Saturday, February 26, 2011

Allen West All The 2012 [One thing for sure, he won't be blowing sunshine up your butt!]

Source: The Shark Tank Florida's Political Feeding Frenzy

Allen West Confronted by Koran-Wielding CAIR Executive (VIDEO)
by Javier Manjarres

At a townhall meeting hosted by Congressman Allen West on Monday evening in Pompano Beach, the Q&A segment of the meeting featured a Koran wielding Nezar Hamze, Executive Director of the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Hamze confronted Congressman West and asked him to point out where in the Koran does it give marching orders to Muslims “to carry out attacks against Americans and innocent people”. West quickly pointed out that the Koran was written long before America even existed and that it does indeed tell believers to kill infidels, and then proceeded to chronicle a lengthy list of historical Muslim acts of aggression. Congressman West closed his retort by referencing the Fort Hood shootings and 9-11 attacks, saying that his first hand experiences on the battlefield has given him insight into the tactics that Islamists use before telling Hamze not to “try to blow sunshine up my butt” with his criticism of him. West took offense to Hamze’s amateurish criticism of his stance on radical Islam and concluded by telling Mr. Hamze to “put the microphone down and go home.”

More of Allen West from YouTube
The guy is smart! ...and doesn't need a teleprompter!

Friday, February 25, 2011

It's not apples and's China and all the rest ~ Check out this interactive map to compare China's GDP with other countries

Source: Economist Corporate Network

Comparing Chinese provinces with countries
All the parities in China
Which countries match the GDP, population and exports of Chinese provinces?
China is now the world’s second-biggest economy, but some of its provinces by themselves would rank fairly high in the global league. Our map shows the nearest equivalent country. For example, Guangdong's GDP (at market exchange rates) is almost as big as Indonesia's; the output of both Jiangsu and Shandong exceeds Switzerland’s. Some provinces may exaggerate their output: the sum of their reported GDPs is 10% higher than the national total. But over time the latter has consistently been revised up, suggesting that any overstatement is modest.
What about other economic yardsticks? Guangdong exports as much as South Korea, Jiangsu as much as Taiwan. Shanghai’s GDP per person is as high as Saudi Arabia’s (at purchasing-power parity), though still well below that in China’s special administrative regions, Hong Kong and Macau. At the other extreme, the poorest province, Guizhou, has an income per head close to that of India. Note that these figures use the same PPP conversion rate for the whole of China, but prices are likely to be lower in poorer provinces than in richer ones, slightly reducing regional inequality.
Correction, February 25th: The original figure given for Hong Kong's exports included re-exports. This has been changed to refer to domestic exports only.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Another Islamist Terror Plot...and Obama says we will never be at war with Islam*

Saudi student arrested in plot to bomb Bush home
Source: MSNBC
A 20-year-old college student in Lubbock, Texas, was arrested for an alleged bomb plot against a home of former President Bush. NBC's Pete Williams reports.

*US will never be at war with Islam: Obama
ANI, Sep 12, 2010, 04.42pm IST

WASHINGTON: At a ceremony at the Pentagon Memorial to mark the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, US President Barack Obama has emphasised that America will "never be at war with Islam."  ...continued here

Islam is at war with the United States and all western cultures.  They know they cannot win militarily so they fight their battles clandestinely and yet openly proclaim their intentions...just like Obama!  Destroy America!

Muslims freedom of religion in America... sounds like a plan, a terrorist plan

H-T Lew Waters via email
Lawsuit alleges FBI violated Muslims' freedom of religion

By Jerry Markon Washington Post Staff Writer
An FBI informant who infiltrated a California mosque violated the constitutional rights of hundreds of Muslims by targeting them for surveillance because of their religion, the ACLU and a Muslim group said in a lawsuit Tuesday.  ~ ... Story continues here.
Here we go again!  The religion of peace has been violated...tsk, tsk, tsk, those poor SOB's.  The ACLU needs to get a new life but that will never happen after all they are as anti-American as the Muslims.  Now lets see, did I not read that most mosques in America are simply fronts protected by the Constitution because they supposedly are places of worship.  They worship some guy by the name of Mohamed who wrote a book called the Quran with a theme directed at wiping out all other religions except Islam...or else be subject to dhimmitude and/or beheading (How nice is that?).  Well I cannot prove that all mosques are some form of terrorist front so let me provide a few typical examples (side note: Driving home from work on September 11, 2001 [911], I'll never forget that middle eastern man as our vehicles passed one another dressed in some sort of Muslim ceremonial garb laughing right into my face as if to say, "Alah akbar, you piece of crap!"  Needless to say I took it personal. The scumbag was elated over the three thousand plus murders of innocent Americans.)  Meanwhile here are a few news stories concerning the places of worship...aah, I mean terrorist plotting.

