Is the Age of Obama the beginning of the end of America, the last best hope of earth?

President Obama’s curtsy to the Saudi king and his reverential bow before the Japanese Emperor was one of those “right-wing” criticisms that I thought, at the time, was mostly much ado about very little of substance. I now take that back. It was emblematic of what is taking place now.

While all hands on deck have been focused on the healthcare “debate” and Christmas family matters, President Obama last week quietly signed an amendment to Executive Order 12425 (signed by Reagan in 1983, but with restrictions in place to protect the Constitutional rights of our citizens), effectively eroding American sovereignty by immunizing INTERPOL activities within the U.S.

Andrew McCarthy:

for no apparent reason, President Obama issued an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, Interpol’s property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.

Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the International Criminal Court — which the United States has refused to join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported war crimes — i.e., for actions taken in America’s defense).

Steve Schippert:

By removing language from President Reagan’s 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates – now operates – on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Much more at Threat Watch

Also blogging:
A Soldier’s Perspective
Brutally Honest
Wizbang Blog
Pink Flamingo Bar
The Anchoress
NewsBusters
Friends of Mark Furhman
Dr. Melissa Clouthier
Ed Morrissey

Dennis Prager wrote a very good article on how President Obama regards “American exceptionalism”. Basically, he doesn’t put much regard into the concept, at all:

As the passage of the bill that will start the process of nationalizing health care in America becomes almost inevitable, so, too, the process of undoing America’s standing as The Last Best Hope of Earth will have begun.

That description of America was not, as more than a few Americans on the left believe, made by some right-wing chauvinist. It was made by President Abraham Lincoln in an address to Congress on Dec. 1, 1862.

The bigger the American government becomes, the more like other countries America becomes. Even a Democrat has to acknowledge the simple logic: America cannot at the same time be the last best hope of earth and increasingly similar to more and more countries.

Either America is unique, in which case it at least has the possibility of uniquely embodying hopes for mankind — or it is not unique, in which case it is by definition not capable of being the last best hope for humanity — certainly no more so than, let us say, Sweden or the Netherlands.

Indeed, President Obama acknowledged this in April, when asked by a European reporter if he believes in American exceptionalism. The president’s response: “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”

The president was honest. In his view, as in the view of today’s Democratic party, America is special only in the same way we parents regard our children as “special.” We all say it and we all believe it, but we know that it is meaningless except as an emotional expression of our love for our children. If every is child is equally special, none can be special, in fact. If every country is exceptional, then no country is exceptional, or at least no more so than any other.

With the largest expansion of the American government and state since the New Deal, the Democratic party — alone — is ending a key factor in America’s uniqueness and greatness: individualism, which is made possible only when there is limited government.

Read the rest.

My Fellow Americans:

Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our Allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest — until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men’s souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.

Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

And for us at home — fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas, whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them — help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.

Many people have urged that I call the nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

Give us strength, too — strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.

And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.

And, O Lord, give us faith. Give us faith in Thee; faith in our sons; faith in each other; faith in our united crusade. Let not the keeness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment — let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogances. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace — a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen.

Franklin D. Roosevelt – June 6, 1944

Over at Aarrggh there is a copy of an email sent to members of the Combined Joint Task Force 82, who are currently in Afghanistan, from the French:

To Combined Joint Task Force 82,

65 years ago, at 2h30 (French Local time), you jumped from hundreds of DAKOTAS in the dark skies over Normandie in order to liberate France and Europe.

That D-Day, you wrote the most glorious page of your history and the name of your Division is forever famous in France.

That D-Day, you and the allied forces met their rendezvous with destiny.

6 June 2009, Afghanistan; we are still brothers in arms.

We will never forget what you did on D-Day.

In the name of all the French soldiers embedded with CJTF-82, thank you for what you have done.

Today, in celebration of those events 65 years ago, we are “All Americans.”

Airborne!

Ltc Pierre V.
French LNO

And while Obama’s speech was nice, there is one that many people have not seen because of the death of Ronald Reagan that same day. President Bush gave one that brought the people out of their seats in 2004:

…when George W. Bush went to France, he had an even harder job. Bush’s host in 2004 was French President Jacques Chirac, who had broken with the Bush administration over the invasion of Iraq. At a joint Paris press conference I attended on June 5 of that year, the body language between the leaders was terrible, the tension palpable. Yet, the following morning Bush won over Chirac with a remarkable, if unremembered speech – one of the best of Bush’s presidency.

One reason it is not well remembered is that Reagan, that old trouper, that ham, died that morning – and the news of his death blotted out the sun, as far as the media was concerned. This included those of us making the European trip with Bush, and who found ourselves writing about the 40th president of the United States instead of the 43rd. In addition, and this is real inside baseball, the geniuses who ran the Bush press office made it very difficult, logistically, to cover the president’s speech. I am proud to report, however, that yours truly arose at 3 a.m. for a bus trip from Paris to Normandy to be there for the event.
It was well worth it. Prefaced by a gentle nod toward Reagan (“a gallant leader in the cause of freedom”), George W. Bush gave as noble an explication of why democracies fight as any president ever has.

Standing at a lectern with a clear view of the English Channel, packed with vintage ships from the Second World War, Bush spoke of the great battle that had taken place below the cliffs in front of him, and how, when the firing had finally ended and the wounded and dead were removed from the beaches, the sand was still littered for mile upon mile with the equipment of the armies and the belongings of the boys who had given everything they had.

“There were life belts and canteens and socks and K-rations and helmets and diaries and snapshots,” Bush said. “And there were Bibles, many Bibles, mixed with the wreckage of war. Our boys had carried in their pockets the book that brought into the world this message: Greater love has no man than this: that a man lay down his life for his friends. America honors all the liberators who fought here in the noblest of causes.” Turning then toward Chirac, Bush delivered the speech’s kicker. “And America would do it again, for our friends.”

The field of green was silent for a moment before the aging audience broke into heartfelt applause. Chirac, clearly moved by Bush’s words, approached the American president, grasped both his hands, and for a poignant moment, did not let go.

