Obama O.K. With Inviting Murderers to 4th of July Weenie Roast

@Buffalobob: At the very least he should serve “Hebrew National” but I imagine he has banned that brand from the government warehouse.

The nothing-ness President. 2:35 media cut where he says absolutely nothing. Blah, blah blah. No insight, just double-talking, jive, affirmative action BS.

Imagine the chit chat at the barbeque between embassy officials and visiting Iranian diplomats.

“I understand your government shot, gassed and killed your citizens, even charged one family for the bullet that killed their son. BTW, President Obama personally gave the order that no bacon be allowed in the baked beans and did you try the potato salad yet?”

Insane, madness! Idiot in chief!

They will probably serve imported Austrian bratwurst instead of hot dogs. Cuban steak sandwiches served on British Roquefort and almond sourdough bread, Artisan Cheese, Truffles, Ceviche, and so on. (Can’t be seen eating what the simple people eat. Of course, as a “state Dinner” this will all be paid for by the taxpayers.)

..But I’m sure there will be lots of Kool-aid.

This is an example of what leadership looked like for the previous 8 years:

On August 26, 2002, in an address to the national convention of the Veteran of Foreign Wars, Cheney flatly declared: “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.”

On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish TV, President Bush declared: “We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories.”

American Military Deaths in Iraq
Total In Combat
Since war began: 4316 3458
Since 5/1/2003: 4177 3350

Conservative foreign policy credibility? At an all time low. Why should we listen to you now?
Read this for some Bush Flip Flops and also some fears about Obama…

http://www.proconservative.net/PCVol10Is199RubinForeignPolicy.shtml

Just trying to be “Fair and Balanced”

@philly_nj: It’s a good thing we don’t have “debates” like that in this country.

@mooseburger: Did you forget a few things:

“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
– President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
– President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”
– Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” S
– Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
– Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
– Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
– Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
– Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”
– Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
– Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
– Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
– Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
– Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do” Rep.
– Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
– Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …”
– Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Get some new material. That “Bush lied” crap is getting stale.

You obviously can’t defend President Weeenie Roast if that’s all you got!

“…But I’m sure there will be lots of Kool-aid.”

And as usual, the flavor will be Stupidberry.

Hi Mahmoud, how do you like your hamburger cook?, asks Barry.

I like mine rare, I love to see the blood run in my burger, says Mahmoud.
Oh, Barry, don’t forget the cool aid, I love this American drink! We need to sell this drink in Iran, says Mahmoud.

Finally, Mahmoud says, “So, Barry when are you coming to Iran to bow to our Great Leader?, I heard you had so much fun in Saudi Arabia. When you visit Iran, I will show you our Nuclear power plant that makes all these weapons that we plan to drop over Israel…Oh, we will have so much fun together…I can even teach you how to run your elections in 2010…”

@mooseburger: The preface to your link “if this were true” says it all.

Sorry, but your lame attempt to divert any accountablity for Obama sucking up to the Mullahs is transparent.

Hi Old Trooper!
Hope you had a great vacation in Europe. We are so proud of you, and I read all of your reports.

I believe that total repression will fall upon Iran. The same encouragement took place in Irak when the Shia’ began to oppose the Ba’ath Party and , at the end, they were left alone. We know what happened afterwards.
It will be a misake to leave this opportunity unattended, a split Iran is a weaker Iran and thus it benefits the West to gain leverage. However, it is a complicated matter and we need a very astut approach.

Mike I disagree that Obama is “weak.” Obama isn’t weak, he’s UNAMERICAN, period. He and his billionaire communist anti-American backers know EXACTLY what they are (or aren’t) doing.

I could only agree with you that he is weak if he was on the side of America; he isn’t, at least not the one we all know and love.

He’s “remaking” it, remember?

President Obama on Tuesday linked the attendance of Iranian diplomats to the potential for warming between the two nations.

The United States and Iran don’t have formal diplomatic relations but Obama said that it’s up to the Iranian diplomats to decide whether to use an invitation to attend embassy festivities as an opening.

“I think that we have said that if Iran chooses a path that abides by international norms and principles, then we are interested in healing some of the wounds of 30 years in terms of U.S.-Iranian relations. But that is a choice that the Iranians are going to have to make,” Obama said during a press conference in the White House briefing room.

What an idiot, can’t believe this is happening.

As much as I hate to stand up for the MSM, it looks like Fox left out statements that said more about why the invites were withdrawn that makes the White House’s statement a bit stronger:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/24/white-house-rescinding-july-4-invitations-to-iran-diplomats/

Relatively speaking, of course. I still can’t believe that this jacka**ery was even on the table to begin with.

@ Brother Bob

Most broadcast news reports don’t provide every single minute detail of a story. They edit down to essential elements of a story to allow for time to report other news. This is true for: FOX, CNN, NBC,ABC,CBS,MSNBC etc…

Having said that, what “essential elements” are included, is a result of the Editorial staff’s opinion on what is “essential”. While I agree there are some who use personal political bias to decide what is cut, the ethical Journalist and Editor includes all the important facts, not just the ones that to support their bias. These ethics have degraded, starting with the days of “yellow journalism” and today they are at an all time low. (I’ll point out that in the early part of the 1900’s there were nearly as many conservative reporters as liberal ones, but the majority were moderates. Today the total of moderates and conservative journalists are roughly around 10% to 15%. I leave it for others to decide for themselves if there is a correlation between liberalism and unethical reporting bias.)

More telling of news bias are stories that are pulled to save political asses, and stories that are covered and re-covered ad absurdium in order to create political damage. Or the censorship methods of fluff reporting of useless “news” while ignoring totally very important news. Until the Internet, people rarely realized just how much news they were missing.

A stronger statement by Hillary, whom I suspect was staying low-key through the whole thing to support her boss, but may have handled this differently on her own:

“Unfortunately, circumstances have changed, and participation by Iranian diplomats would not be appropriate in light of the unjust actions that the president and I have condemned,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton