'm gonna have to mark you off on the side of the Advesaries of Liberty.
I hope one day you will redeem yourself.
Joe the Plumber a libertarian ?
You mean the guy who spoke out earlier this week against freedom of the press ? (In case you didn't know, that's in the First Amendment).
What a joke.
Joe the unlicensed plumber is a media created celebrity whose 15 minutes were up three months ago.
That's not what he said. That's what the ultra-liberal media said he said.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid Anonymous.
And btw, next time you post here, how 'bout following the rules, and including your name and town.
If your question is, did the surge work? Yes it it did. If your question is, do partisan democrats in congress refuse to admit it worked, you are correct there as well. As far as the anti-war libertarian faction goes, my question is, what impact do they have on US foreign policy? I would think relative to the major parties that control things, they are insignificant. As far as bloody american battles, look at The Battle of the Wilderness or Gettysburg. I think in the former there were almost 20K dead in one day. People today have no stomach for such things.
Eric - I understand the decrease in violence is more due to the "Anbar Awakening" then anything we did. Let's get the facts right here. Also I just can't see why we threw away 4000 soldiers. Sorry, I just can't.
Eric,
I removed any vestige of intellectualism but you don't seam to be able to grasp my point about the military being controlled by scum bag politicians. Let’s try this again.
Politicians are politicians and 99% of them are low life scum bag whores.
Is that too much intellectualism for you?
Tom - Reagan was in that 1% of good guys that happened to be politicians. He told the truth, he didn't pander.
Alex, we didn't "throw away" those 4,000 lives.
Again, as a Veteran, I can tell you there is no greater honor for those of us to serve than to give one's life for America.
Those 4,000 were Volunteers, not Draftees. If they had been Draftees the situation would be 1000% different.
Lundy, you're half correct.
Democrats are "scumbag politicians," Republicans ABSOLUTELY ARE NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And until you learn that fundamental difference you will be unable to grasp any political concept be it intellectual, or less so.
Alex:
Luckily, we live in an age where there is no conscription in this country. THey were an all volunteer force that knew the risks when the signed the dotted line. Since it was their choice, no one threw away anything, but their sacrifice was willing. You could ague against altruism, as Ayn Rand does and I might even agree with your argument, but they did it willingly.
Tom:
If the scumbag politicians don't control the military, then who should? Better the scumbags control the military than the military control the government. Your only other choice is the judiciary, and we all know what lawyers are like. :) Oh yeah, most politicians are lawyers too...
Eric:
I can think of a few republican scumbags...
Eric - your heart seems to be in the right place, but some of your statements are just ridiculous. How can you say that all Republicans are good guys....
“Again, as a Veteran, I can tell you there is no greater honor for those of us to serve than to give one's life for America.”
Jesus, Eric! Can you not grasp anything?
You are not giving your life for America. You are giving your life for a politician or a group of politicians. Repeat after me…
Politicians control the military…
99% of politicians are low life scum bag whores.
Do you get it yet????
Really Tom???
And who was it who crashed those planes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon?
A bunch of boozed up "wild and crazy" Scandanavians?
Alex, I amend my comment.
98% of all Republicans are the good guys.
Ted Stevens, and a couple others are truly evil politicians, just as bad as any Demo-Rat.
"98% of all Republicans are the good guys."
Denial isn’t just a river in Africa.
Beinart has been a liberal supporter of the Iraq war. He wrote a book a couple of years ago saying the Democrats needed to go back to being the party of Scoop Jackson and Harry Truman on international affairs.
His column is old news.
Beinart has been a liberal supporter of the Iraq war. He wrote a book a couple of years ago saying the Democrats needed to go back to being the party of Scoop Jackson and Harry Truman on international affairs.
His column is old news.
It's still welcome.
And it did appear in the Washington Post.
Hey Eric--
If you're going to make a claim, you should at least get some of your facts straight.
I addressed the success of the Surge on June 24, 2008; you can read the recap here
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2009/01/thanks-eric-but-try-to-get-your-facts.html
As for your cavalier willingness to dismiss the deaths of 4,000 of my brothers and sisters, along with the tens of thousands who have been wounded as the evidence that we are a pussy nation....