I’ve been looking for the video of the speech, if anyone finds it let me know.

UPDATE

I found this one with snippets of his speech, including that the last few sentences of the one quoted above:

[Mike's Edit]: The full text of the Bush speech is here. The following is an audio excerpt of the last four minutes and thirty seconds which includes the passage Curt cites above:

Remarks by President Ronald Reagan on the 40th Anniversary of D-Day
delivered 6 June 1984 in Pointe Du Hoc, Normandy, France

Full text here.

Mata has the video below.

More photos:

President Reagan greeting former U.S. Rangers at Pointe du Hoc, Normandy, France. 6/6/84

Lesson yet to be learned by President Obama: Don’t make promises you can’t deliver on.

By Craig Whitlock and Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Foreign Service:

BERLIN, May 28 — The Obama administration’s push to resettle at least 50 Guantanamo Bay prisoners in Europe is meeting fresh resistance as European officials demand that the United States first give asylum to some inmates before they will do the same.

Rising opposition in the U.S. Congress to allowing Guantanamo prisoners on American soil has not gone over well in Europe. Officials from countries that previously indicated they were willing to accept inmates now say it may be politically impossible for them to do so if the United States does not reciprocate.

“If the U.S. refuses to take these people, why should we?” said Thomas Silberhorn, a member of the German Parliament from Bavaria, where the White House wants to relocate nine Chinese Uighur prisoners. “If all 50 states in America say, ‘Sorry, we can’t take them,’ this is not very convincing.”

Here’s a novel idea: Do a complete about face and salvage Guantanamo’s reputation as the most transparent and humanely run detention facility in the world.

Out of more than 24,000 interrogations that took place between 2002 through 2005, the FBI reported only 3 instances of abuse.

Admittedly, there were problems in the early days, but that’s not the case now.

Opening Guantanamo for business was a crisis response to the aftermath of the overthrow of the Taliban, when upwards of 70,000 Taliban and al Qaeda fighters were captured. Less than 800 were deemed potentially valuable for intelligence extraction; or thought too dangerous to be let loose.

DoD release:

“Detention of enemy combatants in wartime is not an act of punishment. It is a matter of security and military necessity. It prevents enemy combatants from continuing to fight against the U.S. and its partners in the war on terror. Releasing enemy combatants before the end of the hostilities and allowing them to rejoin the fight would only prolong the conflict and endanger coalition forces and innocent civilians.”

From Douglas Feith’s War and Decision, pg 160:

Rumsfeld was displeased to have the Defense Department take on the detention mission and protested the idea repeatedly. But he knew that intelligence from these detainees could help save lives. We could not count on any other country to perform the mission- and no other agency of the U.S. government was ready to do it. So Rumsfeld accepted the task, though he told his staff from the outset that the responsibility would be a source of more trouble and more criticism than anyone could predict. It proved every bit as bad as he anticipated.

Out of the many places considered by the Dept of Justice, CIA, and FBI, as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld put it, “Guantanamo is the least bad option”

I believe it still qualifies as the “least bad option”.

The damage may be irreparably done in the “high” court of world opinion (which led even the Bush Administration to seek possibilities in closing it down); but given the enormous difficulties in figuring out what to do with 240 of “the worst of the worst”, this may be a case where appeasement to “world opinion” should give way to “setting the record straight” and shifting public perception and Guantanamo’s image to reflect the reality of it.

If anyone can change America’s image and salvage its damaged reputation it should be President Obama, the great repudiator of all things Bush. Let him even claim credit for “turning Gitmo around”. Use his political capital to convince the world that he will guarantee that Guantanamo will be the most humanely run detention facility than any prison in the world (it already is- so it should make President Obama’s job a “cakewalk”; he’s good at words, afterall).

The myths of Guantanamo as “the gulag of our time” deserve to be repelled, as I believe much of it has amounted to slander.

Cue the violin and color me unsympathetic. I simply found this disillusionment amongst jihadi-wannabes simply amusing and pathetic:

Reporting from Brussels — Determined to die as martyrs, the French and Belgian militants bought hiking boots and thermal underwear and journeyed to the wilds of Waziristan.

After getting ripped off in Turkey and staggering through waist-deep snow in Iran, the little band arrived in Al Qaeda’s lair in Pakistan last year, ready for a triumphant reception.

“We were expecting at least a welcome for ‘our brothers from Europe’ and a warm atmosphere of hospitality,” Walid Othmani, a 25-year-old Frenchman from Lyon, recalled during an overnight interrogation in January.

Instead, the Europeans — and at least one American — learned that life in the shadow of the Predator is nasty, brutish and short.

Wary of spies, suspicious Al Qaeda chiefs grilled the half-dozen Belgians and French. They charged them $1,200 each for AK-47 rifles, ammunition and grenades. They made them fill out forms listing next of kin and their preference: guerrilla fighting, or suicide attacks?

Then the trainees dodged missile strikes for months. They endured disease, quarrels and boredom, huddling in cramped compounds that defied heroic images of camps full of fraternal warriors.

“What you see in videos on the Net, we realized that was a lie,” Othmani told police. “[Our chief] told us the videos . . . served to impress the enemy and incite people to come fight, and he knew this was a scam and propaganda.”

Disenchantment aside, the accounts of four of the returning militants arrested in Europe combine with intercepts to paint a detailed picture of Al Qaeda’s secret compounds. They also reinforce intelligence that a campaign of U.S. Predator drone airstrikes has sown suspicion and disarray and stoked tension with tribes in northwestern Pakistan, anti-terrorism officials say.

At the same time, the case shows that wily militant leaders still wage war in South Asia and train a flow of foreign recruits. The few trainees from the West remain an urgent concern. Anti-terrorism forces have detected at least one American, a convert to Islam, who trained with Al Qaeda in Pakistan during the last year, Western officials say.

Militant paths from the U.S. and Europe may cross: Prosecutors in Brussels have made a request to interrogate a witness now in the United States who was in Pakistan with the European suspects, a Belgian anti-terrorism official said.