1. February 9th, 2005 Hakeem Olajuwon’s Mosque Implicated In Terror Probe
A mosque established and funded by basketball star Hakeem Olajuwon gave more than $80,000 to charities the government later determined to be fronts for the terror groups al-Qaida and Hamas, according to financial records obtained by The Associated Press. Read more here.
2. Brooklyn Mosque Implicated In Terrorism Fundraising
NEW YORK - MARCH 4: (NEW YORK NEWSPAPERS OUT) A man enters the Al-Farooq mosque March 4, 2003 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City. A Yemeni cleric detained in Germany told the FBI that most of the $20 million he supplied to al Qaeda came from contributors in the U.S., including worshippers at the Al-Farooq mosque. See picture here.
3. Mosque Imam implicated as terror supporter

Updated: 2/26/2003 12:10:06 AM Posted: 2/25/2003 11:54:16 AM
CLEVELAND -- The controversy continues over the head of the Cleveland Islamic Center and his possible ties to a terrorist group in the Middle East.
The Anti-Defamation League of Cleveland says there is no doubt that the person in Cleveland the Justice Department says raised money for suicide bombers and refers to as "unindicted co-conspirator number one" is Imam Fawaz Damra. Story continues here.
4. Bring On the Mosque, Bring On the Terror
Mosques have been used extensively by al-Qaeda operatives and other Islamic terrorists to recruit, finance operations and train zealots to commit attacks—a fact often ignored by advocates of building a huge Muslim religious center in the shadow of Ground Zero in New York.
The documented involvement of mosques in terror helps explain why so many Americans, over 60% in most polls, opposed putting a $100 million mosque and Islamic center on the hallowed ground where nearly 3,000 innocent people were murdered by al Qaeda. Story continues here.
5.  Tree-Lighting Plot Not Portland's First Terrorism Activity
IPT News December 1, 2010
A Portland mosque where a man accused of plotting to bomb a Christmas tree-lighting ceremony prayed has been previously tied to a terrorism investigation, court documents show.  The Masjid as-Saber, a.k.a. The Islamic Center of Portland, where Mohamed Osman Mohamud reportedly sometimes worshipped, was discussed in a 2003 affidavit submitted in the trial of several men accused of attempting to travel to Afghanistan to fight U.S. armed forces, also known as the Portland Seven. Story continues here.
Lets face it, the anti-American attacks not only come from the scheming that goes on within mosques, it comes from the so-called religion of peace, Islam!  Muslims have consistently used the 1st Amendment to the Constitution to legitimize their presence in the United States.  The Muslims who practice their Islamist  faith according to the Quran have but one objective, and that is to destroy western culture and making Islam the only accepted the following quote (rule #4) from An Explanatory Memorandum On The General Strategic Goal For The Group In North America:

4- Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America:
The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny
Obviously the ACLU does not have an understanding of the role of the Muslim Brother in North America.
But on the other hand maybe they do! ~ Norman E. Hooben

PS to the ACLU:  Hundreds of Muslims are not being targeted for surveillance because of their religion; they're being targeted for surveillance because of their terrorist activities.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Future Pennsylvania Avenue Resident

No tele-prompter needed him as he spiels off his repsonses with definitive resolve.  The man knows his stuff!


There comes a time when the people of a country will have to make a decision, if not, either the people, the country or the decision will become insignificant. ~ NEH

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Christchurch Catastrophe...incredible video while it happens!

Source: The Telegraph (UK)
More from The Telegraph

Christchurch earthquake: shattered Christchurch counts quake dead

Six months ago Christchurch residents thought that they had dodged a calamity but the catastrophe was postponed not avoided.