Your comments amount to spitting on their graves and hospital beds.
Not that I'm surprised.
Hey Fuck You Newton, you fuckface America-hater.
I spit on you.
We are a Pussy Nation. When we can't even tolerate 4,000 dead in a War to eliminate the WORST FUCKING MURDEROUS HITLERITE STALINIST DICTATOR OF OUR ENTIRE LIFETIMES!!!
How many died in WWII? fighting Hitler?
400,000.
How many died in the Cold War fighting the Soviets and Red Chinese.
Over 100,000.
How many died in the Civil War? 500,000.
10,000 in one single day at Gettysburg or Antietam.
General Patton would be ashamed of this Nation if he were alive today.
We've become soft. And the Radical Muslims know this. And unless we get serious here soon, and stop electing jerkoffs with the middle name of HUSSEIN!!!!!!
We're doomed.
And if you can't see that, you might as be with our enemies.
You're either with us in this decades long fight against Islamo-Fascism, or you're against us.
Note to Eric: I, Trent Hill, am a rightwing minarchist of the Mises/Hayek/Randian variety. I am anti-war. I am not an Anarchist, nor am I antiwar.
If you remember correctly, im a registered Republican and used to be part of the Constitution Party. You can call me alot of names, but anarchist/Libertarian Party member just isnt honest. And for the record, George Phillies isnt an anarchist either...he's basically a low-tax Democrat.
Sorry Trent Hill. But you are a Bush basher, and opposed the War in Iraq, and the overall War on Islamo-Fascism.
That makes you solidly a Leftwinger America-hater in my book.
Not too mention the fact you never served in the Military.
Leftwing yellow-bellied coward is more like it.
At least some who didn't serve in the Military support the Troops. You don't. So, nothing but sheer and utter disdain for you.
You call yourself a "Randist."
Really? How's that?
Every Randist I know is a fierce supporter of the War on Islamo-Fascism. And there's no doubt, that if Ayn were alive today, she'd be one of the strongest supporters of the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Just as she was a staunch Anti-Commie/Pro-Defenser Reaganite in the 1970s and early 80s.
"Sorry Trent Hill. But you are a Bush basher, and opposed the War in Iraq, and the overall War on Islamo-Fascism.
That makes you solidly a Leftwinger America-hater in my book.
Not too mention the fact you never served in the Military."
Those who disagree with the liberal President George Bush cant be rightwingers? That seems backwards, Eric. As for opposing the war, you're right, I do. It is expensive, stupid, and ridiculous. If H.R. Gross, Howard Buffett, George Will, Pat Buchanan, William F. Buckley, Don Luskin, and John Derbyshire are all liberals--then so am I. All of those men are rightwingers of various sorts who oppose the current war.
As for the contention that I've never served in the military--I work in the private sector and you got paid by my taxes--and that makes ME the leftwinger? HAH.
-Trent Hill
"You call yourself a "Randist."
Really? How's that?"
You don't read so well. I said I was a minarchist in the mold of Hayek/Mises/Rand. Which means I think the size of government ought to be roughly the same as those individuals saw fit.
-Trent Hill
THe only thing Bill Buckley is protesting is his stupid ass son voting for Obama.
"THe only thing Bill Buckley is protesting is his stupid ass son voting for Obama."
Im not a fan of Buckley, but if you're disputing that he disagreed with the Iraq War, I can link you to exact quotes from the man himself.
He may have at one time, but he is busy spinning right now.
"He may have at one time, but he is busy spinning right now."
Cute. But Buckley was unapologetically against the War until his death. His son has nothing to do with the conversation.
You have no sense of humor.
"You have no sense of humor."
You have no sense of propriety. Im quite sure that Bill is proud of his son.
In order to determine whether or not something has "succeeded," it's necessary to know what that thing was intended to achieve.
Per George W. Bush, the objective of the "surge" was a "unified, democratic federal Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself, and sustain itself, and is an ally in the War on Terror."
If the "surge" had "worked" -- if Iraq's government was unified, democratic and federal, if Iraq now could govern itself, defend itself and sustain itself, and if Iraq was an ally of the US in the "war on terror" (sic) -- no justification would obtain for a continued US presence in Iraq.