Police in Europe tracked the group’s radicalization and travel with the help of real-time U.S. intercepts that corroborate the confessions, and they exploited the men’s reliance on the Internet. Fear of an imminent attack spurred their arrests here in December after Hicham Beyayo, 25, a Belgian just back from Pakistan, sent a troubling e-mail to his girlfriend.

“I am leaving for an O [operation] and I don’t think I will return,” Beyayo wrote Dec. 6, according to investigative documents. “My request has been accepted. You will get a video from me to you from the [organization].”

Beyayo told police that he was boasting to impress his girlfriend. But investigators believe the group may have been groomed for missions at home.

“They were much more valuable for operations in Europe,” said the Belgian anti-terrorism official, who, like others interviewed, requested anonymity because the investigation is continuing. “Al Qaeda does not need Belgians and French to fight in Afghanistan.”

Islamic resistance doesn’t come cheap

Beyayo is about 5-foot-5, chubby and bespectacled. Like the others, he is of North African descent. He grew up in the tough Anderlecht neighborhood of Brussels, and his brothers have done time for robbery and arms trafficking. But he does not have a criminal record. He interspersed college courses with fundamentalist Islam.

“He is the intellectual of the family,” said his lawyer, Christophe Marchand. “He bears no ill will against Belgium. He went to Afghanistan to join an Islamic resistance movement.”

Islamic resistance is expensive. The unemployed Beyayo scrounged together about $5,000 for the trip.

The Frenchman Othmani, a father of two, had to borrow about $1,000 from his mother, and he spent hundreds on hiking boots, a sleeping bag, thermal underwear and a “big Columbia-brand jacket for the cold.”

The leader was Moez Garsalloui, 42, a Tunisian married to the Belgian widow of a militant who killed Ahmed Shah Massoud, an anti-Taliban warlord, in a suicide bombing two days before the Sept. 11 attacks.

The balding, bearded Garsalloui sought recruits among visitors to a radical website run by his wife, who is revered in militant circles.

It was Garsalloui’s first trip to South Asia, but he took advantage of his wife’s strong Al Qaeda ties, investigators say. He organized smuggling contacts and met four Belgians and two French in Istanbul in December 2007. He carried a bag full of cash — about $40,000, according to the confessions.

Garsalloui went ahead alone, leaving the others to a harsh monthlong trek. Turkish smugglers frightened them by waving a pistol around, charged extra because they were “Arabs,” and stole their gear and clothes, claiming it was for charity.

“They cleaned us out,” Othmani recalled. “What they took was for the so-called poor, but evidently it was nothing of the kind.”

Later, the recruits tried to burn their passports “because we all intended to die as martyrs in Afghanistan,” Othmani said. But the smugglers confiscated the documents.

Next came a nocturnal mountain crossing into Iran. The recruits struggled through deep snow. A Belgian’s foot turned blue. Beyayo fell repeatedly, dragged along by comrades as he moaned that this was the place where they would die.

After several men called their mothers from Iran, the group entered Pakistan via Zahedan, an Iranian border town that is a hub for militants and smugglers, the Belgian anti-terrorism official said. As they approached the tribal zone dominated by the Taliban, military patrols looked the other way and diners at a roadside restaurant seemed to know exactly where they were headed.

Their destination was a village in the Waziristan region about two hours past Bannu. But the reception was nothing like the heyday of the Afghan camps when Westerners, especially converts, got a chance to meet Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden himself.

Saudi Arabians armed with AK-47s emerged from a mosque looking hostile. They thought the French in particular could be spies, a senior French anti-terrorism official said. Increasing infiltration has contributed to recent captures and killings of militants, investigators say.

“They thought they would get a hero’s welcome because they were Europeans,” the Belgian official said. “That was not the case.”

Tensions eased when Garsalloui showed up. But the recruits were kept in a kind of limbo. They had the misfortune of arriving just as U.S. forces unleashed a drone-fired missile barrage that would kill half a dozen veteran Al Qaeda chieftains in 2008. In an e-mail to his wife, Garsalloui said he narrowly escaped a strike that had killed a top Libyan. “I came close to dying,” he wrote.

In other words, you just missed martyrdom. Face it: You’re a failure, and now your al-Qaeda-linked wife knows it.

Better luck next time.

Fearful of the drones as well as informants spotting them and targeting hide-outs for missile strikes, the trainees hunkered inside during the day. They moved frequently among crowded, squalid houses shared with local families in mountain hamlets.

Hoping to fight the Americans

The suspects say they wanted desperately to fight American troops in Afghanistan. To their dismay, the chiefs made them cough up more cash for weapons. They were assigned to train with an Arab group numbering 300 to 500, but spread out in small units for security. Religious and military instruction took place indoors, with firearms and explosives sessions confined to courtyards for secrecy.

A Saudi chief named Mortez assured the Europeans that they would go to the Afghan front. But idle weeks followed.

“We were quite angry for different reasons,” Beyayo recalled. “We waited and Mortez’s promises didn’t come true. Life as seven together plus the host family was not always easy. And . . . [Garsalloui] played the little boss and gave us orders.”

Only Garsalloui and a strapping Belgian, who both spoke fluent Arabic, went to Afghanistan as part of a Saudi unit.

Garsalloui later e-mailed a photo of himself wielding a grenade launcher to his wife. He bragged to comrades that he had killed American soldiers with a bazooka. Investigators are trying to verify the claim.

Meanwhile, Beyayo and Othmani say they chafed in safe houses, cooking foul meals, cringing during bombardments, getting sick. Beyayo suffered a bout of malaria.

A slippery character named Amar appeared, worsening the mood.

“We realized with time that this individual was there to test us, to spy on us,” Beyayo recalled.

“He also gave us a speech according to which we should not dream because we were not ready to fight. . . . The idea of going back to Belgium and France began to form among us. Morale-wise, we were crushed.”

One Belgian stormed out, intent on reaching the nearest city on his own and making his way back to Europe, the Belgian anti-terrorism official said. After hours of hiking through a desolate valley, he realized that it was hopeless and turned back.

Late last year, Beyayo, Othmani and two others finally came home and into the clutches of police, who had monitored them closely. A central question: the extent of their involvement in terrorist activity.