After the city escaped with damage, but no deaths, from a 71. magnitude earthquake that struck in September, locals acknowleded their good fortune.
But at 12.51pm yesterday on Tuesday the cathedral city's luck resolutely ran out.
Officeworkers had settled down for lunch at their desks, shoppers thronged the city's malls and squares and children played in schoolyards across the city when the ground began to shake.
It did not stop shuddering violently for almost one full minute, all the time it took to turn the picturesque city into a disaster zone.
Buildings that had withstood hundreds of lesser earthquakes crumbled into piles of dust as the 6.3 magnitude earthquake hit. The cathedral's famous spire cracked and fell, liquefaction - earth literally turned to liquid - seeped up through the streets. Christchurch - New Zealand's vibrant second largest city - resembled a Hollywood apocalypse film for real.
The worst of the destruction was in the city centre, where more than 100 people were trapped as offices, hotels and shops collapsed around them. Some managed to make it out by crawling, jumping and scaling the outside of cracked and fractured buildings. As masonry rained down and the aftershocks continued, there were reports of people trapped in the PGG Building, the Cantebury TV building and under fallen chunks of the cathedral.
With screams coming from the remains of buildings, it was obvious that this time the city would not escape without fatalities. Soon the death toll had climbed to 65, but there were rumours around the city that it could reach as high as 300 as rescuers started to pick through the rubble. Several of the dead were killed in buses and cars that were crushed like cans by falling debris. A backpacker died in the city's YHA. Another person was reported to have perished in a bookshop. There were also reports of dead bodies lying in Cashel Mall in the centre of the city, covered by t-shirts until rescuers could come and take them away. The authorities confirmed that the dead included children.
John Key, the prime minister, said it was the nation's "darkest day".
Bob Parker, the major, declared a state of emergency, saying the city had "paid a very heavy price here."
For the tearful and shellshocked survivors, the hours following the earthquake were bewildering.
The injured, some carried on makeshift stretchers from buildings by their workmates and friends, most bleeding, gathered in the city's parks where impromptu medical centres were set up. There were so many wounded that the city's ambulances could not cope and police and civilian cars were employed to help ferry those in need to packed hospitals. Others, fearful of returning home, set up tents in parks and open spaces to sit out the rainy and cold night.
Elsewhere, chaos took hold. One man was arrested for trying to enter a building to rescue a friend. Husbands frantically looked for their wives, parents desperately tried to track down their children, their efforts stymied by road closures, gridlocked traffic and a communications system rendered almost useless by the quake.
Some 80 per cent of the city was without power and water was running out.
As the dust started to clear and rescue workers started to move in, gingerly picking over debris and listening for calls for help, aftershocks continued to rumble through the city, sending large shards of glass and bricks onto the streets below.
Then the fires started. Several damaged buildings ignited, making rescue attempts even more hazardous. But the rescues continued.
During the night, emergency crews corndonned off the city so that they could listen properly for tapping and calls for help.
Through the night some 30 people were rescued alive from beneath fallen buildings, and several dead bodies were also recovered. Of those that survived, some had to undergo amputations to be freed from the wreckage, while rescue workers said that others were retrieved without suffering a scratch.
Anne Voss, who was trapped under her office desk, said she had called her children to say goodbye because she thought she was going to die, "It was absolutely horrible," she told New Zealand TV.
"My daughter was crying and I was crying because I honestly thought that was it.
"You want to tell them you love them, don't you?"
Sven Baker was another one of the lucky ones. He survived by diving under his desk in his four-storey office block when the earthquake hit. The decision saved his life.
"I went under the table just as the whole facade of the building collapsed on the street.
"It was a massive earthquake, unbelieveable, it took you off your feet," he told the Dominion Post.
"It was a miracle to have walked out."
By this morning disaster recovery crews were flying into Christchurch from Australia to help with the recovery effort.
The damage to Christchurch, which is the gateway to the South Island and is home to 390,000 people, was more extensive than in September because the quake was far shallower and more sudden than the last one.

The President's first job is to keep us _____ (fill in the blank).

Source: Lew Rockwell
The Presidency and Mythology
by Andrew P. Napolitano
Here is Judge Napolitano's closing argument on his FreedomWatch Presidents’ Day Special, which featured Tom DiLorenzo and Tom Woods.

Does the government work on behalf of the people or do the people exist for the benefit of government? Is history a recollection of things that have actually happened, or a narrative deployed to legitimize power and the crimes that led to the acquisition of that power? Tonight, on this President’s Day, state-sanctioned history, the Presidents of the United States, and you.
In the last hour we’ve heard that some of the Presidents often billed by historians and the public as “the greatest” were anything but. To be fair, it’s difficult to be a great person when your job is to head an organization like the State that is rooted in deception, theft, and murder. And we know from Lord Acton that no great man is a good man.
From the beginning, any claim that the American government is good because some Americans are exceptional does not make any sense. The individual virtues of human beings cannot possibly extend to the government. By definition, the government lies, cheats, and steals. After all, it has no resources of its own, only those it appropriates from the people. No one may lawfully compete with it. We are forced to pay its bills and accept its so-called services. There is no escaping it. The ideas behind a nation may be exceptional, but they are not manifested by the government. And, of course, we must never mistake the government for the people it claims to represent.

So, why does the official history of our Presidents seem like so much mythology and legend when viewed side by side with what really happened? Is history being deliberately manipulated to whitewash the crimes of the past and manufacture the consent of the people? Or is the whitewashing of history simply a natural reaction by a people and a culture that would rather not come to terms with their not so rosy past? It’s both. It is human instinct to trivialize the dark and the wicked in us and to elevate the good and the honorable in us. But, indeed, the history transmitted to you and your children in government schools has whitewashed all the Presidents but a few. And make no mistake about it, they are government schools; because they all exist at the pleasure of the State so that the government’s version of history becomes the popular version of history. Napoleon understood this when he remarked that history is not the record of what has happened before us, it is the record of what people think has happened before us. The government understands this, too.
Franklin Roosevelt manipulated the United States into World War II for years prior to a declaration of war. The Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7th 1941 was not only not a surprise, but was facilitated by FDR. Abraham Lincoln was a racial supremacist who wanted blacks forcibly removed to Africa. Woodrow Wilson arrested people for speaking German in public. If these facts were as well known as the fiction that has surrounded them, then the information which the government wishes us to accept uncritically about the present day state of affairs would be more vigorously challenged. So here is the lesson: The government has mythologized the past in order to lull us into accepting its version of the present; and the essence of that mythology is the presidency.

When Lincoln stated at Gettysburg that government is of the people, by the people, and for the people, that was government propaganda. The government is not of the people, and it shares none of the characteristics and traits of the people themselves. No less a president than George Washington told us that government is not reason, it is force. Government is a tool, a powerful and a dangerous tool. And so it must be wielded carefully and only when moral, constitutional, necessary, and proper. Government officials are not performing a public service, and they do not regard themselves as public servants. They regard themselves as our masters.
Under the Constitution and the law, as I’ve said time and again on this show, they are employees of the people and ought to serve at our pleasure. When we lionize our government officials, be they Presidents or postal workers, when we mythologize and deify them, when we build temples to worship them, we violate the nature of the service they ought to be performing. Jefferson would be scandalized at the temples we have built for him. Lincoln and FDR would no doubt welcome theirs. If we want to take our government back, we must begin by taking an honest account of what our government has done, ostensibly in our names, and reject the untrue narratives it instead foists upon us. The truth shall set us free.
All presidents but Jefferson have argued that their first job was to keep us safe. All presidents but Jefferson were wrong. If you read the Constitution, you will see that the President’s first job – as Jefferson understood well – is to keep us free.
February 22, 2011
Andrew P. Napolitano [send him mail], a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at the Fox News Channel, and the host of “FreedomWatch” on the Fox Business Network. His latest book is Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History, (Nelson, 2010). His next book is It is Dangerous to be Right When the Government is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedom, coming in September.
Copyright © 2011 Andrew P. Napolitano

Monday, February 21, 2011

The Coming Revolution...will you join?

Reverend Manning is a little passionate to say the least but one thing for sure, he is absolutely right on!  His prediction mirrors my own and it's not a question of "If its going to happen?" it's only a matter of time "When is it going to happen?"...people are getting restless.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Did we go to different schools together? Getting rid of the beast...not a bad idea!