Last time I looked, there were still more than 100,000 US troops in Iraq, and they were there because the Commander in Chief who ordered the "surge" has ordered them to remain there. In other words, that Commander in Chief is plainly and unequivocally stating stating by his actions that the "surge" didn't work.
Besides, we've discussed this before -- even if it had worked, that would not have justified the war, any more than China's continuing success in occupying Tibet justifies that occupation.
Let's take your List:
Buckley and Derbryshire did not "oppose the War." That was just propoganda from Anti-Warists trying to discredit those on the Pro-War side. They were skeptical and cynical on it, but not "opposed."
HR Gross and Don Luskin - never heard of the fuckers.
Buffett? Sure, he opposed the War. He's a flaming Leftist. Why would you include him on a List of "Rightwingers"?
George Will? An elitist big government NeoCon.
Buchanan? Well. um, we all know about ole' Pat's political leanings. Let's just say a little closer to Jew-hating National Socialist.
So, putting yourself on the side of a National Socialist Buchanan, NeoCon Will, and a hardcore Leftist Republican-hater like Buffet makes you a Leftist, as I have repeatedly stated.
Wrong Knapp you Fuck. Fuck you! Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and fucking wrong.
THE OBJECTIVE IN IRAQ WAS TO GET RID OF SADDAM HUSSEIN AND UDAY AND QUSAY.
A second objective was to get rid of Zarcawi.
All Ojbectives were clearly achieved.
Funny, the Liberal pukes, keep changing the goal posts.
I remember for months they were screaming, "Where's Saddam... The War is failed... Bush hasn't found Saddam."
Then we found him.
It was a one-day story on CNN, and then they quickly moved on to screaming, "Well, we haven't found Zarcawi..."
We got him too. Another one-day story, and the drive bys moved on again.
They even had the audacity to make up some other schmuck as the "new leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq," as "proof" the Bush strategy is a "failure."
Well we nabbed that fucker too.
It's the old "moving the goalposts" trick. The Liberal Media is superb at it. And nobody ever calls them on it.
And amazingly, dumbshits like "The Knappster" fall for the trick, as well.
Quick, break out that snake oil. Looks like we've found a buyer.
Hey Trent, you say you want to "shrink government"?
And just how do you propose to do that with Islamo-Fascists running the country?
Are you completely ignorant as to what's going on in Europe right now? They are taking over Holland, France, Germany and Belgium. The UK has become one big London-stan.
And they are pushing for laws, for bigger and bigger government.
Hell, some Judges in the UK have just approved a modified version of Sharia Law in some sectors of London.
Tell us please Trent, how surrendering to Islamo-Fascism is supposed to bring us all "limited government."
Can't happen here???
Have you been to Detroit lately?
I have. Just spent 2 friggin' months there.
The entire city of Dearborn is now Muslim, and 80% of Dearborn Heights. Illegal aliens from Saudi Arabia, Jordon, Palestine, Egypt, and other Middle Eastern countries are flooding through the Canadian border to link up with their pals in Dearborn, and Detroit suburbs.
They simply stay, either over-stay their Visas, or just don't even bother with paperwork. Jobs? They work in the booming cell phone industry, or hacking various items that don't require documentation.
The other side of the Border? We've got Mexican drug gangs, and even Mexican police, in some instances now crossing into areas near El Paso, Del Rio and Tucson.
You don't think they'd harbor a few Radical Islamists for the right amount of cash? It's not like the Drug Gangs have any scruples, or are worried about geo-politics.
I'd like an explanation. Just how is it that we are to have a limited government society with people who are economically Socialists, and opposed to every civil liberty you can think of - marijuana legalization, sexy clothing on women, in favor of all sorts of censorhip, opposed to dog ownership, opposed to eating pork, wanting to outlaw all forms of gambling, and hateful towards all gays - allowing them into our society?
Wouldn't that tip the balance over to the Nanny-State big government Democrats?
And once in power, don't you think these Democrats beholden to their new Muslim constituency would be more inclined to open the Gates even further, through immigration reform, to allow in even more Muslims who want even bigger government?