Their defense lawyers insist that they are failed holy warriors.

“They just weren’t tough enough,” Marchand said.

Sounds like they should have a film crew chronicle their failed exploits and turn it into a reality-based sob show: Who will be Europe’s next top tough-enough terrorist?

Apparently, not them.

Stunning story by AP’s Beverley Rouse appeared in the UK’s Independent today. Apparently, Britain’s Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, has released the names of 16 people banned from entering the country so others could better understand what sort of behaviour Britain was not prepared to tolerate.

On the list were jihad preaching clerics, two members of a Russian skinhead gange who committed 20 murders, a KKK grand wizard and neo-Nazi… plus Muslim activist Abdul Ali Musa (previously Clarence Reams), murderer and Hezbollah terrorist Samir Al Quntar and Kashmiri terror group leader Nasr Javed.

Sharing that spot of “shame” was Michael Savage and anti-gay protesters, American Baptist pastor Fred Waldron Phelps Snr and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper.

“Coming to this country is a privilege. If you can’t live by the rules that we live by, the standards and the values that we live by, we should exclude you from this country and, what’s more, now we will make public those people that we have excluded.

“We are publishing the names of 16 of those that we have excluded since October. We are telling people who they are and why it is we don’t want them in this country.”

~~~

“If people have so clearly overstepped the mark in terms of the way not just that they are talking but the sort of attitudes that they are expressing to the extent that we think that this is likely to cause or have the potential to cause violence or inter-community tension in this country, then actually I think the right thing is not to let them into the country in the first place. Not to open the stable door then try to close it later,” Ms Smith said.

“It’s a privilege to come to this country. There are certain behaviours that mean you forfeit that privilege.”

Discussing specifically Michael Savage, Ms. Smith said:

“This is someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country.”

ahhh… the slippery slope syndrome. The attempt to straddle the line between free speech, and incitement to hate. And now, if the country’s Home Secretary doesn’t like what you say, you’d better alter your travel pans. Since October, under the nanny control of Ms. Smith, “the list” has grown from an average of two names added monthly to five.

Truly sad to see what was once a major force in the world reduced to oppression in the name of political correctness. Parallel Shariah court systems, 50% taxes, oppressive gun laws, and now subject to the thought police just to visit the dang place…

Keep this up and more will be leaving than coming in anyway…

This day is designated by the Jewish people to remember those who were lost in the Holocaust.

Jews who were classified as “not fit to work” waiting in a grove outside of Crematorium IV before they were to be gassed.

‘Men to the left! women to the right!’ Eight words spoken quietly, indifferently, without emotion. Eight short, simple words. Yet that was the moment when I parted from my mother. I had not had time to think, but already I felt pressure of my father’s hand. We were alone. – Elie Weisel, Night

I am not Jewish. I was born into and raised by a Christian family but have always had very close Jewish friends. My friends welcomed me into their homes and families and I became very aware of their deeply rooted traditions and the reasons behind them. As a Christian, and a believer in the Old Testament, I was able to relate to these traditions because Christians share a heritage with the Jewish people.

My friend Judy’s mother, Marilyn, lost all of her family with the exception of one uncle in the concentration camps. Marilyn vividly recalls how they were herded up with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. She tells of how they were packed shoulder to shoulder in cattle cars and hauled away. She has told me the stories of how her grandparents stitched diamonds and gold into the hems of their coats and dresses in an effort to keep them away from the Germans.

If you haven’t read Elie Wiesel’s book Night, I encourage you to do so. It is a haunting account of his first person experiences at the hands of the Germans.

The following photographs are from The Auschwitz Album. This is the only surviving photographic record of what went on withing Auschwitz as it was happening.

In a world where Jewish people are still hated and targeted for nothing more than their heritage and religious beliefs, we must never forget what can happen when evil is allowed to run rampant.

h/t – Atlas Shrugs for the first picture.

A modest suggestion: from now on, every president who wishes to go abroad and review all his lesser citizens’ collective past and present sins, with accompanying apologies — to applause from foreigners — must first, in the spirit of New Testament atonement, review his own regrettable transgressions. It would go something like this:

“Today we witness a global financial meltdown — a result of a dangerous nexus between lax politicians and unethical high finance. I know this well, and wish to apologize for taking thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the now-bankrupt AIG financial firm, which sought to escape proper regulation by offering campaign contributions to politicians like myself, who unilaterally renounced the three-decade tradition of public campaign finance.”

~~~

“Racism is an insidious pathology that reaches even into the pulpit; it is a human sin that no one race has a monopoly on. I am well aware of the havoc it causes the innocent — after failing to say “No! Stop!” to my own Rev. Wright as he caricatured in my church whites, Jews, Italians, and almost anyone else who does not look like himself and our congregation. Likewise, class prejudice and stereotyping are often at the heart of much of the world’s problems; I too have engaged in such hurtful condemnations when just recently I labeled, in blanket fashion, the working class of rural Pennsylvania as xenophobes, fundamentalists, and nativists.”

“We need to adopt a new attitude toward the mentally and physically challenged; too often we flippantly make fun of the disabled, as I did, when I unthinkingly made a joke in front of a national television audience at the expense of those who participate in the Special Olympics.”

“Now turning to my country’s own regrettable past, let me begin with an apology for its . . .”

Of course to a narcissist like Obama….these apologies will never be uttered.

America is at war (though, the term “war” is no longer being used because the Obama Admin finds it too belligerent, and the Democrats’ Congress don’t want to be reminded that they declared the war lost). Still, America is in a bad economic situation, and the TRILLIONS spent on the economy by Barack Obama and the Democrats’ Congress really should have had some sign of slowing the economic decline if not already bringing about recovery. Their efforts to spend and give away hundreds of billions of dollars has been going on now for almost half a year.

Yet, the economy is not slowing its decline. It is getting worse-seriously worse.