I never did quite understand the need for a federally regulated department of education...there was no such beast during my informative years.  But then again when I really got informed, that by controlling the curriculum you can get control of the people at an early age...the informative years!
It was William Foster who fostered the idea of a National Department of Education as a means to develop a socialist society in the United States.  Why?  Because he was a Socialist and head of the Communist Party in America.  Then there was a degreed Socialist by the name of George Counts who counted on people like Foster to facilitate the agenda of the Socialists, he said, "... the teachers should deliberately reach for power and then make the most of their conquest" in order to "influence the social attitudes, ideals and behavior of the coming generation."  The teachers must have been listening closely to Mr. Counts, just look at the power of the National Education Association (NEA) today.  And talk about making the most of their conquest, the majority of children today are what I would call, "under educated"  at least in the realm of things that really matter.  I was just an average student and paid very little attention in class but that little attention made me much smarter than the average student of today. (By the way, I went back to school (UTSA) at the age of 42 to pick up where I left off some years earlier.)
And lets not forget C.F. Potter and John Dewey who in 1933 published the Humanist Manifesto wherein they stated, "Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism, and every American public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?"
So you can readily assume that an American education worked out pretty well for a few hundred years until the Communists got control; for ever since we have learned that the dumbing down of America is a real problem...and it's costing us in more ways than one!  The money costs is only one part of the equation and the following essay by Mr. Bill Walker pretty much lays it on the line. ~ Norman E. Hooben
ps: Mr. Walker makes a pretty good argument for eliminating the Department of's a hell of a lot cheaper to get rid of the beast and just think how much smarter your kids will be!

The following from: Lew

US Education: Show Us the Money!

According to the 2009 OECD figures, the US   government spends more per pupil than any nation in the world except Switzerland. The US spent an average of $149,000 for the K–12 education of every 2009 public high school graduate. That works out to $11,461 per year or so.
So the solution is obvious: shut down the schools and invest the money instead. Just let the kids stay home and study on the Internet. Let’s even save some money to reduce the deficit, and only invest $11,000 per year. At 7% return, each child would have a $391,000 IRA when they’re 18. That way, even if they spend the next 50 years surfing or hiking the Appalachian Trail, they would all retire at 68 with $12,512,000 (assuming the same 7% average yearly return). This solves not only the education crisis, but the Social Security problem (they wouldn’t need it) AND the health-budget crisis (how much heart disease could there be, if everyone spent their time surfing and hiking?)
So we are spending a really staggering amount of capital on public schools. How’s it paying off for the lucky recipients?
Not so well. While at the top rank in funding, the US is not exactly at the top of educational achievement. In the 2010 PISA report, US students placed 25th out of the 34 OECD countries in math.

Only 77.5% of US students even graduate from high school. If that seems frighteningly low, it is… West European graduation rates are closer to 90%, and that doesn’t count the many Europeans that enter industrial apprenticeship programs.
Districts that spend more money don’t necessarily get better results. The Washington DC school district spent $28,170 per pupil in 2009. The graduation rate was around 72%, even worse than the national average.
So if throwing in more money doesn’t work, what does? Less money…. As long as it comes with more freedom. For concrete examples, I’ll use my adopted state of New Hampshire, home of the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance.
Like the rest of the country, New Hampshire doesn’t economize on public education. From the NH Dept. of Education web site: "The per pupil amount of all expenditures – operating, tuition, transportation, equipment, interest, and non-K–12 expenditures is $13,914.96." (For the 2008–2009 school year, the most recent published). The 2010–11 figure will be far higher, well over $14,000, if only because interest expense will skyrocket. Much of the state operating budget was borrowed in the last two years… fortunately the legislature which went into debt was largely replaced last November, in part due to the NHLA.

Everyone knows that private school students get better academic scores. So everyone assumes that they must be very expensive. That assumption is wrong. Looking around at how much good private schools actually cost around NH:
The Well School in Peterborough charges $7,360 for grades 1–4 and $8,800 for grades 5–8. Pine Hill Waldorf School in Wilton is $12,160 for grades 1–8. Monadnock Waldorf School costs $7800 for all grades. Here’s the fee schedule for St. Joseph Regional in Keene: "Tuition for grades K-8 for Catholics is $3,153, and $4,412 for non-Catholics. There is a 5 percent discount for one-time payment in full, and a discount for multiple children from a family."