Is it a mere coincidence that Michigan is turning into the most Socialist big government State in the Nation?
Sorry Knapp, your analogy doesn't hold up.
Last time I checked the Chinese are not dipping Tibetans in batts of hot oil, or throwing them off roof tops with their hands tied behind their backs.
Nor are the Chinese invading bordering countries like India, or Laos, the Koreas or Mongolia, like Saddam invaded Kuwait, killing upwards of 200,000 Kuwaitis, some using brutal torture methods.
Nor are the Chinese gassing their own people as Saddam did to some 200,000 Kurds.
Nor are the Chinese shooting down our F-14s near Chinese airspace.
Nor did the Chinese send a missile to one of our American ships killing 37 US Sailors.
Nor did the Chinese harbor Al Qaeda Terrorists, and build them two Training camps as Saddam did with Salman Pac and Al Answar-Al Islam.
Nor did the Chinese work and coordinate efforts directly with Bin Laden prior to 9/11.
Geez, I could go on and on and on.
Are the Chinese perfect? No. Is it preferable that they give Tibet more independence? Yes. (Although some of the latest Pro-Socialist AND anti-Sex statements by the Dailai Lama, leave me speechless, and wondering if it's really worth it?)
But to compare the two countries is like the proverbial apple and oranges, only the Iraqi apple under Saddam Hussein had a big fat killer worm in it.
William F. Buckley Jr., the longtime conservative writer and leader, said George W. Bush's presidency will be judged entirely by the outcome of a war in Iraq that is now a failure.
``Mr. Bush is in the hands of a fortune that will be unremitting on the point of Iraq,'' Buckley said in an interview that will air on Bloomberg Television this weekend. ``If he'd invented the Bill of Rights it wouldn't get him out of his jam.''
Buckley said he doesn't have a formula for getting out of Iraq, though he said ``it's important that we acknowledge in the inner councils of state that it (the war) has failed, so that we should look for opportunities to cope with that failure.''
The 80-year-old Buckley is among a handful of prominent conservatives who are criticizing the war. Asked who is to blame for what he deems a failure, Buckley said, ``the president,'' adding that ``he doesn't hesitate to accept responsibility.''
Buckley called Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a longtime friend, ``a failed executor'' of the war. And Vice President Dick Cheney ``was flatly misled,'' Buckley said. ``He believed the business about the weapons of mass destruction.''
William F. Buckley Jr. March, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/9tfwa9
Thanks for posting the quote. Buckley was right. George W. Bush will be judged entirely on the outcome of the Iraq War. And as prominent Liberal Columnist Beinhart said in the Washington Post yesterday: "Admit it!" The War is won.
Buckley died just as the Surge was getting under way.
No doubt, if he had lived another year, he'd be priasing Bush's success.
"THE OBJECTIVE IN IRAQ WAS TO GET RID OF SADDAM HUSSEIN AND UDAY AND QUSAY."
Now you're trying to switch horses. We were talking about the "surge," not the original war.
The "surge" happened LONG AFTER SADDAM AND HIS BASTARD PUPS WERE GONE, so getting rid of them was obviously not its objective. It's objective was the one I quoted from George W. Bush himself. And it did not fulfill that objective.
It's objective was the one I quoted from George W. Bush himself. And it did not fulfill that objective.
You pathetic shit. According to your retarded fucking standard, the US has never prevailed militarily anywhere since we still have forces in Korea, Europe, etc..
Are you 10 years old or something? I can't believe an adult could actually spout such ridiculous gibberish.
"Buckley and Derbryshire did not "oppose the War." That was just propoganda from Anti-Warists trying to discredit those on the Pro-War side. They were skeptical and cynical on it, but not "opposed."
HR Gross and Don Luskin - never heard of the fuckers.
Buffett? Sure, he opposed the War. He's a flaming Leftist. Why would you include him on a List of "Rightwingers"?"
Buckley and Derbyshire both said that invading Iraq was a mistake and we should leave. That is "opposed" to the war.
You've never heard of HR Gross or Don Luskin? Wow. You really aren't very bright.
And as for Buchanan and George Will--I dont agree with either of them 100%. But both are undoubtedly conservatives. And didnt you claim that "NeoCon" was an anti-semitic slur?
And I said HOWARD Buffet you moron, that is Warren Buffet's DAD. He was a congressman from Nebraska--and a hardcore conservative.
-Trent Hill
"Tell us please Trent, how surrendering to Islamo-Fascism is supposed to bring us all "limited government.""
Right, because there are so many muslims trying to expand Government here in the US...oh wait--thats the Democrats and Republicans. There is only one muslim congressman, and his liberal record is nowhere near as bad as black-Democrats or white-warmonger Republicans--should be commit genocide against white pro-war Republicans and black Democrats,too?
-Trent Hill
"Buckley said he doesn't have a formula for getting out of Iraq, though he said ``it's important that we acknowledge in the inner councils of state that it (the war) has failed, so that we should look for opportunities to cope with that failure.'' -Article on Buckely
"Thanks for posting the quote. Buckley was right."
-Eric Dondero.
Case closed.
Correction: I have heard of Luskin. He's some business news talking head on CNBC or something?
HR Gross? No. Have no clue who he is.
Hey Trent you asshole.
WE NOW HAVE A FUCKING MUSLIM PRESIDENT!!!!!!!
Only "one Muslim Congressman" my ass!
We actually have two Muslim congressmen, both of them members of the Nation of Islam, but then again, this is the blog where shades of subtlety and distinctions go to die terrible deaths.
I love Dondero's closet racism. If he actually lived in the Detroit area, he would know that there is an incredibly diverse group of Middle Easterners. Not only do we have Muslims, but we also have a lot of Chaldean Catholics (they pretty much own all the grocery stores and party stores now), Lebanese Maronite Christians, and Antiochian Orthodox Christians, in addition to the numerous Sikhs that we have in the area as well. Not to mention all the non-Chaldean Catholics we have too.
Dondero, of course, assumes that they're all Muslim because of their names and the color of their skin, without actually knowing the people there. He's the kind of guy who says "I'm not racist, but" and then goes on to explain why freedom will die unless white people of European descent make more babies.
"HR Gross? No. Have no clue who he is."
HR Gross was a radio broadcaster, journalist, and conservative/libertarian congressmen,and one of the top congressmen in the past couple of decades for anyone who pays attention to the small government movement.
-Trent Hill
"Hey Trent you asshole.
WE NOW HAVE A FUCKING MUSLIM PRESIDENT!!!!!!!
Only "one Muslim Congressman" my ass!"
Actually, I was mistaken. It was two congressmen who are Muslim. There are also two Buddhists, 30 jews, and 3 openly fay members---are they taking over America too?
And no, Barack isnt Muslim.
-Trent Hill
Eric,
Over half of the 30,000 Arab-Americans living in Dearborn are Lebanese Maronite Christians, you idiot. A larger percentage is made up of Syrian orthodox Christians, and most of the others are liberal-Muslims from Yemen.
Nemo,
He's the kind of guy who says "I'm not racist, but" and then goes on to explain why freedom will die unless white people of European descent make more babies.
Actually, he's already done this so you're absolutely en pointe.
And yes, Barack Hussein Muhammed Obama IS A MUSLIM!!!
Look at the fucking records from the school in Indonesia you fuck.
Says in big bold letters: "Religion - Islam."
His friggin' Father was a Muslim leader in their little Northern Kenyan village. He had 4 wives!!!
Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1982, by his own words in his own book, on an Indonesian Passport, NOT US! At the time, only Muslims were permitted to travel into Pakistan.
Now, if you want to make the argument that Obama is a former Muslim - an Apostate - that's fine.
But the man is Muslim to the core, deep within his soul.
BTW, a 2001 NY Times interview with him said, and I paraphrase, "He recited the Muslim prayer in perfect cadence."
How many non-Muslims you know who can do that?
He's also our first President who's fluent in Indonesian and speaks some Arabic.
Anonymous, "over half are Christians," may be correct as the legal immigrant Arab/Middle Eastern population in Dearborn. But I was talking about ALL of them, the entire population, living in the Detroit suburbs, including the millions of illegal immigrants from the Middle East, who've entered the country from Canada.