How long does the Democrats’ Congress and Barack Obama believe the American people should wait to see some results from the TRILLIONS of dollars spent in their name? Half a year? No, that’s too soon we’re told. A year? No, it’s not reasonable to expect 300,000 new homeless families every month to wait a year. It’s not reasonable to ask the 742,000 people who lost their jobs last month to wait until March 2010 for a job.

We’ve been told that to oppose the Democrats’ plan to borrow/spend America back into economic comfort is unpatriotic. We’ve been told that their way is the only way, and to suggest other ideas or even think about them is patently wrong. We’ve been told that making businesses more profitable by cutting taxes is not a good way to make businesses more profitable, but taking money from business investors and owners somehow makes them more likely to hire than to fire.

How long will Americans wait until they have the audacity to question the Democrat’s economic plan that barely even has HOPE to succeed let alone expectation or historical precedent of succeeding?

We could ask President Obama, but he’s left the country to beg socialist nations for money; socialist nations that a waving their arms telling us that America has already spent too much.

In a not so surprising move, China joined the choir, advocating the dollar demotion, but with a twist. Bejing’s central bank governor, Zhou Xiaochuan, proposed creating a currency made up a basket of global currencies and controlled by the International Monetary Fund … saying it would help “to achieve the objective of safeguarding global economic and financial stability.”

Zhou did not mention the dollar by name. But in an unusual step, the essay was published in both Chinese and English, making clear it was meant for a foreign audience.

China has long been uneasy about relying on the dollar for the bulk of its trade and to store foreign reserves. Premier Wen Jiabao publicly appealed to Washington this month to avoid any response to the crisis that might weaken the dollar and the value of Beijing’s estimated $1 trillion in Treasuries and other U.S. government debt.

~~~

To better insulate countries from the ills of one country or one currency, Zhou said the IMF should create a “reserve currency” based on shares in the body held by its 185 member nations, known as special drawing rights, or SDRs.

He said it also should be used for trade, pricing commodities and accounting, not just government finance.

As of yesterday, Treasury Secretary Geithner and Fed Reserve Chairman Bernanke both stated they would renounce any any proposal to move towards a global currency. The top EU economist also added his support for the dollar.

UPDATE: Apparently not every EU official is thrilled with the US spending plans… news today of the EU President labeling the Obama spending plans “the road to hell”.

The head of the European Union slammed President Barack Obama’s plan to spend nearly $2 trillion to push the U.S. economy out of recession as “the road to hell” that EU governments must avoid.

The blunt comments by Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek to the European Parliament on Wednesday highlighted simmering European differences with Washington ahead of a key summit next week on fixing the world economy.

It was the strongest pushback yet from a European leader as the 27-nation bloc bristles from U.S. criticism that it is not spending enough to stimulate demand.

During Obama’s press conference ( Transcript here) later that evening, Obama found himself caught in one outright lie, followed rapidly by pronouncing the dollar “strong”. This was in response to a question by FOX’s Major Garrett on the proposal to move away from the dollar as the reserve currency, and in the wake of the EU and G20 countries refusing to follow Obama down his government spending spree.

The first reponse right after the CNN question is the outright lie about asking other countries to spend…

Well first of all, I haven’t asked them to do anything. What I suggested is, is that all of us are going to have to take steps in order to lift the economy. We don’t want a situation in which some countries are making extraordinary efforts, and other countries aren’t, with the hope that somehow the countries that are making those important steps lift everybody up.

What a crock of doublespeak. As I pointed out in my post yesterday that Obama had penned an international op-ed to the masses, attempting to gin them up against their leaders who are resisting the call by both Geithner and Obama for their increased spending. And by doing so, he was setting them up to be the scapegoats if his lone ranger spending policies failed.

Obama then followed it up – using approx 2/3rds of his answer to justify and cite support for the global spending – the same spending he said he didn’t suggest – by like the minded, recently elected liberal leaders of Australia (Kevin Rudd) and Britain (Gordon Brown).

By dancing with words, Obama sought to deny his actions by backing up his actual intent – done so by “circling the wagons” in conjunction with other leaders.

Either Mr. Garrett was unaware of Obama’s op-ed plea, or he had no opportunity for a follow up question.

But the art of word parsing is this TOTUS’ specialty. In Obama’s language, because he did not specifically did not use the words “spend more” means he wasn’t telling them to spend more. Yet others don’t hear it that way. Time Magazine interpreted Obama’s statement: “It’s very important to make sure that other countries are moving in the same direction, because the global economy is all tied together.” as an insistence that the world’s top economies adopt aggressive, America-sized spending programs. And the EU countries have accepted his “global” ovatures as meaning the same.

After the two minutes of deny/redefine, Obama addressed the dollar’s health…

…. I would just point out that the dollar is extraordinarily strong right now. And the reason the dollar is strong right now is because investors consider it – the United States – the strongest economy in the world.. and with the most stable political system in the world. So you don’t have to take my word for it. I think that there is a great deal of confidence that ultimately, although we are going thru a rough patch, that the prospects for the world economy are very very strong.

Were that true, why are we having this conversation? Why is China, our largest investor, plus Russia and the UN floating the very serious proposal to knock the dollar off it’s lofty perch?

Well… that was then, and today’s a new day. And evidently the parsing of words means a great deal. Because Geithner does a 90% turn in a CFR interview chit chat, suggesting that he is “open” to the Chinese compromise proposal.

“I haven’t read the governor’s proposal. He’s a very thoughtful, very careful distinguished central banker. I generally find him sensible on every issue,” Geithner said, saying that however his interpretation of the proposal was to increase the use of International Monetary Fund’s special drawing rights — shares in the body held by its members — not creating a new currency in the literal sense.

“We’re actually quite open to that suggestion – you should see it as rather evolutionary rather building on the current architecture rather than moving us to global monetary union,” he said.

“The only thing concrete I saw was expanding the use of the [special drawing rights],” Geithner said. “Anything he’s thinking about deserves some consideration.”

The continued use of the dollar as a reserve currency, he added, “depends..on how effective we are in the United States…at getting our fiscal system back to the point where people judge it as sustainable over time.”

Apparently the absolute confidence in the dollar stated in the preceding hours has it’s caveats….

Despite all the Obama administration denials, everything they are doing – in conjunction with “Helicopter Ben” Bernanke, busy in the back room printing an overabundance of US currency in order to meet Geithner’s toxic asset buy up – is laying the foundation for the creation of a global currency. The dollar devaluation depends upon the bet that flooding the world with undervalued US dollars will result in the ability to repay that debt quickly with increased revenue from a rejuvenated US economy.

In light of much of the world’s vote of “no confidence” in the dollar… most especially that of our largest foreign investor… the gambling stakes are especially high. Obama and his economic team can mouth all the positive platitudes in the world, but it will still not “change” the course they have chosen to trod with unprecedented spending, instead of Congressional belt tightening.

Playing with the status of the dollar is a large gamble for Obama to take using the taxpayers’ earnings as the ante. And that is indeed “change” we can believe in.

There’s been no shortage of news that other world governments have no intention of following the Obama/Pelosi/Reid heist of taxpayer dollars. On March 11th, NPR reported on the impending clash of economic policies in the upcoming G20 meeting.

The Obama administration has set out on what could be an economic policy collision course with some of its closest allies. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is heading to a weekend meeting of Group of 20 finance ministers and central bank governors with this message: The United States thinks other governments should be spending more on economic stimulus programs.

The message may not go down well with European leaders, however, many of whom have different ideas about what needs to be done to get the world economy back on track.

The Treasury Department announced Wednesday that Geithner will urge the G-20 governments to implement stimulus-spending programs worth at least 2 percent of their gross domestic products this year and next.

At that time, the only country with significant capital – China – was willing to spend that much. And much of that may have to do with how intrinsically woven their economic success is with the US economy.

But the Europeans are finding such language “not to our liking”.

Many Europeans say a U.S. failure to oversee and regulate its financial system more carefully was the factor that led to the global economic crisis, and they now bristle at being told what policies their governments should follow.

“Basically policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic are proceeding on their own domestic agendas,” says Daniel Gros, director of the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels. “Neither takes much notice of what the other is doing, and the agendas are different.”

Two days later, IBD also reports on the firm “no” to spending. And one of the reasons may just be they’ve already traveled the Euro-socialist road, and are more than well aware of it’s economic drawbacks.

On Friday, the EU resisted pressure — from the pork-happy U.S. — to pump more cash into its recession-hit economies. It had already shoveled out a $270 billion stimulus package of its own, and came up with a $67 billion bailout fund for Eastern Europe. With all that done, the EU wanted to end it.

“You can’t think you can solve everything with taxpayers’ money. Stimulus packages are already in place and taking us through this challenging time,” said Fredrik Reinfeldt, the prime minister of, brace yourself, Sweden.

“There is no alternative to globalization as a motor for growth and employment, thus fostering prosperity worldwide,” wrote German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende in Der Spiegel on March 19, arguing against spending for its own sake.

~~~

After more than 100 years of socialism, starting with German Iron Chancellor Otto von Bismarck’s 1883 move to install the basis for Europe’s social welfare state, which was rapidly imitated by other states and led to a heavy hand of government through the Continental economies, most of Europe has a pretty good idea what socialism is, where it leads and what its limits are.

While not keen on killing such a central part of their culture, they’re also not blind to its ill effects. These include high unemployment, lack of job mobility, failure to foster business startups, talent flight, hyperinflation and generally slow economic growth.

All of that comes from the kind of government spending that exceeds the productive capacity of a private sector to finance it. It’s the very stuff Democrats, still steeped in 1940s nostalgia, are gunning for as they spend beyond what they can imagine.

On the same day, Time magazine also spread the message of “enough!” from the EU countries. Most notably a Brussels think tank economist who, in essence, said Obama’s charm is not reason enough to follow the US off an economic cliff. And they are also quick to point out that sweeping global regulations/reform are hard to find consensus on, and to enforce.

President Barack Obama this week urged the world’s top economies to adopt aggressive, America-sized spending programs. “It’s very important to make sure that other countries are moving in the same direction, because the global economy is all tied together,” he said.

But on the other side of the Atlantic, European Union governments have spurned entreaties to let funds flow into their staggering economies. “Europe has done what it needed to do,” says Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, who is also chairman of the 16-member euro zone, adding that the U.S.’s appeals “were not to our liking.”

The issue is expected to dominate next month’s London summit of leaders from the G-20 group of top economies. “I do not have high expectations for London,” says Nicolas Véron, a scholar at the Brussels-based economic think tank Bruegel. “Not everyone will follow the U.S. just because of Obama. Global solidarity solutions are fiendishly difficult both to decide and to enforce. There is a growing realization that regional or national responses are preferable wherever possible.”

None of this has stopped Obama and Geithner’s concerted attempts to increase the major players in the desired lemming herd…. to no avail.

By two days ago, the EU foreign policy blog was reporting of the “almost audible tone of defensiveness”, chafing at US criticism.

Europe has been feeling pressure, most especially from the US administration, to contribute in a bigger way to global efforts at recovery through economic stimulus. So far, according to the International Labour Organisation, who have been tracking stimulus expenditure, 30 countries have announced stimulus plans which amount to 3.16% of global GDP (detailed word doc with figures here). The major plans include China’s €586 billion and the $700 billion Obama Stimulus plan (and 2 previous Bush plans which together add to almost a trillion dollars). As an aside, the whole debate on whether stimulus will actually work is considered by the Presdent of my alma mater, DCU here.

In contrast, the headline Stilulus Plan that was agreed at the European Council last Thursday was only €5 billion, leading to the below cartoon [by Martin Turner] in the Irish Times which reflects a perception that the EU is not pulling its weight in reviving the Global economy.

The US is pressurising Europe to increase spending nonetheless and as I blogged before Obama sent this message with the Irish Prime-Minister from St. Patrick’s Day celebrations in the White House last Tuesday. Also last Tuesday Paul Krugman, an American economist and Nobel laurate was in Brussels expressing his concerns about the low levels of expenditure of the European (and the US) stimulus plans. Guenter Verheugen, the Enterprise and Industry Commissioner in the EU responded to Krugman’s statement, saying that “We think it is a little bit too early to judge whether the stimulus packages which we have produced are working or not.”

“too early to judge”… let’s not muddy the waters with logic, right? Europe is taking the spend a little, and wait and see road – the opposite tangent of the Obama approach to throwing out tons of taxpayer cash as quickly as possible, and see what happens later.

The EU blogger says the union appears to be satisified with the member-states response to the economic woes.

Europe also appears to have a different view of how Europe can contribute to recovery. The European stimulus funds are targeted to generate “new investments, boost demand, create jobs and help the EU move to a low-carbon economy”. The “global” aspect of this is the pledge to give €75 billion more to supplement the IMF’s funds contingent on reciprocation from the US/China.

During the summit, leaders expressed satisfaction with how Member-States had used spending plans to ameliorate the worst parts of the Global recession. Chancellor Merkel said in the German Parliament last Thursday that her nation “was doing more than most to support the world economy through higher spending and lower taxes”. She ended the summit by saying that “A competition to outdo each other with promises will not calm the situation” – Europe certainly looks like it will not be attempting to raise the stakes anytime soon.

This leaves Obama as the loan… er…. *lone* master of spending by a government with an economy of consequential size. And that must be a very lonely limb indeed.

This *also* leaves the TOTUS extremely vunerable to impending criticism…. (like they haven’t been doing that all along???) So what’s the community-organizer-in-chief strategy now? Same ol’ Alinsky tactics… reaching out to the global masses to unite against the enemy… non-cooperative leaders.

Thus Obama’s penned himself an op-ed for foreign release. Apparently he thinks he can “stimulate” the masses into prodding their governments into a change of heart.

You can read the text of his op-ed at the above link, but I’ll just provide some excerpts here. For the most part, it’s filled with the usual “must act” doom and gloom with which we American’s are already too familiar.

But I can’t help but notice Obama, in his arrogance, is setting up the governments who do not increase their spending as the reason the US economy may fail to respond…. stating that altho the nations have done some spending, the G20 stimulus efforts must remain “robust and sustained until demand is restored”.

Our leadership is grounded in a simple premise: We will act boldly to lift the American economy out of crisis and reform our regulatory structure, and these actions will be strengthened by complementary action abroad. Through our example, the United States can promote a global recovery and build confidence around the world; and if the London Summit helps galvanize collective action, we can forge a secure recovery, and future crises can be averted.

Our efforts must begin with swift action to stimulate growth. Already, the United States has passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — the most dramatic effort to jump-start job creation and lay a foundation for growth in a generation.

Other members of the G-20 have pursued fiscal stimulus as well, and these efforts should be robust and sustained until demand is restored. As we go forward, we should embrace a collective commitment to encourage open trade and investment, while resisting the protectionism that would deepen this crisis.

Second, we must restore the credit that businesses and consumers depend upon. At home, we are working aggressively to stabilize our financial system. This includes an honest assessment of the balance sheets of our major banks, and will lead directly to lending that can help Americans purchase goods, stay in their homes and grow their businesses.

This must continue to be amplified by the actions of our G-20 partners. Together, we can embrace a common framework that insists upon transparency, accountability and a focus on restoring the flow of credit that is the lifeblood of a growing global economy. And the G-20, together with multilateral institutions, can provide trade finance to help lift up exports and create jobs.

Third, we have an economic, security and moral obligation to extend a hand to countries and people who face the greatest risk. If we turn our backs on them, the suffering caused by this crisis will be enlarged, and our own recovery will be delayed because markets for our goods will shrink further and more American jobs will be lost.

More setting the stage for the future blame game in the event of failure?