The Tilton School charges $17,300 for grade 9–12 students… but they offer an indoor hockey rink, a full size theatre, a Creative Art Center and access to Gunstock ski resort. When do the students have time for math with all that skiing and hockey, anyway? But it’s true, if your private school only spends $8000 for grades K–8, you can splurge a little on the prom and the ski lodge when you’re a senior.
We NH taxpayers are paying MORE per pupil than many private schools charge. We have plenty of money to give our children great educational opportunities. But we are turning it over to a system with no options for parents or innovative teachers. A system with no competition or choices is a system doomed to fail.
The situation is the same everywhere in the nation. We are spending enough money to give every child a good private education… and if the parents could get the money, no doubt they would do just that. If those Washington DC parents ever actually get their hands on that $28,170 per child, their children will quickly be breaking their legs on the ski resorts too (which will give them plenty of time to study their AP calculus).
Of course the moral and practical solution is to leave education to the free market. Parents would pay for their own children, voluntary charity would pick up for the children of the unlucky or improvident few. There would be as many educational options as there are children.
But the debate today is framed by the Department of Education and the teachers’ unions. They constantly shriek that "education needs more money." Fine. As a first step, let’s just agree with them. Education does need more money… and the only way to get more money for actual education is to give it to the parents, not the bureaucracy. Let the NEA explain why it’s OK for politicians’ (and NEA members’) children to go to private schools, but the children of working people have to go to some of the lowest-quality public schools in the developed world….
And pay more for it.

February 19, 2011
Bill Walker [send him mail] is a research technologist. He lives with his wife and four dogs in Grafton NH, where they are active in the Free State Project.
Copyright © 2011 by Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Obama Rhetoric: "I think he's going to get us all killed with his rhetoric."

"And so Mr. Obama resorts to rhetoric, but not the rhetoric of the wise, cautious statesman, careful with every word, lest unintended, potentially destructive messages be received. It is the rhetoric of the community organizer, the union boss, the black liberation theologian, the socialist, the man who, when his policies are rejected by the American people, thinks it’s a failure of “messaging,” a failure to be set right by yet another speech with a new “message” — a new word to replace a word to which the public has caught on. The American public, he understands, has not heard nearly enough of his speeches."
Not since our good friend and prolific writer Roger Gardner departed this topsy-turvey world in December of 2009 have I recommended a reading that should be read by all; this is one such article.  In case you haven't noticed by now the Obama rhetoric is most always meant to be the opposite of what you are hearing...of course Bill Clinton was also good at the art of deception politics as is his wife Hillary, the author of the Alinsky papers better known as her college thesis.  I'm not sure the average Obama supporter will ever comprehend that the Obama rhetoric will surely be the straw that breaks the camel's back if Obama is allowed the last word...which may be fundamental as in the fundamental destruction of America. ~ Norman E. Hooben

The following from Pajamas Media 

The Limits of Obama’s Rhetoric

Where it isn't dangerous, it's simply impotent.