I used to knock on doors in Dearborn, for a local political initiative. Did it for two weeks. Had to knock on every single door.
About every other House was Middle Eastern, and they'd have, maybe 10 to 15 people living inside. Only one of them would be a legal resident. I know, cause I was asking for registered voters.
They even joked about it. I was amazed at how open they were about their illegal alien status. They didn't seem to care at all.
Border Patrol are known to be lax. But Border Patrol between Canada and Michigan, particularly around Detroit, are virtually non-existent.
So, they keep coming and coming and coming. All the while laughing in our faces.
Bint, are Africans inherently Freedom-oriented? Do they have an historical background of Constitutionalism, and Liberty-minded policies?
Westerners, particularly Anglo-Saxon Westerns do.
You're actually saying that it's "racist" to promote Anglo-Saxon culture of freedom and liberty, over cultures from societies who have no such history?
Eric,
How many non-Muslims you know who can do that?
Almost anyone who has lived in a predominantly Muslim country can do that. It's not a big deal really. If you hear the muezzin's call over loudspeakers every single day for any extended period of time, you'll learn it without even trying to. I've heard many non-Muslim Americans who've lived abroad either complain about it or praise it as beautiful. I live really close to a Catholic church that has a bell that sounds out each hour. On most mornings, I can hear that thing even in my sleep. Even though I have many nostalgic feelings about the Catholic religion and my daughter plans to become one, it doesn't make me a Catholic.
He's also our first President who's fluent in Indonesian and speaks some Arabic.
This makes me like him even more. I'm of the belief that one almost HAS to speak more than one language if they want to be truly erudite. Incidentally, I was a staunch conservative when I first started learning other languages.
Bint, are Africans inherently Freedom-oriented?
No one is "inherently Freedom-oriented". If you think otherwise, show where science has found evidence of this.
Do they have an historical background of Constitutionalism, and Liberty-minded policies?
Just as Europeans are not one group but many, so are Africans. Many of these groups have histories that are just as full of liberty-minded policies as any European group.
Westerners, particularly Anglo-Saxon Westerns do.
Are you looking for me to give you a cookie or something? Westerners also have a history of repressing freedom and restricting liberty.
You're actually saying that it's "racist" to promote Anglo-Saxon culture of freedom and liberty, over cultures from societies who have no such history?
Show where I've ever said that and I'll GLADLY and promptly answer your question.
Eric,
Obama Sr. was a muslim, but was a converted athiest by the time he entered college. Obama Sr. did not move to Jakarta after he divorces, but to the US--where he attended Harvard. While Obama DID attend a muslim-oriented school in Indonesia, he also attended a Catholic school and there is no evidence to suggest the muslim school is a madrassa (a radical school, tought by Wahabbists). You automatically assume that any muslim school is a madrassa, just like any Catholic school in Ireland must be an IRA training camp. In fact, the muslim school is a public school in Indonesia. His step-father was a muslim, but a non-practicing one.
-Trent
"Anonymous, "over half are Christians," may be correct as the legal immigrant Arab/Middle Eastern population in Dearborn. But I was talking about ALL of them, the entire population, living in the Detroit suburbs, including the millions of illegal immigrants from the Middle East, who've entered the country from Canada."
Quite impossible, since the population of Dearborn is only 90,000. You're shifting goalposts.
-Trent Hill
Trent,
Quite impossible, since the population of Dearborn is only 90,000. You're shifting goalposts.
You know Dondero is never one to let the facts get in the way of his stories.
Notice you didn't address the issue of Obama's 1982 visit to Pakistan on a "spiritual journey" on an Indonesian passport.
Eh Trent, gonna try to explain that one away too with deflections, and half-ass statements that aren't related to the issue at hand?
Admit it Dude, you know down deep Obama's a Muslim. But to admit that would just destroy your template, and put you on the defensive.
So, you deflect, try to change the subject, and carefully select those points that fit your template.
"Admit it Dude, you know down deep Obama's a Muslim. But to admit that would just destroy your template, and put you on the defensive."
I know no such thing because it isnt true.
But, even if it were, it wouldn't make any difference. Someone isnt dangerous becasue of their religion.
Post a Comment