Only coordinated international action can prevent the irresponsible risk-taking that caused this crisis. That is why I am committed to seizing this opportunity to advance comprehensive reforms of our regulatory and supervisory framework.

~~~

This G-20 meeting provides a forum for a new kind of global economic cooperation. Now is the time to work together to restore the sustained growth that can only come from open and stable markets that harness innovation, support entrepreneurship and advance opportunity.

The nations of the world have a stake in one another. The United States is ready to join a global effort on behalf of new jobs and sustainable growth. Together, we can learn the lessons of this crisis, and forge a prosperity that is enduring and secure for the 21st century.

These Chicago’esque Alinsky scare tactics may work well in Obama’s America on the vacant eyed O’faithful. But I doubt they will do much overseas.

Obama and Geithner have plead with, and cajoled the world leaders to no avail. Now, in a more desperate attempt, they turn the Obama charm offense on to international citizens… all with the not-so-veiled threat that non-cooperation for their governments can be the reason for failure.

Always looking for a scapegoat, this one. How’s that for “political courage”?

Obama’s op-ed appears in the following foreign media:

Other misc media: in South Africa (Sunday Times), Australia (Syndey Morning Herald and The Australian) and the United States (Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times and the Baltimore Sun).

One of the best qualities in the man that I will sorely miss is that he never backed down on something he felt was right due to public opinion. He knew we had to finish the Iraqi mess once and for all after 9/11. There was no way we could allow Saddam to thumb his nose at the world, supporting terror, and obtaining WMD, in a post-9/11 world. He knew 13 years of conjoling, begging and pleading was enough. But even then he gave Saddam a chance to stop it. He didn’t just give him a chance to stop the war from happening he went to the UN for help in getting him to comply with a strong resolution. A resolution that any sane leader would have recognized was his last chance:

…in 2002 President Bush bucked the advice of his more hawkish advisers and agreed to take Tony Blair’s advice and seek another U.N. Resolution — was it the 16th or 17th? — against Saddam Hussein. Resolution 1441 passed 15-0. True, the Administration failed to obtain a second resolution, not least because the French reneged on private assurances that it would agree to a second resolution if America obtained the first.

He has done everything in his power to insure that we would not be attacked again. Again, making unpopular decisions, but he never backed down in the face of public opinion because he knew it was the right thing to do. We do not find many politicians like that. It’s a rare quality and the one I will miss sorely.  

He put two great justices onto the Supreme Court in Samuel Alito and John Roberts. Something that will pay dividends for many years to come.

He is leaving a strong alliance with Europe:

This American president will bequeath his successor an alliance with Europe as robust and healthy as at any time in the post-Cold War period.

Pro-American governments are in charge in Paris, a first since 1945, as well as every other major European capital (London, Berlin, Warsaw, Rome) except Madrid. On Russia and China, on terrorism, rogue states and the spread of weapons of mass destruction, Europe and America share the strategic diagnosis, if not wholly the cure. A revived NATO leads missions in Afghanistan and the Balkans.

To be sure, Europe hasn’t fallen in love with hard power, and Washington didn’t sign up for unfettered multilateralism. The improved outlook in Iraq, and the Bush administration’s decision to lay off Iran, defused two potential flashpoints late in its term. Even so, recent years have seen a Euro-American rapprochement take hold that silenced shrill predictions of “divorce” or worse in the wake of the Iraq war.

“Trans-Atlantic relations are rather good at the moment,” says a senior European Union foreign policy adviser who requests anonymity and is not inclined to Panglossian views of the alliance. “Better than ever,” adds another, Alar Olljum, who runs the in-house think tank for the European Commission.

Europeans tend to find explanations in altered American behavior. Here “Bush One” is pitted against “Bush Two”: the first term of unilateralism and Iraq and the second of kinder, gentler diplomacy. Condoleezza Rice kicked off the charm offensive with a speech in Paris in early 2005 calling for a fresh start. Europe and America, she said, must together seize “a historic opportunity to shape a global balance of power that favors freedom.” Robert Gates replaced the European bête noire Don Rumsfeld at the Pentagon.

Yet the Bush policy on NATO, the Mideast or other big issues didn’t change significantly from the first to second terms. Europe itself did.

And finally I will leave off with The Anchoress from a post she did in 2007 in response to the Bush bashing from the right, of all places, due to the immigration issue.  One issue I never agreed with the man about. 

Betrayal is such a strong word; did he betray you, really?

• Did he protect us from the reach & province of the International Criminal Court? Yes.
• Did he keep us from the Kyoto mess that is currently tying up Europe? Yes.
• Did he create a workable alternative to Kyoto that other countries have embraced? Yes. Bet you didn’t know that!
• Have US Carbon Emissions decreased on his watch, without Kyoto? Yes.
• Did he submit a comprehensive energy plan that got killed by a weak congress? Yes.
• Has he lowered the deficit ahead of schedule in time of war? Yes. Even the NYTimes admits it!
• Did he cut taxes? Twice? Yes. And yes.
• Did he try to get the cuts made permanent? Yes. Congress dropped that ball.
• Did he stop government funding of EMBRYONIC stem cell research? Yes.
• Has he kept the promises he made as he held a dead cop’s shield before the Joint Houses? Yes.
• Did he go after the Taliban and AlQaeda in Afghanistan barely a month after 9/11? Yes.
• Has he been unflagging in his efforts to subdue terrorism, worldwide? Yes.
• Has be been the consistent voice for human liberty around the globe? Yes.
• After some serious missteps, is the surge working? Yes.
• Has he been a staunch friend to Israel, the only stable democracy in a frantic region? Yes.
• Did he end the farce of world-wide Arafat admiration? Yes
• Did he remove Saddam Hussein, whose state supported terrorists, from power? Yes.
• Did he invade Iraq at a time when the whole world believed Saddam had and “would use” WMD? Yes.
• Did he bring a much-maligned coalition with him? Yes. Some are still there.
• Did he liberate 50,000 people in keeping with the ideals of the 1998 Iraqi Liberation Act? Yes.
• Has he inspired the Iraqi people to finally believe enough in freedom to fight AlQaeda with us? YES!
• Has he figured out that a free and engaged Middle East makes America safer? Yes.
• Has he kept you safe since 9/11? So safe that you’ve almost forgotten to fear? Yes.
• Did he remove “the wall” between the CIA and the FBI? Yes.
• Did he go to the UN before invading Iraq? Yes.
• Did he tell the UN that the US would never ask permission to defend herself? Yes.
• Did he inspire Libya to surrender it’s WMD without firing a shot? Yes.
• Did he appoint excellent SCOTUS and Federal Judges to the bench? Yes.
• Did he implement the NSA terrorist eavesdropping program? Yes.
• Did he immediately move to freeze assets and make terror funding more difficult? Yes.
• Did he reform Medicare? Yes.
• Did he reform Social Security to give you more power over your money? He tried. See Congress.
• Did he manage an economy thru recession, terror attack & war w/ consistent gains for over ten quarters? Yes.
• Has he kept unemployment between 5.5% and 4.4% for an impressive period? Yes.
• Does he say what he means and mean what he says? Yes.
• Did he try to address immigration last year, when the houses in his party? Yes.
• Does he support the second amendment? Yes.
• Does he support school vouchers and school choice? Yes.
• Did he sign the ban on Partial Birth Abortion? Yes. It went to court, but he signed it.
• Did he reverse Clinton’s intent to kill Reagan’s pro-life Mexico policy? Yes.
• Did he support the Defense of Marriage Act? Yes. That used to be vitally important to you.
• Did he expand the roles of faith-based organizations in social programs? Yes.
• Did he prosecute the white-collar criminals like Ken Lay who ran riot through the ‘90’s? Yes.
• Has he handled himself with enormous courage, dignity and grace in the face of world/media/hate?
• Is he a man with a creed before he’s anything else? Yes.
• Did he establish Health Savings accounts? Yes.
• Did he have the Border Patrol installing monitoring devices along the borders? Yes.
• Has he made mistakes? Yes. Some undeniable beauts.
• Has he been an imperfect president? Yes.
• Has he spent too much? Probably.
• Has he given you most of what you’ve wanted? Actually, looking at the list…yes!
• Has he dared to disagree with anyone to keep his principles, even you? Yes.

Has he really been your Judas? Has he really betrayed you?

What she said.

He leaves us with a safer country.  A strong country.  A proud country.

Thank you President Bush.  You will be sorely missed.

Job well done!