As a high school teacher, I’m always mildly surprised to discover that my students have no real idea that foreign cultures — other peoples — are so different as to be virtually different species. They’re amazed to learn that untold millions of human beings have never seen a roll of toilet paper, and are dumbstruck to discover that in many nations, women and girls may be killed by their relatives for real or imagined offenses against family honor. Over the years I’ve learned that most American adults know, intellectually, that the peoples of other lands are not like Americans, but their practical understanding of these differences is, like their younger countrymen, weak. Unfortunately, the president of the United States is no better off. Arguably, he is worse.
Hillary Clinton was more prophetic than we imagined. That 3 a.m. phone call has happened again. Perhaps the administration’s first 3 a.m. call came in June of 2009, when the Iranian people rose against their theocratic oppressors. Mr. Obama took bold, decisive action, just as he has done with the crisis in Egypt.  Here, from the White House website, is what Mr. Obama said on June 20, 2009:
The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.
As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.
Martin Luther King once said “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” I believe that. The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian peoples’ belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness.
It takes but a moment’s comparison of this rhetoric with that which Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are currently employing on Egypt to understand that it is virtually identical. Mr. Obama is forthright and mighty in “watching,” mourning the loss of innocent lives, decrying violence and injustice, and supporting the “universal rights to assembly and free speech.” He is even more intimidating in “bearing witness.” And bear witness he did, as many were imprisoned, tortured and murdered, and the uprising that might have transformed Iran in favor of greater liberty and democracy was crushed.
There are, without question, differences in the Iranian and Egyptian uprisings. The Iranians are the youngest, most educated, and most pro-American people in the region. Overwhelmingly, they are anxious to depose the inhuman Muslim theocrats who have tortured and murdered them for decades.  Almost certainly their success would have been America’s success, an enormous stride toward all of the high values touted in Mr. Obama’s rhetoric. It would have helped to establish real, as opposed to rhetorical, peace in the region. Mr. Obama, like the Palestinians he reflexively supports, seems to miss no opportunity to miss an opportunity — or to insult an ally, or support an enemy.
Egypt, on the other hand, is far more complicated. Hosni Mubarak, while generally supportive of America and American interests, was clearly a dictator, though not nearly as despotic as Saddam Hussein, and a ruler who kept one of the most virulent strains of Islam, led by the Muslim Brotherhood, under control. Because the CIA has never fully recovered from the Clintonian purge of human assets and capabilities, we were blindsided by the uprising and President Mubarak’s swift resignation. CIA Director Leon Panetta admitted that the information he provided at the House Intelligence Committee was not a product of professional skulduggery and analysis but of the lamestream media. Mr. Panetta served merely as a relay or conduit between the media and Congress. Is it any surprise that the CIA has no real idea who is behind the uprising or what their ultimate goals are?
With the Egyptian army in control, Egypt is momentarily stable, but few of the likely outcomes look promising — for America, for Israel, for peace, or for regional stability and Western civilization.
Egypt is the birthplace and intellectual and spiritual center of the contemporary world jihadist movement. The Muslim Brotherhood is arguably its vessel. If not directly behind the conflict, the Brotherhood is surely maneuvering behind the scenes with an eye toward taking control. We know that operatives of all of the primary state sponsors of terror and of the terror organizations themselves are streaming into Egypt, jockeying for power and influence. Even if one makes the naive, nuanced assumption that the uprising is an entirely spontaneous demonstration of youth power — without the influence of outside or jihadist agitation — the goal is surely not an American-friendly democracy. Recent polls have indicated an overwhelming preference for Sharia and all that goes with it. Fact: Sharia is not compatible — at all – with liberty, “universal rights,” or democracy. Once established, however, it will provide Mr. Obama with yet another opportunity to “bear witness” to the barbaric mistreatment of an entire nation.
Who, then, is picking up the phone at 3 a.m.? Considering all of the powerful, awe-inspiring foreign policy tools in the toolbox of the president of the United States — even now, we have substantial influence and persuasive power — which will he be most likely to employ? Our president is Barack Obama, and the tool to which he resorts, first, last, and always, is rhetoric.
Like my students, Mr. Obama, despite being always the smartest man in the room (according to his advisor and primary worshipper, Valerie Jarrett), eternally bored with offices far below his infinite intellectual capacities (apparently all to which he has ascended to date), knows little of the cultures of others. Ironically, we have a Department of State which is supposed to be staffed with people who know such things, but considering how often Mr. Obama has egregiously insulted the British, the State Department seems to know little about them. That being the case, there is probably no real hope that they know anything about the Egyptians — or that Mr. Obama will listen to them if they do. Which is worse?  Discuss.
And so Mr. Obama resorts to rhetoric, but not the rhetoric of the wise, cautious statesman, careful with every word, lest unintended, potentially destructive messages be received. It is the rhetoric of the community organizer, the union boss, the black liberation theologian, the socialist, the man who, when his policies are rejected by the American people, thinks it’s a failure of “messaging,” a failure to be set right by yet another speech with a new “message” — a new word to replace a word to which the public has caught on. The American public, he understands, has not heard nearly enough of his speeches.
Thus has lunatic, ruinous borrowing and spending changed from “stimulus” to “investment.” Thus has a continuing and deep recession, a recession threatening to experience a double dip, had its back broken by a “recovery summer” (that wasn’t). Thus has spending the nation into bankruptcy at warp speed become “winning the future.” And thus has the long past due necessity of dramatically reducing spending — I mean “investment” — and revamping entitlements become the biggest, most destructive entitlement of all time — ObamaCare — and so have we set the goals of high-speed rail, of sending everyone to college (regardless of whether they want or need college), of “clean energy,” etc.
Mr. Obama appears incapable of understanding that rhetoric has its limits, particularly cross-cultural limits. His rhetoric is currently ineffective or annoying to a majority of the American public. Peoples who are struggling for mere individual and familial survival, or who would prefer that America and all Americans be obliterated — especially those who are willing to take affirmative steps toward that goal — are likewise unaffected by Mr. Obama’s particular brand of persuasion, except to more firmly entrench their enmity. Being liked by the “Arab street” or the “Muslim street” is meaningless in the affairs of nations. Being respected or feared, and being able to influence events toward freedom, democracy, and peace, is. Mr. Obama seems consistently to place a higher priority — much higher — on the former.
Mr. Obama’s Olympian narcissism is likewise an impediment to a competent foreign policy. This was clearly illustrated by what he doubtless imagined to be his historic address to the Muslim world in Cairo on June 4, 2009. What could he have been thinking? “I shall sojourn to the land of Egypt. There shall my word be made manifest unto the Muslims, and they shall hear, find it good, and like me, and bask in my glory.” Not so much. In fact, the results were almost certainly even less effective than his historic address to the Germans on July 24, 2008, delivered when he was only the most leftist member of the U.S. Senate, at least in part because this time no one served beer. Yet the media — like CNN’s Wolf Blitzer — wonders if this momentous speech was the proximate cause of Mr. Mubarak’s removal.
American leftists are often content when Mr. Obama must rhetorically wander off the reservation. They know that he is winking at them and that his wink is saying: “I have to make this pretense, but I’m really one of you.” Unfortunately, Mr. Obama seems to be winking at the Muslim world. There are fundamental cultural differences — to which Mr. Obama is apparently oblivious — that prevent observant Muslims from understanding his many rhetorical winks, or from accepting them at face value, or at all.
Consider the outrage that would ensue should an American president journey to Rome to address the Catholic world, or to Salt Lake City to proclaim historic outreach to the Mormon world. Imagine NASA’s administrator announcing that he has received a new primary mission from the president, which is to make Hindus feel good about the scientific contributions of their ancient ancestors. Yet Mr. Obama can make such blatant winks at Muslims and none dare question it. But the larger question is whether his “outreach” is effective, or — because of who he is — harmful.
Put aside the fact that the cultural gulf will render virtually anything Mr. Obama says meaningless to the Muslim world — with a few exceptions that will be explored shortly. Mr. Obama has two much larger problems, problems that render his influence on Muslims virtually non-existent. As POTUS, Mr. Obama is the leader of  the “Great Satan,” the force tens of millions of Muslims see as the greatest worldly evil opposing the very existence of Islam. No amount of outreach or soaring rhetoric will address this. The other, and larger, problem is Mr. Obama’s heritage.
In response to public concerns that he is Muslim, Mr. Obama has professed his Christianity. Most Americans are willing to accept such professions, but some still believe him to be a Muslim, based at least in part on his obvious partiality to Muslims and Muslim causes. There is no doubt that Mr. Obama was born to a Muslim father, and during his childhood, raised as a Muslim in a Muslim nation. To observant Muslims, the child of a Muslim father is a Muslim. Unlike Christians, who may leave a given faith and adopt another — or none at all — with few or no consequences, Islam is not so forgiving. A Muslim who leaves the faith is an apostate fit for death. Most Muslims will not try to kill those who leave their faith, but a great many will. To any truly observant Muslim, by his own public admission, Mr. Obama is an apostate Muslim. Combine this with his position as the leader of the Great Satan, and Mr. Obama may very well be the last person on Earth to which an observant Muslim will listen, to say nothing of their willingness to act upon his rhetoric.
So where does this leave America? To the degree that Mr. Obama’s primary foreign policy tactic is rhetorical, he will be seen by much, perhaps most, of the Muslim world as weak and worthy of ridicule, particularly among those who wish us ill. It is weakness, more than anything else (particularly Gitmo), which serves as a jihadist recruitment tool. At the same time, his neophyte knee-jerk proclamations during crises may serve to convince those who are our allies, or who might be considering the wisdom of greater cooperation with America, that the most dangerous ally in the Middle East is America — an axiom with a long and venerable history in the region.
The situation in Egypt may eventually resolve in a manner that is, at least, not overtly destructive to American and Israeli interests, which are the interests of peace and regional stability. But if this happy state of affairs does occur, there is little information currently available to suggest that Mr. Obama will have had anything to do with it other than to try to talk it into submission.
Surely, if things turn out well, he will take credit, as his supporters and the media (but I repeat myself) have already begun to do. For the moment, however, with the outcome still uncertain, Mr. Obama is being uncharacteristically quiet — aside from the typical Kumbaya rhetoric about the march of history.
Americans — and untold millions around the world — may wish that when the phone rang at 3 a.m., Mr. Obama would have rolled over and gone back to asleep.